99.65

[actucker]

You are agreeing with me entirely. Their show was far from perfect.

It was, however, the best of the night, and possibly one of the most well-executed shows in the activity we've ever seen. I'm just trying to indicate to you that the perfect score exists. We need to find another way to reach it though instead of using 20 as a ceiling. Because all too often in the public eye, they interpret 20 as perfect, and DCI exacerbates the issue by using that term frequently as well. It is an element that HAS to exist, we just don't know how or if it will ever be collectively agreeing upon that it would ever be right. Until that moment, we need to redefine what 20.0 means and why it is all too often used now in the activity.

As someone said earlier, it wouldn't have mattered if the champion scored a 23.4 as long as the spreads were accurate. I couldn't agree more.

But the question is, why are we here now? At 99.65. How did we get to this point? There were not 100 other corps out there where the numbers couldn't be managed more effectively to achieve a lesser value than 99.65, or 0.35 from perfect in the general populous' view out side of DCP. It's a flaw in this system that someone needs to brainstorm a solution for. Lest we view a 100 as indeed perfect when it inevitably happens.

Why. Why is it a flaw? Who cares what the math is. You said yourself, the right corps were in the right order with the right spreads. Who cares what the final number is. Its inconsequential.

[chaddyt]

When you are setting a system based on achievement, and you create a ceiling, whether manufactured, artificial, or even superficial, there is a set expectation that the highest possible value is the highest possible, equating to some level or existence of perfection.

You can claim all you want that the judging manual or training materials never use the word perfect, but they certainly use "achievement" and "possible" in their vocabulary. Perfect is not a mythological element. It's a non-fictional item that can certainly exist, therefore it is indeed possible. If we didn't want to hand out 20.0's then there shouldn't be a ceiling.

Maybe this could be like WGI and we could all go to the diva retreat in the winter and collectively be implored to create a new Box 6 on the sheet.

That would be faaabulous.

You want the tic system back then where everyone starts with a 100 and judges deduct points for mistakes.

That's not the system that's currently in place.

Start shopping for a Delorean to take you back to that era. Bring a goat along so you can feed the T-Rex while you're there.

[OrlandoContraAlum]

So BD are onto something with shows about film directors. Looking forward to a Michael Bay tribute next year!

Nah, that won't happen until DCI allows pyrotechnics... ;P

[wilme861]

I don't understand the fear of using the word perfect on here either. A 20.0 is a perfect score, period! Judges won't be giving out a 20.0 unless they think it's deserved. The spreads are important but when you get to the very top, the spreads can be misleading. Perfect scores really only will come out at champions so as an example, let's say Crown is given a 19.8 in brass and BD just went and the judge believes they deserve a .4 spread difference with Crown based on that performance. This situation would never arise in real life as a judge won't ever be making this kind of mistake at championships but you get the idea. Obviously a 20.2 can't happen so it's either a 20.0, 19.9, or 19.8. Obviously, 19.8 gets thrown out since BD was better than Crown so it becomes a decision of "could that have been done any better?" If not, a 20.0 will come out. If the judge thinks it wasn't perfect, meaning it can still be better, a 19.9 will come out.

I think another misconception with judging is that judges number decisions are based completely based on the show they just watched. It's not. They know what the corps has been scoring in general and where they fall in the scope of the rest of the competition. Obviously, what the corps just did has more weight but the judge still used the previous numbers as a sort of reference, That's the single biggest reason why you don't see much movement in placements. That doesn't mean that judges won't completely go out of the norm of other judges and award first to someone that other judges have been placing fourth. My point is simply that if they know Crown is going on first at a show where the next best competition is the Cavaliers, they can be very confident in throwing out a very high number on Crown's brass since 99.999999% of the time, no one else will be better. I know some people will argue this but they've been doing this since DCI first started and I was able to see the judges doing just this at Rutgers as I sat a row behind them all and saw EACH one check out past recaps.

[superOOk]

Why wouldn't DCI have a scoring system that allowed comparisons from year to year? Am I the only one that thinks this is silly?

[charlie1223]

I think a score of 99.65 is refreshing! It makes 100 feel that much more possible and can't wait till a corps can muster the talent and design to achieve it! Congrats BD. You've set the bar higher for execution, precision, and effect. I can only expect bigger and better things from DCI next year!!

[Cappybara]

Why wouldn't DCI have a scoring system that allowed comparisons from year to year? Am I the only one that thinks this is silly?

Because the activity is inherently subjective and the judging system changes too much. It's as simple as that. You can't expect someone to objectively judge what is the best corps of all time when the styles change from era to era and when each judge has an opinion different from the other.

To add on, how can you compare a score? For example, Crossmen scored an 86 something this year as a 12th place corps whereas last year the 12th place corps scored an 84 or 85 something. Does this mean Crossmen were better than last year's 12th place show? Not necessarily. It's just the way the spreads worked out this year, the number that the judges decided to start with, and the strength of the corps below them.

Edited August 10, 2014 by Cappybara

[chaddyt]

Why wouldn't DCI have a scoring system that allowed comparisons from year to year? Am I the only one that thinks this is silly?

You can't rationally compare scores from night to night...

... And you want to compare year to year???

Yes. That's the definition of silly.

[actucker]

Why wouldn't DCI have a scoring system that allowed comparisons from year to year? Am I the only one that thinks this is silly?

I don't think its silly at all. Shows aren't designed the same way from year to year. They sheets aren't the same from year to year. The competition isn't the same from year to year. The activity evolves, so suggesting that we should be able to compare scores from year to year is pretty silly.

[IMcomguy]

Why. Why is it a flaw? Who cares what the math is. You said yourself, the right corps were in the right order with the right spreads. Who cares what the final number is. Its inconsequential.

It is a flaw because WE (and we're not really the common public, we're on DCP for cripes sake...) even rant and rave and discuss scores from year to year and how they compare to one another. If the system isn't about achieving that perfect score, then none of you should ever again talk about scores between seasons ever again. We're all guilty of doing it. There needs to be an understanding that the 99.65 being a "record" means jack in terms of history. Yet it's still the number one topic tonight. That's a flaw in my view.

You want the tic system back then where everyone starts with a 100 and judges deduct points for mistakes.

That's not the system that's currently in place.

Start shopping for a Delorean to take you back to that era. Bring a goat along so you can feed the T-Rex while you're there.

You're reaching. Really, you are. I said nothing about the tick system, nor do I want to deduct for mistakes. Read above for why I feel it's simply a flaw that needs to be addressed somehow. Whether we start lower or something, it doesn't matter, just find a way to keep scores manageable from year to year. Because clearly, 7 judges ran out of room tonight, can't we agree there? Or were they all perfectly on their game tonight because of their psychic abilities to foresee Bluecoats or Cadets being exactly 0.5 or 0.4 back from that 20.0 number?

And Back to the Future IS my favorite movie trilogy of all-time. But only the original Jurassic Park would do for me.

Ok, given your summation of the system it's clear you get it. But your last paragraph confuses me a bit. Why does it matter? Why do we need a lesser value? if the judges got the ranking right, and got the rating right, why does it matter what the sum total was?

I'm not arguing with you...I just don't see the problem.

Does the sum total not matter to you when it's used as the title of this topic? If it didn't matter, this would be titled "Great score!"

In summary, I get it. I do, seriously. I just have a tough time with the drastic shattering of the roof tonight. The first two nights were more feasible for me. Tonight seemed a bit over the top for no reason. I think almost everyone was shocked at the total, were you not? I could see a 99.25, or 99.35.... but wowzas, 99.65? Were they 0.675 improved tonight over last night?

Anyway, it was a fun night. But I'm not sure if this show will have close to the legacy of 5 or 6 others we could probably all name from a conceptual standpoint, but rather it will leave a legacy based purely on the derived score. I want to see a show that lives on through both. Many people in the stands (read: paying customers) felt even Bluecoats had a show that would leave a longer impression on them than BD, and that was JUST TONIGHT. Not over the course of history. I just want to feel like a show earns a 99.65 for it to see that number.

Edited August 10, 2014 by IMcomguy