No Detailed Recaps

[perc2100]

I think anytime you can take a step towards the judges evaluating the show of the night is a step in the correct direction. This is a very grey area evaluated activity. There is lots of room for human perception to skew the numbers (an 8.5 out of 10 is different to everyone, and different from every corner of the field or seat in the stands). So I don't think this is a bad idea. Does it mean judges talk to each other? Maybe. Do we think one Analysis judge will call one from the previous show and ask "what happened there, what did you see..." I don't think it'll get to that degree.

But i think it works two fold. One, it makes each judge operate independently from the previous judge of that performance. It separates performances from each other. And it gives the performers more weight onto the show of the night, as opposed to the show as it progresses. Meaning instead of judging what it could be or what it was, they now have to worry about what it is.

It happens; maybe not it's not prevalent but judges to communicate w/each other about what they saw (maybe that will happen LESS if judges don't see recaps and see that Judge B radically "disagreed" with me and I'm curious what he saw/heard that I did not).

Also, I'd argue the vast majority of judges DO work independently from previous judges or performances. Judges are generally not weak-minded fools susceptible to the Jedi mind-trick when it comes to scoring: they're not the weaker personality types that see a show and say, "OMG how do I score/rank this?!?!?!" They're generally the type of fans who are more stubborn than us on DCP, who have no problems arguing WHY their numbers are correct.

At the end of the day, I would venture to guess the ONLY thing that sways judges in DCI is critique: when staffers either successfully argue their points as to why judges are missing crucial aspects that should boost their score, OR staffers flat-out bully their way to higher numbers (or complain to the judge Caption Head to get those judges on lesser panels). This is an aspect that will NOT likely be diminished with this change.

[Kamarag]

It happens; maybe not it's not prevalent but judges to communicate w/each other about what they saw (maybe that will happen LESS if judges don't see recaps and see that Judge B radically "disagreed" with me and I'm curious what he saw/heard that I did not).

Also, I'd argue the vast majority of judges DO work independently from previous judges or performances. Judges are generally not weak-minded fools susceptible to the Jedi mind-trick when it comes to scoring: they're not the weaker personality types that see a show and say, "OMG how do I score/rank this?!?!?!" They're generally the type of fans who are more stubborn than us on DCP, who have no problems arguing WHY their numbers are correct.

At the end of the day, I would venture to guess the ONLY thing that sways judges in DCI is critique: when staffers either successfully argue their points as to why judges are missing crucial aspects that should boost their score, OR staffers flat-out bully their way to higher numbers (or complain to the judge Caption Head to get those judges on lesser panels). This is an aspect that will NOT likely be diminished with this change.

I don't know what rules DCI has in place for judges, as far as discussiuon of what they heard/saw goes, but I can give you a little insight into how it may go down in the band world.

Jeff Ream and I judged in the same circuit, and often judged on the same panel. After the show, we'll usually discuss what we saw and heard, mostly content and performence. Jeff might point something out that I may have missed, or vice verdsa. Along the lines of...

Jeff: "Man, did you catch when Band X did [whatever]?"

Me: "No, I was sampling something else...but I'll be sire to check that out the next time I see them. Did you happen to catch Band Z's [whatever]?"

Jeff: "Yea, that was really well done."

Now, Jeff is a great judge and I respect what he has to say (even when we might not necessarily agree). We don't generally talk numbers, mostly because there's no reason to. But to be perfectly honest (and since I'm not juding there anymore) there are judges I won't discuss anything with, and who's numbers I absolutely consider suspect. When you judge in a circuit with 200+ bands, and only do one show a week, it's not unreasonable at all to look at previous recaps. I generally don't, for several reasons (unless Im referencing my own numbers from a previous show). Not counting a show where my own band perfromed, the only reason I've done a recap analysis of a show I didn't judge was because I was asked to look at something specific and make a "scoring correction" if I felt it was warrrented. I do know a lot of judges that do look at recaps, but that's on them.

Then again, maybe all of this falls under "how the sausage gets made".

Edited February 8, 2016 by Kamarag

[perc2100]

I don't get the controversy on this at all. We will still get the caption numbers and the corps will still get the details. This matters why exactly?

1. Transparency. Specific recaps show explicit breakdown of each subcaption so we can see exactly how the math worked. We could see what judges really liked or didn't like, we can see if judges consistently really like/don't like specific corps/captions, etc. With this change we'll see only broad caption scores without seeing WHY the numbers are what they are. For example, last year Cadets struggled Visually finals week. We full recaps we can see Cadets scored consistently higher in Content than Achievement, and then surmise that they couldn't clean their design sufficient enough. The lack of transparency throughout the season could cause unrest in fans, mistrust in the system, guessing games, etc. The fact that we've had recaps available as long as I've been a drum corps fan (early 1990s, where you could read recaps in DCN) makes this feel like a substantial step backwards as far as institutional transparency. Full recaps available after the season won't matter, IMO, as the bulk of conversation and analysis will be meaningless after-the-fact.

2. Distrust. I read this as DCI has little/no trust in their own judges/judging system. They said this in the press release over a week ago:

Although corps will be given the opportunity to view detailed scoring results of their performances during critiques following events, judges will not have access to recaps during the competitive season.

DCI explicitly mentions judges not having access to recaps during the season as the only reference to why this logistical change might've happened. There could be other reasons, but this to me reads like DCI doesn't trust judging. If the vast majority of DCI Directors don't trust their own judging, IMO there are deep, fundamental flaws with the entire activity/circuit.

3. Personal interest. Like I said, I like to see how the numbers work out from sub-caption to sub-caption. This will be nothing buy a guessing exercise in 2016 and since I don't go to many/any DCI shows live & mostly watch via the live streams, I love to analyse the recaps to get a good idea of what I heard on live stream vs what the judges heard live. With that gone I lose a bit of interest in the summer tour/competitions.

[Tobias]

If the placements, scores fall into the same ultimate pecking order as they usually do most seasons, then I fail to see how the looss of detailed recaps info.... freely available to the fanbase for decades, but now lost until after the season is over..... can be viewed as progress.

On the other hand, if judges do not talk to one another during the season, and they really will not have access to previous recaps scores, and this leads to more volatility, placement shifts from nite to nite throughout the DCI placement order and.... " on any given Sunday, " begins to legitimately take hold, then this loss of recaps could have a tradeoff value for fans that might be worth trading for.

But.... I'm not holding my breath that this summer we'll see the latter here take place here, instead of the former. But I'm willing to see how this withdrawal of published recaps works now in the real world of DCI judging. I'll take a wait and see attitude to see if the intended outcome that was the impetus for this measure's adoption actually takes place this summer.

Judges not talking to one another?😂😂😂😂That's funny...

[GUARDLING]

1. Transparency. Specific recaps show explicit breakdown of each subcaption so we can see exactly how the math worked. We could see what judges really liked or didn't like, we can see if judges consistently really like/don't like specific corps/captions, etc. With this change we'll see only broad caption scores without seeing WHY the numbers are what they are. For example, last year Cadets struggled Visually finals week. We full recaps we can see Cadets scored consistently higher in Content than Achievement, and then surmise that they couldn't clean their design sufficient enough. The lack of transparency throughout the season could cause unrest in fans, mistrust in the system, guessing games, etc. The fact that we've had recaps available as long as I've been a drum corps fan (early 1990s, where you could read recaps in DCN) makes this feel like a substantial step backwards as far as institutional transparency. Full recaps available after the season won't matter, IMO, as the bulk of conversation and analysis will be meaningless after-the-fact.

2. Distrust. I read this as DCI has little/no trust in their own judges/judging system. They said this in the press release over a week ago:

DCI explicitly mentions judges not having access to recaps during the season as the only reference to why this logistical change might've happened. There could be other reasons, but this to me reads like DCI doesn't trust judging. If the vast majority of DCI Directors don't trust their own judging, IMO there are deep, fundamental flaws with the entire activity/circuit.

3. Personal interest. Like I said, I like to see how the numbers work out from sub-caption to sub-caption. This will be nothing buy a guessing exercise in 2016 and since I don't go to many/any DCI shows live & mostly watch via the live streams, I love to analyse the recaps to get a good idea of what I heard on live stream vs what the judges heard live. With that gone I lose a bit of interest in the summer tour/competitions.

One has to wonder, with the world very different ( internet, etc etc, instant information) have we got to a point that the transparency and demand of information that at one time was much more guarded ,have we got ourselves in much more trouble sharing every bit of information ( no I'm not just talking drum corps ) Many I know do not want to look at the 2 sides to this equation BUT there are for sure 2 sides. Just a thought.

Many good reasons for sure wanting it all out there( as you mentioned ) and many good reasons for the opposite I suppose.

Edited February 8, 2016 by GUARDLING

[drumcorpsfever]

One has to wonder, with the world very different ( internet, etc etc, instant information) have we got to a point that the transparency and demand of information that at one time was much more guarded ,have we got ourselves in much more trouble sharing every bit of information ( no I'm not just talking drum corps ) Many I know do not want to look at the 2 sides to this equation BUT there are for sure 2 sides. Just a thought.

Many good reasons for sure wanting it all out there( as you mentioned ) and many good reasons for the opposite I suppose.

I see your point. But we're talking about individual scoring here. It's the individual scores that equal the overall caption scores - which, in turn, equal the overall score. Since scores do matter, and a component of the overall show experience for fans and performers alike, it's a hard arugument to suggest that a piece of the scoring be withheld. It's not like we're talking about the judge's tapes.

I say this, however, in favor of withholding recaps. It's obvious by the voting membership of DCI that by withholding recaps the scoring results will benefit from the change. And, keep in mind, they'll try it for a year. If it does not have the impact desired, I'm sure they'd consider changing it again.

And, transparency or not, we'll all be able to judge the results.

Edited February 8, 2016 by drumcorpsfever

[GUARDLING]

I see your point. But we're talking about individual scoring here. It's the individual scores that equal the overall caption scores - which, in turn, equal the overall score. Since scores do matter, and a component of the overall show experience for fans and performers alike, it's a hard arugument to suggest that a piece of the scoring be withheld. It's not like we're talking about the judge's tapes.

I say this, however, in favor of withholding recaps. It's obvious by the voting membership of DCI that by withholding recaps the scoring results will benefit from the change. And, keep in mind, they'll try it for a year. If it does not have the impact desired, I'm sure they'd consider changing it again.

And, transparency or not, we'll all be able to judge the results.

oh I totally understand and agree . There's just another part of this. We have become a society that's involved in every aspect of practically everything. At one time spectators ( although some more educated than others ) were just that , spectators. Now everyone wants to be a part of it all. Has that taken away from the enjoyment of the entertainment experience or added to it. I know many who feel both ways on this.

Either way you are right although withholding does not mean a judge couldnt find out easily, like they do now.

You are also right with a test for everyone IF it works, helps or won't matter to the masses in the long run.

Edited February 9, 2016 by GUARDLING

[George Dixon]

Some of us like the granularity of the recaps is all, George. It's not a mystery. If you never did pour over the sub-captions that's OK, too. But some did. I did.

Just like sports fans pour over stats. That's all.

I get that.

However the sports analogy and stats really doesn't apply - these are subjective opinions. not yards per carry

I'd best most of us who do follow scores (I'm one of them) will still survive without the details DURING the season

I'm hopeful this will create more of a blank slate for the judges - and that will end up beneficial

As always, time will tell. If it's a disaster they could change it back, or even change their minds mid season

I personally think the new approach is an improvement,

George.

[Jeff Ream]

It will be interesting to read the DCP threads about corps without really knowing caption strengths. I've always felt many here review the recaps and then critique why corps X is leading or corps Y is faltering. I thought Crown 14 was amazing when I saw and heard them and I think many here agreed until recaps started to be analyzed. Then the tune changed, well the visual and overall design is very flawed. I never really saw that.

actually early on they were amazing. then everyone caught up and passed them by

[Jeff Ream]

I think anytime you can take a step towards the judges evaluating the show of the night is a step in the correct direction. This is a very grey area evaluated activity. There is lots of room for human perception to skew the numbers (an 8.5 out of 10 is different to everyone, and different from every corner of the field or seat in the stands). So I don't think this is a bad idea. Does it mean judges talk to each other? Maybe. Do we think one Analysis judge will call one from the previous show and ask "what happened there, what did you see..." I don't think it'll get to that degree.

But i think it works two fold. One, it makes each judge operate independently from the previous judge of that performance. It separates performances from each other. And it gives the performers more weight onto the show of the night, as opposed to the show as it progresses. Meaning instead of judging what it could be or what it was, they now have to worry about what it is.

I thought we saw that more last year than we have in the last 40