Recommended Posts

  • Replies 173
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yes. I think Corps at the top are given much more lattitude. They can play anything from Christmas tunes of songs even 3 year olds know, all the way to head scratcher complex shows where even the adul

You raise some great points. Obviously, there is a recognized need to please the fans....and that can be a roll of the dice because while some fans want the tried and true, some hate anything ever do

Hey Everyone, Long time reader, first time poster! I’ve been around Drum Corps all my life, but recently, I’ve found myself wondering about the creativity of certain corps; frequently from

Anyone can throw good dots or notes on the paper. if it isn't performed well, then it's dots and notes on paper and won't get credit.

Oh if it was just so simple. (" anyone can throw dots on a paper"... not all those dots are put on the paper the same)

We all should be able to agree that any great Show Design " if it isn't performed well, won't get credit " ( near as I can tell, nobody believes or stated otherwise ).

But let me ask you a question, ... all things are not equal.. so do you believe that its better in receiving points on the current sheets to have a great Show Design performed reasonably well, or have a reasonably good Show Design performed greatly ?

I think its preferable, given a choice , to have the former, not the latter. I see lots of dirt at Finals..even among the top 3, 4 Corps. And I think its understandable to some degree, as the demand on the marchers today, is far far greater than it ever was when I marched and taught. So it can be expected that they'd be some noticeable performance execution issues, even among the top Corps. What carries the day in the end however, increasingly, is the great Show Design. Its seems to me that even the performance execution captions are brought up with a great Show Design, even one not particularly liked by audiences. If a Corps has a subpar Show Design but executes it much better than a Corps with a great Show Design, but executed reasonably well, the current sheets will allow the judge in the booth to award the latter Corps over the former Corps... and from what I'm seeing, thats exactly what the judges are rewarding now. Phantom Regiment could perform and execute their show much better this year than the Bluecoats execute their show, but it won't matter, as the points can be more found on the current sheets that will allow a greatly designed 2014 Bluecoats show, reasonably well executed , to stay far ahead of 2014 Phantom Regiment, no matter how well executed and performed Phantom's show might be come Finals.

I don't believe that last years 6th place Bluecoats Corps had any less marcher talent overall than this year's Bluecoats Corps. I don't know this part for a fact, but my instincts tell me last year's Bluecoats Corps had similar hard working, talented marchers as this one. The difference however is the Show Design. The Bluecoats MM's, probably as talented as last years , are scoring much higher and in contention to move up in placements ( and not down from 6th ) essentially because of their Show Design, not their early season performance and execution of its MM's. Its the Show Design that is carrying the Bluecoats MM's to higher scores this year, because its a GREAT Show Design compared to others in its mix, and its performed reasonably well. Thats my assessment on why Corps like the Bluecoats move up, and why Corps with the MM overall talent of the 2012 Cavs wound up in 8th place 2 years ago.. Primarily Show Design.. not primarily the result of MM's performance execution failures of their show provided to them to perform and execute.

Edited by BRASSO
Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the lack of a transfer policy had not a thing at all to do with the Cavs placement slide of 5 positions from 2011 to 2012 ( that incidentally they appear to have rebounded nicely from). I have no idea why you brought up a totally unrelated topic to this. But since you did, lets look at this then :.... the Cavs of 2010-2011 were a top 3 Corps both years. As such, one would naturally expect the preseason of 2012 to bring out good talent for the Cavs to draw upon at their winter camps. And from reports, thats indeed what they got. We can also assume that quite a few of them did not expect that Michael Gaines, the genius behind the Cavs Show Designs would leave. But lets assume that many DID know he was gone. Its logical to assume then that the Cavs MM's assumed that Gaines replacement would provide them a Show Design for 2012 that would permit them to compete for the top 3 once again. But lets be real here now. The reality is that the Show Design put together for the Cavs MM's for 2012 could not come remotely close to what he Cavs MM's of previous years were used to receiving from Gaines. Those Cavs MM's in the winter had not seen the blueprint of the Show Design.. thats not how its done. So there was every expectation for the Cavs MM's that went there ( coupled with the goodly number of returning Cavs vets ), that they were going to get a great Show Design, either way. But of course, they didn't. The Cavs Design Team of preseason 2012 struggled mightily to put together a Show Design that would be equal to that of the departed Michael Gaines. They couldn't do it that year. But the Cavs had the marcher talent to compete for a top 3 placement that season... and thats no doubt why some went there, and why other Cavs vets from 2011 there stayed.there. But they had no shot at all to stay in the top 6 that year, let alone compete in the top 3 and for a 2012 Title. The 2012 Show Design under the current sheets doomed those Cavs MM's from the very beginning that year.... so no, there is no connection whatsoever between where MM's gravitate to, transfer policies and final placement, when it comes to Show Design. When we add " Show Design " into the equation... Show Design trumps all. And the Cavs MM's of preseason 2012 thought they'd get the expected top 3 Show Design to enable them to compete for 2012. But nobody, but nobody ( ok, maybe you and 3 others ) thinks they could finish highly in 2012 if they just worked hard, cleaned, worked on performance execution and yada yada.. That is, of course, quite silly when we simply look at what those talented Cavs MM's got for their 2012 Show Design after they lost Show Designer Michael Gaines after the 2011 season.

interesting..you seem to know alot about cavies staff that year as well as how they struggled during the winter to put a show together. Well. The reason for bringing up the transfer policy you seem to like is because with that you also said that it doesnt matter how talented the kids are its all about the who is who and staff etc etc. So then what the transfer according to you it doesnt matter anyway. OK done with all that AGAIN.

Again I will ask of all this , and? ( even iF you were right).....................................................good in both areas is good......good in one or the other.....not so good..

Edited by GUARDLING
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh if it was just so simple. (" anyone can throw dots on a paper"... not all those dots are put on the paper the same)

We all should be able to agree that any great Show Design " if it isn't performed well, won't get credit " ( near as I can tell, nobody believes or stated otherwise ).

But let me ask you a question, ... all things are not equal.. so do you believe that its better in receiving points on the current sheets to have a great Show Design performed reasonably well, or have a reasonably good Show Design performed greatly ?

I think its preferable, given a choice , to have the former, not the latter. I see lots of dirt at Finals..even among the top 3, 4 Corps. And I think its understandable to some degree, as the demand on the marchers today, is far far greater than it ever was when I marched and taught. So it can be expected that they'd be some noticeable performance execution issues, even among the top Corps. What carries the day in the end however, increasingly, is the great Show Design. Its seems to me that even the performance execution captions are brought up with a great Show Design, even one not particularly liked by audiences. If a Corps has a subpar Show Design but executes it much better than a Corps with a great Show Design, but executed reasonably well, the current sheets will allow the judge in the booth to award the latter Corps over the former Corps... and from what I'm seeing, thats exactly what the judges are rewarding now. Phantom Regiment could perform and execute their show much better this year than the Bluecoats execute their show, but it won't matter, as the points can be more found on the current sheets that will allow a greatly designed 2014 Bluecoats show, reasonably well executed , to stay far ahead of 2014 Phantom Regiment, no matter how well executed and performed Phantom's show might be come Finals.

I don't believe that last years 6th place Bluecoats Corps had any less marcher talent overall than this year's Bluecoats Corps. I don't know this part for a fact, but my instincts tell me last year's Bluecoats Corps had similar hard working, talented marchers as this one. The difference however is the Show Design. The Bluecoats MM's, probably as talented as last years , are scoring much higher and in contention to move up in placements ( and not down from 6th ) essentially because of their Show Design, not their early season performance and execution of its MM's. Its the Show Design that is carrying the Bluecoats MM's to higher scores this year, because its a GREAT Show Design compared to others in its mix, and its performed reasonably well. Thats my assessment on why Corps like the Bluecoats move up, and why Corps with the MM overall talent of the 2012 Cavs wound up in 8th place 2 years ago.. Primarily Show Design.. not primarily the result of MM's performance execution failures of their show provided to them to perform and execute.

and there you go...this is what you were after right from the beginning. You believe that one thing trumps another or at least YOU believe it should. This can go round and round with exactly what's on the other pages SOOOOOO as they say on Shark Tank " for that reason I'm Out"...lol

That is unless I see something intriguing :smile:

Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting..you seem to know alot about cavies staff that year as well as how they struggled during the winter to put a show together. Well. The reason for bringing up the transfer policy you seem to like is because with that you also said that it doesnt matter how talented the kids are its all about the who is who and staff etc

Thats right. The Cavs in the offseason of 2012 attracted sufficient talent around the country after finishing 2nd and 3rd in the previous 2 seasons. Coupled with the Cavs normal retention of veterans from the 3rd place Cavs of 2011, the campers had every reason to assume that the Design Staff there ( with or without Michael Gaines for 2012 ) would give them a Show Design to allow them to compete for a Title in 2012. But the MM's got no such Show Design creation as they thought they would there in the offseason. Prior to 2012, the Cavs had not finished out of the Top 7 since 1984. The open, unfettered, annual flow of talent to the Cavs did not abate after their 3rd place finish in 2011. Thats silly to think that. The talent was there, as it always had been. But they lost Gaines, and his replacement created, by comparison, a dud. So all the MM talent in the world that came in, could not save that Cavs Corps from placement slide from 3rd to 8th. So thanks for bolstering my point, that even the uninterrupted and unfettered flow of MM talent at levels commensurate with a historically top Corps , can't save a Corps from placement slide when the adults create a Show Design that is a dud compared with that Corps previous Show Designs. So once again, thanks for bringing up a topic ( transfers ) that is unrelated to the placement slide of the 2012 Cavs. It unintentionally on your behalf however provided even further evidence of the increased importance to placements of the adult created Show Designs.

Edited by BRASSO
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats right. The Cavs in the offseason of 2012 attracted sufficient talent around the country after finishing 2nd and 3rd in the previous 2 seasons. Coupled with the Cavs normal retention of veterans from the 3rd place Cavs of 2011, the campers had every reason to assume that the Design Staff there ( with or without Michael Gaines for 2012 ) would give them a Show Design to allow them to compete for a Title in 2012. But the MM's got no such Show Design creation as they thought they would there in the offseason. Prior to 2012, the Cavs had not finished out of the Top 7 since 1984. The open, unfettered, annual flow of talent to the Cavs did not abate after their 3rd place finish in 2011. Thats silly to think that. The talent was there, as it always had been. But they lost Gaines, and his replacement created, by comparison, a dud. So all the MM talent in the world that came in, could not save that Cavs Corps from placement slide from 3rd to 8th. So thanks for bolstering my point, that even the uninterrupted and unfettered flow of MM talent at levels commensurate with a historically top Corps , can't save a Corps from placement slide when the adults create a Show Design that is a dud compared with that Corps previous Show Designs. So once again, thanks for bringing up a topic ( transfers ) that is unrelated to the placement slide of the 2012 Cavs. It unintentionally on your behalf however provided even further evidence of the increased importance to placements of the adult created Show Designs.

lol..this should be a no spin zone..and I dont mean guard equipment..You obviously have an in at cavies to have so many insights. very interesting, VERY

Again I will say,and so have others...to be top you need both a good corps and a good show....period! you want to split hairs to what is tenths over another and whats more important...have a ball.

adults also have ALWAYS created all parts of any show...from the very beginning...no change there

time to move on!

Edited by GUARDLING
Link to post
Share on other sites

lol..this should be a no spin zone..and I dont mean guard equipment..You obviously have an in at cavies to have so many insights. very interesting, VERY

Again I will say,and so have others...to be top you need both a good corps and a good show....period!

Ok, here's your "logic " at work. You ( and 2 or 3 others here ) believe that scores and placements are an equal measure of Show Design and MM performance execution on the current scoring sheets. Thus, to follow this logic, then the Cavs placement slide from 3rd in 2011, to 8th in 2012, is shared equally by the Cavs Show Designer(s) and the Cavs marchers.. equally. ( you can't have it any other way, or your logic collapses. )

But I simply disagree with this. I do not have the 2012 Cavs marchers sharing equally in the responsibility for the placement slide from 3rd to 8th with the 2012 Cavs adult Show Designers. I hold the 2012 Cavs adult Show Designers FAR more responsiible than you do for that placement slide from 3rd to 8th. We just disagree on this... no problem. You assign much more of the MM responsibility for the placement slide from 3rd to 8th than I do. I think the 2012 Cavs MM's had no shot at all of staying in the top 3 or 4 in 2012 with that dud of a Show Design creation. You think they had that chance, if they executed and performed better. I think you are misguided in that. The Cavs of 2012, as talented as they were in 2012, never had a fighting chance at all not to have suffered placement slide with that dud of a 2012 Show Design, even if they practiced until they all dropped, and performed and executed the snoot out of it at Finals.

Edited by BRASSO
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it has changed. .. no matter how many times you say that it hasn't. The newer judging sheets are a pale imitation of previous judging sheets where MM Performance execution counted for much greater garnering for total points to be had than Show Design did... heck in the earlier years of DCI, they never even had themed shows in most cases, and as such, the music need not to have had any relationship to each music selection played within the show at all. Show Design, ala a story telling, or a Visual rendering, was almost a total non factor in the early DCI judging sheets. It was all mostly performance and execution driven by the marcher members themselves. Thats not true today at all however. The Show Design, is a big big deal today, and its where the most points can be had ( or lost ) on the changed, and newer, updated DCI judging sheets ( now built upon a "build up point system ", rather than a" tic deduction point system" ).. So it HAS changed. Those who don't know this simple and undeniable reality either weren't around in the early years of DCI, or have amnesia, or are simply in denial.

You are mixing up captions. Shiow design (as described in your post above) plays little, if any, role in the Performance captions. The subcaptions are basically content and achievement, and content is not where the theme or aesthetic design of the show plays a major role. It is more akin to the old analysis sheets that accompanied the execution sheets, or even earlier the demand subcaption that was included on the execution judges' sheets.

Repertoire on the Effect sheets..which is only half of that one sheets points, is where the design would really come into play. Even on the effect sheet, half of the points go to the performance of the repertoire.

Show design did play a role in GE, however, though not in the terms of 2014, of course. The design of the drill to enhance the music, the emotions the brass charts generated, the enhancement of the brass created by the drum charts, the artistry of the show, coordination of elements, variety of moods, etc...the design did play a role, in the terms of the day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.