gellio Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 Hi All, It's been a long time since I looked at the 1989 recaps, and I must say I am stunned that we placed 2nd in Visual Performance. How? I know you really can't judge a performance from the DVDs, but when I watch our show, I see a 7th place visual performance. And, how the #### did Star of Indiana place 5th in brass? They should have been 2nd (behind Phantom), IMO. I was brought to the recaps today because I was curious how Star placed in brass. I just listened to the show, and their hornline rocked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gumby5647 Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 Hi All,It's been a long time since I looked at the 1989 recaps, and I must say I am stunned that we placed 2nd in Visual Performance. How? I know you really can't judge a performance from the DVDs, but when I watch our show, I see a 7th place visual performance. And, how the #### did Star of Indiana place 5th in brass? They should have been 2nd (behind Phantom), IMO. I was brought to the recaps today because I was curious how Star placed in brass. I just listened to the show, and their hornline rocked. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> According to the recap I have Visual Performance went like this: 1st: Phantom Regiment 14.9 2nd: Santa Clara Vanguard 14.7 3rd: Cavaliers 14.6 4th: Cadets of Bergen County 14.5 5th: Blue Devils 14.4 6th: Madison Scouts 14.3 7th: Star of Indiana 14.1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gellio Posted April 29, 2005 Author Share Posted April 29, 2005 According to the recap I have Visual Performance went like this:1st: Phantom Regiment 14.9 2nd: Santa Clara Vanguard 14.7 3rd: Cavaliers 14.6 4th: Cadets of Bergen County 14.5 5th: Blue Devils 14.4 6th: Madison Scouts 14.3 7th: Star of Indiana 14.1 <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ah, you're right. I was looking at the Semi's recaps! Still, we shouldn't have beaten Star in VP! No way! And, Cavies should have walked away with VP in 1989. No one was even close...maybe SCV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 Surely we can appeal to DCI and have the scores changed. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
84BDsop Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 Surely we can appeal to DCI and have the scores changed. :P <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Good....you can work on 84 next! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gellio Posted April 29, 2005 Author Share Posted April 29, 2005 Surely we can appeal to DCI and have the scores changed. :P <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, can you honestly tell me if you watch us and Star that we were cleaner visually? Doubt it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gellio Posted April 29, 2005 Author Share Posted April 29, 2005 (edited) Good....you can work on 84 next! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sure, I'll work to put you guys in 3rd, with Garfield in 2nd and Santa Clara in 1st. Would that work :) Totally kidding. Sucks about '84. BD & Garfield were too close to call. Santa Clara was #### good too. I'd been happy if any of you three won, especially SCV. Edited April 29, 2005 by gellio Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocketman Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Good....you can work on 84 next! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Then 78 and 79! Rocketman - who? what? ampssuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMichael1230 Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Well, can you honestly tell me if you watch us and Star that we were cleaner visually? Doubt it! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Dont you remember that in 1989, prelims were a random draw and there was no set "order" of appearance.....?? You had a corps like the Railmen going on right after SCV This totally affected scoring and placement and is why some of the numbers were out of line for prelims......BTW, 89 Scouts visual performance was quite good, carriage, transition, and impact were all tight. ~G~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dckid80 Posted May 1, 2005 Share Posted May 1, 2005 Especially '78 Then 78 and 79!Rocketman - who? what? ampssuck <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 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.