Discussion about order of performance

[MikeRapp]

I'm confused. Are they the only ones who get a vote on the rules? Do they get more votes than the other corps?

Sorry, you missed my point. The corps directors all know that order of performance directly impacts scores. It shouldn't, but it does because judges are humans. See my post quoting Eddie Fogler regarding whether basketball officials are biased: "All officials know who is supposed to win."

[MikeRapp]

That's double-edged though. Say Colts go on first, and their brass line comes out smoking hot (for the Colts), and the judge is so impressed he gives them an 18 in brass. Then BD comes on, and they're performing at what an actual 18 sounds like, but since they're noticeably better than Colts, the judge has to give them a higher score than Colts. Thus, BD might get an inflated score because of an earlier corps' performance.

The solution I see (not sure if this is actually practical) is to calibrate the judges before each show. Make them watch a few performances on video with already-agreed-upon scores and make sure the judges score within a point of those. If they don't pass the test, they can't judge that night.

A more realistic plan would be to do as I suggested: Make all the shows prior to the first Regional random order of performance, with exceptions made for the "home corps" as they do now. Use the first Regional scores to rank the order of performance from that point forward. It certainly would put a lot more importance on the early shows, which as we have seen usually don't have full shows and in the case of Blue Knights, have far less.

[skevinp]

Sorry, you missed my point. The corps directors all know that order of performance directly impacts scores. It shouldn't, but it does because judges are humans. See my post quoting Eddie Fogler regarding whether basketball officials are biased: "All officials know who is supposed to win."

You seem to have suggested, more than once, that the directors of the top 6 corps are keeping the order of performance rules from changing to something that would be more fair to the other corps.

My point is there are more than 6 other corps, so how are they being prevented from changing the rules by a smaller number of directors? Do the top corps get more votes? I didn't think that was the case but I don't know. Can anyone clarify?

[MikeRapp]

You seem to have suggested, more than once, that the directors of the top 6 corps are keeping the order of performance rules from changing to something that would be more fair to the other corps.

My point is there are more than 6 other corps, so how are they being prevented from changing the rules by a smaller number of directors? Do the top corps get more votes? I didn't think that was the case but I don't know. Can anyone clarify?

Ah, I get what you are saying; I was not not suggesting they are keeping the rules from being changed, because I don't know what has been proposed. My point is, I believe corps directors know that order of performance impacts scoring, because the rule book says it is supposed to.

Every judge will tell you, no, I'd score this corps the same whether they performed first or last, but human nature says otherwise.

I believe scoring would be a lot more volatile if the order of performance is more random—and therefore it would be a lot more likely that we'd see a dark horse corps rise in the rankings. Right now, it would appear as though it would be at best extremely difficult for that to happen, because the general order of performance is designed to reflect the expected outcome of the scores.

End results in the current scenario could be considered, by very definition, a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Now maybe we don't WANT scoring to be more volatile. Maybe, at the end of every season, every corps does in fact finish where their performance quality dictates. Maybe a corps would rather perform "near" corps of similar perceived strength...but I bet if you gave Phantom the option of performing third, or next to last, they're picking next to last every single time, because they know it is far more likely they will register a better score (to say nothing of the fact that there will be more people in the stands).

[MikeD]

Ah, I get what you are saying; I was not not suggesting they are keeping the rules from being changed, because I don't know what has been proposed. My point is, I believe corps directors know that order of performance impacts scoring, because the rule book says it is supposed to.

Every judge will tell you, no, I'd score this corps the same whether they performed first or last, but human nature says otherwise.

I believe scoring would be a lot more volatile if the order of performance is more random—and therefore it would be a lot more likely that we'd see a dark horse corps rise in the rankings. Right now, it would appear as though it would be at best extremely difficult for that to happen, because the general order of performance is designed to reflect the expected outcome of the scores.

End results in the current scenario could be considered, by very definition, a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Now maybe we don't WANT scoring to be more volatile. Maybe, at the end of every season, every corps does in fact finish where their performance quality dictates. Maybe a corps would rather perform "near" corps of similar perceived strength...but I bet if you gave Phantom the option of performing third, or next to last, they're picking next to last every single time, because they know it is far more likely they will register a better score (to say nothing of the fact that there will be more people in the stands).

Outside of the regionals and champs, most of the shows contain 6 or 7 corps. Do you really think ranking and rating will be all that volatile in a 6-corps show? Personally, I do not. Most of the DCI judges are also MB judges, where they see many more bands than that at even local shows.

the corps tend to rank themselves by their performances, anyway. Could absolute score numbers vary if, say, the BD went on first? Maybe there might be an ever-so-slightly lower number assigned in that case,impacting the succeeding numbers as well, but that is about it, IMO the corps will place as they do now. Even that is highly doubtful to me, but not out of the realm of slight possibility

[wilme861]

Outside of the regionals and champs, most of the shows contain 6 or 7 corps. Do you really think ranking and rating will be all that volatile in a 6-corps show? Personally, I do not. Most of the DCI judges are also MB judges, where they see many more bands than that at even local shows.

the corps tend to rank themselves by their performances, anyway. Could absolute score numbers vary if, say, the BD went on first? Maybe there might be an ever-so-slightly lower number assigned in that case,impacting the succeeding numbers as well, but that is about it, IMO the corps will place as they do now. Even that is highly doubtful to me, but not out of the realm of slight possibility

Exactly! Order of performance won't affect the eventual rankings at the end of the day but may change the scores themselves the littlest bit. If a couple of corps are very tight in scoring and one happens to go on first and the other last, maybe those corps flip flop but even that's not very likely. Judges score based on the performance, period. I know there are all kinds of conspiracies out there that say otherwise but if you want to move up in the rankings, get better. It's really that simple.

[Chief Guns]

if you want to move up in the rankings, get better. It's really that simple.

I don't like it cause then i won't be able to come on here and ***** moan and complain and throw a temper tantrum like a little kid when my corps gets beat.

BTW i completely agree with you.