How_Will_It_End? Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 This hypothetical may be out of left field, but it is something I've wondered about. I ask this in all seriousness. I'll use Spirit as an example. Spirit opened their season on June 20, scoring 58.10. Last night in Pittsburgh (Aug 2), they scored 78.85. Now, forget about different panels, etc, Presume the same panel of judges scored both shows on the same sheets. The question I have is: Do you believe that if Spirit had performed their Aug 2 show on June 20 (precisely the same: Aug level of execution, Aug show, same everything), that they would have scored ca. 78.85? Discuss... Somebody brings up this exact same topic every year or so. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wvu80 Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 If I correctly interpreted the question, my answer is YES. With a one caveat. That is, we must accept the judging sheets and judges are infallible, as to the moment with no future plan in mind. "No" to the above ridiculous statement that the judge's sheets are infallible, and just plain "no" to the OP's question. This "theory" has been settled since 1973. "Discussing" it won't change the obvious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Detweiler Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Folks, I am a little taken back by all of this speculation. The job of an adjudicator is to rank and rate on any given night, the units that are presented to him or her. There is absolutely no relevance of numbers from show to show other than achievement of criteria to place the performance in a given box. NONE,ZERO,ZIP,NILL! Comparing numbers from show to show or week to week or month to month is a distortion of the way the sheets are written and the training of the judging community. The ONLY thing that is relevant are the numbers within a given show on a given night and even that is certainly no guarantee of future achievement and so in no way should be used as any kind of barometer. Highest score wins...on THAT night. Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Windish Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 "No" to the above ridiculous statement that the judge's sheets are infallible, and just plain "no" to the OP's question. This "theory" has been settled since 1973. "Discussing" it won't change the obvious. Sorry you didn't comprehend the words I strung together. I'll try to be more careful next time. To further confuse you, if a corps displays true August-level excellence back in June, I believe it SHOULD receive an August-level number. It does NOT, because the June number is established to be one that allows room for typical growth over time. The OP wondered if a corps exhibited an August-level performance back in June, on the same scoring sheet criteria, should it receive the same higher, August-like, number. I contend, YES, it should. Practical matters, however, prevent that from happening. It all goes according to a plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wvu80 Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Sorry you didn't comprehend the words I strung together. I'll try to be more careful next time. To further confuse you, if a corps displays true August-level excellence back in June, I believe it SHOULD receive an August-level number. It does NOT, because the June number is established to be one that allows room for typical growth over time. The OP wondered if a corps exhibited an August-level performance back in June, on the same scoring sheet criteria, should it receive the same higher, August-like, number. I contend, YES, it should. Practical matters, however, prevent that from happening. It all goes according to a plan. I understood exactly, and your words don't confuse me. The ENTIRE response to the OP's question from everybody who responded is NO. You seem to "contend" that is "should." NO, it should NOT. The scoring is not intended to work that way, and it doesn't work that way. If you think a Blue Devils show with a June score of 80 loses to a corps with the score of 81 in August, the answer is NO. No it does not. No, not even close. It's not that it should, it does not. A Blue Devils show that scored the lowest in June will always beat a corps with a score of 81 in August. There is No sense in debating a hypothetical that is NOT true, the numbers are NOT comparable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Windish Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Alrighty then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesmr Posted August 4, 2015 Author Share Posted August 4, 2015 There is No sense in debating a hypothetical that is NOT true, the numbers are NOT comparable. Thus the assignment of numeric scores is arbitrary. Rankings, I say! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Detweiler Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 No, they are not arbitrary. They are relevant to the achievement of criteria on any given night. No more...no less. Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeDz Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 If you look at the scores under the old tick system, a high score was possible almost any weekend of the season. Some corps scored almost the same every weekend because a judge might be recording ticks at the same rate from week to week because even cleaning up left enough for the max.... The "new" system currently in place is the best we've ever had. It rewards improvement in design, improvement in execution and rewards better execution of better design as well....... many variables there. It explains why the top 4 are the top 4 and scoring as they are going into Indy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimBurnell Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 (edited) Right but it also invites comparison across shows and years.I wonder if anyone has ever tried "delta scoring", where judges would do the same thing they do today, except that instead of arriving at a composite score that is low in June and high in August, for each caption, the caption winner is given a perfect score for that caption, and all other scores are computed by subtracting be delta with the caption winner? Example, taking last night's Massillon scores:Crown: GE1 and GE2 transmute to 20s, giving a GE score of 40. Vis Prof becomes 19.9 (0.1 below Cadets). Vis Analysis becomes 19.7 (0.3 below Cadets). Guard becomes 20. Visual score is (19.9 + 19.7 + 20)/2 = 29.8. Brass is 19.9 (0.1 below Cadets). Mus Analysis is 19.8 (0.2 below Cadets). Drums are 19.1 (0.9 below SCV). Music score is (19.9 + 19.8 + 19.1)/2 = 29.4. Overall score is 40 + 29.8 + 29.4 = 99.2 Cadets: GE1 is 19.7 (0.3 below Crown). GE2 is 19.8 (0.2 below Crown). GE is 19.7 + 19.8 = 39.5. Vis Prof is 20. Vis Analysis is 20. Guard is 19.5 (0.5 below Crown). Visual = (20 + 20 + 19.5)/2 = 29.75. Brass is 20. Music Analysis is 20. Drums are 19.7 (0.3 below SCV). Music = (20 + 20 + 19.7)/2 = 29.85. Overall is 39.5 + 29.75 + 29.85 = 99.1Ah so didn't quite work the way I expected, probably because GE is computed so differently from the other captions. Still that probably could be fixed. Edited August 4, 2015 by JimBurnell 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.