Jump to content

Enough Judging Conspiracy Theories


Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, ContraFart said:

A 2.5% error (which is .5 in a single caption) is not tolerated in any industry I know of.

But the .5 difference would only be 'error' if it was the exact same run with the exact same judge. The Sat run was different, the Sat judge was different; apparently that run was .5 less of a quality based on the sheets to that different judge on that particular show.  Thus no error was committed. You have stated that the Sat run was better. What makes your observation more valid than the Sat judge?

Edited by Stu
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, ContraFart said:

A 2.5% error (which is .5 in a single caption) is not tolerated in any industry I know of.

How do you know it is an "error"? The 0.5 variance might well be due to a difference in the performances, one corps having a slightly lesser performance while the other a little better run. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, barigirl78 said:

So, the selection of the judges for the biggest shows is a fairly secretive process that the general public is not informed about.  Isn't that a situation ripe for conspiracy theories?

Do the corps staffs even know how it's done?

i'm sure the corps know. I'm sure the process is even spelled out on paper. many band circuits dont publish their rules about how judges get assigned either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ContraFart said:

I dont disagree with your premise. BD has a very smart and thriving organization, but its not like they exist in a vacuum. Other corps I am sure have tried to emulate their success without the same success. There are factors that make BD unique that cannot be replicated and geography is one of them. Do you think the Colts can support the same business model in the middle of IA?

most other corps waited too long to do it, hence BD's long leg up

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Stu said:

His claim is that many of the more experienced judges in DCI are not rewarding newer designs properly. However, the scores and rankings, and audio judge recordings that I have heard and asked staff about, show the opposite; that the newer designs are being well rewarded. And when I pressed him on if he has direct knowledge of proof to his claim, at least one response from him was, 'don't know', and the other responses were only based on that he can read the critera on the rubric sheets, and does not have direct proof, or that he does not want to name names. I even gave him the option to redact names and just show scoring ranking proof, but he said that was even too close to naming names.

and maybe he has access to info you don't. there are people out here smarter than you, with more inside scoop than you, that dont care to share it with you.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, barigirl78 said:

I just think it's amazing that everyone is guessing at how it works.

Why is the process such a secret from the fans?

i dont really care. Not like i have any skin in the game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MikeN said:

OT, but the good news is that almost certainly will not be the performance on the DVD's / CD's.  Wish they'd had that option back in '89.

Mike

they did on the tapes

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ContraFart said:

A 2.5% error (which is .5 in a single caption) is not tolerated in any industry I know of.

polls. they are usually +/-3%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jeff Ream said:

they did on the tapes

 Yes, the infamous BD soprano soloist snafu at Finals in '89 was exchanged for the better performed Semi's solo for the DVD's.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...