Sign in to follow this  
DeusExGreenMachina

Enough Judging Conspiracy Theories

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

also, one must consider that 1-3 tenths in a sub box means on any given day. 4-6 tenths, then there's some differences. given that the numbers quoted are the bottom line number for the caption it means it was that close.

But dont total swings count? SCV went from +.2 to -.3 in a single night which is a .5 swing. Would that be considered in that .4 to .6 margin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ContraFart said:

I already said I stood corrected at that previous statement. However the same thing happened last year with Crowns guard and the head to head was even or had crown ahead by one coming into championship week. IMO Crowns guard had the run of lifetime on Saturday night, yet still lost only on Saturday night.

It still does not address the premise. If judging in and of itself if so fluid that 2 panels will not score the same exact show the same on the exact same night (which was mentioned in this thread) then what weight to the scores actually have? Why is consistency among panels not even a goal?

 

the scores are based on where the group falls in a certain box in each subcaption. a rough night could cause a number to fluctuate.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ContraFart said:

But dont total swings count? SCV went from +.2 to -.3 in a single night which is a .5 swing. Would that be considered in that .4 to .6 margin?

again, the sub boxes are your key. Just because you win a sheet Friday doesnt mean you're guaranteed to win Saturday, especially if the performance is up to the night before.

 

So lets look...Semis, SCV 99/99, BD 98/98

 

finals BD 98/98...so literally unchanged. SCV 97/96. So to that judge, vanguard did not have the night Saturday they did Friday, and because of the performance issues, they didnt get as much credit for book. Yet as the numbers show, BD beat them more often that not. Is it possible Friday SCV's guard just had the show of their lives, and one maybe they couldnt ever top?

 

this is my biggest complaint about averages used to determine caption winners at finals.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

again, the sub boxes are your key. Just because you win a sheet Friday doesnt mean you're guaranteed to win Saturday, especially if the performance is up to the night before.

 

So lets look...Semis, SCV 99/99, BD 98/98

 

finals BD 98/98...so literally unchanged. SCV 97/96. So to that judge, vanguard did not have the night Saturday they did Friday, and because of the performance issues, they didnt get as much credit for book. Yet as the numbers show, BD beat them more often that not. Is it possible Friday SCV's guard just had the show of their lives, and one maybe they couldnt ever top?

 

this is my biggest complaint about averages used to determine caption winners at finals.

But how many would say that Saturday night was not as good as Friday night, unless they had the scores to support their confirmation bias? If people viewed Friday night thinking it was Saturday night and only had the scores from Saturday night, would they disagree with the scores, since the performance on the field in reality yielded a different result than the scores in front of them did?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ContraFart said:

Why is consistency among panels not even a goal?

 

I will answer, because that's impossible to achieve to everyone's satisfaction. The final cumulative score rank, for that particular event is all I consider. I know what happens within smaller caption focus will vary greatly from day to day, person to person. Even the corps performance, per day, differs in quality.

By the way, I was hoping for a SCV win this season. Of all other competitors, I thought Blue Devils were closest to them in every regard leading to who will win.. On THAT Indy night, Blue Devils garnered a higher cumulative score. . . . . so it was Blue Devils. Who knows, 24 hours later, the winner might well be SCV.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

yup. and god bless Marie when she still judged

You said yup, so can ya please direct me to the score and caption in the last two DCI WC seasons recaps where a boot and skirt wearing high stepping color guard placed higher than the newer modern artistic spandex dancing guard in the top 12?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fred Windish said:

I will answer, because that's impossible to achieve to everyone's satisfaction. The final cumulative score rank, for that particular event is all I consider. I know what happens within smaller caption focus will vary greatly from day to day, person to person. Even the corps performance, per day, differs in quality.

By the way, I was hoping for a SCV win this season. Of all other competitors, I thought Blue Devils were closest to them in every regard leading to who will win.. On THAT Indy night, Blue Devils garnered a higher cumulative score. . . . . so it was Blue Devils. Who knows, 24 hours later, the winner might well be SCV.  

And I am sorry but that is just not acceptable to me. Especially since the results seem to favor one drum corps over another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/20/2017 at 10:55 AM, BRASSO said:

 Whst judges are you talking about here. Who are you referring to here ?

Again, please defer to his preference to not put names out into the public.  I wouldn't do that either.  I know you think it's not verifiable without names attached, but there is a higher responsibility here to professionalism.  It used to be a great quality and a standard to ascribe to.   Now we have the days of click bating and being able to put blogs out and say names without having to worry about real world consequences.  There isn't much professionalism left in many jobs and I applaud it.  

Edited by Vdad76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Vdad76 said:

Again, please defer to his preference to not put names out into the public.  I wouldn't do that either.    

 While I hear you, do you know how many times over the years that long time DCI Judges Deb Torchia and Marie Czapinski have been raked over the coals here on DCP for their alleged judge " bias " ? If you are a newbie to DCP you might not be aware of it.  But if you have been on DCP for a few years, you know that these 2 female judges has been publically criticized dozens of times over the years. Hardly a season goes by now that some regular DCP'ers will not single one or the other of them out... by name on here... for this alleged " bias ". So its rather peculiar that suddenly NOW we are being asked not to go public with any OTHER judge names that might have some " Ageism " issues or " judge bias" issues, or other " issues " regarding their judging.

Edited by BRASSO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BRASSO said:

 While I hear you, do you know how many times over the years that Deb Torchia has been raked over the coals here on DCP for her alleged judge " bias " ? If you are a newbie to DCP you might not be aware of it.  But if you have been on DCP for a few years, you know that this female judge has been publically criticized dozens of times over the years. Hardly a season goes by now that some regular DCP'ers will not single her out... by name on here... for this alleged " bias ". So its rather peculiar that suddenly NOW we are being asked not to go public with any OTHER judge names that might have some " Ageism " issues or " judge bias" issues, or other " issues " regarding their judging.

Agreed - I find that unless its the same panel or a dual panel with high-low averaging, or a change in how soon an active judge can consult a corps (currently one year off from judging) judging will seem to most as on a whim.  Making the tapes public will not help, judges are very aware that tapes are made public.

Example, I was sitting right next to the Judging panel at the 2000 DCI Finals in DC, I wish I could find the judge's name next to me. I heard every word, as for her reaction and statements regarding the Cadets, I assumed she placed them first, not so.  She literally was saying one thing and scoring another.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.