Have DCI Standings Actually Stagnated?

[cixelsyd]

Don't you think that sports that rely on an objective score system will naturally have a more diverse pool of winners?

No.

If you drop a fly ball you miss the out and could lose the game. If you a drop a rifle... well maybe the judge doesn't catch it, or he likes the recovery, or maybe the dancer did it on purpose but it was not performed like it, or maybe he sees and that's all he/she focuses on.

So you are saying that subjective judging yields less diverse results (i.e. slotting) because they either miss mistakes or evaluate them differently for different corps? You may be correct there. But I would not settle for that state of affairs. Subjective judging should yield valid results. If enough mistakes are being missed, maybe judging needs to be improved to fix that.

[cixelsyd]

Maybe volatility is actually uncharacteristic of judged performances and art if you consider the standards set for what is "perfect" is predetermined by the standards of past winners and past judging experiences. The beginning of DCI could be said to have more volatility because it lacked this. (after all DCI was new and so were the judging standards)

Drum corps judging was not new in 1972. If the newness of DCI mattered, then 1972-3-4 would have been more volatile than the preceding years. Do you think it was?

The lack of volatility comes from the judges having a clearer idea about what wins year after year and wanting to validate that their choices every year are as objective as possible. They understand that the winner they selected last year has to be at-least as good or comparable to the winner this year. This idea gives a certain legitimacy to the criteria being judged and how the judges interpret that criteria (They don't want to be wrong or seen as subjective). If there wasn't this development of a standard then it's likely that a judge who is inconsistent in is subjective perception of shows could severely corrupt the integrity of the judging establishment.

So there is an incentive to not refine judging procedures but to reinforce them. And it is not just for the sake of the integrity of DCI and the judges but also for the sake of the competing corps. They don't want to have to guess what the judges look for in championship shows and they want to be able to design shows with a consistent judging system so that it can be within a ball park chance of winning (let's not let this point devolve in to designing for the judges vs. designing for the fans please).

So, you have the desire for a consistent and objective judging system/style by all parties (Fans, Corps, DCI, Judges)but then you have corps that, just by the nature of them winning, shape that system/style.

You keep using the word "objective" when we have a subjective judging system. But if I substitute the word "consistent" for "objective", I think I follow you. Do I have that right?

[charlie1223]

No.

So you are saying that subjective judging yields less diverse results (i.e. slotting) because they either miss mistakes or evaluate them differently for different corps? You may be correct there. But I would not settle for that state of affairs. Subjective judging should yield valid results. If enough mistakes are being missed, maybe judging needs to be improved to fix that.

The evidence presented in drum corps and figure skating prove otherwise. What do you say to that when subjective judging have streaks of continuous winners? You can't just ignore the facts! Maybe you want to find a sport with a subjective judging system that has a more volital standings? Then that would be interesting. But having a judge decide your score is different than the players. Imagine if touchdowns were awarded based on the GE of the players victory dance afterward!

Edited March 1, 2013 by charlie1223

[charlie1223]

Drum corps judging was not new in 1972. If the newness of DCI mattered, then 1972-3-4 would have been more volatile than the preceding years. Do you think it was?

You keep using the word "objective" when we have a subjective judging system. But if I substitute the word "consistent" for "objective", I think I follow you. Do I have that right?

Judging drum corps wasn't new but the sheets used for judging were no?

PT2: well... I wouldn't use them interchangeable but the idea was that appearance of objectivity (which is technically what we all want from a subjective judging system come from being consistent on how you judge). You're right in thinking they are related but I don't know if they are interchangeable.

[Stu]

cixelsyd: this question was asked of you > "Don't you think that sports that rely on an objective score system will naturally have a more diverse pool of winners?" and you replied 'No'.

Then explain why all of the objective scoring sports organizations have had a last place team walloping a first place team in various games and/or play-off scenarios (when has that 'ever' happened in a subjective system like DCI?). All objective scoring sports organizations also have a far grater percentage of different teams winning the grand prize called the Superbowl, World Series, Stanly Cup, ad infinitum. I can give you a plethora of specific examples which would completely counter and destroy your position on this but it would also take up a huge amount of space in one posting.

[BRASSO]

The evidence presented in drum corps and figure skating prove otherwise.

Why are we comparing the scores and placements in DCI with the sport of " figure skating " ?

Most of the competition in Figure skating is either a single competitor, or 2 skaters. It is not even remotely a " team " event competitition.

If we insist on comparing a similar subjective judged system involving a body of water, a team sport, and forms and creative things judged in unison, by team members, etc then team Synchronized Swimming is far more appropriate as a team sport to compare than the mostly single, dual skater sport of " figure skating "

Then again, lets not compare figure skating and synchronized swimming to DCI... either of them.... as the thought of comparing Drum Corps judged shows to either of these just gives me a headache.

Lets make an agreement here on DCP... no more comparisons of Drum Corps competitions to MLB, Figure Skating or Synchronized Swimming. Hows that ?

Edited March 1, 2013 by BRASSO

[charlie1223]

Why are we comparing the scores and placements in DCI with the sport of " figure skating " ?

Most of the competition in Figure skating is either a single competitor, or 2 skaters. It is not even remotely a " team " event competitition.

If we insist on comparing a similar subjective judged system involving a body of water, a team sport, and forms and creative things judged in unison, by team members, etc then team Synchronized Swimming is far more appropriate as a team sport to compare than the mostly single, dual skater sport of " figure skating "

Then again, lets not compare figure skating and synchronized swimming to DCI... either of them.... as the thought of comparing Drum Corps judged shows to either of these just gives me a headache.

Lets make an agreement here on DCP... no more comparisons of Drum Corps competitions to MLB, Figure Skating or Synchronized Swimming. Hows that ?

Just comparing the nature of subjectivness in scoring. Michael Boo actually wrote a great article on DCI.org comparing the two. So I'm not coming out of left field on this. Comparing the nature of how they score is Completly valid.

http://www.dci.org/news/view.cfm?news_id=c6ef6c95-e9d9-4e5f-941f-47cff784a984

Edited March 1, 2013 by charlie1223

[cixelsyd]

The evidence presented in drum corps and figure skating prove otherwise. What do you say to that when subjective judging have streaks of continuous winners?

Not having seen the figure skating examples, I would have to ask if any of these repeat champion skaters were actually that uniquely good that those streaks of titles were fully earned. Not to mention, what were all the other placements? I hear ice dancing has had a long and inflexible order of placement that might actually remind one of DCI, but what about the singles and pairs?

[charlie1223]

http://www.fina.org/H2O/docs/histofina/synchro.pdf

Synchronized swimming has many divisions but but you can still consistent teams (and team members) at the top. But since 1998 Russia has won the "Team Division".

How about WGI? Are we allowed to say that DCI and WGI are "similar"?

Percussion Independent Open has had 6 champions since they started in 1994. Only 3 of them have won more than 2. Riverside and Blue Knights are tied with 4 and Music City Mystique has 7.

[cixelsyd]

cixelsyd: this question was asked of you > "Don't you think that sports that rely on an objective score system will naturally have a more diverse pool of winners?" and you replied 'No'.

Then explain why all of the objective scoring sports organizations have had a last place team walloping a first place team in various games and/or play-off scenarios (when has that 'ever' happened in a subjective system like DCI?). All objective scoring sports organizations also have a far grater percentage of different teams winning the grand prize called the Superbowl, World Series, Stanly Cup, ad infinitum. I can give you a plethora of specific examples which would completely counter and destroy your position on this but it would also take up a huge amount of space in one posting.

First of all, the context of this thread was to compare annual results, not results of single events.

But more importantly, it is still incumbent on the competitor to outperform their previously superior competition to create diverse results in an objectively scored contest. I think many sports have more diverse pools of winners due to the nature of the sport, and the idea that in some cases, the sport was purposely created to be a close competition (unlike art/sports, which are not created solely for that purpose).