Jump to content

2017 DCA Finals


KVG_DC

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Jim Schehr said:

I'll do my best to help you see your way clear. Yes! DCA sheets were used at all DCI shows CT performed. Dublin was their seeding score for prelims. 

In other words, it doesn't matter if you attend a DCA show so long as you have been judged on DCA sheets either at a DCI and/or DCA show. Your seeding score is the highest score on DCA sheets regardless if it's at a DCI or DCA show. 

and tolerance goes a long way. While the sheets are clear, many of the DCI judges may not have judged other DCA corps, so had no tolerance to go off of. I highly doubt they are logging on to DCAcorps.org to see what other A Class corps have been getting.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jim Schehr said:

I'll do my best to help you see your way clear. Yes! DCA sheets were used at all DCI shows CT performed. Dublin was their seeding score for prelims. 

In other words, it doesn't matter if you attend a DCA show so long as you have been judged on DCA sheets either at a DCI and/or DCA show. Your seeding score is the highest score on DCA sheets regardless if it's at a DCI or DCA show. 

Thanks! As I said, this is news to me. And I think news to other people. (See the post I quoted, which attributed CT's seeding to having "no scores from a DCA-sanctioned event".)

Has it always been this way? It seems to me that on one or more occasions in the past, Renegades went to some expense to bring in DCA judges to the west coast so that the corps could have a stronger score for championship seeding. Am I wrong to have believed this to be the case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, N.E. Brigand said:

Thanks! As I said, this is news to me. And I think news to other people. (See the post I quoted, which attributed CT's seeding to having "no scores from a DCA-sanctioned event".)

Has it always been this way? It seems to me that on one or more occasions in the past, Renegades went to some expense to bring in DCA judges to the west coast so that the corps could have a stronger score for championship seeding. Am I wrong to have believed this to be the case?

It was changed not to long ago. But I don't know exactly when. Just know that it was. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said:

Why did the Finals announcer, for about two-thirds of the scores, say "with no penalties"?

That led to speculation in the audience that the other corps, for whom he didn't say that, actually had received penalties.

But looking at the recaps, I see that wasn't the case.

I did that "with no penalties" thing for years, until several years ago.  (For those who don't know this, DCA does announce any penalties... not what the penalty is for, just the amount of the penalty... three tenths, one point, whatever.)

Now... the shows I do... I figure it's a given that if I don't say anything for a particular corps, there isn't a penalty for that corps.  Saves me a few words.  :tongue:  Also prevents me from missing a corps, which could lead to the speculation you mentioned. Or not.  LOL.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Jim Schehr said:

It was changed not to long ago. But I don't know exactly when. Just know that it was. 

I was under the impression that the score still needs to be from a DCA-sanctioned show.  Guess I'm wrong. Often I'm so far out of the loop, I'm in a straight line.  LOL.

Edited by Fran Haring
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fran Haring said:

I did that "with no penalties" thing for years, until several years ago.  (For those who don't know this, DCA does announce any penalties... not what the penalty is for, just the amount of the penalty... three tenths, one point, whatever.)

Now... the shows I do... I figure it's a given that if I don't say anything for a particular corps, there isn't a penalty for that corps.  Saves me a few words.  :tongue:  Also prevents me from missing a corps, which could lead to the speculation you mentioned. Or not.  LOL.

I didn't catch the announcer's name; he was one I hadn't heard before. I certainly appreciated his easy-going nature, even when he made a mistake (like not calling the drum majors forward before starting with the scores). But the "with no penalties" bit was very much a Checkov's gun, in that lots of fans figured it presaged some corps' approaching doom.

Last year at BOA Finals, the announcer made a point of saying that any tie would be broken by the G.E. score. And then Carmel and Avon tied for first, but Carmel had the higher effect. (I believe they've changed that rule this year to allow for ties.) So I was waiting Sunday for a shoe that never dropped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said:

Thanks! As I said, this is news to me. And I think news to other people. (See the post I quoted, which attributed CT's seeding to having "no scores from a DCA-sanctioned event".)

Has it always been this way? It seems to me that on one or more occasions in the past, Renegades went to some expense to bring in DCA judges to the west coast so that the corps could have a stronger score for championship seeding. Am I wrong to have believed this to be the case?

it changes all the time...depends on the current situation. I will say that DCA has been making a concerted effort to get judges around to the regions and not just hire locals for the gig like the old days.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, camel lips said:

Then why all the crying on  Social media and some here about Sky being left out of the night show because Kidsgrove "took" their spot??? 

 

I can see a new rule  coming out next year like the rule that came about sometime in the 2003/  2004 when they wanted to get some of the NE corps that fell out the top ten and lost their voting rights..so they came up with this "new" rule that said something to the effect if you have two scores in August and compete at Championships you can be a Member corps. That was until MCL did exactly that in 2006 and became a member Corps simply following the rules . Suddenly the next year they changed the rule since it benefited someone other than the people the rule targeted. How convenient. 

 

You know what? Prove it. Provide evidence. 

I haven't seen anyone from Sky complaining, and I talked to some of them before they went on Sunday night. I haven't seen any Sky fans complaining either. I think you're full of crap.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Kamarag said:

 

You know what? Prove it. Provide evidence. 

I haven't seen anyone from Sky complaining, and I talked to some of them before they went on Sunday night. I haven't seen any Sky fans complaining either. I think you're full of crap.

Still waiting for said proof in private message.

I made the statement that if the kidsgrove scouts didn't come over, we would've made finals.

but you know what, they did come over, and we weren't, and they made it fair and square.  Oh well, what could you do?

I am still befuddled by the comment of maybe if we started in November like everyone else.  Last I checked we started in November like everyone else, so.....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, N.E. Brigand said:

So there should be no more complaints ever again about numbers management, right? Because any tie would have to be a deliberate decision by the judge, not a case of failing to leave enough room for a subsequent corps to score.

Were it only that simple . . . it's not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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