Kamarag Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Um, brass. it's really, really rare than a corps wins High Brass without being at least in the top four. It's happened...maybe twice? Have there been lines deserving of the brass trophy in 5th or 6th? Yes there have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowtown Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Just can’t get hung up on this… have we talked about the lamp that almost tipped over and the scramble? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Because you can't compare scores from year to year, thus taking away any special mark that someone might achieve in that year, including BD's 99.65. The entire reason for scores is so we can compare one show to another. Once we lose that ability, there is no real reason to have scores, just placements. You did not 'lose' that ability, as it was never there in the first place. Judges rank and rate according to the criteria for that single show...it is hard enough to try and compare scores across shows in the same year, let alone across years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lrienaeds Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 it's really, really rare than a corps wins High Brass without being at least in the top four. It's happened...maybe twice? Have there been lines deserving of the brass trophy in 5th or 6th? Yes there have. I believe the 1991 Blue Devils are the lowest overall placing corps (5th) to win brass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
84BDsop Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 averaging causes enough confusion just with GE,....so why average more? THAT'S all you have to refute my proposed system, Jeff? That's not even phoning it in. I expected something more along the lines of your usual detailed, having been in the trenches insights, not "it's confusing." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jww Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 Let's be realistic here. 99.65? You mean to tell me that for an 11 min show, there were no minor mistakes or issues. I find this hard to believe. What this proves is the judging community has issues. To issue a perfect score in any caption is a stretch. What this say is the judges have reached their limit has a judge and having nothing educational to say. When this happens all of the judges who gave that perfect score should not be allowed to judge anymore. Just a thought. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaddyt Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 Let's be realistic here. 99.65? You mean to tell me that for an 11 min show, there were no minor mistakes or issues. I find this hard to believe. What this proves is the judging community has issues. To issue a perfect score in any caption is a stretch. What this say is the judges have reached their limit has a judge and having nothing educational to say. When this happens all of the judges who gave that perfect score should not be allowed to judge anymore. Just a thought. John ::: sigh ::: Wash, rinse, repeat..... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 Let's be realistic here. 99.65? You mean to tell me that for an 11 min show, there were no minor mistakes or issues. I find this hard to believe. What this proves is the judging community has issues. To issue a perfect score in any caption is a stretch. What this say is the judges have reached their limit has a judge and having nothing educational to say. When this happens all of the judges who gave that perfect score should not be allowed to judge anymore. Just a thought. John read all the other threads or back on this one. Im sure those who beat this subject to death dont want to repeat it yet again so I will.........Perfect score doesnt mean perfect Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TastyWaves Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 Edit: This is a joke people...I'm not slamming any corps, just commenting on the ridiculousness that is DCI judging... lol... This is the definition of a coward. To actually state that judges have been paid off in the huge letters and then immediately punk out and try play it off as a "joke". haha. Just another example of the insufferable arrogance that exists here. The thought process that because "My" opinion is at odds with the end result, the system is now wrong, everyone but "Me" is an idiot and of course "Judges were paid off". Why not just state "I am so smart and so important and so much better than EVERYONE that anyone who disagrees with me is either wrong, stupid, or paid off!"? At least have the courage to say it without pretending to be kidding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Windish Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 Haven't read all posts here, but a corps receiving a '100' would not really concern me. Could that score just represent "this is everything I could ever expect to see THIS evening" or, "what I have witnessed here is as perfect as can be at THIS point in drum corps development." Besides, if a score of 100 (perfection) can never be achieved, would not a '99.999' then become the only perfection we can ever strive to achieve? All that matters to me is for the corps doing everything better than all others that show is declared the winner. 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.