BigW Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 On 2/25/2019 at 3:45 PM, jwillis35 said: This is what I thought you meant. I can't really think of anything at the moment that is quite like DCI or various band judging. In Olympic judging each judge looks at all aspects of the program. I'd be interested to see how scores would be with each judge looking at each caption, but drum corps and band judging is difficult because you're combining brass, percussion, guard, visual design, general effect, visual proficiency, and more. Simply put there are certain people who are more qualified to judge certain areas. OMEA (Ohio Music Educators) AFAIK uses a similar Olympic system or at least used to at some point. IIRC, 5 person panels judging the total show in all aspects, throw out the high and low and average. NE Brigand might be able to throw some light on that. I've heard mixed results on it. I think like any system, how good are the people taking the look and listen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 18 hours ago, BigW said: OMEA (Ohio Music Educators) AFAIK uses a similar Olympic system or at least used to at some point. IIRC, 5 person panels judging the total show in all aspects, throw out the high and low and average. The Olympic system looks nothing like this. The last time the holistic 6.0 scale with hi and low scores thrown out was used was 2002. The current record score for a men's combined short and long programs is 330.43 by Yuzuru Hanyu. I just looked it up because I'm a geek. From that weird score, you can see there's great specificity in judging now, including the use of slomo playback to check things like degree of rotation, which edge of the blade a jump was landed on, two-foot landings, etc. To use DCI scoring terminology, t's "tick"-based to the extreme. They have exhaustive rubrics, and each judge has a specific role. There is nobody who judges a program in "all aspects" and gives a score. A lot of people have criticized the current system because it pretty much eliminates the idea of awarding for anything resembling general effect/artistry, though there is some subjectivity when it comes to awarding points for degree of execution in things like sequencing of components, spins, and edge work/spiral sequences. If Boo's around, he can clear up anything I'm wrong about, I'm sure. 🙂 I'm in favor of having DCI judged more like the old 6.0 scale. The attempts at objectivity with the current rubrics are laughable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bldbrkr Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) HI, The old 6.0 system is alive and well in a certain part of the International Judging System. It can be found in the Program Component Scores. That includes, transitions, choreography, skating skills and so on. In many cases it can sink or elevate a skaters placement. I personally prefer the IJS system to 6.0. Each competition is like getting a report card from the judges . The 6.0 system was too vague. The big difference i feel is that DCI and the marching arts don't have set elements that are judged. For example, if everyone had the same Mello sustain and the judges awarded a score based on that same feature in every corps. I think back in the very old days they might have something like this in Drumcorps?? even before my time in the 80's :-) Edited March 1, 2019 by bldbrkr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 1 hour ago, bldbrkr said: HI, The old 6.0 system is alive and well in a certain part of the International Judging System. It can be found in the Program Component Scores. That includes, transitions, choreography, skating skills and so on. In many cases it can sink or elevate a skaters placement. I personally prefer the IJS system to 6.0. Each competition is like getting a report card from the judges . The 6.0 system was too vague. The big difference i feel is that DCI and the marching arts don't have set elements that are judged. For example, if everyone had the same Mello sustain and the judges awarded a score based on that same feature in every corps. I think back in the very old days they might have something like this in Drumcorps?? even before my time in the 80's 🙂 It's not a 6.0 scale, but you're right that program components are a lot more subjective. Instead of a holistic artistry score on the old 6.0 scale, it's broken down into several categories, each of which is rated on a .25-10.00 scale. Program components also been worth fewer points than the technical elements scores. Back in the 6.0 system, artistry was given equal weight to technical elements. Old-timers widely consider the program components scoring model that the ISU uses to lead to "cut-and-paste" (another phrase we see in DCI discussions, lol) transitions, choreography, spirals, etc. It was fun watching the old-timers freak out about Kim Yuna losing to Sotnikova back on 2014, which really encapsulated the arguments for and against the new judging system. As you said, with DCI, there are no real set elements judged like with program components in figure skating. That's one of many reasons why I personally think using rubrics to judge something as nebulous as general effect is beyond silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigW Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 15 hours ago, Lance said: The Olympic system looks nothing like this. The last time the holistic 6.0 scale with hi and low scores thrown out was used was 2002. The current record score for a men's combined short and long programs is 330.43 by Yuzuru Hanyu. I just looked it up because I'm a geek. From that weird score, you can see there's great specificity in judging now, including the use of slomo playback to check things like degree of rotation, which edge of the blade a jump was landed on, two-foot landings, etc. To use DCI scoring terminology, t's "tick"-based to the extreme. They have exhaustive rubrics, and each judge has a specific role. There is nobody who judges a program in "all aspects" and gives a score. A lot of people have criticized the current system because it pretty much eliminates the idea of awarding for anything resembling general effect/artistry, though there is some subjectivity when it comes to awarding points for degree of execution in things like sequencing of components, spins, and edge work/spiral sequences. If Boo's around, he can clear up anything I'm wrong about, I'm sure. 🙂 I'm in favor of having DCI judged more like the old 6.0 scale. The attempts at objectivity with the current rubrics are laughable. The Olympic system used to look like that... and is now referred to as the "6.0 system" used until 2005... I'm so sorry I didn't clarify. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.0_system Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bldbrkr Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Sorry, yes. It is ,25 to 10. I Meant the feel and ambiguity of the 6.0 system is alive and well. ISU is great at putting out educational videos on PC, but there is still much left up to individual interperpretation in that part of the scoring. Even the Techincal Score GOE - grade of execution, can be a wonky at times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.