Jeff Ream Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 4 hours ago, cfirwin3 said: As I have noted before... failures of any sort that are not systemic issues are rarely 'punished'. Like a fall that causes multiple others or a lost piece of equipment in the rain or wind... or a fracked note on a solo... Or an aired-out high note. Judges aren't waiting to drop the axe on mishaps of any sort. No, but when your vocalists mic keeps crapping out 2/3 of finals night, for large moments in your show, 9.7's really shouldn't be handed out 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 3 hours ago, GUARDLING said: You are right BUT the tic system was just as subjective as it is today...maybe worse because judges had little accountability. Ive taught and judged under both preach. sheets had little defined criteria, and a tic was never defined in stone to be universally held as he standard by all judges. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 3 hours ago, Cappybara said: I'd argue that since the staff put the members in control of the electronics, it is within their hands. i'd argue achievement would suffer because the mic crapped out, and design should suffer as well for putting the kid in that position 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 1 minute ago, Jeff Ream said: preach. sheets had little defined criteria, and a tic was never defined in stone to be universally held as he standard by all judges. Amen brotha😀 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 2 hours ago, JimF-LowBari said: And you’re still voicing stone cold fact and not your opinion on reason for changes to scoring system? I give up trying to explain the difference, time for bedtime anyway and that 6am alarm Jim, here's an example of why the tic system was just as subjective...in fact moreso than what is used today that I know you can relate to. 75 DCA...drum title fought back and forth by Sky and the Rebels. Judge A loved Sky, didn't mind the lower tuning made them sound fuzzy. hated the Rebels because the higher tuning exposed errors far more easily. Judge B was the exact opposite. Judge B judged finals night and the Rebels won drums. and none of this was covered on the sheets of the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said: in your opinion. in the opinion of the fans that keep filling stadiums, not so much So are you saying G.H. was right? It was he who pushed for a lot of such changes on the grounds that the fans wanted them. Personally I don't think the audience size has grown because of electronics. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said: Jim, here's an example of why the tic system was just as subjective...in fact moreso than what is used today that I know you can relate to. Jim has consistently said in this thread that the tick system was subjective. He has not once denied it. Nor has he called for a return to it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, cfirwin3 said: I could have said return to... But it didn't seem necessary. The fact that they had positive point accrual prior to (preceding) the application of negative ticks is not terribly important to a discussion on the change from deductive tabulation to a fully achievement based system. (Waiting for the dog to come back in) have no idea what is being said here.... Unless the poster is saying a perfect built up/positive score added up to 100 and then the tics were applied. If that’s the case then he/she is mistaken. Forget exactly but something like 60 points build up (GE/content analysis) and 40 points tear down (execution). Edited August 8, 2019 by JimF-LowBari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said: DCA hosts an alumni show every year finals weekend. It's been so outrageously popular it usually draws about 1000 paying fans and has now been moved indoors. To be fair, more than half of those alumni performances (I attended the show in each of the past five years) were effectively standstills. Even the best performance in every year (Caballeros Alumni) has minimal drill that would seem pretty simple in the 1960s. Nobody's really calling for that. Certainly Roy's post to which you were replying was not. As I've said before in this discussion, I think almost everyone in this thread in in about 90% agreement already about what's working and what's not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfirwin3 Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 5 hours ago, JimF-LowBari said: (Waiting for the dog to come back in) have no idea what is being said here.... Unless the poster is saying a perfect built up/positive score added up to 100 and then the tics were applied. If that’s the case then he/she is mistaken. Forget exactly but something like 60 points build up (GE/content analysis) and 40 points tear down (execution). Why are you on this issue of antiquated scoring minutiae? What purpose does it serve and what are you trying to demonstrate? I didn't define the proportions because I don't recall them any better than you do and it has zero relevance here. It's trivial. 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.