Return the power to the performers (?)

[GUARDLING]

This is your first mistake, and you'd better not make it a point to "educate" the public about the standards on which corps are judged and a champion is determined. Talk about seeing sausage be made!

The game is "rigged" in favor of this corps or that? Do you really think that anywhere close to a majority of fans know, let alone care, that it's rigged?

According to the Who Are You survey of 2014, on 4% of fans attended shows to see a particular corps compete.

Drum Corps is entertainment, not competition, to the vast majority of fan, IMO.

People have always thought the competition was rigged. ALWAYS. there were just no surveys or internet back then the #####ing and moaning just took place at the local bar after or a diner..lol

Interesting though, I mentioned this in another thread a while ago. ENTERTAINMENT VERSES COMPETITION . Not that one has to be exclusive to the other.

Ouestion:

When did the audience member become more than a spectator.? I suspect when more MMs aged out and became majority of the ticket buyers.

When did people stop buying tickets to see a corps compete and became one of entertain me. I believe at one time people went to view a contest ( not be involved ) now its corps are here for my enjoyment. Very different perspectives. Probably that doesn't not mean a whole lot now merely because it's not then its's now. BUT as one who went through the entire revamping of the activity over and over I find that interesting.

AS I said it probably has alot to do with the fact that BITD it could have been lots of parents in the stands supporting their kids or VFW or Am. Legion folks just at their convention. It clearly became something else when the marcher became the viewer.

Now wont it be interesting though with many band kids in drum corps does it revert back ..hmmmm..AHHH whatever..as long as were still here..lol

Edited September 1, 2015 by GUARDLING

[Tenoris4Jazz]

If the public tires of the same old ones winning all the time because the judges like them and the crowd picks someone else, then tickets eventually wither especially when costs of travel increase..

If people go home wondering why Crown doesn't win guard (or gold) when when winning it all season, tickets eventually wither especially when costs of travel increase..

If people don't understand what on earth is GE and why who wins GE usually wins DCI, tickets eventually wither

I am agreeing with your last position ("To what...) but am differing in the conclusion that is based merely on business factors.

DCI is a competition. When the public thinks it is rigged or skewed or leaves common sense out, that hurts business as being other than fair competition.

I suspect you and I speak with very different folks involved in drum corps; your perspectives and mine are not in opposition, but different sides of a triangle which has DCI is fair competition as its base. I am saying that the elephant in the room is that these questions must be addressed for that perception to continue no matter who wins or medals or misses finals.

I was always fascinated that the audience for professional golf was never bigger or more passionate than when Tiger Woods was winning virtually everything. You either loved that he was dominating or cheered for him to fall in the ocean. I know there is a similar feeling about BD, but I think it's more of a productive feeling. Lots of people want to see BD knocked off their perch, but they want to see it done by someone outdoing them at their best, not BD falling down. Can it be there is an element to GE now that includes the David vs. Goliath mentality?

[BRASSO]

First, can we all admit that we're using a bit of hyperbole in referring to a sixth-place percussion line, with a Finals score of 18.95, a score which is solidly in Box 5 (what would be a clear grade of "A" on a test) as "woefully ineffective"?

Second, you keep saying that G.E. is equivalent to show design, for instance in this post where you refer to "adult-created Show Design (GE)". Can you prove that they are the same thing? What on the sheets supports this claim?

Third, this statement you've made probably needs some further consideration:

"Performers can effectively perform and execute their playing better than anyone (1st place in percussion even out of 45 Corps), but if adults let them down by giving them a subpar show design (GE), no amount of highly effective, superior, performer performance execution such as 1st place (percussion )can save the corps from the lemon the adults put out onto the field."

Would you really want it any other way? If the design didn't matter, then couldn't the musicians just play the most difficult but boring technical exercises while marching super-challenging but boring drill? Isn't there a risk that evaluating execution above effect will drive away audiences? Do you know why "figure skating" has that name? For those who don't: it's because originally, a large part of a skater's score in competition came from demonstrating how well they could skate a certain "figure" (like the number "8") on the ice. The judges would then closely examine the marks that skaters left in the ice to make sure that, for instance, circles, were perfectly round. However:

"Pressure to reduce the weight of compulsory figures began when the Olympics Games and other skating competitions began to be widely shown on television. Television coverage posed major problems to the compulsory figures for two reasons. They were not considered appealing to television audiences, with even the most ardent skating fans finding the completion of the figures, followed by seemingly microscopic analysis by the judges, to be tedious, and the general public held even less interest for the figures. In addition, skaters who excelled at compulsory figures were often not the most talented at free skating, but sometimes accumulated such a large lead from the school figures that they won the competitions overall. Such results would often leave general viewers stunned because they had watched only the free skating and had little or no knowledge of the compulsory figures." (Source.)

The compulsory figures counted for 60% of the score until 1968, and were reduced in importance in stages after that, before being eliminated entirely in 1999 (in the U.S.; most of the rest of the world had abandoned them a decade earlier). I have a friend whose daughter had taken up figure skating shortly before that, and he's always been disappointed at this change, because she was quite good at figures. Most of the audience, however, had no taste for such fine execution, no matter how much discipline it required.

Now, maybe it was wrong to let the audience's desire for entertainment change that activity. Maybe the skating purists should have stuck to their principles and let the audience go hang. I'm just saying that there may be consequences to putting execution first that aren't being considered.

The problem I have with this is there are 7 questions you posed for me in this one post alone, and 3 of them are, as near as I can tell, unrelated to the other three, and 1 of the 6 questions you asked of me relates to a sport that I would rather be scorched by the heat of a thousand suns than watch. Given all this, I think I'll just pass on any attempt to provide any possible cogent replies to these 7 questions, ... but do know that I did read what you wrote, it was an interesting read, some interesting takes, but that I do stand full square behind my comments above still. I will acknowledge for you however that Crown was NOT the only Corps to win a DCI title while finishing 6th in Percussion, and that your research to find that BD actually finished 7th in percussion performance execution in 1980, is indeed an additional example ( that I had previously missed from 35 years ago) of Corps ineffective performance execution in Percussion, or Brass, or Guard not neccessarily becoming an impediment in the end to winning a DCI Title, as GE ( adult created Show Design ) can, and has, saved Corps in the end, despite the subpar & ineffective on field performers execution.

Edited September 1, 2015 by BRASSO

[BRASSO]

I perhaps should emphasize that, while all the criteria on the sheets are subjective, that doesn't mean I think any corps should use the subjectivity as an excuse for not winning. It will always be possible to improve the sheets, but they are satisfactorily clear enough that any corps should know why they are or are not achieving on them. Corps who disagree with the criteria on the sheets should argue for changes in the off-season--or accept that they're not going to win (which is a perfectly reasonable option, as long as it's made clear to the members).

All the Corps know what the DCI judging sheets are. They've had their input on them over the years. If they put their Corps out there on the field of competition than they have agreed with the judging system. its not an issue for them at all. As a matter of fact I have not heard of any Corps staffers using the excuse that the reason their Corps did not win is because the system has been rigged for BD. Some disgruntled fans might be into excuse making for BD winning all the time, and not their favorite Corps. But not these Corps leaderships.

Edited September 1, 2015 by BRASSO

[mfrontz]

I was always fascinated that the audience for professional golf was never bigger or more passionate than when Tiger Woods was winning virtually everything. You either loved that he was dominating or cheered for him to fall in the ocean. I know there is a similar feeling about BD, but I think it's more of a productive feeling. Lots of people want to see BD knocked off their perch, but they want to see it done by someone outdoing them at their best, not BD falling down. Can it be there is an element to GE now that includes the David vs. Goliath mentality?

Well, there shouldn't be an element to GE that is a David va. Goliath thing. When it happens, it is wonderful for the activity. Your larger point is correct. Competition is entertainment and there is no better entertainment than David va. Goliath. Even if sometimes Goliath wins. And in the most recent case, David and Goliath had split the last two championships.

[N.E. Brigand]

The problem I have with this is there are seven questions you posed for me in this one post alone, and three of them are, as near as I can tell, unrelated to the other three, and one of the six questions you asked of me relates to a sport that I would rather be scorched by the heat of a thousand suns than watch.

In a public discussion, all comments ought to be considered fair game for anyone to respond (not just the person who seems to be directly addressed), and no one should feel obliged to answer any questions. DCP is fun, but we all also have lives to lead.

[cixelsyd]

If the public tires of the same old ones winning all the time because the judges like them and the crowd picks someone else, then tickets eventually wither especially when costs of travel increase..

If people go home wondering why Crown doesn't win guard (or gold) when when winning it all season, tickets eventually wither especially when costs of travel increase..

If people don't understand what on earth is GE and why who wins GE usually wins DCI, tickets eventually wither

I am agreeing with your last position ("To what...) but am differing in the conclusion that is based merely on business factors.

DCI is a competition. When the public thinks it is rigged or skewed or leaves common sense out, that hurts business as being other than fair competition.

I suspect you and I speak with very different folks involved in drum corps; your perspectives and mine are not in opposition, but different sides of a triangle which has DCI is fair competition as its base. I am saying that the elephant in the room is that these questions must be addressed for that perception to continue no matter who wins or medals or misses finals.

But it DIDN'T happen. In 2015, among record attendance, your concerns did not take place. What must be changed to accommodate your fear that something bad will happen, when it hasn't.

I have asked it now for multiple pages and, yet, no one, not a single person here, has answered the question "What made 2015 such a successful season?".

You have received several responses to your question. Among them:

- competitive drama was higher this year, compared to 2014 BD domination

- in the wake of losing Fan Network, more people attended shows in person

- economy improving, lower fuel prices

As for the withering of ticket sales xandandl refers to, it is my belief that it occurred when competitive results became more static (for example, throughout the 1980s).

When did people stop buying tickets to see a corps compete and became one of entertain me. I believe at one time people went to view a contest ( not be involved ) now its corps are here for my enjoyment. Very different perspectives.

I think we should be careful not to exaggerate the difference. For one thing, many people appreciate both the contest and the entertainment.

When competition is more static, it is not as much the topic of conversation in the bleachers. If you simply observe audience conversations at shows now compared to when you first experienced the activity (for you, 1970s?), you would think there was a noticeable cultural shift. But there was a lot more to talk about in the stands back then, when placements flip flopped from day to day (and without internet, more of our news was word of mouth).

[MikeD]

People have always thought the competition was rigged. ALWAYS. there were just no surveys or internet back then the ######## and moaning just took place at the local bar after or a diner..lol

Interesting though, I mentioned this in another thread a while ago. ENTERTAINMENT VERSES COMPETITION . Not that one has to be exclusive to the other.

Actually, the only time it was rigged is when I marched.

[garfield]

You have received several responses to your question. Among them:

- competitive drama was higher this year, compared to 2014 BD domination

- in the wake of losing Fan Network, more people attended shows in person

- economy improving, lower fuel prices

As for the withering of ticket sales xandandl refers to, it is my belief that it occurred when competitive results became more static (for example, throughout the 1980s).

I think we should be careful not to exaggerate the difference. For one thing, many people appreciate both the contest and the entertainment.

When competition is more static, it is not as much the topic of conversation in the bleachers. If you simply observe audience conversations at shows now compared to when you first experienced the activity (for you, 1970s?), you would think there was a noticeable cultural shift. But there was a lot more to talk about in the stands back then, when placements flip flopped from day to day (and without internet, more of our news was word of mouth).

1. Competitive drama - Yes, thanks to tighter scoring ranges

2. FN down? No, that doesn't add up. DCI-Live broadcasts had higher subscribers than expected

3. Gas prices? Edit: Mean travel to drum corps shows is less than 40 miles across the country, and average is 186. About 7 gal of gas. Better economy? Well, sure, I suppose. Maybe more people can afford show tickets. But 20% to 30% more fans can afford tickets? The economy is not THAT much better.

But you forgot the really big one: "Pleasing" or "Inviting" or "Accessible", or "Enjoyable" show programming.

Isn't THAT the big elephant in the room to which Xandi refers?

The "competitive drama" to which you refer is artificial, implemented, manipulated. DCI did it by tightening up the scoring band.

Programming success comes from design and execution - organic things, controllable at the corps level and, apparently, exceeding expectations.

Was the competitive result even slightly different than past years, or was it just the drama of tighter scores that was different?

Drum corps is entertainment to the vast majority of fans in the stands, it's not a competition except to the corps themselves (in fighting for payout dollars), and to a relatively few number of fans who understand how the activity is actually scored.

We focus on the competition on DCP because we beat it to death. But it doesn't sell tickets.

Programming and design sells tickets, IMO.

(Gas prices and the economy are only influential at the margins, IMO.)

Edited September 1, 2015 by garfield

[xandandl]

Garf,

In a court room, a good lawyer would tear your logic and answers apart for you answer specific questions with generic numbers.

Yes, the usual (other than championship week) may draw people from 100 miles.

Championships are different and draw from around the globe not just Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, and Kentucky.

Just check the airports the Sunday after Finals. It's not just the MMs running to their next band camp. Back your infallible business statements with the zip codes of actual ticket buyers. It's not the ISSMA championships at all. That's why folks sacrifice to buy those tickets (even in sections 435 with its' blocked views.) I would presume that the fluctuation in air fares and hotel prices to and from Indy may have even a greater quantitative influence than gas per gallon prices.

Your entertainment statements are very similar to George Hopkins' G-7 presentation.

As another poster stated previously, competition is part of the sense of entertainment.

Does the crowd really find BD more entertaining than Crown, Troopers, Bluecoats, Surf???

And sir, the elephant in the room is more than limited to the bottom line business.