Is an 82 in July the same as an 82 at DCI finals?

[BRASSO]

I understand that the judge's first responsibility is to rank the corps but the box system they use should reflect what they see, whether that be in July or august. Just seems strange to me how it works. In WGI i think they are much more pure to the boxes which means that groups can come out the gate and score in the high 80s.

Just imagine if a Corps got a 96 in early July, but then improved a boatload each week in every section of the Corps after that. Can you imagine the discussion on here THEN as to what score we should give them 5-6 weeks later at Finals Week ? Man, that'd be something else, huh ?

Edited July 10, 2012 by BRASSO

[Jeff Ream]

It's impossible under the current system to use objective scoring. The judges can only grade each subcaption in tenths of points.

So for example in the Music Effect content subcaption, if they want just *rank* the corps without any ties, they could give twelfth place no more than an 8.9. But they have to turn in the scores immediately after judging, so how could they know that the first corps to go on should get the 8.9? And yet, it's risky to give them a higher score than that because if they *are* only the 12th best corps in that subcaption and you gave them a 9.2, then how are you going to fit the other 11 corps in above them?

So corps 12 came on and you gave them an 8.9 to leave room. Well, corps 11 comes on and does much better. Do you give them a 9.3, or a 9.0? A 9.3 would let you rank corps 10 and corps 9 below corps 11, but what if they are *better* than corps 11?

So as for your question, doesn't "82" *mean* something? Well, what's more important? Being able to compare the corps' performances, or just giving them an objective score? I think ranking is more important, and given the score resolution judges can give I think the bottom two or three corps in finals will always end up in the low to mid 80s, regardless of how good they are.

ties obviously aren't that big of a deal because I saw a sub box tie in a 6 corps show the other night

Edited July 10, 2012 by Jeff Ream

[HeWhoWaits]

It's impossible under the current system to use objective scoring. The judges can only grade each subcaption in tenths of points.

So you agree that the problem is with the SYSTEM.

If there are clearly defined OBJECTIVE measures available, why shouldn't a particular judge be able to give the exact same score to two (or seven) groups. Equal achievements should get equal scores. The "one score, one corps" concept is inherently flawed.

[N.E. Brigand]

So you agree that the problem is with the SYSTEM.

If there are clearly defined OBJECTIVE measures available, why shouldn't a particular judge be able to give the exact same score to two (or seven) groups. Equal achievements should get equal scores. The "one score, one corps" concept is inherently flawed.

It's not "one score, one corps" that causes the trouble. As skywhopper indicated, the main problem (if it is a problem) comes from judges having to score early corps without knowing how well later corps will do. "Objectively", a judge may feel a corps deserves 9.0, but also that the corps is worse than the group to whom he just gave 8.8, with the intent of leaving enough room for later performers.

[skywhopper]

So you agree that the problem is with the SYSTEM.

If there are clearly defined OBJECTIVE measures available, why shouldn't a particular judge be able to give the exact same score to two (or seven) groups. Equal achievements should get equal scores. The "one score, one corps" concept is inherently flawed.

Well, judges are allowed to give out ties. Though if they do, I'm guessing it doesn't *always* mean they truly believe both corps performed identically, but that in some cases they are painted into that position by the scores they've given earlier performances.

If you're a finals judge and you gave Crown a 9.9 in Brass and Blue Devils a 9.8 in Brass and then Cadets perform and you think they did better than Blue Devils but not as good as Crown, then what score to you give them?

[bluecoats88]

Well, judges are allowed to give out ties. Though if they do, I'm guessing it doesn't *always* mean they truly believe both corps performed identically, but that in some cases they are painted into that position by the scores they've given earlier performances.

If you're a finals judge and you gave Crown a 9.9 in Brass and Blue Devils a 9.8 in Brass and then Cadets perform and you think they did better than Blue Devils but not as good as Crown, then what score to you give them?

I say give them a 9.85

[combia1]

It's impossible under the current system to use objective scoring. The judges can only grade each subcaption in tenths of points.

So for example in the Music Effect content subcaption, if they want just *rank* the corps without any ties, they could give twelfth place no more than an 8.9. But they have to turn in the scores immediately after judging, so how could they know that the first corps to go on should get the 8.9? And yet, it's risky to give them a higher score than that because if they *are* only the 12th best corps in that subcaption and you gave them a 9.2, then how are you going to fit the other 11 corps in above them?

So corps 12 came on and you gave them an 8.9 to leave room. Well, corps 11 comes on and does much better. Do you give them a 9.3, or a 9.0? A 9.3 would let you rank corps 10 and corps 9 below corps 11, but what if they are *better* than corps 11?

So as for your question, doesn't "82" *mean* something? Well, what's more important? Being able to compare the corps' performances, or just giving them an objective score? I think ranking is more important, and given the score resolution judges can give I think the bottom two or three corps in finals will always end up in the low to mid 80s, regardless of how good they are.

This is one of the reasons WGI has moved to a "paperless" judging system. Instead of turning in scores for a unit right after they perform, the judges keep their totes for entire rounds (or half rounds) and they are allowed to go back and adjust previous scores if needed. This helps eliminate the numbers management issues you describe above. You can adjust your numbers to maintain proper spreads and competitive neighborhoods, and it allows you to properly rank without ties. And in theory, you should never have to artificially punish or reward a unit with your subcaption scores.