some old corps photos

[IllianaLancerContra]

OK, so it sounds like Dale's photos come from two different shows. I'm thinking that this photo (and probably the first nine or so in Dale's group) are from Michigan City, while the remainder are from some other show, possibly Indianapolis:

I was at this show - I remember being in 'right-field' stands.

Edited January 5, 2008 by IllianaLancerContra

[GGarrett]

Notice all the penalties given out in those days.

Look at the horn score Sandra Opie gave us! Some of those drum execution spreads sure are pretty wide from one judge to the other.

Thanks for posting this recap!

This was in the day when dropped equipment cost you .1 of a point!

Wow. I was in the corps that won this show on this night. As mentioned in earlier posts, unfortunately for me my memory has sort of blended some shows together. But I should remember this show, because I would have been (and probably was...) crazy out of my mind that we beat EOC in drums that night. I know there was a change in staff at EOC from '77 to '78 and they had some age outs, but I was a huge fan of their drumline and corps in '77, so beating them would have been quite a feat for me personally in '78.

I noticed also that M&M and GE is where we really won the show that night, not the usual hornline killing everyone. With 1.20 in penalties, I can reasonably assume our guard probably had a lot of dropped equipment (as Lee eluded to above), but the Guardsmen guard was never one to back off of their intended difficulty even it cost them in early shows. Bill Harty just made them work that much harder to get it right... not wash it down.

Another noteworthy point is that Cavaliers sure seemed right in the thick of things for that date, in that ultimately us (Guardsmen) and Kilts would make finals and Cavaliers wouldn't.

[byline]

I know there was a change in staff at EOC from '77 to '78 and they had some age outs,

No kidding. Not the least of which was losing Tom Float to Spirit. I think if you had to pinpoint the change in the drum line from '77 to '78, most people would agree that that was the biggest factor.

Not sure so much about the age-outs; John can respond to this better than I can. But there was still plenty of outstanding talent in the 1978 drum line. I can remember hearing people say, shortly after I arrived, that this was the most talented corps Oakland had ever fielded, so there was a lot of excitement early on, which waned with each successive contest/low placement. I'll always remember my first year with Oakland as starting with so much promise, but then by the end feeling like such a downer due to the competitive results.

[sarnia sam]

No kidding. Not the least of which was losing Tom Float to Spirit. I think if you had to pinpoint the change in the drum line from '77 to '78, most people would agree that that was the biggest factor.

Not sure so much about the age-outs; John can respond to this better than I can. But there was still plenty of outstanding talent in the 1978 drum line. I can remember hearing people say, shortly after I arrived, that this was the most talented corps Oakland had ever fielded, so there was a lot of excitement early on, which waned with each successive contest/low placement. I'll always remember my first year with Oakland as starting with so much promise, but then by the end feeling like such a downer due to the competitive results.

A few people aged out, but not enough to cause any real problem. If one had the opportunity to listen to our prelims performance, noting the much improved hornline and usual cleanliness of the drumline, plus the tightness of the ensemble brass to drums, you might have some of the same questions about our placement as we do. As a musical ensemble we sounded a lot better than the year before.

Regards,

John

[byline]

A few people aged out, but not enough to cause any real problem. If one had the opportunity to listen to our prelims performance, noting the much improved hornline and usual cleanliness of the drumline, plus the tightness of the ensemble brass to drums, you might have some of the same questions about our placement as we do. As a musical ensemble we sounded a lot better than the year before.

Regards,

John

That's very true. The area where we got nailed hardest was in M&M, and that was frustrating (to say the least). We certainly were not the greatest marchers on the planet . . . but not the worst, either. I also think judges may have used the magic act as another excuse to downgrade the corps, possibly giving less credence to the performance behind it. But ah, there go the conspiracy theories again. And I promised I'd give up on those.

I remember playing the DCI record of our prelims performance to my Cavies friend, Mike, and he was rather impressed. Also when I tried teaching him some of our flag book, and he asked me why we made everything so hard, LOL! Imagine hearing that from a Cavalier guard member! He was so into his own experience that he wouldn't come right out and say we should've placed higher . . . but I think that's exactly what he was thinking.

[GGarrett]

well I should clarify: I should have put "I'm sure they had some age outs" ...

Either way, EOC was an undeniable powerhouse corps in the mid 70's. And it's true that your score at that show also has you guys right in the thick of it as well for that date. It clearly shows the FACT that every year there are corps who come out and improve as the season goes on, but the scores just don't keep pace with the improvements. That happens even today, and does indeed seem to imply a problem with fairness in judging. And before anyone jumps down my throat, all I'm saying is that I have always felt the the HUMAN ELEMENT involved in judging still remains. Until they invent some type of computer program or totally NON-human judging "machine" ... we may never "really" know who the BEST corps actually was at each show.

I've felt this way for many years... since back when I marched... so I didn't just come about this thinking whenever my favorite corps or MY corps didn't win or do well. I really kicked it into high gear about "collusion & unfairness" in judging back when the Geneseo Knights had the most unexplainable point drop during a season EVER back in the day.

[byline]

well I should clarify: I should have put "I'm sure they had some age outs" ...

Either way, EOC was an undeniable powerhouse corps in the mid 70's. And it's true that your score at that show also has you guys right in the thick of it as well for that date. It clearly shows the FACT that every year there are corps who come out and improve as the season goes on, but the scores just don't keep pace with the improvements. That happens even today, and does indeed seem to imply a problem with fairness in judging. And before anyone jumps down my throat, all I'm saying is that I have always felt the the HUMAN ELEMENT involved in judging still remains. Until they invent some type of computer program or totally NON-human judging "machine" ... we may never "really" know who the BEST corps actually was at each show.

I've felt this way for many years... since back when I marched... so I didn't just come about this thinking whenever my favorite corps or MY corps didn't win or do well. I really kicked it into high gear about "collusion & unfairness" in judging back when the Geneseo Knights had the most unexplainable point drop during a season EVER back in the day.

I tend to agree with what you've posted. I think it's less about an outright "conspiracy theory" than human . . . well, maybe not error, but at the very least, subjectivity. I've judged, so I know what I'm talking about. I don't pretend to have been infallible as a judge, and I can clearly remember one major error I made as a judge (I'm sure I made more, but one really stands out in my mind). It's almost more like a collective mindset sets in. That's why I have never liked critique. I figure everything I have to say to the groups I'm judging is on the sheets, and more importantly, on the tapes. If I failed to tell them what they needed to do to improve, then I wasn't doing my job. What's the point of going over all that again in person?

I described critique to a figure-skating judge here in Canada, and she was in disbelief. She wondered how on earth judges could maintain their objectivity if they were constantly in direct interaction with the groups they're supposed to judge, and actually in a role where they were supposed to be "helping" them develop their shows. She said that a judge's job isn't to tell an individual or unit what to do; it's simply to evaluate what they are doing. The individual or unit takes it from there.

I agree with her. IMO, everything a judge has to say about a show should be on his/her judging tape, and on the scoresheet. Any comments a judge would make afterward are, to me, redundant.

What has always bothered me about critiques is that I see a huge potential for them to be used to influence, to persuade, to sell a show. I really don't see a need for that. If a show works, it will work on a number of different levels, and a good judge will "get it" it some level. S/he doesn't need to be persuaded or convinced of what the show is supposed to do.

And then I wonder if there's a problem of judges who, while maybe not outright incompetent, are not confident in their ability to give the correct score, so they rely on what has come before, once again contributing to that collective mindset.

[BDCorno]

What has always bothered me about critiques is that I see a huge potential for them to be used to influence, to persuade, to sell a show. I really don't see a need for that. If a show works, it will work on a number of different levels, and a good judge will "get it" it some level. S/he doesn't need to be persuaded or convinced of what the show is supposed to do.

I couldn't agree with you more. Luckily, back when I was judging winter guard here on the West Coast, there wasn't much confrontation or effort to influence by the units' instructors. Most of the time there was back and forth regarding intent and broad-brush concepts, which I found to be rather helpful in the development of many guards AND instructors. However, I do recall one critique in which I did VA and had a rather prominent show designer get in my face as to why I didn't place their group in "box 5" at the FIRST SHOW OF THE SEASON. I understand competitiveness, but the plain fact was that the group, while full of talent and potential, was not at that level just yet.

I'm glad this was a very rare occurrence in my days judging, but situations like that could be commonplace in other disciplines such as figure skating. Drum corps wasn't too bad that way either, but some of the better staffs would either ignore or patronize you if they didn't like the results. Passive aggressive, no doubt - but certainly preferable to someone "in your face".

[lindap]

I couldn't agree with you more. Luckily, back when I was judging winter guard here on the West Coast, there wasn't much confrontation or effort to influence by the units' instructors. Most of the time there was back and forth regarding intent and broad-brush concepts, which I found to be rather helpful in the development of many guards AND instructors. However, I do recall one critique in which I did VA and had a rather prominent show designer get in my face as to why I didn't place their group in "box 5" at the FIRST SHOW OF THE SEASON. I understand competitiveness, but the plain fact was that the group, while full of talent and potential, was not at that level just yet.

I'm glad this was a very rare occurrence in my days judging, but situations like that could be commonplace in other disciplines such as figure skating. Drum corps wasn't too bad that way either, but some of the better staffs would either ignore or patronize you if they didn't like the results. Passive aggressive, no doubt - but certainly preferable to someone "in your face".

Hope you don't mind, Dave. Here's my little story.

In 1979, we founded a winter guard association in Alberta which lasted until about 1987 and started a local judging program to offset costs. The training was rigorous; we had to critique ballets, had our test tapes critiqued by seasoned judges, as examples. I had marched guard (flag, rifle I&E, captain with a sabre), taught about 4 guards, minor was theatre, viewed many performances outside of drum corps and felt capable of being objective and judge the performance at the time of the performance. I thought my scores were fair but was always learning more. My weakness was talking into the tape recorder. I was treasurer, secretary and later contest coordinator of the association but either took no payment for services or made sure we were within bylaws. I had overheard a conversation after a contest indicating how can anyone judge their own people? I didn't want any perception of conflict of interest, so I quit. More volunteer burnout than anything else and no regrets. BTW, gotta ask around for more drum corps photos. I'll keep looking.

[GGarrett]

I am happy to hear these thoughts Sue, Dave and Linda. I read with great interest (and satisfaction, actually!) your post, Sue, and thought about the interesting connection in judging between things like Figure Skating and drum corps... or some gymnastics and drum corps... and so on. Who made the fewest mistakes is the way I came up through drum corps, then it was changed to ADD points for who has the most difficult show. My question: By who's standards? And who governs the continuity there and assures that it is the same interpretation across the board? What if... just what if... something in your subconscious keeps telling you "well, this is <so & so> corps, and and maybe that error there was an aberration, so I'll let that go." and what if... just what if... you see <so & so> corps at the same show and you don't apply the same criteria? This could mean that when it comes down to just 1/2 points separating winner and third place, we may have crowned the wrong winner. Or kept an appropriate deserving finals participant out of a show that could make or break it's membership or future. I could go on and on...

ANYWAY... this conversation should be somewhere else. This thread is for awesome pictures. Apologies all! But I have been labeled the "conspiracy theory" guy a few times here on DCP, so when I see a worthwhile conversation spark up, I jump in. It's pretty much all just opinion, anyway, until proven otherwise...