Paraphrased Thoughts on "Judging" from a newly minted 5-year Age Out

[FTNK]

5 hours ago, alphabetmonkey said:

Has anyone considered polling the marchers? Do they have a forum to have their say regarding the general direction of DCI?

DCI is heavily invested in this not happening

[greg_orangecounty]

1 hour ago, GUARDLING said:

The problem was consistency in judging as well as accountability and it was as subjective even more so than today.

There will always be inconsistency in judging when humans are involved.  One plate umpires strike is another's ball.  One line judges completion is a back judge's incomplete pass.  My point is the tic system worked in that it placed corps in their correct order of finish and allowed for innovation at the same time.  

Not saying to turn the clock back to 1970-something but the tic system worked and .doesn't deserve the criticism I read here from fellow dinos. 

 

[GUARDLING]

2 hours ago, Mello Dude said:

I completely disagree.  I think is so biased today as to render most scoring just a joke anymore.  Corps get credit for things they aren't doing because of just their name.  

I have judged, taught and directed under both and it was a hot mess with the tic system...Bias was just as much,,,, no more BITD. I can easily look back and see all those things you say and with no accountability

I think many who did both ( Mike for 1 ) would agree. Now of course there's always the exception   🤩

Edited August 18, 2021 by GUARDLING

[GUARDLING]

45 minutes ago, greg_orangecounty said:

There will always be inconsistency in judging when humans are involved.  One plate umpires strike is another's ball.  One line judges completion is a back judge's incomplete pass.  My point is the tic system worked in that it placed corps in their correct order of finish and allowed for innovation at the same time.  

Not saying to turn the clock back to 1970-something but the tic system worked and .doesn't deserve the criticism I read here from fellow dinos. 

 

It did just the opposite. How could a corps back then place often many spots lower or higher one day to the next, bad night? a spot or even 2?, maybe several? Not even so much spots but many many point differences I dont think so. Did a corps all of a sudden get several spots better over night, ahhhh no. How many corps felt ( because of who happened to be judging ) a false sense of what they were, where to clean, who to listen to. All those things happened constantly back in the day.

Often back then we all just looked to who would be judging at the end as to who we listened to or what our next move was OR with all the lack of consistency or accountability , just did what we wanted and hoped for the best.

 

Edited August 18, 2021 by GUARDLING

[GUARDLING]

2 hours ago, Poppycock said:

Interesting that there are adjudicators who can determine a spread by tenths or less, but can’t explain the difference or what is required to fix it to close the spread  

Frankly I’m not convinced the majority of adjudicators know what clean is. From a marching standpoint fluttering, ring around the rosie, and strike a pose forms is more dirty than actual marching, yet somehow it gets rewarded above marching drill forms in unison. 

lol...I appreciate the humor, i really do...Now with that said I personally would rather clean arcs, lines, boxes etc etc then fluttering free form etc etc. In the beginning YEARSSSSSSS ago some staff would say just get there, NOW for sometime every step is considered and made consistent , If every step isn't planned how could it ever reach destination, etc etc without disaster. Maybe a few don't consider this..lol Bottom line...way harder

I'm with ya as far as how someone can judge tenths between corps, a hard and questionable task BUT I will say it's credit to the corps IMO. Is there really a huge difference between sport 1, 2 or 3? no, 4 5 or 6? not really in many cases. Just to be among the top 12 today is a very high level.

 

Edited August 18, 2021 by GUARDLING

[Jeff Ream]

15 hours ago, rpbobcat said:

My issue isn't with the concept of judging.

The problem is having an objective system to accomplish that.

Art, by its very nature, makes that difficult, if not impossible.

If a judge likes jazz, more then rock, there is no way to completely put that "out of your mind" when you judge a show.

Same thing, I find it hard to believe that a judge who marched, taught, designed for corps "A", wouldn't judge that corps differently then corps "B".

Its just human nature.

While not perfect, I do think the "tick" system did provide more objective judging.

 

 

there has never been and never will be a truly objective system. no tic was ever clearly defined. every judge has their tolerance, and the sheets today have far more criteria on them than sheets ever had in the past.

 

and fan based reaction to be added to final results is flawed, because local favorites could total skew the results.

[Jeff Ream]

13 hours ago, cixelsyd said:

Then why do so many of them leave a corps they happily marched with, in favor of marching with a higher scoring corps the following season?

"the experence"

 

i put the quotes there for a reason

[GUARDLING]

2 hours ago, Mello Dude said:

Well, I wasn't thinking of Flo viewers voting.  Frankly, tickets could have a code that allows for one vote for someone at the show.  Getting more people to come out and see drum corps can only be a win.  Tech savvy in 2021 should not be an issue.  Besides, even old people can learn too.  No one is saying you have to vote either.  If you want to, be bothered to learn OR have a booth setup for people without phones and can help them.

 

It can be done WGI does this for a fan favorite BUT it doesn't have anything to do with scoring. Mostly its what staff people can do to muster up friends, family, etc etc to text in.

[Jeff Ream]

11 hours ago, troopers1 said:

Speaking purely for myself...and for no on else.

Competition is important to our activity, and there are benefits to it.

But, in our activity's current state, the way we are measuring ourselves is leading us to do things that are hurting us.  Our shows are written to check certain boxes on judging sheets.  We have to pack in a certain number of tricks per minute that make our musical arrangements unrecognizable and unrelatable until the third or fourth careful listen.  We spend a lot of money on "stuffs" to eek out that extra .15 point, but that don't pay off in the actual value of our shows to the paying (and non-paying) consumers.  At the same time we are pushing our membership closer to the financial brink, and pushing our students beyond what many can support phyiscally, financially and academically.  

shows were always written to check certain boxes on the sheets

[Jeff Ream]

4 hours ago, skevinp said:

I think this is an interesting proposal in the spirit of brainstorming and thinking about it might lead to something better, but by itself it would end up scoring a whole lot of things other than the quality of performance.  

Like popularity based on past performance, population of the area the corps is from, existence of other corps from the same area, varying quality of the broadcast from corps to corps, technology savvy of the fan base, varied investment in “getting out the vote”, size of the corps (and hence number of parents), inconsistency in understanding and application of the criteria, and so forth.  

VOTE FOR SANJAYA!!