Rep. Vs. Ach. scores

[crfrey71]

That might make sense if the judges had the score to look at, but they don't. They can go only on what they hear.

Well they can certainly hear which book has more demand than the other. That's why they are out there in the first place. For music, I kind of like breaking it down to Technical and Musicality.

[Kamarag]

Well they can certainly hear which book has more demand than the other. That's why they are out there in the first place. For music, I kind of like breaking it down to Technical and Musicality.

What good is attempting a book you can't play? That's why the current system credits only what is achieved, never what you attempt. Crediting the book ahead of time, like you seem to be suggesting, would be disastrous,

[crfrey71]

What good is attempting a book you can't play? That's why the current system credits only what is achieved, never what you attempt. Crediting the book ahead of time, like you seem to be suggesting, would be disastrous,

But achievement is it's own judging column on the sheets. So again, what really is Repertoire and Content? The terms seem very clear-cut in their meaning. I am basically saying that the content is basically a degree of difficulty. Why would it be disastrous? I am sure a corps like Pioneer would not write the same demand into their hornline as say Crown or BD. I have faith in the corps staff, technicians, and caption heads, to know how what their corps can achieve and would write appropriately. An easier hornbook should be easier to achieve. A harder hornbook harder to achieve. The old risk vs. reward model.

[Kamarag]

I am basically saying that the content is basically a degree of difficulty.

Well, again, you're changing the system. Content and difficulty/demand are not synonymous. In fact, neither word is on the sheets in any form. The haven't been for several years.

[crfrey71]

Well, again, you're changing the system. Content and difficulty/demand are not synonymous. In fact, neither word is on the sheets in any form. The haven't been for several years.

Well, if nothing else. I am showing my age. Still totally confused.

[critter]

Well they can certainly hear which book has more demand than the other. That's why they are out there in the first place. For music, I kind of like breaking it down to Technical and Musicality.

I know it has already been mentioned, but you can't hear the demand when the clarity isn't there.

Your second sentence makes it sound like you are referencing field performance as well. From that angle, you also get a different read for re-writes, which will also be reflected in changes in the rep. score.

[drumcat]

This has bugged me for years and years.

The main problem isn't the two things that are being judged. I'd generally agree that rep is a judgment of the staff quality, and that's a dollar-for-points debate. I'll leave that alone. The main problem with this system is that it is designed and presented as two independent scores. I can give you an 8.8 in rep and a 6.2 in ex. Right? No. It's not right. That's because well over 90% of all ex scores are within -0.4 -> +0.1 of the rep score.

Why is this bad? Aren't they related? Well, they are by definition, but they aren't generally presented that way. If I said you got an 8.8 in rep, and 8.6 in ex, you wouldn't notice. If I told you that you got a 17.6 with a -0.2 in execution, you'd also be saying the same thing. This is why execution isn't half the score. It accounts for only about a single point out of 20. Yes, 5% of the score is execution.

The "rep" is the 95%. This is why drum corps is so hard to get used to. It's a system where we all kid ourselves into thinking it's sort of half content, half ticks. It's not. It's a constant evaluation of what is possible in the potential of the show, and then the minor tweaking of the show based upon the performance at hand. DCI is won and lost on Pyware and Sibelius.

I'm not suggesting that the criteria is wrong on its own. What I can tell you is that it's my personal belief that the scoring of each of the two categories by the same judge each evening, and the associated consistent pattern in which it is applied, along with the definitions, application, anecdotal evidence, statistical analysis, and simple observation will tell you is that the problem is the system itself. (Sorry; couldn't break that sentence up.) You're asking people to evaluate one half, and then based on it, evaluate the other half. Plain and simple, if the deviation from the first half is small, the ACTUAL effect on scores of the second number is very, very minimal.

I'm sure someone will take issue with how I've described the process of arriving at the two sub-scores. That's fine. As long as one is dependent upon the other, the dependent number is exceptionally less powerful.

Now, let me put on my helmet before my judge friends see this...

[drumcorpsfan4567]

No one really knows what general effect is.

^This

And yet in a "youth activity" we continue to place the most scoring emphasis on a caption which is controlled mostly by the designers and the tastes of the judges, which more often than not do not seem to line up with the tastes of the fans.

[jjeffeory]

^This

And yet in a "youth activity" we continue to place the most scoring emphasis on a caption which is controlled mostly by the designers and the tastes of the judges, which more often than not do not seem to line up with the tastes of the fans.

Plus "the deciders" are over 40, white, and probably not too hip. Sounds a bit like me, but not exactly. You under 21 people should be scared.

[HeWhoWaits]

No one really knows what general effect is.

I don't know what porn is but I know it when I see it.

Wish the same was true of GE.