2000Cadet Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 I don't think Crown will get to 97 this year... the others have a decent shot. Honestly, unless I'm missing something, I think Crown's show is pretty hot (no pun intended). So much going on in that show. I figured they would be ahead of SCV last night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 Good stuff!! But i believe Cavies was 96.2 in 1998. That year was interesting too cause that's also the year we came the closest to seeing three corps go over 98. BD was third with 97.7 Yes, of course. Fumbling fingers. Fixed, thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Dixon Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 If anything we will have a record low for the top group. Lol. Scores seem low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Guns Posted July 13, 2015 Author Share Posted July 13, 2015 If anything we will have a record low for the top group. Lol. Scores seem low. I think we will see the scores pickup after San Antonio. I think first place at finals will be around 97.5 with 5th place in 96.1 range. I think it's gonna happen this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superOOk Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 Think about what happens if you have 5 groups really close. Do scores tend to contract or expand when there are lots of corps being judged? This will give you your answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowtown Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 High scores at finals are usually due to lack of competition and big gaps in tiers, so I’d expect the scores to be lower if there all remain close And from what I’m seeing, they are all bunched because no one is that great, most these top shows have major performance and design issues right now 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 (edited) High scores at finals are usually due to lack of competition and big gaps in tiers, so I’d expect the scores to be lower if there all remain close And from what I’m seeing, they are all bunched because no one is that great, most these top shows have major performance and design issues right now WOW!..LOL... this coluldnt be more wrong IMO as well as how it actually works. High scores at finals means 2 things , good corps as well as good corps at the bottom which drive score higher. AS far as shows , which of course is subjective. IMO It's probably the best top five in a long time. actually the bottom corps arent shabby either IMO Design issues? Sure, isnt there always in early july as corps get feedback? I guess there's always 2 ways to view something Edited July 13, 2015 by GUARDLING 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowtown Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 Take last year’s record score, much of it was because second place wasn’t close to Blue Devils, same with 09, 05 and 02 it’s more about the spread than being oh so awesome. Lower scoring years are usually better years. In 2024, it will mainly be Bluecoats fans claiming 2014 was awesome, for most other corps, eh. 2006 was a very competitive year hence; the top score was a very low 97 something with 2 others less than a point off Competitive years are lower scores, lower scores doesn’t mean they are worse than years with higher scores either no, it's not the best top 5, weak performance and weak design is keeping them close, it may be the worst top 5 in a while, none have yet to distinguish themselves. A few have a chance to clean themselves to a different tier no one has 'the show' this year Less than a month to go and the corps look behind in performance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 Take last year’s record score, much of it was because second place wasn’t close to Blue Devils, same with 09, 05 and 02 it’s more about the spread than being oh so awesome. Lower scoring years are usually better years. In 2024, it will mainly be Bluecoats fans claiming 2014 was awesome, for most other corps, eh. 2006 was a very competitive year hence; the top score was a very low 97 something with 2 others less than a point off Competitive years are lower scores, lower scores doesn’t mean they are worse than years with higher scores either no, it's not the best top 5, weak performance and weak design is keeping them close, it may be the worst top 5 in a while, none have yet to distinguish themselves. A few have a chance to clean themselves to a different tier no one has 'the show' this year Less than a month to go and the corps look behind in performance Well we have to agree to disagree I guess. Sure there are problems in most corps this time of year but i think the quality is getting better all around, we dont have 4 or 5 corps looking to be 10-15 just by chance either. That side of the scale is quite impressive also. Bottom corps ( if good will always drive upper scores upward. I dont think we will see 99s this year , not that any of that matters , it's only numbers and dont mean very much, spreads are what counts. Its like the question many ask every year. How did so and so get a 20 out of 20 or whatever, or a perfect score, the highest number does not nor has ever meant perfect. Just the highest number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Guns Posted July 13, 2015 Author Share Posted July 13, 2015 Well we have to agree to disagree I guess. Sure there are problems in most corps this time of year but i think the quality is getting better all around, we dont have 4 or 5 corps looking to be 10-15 just by chance either. That side of the scale is quite impressive also. Bottom corps ( if good will always drive upper scores upward. I dont think we will see 99s this year , not that any of that matters , it's only numbers and dont mean very much, spreads are what counts. Its like the question many ask every year. How did so and so get a 20 out of 20 or whatever, or a perfect score, the highest number does not nor has ever meant perfect. Just the highest number. Would you agree that the 20's are perfects when we want them to be perfects and its a maximum score when we want it to be a maximum score? I have seen people on these forums get chopped at the knee caps for congratulating BD on their perfect 20's in captions. Those people get hammered and corrected that BD just got the max score. But those same people that was blasting BD fans was congratulating Crown for their 20 in Brass in 2013. In regards to it's only numbers and it doesn't mean much, I found it very interesting in 2009-2010 when BD came close to breaking the scoring record, it mattered to a lot of people on this forum then. I remember seeing a bunch of post saying "At least they didn't break the record." "Cavies/Cadets scoring record is still in tact!" And a lot of other post/comments like that. But it wasn't until last year when BD shattered that record that all of the sudden the scoring record didn't mean anything and the real record that matters is SCV's scoring margin record. And it's safe to assume that if BD ever takes that record down, then DCP will come up with another record that actually means something and downplay the significance of the scoring margin record. Not saying you are to blame. I have read a lot of your post/comments in the past and I come to respect you for your insight on the activity. You just happened to mention it so I wanted to give my perspective, no matter how wrong or right it is. 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.