jbolstad55 Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 I'm trying to find information concerning the list of tiebreakers that DCI will use to determine the next Champion should a tie occur for first place. DCI has not responded to my requests. I know the first one is the use of ordinals from each caption. Anyone know the others? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markdewine Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Sorry I don't have the answer to your question. But.......I'm convinced the simplest solution to this problem is the "way it used to be done, back in the day." If you won prelims, and tied in Finals...you won. Outright. You didn't need a PhD. in mathematics...ya just knew. B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hipposduck Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 I heard it had to do with GE score Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OhioStateTad Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 (edited) No, no, no, it's not GE. That is (or was?) DCA's tiebreaker. Here it is in a nutshell: In the event of a tie FOR FIRST PLACE, the "ordinal" system will take over. That is, each of the 9 judges' numbers (20 points each) are ranked 1st, 2nd, etc. and are assigned that point value (highest number gets 1 point; second highest gets 2 pts, etc.). Then, the ordinal points are added up; whichever corps has the smaller number wins. In the lesser mathematical event of a tie HERE, they go to captions (meaning: just OVERALL GE, etc). If a tie still results, then we have a tie. Period. So, theoretically, two corps (heck.. 3!) could still tie for the DCI title. Take the three DCI finals ties (1996, 1999, 2000). In 2000, Cadets win by a nose: 14 ordinal pts to Cavies' 15. In 1999, both BD and SCV had 12 ordinal points. SCV won GE and Ensemble Music (2 captions); BD won Ensemble Visual, Brass Performance and Visual Performance (3 captions). BD wins in the second tiebreaker. (They won Guard, but since the tiebreaker was not in effect before Guard became part of the 100 point scale, I excluded it). In 1996, BD and Phantom both had 13 ordinal points. In the tiebreaker, Phantom won GE and Brass Performance (2 awards), while BD won Ensemble Visual and Percussion Performance (2 awards--Cadets won the other two). So, 1996 is a dead-heat tie. Take that tedious post about "which 99.15 was better?" It depends on how one works it. On the 2002 sheet, Cavies' ordinal adds to 10; on the 2005 sheet, Cadets' ordinal is 9, so, Cadets win. When one compares those two corps numbers only against each other, Cavies win against Cadets, 10 to 12. Edited May 16, 2006 by OhioStateTad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumcat Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Conclusive and comprehensive. Bravo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OhioStateTad Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 (edited) Conclusive and comprehensive. Bravo. Aww, thanks. I'm the cutest numbers nerd you'll ever see. B) Howevah... when DCI unceremoniously added the second drum judge at regionals/champeenships--3 years after the tiebreaking system was created---did they add a clause into the tiebreaking system? If not, a corps that gets the short end of the tiebreaking stick could sue for a trophy! ^0^ Edited May 16, 2006 by OhioStateTad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schickmeister Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Isn't it just enfuriating that we STILL can't pick a winner in 1996!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumcat Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Aww, thanks. I'm the cutest numbers nerd you'll ever see. B) Howevah... when DCI unceremoniously added the second drum judge at regionals/champeenships--3 years after the tiebreaking system was created---did they add a clause into the tiebreaking system? If not, a corps that gets the short end of the tiebreaking stick could sue for a trophy! ^0^ I'm not so cute, and besides, I'm a data dude. Why is it annoying we can't pick a winner in 1996? We have a tiebreaker clause in place now, and it's pretty good. If two corps get past that, then let's be ok with it. ;) The added judge is still perc. Those two are still averaged and treated as one score. Nothing on that changes the system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_S Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 In the event of a tie FOR FIRST PLACE, the "ordinal" system will take over. That is, each of the 9 judges' numbers (20 points each) are ranked 1st, 2nd, etc. The added judge is still perc. Those two are still averaged and treated as one score. Nothing on that changes the system. Does the ordinal system count each judges score, the subcaption placement, or does it count placement within the entire caption? That is, if a corps finishes first with both judges - meaning their averaged score also places first - do they get one '1', or two? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ItsOnTheField Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Sorry I don't have the answer to your question. But.......I'm convinced the simplest solution to this problem is the "way it used to be done, back in the day." If you won prelims, and tied in Finals...you won. Outright. You didn't need a PhD. in mathematics...ya just knew. B) So if corps A has a great run in prelims and places first, then has a bad run in finals...while corps B had the performance of their lives and ties corps A in finals, that means corps A should just win because they won prelims? Thats crazy!!!! Of course there could be other factors, but that doesn't seem to be the best method, IMHO If there is a tie...they should perform again LOL <**> 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.