CrownLeadSop Posted August 15, 2012 Share Posted August 15, 2012 (edited) They may be trying to reward consistent excellence over time versus a one-time high score. I'm sure there is a reason. It also addresses the issue of one judge having the sole responsibility for caption awards in their hands/on their shoulders. I like it the way it is. Edited August 15, 2012 by CrownLeadSop 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quad Aces Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Again, your participation on DCP is appreciated by myself, Rex, and others I'm sure. We agree that "every question doesn't warrant a press release of some sort". However, on the 'authoritative source' for DCI competition information - in an article that you wrote, in-fact - the information is wrong and has not as of this moment been corrected. Your article STILL says "There was a tie for the John Brazale Best Visual Performance Award, between Blue Devils and Carolina Crown." I realize this is a little itty-bitty point and grant you that in the overall scheme of things, its a minor detail. However, when corps and fans go a-braggin (as they've earned, respectively) about the 2012 results in the future - the 'official' site for the activity has it wrong, despite the error having been brought to the author's attention. As skywhopper notes above [with my edit], "If the final outcome *doesn't* matter [enough to be correctly reported by DCI in their official reporting], then why give the award at all?" OK - I've beat this drum enough. Peace out. I think what Mike is saying is that there really was a tie for the visual caption award (despite the old script that Brandt was reading from saying that ties can't happen) because ties were "re-allowed" as of the vote in 2001. So, in the end the announcement on Sat. was correct, and there is no need to correct anything on DCI's website or anything like that. Is all of that right, Mike? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the lone ranger Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I think what Mike is saying is that there really was a tie for the visual caption award (despite the old script that Brandt was reading from saying that ties can't happen) because ties were "re-allowed" as of the vote in 2001. So, in the end the announcement on Sat. was correct, and there is no need to correct anything on DCI's website or anything like that. Is all of that right, Mike? No. How is everyone so confused still. There is no tie for the award. Crown won outright. The only way there can be a tie is if they were tied after semis. And tied again in finals. In this case crown won finals by .2 , in case of an averaged tie, whoever wins finals night is the winner, therefore crown is the sole winner.case closed. It being announced as a tie, was a mistake. Just like the misreading of the brass award. Notice there are no bluedevils getting on here saying anything different. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrlandoContraAlum Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) Here's what I've found out, (This has greatly intrigued me as well, so I've been trying to get to the bottom of it.) In 2001, a rule was passed that eliminated ties. In 2009, George Hopkins made a motion at the Rules Congress to eliminate the rule that eliminated ties. This came up suddenly, during the event, and it was unanimously approved by all the directors. The script handed to Brandt was one thing that had not been changed over the years and no one (including me) caught it. So, the answer is: Yes, ties are allowed in the caption awards, despite what Brandt announced earlier because he read exactly what was given to him. And for those who didn't see an earlier thread; the confusion about the brass trophy came up because Brandt was given two sheets...one with the caption awards and one with the scores. He had to go between the two during his announcements and his eyes went to the name above a caption award instead of below. Someone was pointing to each to keep him on track, but it was just to keep him reading off the correct sheet at the proper time. This too will be corrected as Brandt will from now on be given a single sheet in script form that will allow him to simply read from the top down in finale. The talk among some about Brandt needing to be replaced due to the issue at Finals, without knowing what was happening behind the scenes, was troubling. Brandt is neither feeble, past his prime or incompetent. He is Brandt Crocker, and has more than earned being embraced by all in the activity. He's as vital now as he was in 1972. Would someone please do a mock-up t-shirt in PhotoShop with his photo and the words, "Needs more Brandt"? I think what Mike is saying is that there really was a tie for the visual caption award (despite the old script that Brandt was reading from saying that ties can't happen) because ties were "re-allowed" as of the vote in 2001. So, in the end the announcement on Sat. was correct, and there is no need to correct anything on DCI's website or anything like that. Is all of that right, Mike? Based on the above bolded quotes, then yes, regardless of script, ties CAN happen in caption awards (but not for 1st place overall). Quad Aces simply typed the wrong year. From 2001 to 2009, there could be no ties. After 2009, there could. No. How is everyone so confused still. There is no tie for the award. Crown won outright. The only way there can be a tie is if they were tied after semis. And tied again in finals. In this case crown won finals by .2 , in case of an averaged tie, whoever wins finals night is the winner, therefore crown is the sole winner.case closed. It being announced as a tie, was a mistake. Just like the misreading of the brass award. Notice there are no bluedevils getting on here saying anything different. And this is, therefore, wrong. Edited August 16, 2012 by OrlandoContraAlum 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Boo Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I think what Mike is saying is that there really was a tie for the visual caption award (despite the old script that Brandt was reading from saying that ties can't happen) because ties were "re-allowed" as of the vote in 2001. So, in the end the announcement on Sat. was correct, and there is no need to correct anything on DCI's website or anything like that. Is all of that right, Mike? Yes; you are correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Boo Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Again, your participation on DCP is appreciated by myself, Rex, and others I'm sure. We agree that "every question doesn't warrant a press release of some sort". However, on the 'authoritative source' for DCI competition information - in an article that you wrote, in-fact - the information is wrong and has not as of this moment been corrected. Your article STILL says "There was a tie for the John Brazale Best Visual Performance Award, between Blue Devils and Carolina Crown." I realize this is a little itty-bitty point and grant you that in the overall scheme of things, its a minor detail. However, when corps and fans go a-braggin (as they've earned, respectively) about the 2012 results in the future - the 'official' site for the activity has it wrong, despite the error having been brought to the author's attention. As skywhopper notes above [with my edit], "If the final outcome *doesn't* matter [enough to be correctly reported by DCI in their official reporting], then why give the award at all?" OK - I've beat this drum enough. Peace out. My head hurts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the lone ranger Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) Based on the above bolded quotes, then yes, regardless of script, ties CAN happen in caption awards (but not for 1st place overall). Quad Aces simply typed the wrong year. From 2001 to 2009, there could be no ties. After 2009, there could. Tell that to the blue devils. Who have no trophy, and to Todd Ryan who himself said crown was the outright winner. You can't just quote other people and tell it for truth. And this is, therefore, wrong. Edited August 16, 2012 by the lone ranger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetoSuave Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Yes; you are correct. Then if this is in-fact correct and DCI's official position is that there is a tie for the award, I offer a sincere apology to Mike Boo and DCI for my comments. I can see now how Brandt Crocker was confused. Now - someone PLEASE go tell Carolina Crown and their fans that they did not win the award solely and get a trophy over to the guys in Concord. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the lone ranger Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) Then if this is in-fact correct and DCI's official position is that there is a tie for the award, I offer a sincere apology to Mike Boo and DCI for my comments. I can see now how Brandt Crocker was confused. Now - someone PLEASE go tell Carolina Crown and their fans that they did not win the award solely and get a trophy over to the guys in Concord. No it is not correct. I'll eat crow, If anyone can show any proof. Not just conjecture. Edited August 16, 2012 by the lone ranger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywhopper Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I think this discussion is all pointless since we don't have any official rules, and as far as I know, the details of Hop's 2009 rule proposal for "ties are cool" are unpublished. I had thought the rule was just for the sake of deciding the medal winners. Since championships are decided based on solely the finals scores (and the tie-break could have been controversial in terms of caption rankings prevailing), that's really a separate topic than caption awards, which are based on combined score (but which have the easy tie-break of finals-night score if necessary). But Boo says the ties-okay rule applies to caption awards, too. So... I'm going with what Boo says. Though I still wish DCI published an authoritative list on their site of championship and caption winners through the years. 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.