Seeding and slotting....same deal.........

[Bob984]

I have been involved in the junior corps activity for thirty years. always been against any kind of seeding in any show. I think it promotes slotting. There are also some problems involving the judge's tools. For example, if two corps go on back to back, are very, very close in the caption in the opinion of the judge, but there are several corps left, the judge may be forced to put a bigger spread than is deserved between the two, to allow room for any others who may rank in the same area or between those two. For example, let's say there are 6 groups that perform between an 83 percentile and 85 That only leaves the judge between a 166 and 170 to fit them (ie 5 numbers....not enough), and the order of appearance compounds problems even more. Now, add a zero, and give the judge 2000 points. He now has FORTY numbers to use between those percentages. The problem is eliminated, and the order of appearance is not a factor. Order of appearance by random draw assures (1) a more even audience for all competitors. (2) The judge will work harder, as there is no way the judge can simply apply any kind of smooth upwad curve, or "take lightly" the first few performances. The judge has to focus on the sheet/boxes harder, and also has to review and consider every corps that has performed before ranking. Maybe a corps has a hot caption but is not a contender........do they really deserve to lose positions in that caption because they went on early, or a score that is too low, even if ranked correctly, because the judge had to "leave room"? ? I know that there are some who say that the 12th place corps going on after the champion is going to make them look bad. Not necessarily. In the long run, that 12th place corps is going to become better as a result of this....they have been placed on even turf, and they are going to work hard to prove to the audience that they are quite respectable. Where a corps places in the quarters or semis should have no bearing on their score or placement in finals. At championships. I am in favor of the 1988 system where prelim scores of the finalists were not announced and the finals judges did not have access to those numbers, either. In fact, I don't think the finals judges should even be in attendance at quarters/semis. Not knowing, along with random appearance orders, will increase the possibility of major moves (up or down) between qualifying rounds and finals.... a judge is not going to know that he just gave 1st in a caption to a group that was 5th, or they put the prelim winner in 5th place in their caption in finals.

I know that I am in the minority here, and there are many who are happy with the way things are. I would like to hear other opinions, both those who agree and don't agree. Bob

[CitBos]

BUMP.

[BRASSO]

Some of these ideas have merit and would seem make the system more transparent and fairer to all the Corps.

The problem as I see it, is that the collective bargaining position of the judging fraternity within DCI would probably be opposed to such changes. It would make the judging comparisons between Corps they would have to make with these changes more difficult for sure. So I doubt we'd see the Judges sign off on it, and thus it seems like a non starter, although some great ideas here, Bob.

[soccerguy315]

I agree with everything you said except the part about adding a zero to make it easier to rank the corps you see. It's already virtually impossible to see the difference between a 14.4 and a 14.5 (or a 19.7 and 19.8), but there is no way you could decide that one corps deserves a 1625 vs. a 1627.

[soccerguy315]

Some of these ideas have merit and would seem make the system more transparent and fairer to all the Corps.

The problem as I see it, is that the collective bargaining position of the judging fraternity within DCI would probably be opposed to such changes. It would make the judging comparisons between Corps they would have to make with these changes more difficult for sure. So I doubt we'd see the Judges sign off on it, and thus it seems like a non starter, although some great ideas here, Bob.

I have a question about this... a lot of times it is said on DCP that scores from different shows are not comparable because different corps are at the show, so maybe corps #1 and corps #6 don't have the gap that they will have when corps #2-5 are also at the same show. I agree with this... BUT, don't they have the same judging sheets? If the judges are judging on the sheets, shouldn't it be irrelevant what any other corps does anywhere? Why is corps A compared to corps B when really corps A and B should both be compared to the sheets? (they mysterious sheets that no one can look at)

Edited December 3, 2009 by soccerguy315

[CitBos]

As an idea I have, even though I don't know how "easy" it would be, but if, during a corps performance, the judges basically do what they normally do (leaving comments on a tape recording, write comments down on a sheet at the end of a performance), but instead of giving a definent score at the end of their performance, don't give a score just yet. Or, give a rough score range (17.5-18.0) that the judge feels the corps would be in. Then, at the end of the entire show, the judge will go back, look through all of his sheets, and the score range he put for each corps, and decide/give each corps a definent score. What someone can do is make up some sort of blank chart for each judge where he/she can write their comment and score range, and then look at at the end, so he/she doesn't have to keep flipping through the sheets that get handed to the corps staff.

This makes sense in my head, hopefully it makes sense to everyone else.

[CitBos]

I have a question about this... a lot of times it is said on DCP that scores from different shows are not comparable because different corps are at the show, so maybe corps #1 and corps #6 don't have the gap that they will have when corps #2-5 are also at the same show. I agree with this... BUT, don't they have the same judging sheets? If the judges are judging on the sheets, shouldn't it be irrelevant what any other corps does anywhere? Why is corps A compared to corps B when really corps A and B should both be compared to the sheets? (they mysterious sheets that no one can look at)

I think people say that scores from different shows aren't comparable mainly because no two shows have the exact same judging panel, and each judge who do the same caption see things differently. Like, say if there were two brass judges (I don't know if there really is a brass judge, but this is just "what if", bascially) in the box at the same show. And they sat right next to each other so they have the same vantige point. And both judges have the same basic background. One might find mistakes/"dislikes" certain parts that the other judge loves, and vice versa.

[G-Rott]

I am in favor of the 1988 system where prelim scores of the finalists were not announced and the finals judges did not have access to those numbers, either. In fact, I don't think the finals judges should even be in attendance at quarters/semis. Not knowing, along with random appearance orders, will increase the possibility of major moves (up or down) between qualifying rounds and finals.... a judge is not going to know that he just gave 1st in a caption to a group that was 5th, or they put the prelim winner in 5th place in their caption in finals.

I'm down with this...

[BRASSO]

As an idea I have, even though I don't know how "easy" it would be, but if, during a corps performance, the judges basically do what they normally do (leaving comments on a tape recording, write comments down on a sheet at the end of a performance), but instead of giving a definent score at the end of their performance, don't give a score just yet. Or, give a rough score range (17.5-18.0) that the judge feels the corps would be in. Then, at the end of the entire show, the judge will go back, look through all of his sheets, and the score range he put for each corps, and decide/give each corps a definent score. What someone can do is make up some sort of blank chart for each judge where he/she can write their comment and score range, and then look at at the end, so he/she doesn't have to keep flipping through the sheets that get handed to the corps staff.

This makes sense in my head, hopefully it makes sense to everyone else.

The main problem with this might be you are asking the judge to go back in memory ( or read previous notes ) to a Corps that performed much earlier in the competition. That said, I would be for delayed scoring in theory, and see it as an improvement in scoring Corps after each performance.

One other thought...... It seems to me that erventually the Visual Caption judges will have access to computers in their booth to video replays. I don't see this as a matter of " if ", but of " when ". The judges will be able to fast forward, pause, rewind, etc portions of performances on their computer screen so that their eye can further take in visual designs to ascertain perfections and imperfections, and also to see portions of the show that they missed originally, because their eye was on another set or another visual component of the show.. I see this transition as inevitable. Judges need to be brought into the new technology age where paper, pencil, and old tape recorders are a thing out of the 70's and 80's.... not the 21st century.

Edited December 3, 2009 by BRASSO

[dcialum89]

Judges need to be brought into the new technology age where paper, pencil, and old tape recorders are a thing out of the 70's and 80's.... not the 21st century.

I actually have heard that they are FINALLY going digital for "judges tapes" this year.