chaos001 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Then maybe he should reconsider referring to placements 7-12 as the bottom 6. What would placements 13-22 be in his context? Seppuku-level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruckner8 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 I absolutely agree. However, I also believe that Yoda didn't mean for it to sound condescending....but it did! In fact, this year proves that sometimes the difference between top 3 and top 8 is simply the design and not the organization, CI nor MM attitude. As the author of CI, I feel compelled to point out that CI only comes into play when it's close...it doesn't cause corps to win that suck. To use CI in its proper context with Cavies, you'd have to ask "I wonder if Madison [or any lower placing corps] was actually better than Cavies?" If a vast majority feel that Madison was better, then we can conclude that CI played a role. The question can be asked for any slot. Furthermore, if "the design" was truly the only problem with Cavies, then how come their sub captions don't bare that out? For if they had 10th place design and 1st place performance, they'd end up around 5-6th place, right? In fact, they had ZERO captions where the performance outpaced the design...in every case, the same or LOWER. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plan9 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 As the author of CI, I feel compelled to point out that CI only comes into play when it's close...it doesn't cause corps to win that suck. To use CI in its proper context with Cavies, you'd have to ask "I wonder if Madison [or any lower placing corps] was actually better than Cavies?" If a vast majority feel that Madison was better, then we can conclude that CI played a role. The question can be asked for any slot. Furthermore, if "the design" was truly the only problem with Cavies, then how come their sub captions don't bare that out? For if they had 10th place design and 1st place performance, they'd end up around 5-6th place, right? In fact, they had ZERO captions where the performance outpaced the design...in every case, the same or LOWER. Far be it for me to go toe to toe with the Master of CI (I'm verklempt ), however I am not suggesting that design by itself can carry a corps to the title. In fact design requires top notch captions as well (but I refer to them as "the ticket ride")....IMO championships are built on the backs of monster designs (those..."oh yeah, that's one's going to seriously compete" designs). And in the best DC designs, the captions actually rise up to meet the level of the production. Some obvious exceptions, BD 08 and Crown 12 Percussion. And again IMO, the sheets just record all of that....they're not calculated.... just judge's rationale for outcomes. Also, I'm not suggesting that design was Cavies only problem this year, but design is like a badly written musical with the best actors and musicians available to perform it. They can only take it so far, and I would even suggest that as the season begins and everyone (including the MM's) know that they have a weak performance vehicle....it effects the attitude of the performers and even the staff. In some way, I think I'm attempting to define CI and how it works negatively as well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda1234 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Then maybe he should reconsider referring to placements 7-12 as the bottom 6. What would placements 13-22 be in his context? You're right. I figured top 6/bottom 6 was a good dividing line since its been awhile since the corps was in the 7-12 range. If corps are "offended" by the "bottom 6" status, maybe that will motivate the right people to put a better product on the field. I think the fans would love it if the top 12 all had the same level of performance. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaos001 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 You're right. I figured top 6/bottom 6 was a good dividing line since its been awhile since the corps was in the 7-12 range. If corps are "offended" by the "bottom 6" status, maybe that will motivate the right people to put a better product on the field. I think the fans would love it if the top 12 all had the same level of performance. Even if everyone comes out with a great product, someone has to place 7-12. Nothing wrong with that. Three of my favorite shows were in this bracket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 If corps are "offended" by the "bottom 6" status, maybe that will motivate the right people to put a better product on the field. Since when is some of the Corps that finished in " bottom 6 " not as good a " product " as some of tne Corps " product " in the higher 6 ? If you are talking what judges think, you might have a point. But rarely do I not find a Corps show or two in lower placements a " better product " than one of two that perhaps placed higher. Sometimes its a MUCH better " product" as far as my enjoyment level is concerned too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda1234 Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 Awesome. We don't all have the same standard of what "good" is. But in a competitive situation the object is to be undeniably "the best". Anyone ever seen a 7-12 show and felt like that show/corps was undeniably "the best"? I haven't ever experienced that. Cavaliers will be competitive again and I can't wait to see it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kickhaltsforlife Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 (edited) Cavies had plenty of performance issues. I know some turned a blind eye/ deaf ear to them.. But they didnt sound all that great, and they looked awful on the field. Bring the red things.... haven't recieved any since the last time I spoke out on the Cavies. But no.. they are so great. best drum corpz ever!!!! I luved their sunglasses!!!! <3<3<3 I <3 the cavaliers!!! Yeah boyz!! Edited September 14, 2012 by kickhaltsforlife 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaos001 Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 Cavie had plenty of performance issues. I know some turned a blind eye/ deaf ear to them.. But they didnt sound all that great, and they looked awful on the field. Bring the red things.... haven't recieved any since the last time I spoke out on the Cavies. But no.. they are so great. best drum corpz ever!!!! I luved their sunglasses!!!! <3<3<3 I <3 the cavaliers!!! Yeah boyz!! The ones who would red mark this post would only do that because they're being defensive. Truth is, the Cavies' M&M wasn't very good. Even on Finals night it was obvious with poor marching technique and playing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Boo Posted September 15, 2012 Author Share Posted September 15, 2012 I've read that this video of Aimachi Marching Band is one of Mitch Rogers' drills. 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.