Is the DCI 2005 Champion a foregone conclusion?

[Eggbert]

The outcome is predictable and not. Corps are classed together in clumps separated by about 2 points. Right now the clumps seem to be:

Cavies Cadets

Phantom Devils Madison Bluecoats

Crown Crusaders Vanguard

BK Colts Gmen Spirit Crossmen

The final score and placement within those groups is a crap shoot of how the tenths fall that night, either on the field or in the minds of the judges, as it has always been. Will some corps rise or fall from one group to the next? Probably not. Some call it slotting but how else does one compare apples and oranges?

The combination tic/build up system is exactly what we had in the late 70's. Not that it was great, but I do prefer it over a system based solely on the nebulae of aesthetic opinion.

The advantage of the tic system is that the individual performer knows that he has a chance to single-handedly BEAT THE JUDGE that night. I may have been getting a tic for a particular run every night. But, one night I look the judge right in the eye and nail it perfectly and he throws up his clipboard in frustration and walks away. I got him!! WHAT A FEELING! THAT is what the tic system was good for. You knew that you personally had the power to raise your score by a tenth or two every night. Everyone had a judged mistake to correct and by correcting it you personally contributed to the rise in score. And you had the judge's handwriting to prove it.

But... the tic system is obviously flawed. It's never really objective and I agree that today's system effectively ranks the corps as well or as poorly as the old system did. What I don't like about today's system is that the entire activity becomes driven by the aesthetic tastes of the judge in every way. The judge as an extension of the top corps directors and staff makes it an entirely closed system which just doesn't seem all that healthy to me.

[Rocketman]

While I would ike to think that "my corps" has a chance win this year, I do believe a corps beginning with the letter "C" will probably win. and the separation between 2nd and third (if there is a second) will be at least 2 points. I believe 3rd will likely be all by themselves and 4th - 6th will be within a point, with SCV ending in 7th 3 points down!

Rocketman - professional prognosticator

ampssuck

[Pinwiz]

The advantage of the tic system is that the individual performer knows that he has a chance to single-handedly BEAT THE JUDGE that night.  I may have been getting a tic for a particular run every night.  But, one night I look the judge right in the eye and nail it perfectly and he throws up his clipboard in frustration and walks away.  I got him!!  WHAT A FEELING!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...because playing something difficult when the field judge is right in front isn't important now. Liar.

Impressing the judge is impressing the judge. The difference is that you were trying to prevent a loss of points, while I was trying to gain points for my corps. Seems like I got the better deal.

[MikeD]

A tic is a tic is a tic!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There are events that happen, such as the short phrase of drum music is postulated. Whether there are ticks or not was dependent on the judge's subjective decision...not to mention his/her geographic location when the event happened.

The snares, for example, may have totally destroyed a phrase...if I were standing back by the basses I would NOT have been able to record a tick (or group of ticks) for that snare event, as I would have been out of position to truly evaluate that snare phrase, even if I heard what I considered to be errors.

So, events were events, but events were only ticks when the judge decided they should be.

Mike

[ssorrell]

So, events were events, but events were only ticks when the judge decided they should be.

Mike

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

so true. Mistakes were ticks ONLY when the judge caught them. Let's see...128 people on the field and 3 field judges. There were obviously LOTS of missed ticks. So...it is completely possible that the cleanest corps did not win during the era of the tick system. The corps that got caught the least won! Which makes the tick system just as unreliable as any other system.

There are flaws with any system. The current system seems to work pretty dang well IMHO.

Edited August 3, 2005 by ssorrell

[jwillis35]

I didn't mind the tic system in judging, but too often you would see corps water down their shows for the sake of points. Creativity was only going to go so far under a system that constricted the designers with fear of failure.

Nothing against the Blue Devils, but in 1979 and 1980 I feel they won two titles by watering and hosing their book and show in order to be as clean as possible. Phantom paid the price in 1979, and the 27th Lancers paid the price in 1980 with a show that had more demand, innovation, and artistry, but they were just not as clean as BD.

In the end we were awarding the high score to the corps that simply cleaned and did not get caught making mistakes, vs. a corps that produced the best product and performed the heck out of it, even though it may not have been perfectly clean.

In any creative activity, as well as in research and development in any industry, growth, innovation, and excellence must be achieved by opening doors and tearing down boundries. People need space to work. They cannot be limited by closed in walls and constricting rules.

Jonathan

[MikeD]

I didn't mind the tic system in judging, but too often you would see corps water down their shows for the sake of points.  Creativity was only going to go so far under a system that constricted the designers with fear of failure. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Absolutely true...and that predates DCI.

Mike

[glory]

Another historical perspective on tics.

It wasn't today's board/directors who decided to do away with the tic system. It was the board and directors who were using the tic system who found the process flawed and decided to improve it. That doesn't necessarily imply that today's system is perfect. It does show that yesterday's directors were sure the tic system didn't work.

HH

[ssorrell]

It does show that yesterday's directors were sure the tic system didn't work.

HH

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not necessarily that it didn't work, but they thought they could find a better system.

I said it before but in a different way, there is NO perfect system. All will have their flaws.

[gdisney]

How do we know if a book is "hard" if we don' "tic" the execution?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're kidding me, right?

You don't need to "tic the execution" to know a book is hard.  There are lots of factors to consider.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with Nikk. What does execution have to do with with how hard a book is? So, if you get a lot of tics on your execution, that means your book is hard? Maybe what he meant was more along the lines of "You have to exceute your book well to demonstrate its difficulty". That seems more realistic of an argument, though still flawed in some respects. If you don't execute well, could be that your book is too hard. Ideally, I think, a corps should always produce a book that is challenging to its members' abilities, but not over their heads.