Herk Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Crown hasn't performed in days so you can't use their score to slot them. LOL!! Believe me...I am the LAST person in the world to accuse of "slotting". In fact, I made the exact same point you did about them not performing lately. I don't think they've been sitting on their butts the past few days and I DO think they'll jump up a bunch from their last score. On the other hand, depending on HOW MUCH they jump could determine if it's out of range of Cavies/PR/BK. Those three corps aren't sitting on their butts either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleveland1 Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Regiment has been out scoring BK in Brass Content at every show. Except at the Santa Clara and Stanford shows where BK had a better content score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnD Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 That's the legend as it is told repeatedly. I would be curious to see proof of this, as there are some shows not sponsored directly by said corps that also end up with the full kit and kaboodle each and every year as well. So all the sponsors got together and collectively decided to pay for full panels, why? I'll still bring back my original statement of not hearing an explanation on how this is deemed acceptable from an educational standpoint as the balance of feedback is way off. If it's because the money is fronted, so be it. But DCI should step in and create a level playing field for adjudication at these early shows especially. Again, it is the most crucial time of the year for so many groups developmentally. It really reflects poorly on the organization as there really has never been any public statement about it, yet the public can clearly see the disparity visible on the recaps by simply counting the number of judges on each sheet. It would be like using two umpires in MLB for the National League, while the American League games all get a full slate. Or just not providing any replay systems to NFL games that aren't on National TV, but only regionally shown....etc. etc. .... or it could be an attempt by DCI to provide corps/show sponsors with the ability to earn a few more dollars on these early season shows by not burdening them with mandatory costs associated with a full panel .... or, even given the opportunity to save some money, some show sponsors are willing to take the financial hit to provide the corps that participate in their shows a better 'read' on their programs - helping ensure their shows are well-subscribed and attended .... or any number of reasons. Perhaps a note to Tom Hope, the DCI Pacific coordinator or Dan Acheson, DCI Executive Director would provide you with the "proof" you desire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cappybara Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Except at the Santa Clara and Stanford shows where BK had a better content score. My bad. Was out of the country for a bit and must've missed it. I wonder what causes this variation in content scores between 2 corps when get should technically just gradually grow at the same rate (assuming no changes are made). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleveland1 Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 My bad. Was out of the country for a bit and must've missed it. I wonder what causes this variation in content scores between 2 corps when get should technically just gradually grow at the same rate (assuming no changes are made). Different judges perhaps. I also want to know how much BK not having their full show influences their content and GE scores Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskey Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 (Who can blame them, they get to spend a few weeks in sunny California and out of the rainy midwest/east coast...) In all seriousness, DCI needs to split this bill evenly though and make some executive decisions that benefit their other member corps from an educational perspective. This is not new to 2015. Ever since these limited panels were rolled out to save money, there has been an obvious slant towards where these limited panels are relegated to and where the party happens. Yup even playing field. June shows out west, July/August shows in the Midwest, South, and East. I know this has to do with judging panels but in terms of even playing field it hasn't been that way for awhile now and probably never will be. There is level of fan appreciation corps like BD, Academy, PC, Mandarins receive out here in the west coast compared to past the Rocky Mtns. I've been to shows all over and you just feel the difference. Just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMcomguy Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) .... or it could be an attempt by DCI to provide corps/show sponsors with the ability to earn a few more dollars on these early season shows by not burdening them with mandatory costs associated with a full panel .... or, even given the opportunity to save some money, some show sponsors are willing to take the financial hit to provide the corps that participate in their shows a better 'read' on their programs - helping ensure their shows are well-subscribed and attended .... or any number of reasons. Perhaps a note to Tom Hope, the DCI Pacific coordinator or Dan Acheson, DCI Executive Director would provide you with the "proof" you desire. You have it backwards. Instead of manadatory costs for full panels, how about we just agree to give every show a limited panel until "x" date? Thus creating more dollars for the hosts at every event. You still did not explain why they (the show hosts) would want to do this and bring in extra judges. To throw away the cash, or for competitive reasons? As it is clearly the latter, then that validates my point as to just how important having as many points of feedback as possible is to each and every corps. Allowing it to be determined by richer show hosts simply because they've got the extra green to front the costs of having a larger panel is exactly the reason why we need DCI to regulate this practice. Do the limited panels across the board or don't do it at all. Period. Edited June 28, 2015 by IMcomguy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrunchyTenor Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Odd but I'm getting rain sprinkles in San Diego bay on a sailboat. Supposed to have some storm later. Hopefully nothing happens tonight in Pasadena We had a couple of sprinkles on the way in yesterday, but no rain at the show until we were walking out to the parking lot. Weather coming in today. i hope it doesn;t mess with Riverside! Garry in Redlands Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcifangirl Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 If my memory serves me correctly, the show sponsors (corps) on the west coast (DCI West) have elected to spend the extra money to pay for full judging panels and take the hit against the profits for their shows. There is no "reward" for the west coast from DCI. I'm pretty sure that if the show sponsors anywhere else in the country wanted to provide a full panel for their early season shows, DCI would be more than happy to provide (sell) them. I was under the same impression. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wesleyrp Posted June 28, 2015 Author Share Posted June 28, 2015 Want to say as they move out of Cali it's 5 person panels til Drums? 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.