jasgre2000 Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 I find it strange that so many people want judges to reward design over performance and proficiency. I think it is a result of the unique mixture of art and sport (for lack of a better term). Normally, when you judge art, the judgment is based on the reaction of the consumer--e.g., how does the painting make you feel; does the film invoke any profound thoughts or emotions; etc. With sport, however ... even individual sport ... it doesn't really matter what things look like, or how the audience reacts ... what is important is how proficient the player/performer is (or who gets the ball in the basket more). In this activity, which seems to me to be rightly focused on the experience that is gained by the performers over the praise that is given to designers or the reaction from the crowd, I just can't understand why anyone would think we should be rewarding any particular kind of design over the proficiency of the players on the field. Otherwise, we would be destroying every incentive for the performers to work hard to be the very best we can be (which is the point of any competitive activity,in my opinion). I have no problem with design being a part of the judging sheets, but I think it is crazy to think that design should ever be more important than what the players are doing on the field. I have certainly enjoyed watching some shows over others, and I agree that it is important for DCI to keep audiences coming to shows (though I think it is fantasy to think drum corps will ever attract massive audiences). I don't think those goals should be accomplished by punishing players for show designs that some people don't like by docking their scores. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 As long as the criteria is equal and fair amongst all units, it matters not to me what the scores are based upon. Why? Because no matter what it will always just be opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamarag Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 Well, considering that of the two poll options, only one is already a consideration in the scoring... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 As long as the criteria is equal and fair amongst all units, it matters not to me what the scores are based upon. Why? Because no matter what it will always just be opinion. as many have said before ...it's always been an opinion................even BITD with the tic. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JKT90 Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 I think judges should stick to the sheets...notice it states multiple times to look for audience engagement. I think the real question is do they actually do that? https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/104151822/DCI-World-Class-Judging-Sheets.pdf 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamarag Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 (edited) I think judges should stick to the sheets...notice it states multiple times to look for audience engagement. I think the real question is do they actually do that? https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/104151822/DCI-World-Class-Judging-Sheets.pdf The important thing to remember as pertains to this thread is that audience engagement does not mean "entertainment level of the design". At all. Now, if "entertainment" was added as criteria on the sheets, we'd have a completely different ballgame. I'm not at all opposed to that either. Edited July 21, 2013 by Kamarag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JKT90 Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 1374433404[/url]' post='3291053']The important thing to remember as pertains to this thread is that audience engagement does not mean "entertainment level of the design". At all. Now, if "entertainment" was added as criteria on the sheets, we'd have a completely different ballgame. I'm not at all opposed to that either. How do you discern the difference between engagement and entertainment? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13strokeroll Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 The important thing to remember as pertains to this thread is that audience engagement does not mean "entertainment level of the design". At all. Now, if "entertainment" was added as criteria on the sheets, we'd have a completely different ballgame. I'm not at all opposed to that either. Agreed. But, how would a judge then determine if the audience is engaged vs. lethargic because they've just sat in 100 degree weather after a 1 hr rain delay? It's not a question easily resolved, if at all. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamarag Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 Agreed. But, how would a judge then determine if the audience is engaged vs. lethargic because they've just sat in 100 degree weather after a 1 hr rain delay? It's not a question easily resolved, if at all. Yea, absolutely. I do know that "audience engagement" *isn't* talking about the paying, ticket-holding audience. It refers to the judge as a member of the audience the corps are performing to. I know that's not the answer anyone wants to hear, but that's how it's directed by DCI. The idea being that corps performances affect individuals differently, and how can one person presume to speak for another on what's "engaging". Just because "the audience" isn't clapping doesn't mean they aren't engaged. I'm not defending this, I'm just trying to explain it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 (edited) I find it strange that so many people want judges to reward design over performance and proficiency. I think it is a result of the unique mixture of art and sport (for lack of a better term). Normally, when you judge art, the judgment is based on the reaction of the consumer--e.g., how does the painting make you feel; does the film invoke any profound thoughts or emotions; etc. With sport, however ... even individual sport ... it doesn't really matter what things look like, or how the audience reacts ... what is important is how proficient the player/performer is (or who gets the ball in the basket more). In this activity, which seems to me to be rightly focused on the experience that is gained by the performers over the praise that is given to designers or the reaction from the crowd, I just can't understand why anyone would think we should be rewarding any particular kind of design over the proficiency of the players on the field. Otherwise, we would be destroying every incentive for the performers to work hard to be the very best we can be (which is the point of any competitive activity,in my opinion). I have no problem with design being a part of the judging sheets, but I think it is crazy to think that design should ever be more important than what the players are doing on the field. I have certainly enjoyed watching some shows over others, and I agree that it is important for DCI to keep audiences coming to shows (though I think it is fantasy to think drum corps will ever attract massive audiences). I don't think those goals should be accomplished by punishing players for show designs that some people don't like by docking their scores. Your poll offered 2 choices. 2 choices alone on your question of " what should scores be based upon ?". Its like starting a poll for ice cream preferred flavors, and you offered up " Chocolate Chip " and " Rum Raisin " as the only 2 possible choices ( as you preferred " Chocolate Chip " ). And why does the answer be one of the other, as well ? Right now, all we should be able to agree on here with the 2 choices you provided to us is that " show design " has a a HUGE role on the current scoring sheets, whereas " performance profiency " plays a secondary role on the current scoring sheets. The better question ( of these 2 ) might be the question around perhaps providing more balance among these 2 things on the sheets, instead of a choice between one or the other. I do agree with you that today, more than ever before, that it is the adults that are being judged much more on the current judging sheets than the young performers in their performance. Under the tick system it was more the performer being judged. Today, under the build up system, show design points are found throughout most all the captions. For example, the 2013 Phantom Regiment MM's could execute almost to perfection their show, but it has no chance of winning a DCI Title this year. Thats because the Corps ahead of them have adults that created a show design that can be imperfectly executed but will have " show design " points to be had up the wazzoo to enable their Corps to garner points in the current judging sheets by August. Phantom is not alone in this either. Cavs, Madison, Bluecoats... and I submit even SCV, can not do so, as the judges like the eclectic, the complex, the highly new and creative, and the demanding shows much more, and points are to be had come August if there is just a modicum of performance execution in these top 3 Corps. What sets Corps 1-3 from Corps 4- 12 or so, in not so much " performance abilities " ( they all can play, move, and march pretty close in talent levels together ). Its Show Design. And thats the Adults. They're being judged out on the field more so than the performers, especially within the World Class Division. Edited July 21, 2013 by BRASSO 4 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.