Scores..."where everything is made up and the points don't mat

[DAvery]

Funny thing about OMEA contests - when the _kid comes home from contests he knows who won drums, colorguard, overall score, and design scores. The sheets are passed out to the directors at the end and the kids pass them around the buses. They don't announce these scores, apparently as to not upset the parents in the stands, because everyone knows the kids get the scores.

I can see the lowest-placing band kids on the bus when they get their scores. Are they emotionally less-impacted by reading their scores on the bus than by hearing them announced after the show?

Scores. Kids want scores. Even the lower-placing bands because they want to know where they rank, even if they suck. It's human nature.

How many sports teams have had "something to prove" after a particularly bad year or major event? When did we decide that music kids can't take it?

I know of one OMEA official who told me personally that he actively lobbies OMEA to do away with all contests (they now call them "adjudicated event" by name) and make them all "adjudicated exhibition events".

Seriously? Is it in our water?

I disagree. I think scores are only important in a relative manner. When I marched, my corps fighting to get back into finals (as they had dropped out the year before). I wanted to make finals, but didn't really care about what score that would take or what corps we had to beat. Just that it was good enough to be in finals. When I taught band in ohio, it was what I taught the students also. I didn't really care about the score, but wanted a score high enough to make state finals. To have another performance. I remember one performance where the students performed very poorly. They came off the field and were ######. They knew they hadn't done what they were capable of. They were even more ###### when we were announced as grand champion. They felt they had cheated the audience with their performance and to top it off been rewarded with a trophy.

Edited October 25, 2013 by DAvery

[DAvery]

Funny thing about OMEA contests - when the _kid comes home from contests he knows who won drums, colorguard, overall score, and design scores. The sheets are passed out to the directors at the end and the kids pass them around the buses. They don't announce these scores, apparently as to not upset the parents in the stands, because everyone knows the kids get the scores.

I can see the lowest-placing band kids on the bus when they get their scores. Are they emotionally less-impacted by reading their scores on the bus than by hearing them announced after the show?

Scores. Kids want scores. Even the lower-placing bands because they want to know where they rank, even if they suck. It's human nature.

How many sports teams have had "something to prove" after a particularly bad year or major event? When did we decide that music kids can't take it?

I know of one OMEA official who told me personally that he actively lobbies OMEA to do away with all contests (they now call them "adjudicated event" by name) and make them all "adjudicated exhibition events".

Seriously? Is it in our water?

I disagree. I think scores are only important in a relative manner. When I marched, my corps fighting to get back into finals (as they had dropped out the year before). I wanted to make finals, but didn't really care about what score that would take or what corps we had to beat. Just that it was good enough to be in finals. When I taught band in ohio, it was what I taught the students also. I didn't really care about the score, but wanted a score high enough to make state finals. To have another performance. I remember one performance where the students performed very poorly. They came off the field and were ######. They knew they hadn't done what they were capable of. They were even more ###### when we were announced as grand champion. They felt they had cheated the audience with their performance and to top it off been rewarded with a trophy.

[JimF-LowBari]

at a band show I judged this past weekend,a lower placing band was thrilled to see where their number got to...because of the chaos that was the beginning of their season.

so yes, scores matter.

Gee thinking about a corps you know a bit about... After getting back on the field after being inactive spent almost the whole season coming in last. Corps BoD was honest enough to say that we were inexperienced enough that we would be coming in last to the big names. So the only corps we could compete against was.... us the week before.... IOW the score had better go up or we were not improving to prepare when we would start beating other corps. Danged if we didn't beat some corps the week before Finals and a few more at Prelims (ah... now what?).

Edited October 25, 2013 by JimF-LowBari

[Jeff Ream]

Let's stick with DCI; what exactly constitutes a DCI judge as being 'under qualified'?

I'm not sure underqualified fits. if anything I'd say out of touch or stuck in the past. in pretty much any criticism I've ever heard of DCI judges, that they were clueless wasn't the issue, it's that they were stuck in an age gone by

[Stu]

I'm not sure underqualified fits. if anything I'd say out of touch or stuck in the past. in pretty much any criticism I've ever heard of DCI judges, that they were clueless wasn't the issue, it's that they were stuck in an age gone by

But I am not seeing this supposed ‘archaic’ judging anywhere within DCI; if it were so someone could point to a few judges who actually dump on ‘modern’ shows and reward ‘throw-back’ shows. Moreover… a) On the Performance side Intonation is always Intonation, Articulation is always Articulation, Diddle Control is always Diddle Control, Spacing is always Spacing, Timing is always Timing, no matter what 'age' (throw-back or modern); and b) On the General Effect side no ‘throw-back’ show design I can think of has been given credit over the ‘modern’ shows presented by the top 9 or 10 by any GE judge. So I am still at a loss on why, or who, these supposed under qualified judges are within DCI.

[BillH]

No, that is not why ‘all’ kids march drum corps. This is going to sound crass and I mean no disrespect, but…. how many rings have you earned and how close have you or your corps been to obtaining a ring? The reason I ask is that there are many who have won the title, or had the title within reach, who would disagree with you on how little you think that achievement was/is in motivating a performer to become ‘the best’ if for only a brief moment. Winning is a great motivator to win again, and win again, and win again, and that is a wonderful great thing to do as well as having the amazing summer flashing before their eyes as they walk out of the exit tunnel after the last performance of the season.

I earned a few rings when I marched (long ago) and can certainly state that the primary motivator was the challenge of the show and the improvement of the corps. I count myself lucky to have been in the right place at the right time to win 3 consecutive DCI championships. But the value I placed (at the time and in hindsight) on the experience was not on the medal. Rather it was on the process. The shared goals of perfecting the "imperfectable: and performing at increasingly high levels. I can confidently state that this attitude was true for many (maybe even most), but not all of my corps mates.

Each MM will be motivated by whatever motivates them. I just know I cannot control how much better or worse someone else's design, instructional staff, member talent level and travel/rehearsal/schedule efficiency is. Thus to let some outsiders' evaluation of my effort be a PRIMARY motivator is a recipe for disaster. In all my years in this activity (both DCI and MB), nothing is more frustrating than seeing kids cry over a score or placement, after busting their a**es all summer. I just feel they are missing the point of this "sport."

That is just my take and respect the option of others to be all about winning or at least out-scoring someone else.

[Jeff Ream]

But I am not seeing this supposed ‘archaic’ judging anywhere within DCI; if it were so someone could point to a few judges who actually dump on ‘modern’ shows and reward ‘throw-back’ shows. Moreover… a) On the Performance side Intonation is always Intonation, Articulation is always Articulation, Diddle Control is always Diddle Control, Spacing is always Spacing, Timing is always Timing, no matter what 'age' (throw-back or modern); and b) On the General Effect side no ‘throw-back’ show design I can think of has been given credit over the ‘modern’ shows presented by the top 9 or 10 by any GE judge. So I am still at a loss on why, or who, these supposed under qualified judges are within DCI.

oh there's some there. No need to mention names or the loyalties they tend to show every year. You've even seen some directors call out some folks as in "we never win with so and so".

Don't get me wrong. DCI is probably the best of the circuits out there ( DCA isn't bad either to be 100% honest). But no circuit's judging is perfect.

[fsubone]

Says who exactly? I mean a person who learns to 'win' multiple titles via being a member of the Blue Devils can take that 'winning' philosophy into the world of a business career; example: there are 100 applicants for a single job with only one winner for that job, and a BD alum has already been taught the philosophy on how to 'win', and that is a rather big advantageto have over others during the interview process.

Yes and no. Someone who's marched multiple years with a winning corps has a leg up, but did they win solely because of their effort, or were they given a vehicle that enabled the win? And was their effort the same as the effort of the other 149 people? I've met people in every corps that work harder than their final placement would show, and some at the top who get carried along all season to the win, without the same effort. Which person is more qualified?

[BRASSO]

I remember one performance where the students performed very poorly. They came off the field and were ######. T They were even more ###### when we were announced as grand champion. They felt they had cheated the audience with their performance and to top it off been rewarded with a trophy.

It never made much sense to me either where many in the audience " feel cheated " by a performance, and yet the judges rewarded the show performance with " a trophy ". I'm glad that the marchers understand that being rewarded by the judges with a high score, is not as fulfilling for them as rewarding an audience with their show performance.

Edited October 25, 2013 by BRASSO

[JimF-LowBari]

Yes and no. Someone who's marched multiple years with a winning corps has a leg up, but did they win solely because of their effort, or were they given a vehicle that enabled the win? And was their effort the same as the effort of the other 149 people? I've met people in every corps that work harder than their final placement would show, and some at the top who get carried along all season to the win, without the same effort. Which person is more qualified?

And to take it another step, is the company already a 'winner" or is it working to improve itself from the ground up. I know people who can do a great job with something that is already set up and working well. But if they have to rebuild or start pretty much from scratch they are S.O.L. Give me the folks who bust their butt with others without worrying about if they are at the top, bottom or middle.