Sanford trophy vs. DCI ring

[Stu]

Isn't a good bit of those sports refereeing decisions subjective judging: is the ball inside the batter's strike zone or not, was it foul or not, did the foot hit the bag before the tag? Because it is so subjective because it is human judgement, not robotic, that's why they had to invent the call to the Toronto office to review the play and the review under the hood in other sports.

In stick and ball activities... The subjectivity via the calls from the referee/umpire is miniscule compared to the subjectivity within judging in DCI, Ice Dancing, and other 100% completely 'judged' contests like BBQ Cook-offs. In fact, in all the years I have watched professional stick and ball sports, I cannot think of a game, other than where a safety penalty was given out (ie grabbing the face mask), where a subjective call from a ref or ump actually changed the competitive outcome.

In stick and ball activities... The scoring is completely objective (most points scored across home plate, most points scored through the end zone, most pucks entering the cage), whereas the scoring in DCI, Ice Dancing, and Food Contests is 100% completely subjective (educated opinion giving this group a 19.8 and that group a 19.5).

[drilltech1]

In stick and ball activities... The subjectivity via the calls from the referee/umpire is miniscule compared to the subjectivity within judging in DCI, Ice Dancing, and other 100% completely 'judged' contests like BBQ Cook-offs. In fact, in all the years I have watched professional stick and ball sports, I cannot think of a game, other than where a safety penalty was given out (ie grabbing the face mask), where a subjective call from a ref or ump actually changed the competitive outcome.

In stick and ball activities... The scoring is completely objective (most points scored across home plate, most points scored through the end zone, most pucks entering the cage), whereas the scoring in DCI, Ice Dancing, and Food Contests is 100% completely subjective (educated opinion giving this group a 19.8 and that group a 19.5).

Come on, guy, Who are you kidding? You evidently don't watch much sports.

You have never seen a missed foul call in basketball, hockey, lacrosse, or football? You've never seen a bad call by a ref which the later replay showed to be a strike rather than a ball or a ball rather than a strike? You've never seen a ref missing a flagrant foul behind the blue line because he was "sampling" elsewhere? Or missing holding penalties in football and basketball? Or missing a time penalty in basketball or lacrosse and field hockey? I won't even mention curling.

You evidently wear the same blinders the refs do or spend too much time criticizing the posts of others on DCP rather than dealing with reality, Get in the Game!

Edited September 26, 2013 by drilltech1

[Stu]

Come on, guy, Who are you kidding? You evidently don't watch much sports.

You have never seen a missed foul call in basketball, hockey, lacrosse, or football? You've never seen a bad call by a ref which the later replay showed to be a strike rather than a ball or a ball rather than a strike? You've never seen a ref missing a flagrant foul behind the blue line because he was "sampling" elsewhere? Or missing holding penalties in football and basketball? Or missing a time penalty in basketball or lacrosse and field hockey? I won't even mention curling.

You evidently wear the same blinders the refs do or spend too much time criticizing the posts of others on DCP rather than dealing with reality, Get in the Game!

I never said that I have not seen questionable calls by refs and umpires. What I 'did' say is that I have never seen a subjective call which actually and completely altered the final outcome of the game. Of course there are some touchdowns or runs across the plate that have been allowed or disallowed by questionable calls; but over the course of the entire game the team which benefited from that call won not because of that call but won because of the scoring which took place throughout the entire game apart from that call. In 'objective outcome' competitions there is a small percentage of subjectivity via the refs/umps (mainly to keep the teams from cheating), but in DCI and Ice Dancing the subjectivity of who wins is not only large, it is 100%.

[drilltech1]

Any more drummers, I mean percussionists adding to this thread?

[corpsband]

Come on, guy, Who are you kidding? You evidently don't watch much sports.

You have never seen a missed foul call in basketball, hockey, lacrosse, or football? You've never seen a bad call by a ref which the later replay showed to be a strike rather than a ball or a ball rather than a strike? You've never seen a ref missing a flagrant foul behind the blue line because he was "sampling" elsewhere? Or missing holding penalties in football and basketball? Or missing a time penalty in basketball or lacrosse and field hockey? I won't even mention curling.

You evidently wear the same blinders the refs do or spend too much time criticizing the posts of others on DCP rather than dealing with reality, Get in the Game!

You're conflating "human error" with "subjective scoring".

They're NOT the same.

The ball goes through the hoop. That's two points.

The music, drill, guard, and percussion combine for a somewhat effective moment at this point in the show. That's...not objective at all.

Sure both systems are subject to human error. The ref can miss the call. The percussion judge can be in the wrong place all the time.

But there's not much subjectivity in the "the ball crossed the line". It did or it didn't. In most cases there's no "opinion" involved at all. Contrast that to the verbiage on a DCI sheet. In most (all) cases it's a subjective assessment on some aspect of a performance. It's ALL opinion.

Edited September 27, 2013 by corpsband

[Slingerland]

in answer to the original question, would someone rather win a National Championship, or win "Miss Congenianality*"? Really? That's a thing?

* (ok, Miss "Drums Marginally Better Than the Other Top Bands" - better? )

Edited September 27, 2013 by Slingerland

[charlie1223]

You're conflating "human error" with "subjective scoring".

They're NOT the same.

The ball goes through the hoop. That's two points.

The music, drill, guard, and percussion combine for a somewhat effective moment at this point in the show. That's...not objective at all.

Sure both systems are subject to human error. The ref can miss the call. The percussion judge can be in the wrong place all the time.

But there's not much subjectivity in the "the ball crossed the line". It did or it didn't. In most cases there's no "opinion" involved at all. Contrast that to the verbiage on a DCI sheet. In most (all) cases it's a subjective assessment on some aspect of a performance. It's ALL opinion.

Well, the system only works because there is an EFFORT to be objective... if it was purely subjective I think we would have corps that place lower suddenly being at the top because... its the judges opinion. That doesn't happen because we believe in an objective standard, agreed upon by the people we deem to be professionals in our field, and defended by evidence (as heard from judges tapes and their sheets), and that makes it "work".

We have criteria which we say a top corps needs to fulfill and we do have an objective understanding of what high execution and low execution is (talking purely in generalities). There's a standard for what is good and bad because there is some objective part that pretty much everyone in the marching arts agrees on it. When you start to get really close... ie. comparing 5 REALLY great groups.. then it gets more subjective... but I think that there is SOME level of objectiveness involved with judging....

Just to add... The GE captions... yes highly subjective... but the achievement captions that judge what is physically going on (and not emotionally or "effect") do have SOME objective elements to them to make the system work. If you teach or judge... im sure this is pretty obvious. Even if its sometimes hard to "catch"... but a late attack is a late attack. And a dropped rifle is a dropped rifle.

Edited September 27, 2013 by charlie1223

[Stu]

Well, the system only works because there is an EFFORT to be objective... if it was purely subjective I think we would have corps that place lower suddenly being at the top because... its the judges opinion. That doesn't happen because we believe in an objective standard, agreed upon by the people we deem to be professionals in our field, and defended by evidence (as heard from judges tapes and their sheets), and that makes it "work".

We have criteria which we say a top corps needs to fulfill and we do have an objective understanding of what high execution and low execution is (talking purely in generalities). There's a standard for what is good and bad because there is some objective part that pretty much everyone in the marching arts agrees on it. When you start to get really close... ie. comparing 5 REALLY great groups.. then it gets more subjective... but I think that there is SOME level of objectiveness involved with judging....

Just to add... The GE captions... yes highly subjective... but the achievement captions that judge what is physically going on (and not emotionally or "effect") do have SOME objective elements to them to make the system work.

There are 'objective results' and 'subjective evaluations', but, no offense, but there is no such thing as 'objective evaluation' no matter what language appears on the judging sheets. A baseball hit over the left field wall inside the foul pole yields a 100% 'objective result' called a home-run; the degree of quality execution of drum beats provided by multiple drummers and evaluated by a judge is 100% 'subjective evaluation' called clean beats. No matter how one attempts to use objective language within any of the DCI judging sheets, any of them, the interpretation of those words on the sheets will 'always be 100% subjective'.

[charlie1223]

There are 'objective results' and 'subjective evaluations', but, no offense, but there is no such thing as 'objective evaluation' no matter what language appears on the judging sheets. A baseball hit over the left field wall inside the foul pole yields a 100% 'objective result' called a home-run; the degree of quality execution of drum beats provided by multiple drummers and evaluated by a judge is 100% 'subjective evaluation' called clean beats. No matter how one attempts to use objective language within any of the DCI judging sheets, any of them, the interpretation of those words on the sheets will 'always be 100% subjective'.

The thing I disagree with is that you can objectively say that a bad highschool drumline is technically worse than The Cadets Drum line. You take the facts of what you hear... bad attacks, dirt, poor technique, sound quality, etc and come to a decision that is NOT effected by your own personally bias. That is the direct definition of objective.

We are NOT evaluating "which drumline you "feel" is better." or "which drumline made you have the most goosbumps".. You CAN evaluate some aspect of the caption objectively by tallying any level dirt and comparing that to how much dirt the other guys have. You can specifically see a marching member out of step and compare that to a group that didn't have anyone out of step. There are SOME things that are objective evaluation in that you look at it, tally it, and record the fact of what physically happened.

Now we can get into the style, the approach, the writing, the design, the effect and then it gets way more subjective. I just don't think you can say its 100% subjective when there are obvious objective criteria that separates The Cadets drumline from a highschool drumline. The results... as in placing these objective critera and turning into a number is subjective. But certain elements are objective standards that we as an activity have established... and it has nothing to do with opinions.

I'm simply trying to stress the blend of objectiveness and objectiveness.

[Stu]

The thing I disagree with is that you can objectively say that a bad highschool drumline is technically worse than The Cadets Drum line. You take the facts of what you hear... bad attacks, dirt, poor technique, sound quality, etc and come to a decision that is NOT effected by your own personally bias. That is the direct definition of objective.

We are NOT evaluating "which drumline you "feel" is better." or "which drumline made you have the most goosbumps".. You CAN evaluate some aspect of the caption objectively by tallying any level dirt and comparing that to how much dirt the other guys have. You can specifically see a marching member out of step and compare that to a group that didn't have anyone out of step. There are SOME things that are objective evaluation in that you look at it, tally it, and record the fact of what physically happened.

Now we can get into the style, the approach, the writing, the design, the effect and then it gets way more subjective. I just don't think you can say its 100% subjective when there are obvious objective criteria that separates The Cadets drumline from a highschool drumline. The results... as in placing these objective critera and turning into a number is subjective. But certain elements are objective standards that we as an activity have established... and it has nothing to do with opinions.

I'm simply trying to stress the blend of objectiveness and objectiveness.

What you describe is still not 'objective' but actually still subjective; yes an educated musician can judge the differences between a poorly performing high school line and the 2013 Cadets (that is still subjective opinion based on interpreting language on the sheets but that is a discussion for another thread). But that is not the case when the 2013 SCV, 2013 BD, and 2013 Cadet lines went up against one another. That is a situation where 100% complete subjectivity from an educated judges opinion comes into play (also no line produces complete cleanness throughout the entire performance and the judge can miss or capture that depending on where he/she is on the field at any given moment). And as it applies to interpretation there are, for example, three basic ways a diddle can be performed: Slurred, Metronomic, and Closed. The philosophy of the judge will influence how that judge interprets the sheets, hears, and subjectively evaluates, those diddle passages even if each drum line is consistent and clean. 'Objective', on the other hand, would be something like this: Have each line stand in one spot exactly 50 feet away from a decibel meter; then have each line produce one shot in which the meter registers the amplitude; the line with the highest registered decibel level wins. That is objective. However once a judge begins to make evaluations on stick motion uniformity, fluid heights of accents and crescendos, phrasing, etc... it thus becomes completely subjective. Want to make baseball like DCI, do not count the ball objectively hit over the fence then the runner objectively touching home plate as a score; have judges utilize judging sheet criteria and base a scored run on a combination of the swing quality of the batter, the open-sound quality of the crack of the ball being hit by the bat, and how fluid the player runs around the bases, then baseball will be subjectively scored just like DCI.

Edited September 27, 2013 by Stu