Christian Acosta

How DCI members learn drill and how colorguard members learn work

Recommended Posts

On 1/15/2018 at 12:54 PM, Mickk3 said:

Whats the form method?

 

Dot vs Form can really depend on what you are trying to achieve. In earlier days of this debate, the two most extreme examples of these were both right, considering their circumstances.

Watch some Cavaliers signature Brubaker (and followers) drill of the 80's and early 90's.

Then watch Cadets of similar vintage (Zingali and followers).

 

The Cavies stuff = tight and sharp geometry with large amounts of symmetry. Shapes that the viewer knows and will easily spot when something is off. Even when not being a overly critical audience.

Cadets = nebulous shapes with less predictable mathematical development than Cavies geometry.

Cavies were preachers of worship the dot to ensure the exact same precise math every time. Start following each other too much and the results could be disastrous to such well defined and easily interpreted (by the audience) shapes.

Cadets were much more form based. Which worked because, if the shape was "off" or not in the exact same position as prescribed, it was less obvious. Stay together, keep intervals and dress. And it will still be impacting. 

 

Not saying one was better than the other. Actually, looking at what they were uniquely working with, it is understandable why such disparate methods each had successful results. Although I will say, dots are much easier to clean, pinpointing who is the problem ... but only if you have 100% buy-in.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, nowadays, as I understand, everyone is working much closer to Dot than Form along the spectrum. 

 

Then again, modern corps utilizing staging techniques, choreo, and body has added a completely different wrinkle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mingusmonk said:

 

Dot vs Form can really depend on what you are trying to achieve. In earlier days of this debate, the two most extreme examples of these were both right, considering their circumstances.

Watch some Cavaliers signature Brubaker (and followers) drill of the 80's and early 90's.

Then watch Cadets of similar vintage (Zingali and followers).

 

The Cavies stuff = tight and sharp geometry with large amounts of symmetry. Shapes that the viewer knows and will easily spot when something is off. Even when not being a overly critical audience.

Cadets = nebulous shapes with less predictable mathematical development than Cavies geometry.

Cavies were preachers of worship the dot to ensure the exact same precise math every time. Start following each other too much and the results could be disastrous to such well defined and easily interpreted (by the audience) shapes.

Cadets were much more form based. Which worked because, if the shape was "off" or not in the exact same position as prescribed, it was less obvious. Stay together, keep intervals and dress. And it will still be impacting. 

 

Not saying one was better than the other. Actually, looking at what they were uniquely working with, it is understandable why such disparate methods each had successful results. Although I will say, dots are much easier to clean, pinpointing who is the problem ... but only if you have 100% buy-in.

This was a very good illustration of the difference between the two.  Thanks for educating me.  It was helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mingusmonk said:

 

Dot vs Form can really depend on what you are trying to achieve. In earlier days of this debate, the two most extreme examples of these were both right, considering their circumstances.

Watch some Cavaliers signature Brubaker (and followers) drill of the 80's and early 90's.

Then watch Cadets of similar vintage (Zingali and followers).

 

The Cavies stuff = tight and sharp geometry with large amounts of symmetry. Shapes that the viewer knows and will easily spot when something is off. Even when not being a overly critical audience.

Cadets = nebulous shapes with less predictable mathematical development than Cavies geometry.

Cavies were preachers of worship the dot to ensure the exact same precise math every time. Start following each other too much and the results could be disastrous to such well defined and easily interpreted (by the audience) shapes.

Cadets were much more form based. Which worked because, if the shape was "off" or not in the exact same position as prescribed, it was less obvious. Stay together, keep intervals and dress. And it will still be impacting. 

 

Not saying one was better than the other. Actually, looking at what they were uniquely working with, it is understandable why such disparate methods each had successful results. Although I will say, dots are much easier to clean, pinpointing who is the problem ... but only if you have 100% buy-in.

This is a very important aspect if one chooses to use the dot method. 100% buy-in. A member must understand not just the dot but the form. One person off a dot ( depending on space and form ) can change many. Understanding form and what's expected should be understood.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, GUARDLING said:

This is a very important aspect if one chooses to use the dot method. 100% buy-in. A member must understand not just the dot but the form. One person off a dot ( depending on space and form ) can change many. Understanding form and what's expected should be understood.

 

At the same time, if the 2nd person in a diagonal isn't on their dot, it can put the last person in the diagonal tons of steps off of their dot, and make the move impossible.  So dots have to be respected at least to some degree.  In this instance, the 2nd person in the line has to be fixed in order to make the form achievable. 

Edited by soccerguy315

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, soccerguy315 said:

 

At the same time, if the 2nd person in a diagonal isn't on their dot, it can put the last person in the diagonal tons of steps off of their dot, and make the move impossible.  So dots have to be respected at least to some degree.  In this instance, the 2nd person in the line has to be fixed in order to make the form achievable. 

not just dot but body angle. That 2nd , or any persons upper body is angled wrong that also can change where that form ends up......can be complex IF it all isn't explained to the member, Dot ( if one uses them) form, body angle BUT to also make clear IF they choose to put dot over everything,....or not..I have taught people ( most  have) that can be yards off of the form but they swear that they are on their dot but could care less of the form. common sense needed. Or taught

Edited by GUARDLING

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was teaching marching band, we used entirely a dot system. In fact, since we practiced on a parking lot, we painted the sets.  Students never had coordinate or drill sheets.  When we wanted to start at say set 5 of the opener, we told them to go to red 5 (every song was a different color). The only potential issue is when drill had to be changed, which was very rarely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2018 at 7:19 PM, soccerguy315 said:

 

At the same time, if the 2nd person in a diagonal isn't on their dot, it can put the last person in the diagonal tons of steps off of their dot, and make the move impossible.  So dots have to be respected at least to some degree.  In this instance, the 2nd person in the line has to be fixed in order to make the form achievable. 

yep, and this is why we pulled our hair out each fall when linear forms were presented in the show. A student would be on their correct dot/coordinate, but not cover down in the form. The ensuing "conversation" usually ended when the student asked, "well, which of the two do you want me to do?".............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JAZZER said:

yep, and this is why we pulled our hair out each fall when linear forms were presented in the show. A student would be on their correct dot/coordinate, but not cover down in the form. The ensuing "conversation" usually ended when the student asked, "well, which of the two do you want me to do?".............

Get on your dot. Just get on your dot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JAZZER said:

yep, and this is why we pulled our hair out each fall when linear forms were presented in the show. A student would be on their correct dot/coordinate, but not cover down in the form. The ensuing "conversation" usually ended when the student asked, "well, which of the two do you want me to do?".............

know both and a little common sense, especially in a show. Rehearsal time corrections can be made show time , whats done is done

Share this post


Link to post
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.