Length of Shows in 2018

[queenanne_1536]

27 minutes ago, George Dixon said:

But when one corps is playing 5.5 minutes as a brass ensemble and another is playing 9.5 are we really comparing apples to apples?

Not necessary. I would much rather a corps play 9.5 than 5.5, but it doesn't necessary indicate effect, demand or content - purely based on time played.

[N.E. Brigand]

5 hours ago, BoyWonder1911 said:

I was always under the assumption that the scoring starts as soon as the DM turned back around from giving their salute, and ends when they turn around to bow when finished.

I used to think that also before someone here explained it to me. Watch the timing and penalties judge as the drum major gets ready to conduct. That judge will be holding his or her hand up in the air. The other judges will be watching that hand. The judging starts when the judge spins and then drops his or her hand.

This year that usually seems to coincide with when the DM starts, but in many previous years, the DM might conduct a section before the T&P judge gives the signal. The particular show that led me to learn this was Cadets with "Side X Side" in 2013. Listen, for example, to the Finals percussion judge comments by Jeff Prosperie and notice that it's not until the corps has been playing for more than 90 seconds that he says, "All right, here we go. We're about to start."

[N.E. Brigand]

7 hours ago, Cappybara said:

Phantom and Cadets stand out here 

Would it have been smarter for Phantom and Cadets to write a shorter show that could have been cleaned more?

[ouooga]

2 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said:

Would it have been smarter for Phantom and Cadets to write a shorter show that could have been cleaned more?

From a competitive side, absolutely. We don't score length, we score excellence. If Y = show length and X = total practice time (the season), then X/Y = amount of time you can dedicate evenly to each part of the show. X is fixed, which means the only way you get that practice time to show chunk ratio in your favor is to decrease Y.

[Rileydog]

47 minutes ago, ouooga said:

From a competitive side, absolutely. We don't score length, we score excellence. If Y = show length and X = total practice time (the season), then X/Y = amount of time you can dedicate evenly to each part of the show. X is fixed, which means the only way you get that practice time to show chunk ratio in your favor is to decrease Y.

Great explanation! But should a “level of difficulty” measurement be there? I know there is no subjective way to measure that but a longer brass played show requires higher conditioning. Idk, just asking for a friend!

[George Dixon]

1 hour ago, queenanne_1536 said:

Not necessary. I would much rather a corps play 9.5 than 5.5, but it doesn't necessary indicate effect, demand or content - purely based on time played.

Disagree 

[ouooga]

1 minute ago, Rileydog said:

Great explanation! But should a “level of difficulty” measurement be there? I know there is no subjective way to measure that but a longer brass played show requires higher conditioning. Idk, just asking for a friend!

Level of difficulty is a part of GE. It compares the difficulty to enjoyment to execution ratios.

If difficulty were measured in music performance, you could theoretically balance weak performers with harder music. It sounds crazy, but that's how the math would shake out.

On the same token, it's included in GE so a corps doesn't just perform something hard for the sake of it being hard. There's an entertainment factor in there as well.

To counter my own argument about a shorter show being an easier show to clean, the less show (or music or drill or whatever you're doing) over the 10-13 minutes you're on the field is all the judges have to work with. If you're having a shorter [show/brass book/visual book/etc.] and it's just not very entertaining or even technically clean, then that's what you've got. A longer show gives you more opportunities to show how awesome you are, and is theoretically a great idea for corps whose design teams are notoriously hit or miss.

[Ghost]

2 hours ago, Tommeee said:

I would love to see data for the average distance marched by each corps.  Obviously, that would be very difficult to obtain!

Have all mm attach an inexpensive pedometer and voila!

[Rileydog]

5 minutes ago, ouooga said:

Level of difficulty is a part of GE. It compares the difficulty to enjoyment to execution ratios.

If difficulty were measured in music performance, you could theoretically balance weak performers with harder music. It sounds crazy, but that's how the math would shake out.

On the same token, it's included in GE so a corps doesn't just perform something hard for the sake of it being hard. There's an entertainment factor in there as well.

To counter my own argument about a shorter show being an easier show to clean, the less show (or music or drill or whatever you're doing) over the 10-13 minutes you're on the field is all the judges have to work with. If you're having a shorter [show/brass book/visual book/etc.] and it's just not very entertaining or even technically clean, then that's what you've got. A longer show gives you more opportunities to show how awesome you are, and is theoretically a great idea for corps whose design teams are notoriously hit or miss.

I know there are no easy answers and boiled down, each Corps just have to play the game the best way they know how. 

[ouooga]

I was going to post this in the Semis discussion, but it seems to make more sense here. Mandarins have a LONG dance feature number to open their show. That's a LONG chunk of show that the brass did not need to rehearse all season. In my mind, that's strategic, and here we are looking at a solid Finals contender as a result.

Everything you do in life, the juice needs to be worth the squeeze. Mandarins have that figured out this year.