Discussion about order of performance

[Eleran]

And they wouldn't be happy because they know their scores would be impacted in a negative way.

Cavaliers performed before Cadets Saturday and scored 1 point lower

Cavaliers performed after Cadets Sunday and scored 2.4 points lower

Personally? I would prefer corps order gets mixed up more often so that lower-finishing corps don't have to perform before an empty house because people only come into the stands to watch the top-finishing corps.

[ShortAndFast]

People would like to say oh it's simply doesn't matter, but if it doesn't matter then why do we do it this way? I guarantee you, if blue Devils were forced to perform in the first hour of every show, their leadership would not be happy. And they wouldn't be happy because they know their scores would be impacted in a negative way.

http://www.fromthepressbox.com/2015july1-15dcirecaps.htm, search for "DEKALB"

Note how the Blue Devils were forced to perform first. Note where they placed. Happens every year.

What do you think would be different if they had to perform 1st more than once or twice a year?

[MikeRapp]

http://www.fromthepressbox.com/2015july1-15dcirecaps.htm, search for "DEKALB"

Note how the Blue Devils were forced to perform first. Note where they placed. Happens every year.

What do you think would be different if they had to perform 1st more than once or twice a year?

Well, I am mostly just asking for insight, because I know many of you have a lot more experience than I do.

I am really only pondering why there isn't more upward mobility within DCI. This feels like de facto slotting to me. If judges have corps in performance boxes, and they are instructed to at least use these boxes to determine ranking, it seems pretty likely that the worst a corps could finish (realistically, not theoretically) is at the bottom of that box.

There is a self fulfilling prophecy to this, that it seems would result in what we now see, which is glacier-like movement up and down the order of finish. If an elite marching member wants to win a medal during their age eligibility, it would seem to be practically impossible if they marched for a lower "box" corps, which is set by previous seasons' ranking. Which can only result in what we are seeing, which is members abandoning their initial corps for "bigger" corps.

[jwillis35]

In which case, there's no harm in shuffling the corps a bit more.

I mean, if it doesn't matter, why tie performance order to previous placements at all?

I'm all for shuffling corps performance order, especially if it's to allow some younger corps to get a chance to play for a larger audience. Even if it's to just have some fun and shuffle them, then I have no problem with that. I think my main concern in regards to the OP was that I am against shuffling them if it's simply to help some corps score better. That kind of thing. Because even the local village idiot can tell when a lesser competitive show goes on after a big boy or two.

Edited June 27, 2016 by jwillis35

[Cappybara]

Well, I am mostly just asking for insight, because I know many of you have a lot more experience than I do.

I am really only pondering why there isn't more upward mobility within DCI. This feels like de facto slotting to me. If judges have corps in performance boxes, and they are instructed to at least use these boxes to determine ranking, it seems pretty likely that the worst a corps could finish (realistically, not theoretically) is at the bottom of that box.

There is a self fulfilling prophecy to this, that it seems would result in what we now see, which is glacier-like movement up and down the order of finish. If an elite marching member wants to win a medal during their age eligibility, it would seem to be practically impossible if they marched for a lower "box" corps, which is set by previous seasons' ranking. Which can only result in what we are seeing, which is members abandoning their initial corps for "bigger" corps.

There is no movement because the best design teams tend to stay at one corps. Look at Phantom Regiment, they were always a title contender in the 2000's until their whole design team went up and left. The design teams control the upper limit of a corps. If the design is subpar, so will be the corps' placement.

On the other hand, both Bluecoats and Crown have maintained a very consistent and talented team over the years that has helped them rise up the rankings to where they are today. Cadets and especially BD have had their staff for many many years that has allowed them to compete for a title every single year.

The design team creates the design and basically controls how successful a corps will be, a successful show brings in more talent, and more talent + well designed shows result in higher placements. With this system in place, upward mobility is very difficult to achieve. If the system is what you have an issue about, that's a whole different can of worms (in terms of how much we should weigh design vs performance)

Edited June 27, 2016 by Cappybara

[ShortAndFast]

Well, I am mostly just asking for insight, because I know many of you have a lot more experience than I do.

I am really only pondering why there isn't more upward mobility within DCI. This feels like de facto slotting to me. If judges have corps in performance boxes, and they are instructed to at least use these boxes to determine ranking, it seems pretty likely that the worst a corps could finish (realistically, not theoretically) is at the bottom of that box.

There is a self fulfilling prophecy to this, that it seems would result in what we now see, which is glacier-like movement up and down the order of finish. If an elite marching member wants to win a medal during their age eligibility, it would seem to be practically impossible if they marched for a lower "box" corps, which is set by previous seasons' ranking. Which can only result in what we are seeing, which is members abandoning their initial corps for "bigger" corps.

Here's a thread that you might find interesting: http://www.drumcorpsplanet.com/forums/index.php/topic/107285-a-competitive-inertia/

Corps do move up over time, which is awesome. There's a reason why so many people love Crown and Bluecoats. But given how DCI works, it's a slow process. IMO members are being entirely rational: if they want to chase a ring, they need to go to somebody who has medaled in the last couple of years. Rings aren't the only reason why people march, fortunately.

[c mor]

Cue Brasso's transfer policies....

[MikeRapp]

I'm all for shuffling corps performance order, especially if it's to allow some younger corps to get a chance to play for a larger audience. Even if it's to just have some fun and shuffle them, then I have no problem with that. I think my main concern in regards to the OP was that I am against shuffling them if it's simply to help some corps score better. That kind of thing. Because even the local village idiot can tell when a lesser competitive show goes on after a big boy or two.

But do you not see the self fulfilling prophecy of how this method works? Sure, anyone can tell that Madarins can't hold a candle to Bluecoats. It's the subtleties that I am referring to, which can add up over time.

If I were an innocent bystander looking at DCI, it would concern me how little change there is in the pecking order of the activity. It's frustrating as heck to try to recruit and retain elite marching members, and a lot harder to raise money. In the last two decades there is just one corps that has climbed through the ranks to elite level, that being of cours Carolina Crown. Lots of reasons for that, but that is frustrating no doubt to corps in the lower boxes.

Now maybe this activity is so unique and so demanding that you simply must have all the right stuff to compete at the elite level. That is really my concern about Bluecoats, because I look at how much it had to cost to put that show together and it is simply not financially feasible for all but a handful of organizations.

I'm not a socialist, I don't seek the level playing field at all costs. I'd rather see a Bluecoats show than not. I'd just love to see the excitement of a dark horse stalking a medal, and it seems almost absurdly unlikely under the current scenario.

[c mor]

One point : I believe there is wording on the sheets that asks the judge to consider the particular performance in relation to other units performing at the contest.

That can give rise to a situation where a corps might receive a 67 if the next better corps is at 70, or they might receive a 66 if they were deemed 1 point lower than another unit to which the judge already awarded a 67.

My understanding is judges consider the performance, determine a scoring box - which gives a high/low range, then places the unit relative to the other units.

Any judges out there? is that kind of how it is?

[jwillis35]

Cadets and especially BD have had their staff for many many years that has allowed them to compete for a title every single year.

The design team creates the design and basically controls how successful a corps will be, a successful show brings in more talent, and more talent + well designed shows result in higher placements.

I'll add to this a bit. Regarding Cadets, to support your comments about design team, I think we can all see how they are struggling (by Cadets standards - most other corps would love to struggle and still be top 5) because they have finally had to make some big, sweeping changes. They are still plenty good and talented, but it may take a year or so for them to get adjusted to each other, design styles, the flow of teaching together, etc. It was bound to happen, and now we will see how they work together over the next few years. I still wouldn't count Cadets out of the top 4, but top 3 looks iffy, and top 2 is probably not going to happen. Usually you would NEVER say that about The Cadets.

As for the second statement, there is much truth to what you say there. Quality design + teaching = better show and performance, which in turn = better recruiting. But I will also add that how kids are treated on tour and the whole experience makes a BIG difference too. Are they are fed well, housed properly, and having fun? Are they being trained properly (physically and mentally)? Are they traveling safely? Do the alumni support them? Are they growing into hard workers, followers and leaders? Is there proper mentoring? One of the main reasons the Bluecoats have exploded into the upper ranks is not just great staff and talent, but it became clear to many young performers that BLOOO was safe, fun, educational, and definitely well fed. Tour is fun. They have alumni that love them, a home crowd as good as any, they travel well, and the corps is funded well (both locally through bingo - for which I do a fair share of calling, and also through local and national sponsorship).

The Bluecoats have had to make changes to staff here and there. It's not like their entire team has been together for a long time. A corp few have. But the corps has had to let some folks go over the years. No matter what someone's reputation is, they will not keep you around if you can't teach and/or if you treat the members like crap. The members come first, and their safety and quality of education and tour experience is the primary goal.