Judging: How do YOU want to see it?

[jasgre2000]

Score management, or numbers management is a term that's been used in the activity for a long time. While I can see why one might be turned off by the idea, or think that the idea would promote unfair numbers, but let me ask you this. Is it more important that a corps get the exact number that they deserve, or that the corps are placed in the correct order with the correct split. There is an upward limit to how high a score can go, and considering that everything we do is merit based (rather than starting at 100 and deducting as the tick method did), we can get really close to 100 really quickly if we catch the right moments of a show. That being said, numbers management is employed to ensure that you don't end up with no room if a later group is a lot stronger than a group you saw early in the day. It can result in overall lower scores for everyone, but often ensures that the correct spreads occur, rather than having every ensemble bunched up from 95 and up.

The fact is, a show can't really objectively be assigned a number. You can't watch a show and say with any kind of certainty that it was a 96. Even a well trained judge can't just pull a number out of his butt. There has to be some sort of bench mark. There is stuff built into the sheets to make that job easier (for example, WGI has boxes with corresponding words like "always", "sometimes", "often" etc. But even then, you can't watch every performer on the field all at once.

It's not just an issue with drum corps ... it is an issue in any subjectively judged competition. It is why people were upset that Jordan Weiber didn't perform last in gymnastics at the Olympics. The person/group that performs last is more likely to score higher than a group that scores first. It is a proven fact.

Part of it is "score management" by the judges, but it is also because those that perform earlier get compared to what a perfect corps should look like, while those that perform later get compared to the corps that went before them (and therefore look better, in comparison).

[RockyGranite]

It's not just an issue with drum corps ... it is an issue in any subjectively judged competition. It is why people were upset that Jordan Weiber didn't perform last in gymnastics at the Olympics. The person/group that performs last is more likely to score higher than a group that scores first. It is a proven fact.

Part of it is "score management" by the judges, but it is also because those that perform earlier get compared to what a perfect corps should look like, while those that perform later get compared to the corps that went before them (and therefore look better, in comparison).

Then this appears to be the flaw within the judging community.

Instead of comparing Corps A with Corps B, perhaps the better way is to compare both Corps A and Corps B with the "Ideal Corps" and see which comes closest. I don't know...maybe the tic system was better?

[jwillis35]

Personally, I miss the old days of 3 seasons (June-July-August), where corps like Spirit and Sky Ryders would beat Cadets early season by being much cleaner, yet get caught by the better show in august. We just don't see that as much anymore and whenever we see big changes in numbers or placements, (especially with our own biases towards certain groups), we complain to no end of cheating and "slotting".

First, in terms of consistency of scores and captions, we must consider that these marchers and musicians of today are much better trained...from the warm-ups to the types of marching technique, etc. This is one reason why we don't see such fluctuation from night to night in various captions. Now, every corps has their strengths and weaknesses and I think we still see that. But the chances of say a corps like the Blue Devils hitting a 16.2 in brass one night in the early season, then the next night getting a 14.5 is not realistic.

As for your paragraph above, I miss those days too. Largely what happened that changed is how a show is judged from a construction and demand standpoint. Even if a corps like Spirit of Atlanta (as an example) comes out really clean, but their brass, percussion, and visual construction is only hitting Box 3 at the time, and the Cadets are much dirtier, but their Box level in the same captions is a 4, maybe even a 5, then it's tough to get enough points.

Demand and construction were two of the big factors that changed scoring when DCI moved to the "build-up" system. Of course, GE was perhaps the biggest factor. You couldn't just jam out and play great music and still do well. You had to integrate the total show, and the music had to fit the drill and overall visual construction in an artistic manner. The guard also began to take on a larger role. It's no secret that a great guard can add a lot of points to your show. It should also be noted that the Blue Devils, Cavaliers, and Cadets have traditionally had fabulous guards that were/are well integrated into their shows.

[Grumpy]

Order be ######.

Give the score the corps earned from their performance. Let THAT determine the order. Look, just because Spirit has been slightly ahead of BK the whole season, doesn't mean the judges HAVE to keep it that way to the end...to keep them in the "correct order". I find the above highlighted concept offensive.

If the judges can't judge a corps without bunching up and running out of room, then there is a problem with the judging system.

Unfortunately, bias/slotting/order occurs and is largely a result of the first shows of the season. Although I know it will never happen, I would like to see the first show of every corps at the beginning of the season be completely anonymous to the judges-the corps proper in black bibs and t-shirts, completely random performance order, no mention of the corps name or anything else-just "Corps A, take the field for competition" and that would remove any bias or slotting. Unfortunately, it would establish the benchmark for the rest of the season because then it would be common knowledge as to which corps was playing what. IMO, our current judging system almost won't allow corps like Jersey Surf, Teal Sound, and Pioneer to score above Academy, Troopers or Colts. Every corps, no matter how good, is going to have an "off night" occasionally; but in our current system, nobody has off nights-the outcome can be pretty well predicted before the competition even takes place. My parents get a good chuckle every year when we go to a show with them, because I will predict beforehand what the final placement will be. I am correct a good percentage of the time before even hearing a note or seeing any of the visual.

[RockyGranite]

Unfortunately, bias/slotting/order occurs and is largely a result of the first shows of the season. Although I know it will never happen, I would like to see the first show of every corps at the beginning of the season be completely anonymous to the judges-the corps proper in black bibs and t-shirts, completely random performance order, no mention of the corps name or anything else-just "Corps A, take the field for competition" and that would remove any bias or slotting. Unfortunately, it would establish the benchmark for the rest of the season because then it would be common knowledge as to which corps was playing what. IMO, our current judging system almost won't allow corps like Jersey Surf, Teal Sound, and Pioneer to score above Academy, Troopers or Colts. Every corps, no matter how good, is going to have an "off night" occasionally; but in our current system, nobody has off nights-the outcome can be pretty well predicted before the competition even takes place. My parents get a good chuckle every year when we go to a show with them, because I will predict beforehand what the final placement will be. I am correct a good percentage of the time before even hearing a note or seeing any of the visual.

It's really a shame that it is this way.

Now, for me...being in my first year watching this stuff...on one hand, the scores don't matter that much. I can enjoy watching each corps perform. On the other hand, being a BK Dad, I find the idea of slotting and score management to be a very bad thing.

Oh, well...so it goes.

[actucker]

Order be ######.

Give the score the corps earned from their performance. Let THAT determine the order. Look, just because Spirit has been slightly ahead of BK the whole season, doesn't mean the judges HAVE to keep it that way to the end...to keep them in the "correct order". I find the above highlighted concept offensive.

If the judges can't judge a corps without bunching up and running out of room, then there is a problem with the judging system.

If you're offended by judges wanting to get it right, then you need to find an activity to watch that isn't subjective. Maybe you don't understand the point I'm trying to make. The fact is, these guys are human. They can't just judge a product in a vacuum and arbitrarily assign a number. Again, there are devices within the sheets to help with that, but at the end of the day, numbers management is the smart way to ensure that you are being fair to every group. If you give the first group a 99, and the next three groups are clearly two or three points better, how do you differentiate? You're out of numbers.

Again, its not about the number itself. Its about the order, and the spread. I'd rather see 10 groups in the 80s in August, knowing that each group and subcaption was fairly placed, than worry about if corps A's score went up from the night before. I'm not saying that because one corps won the night before, they should win the next night. You have to judge the performance in front of you. However, if corps A is clearly a point and a half better than corps B, I want to be sure that that spread is represented on the sheet.

Don't mistake responsible numbers management for "slotting". Nobody here is arguing for that.

[actucker]

Then this appears to be the flaw within the judging community.

Instead of comparing Corps A with Corps B, perhaps the better way is to compare both Corps A and Corps B with the "Ideal Corps" and see which comes closest. I don't know...maybe the tic system was better?

So tell me. What does the ideal corps look and sound like.

I'll wait...

[RockyGranite]

So tell me. What does the ideal corps look and sound like.

I'll wait...

I would leave that judgment up to the judges....that's what they are being paid to figure out, don't you think?

[actucker]

I would leave that judgment up to the judges....that's what they are being paid to figure out, don't you think?

No. They're paid to decide which corps was best on the field in their caption on a given night according to the sheets, and how big the spread should be.

Really. Does the ideal corps design their show like the cadets, or blue devils? Maybe more like the Cavaliers. Do they use straight let marching technique, or one more like the Cavaliers or Vanguard. What is their brass sound like? Do they drum more like Blue Devils or Cadets, or maybe Vanguard?

You can see why your method might not make much sense right?

[tariq.shah]

It's interesting that we all clamor for better and more consistent judging, yet we freak out when scores and ordinals are all over the place. I think the idea of "consistency" has a different meaning for many people and causes too much confusion and frustration among fans today.

Personally, I miss the old days of 3 seasons (June-July-August), where corps like Spirit and Sky Ryders would beat Cadets early season by being much cleaner, yet get caught by the better show in august. We just don't see that as much anymore and whenever we see big changes in numbers or placements, (especially with our own biases towards certain groups), we complain to no end of cheating and "slotting".

I still think that some of the lower tier teams don't get enough credit early season for coming out on clean and think the judging should more wide open and not "uniform based" at the beginning of each season. Judges are human, but it takes a lot more "intestinal fortitude" to make calls like that in this generation than it did 20 years ago.

So, what say you and how would you like to see things judged differently?

All I want is more objectivity, and more transparency. For instance, I wouldn't mind a slightly increased emphasis on tics, and every now and again I'd like to see judges held accountable in public and be given an opportunity to explain themselves. I think many people would be much happier if this came about.