A history of DCI judging and scoring, and the movement away from music emphasis

[Chief Guns]

3 hours ago, cixelsyd said:

A few thoughts:

1.  I do not think anyone is suggesting that GE be judged purely on volume of audience reaction.

2.  While home field advantage does exist in certain places, it usually does not apply to DCI finals.  Finals has an audience that travels in from all over.  Take an example from around that same time - 1997.  There was a hometown corps in the Orlando finals and in peak form, but the corps whose crowd response measured on the Richter scale instead of mere decibels hailed from over a thousand miles away in Madison, Wisconsin.

3.  Regarding your rhetorical question - should 1999 Madison have beaten top corps in GE - that is the wrong question to ask.  Recall that in GE, Glassmen beat Madison.  Madison did not even surpass Blue Knights in the effect caption, settling for a tie there.  Seventh overall, tie for sixth in "effect".  I have no particular dispute with the overall results.  But the degree to which "effect" captions take performance into account (and conversely, how much "performance" captions account for design) blurs away whatever distinction we were trying to make.  That is why I posted this earlier... 

... because in practice, the "effect" caption reflects the overall placement order with hardly a tile even one spot out of place.

I was being snarky and more of a smart*** when I brought up Madison in 1999. Because the OP seems to be hung up on crowd response from 16 years ago. My apologies.

Regarding your number/tile thing you posted, I hear you loud and clear. but here's the deal..........

We (In General) need to keep it real. We say we want chaos in the numbers/placements/scores. But when it happens, we lose our freaking minds and it's Armageddon in this forum. We have had some regionals over the last few seasons where numbers were all over the place, and we saw people flipping out and calling out judges for their favorite corps finishing let's say 3rd overall, but 8th in a particular caption/subcaption for an example. 

So basically, what we as fans are saying is............."Give us the scoring chaos with numbers and placements being topsy turvy................as long it doesn't happen to and/or affect the corps that I root for."

Edited March 27 by Chief Guns

[Jeff Ream]

6 hours ago, BigW said:

Thank you, Jeff. I'll share experience I've had at least twice. Don't know if you or your spouse have had this one:

 

Is flipping on blinking LED vests while honking and droning inanely away while stumblebumming around while the band moms scream like crazy "effect"? Bad effect, maybe. It certainly was unforgettable; I'll give it that...

it can be good or bad effect. theres a ton of factors that goes into it, so i can't just throw an opinion here based on that. 

[Jeff Ream]

6 hours ago, Onionhead2 said:

The changes made 2014, could they be accredited with the Blue Coats overtaking the Cadets at finals ? 

entirely possible it was a factor

[Jeff Ream]

4 hours ago, Chief Guns said:

 

We (In General) need to keep it real. We say we want chaos in the numbers/placements/scores. But when it happens, we lose our freaking minds and it's Armageddon in this forum. We have had some regionals over the last few seasons where numbers were all over the place, and we saw people flipping out and calling out judges for their favorite corps finishing let's say 3rd overall, but 8th in a particular caption/subcaption for an example. 

So basically, what we as fans are saying is............."Give us the scoring chaos with numbers and placements being topsy turvy................as long it doesn't happen to and/or affect the corps that I root for."

this

[BG984]

5 hours ago, Chief Guns said:

I was being snarky and more of a smart*** when I brought up Madison in 1999. Because the OP seems to be hung up on crowd response from 16 years ago. My apologies.

Regarding your number/tile thing you posted, I hear you loud and clear. but here's the deal..........

We (In General) need to keep it real. We say we want chaos in the numbers/placements/scores. But when it happens, we lose our freaking minds and it's Armageddon in this forum. We have had some regionals over the last few seasons where numbers were all over the place, and we saw people flipping out and calling out judges for their favorite corps finishing let's say 3rd overall, but 8th in a particular caption/subcaption for an example. 

So basically, what we as fans are saying is............."Give us the scoring chaos with numbers and placements being topsy turvy................as long it doesn't happen to and/or affect the corps that I root for."

Sorry, but I am not hung up on "just 16 years ago"....I am not going to write a big thing, but in effect, especially those judges with visual/guard backgrounds, have given many questionable results over the years.  I never stated that I think GE should simply be a "crowd o meter" of audience reaction........that said, if the judges are going to be oblivious to audience reaction and only respond to what they like as an individual, then they need to rename the caption, or it should not even be scored/utilized any more.  The main just of my article (which has pretty much been left alone, because the numbers speak for themselves) is that in a 6 year time frame, the 30% scoring edge in music was whittled to zero.  As I and others have pointed out, these things had to be voted on and approved by the directors.  Do we have better shows as a result of these changes?  Some will say yes, some will say no.......but the move away from musical emphasis is undeniable.

[GUARDLING]

29 minutes ago, BG984 said:

Sorry, but I am not hung up on "just 16 years ago"....I am not going to write a big thing, but in effect, especially those judges with visual/guard backgrounds, have given many questionable results over the years.  I never stated that I think GE should simply be a "crowd o meter" of audience reaction........that said, if the judges are going to be oblivious to audience reaction and only respond to what they like as an individual, then they need to rename the caption, or it should not even be scored/utilized any more.  The main just of my article (which has pretty much been left alone, because the numbers speak for themselves) is that in a 6 year time frame, the 30% scoring edge in music was whittled to zero.  As I and others have pointed out, these things had to be voted on and approved by the directors.  Do we have better shows as a result of these changes?  Some will say yes, some will say no.......but the move away from musical emphasis is undeniable.

Now that goes back to the beginning of the activity and BITD sometimes with a violent response.....lol

[BG984]

17 minutes ago, GUARDLING said:

Now that goes back to the beginning of the activity and BITD sometimes with a violent response.....lol

1966 was pretty wild (I was only 9 and not following, but this was legendary stuff)   https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1681203072683803&set=pcb.3827894180866047

[Jeff Ream]

4 hours ago, BG984 said:

Sorry, but I am not hung up on "just 16 years ago"....I am not going to write a big thing, but in effect, especially those judges with visual/guard backgrounds, have given many questionable results over the years.  I never stated that I think GE should simply be a "crowd o meter" of audience reaction........that said, if the judges are going to be oblivious to audience reaction and only respond to what they like as an individual, then they need to rename the caption, or it should not even be scored/utilized any more.  The main just of my article (which has pretty much been left alone, because the numbers speak for themselves) is that in a 6 year time frame, the 30% scoring edge in music was whittled to zero.  As I and others have pointed out, these things had to be voted on and approved by the directors.  Do we have better shows as a result of these changes?  Some will say yes, some will say no.......but the move away from musical emphasis is undeniable.

Ge has never been and never will be a what the fans want sheet. have you even seen recent versions of the sheet? the more you reply the more its apparent you feel effect is to match what you consider popular, and that isn't how GE has ever been. yes the activity has slowly moved away from music being the overhwelming focus because the activity has eveolved drastically visually. i'm sorry you want to compare scores from the days of color pre, squads, guideons etc to where the activity is today and your article is all abount IMO a false narrative trying to compare two things that are very different as if they're to be on the same level. they aren't drum corps today is very different from drum corps in 1972, and a large reason for that is how much the visual side of the game has changed. And quite frankly, elevator drill and matching pictures stopped being effective 40 years ago.

[BG984]

2 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

Ge has never been and never will be a what the fans want sheet. have you even seen recent versions of the sheet? the more you reply the more its apparent you feel effect is to match what you consider popular, and that isn't how GE has ever been. yes the activity has slowly moved away from music being the overhwelming focus because the activity has eveolved drastically visually. i'm sorry you want to compare scores from the days of color pre, squads, guideons etc to where the activity is today and your article is all abount IMO a false narrative trying to compare two things that are very different as if they're to be on the same level. they aren't drum corps today is very different from drum corps in 1972, and a large reason for that is how much the visual side of the game has changed. And quite frankly, elevator drill and matching pictures stopped being effective 40 years ago.

Man, I never compared things to color pre days.........the post that I did was actually a response to someone talking about the old days and results controversies.....and I posted one that showed the front page of a drum corps paper where two major championships (junior/senior) were protested on the same weekend.......I wasn't there, I was 9 years old............I was on a staff that revolutionized visual and won DCI......but we still played our tails off, with great music written by one of the best hall of famers of all time.   So,  you are trying to paint me into a very old dyno with absolutely no info...not good.   I judged last year.   I know corps are different.  All I am saying is that in a 6 year period, 1994-2000, all music emphasis in the scoring was eliminated.  Not 50 years ago....24 years ago.  I did look at the current GE sheets, and audience engagement is on them (though I honestly believe there are some judging the caption who do not consider that at all, and I also find the term "engagement" vague and open to whatever interpretation they want).    By the way, that show that we did 41 years ago was pretty good...........I think..............ironically 41 wins and one loss that season.....My initial post was simply 100% factual, showing how music scoring emphasis went from a 30% advantage to none in a 6 year time frame..........yes, I have feelings/opinions about that, as do many other people......for those who feel the shift toward visual and away from music is a good one, they are entitled to that opinion.

[greg_orangecounty]

9 hours ago, BG984 said:

.....My initial post was simply 100% factual, showing how music scoring emphasis went from a 30% advantage to none in a 6 year time frame......

And you can tell.  It's as if the judging panel on Dancing with the Stars has taken over.