Ediker Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 On 3/23/2019 at 11:23 AM, Tim K said: ...recall sitting next to parents of a Bluecoats member who marched in 2016. It was at East Coast Classic which was held at Boston College and they had yet to see the show live. Their son slid down the slide a few times and their hearts were in their stomachs. Were there no playgrounds in this young man’s childhood? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, KVG_DC said: Actually, the premise you make here may not be entirely correct. A show designed with 'awesome elements' is not penalized when such elements cannot be performed due to conditions. But those elements are rewarded when present and able to be performed as designed. Ok, then to me there is a problem with the scoring system. Here is the reasoning: If it is deemed by DCI that the weather and field conditions are too bad to compete, then the competition should be canceled; safety takes precident. However... If DCI deems the conditions are good enough to compete, then compete. And at that point if the individual corps staff deem that the conditions are so bad that their own props and or electronics, which are integral to their show design, should not be used, then tough, a knock in GE is warrented. Why? Everyone wants safety, that is true. But everyone should also know DCI will on ocassion say the conditions are safe enough to compete when conditions are not 100% ideal; yet it was the corps design staff who chose to add in items which cannot be safely used apart from 100% ideal conditions. Thus loss in points should go along with that risk if the competion is held and design items are not utilized; that is on the design staff; at least it should be imo. Edited March 24, 2019 by Stu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 32 minutes ago, Stu said: Ok, then to me there is a problem with the scoring system. Here is the reasoning: If it is deemed by DCI that the weather and field conditions are too bad to compete, then the competition should be canceled; safety takes precident. However... If DCI deems the conditions are good enough to compete, then compete. And at that point if the individual corps staff deem that the conditions are so bad that their own props and or electronics, which are integral to their show design, should not be used, then tough, a knock in GE is warrented. Why? Everyone wants safety, that is true. But everyone should also know DCI will on ocassion say the conditions are safe enough to compete when conditions are not 100% ideal; yet it was the corps design staff who chose to add in items which cannot be safely used unless conditions are 100% ideal. Thus loss in points should go along with that risk; that is on the design staff; at least it should be imo. Since a judge evaluates what they are watching at that point in time, if the 'alternate' drill they are seeing is just as effective, or the music is just as good, the score might be as high as with the props, etc. There is not just one way to design a show to achieve a desired effect. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigW Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 1 hour ago, Ediker said: Point taken. I don’t have an opinion about the exact scores, with or without ramps... not an expert there. The props were an embellishment, layered onto an already excellent show. They were not the core of what was being scored. Exactly. In this example, the program was robust and well thought out in many ways. Should not one reward the fact the design team had alternate, safer, and effective solutions to use in certain situations? Should the adjudicator take into effect the overall environmental conditions of the performance? You bet. Sometimes a team can shine in spite of bad weather over other teams because of being able to adapt. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 Just now, MikeD said: Since a judge evaluates what they are watching at that point in time, if the 'alternate' drill they are seeing is just as effective, or the music is just as good, the score might be as high as with the props, etc. There is not just one way to design a show to achieve a desired effect. Which goes back to my original question. If scoring can be just as high without them, then why spend the extra money, time, logistics, etc to have them in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 1 minute ago, BigW said: Exactly. In this example, the program was robust and well thought out in many ways. Should not one reward the fact the design team had alternate, safer, and effective solutions to use in certain situations? Should the adjudicator take into effect the overall environmental conditions of the performance? You bet. Sometimes a team can shine in spite of bad weather over other teams because of being able to adapt. (See bold and place this in context where you said safer) Again this goes back to my original question. If scoring can be just as high without them, then why spend the extra money, time, logistics, etc to have them in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallace Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 Honestly, it’s a lawsuit waiting to happen. We’ve seen some gruesome injuries occur on the field before these contraptions and acrobatics started. I’ve seen the most safety conscious companies have accidents. It’s not a matter of “if”; it’s a matter of “when.” 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim K Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 1 hour ago, Ediker said: Were there no playgrounds in this young man’s childhood? One the one hand, Bloo’s slides were not like kiddie slides in playgrounds and most kids I see at playgrounds or school yards are not playing musical instruments as they slide down. One the other hand, I only had a brief conversation with these parents at Alumni Stadium, so I don’t know if they are “helicopter parents” which does seem to be a hard habit for many parents to break. 🚁 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 (edited) do people feel the same of high speed, faster faster hairpin drill? Many have gone down over the years. I would think much more injured than from props. I do know of many hurt in drill. Seems there are many who love this Edited March 25, 2019 by GUARDLING 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 (edited) 32 minutes ago, wallace said: Honestly, it’s a lawsuit waiting to happen. We’ve seen some gruesome injuries occur on the field before these contraptions and acrobatics started. I’ve seen the most safety conscious companies have accidents. It’s not a matter of “if”; it’s a matter of “when.” and drill? Just askin Edited March 24, 2019 by GUARDLING Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts