cixelsyd Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Read my second statement. You presented two mutually exclusive statements; either the best are the best and remain so, or judges are cheating and not doing their jobs. If you are going to distort my words that grotesquely, there is little point discussing any further. My statements were not mutually exclusive. I only said that slotting can cause less diverse results, not that it is. But since you want your "gotcha!" moment - yes, there are times when (in my opinion) judges fail to fully respond to differences in performance quality on a given day. That is not because they "cheat" - I have no reason to believe they are not making a sincere effort to give accurate results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 If you are going to distort my words that grotesquely, there is little point discussing any further. My statements were not mutually exclusive. I only said that slotting can cause less diverse results, not that it is. But since you want your "gotcha!" moment - yes, there are times when (in my opinion) judges fail to fully respond to differences in performance quality on a given day. That is not because they "cheat" - I have no reason to believe they are not making a sincere effort to give accurate results. Why bring it (slotting) up if it is not what you think is a cause? Are the best really the best in your eyes, or are they not the best? If not, then you said that 'slotting' can be a cause...if you think judges are doing that, then you must think they are not giving an honest evaluation, and just going with the 'slotting' concept regardless of the corps performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Why bring it (slotting) up if it is not what you think is a cause? Are the best really the best in your eyes, or are they not the best? If not, then you said that 'slotting' can be a cause...if you think judges are doing that, then you must think they are not giving an honest evaluation, and just going with the 'slotting' concept regardless of the corps performance. Just because I mentioned the word "slotting" does not mean that I therefore think judges are being purposely dishonest. Again, I said that in my opinion (remember, subjective judging is just another set of opinions), judges sometimes fail to fully respond to performance variations. No one is perfect. I presume that my own opinions are not so bad, given that they agree with the judges so often. It is interesting to note the character of those incidences when we do not agree. In DCI world class, whenever I disagree with a judging result, it seems to me that they err in the direction of consistency with past results. In marching band contests, other drum corps circuits, or even DCI open class, those differences of opinion are evenly split in either direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Thank you. You'll be my first appointment. Name your caption. percussion effect. easier to judge with a drink in hand from upstairs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Not sure what to conclude from this. Are you saying that the tick system contributed to the score variations back in the day? in many ways yes. Because there was no rubric to follow....it was that guys perception. the sheets were vague, and your tick could vary from my tick. In 1975, The Skyliners and Yankee Rebels were butting heads in percussion all year. If judge A was at the show, Sky won. Loved their darker tuning, and was willing to give the benefit of the doubt for stuff that sounded fuzzy due to the tuning. When judge B was on, the Rebs won, because their tuning let it all hang out, and Sky's tuning gave everything a level of fuzz. At the end, judge B was on finals, and the Rebs won drums. Had A been on, Sky would have won. There are a zillion stories like this. Certain judging associations were more brutal than others, hated certain regions styles of doing things etc. Sheets, if they have any, had little to go on, as compared to today. Yes today's system is subjective, but the sheets have definded rubrics to work with that spell things out much more clearly. Now...are the new sheets being judged as they should? In some cases yes. I think more time is needed so people truly understand it's set up to reward performer, not demand. I also think if the field captions were set up like A class guards in WGI or PA in WGI, you'd also see things get more interesting, as they truly reward performer over the book Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Okay, so the sheets are more performer driven. Has the judging actually reflected that, or not, in your opinion? not fully. But I didn't think it would right away. Those sheets weren't just a change in the sheets or the verbiage....it was a philosophical overhaul. I also think part of the problem is some of the corps...demand for the sake of demand, while fan appealing, isn't going to get rewarded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 in many ways yes. Because there was no rubric to follow....it was that guys perception. the sheets were vague, and your tick could vary from my tick. In 1975, The Skyliners and Yankee Rebels were butting heads in percussion all year. If judge A was at the show, Sky won. Loved their darker tuning, and was willing to give the benefit of the doubt for stuff that sounded fuzzy due to the tuning. When judge B was on, the Rebs won, because their tuning let it all hang out, and Sky's tuning gave everything a level of fuzz. At the end, judge B was on finals, and the Rebs won drums. Had A been on, Sky would have won. But it sounds like these judges would have given the same results under a subjective system like today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted March 5, 2013 Author Share Posted March 5, 2013 Some more fascinating ideas. This feels like a different way of describing Bruckner8's "competitive inertia". Sorry I can't respond at more length, but I have to duck out to prepare for a weekend as a Michael Boo groupie. "Well, I'm back", to borrow a phrase. I don't want to start a new thread just to say that it was very nice meeting Michael Boo on Saturday in Valparaiso and chatting with him for fifteen minutes. I did not get to watch him play, because two ensembles had partnered to present Johan de Meij's Symphony No. 1 "The Lord of the Rings" in a 25th anniversary performance under the direction of Maestro de Meji, but the doubling didn't include a need for two tympanists, so Michael gave way to allow the musician in the college ensemble to have that experience. It was wonderful to hear that piece live. Imagine a drum corps performing it! (But see below.) And Michael, unsurprisingly, proved to be a very friendly and welcoming conversationalist. The concert was the highlight of a weekend's worth of Tolkien scholarship (The Hobbit was published 75 years ago) which included a banquet for attendees later that evening. Johan de Meij was in attendance at the dinner (he'd also given a half-hour preshow talk: he cited Tchaikovsky's Symphony No. 5 and Mahler's Symphony No. 2 as orchestral works he particularly enjoys), and I got to ask him what he thought about others' adaptations of his work: specifically, I was thinking of the Cadets' 1999 performance of his Symphony No. 2 "The Big Apple", which was my first occasion hearing his music (and which I enjoyed very much). It wasn't quite a grimace that crossed his face as he noted that he'd been at the Finals performance --something I had remembered from the PBS broadcast-- and that he hadn't cared for the arrangement. More generally, he said that while he respected the musicianship and overall talent on display in drum corps, he feels that music comes second to choreography in this medium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Haring Posted March 6, 2013 Share Posted March 6, 2013 percussion effect. easier to judge with a drink in hand from upstairs OK... you have percussion effect. Mike Davis can cover the rest of the captions. I'll judge for Best Drum Major. That's it... we're done. Problems solved. Moderators, please close this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Haring Posted March 6, 2013 Share Posted March 6, 2013 Next, we'll need to hire Joe Flacco's agent to negotiate our judges' salaries. 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.