2023 Scores Question

[ContraFart]

56 minutes ago, GUARDLING said:

I can understand totally how you feel the way you do. Even decades of teaching and judging I have questions. For me it is a constant and never-ending learning process. Just a thought though, the comparison to the world of gymnastics or even may other judged comparisons, that's 1 person to gain back momentum with drum corps there are 164 others to  rise above even an obvious error. Multiple captions can also do it including the show as a total can do it .

All I can do is explain from my point of view. Is it a flawed system, yes, the best we can do as a judge is judge from a standpoint of providing solid commentary to actually help a group and as a teacher LISTEN to those offering ways to make your product better.

But I actually do understand how you feel the way you do and I'm probably not explaining my view good enough.

I do not think judges act in bad faith. However I do think that we need to decide if this is a competitive activity or not, especially in the world class ranks. I think there can be different approaches between more scholastic based groups and world class competitive groups. 

When you look at the results of the current judging system, especially in DCI, I think we have to ask if the outcomes match the competition. I think in same cases yes and in some cases no. I believe the talent and execution of the top 3 or 4 groups are practically the same, but when the outcome is one group winning 50% of the championships in the past 15 years and I agree with less than half of them, then I begin to question how we get to that outcome. What am I missing? Am I valuing the correct things when I put my personal input on the quality of a show? How am I so far off after 30 years performing, teaching and following the marching arts? Then I see RCC get a 20 in visual even after a Bass Drummer falls down, and I lose all faith the concept of judging. I have become black pilled on the whole concept. 

[TheOneWhoKnows]

1 minute ago, ContraFart said:

I do not think judges act in bad faith. However I do think that we need to decide if this is a competitive activity or not, especially in the world class ranks. I think there can be different approaches between more scholastic based groups and world class competitive groups. 

When you look at the results of the current judging system, especially in DCI, I think we have to ask if the outcomes match the competition. I think in same cases yes and in some cases no. I believe the talent and execution of the top 3 or 4 groups are practically the same, but when the outcome is one group winning 50% of the championships in the past 15 years and I agree with less than half of them, then I begin to question how we get to that outcome. What am I missing? Am I valuing the correct things when I put my personal input on the quality of a show? How am I so far off after 30 years performing, teaching and following the marching arts? Then I see RCC get a 20 in visual even after a Bass Drummer falls down, and I lose all faith the concept of judging. I have become black pilled on the whole concept. 

I understand the frustration about perfect scores. I myself would say 2014 was probably more numbers mismanagement versus an actual 20. Not to say BD didn’t deserve to win, because they absolutely did. 
 

I’m going to say something a lot of people on here won’t like, but it’s reality. Judges miss things. I personally have not seen a video of RCC so I can’t say much without full context, but it is possible to miss it if it’s a quick event. Or if there is event elsewhere that’s being commented on. Or if the judge takes a glance to look at the score sheet or was trying to quickly scratch down a note. All of that is happening while judging. And everyone judges differently. 
 

I would personally be hard pressed to give out a 20 if I saw a mistake, but I would need that judges commentary to understand why they did what they did. We have to judge the entirety of the performance over time. Does one fumble in football determine the entire outcome of the game? Or one strikeout in baseball? It doesn’t. 
 

I would also challenge you to read the visual judging sheet for the world percussion. The performance category (which is really where one would complain about a perfect 10), doesn’t quite depict a rubric of “perfect, no mistakes” 

[GUARDLING]

50 minutes ago, ContraFart said:

I do not think judges act in bad faith. However I do think that we need to decide if this is a competitive activity or not, especially in the world class ranks. I think there can be different approaches between more scholastic based groups and world class competitive groups. 

When you look at the results of the current judging system, especially in DCI, I think we have to ask if the outcomes match the competition. I think in same cases yes and in some cases no. I believe the talent and execution of the top 3 or 4 groups are practically the same, but when the outcome is one group winning 50% of the championships in the past 15 years and I agree with less than half of them, tyoure back to believing that a 20 means perfect...it doesn'then I begin to question how we get to that outcome. What am I missing? Am I valuing the correct things when I put my personal input on the quality of a show? How am I so far off after 30 years performing, teaching and following the marching arts? Then I see RCC get a 20 in visual even after a Bass Drummer falls down, and I lose all faith the concept of judging. I have become black pilled on the whole concept. 

Youre back to believing that a 20 means perfect..it doesn't and never has....and were back...lolYou have to look at the entire production and whoever is #2 what did #1 have even with a major flaw puts them above. Now when you get to that one can disagree with who was better ( as people do ) forever. ( and do also ..lol )

 

Edited June 27, 2023 by GUARDLING

[Jeff Ream]

On 6/25/2023 at 1:08 AM, ContraFart said:

A visual judge is sure as hell looking at the entire visual package at once. Even if they are not, a major event like a fall will be noticed. 

have you judged upstairs? are you actually looking at the entire competition area all at once? or did you turn your head in one direction to see a certain moment?

 

having judged effect for band and indoor, you're never looking at the entire picture every single second of the show. i know you're still all hung up on the WGI percussion numbers, but honetly when you look at that recap, the actual crime happened to United, not the 10.

[Jeff Ream]

On 6/25/2023 at 8:26 AM, cixelsyd said:

Two things:

1.  Judging accountability is provided by scores, recaps, written sheets, recorded commentary, in-person communication in critique, and whatever procedures a circuit has for assignment and/or removal of judges.  Every one of those methods of accountability has been employed with both the teardown (tick) and buildup systems of subjective judging.  Any remaining frustrations with the imperfection of accountability (yours or mine) are an unavoidable consequence of the subjective nature of judging.

It is incorrect to say there was "no" accountability under the tick system.

2.  Consistency in contest results is a product of both judging and the performances of the corps.  And in the days of the tick system, no corps moved in by Memorial Day to do drum corps 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for 11 straight weeks.  There were also more corps back then, making for a more crowded field of competitors.  So a corps really could win by 2 points one night and be in 4th the next night (or afternoon).  You say "often" it had nothing to do with the corps.  I say more often it did.  When performers discuss the relative ups and downs of their results in the 1970s, the clear majority point to performance differences that are reflected in the resulting scores/placements.

Problem is, this overarching desire for judging "consistency" breeds slotting.  Corps are certainly more consistent today than in past centuries, but not perfectly so.  When a judge is confronted with a relative inconsistency in performance on a given night, they are strongly incentivized against calling it out in their results, or even believing their own eyes/ears.

well let's be honest....til tapes really became a thing, accountability was very good ole boys protected

[Jeff Ream]

On 6/25/2023 at 9:24 AM, cixelsyd said:

I am glad you raised this point.  Realizing that some judges are sampling different sections at different times in different performances, we should logically expect some degree of fluctuation in scoring from day to day on that account.

and some captions are more willing to go there than others.

[Jeff Ream]

On 6/25/2023 at 9:30 AM, ContraFart said:

Or maybe we should have 2 field percussion judges, one that concentrates on battery and the other on front ensemble 

ok but.....battery guy is not going to be looking at the entire battery the entire time. they'll be sampling. same thing up front. so again, how you feel it is done or to be done isn't reality

[Jeff Ream]

On 6/25/2023 at 9:32 AM, ContraFart said:

If the numbers actually meant something, then you wouldn't be forced to have ordinals. It is completely unfeasible that 2 groups achieve at the exactly the same rate on a given night? 

ordinals are there because it's easier to see who won what box. remember...a judges job is to rank (ordinals) then rate ( score)

[Jeff Ream]

8 hours ago, ContraFart said:

My wish is to not make this conversation circular, however the reason I think it can get that way is I am not necessarily commenting on why things are the way they are, but more why I think a layman who never heard of drum corps would think that current reality is absurd. 

The very fact that a major event such as a fall can happen and that can have no impact on the final visual score is absurd. I see where is can have little impact on placement, but I am talking particularly about the visual score. Would a gymnast falling off a balance beam or a figure skater falling on a triple axle not have their technical score affected by the fall? The only retort I hear is that a judge cannot be everywhere at once, but to that I say that there should be more judges. 

But think of the layman who is seeing this system for the first time. group A and group B are almost equal. Group A has a fall and Group B does not, but Group A has the "maximum" visual score, how do you explain that? You can say "well the maximum score does not mean perfect blah blah blah", but people are going to relate a 20 in a caption as perfect, whether it is or not. 

I think the following reasons are why I have pretty much given up on the judging system:

1. Numbers do not have the same value from year to year, or even show to show. Is BD 2014 the best show of all time or it is a result of bad numbers management? Would a show that got a 97.3 get that same score with the same performance any other year? No, and reason why is because it depends on the other groups. 

2. Ordinals are forced. A judge cannot tie any group, even if they are giving different comp and achievement scores. At that point the numbers have less meaning because its not about the value, but its about the spread. 

3. Major events can be ignored. "The recovery is more important than the fall". If this were not a competitive activity, I would agree, but sometimes crap happens. Is it really about the performance of that night, if the unexpected is ignored? 

Apparently I am in a minority here, but this is why I think the way I do. 

probably because many of those replying have actually judged. i do think any and all circuits should do more education to the general public on how judging is done. but then you default to WGI, and it goes downhill

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, ContraFart said:

I do not think judges act in bad faith. However I do think that we need to decide if this is a competitive activity or not, especially in the world class ranks. I think there can be different approaches between more scholastic based groups and world class competitive groups. 

When you look at the results of the current judging system, especially in DCI, I think we have to ask if the outcomes match the competition. I think in same cases yes and in some cases no. I believe the talent and execution of the top 3 or 4 groups are practically the same, but when the outcome is one group winning 50% of the championships in the past 15 years and I agree with less than half of them, then I begin to question how we get to that outcome. What am I missing? Am I valuing the correct things when I put my personal input on the quality of a show? How am I so far off after 30 years performing, teaching and following the marching arts? Then I see RCC get a 20 in visual even after a Bass Drummer falls down, and I lose all faith the concept of judging. I have become black pilled on the whole concept. 

ah WGI again, but back to BD winning...

 

are you looking at the results as just your personal preference, or are you looking at the show from the standpoint of every single sheet and did the show meet the criteria on that sheet?

 

i may not have always liked those BD shows, especially oh 08-13, but i get why those that won got there.