Binghamton NY scores

[Dale Bari]

I agree. But a relatively difficult show cannot be given credit if it is performed so poorly that it is incoherent. Otherwise we could just submit the charts to be adjuducated for the "WHAT" . So, at what point does incoherent become coherent and thereby rewarded?

Well, if a show (of whatever difficulty) is being done THAT badly, then no amount of justification based upon difficulty can get it into contention against another show that is much more readable.

It seems to me that the boxes on the back side of the sheet help guide the judge to put the show on whatever level it merits.

If the corps is executing so poorly that a judge cannot discern the true difficulty, then that's the corps' problem, not the judge's. All he can do is call it as he sees it. If he did so fairly and objectively, that's all we can ask of him. What he can do (and probably does in the real world) is ask the corps to clean up the HOW, and he can give that higher number on the WHAT side.

What I could NOT abide by is a judge critiquing a fairly well-executed program and telling the corps he still can't evaluate the difficulty inherent in it. Now, that idea becomes a cop-out.

BTW, I doubt one could ever simply use the charts themselves and alone to evaluate difficulty. Drum corps is not diving or figure skating, where we can pre-calculate the "degree of difficulty" for lone performer combining a couple of standard elements into a very finite routine. The closest you might get is like ski-jumping where an objective standard (like jump distance) is combined with "style points" to award a final score.

Can we simply measure the total distance marched by all dots combined on all drill sheets to decide who has the "hardest" show, 2nd hardest, etc? Doesn't sound very easy or useful to me.

[Kamarag]

Again, in the final analysis, if a good judge is doing his job correctly, there is no need to consider how hard a routine has to be to overcome the better execution of an easier program. The analysis of WHAT and HOW does that for you. If a corps executes at 8.0 for a show with 8.0 difficulty, they will beat a corps that executes at 8.3 for a 7.5 difficulty. (16.0 vs 15.8). The only reason we have any confusion over that concept is that things like "derived achievement" muddy the waters.

Man, that's a great way to say it.

[Kamarag]

Can we simply measure the total distance marched by all dots combined on all drill sheets to decide who has the "hardest" show, 2nd hardest, etc? Doesn't sound very easy or useful to me.

Great assessment. To use a DCI example, the Blue Devils of the 80's and early 90's had difficult drill.

It wasn't always difficult in the velocity or step size, the two factors the uninitiated assume makes up "hard". It was hard in the area of form and exposure. The Blue Devils have always been the absolute masters of the rotating geometric form, and really made thier mark throwing expansions and contractions into the mix. That stuff is incredibly difficult to do cleanly. I'd argue that it's every bit as difficult as what the Cadets and Cavaliers were doing, even though those two corps wouldn't touch a mass rotation/expansion with a ten foot pole.

DCA isn't that different. To use the Brigadiers as an example (and I think Shawn will agree), thier drill from, say, 2003-2005 (shows I have seen a lot of on DVD) looks easy, but that's not necessarily the case. They don't always go for high velocity or step size, but they have forms and movements that are difficult to do cleanly...and that's where the Brigs have really excelled over the last eight or nine years.

Empire has difficult drill in an entirely different area, as do Bucs and Bush...or even Cabs (Cabs this year, to me, have much more achievable drill than they have in the last couple of years, and it shows in thier level of execution).

Drum corps is a subjective activity, both musically and visually...especially visually.

Where 2006 is different from 2004 and 2005 is that there aren't only one or two corps that are a step or more above everyone else. it's a much closer playing field. That's due to better design and a higher level of execution. And unlike the so-called "design renaissance " of the mid 90's in DCI, you can play any style of music you want and still get assessed objectively. For that reason alone, DCA has it all over DCI every time (though I think even DCI is starting to catch on that variety is once again the spice of life).

[spcbrass]

John that is a very fair asessment that you have made. Show's come in varying degress of hard, both visually and musically, but also physically and mentally. IMO there is way too much emphasis on physical demand and not neraly enough on the mental demands that performers face.

As performers we can probably all agree on something. This activity is really about 90% mental. If you have got your head in order then you can overcome all that is physical with a little conditioning. Some of us are trained to make the impossible look easy, and as such our designers use us in the show in ways that you wouldn't dare use the average performer. This is designing smart not designing hard.

When you have a pice of music that requires a soloist it is often your best person out front. The same is true visually. When a very difficult move is needed you go to your best people. If you looked at the order of the section at certain points in the show and the personnel in the line you knew it was coming. The difficulty is there, it is that you have put it in the hands of your best people.

It's like game 7 of the NBA finals...who do you want taking the shot...MJ or your 2nd string point guard?

[KeithHall]

First of all...Hi Tom! Good to see you, at least online again! I agree with what you were saying. I think the parents of our students would like us to grade our students on derived achievement. "Okay...you're failing math right now but we can see the effort you are putting in and we'll actually give you a higher grade because we think that you MAY do better later in the semester.

To me, this sounds unfair. If corps A is clearly the best corps than Corps A should be above corps B, and so on. If Empire was prepared and were obviously better than the other corps (whomever it is), then Empire should win, right? Makes sense. But nowadays, we make life easier for most. Look at the school system in the U.S.

Anyways...I'm with you Tom! Take note everyone.

Sorry, but I gotta jump in...

Is the spread between Bucs and Empire actually getting BIGGER? I saw these two corps a month ago and thought Empire beat Bucs by 3 points (easy). I was shocked that Bucs beat them that night.

I USED to know something about this activity; my assessment that night was that Empire actually put in the hard work, their show was done, and their performers were more prepared (what a concept).

But then some people who DO know what the activity is all about told me about "derived achievement." Apparently it doesn't matter HOW well you do it, it's WHAT the judge assumes you're trying to do.

But if a corps is sloppy and runs out of gas, then how do know WHAT they're trying to do? Do you pretend that it's what you saw Phantom do a couple years ago? Does the judge just get to project that this under-prepared early-July DCA corps is really mid-August 1996 Phantom Regiment?

Obviously, I haven't seen a show in a month, maybe the Bucs are really cookin' right now.

It just bothers me that the judging system doesn't encourage corps to get their darn show done, and develop some endurance before going out in front of paying customers.

And the corps that DO work hard, get their show done, and develop their members into strong, charismatic performers are penalized because the "experts" think they "make it look too easy."

By the way, DCP is outstanding! Kudos to those who created it.

Tom Allen

Fan

Rochester, NY

http://www.geocities.com/tomallentraining/

[Kamarag]

John that is a very fair asessment that you have made. Show's come in varying degress of hard, both visually and musically, but also physically and mentally. IMO there is way too much emphasis on physical demand and not neraly enough on the mental demands that performers face.

I totally agree. I'd like to see "smarter" design visually and allow the musicial aspect to be even better. Believe it or not, 2005 Bucs was a "smartly" designed visual show. The physical demand was lower than in 2004.

As performers we can probably all agree on something. This activity is really about 90% mental. If you have got your head in order then you can overcome all that is physical with a little conditioning. Some of us are trained to make the impossible look easy, and as such our designers use us in the show in ways that you wouldn't dare use the average performer. This is designing smart not designing hard.

I think that's another reason we had such great success at Bucs in 2005. We had the horses to make the (almost) impossible look and sound easy. Though I will tell you this...the hardest part of that show...####, the hardest part of ANY show I've played on the field musically...was Adagio.

The physical demands were nto that high at all visually...but the mental demands musically were enourmous. Dan McGrogan can tell you stories about all the time we spent on attention to the most minute detail of that piece. I think it really showed at Finals too.

[BucsTrumpet07]

Mr. Allen,

All DCA fans do not enjoy the kind of drum corps that the Reading Buccaneers put on the field, but many of them do. This is evident by the reaction we get at every show, including the Rochester show. I don't remember hearing any gasps of "Huh?" from the audience in Rochester. I'm sure being a home show for the Statesmen, there were a lot of people pulling for the home corps, but I found the audience to be very drum corps friendly.

Were you at DCA Finals last year when the final scores were announced? The Buccaneers received an amazing ovation after the scores were announced. This went on for several minutes. I again heard no audible "Huhs?' from the audience.

All DCA fans do not enjoy the Empire Statesmen, but many of them do. When they were announced champions just two years ago, the DCA crowd in Scranton gave it up for them too. The same is true with the Cabs, Bush, and every other DCA corps out there. Some people are into each of them, while others are not.

DCA is fortunate to have corps with very distinctive identities and a very wide variety of show styles. Would those of you that are not Bucs fans that have been throwing "vague insults" at my corps rather have everyone play the style of show that you most enjoy? That would get pretty boring pretty fast, wouldn't it?

You mentioned a list of three great directors from DCA that took part in the development of the current DCA Philosophy. You left out a gentleman, Mr. Jim Gruber, whose tireless efforts, along with a great team of friends, brought the Buccaneers back into the main stage and back into contention. Mr. Gruber and Mr. Tierno are well respected among the DCA directors, in fact that group chose Mr. Gruber as their Director of the Year last season. They have been the voice of reason in many heated arguments at DCA meetings.

If you are not sure who these two guys are, they were the ones putting down hashes at the stadium last Saturday before the show started. This is typical of these two guys. Whatever the corps needs, they make sure it happens, even if it means they have to roll up their sleeves and do it themselves. Their administrative team is a total class act.

There is no "Templin-ocracy" or any other kind of DCA conspiracy for that matter. Mr. Templin has devoted much of his time over the last several decades to DCA, along with several band and indoor guard/percussion circuits and deserves more respect than you give him in your post. Do I always agree with all of his judges? Of course not, and I am not shy about letting them know that sometimes. But I am confident that the ladies and gentlemen that are given the difficult task of adjudicating DCA contests are trying to do their best. Do they always get it right? No, but who does? Is their occasionally a judge that is not the most objective, unbiased person? Probably once in a rare while, but DCA has a system in place to get rid of people that are not willing to do a fair, unbiased job.

DCA has at least a four way race going right now for the top and probably an even closer race for 5, 6 & 7. There is even a very heated brawl just to get into finals this year. This is a good thing for the fans. Four corps, all with distinctly different styles, fighting it out for the top spot. What more could any drum corps fan ask for?

I love you Dan!!! Your the best. I hate all this corps bashing, just enjoy the shows/corps and talk about how much you enjoyed the shows/corps! But don't post stuff that bashes corps so it puts them down...however...this won't put us down....it just makes us stronger!.....Thank you!! :)

-Tarah-

[Jeff Ream]

A concept that I've always had trouble defining is: at what point is the execution of a "difficult" show suffucient to be awarded full credit for it's difficulty (design)?

when it is performed consistently at a high level. errors, if any, are minute.

[Storkysr]

Yeah, I know. The problem is that "high level" is a nebulous term. Crossover between captions seems inevitable. remember the old "content analysis"? Same lack of objectivity in defining this point.

[Jeff Ream]

content analysis is an old school way of saying demand.

and face it, ticks were subjective as ####. your tick may not be the same as my tick.

my suggestion...get a voting member some proposals to get on the agenda for this winter