2000Cadet Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 I've been around drum corps since 1967. I am well aware of how the judging system functions. And I absolutely agree with you, it's not about perfection, per se... but about which unit is the best in a given caption. Ranking and rating. And I certainly prefer the current system over the old "tick" system, which, IMO, was as subjective, if not more so, than the current one. But I still gotta figure... a 99.15 is an indication that a corps is pretty #### good.... clean, if you will. Not a lot of problems with their show. Judges are not perfect, they are people too. They're not infallible. Anyone can watch that show and see there was plenty of dirt and a 99.15 was relatively high for that corps. The show was definitely a great show, but not a 99.15. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayfallon Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 I've been around drum corps since 1967. I am well aware of how the judging system functions. And I absolutely agree with you, it's not about perfection, per se... but about which unit is the best in a given caption. Ranking and rating. And I certainly prefer the current system over the old "tick" system, which, IMO, was as subjective, if not more so, than the current one. But I still gotta figure... a 99.15 is an indication that a corps is pretty #### good.... clean, if you will. Not a lot of problems with their show. Fran, I completely 100% agree with you. Which should probably worry you just a bit... Well said. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesmusic Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Am I the only one that is shocked that the Cavaliers won so many championships since 2000? I mean, I realize there is the whole "shock and awe" aspect of their drill, and their drumline and guards were stellar in all those years, but between brass performance and visual cleanliness, I just can't see it. Live those shows were great fun to watch, but on video, no thank you. I also can't stand to listen to them either. In some of the years they had the failed attempts at screaming trumpets it was almost commical. I have gone back and watched everyone of their championship shows, and without question, I love 1992 and 1995, but just can't give credit in other years. That 2002 show in my opinion is by far the dirtiest show that has and will ever win a championship. Just watched it again last night and I wouldn't have put it above 3rd that year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seen-it-all Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 (edited) Judges are not perfect, they are people too. They're not infallible. Anyone can watch that show and see there was plenty of dirt and a 99.15 was relatively high for that corps. The show was definitely a great show, but not a 99.15. Sure it was. It's right there in the record books. But if you're implying it didn't "deserve" to get a 99.15, then all I would say is that I honestly don't believe that ANY show "deserves" a 99.15. Or anything above a 97 or a 98 for that matter, IMO. It's all relative, though, Varying degrees of excellence and all, sifted through a certain format of adjudication. Context does contribute to all of this, however. The 2002 season was not a very competitive one at the top. The Cavaliers won every single show that year by more than a point, which is pretty incredible. And on finals night, while many would argue they may not have deserved a 99.15, few would argue they didn't deserve to win the show. Or win it by the margin by which they did. Nobody was touching them that night, or that season. Pure dominance from the first day to the last. So in that context, yes, I would say their 99.15 was most assuredly deserved on that evening. As deserved a score as any other championship corps ever received within its own respective context IMO. Edited April 22, 2014 by seen-it-all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 See, that's the huge, common misunderstanding many have about judging/numbers: a 99.15 doesn't mean Cavaliers 2002 were almost perfect, or Cadets 87 percussion had a perfect performance, etc. It just means that the judges thought that those units were that many tenths better in their caption than the 2nd place unit in their caption. It's partly a numbers management thing, and it's partly giving it up for a great show: but it's not necessarily, "this corps was perfect." I actually had a chat with the DCI Percussion Judge from 1987 (several years after the fact) and he said that he agreed with many that Garfield was not perfect in 87, but they were that much better than SCV. I think he was even quoted in Modern Drummer saying that they weren't perfect, but pretty close from his perspective. well....and let's talk about the part no one will mention. if you box yourself out, you have nowhere to go but 10. I mean BD got to go on last for the last year the defending champion could do so, and they literally had no shot at a drum title before they played a note. 2nd place on his sheet was 19.5, who was 3rd from the end...then Cadets who got the 20. BD was looking at best either 2nd or below going on the field. at least in 2002 there's some spread between Cavies and 2nd place on the various sheets Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Am I the only one that is shocked that the Cavaliers won so many championships since 2000? I mean, I realize there is the whole "shock and awe" aspect of their drill, and their drumline and guards were stellar in all those years, but between brass performance and visual cleanliness, I just can't see it. Live those shows were great fun to watch, but on video, no thank you. I also can't stand to listen to them either. In some of the years they had the failed attempts at screaming trumpets it was almost commical. I have gone back and watched everyone of their championship shows, and without question, I love 1992 and 1995, but just can't give credit in other years. That 2002 show in my opinion is by far the dirtiest show that has and will ever win a championship. Just watched it again last night and I wouldn't have put it above 3rd that year. part of it is the bleedover over visual demand into the music captions. the brass and percussion books were not as "notey" as others below them, but they got credit because of the visual demands, and because they weren't as "notey", it made sound great as an ensemble. it's not as bad now, but my God, some tapes I've heard from the early 2000's on the field may have been visual tapes with music commentary sprinkled in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Haring Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Fran, I completely 100% agree with you. Which should probably worry you just a bit... Well said. Yes, that is a tad frightening!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2000Cadet Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Sure it was. It's right there in the record books. But if you're implying it didn't "deserve" to get a 99.15, then all I would say is that I honestly don't believe that ANY show "deserves" a 99.15. Or anything above a 97 or a 98 for that matter, IMO. It's all relative, though, Varying degrees of excellence and all, sifted through a certain format of adjudication. Context does contribute to all of this, however. The 2002 season was not a very competitive one at the top. The Cavaliers won every single show that year by more than a point, which is pretty incredible. And on finals night, while many would argue they may not have deserved a 99.15, few would argue they didn't deserve to win the show. Or win it by the margin by which they did. Nobody was touching them that night, or that season. Pure dominance from the first day to the last. So in that context, yes, I would say their 99.15 was most assuredly deserved on that evening. As deserved a score as any other championship corps ever received within its own respective context IMO. I absolutely agree that show deserved to win. The show had pretty much everything you'd want from a drum corps show, just not everything that warranted that score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seen-it-all Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 In that case, get in line with the thousands upon thousands of others over the years who think corps x didn't deserve their score. :) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2000Cadet Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 In that case, get in line with the thousands upon thousands of others over the years who think corps x didn't deserve their score. :) I stand by my thought. 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.