Judges wandering on field

[LabMaster]

2 hours ago, cfirwin3 said:

They would be doing well to regulate performing height (how high performers can be from the field) down to only a few feet.

There goes some pretty great shows... but I agree, it's just a matter of time.

Would the regulation be for props only used by MM's to perform on?  Or would other props be regulated as well?  There are props that are huge but not performed on (see Bluecoats last year and now).  How stable are these types of props?  Are they wind tested?  Could they withstand an abrupt high velocity wind.  Is it reasonable for them to be? 

[LabMaster]

6 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

not just height...whats being asked to be done on them. Transporting them/moving them. Setting them up. 

C'mon now.  The MM's assemble them and roll them onto the field.  I'm sure they are carefully assembled and checked.  Especially when they are in a hurry.  Yeah maybe an inspection before they go onto the field should be considered.  It isn't hard to do.  Imagine if we could.  Some care should be taken before we issue a ticket to ride.

[Jeff Ream]

7 minutes ago, LabMaster said:

C'mon now.  The MM's assemble them and roll them onto the field.  I'm sure they are carefully assembled and checked.  Especially when they are in a hurry.  Yeah maybe an inspection before they go onto the field should be considered.  It isn't hard to do.  Imagine if we could.  Some care should be taken before we issue a ticket to ride.

who inspects? the host? the corps? DCI provides more people to the show site?

[Cappybara]

2 hours ago, cfirwin3 said:

This is about proving a negative (which can't be done).  It's like asking if a person that wasn't wearing a seat belt and had never been in a traffic accident is less injured now that they are wearing a seatbelt.  The question doesn't address the issue, which has to do with increasing potential and probability rather than a record of prior occurrence (with respect to injury).

It really does boggle my mind... why some are adamantly opposed to this regulation... as if an offense has been made and people have been wronged by the change.

In my opinion, drumlines have been wronged by this change as have corps. 

Corps can't be as creative with drill designs with the battery now as they need to specifically design spots for the battery to be featured by the sidelines in order for the judge to get a good read. 

[cfirwin3]

29 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

absurdity? yes because the rule is based on absurdity.  And no, it's not fairly impossible. I'd lay good odds, in the heat of the moment few could nail it without markings

Jeff, what color is the sky in your world? 😉

[Terri Schehr]

Just now, Cappybara said:

In my opinion, drumlines have been wronged by this change as have corps. 

Corps can't be as creative with drill designs with the battery now as they need to specifically design spots for the battery to be featured by the sidelines in order for the judge to get a good read. 

The smart ones have moved them upfield and they’re moving laterally. Kind of the opposite of the old elevator drill from BITD. 

[cfirwin3]

25 minutes ago, LabMaster said:

Would the regulation be for props only used by MM's to perform on?  Or would other props be regulated as well?  There are props that are huge but not performed on (see Bluecoats last year and now).  How stable are these types of props?  Are they wind tested?  Could they withstand an abrupt high velocity wind.  Is it reasonable for them to be? 

Bloo performers were up on the chairs last year (which were step ladder height).  As for your (extensive) questions, it seems to me that restricting performance height reduces a lot of other concerns, as the need for robust props becomes less relevant when people aren't on them at a significant height.

[cfirwin3]

17 minutes ago, Cappybara said:

In my opinion, drumlines have been wronged by this change as have corps. 

Corps can't be as creative with drill designs with the battery now as they need to specifically design spots for the battery to be featured by the sidelines in order for the judge to get a good read. 

Nonsense.  Nobody has been 'wronged'.  Just the pride of interested fans.

The corps staffers themselves came up with the change... This is something that corps wanted.  They can't 'wrong' themselves.  Ironically to the accusation, the change is due to an expanse of creativity and it now gives designers point blank precision to showcase their sections.

So the real comparison question is not about collisions... it's about adjudication.  Has the adjudicative outcome changed from last year to this?  Good luck proving that discrepancy.

Again, I'm pretty surprised at the umbrage over this.  It affects nobody negatively... just the pride and perception of people not involved and the theories they are beholden to assert.

Edited July 3, 2019 by cfirwin3

[cfirwin3]

52 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

about the same as this year though i have seen a judge dodging out of the way....in the safe zone

It's a lot easier to do when there's less to worry about.  I'm not sure that this was advertised as a 'zero sum' solution... that the judges could now sit in lawn chairs in their safe space without having to move away from a few performers in an area of more predictable contact with them.

[cfirwin3]

55 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

absurdity? yes because the rule is based on absurdity.  And no, it's not fairly impossible. I'd lay good odds, in the heat of the moment few could nail it without markings

Have you ever noticed those 'do not cross' lines on the ground at amusement park rides?  Haven't you ever wanted to just... touch it with your shoe?  Or push your toes over to the other side when nobody is looking?  C'mon! You know you want to!  Everybody's doing it!

I only ask because this discussion that we are having is precisely, absolutely... nothing like that.