adamversus Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Taking a look at the recap from last night's T.O.C. show in Rockford is confusing to say the least. How can the "content" portion of a corps performance vary so wildly from one night previously. As an example, Santa Clara's percussion scores dropped significantly. While the performers could have had a really off night, the content obviously didn't make a wholesale change in one evening. Yet the content numbers dropped significantly in percussion from Minneapolis to Rockford. I understand that different judges will have different interpretations. But this much of a variance in percussion scores? Across the board? It either creates the appearance of (and I'm not say that it actually happened) favoritism, lack of familiarity by a judge, or lack of judging skill. It just makes no sense. Can someone explain this to me? (BTW while I truly do admire the musicality of Vanguard's drum book, I'm not playing favorites here with them. Just think they were shafted - truly shafted) 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamarag Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 (BTW while I truly do admire the musicality of Vanguard's drum book, I'm not playing favorites here with them. Just think they were shafted - truly shafted) You don't think it's possible that SCV and their percussion line had a bad night, or just weren't as good as the night before? When you're dealing in tenths, and your competitors are also very good, having a bad run can kill you. It's like bringing a knife to a gun fight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmurrey74 Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Interpretation and what the percussion judge is watching at any one one will vary considerably especially in regards to the sampling of the front ensemble and battery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecoats88 Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 You don't think it's possible that SCV and their percussion line had a bad night, or just weren't as good as the night before? When you're dealing in tenths, and your competitors are also very good, having a bad run can kill you. It's like bringing a knife to a gun fight. he's not refering to performance. he's refering to the content score which is how well the book is written. I'm sure that doesn't change from night to night or with a bad performance. However, if the line is having an off night, the content might be hard to read for the judge thus lowering his opinion of the book. also what someone else said regarding sampling. If the judge on the second night was sampling during less well written parts of the book then his impression of content would be different from a judge that sampled sections which were better written. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Taking a look at the recap from last night's T.O.C. show in Rockford is confusing to say the least. How can the "content" portion of a corps performance vary so wildly from one night previously. As an example, Santa Clara's percussion scores dropped significantly. While the performers could have had a really off night, the content obviously didn't make a wholesale change in one evening. Yet the content numbers dropped significantly in percussion from Minneapolis to Rockford. I understand that different judges will have different interpretations. But this much of a variance in percussion scores? Across the board? It either creates the appearance of (and I'm not say that it actually happened) favoritism, lack of familiarity by a judge, or lack of judging skill. It just makes no sense. Can someone explain this to me? (BTW while I truly do admire the musicality of Vanguard's drum book, I'm not playing favorites here with them. Just think they were shafted - truly shafted) The physical location of the percussion judge can make a world of difference. They move around sampling the entire percussion section, bit by bit. If they are standing by the pit when the battery is going gang-busters 50 yards away, and then run over to the battery just in time for the pit to take over the meat of the percussion book, the content score would...or at should...be different than if the judge had been located the reverse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkfdPRphan Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Interpretation and what the percussion judge is watching at any one one will vary considerably especially in regards to the sampling of the front ensemble and battery. I agree with this. We have to remember that the percussion score ALSO includes the pit - where ever it might be located. Last night's judge might have been looking for a specific skill that say a vibe player had during the BD show.......and then when SCV came up, no one had that same skill level. Might be time for SCV to add some more difficult skills to the front pit? I believe it is something that Phantom is doing, and all the corps need to do once one of the corps has raised theirs....maybe that is what hurt the SCV score - a new skill that wasn't quite perfected yet. I don't know if this is true, but just something to consider. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peel Paint Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Drum corps judging is subjective. You don't trust the integrity of it when the numbers are inconsistent--I get it. But I think the problem is that you're looking for drum corps judging to be far more objective than it is possible for it to fairly be. It's an art form--it's not an accounting ledger. Sometimes people making your argument refer back to the tick system, when a corps was docked a tenth of a point for each mistake and say, we need to get back to that because it was much more objective. No it wasn't. The tick system was also highly subjective. And if you doubt it, get a group of three friends to watch a drum line warm up and count the ticks and see how consistent your numbers are. I don't trust the integrity of it when the numbers are consistent from one night to the next. They shouldn't be. That gives the appearance of an inability to see changes in performance or to allow for divergent opinion. Even something like Content--there's room for differences of opinion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowtown Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Obviously I can’t speak for the judges but I saw SCV twice this weekend, Lisle and Rockford and this is my take which was 2 very different takes so perhaps… Lisle – focused on the battery a lot, clean hands, great stick control diddles abound, oh yeah, they'll win drums this year Rockford – focused on the front ensemble, it’s nice they toned down the parts after last year when the entire show seemed written as backing for the front ensemble...it was way over written but this is about the weakest front ensemble book Sandi Rennick has written since, what 2004, that won’t win drums 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowtron Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 (edited) This kind of randomness is good. Over time you can take the moving averages to determine who truly better at what. Besides being a subjective activity, there are a ton of other factors. Corps morale and energy. Press box height. Crowd enthusiasm. Weather. Emergency sirens. Injuries. Performance order. Time of day/night. No 2 performances are alike. It's a beautiful sport :) Edited July 16, 2012 by Shadowtron 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 This kind of randomness is good. Over time you can take the moving averages to determine who truly better at what. Besides being a subjective activity, there are a ton of other factors. Corps morale and energy. Press box height. Crowd enthusiasm. Weather. Emergency sirens. Injuries. Performance order. Time of day/night. No 2 performances are alike. It's a beautiful sport :) I think you mean "average" or maybe even "mean", not "moving averages", but I get your point and agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.