What will help DCI become more entertaining

[Pete Freedman]

Kotowed....hmmm an interesting take on what is a public "art". Perhaps you meant who thought about about the paying audience and what they wanted and did not worry about the WGI Mafia's opinion. This is an activity that makes it's money from sales to fans of tickets, t-shirts, DVD etc.

Heaven forbid they pander to those creative croutons....

Right; the wrong choice of words, and also my meaning was poorly communicated. I just put an edit in that post to clarify. I'm in favor of what Surf does, but the idea that more accessible shows should outscore less accessible shows is a bad idea, in my opinion. Corps should score higher when they perform better, both on the technical side and the GE side. In GE, in comparing Surf's Bridgemania to BD's Cabaret Voltaire, the GE judges should consider how well the corps members express the ideas and passions in the respective shows, and not the accessibility of the shows or other factors regarding the source material.

Let's not forget that this is what GE judges are good at; they are educators who spend their time evaluating young people's ability to express artistic ideas, and helping them do it better. That's why they are trained and trusted to judge it.

[Jeff Ream]

Why? An unsolicited email suggestion sent to Cesario from a DCP hack and he would adjust his DCI philosophy; nope,... he might placate me with a response stating that he will, of course, 'seriously' contemplate it and than just toss it aside into the junk mail because it was not his idea. We can banter about all we want here on DCP for the hey of it, but when it comes to our suggestions being taken seriously by the ivory tower elite, forget it.

speaking as a DCP hack LOL....

actually had a conversation with Michael 3 years ago about the very topic we're discussing. Just happened to run into him, and he remembered me from an indoor clinic he had presented at 3/4 years earlier. He knew he knew the face ( infamy will do that), and I reminded him that his presentation then mirrored his iniative he was then just starting, and it was a great chat. I think you'd find him to be more open than you think.

One sentence he uttered that day sticks with me:

"judges are fans too. Sure you get all technical, and we will reward it because of the words on the sheets. But we want to cheer, we want to laugh, we want to cry....it's up to the designers to finally make that happen".

still applies to this day

[Jeff Ream]

I would suggest a little deeper analysis. Now the big question, how many will come again?

very saavy release. he combines LOS as 3 days total...finals to finals is down from what I remember. No specifics on the total nut. Well crafted by a PR person

[Pete Freedman]

Kotowed....hmmm an interesting take on what is a public "art". Perhaps you meant who thought about about the paying audience and what they wanted and did not worry about the WGI Mafia's opinion. This is an activity that makes it's money from sales to fans of tickets, t-shirts, DVD etc.

Heaven forbid they pander to those creative croutons....

Now, about the WGI Mafia:

For 2012 finals the GE Visual judges were Rich Kemp and Mike Stone, both of whom are listed as WGI judges as well. BD got a .45 advantage over Crown in GE Visual, although BD scored about 1.1 higher overall. So let's look at the other visual judges: Vis Performance: Juno Orefice. Vis Ensemble: Debbie Torchia. Color Guard: Lee Carlson. None of these people is listed as a current WGI judge. Are they WGI instructors? Or what? Where is the Mafia?

Also, did Rich Kemp and Mike Stone come to DCI from WGI, or the other way around? Finally, you can explain why you think the WGI influence caused them to score BD higher as opposed to, say, lower.

My question is: Who are the "WGI Mafia" that is allegedly turning DCI into WGI? Based on this one show there seems to be an influence, but not enough by itself to explain the 'inaccessible' BD's win. And even that influence is only if Rich Kemp and Mike Stone started as WGI people and then invaded DCI.

Sources:

2012 DCI Finals scores:

http://www.dci.org/s...b7-d7fe9e874b49

WGI Judges:

http://www.wgi.org/judges.php

A nice interview of Michael Cesario in which he discusses WGI, DCI, and MB influencing each other over the years:

http://mastersmarchi...michael-cesario

[MikeD]

Because it certainly is worth comparing today's Finals numbers with what they were in the "heyday" (if you will) of Finals to get an idea of how the activity has evolved (good or bad).

Yes, the Finals numbers in Montreal may or may not be 100% accurate, but I am sure that DCI didn't outright lie about the numbers and say there were thousands upon thousands of people in the stands when there were only like 10 or so. I'm betting it was a matter of estimation, with the point being that there were far greater numbers (whatever they were) in the seats at Finals then than there is now.

I was not at Finals in Montreal, however I have been to every one since 1989 (with the exception of one year). I can tell you that whatever the exact numbers have been, there were more people attending Finals when I started going vs. now, and there have been countless discussions on DCP as to why and what it all means.

It would have been just as reasonable to compare them to Orlando of the 90's when there were 12K in attendance...in fact that would have had more relevance, since at least it wasn't 30+ years ago.

IMO, of course, any comparisons going back very far are not relevant...really including Orlando.

For me, total DCI show attendance in a year all over the country is a lot more important than just looking at champs, anyway.

Plus, today you have to factor in 1/4 finals at the movies and semis online to get the total audience for champs, so the number is far higher than just those at the show in today's world.

[Triple Forte]

In GE, in comparing Surf's Bridgemania to BD's Cabaret Voltaire, the GE judges should consider how well the corps members express the ideas and passions in the respective shows, and not the accessibility of the shows or other factors regarding the source material.

So...are you saying BD expressed their show (Minus technical achievement of coarse) far better than the Jersey Surf? I don't really agree. Just about any fan could tell you what the Jersey Surf were expressing/projecting....I am confident we can't say the same thing about BD's show. If judges are 'fans'....then they should have grasped on to the Surf show much easier than grabbing on to BD's show.

Would be very interesting to see how much of a show design a judge grasps on their own (Without endless information from a corps staff about their show...verbal and written).

[Stu]

One sentence he [Cesario] uttered that day sticks with me:

"Judges are fans too. Sure you get all technical, and we will reward it because of the words on the sheets. But we want to cheer, we want to laugh, we want to cry....it's up to the designers to finally make that happen".

And I would have replied; "However, we are not talking about the technical but the shear communication!! And judges have a much higher knowledge about the intricacies of each show than the general audience due to closely interacting with corps design staff throughout the season; and due to that very close staff/judge communication the judges can see, hear, and understand the nuances which completely escape the general audience. Want an example? The judges were 'well versed' on the Cabaret Voltaire show concept by the Devils staff feeding them with historical data and design nuance information; yet the overwhelming majority of the paying audience forked out big bucks to one show without any knowledge at all of the avant-garde Dada movement let alone the significance of the Switzerland venue, and therefore most in the audience, even at Finals, sat there going, 'huh? what? I do not get it.' while the judges understood each and every nuance."

[Stu]

Would be very interesting to see how much of a show design a judge grasps on their own (Without endless information from a corps staff about their show...verbal and written).

Ka-Boom!!!! See my post above because I completely agree here!!!!

[BRASSO]

Plus, today you have to factor in 1/4 finals at the movies and semis online to get the total audience for champs, so the number is far higher than just those at the show in today's world.

Well, if we are going to count those fans that watched DCI Championships off site in a theatre within the totals, then logically we would likewise need to count in the totals of those that watched the shows off site on TV too. And if you want to disregard comparisons from earlier decades, then we could simply look at DCI attendance watchers from 2005 and 2012. In this case, factoring in the off site watchers of Championships, its clear that 2005 had perhaps 150,000 more viewers of their Championships than that from last season.... in other words, A LOT more viewers in 2005 than last season. I think a live attendance count comparison is a better barometer among years, but thats not what you wanted to include, so there it is.

Edited May 17, 2013 by BRASSO

[MikeD]

Well, if we are going to count those fans that watched DCI Championships off site in a theatre within the totals, then logically we would likewise need to count in the totals of those that watched the shows off site on TV too. And if you want to disregard comparisons from earlier decades, then we could simply look at DCI attendance watchers from 2005 and 2012. In this case, factoring in the off site watchers of Championships, its clear that 2005 had perhaps 150,000 more viewers of their Championships than that from last season.... in other words, a lot more viewers in 2005 than last season. I think live attendance count is a better barometer, but thats not what you wanted to compare, so there it is.

I think anyone watching that brings in revenue to DCI is the best barometer, if you want to use champs.

The best barometer is season attendance at all DCI events, if evaluating the health of the activity around the country is the goal...IMO of course.