jonnyboy Posted August 13, 2006 Share Posted August 13, 2006 You answered your own question, scores are relative to the other corps, not prior years. In addition, the difference in finals scores can be attributed to scoring as the season progresses. Judges are human, and start tossing out numbers at the very first show. Numbers are managed through out the season, but as the season progresses things can change. Corps X has a great show at Quarters, but Y and Z are better and get better numbers. Semis corps X is better and gets a higher mark than quarters, but Y and Z are stilll better and go higher still etc. So in some years, scores being relative to other corps, the champ ends up with a 97 and some years a 99.15. I won't get into whether the champ of 200X would beat the champ of 199X, thats a whole 'nuther ball game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommeee Posted August 13, 2006 Share Posted August 13, 2006 Year to year, it doesn't make a difference. Machine and The Door part 1 would not have been nearly 2 points apart. placement and spread is more important. I'd go one step farther. No only does it not make a difference year to year, but SCORES, PLACEMENTS, and SPREADS do not make ANY difference at all in the grand scheme of things! If I like a corps that placed 15th, their relatively low score is NEVER going to sour the experience for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS0527 Posted August 13, 2006 Share Posted August 13, 2006 I'm surprised that they were so low, especially when the upward trend during the season was a bit steeper than a lot of years.. I expected the Cavies and Blue Devils to break 98 by the end and Phantom to break at least 97 by the end Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byline Posted August 13, 2006 Share Posted August 13, 2006 Frankly, I think that scores have been way inflated for a while now. 99s? High 98s? Heck, those things have been given out like they're candy...it cheapens the value of receiving those scores. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WLCBonr04 Posted August 13, 2006 Share Posted August 13, 2006 I agree with the argument that the scores were inflated quite heavily this year, and finals seemed to be right. The shows were great, but I don't think they were performed at the level of earning 98s and 99s. A lot of drops, messy percussion, unclean lines, etc were noticed from every corps. So to answer the question, I think the judges had it about right, I personally would have scored lower but thats just me. :) :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newseditor44 Posted August 13, 2006 Share Posted August 13, 2006 I don't think it matters....Frankly, I think that scores have been way inflated for a while now. 99s? High 98s? Heck, those things have been given out like they're candy...it cheapens the value of receiving those scores. Back in the late 1980s, after both Cadets and Devils scored 98.4s (the record at the time), the champions got a 97.9 and a 97.1, before we got SCV's 98.8, which was mostly a product of the second-year GE-laden system. In 1990, the champion score was in the high 97s, in 1991 it was 97.0 flat (even though Star's show was freaking great), in 1992 it was 97.5, in 1993 it was 97.4....all of these were reasonable championship show scores. With the exception of 1996, scores have been super-inflated since then. Every champion (except for 1996) scored in the 98s (including a string of 98.4s) Frankly, I think it cheapens the achievement of getting into the 98s. And not every show I've seen since 1995 deserves those 98.X scores. Couldn't have said it better Nik! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCImonkey Posted August 13, 2006 Share Posted August 13, 2006 (edited) The bottom 4 to 6 corps at Finals generally have a falloff in scores from Semis. The judges purposely spread out the corps to get a more accurate "spread" among the Top 12. I think they started out scoring them low, and when they got up to the top, the judges realized they didn't need as wide of a spread between the corps. The bottom 6 are much better than they were 5 or 6 years ago. Perhaps, they don't need to start them out so low now since the achievement gap between 1-12 is shrinking. Edited August 13, 2006 by DCImonkey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordRider Posted August 13, 2006 Share Posted August 13, 2006 I think it was the flood of 80s! rimshotTerrance Back out of the way 80s with the intent to flood Pasadena,CA 2007 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Flores Posted August 13, 2006 Share Posted August 13, 2006 The only show of the past 10 seasons that I think deserves it high score has to be the Cavies 2002 show...it set standards in visual and music design the the activity had never seen. If you need firther proof of its design superiority, just listen to the music ge judge on the dvd...it was a show of impeccable design, execution and showcase of superior talent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frontline99 Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 It seems to me that this was a systematic thing. Last year the scores of the 13-24 corps got cranked down and this year the top half followed. I think it is an PR attempt to bring some legitimacy to judging. 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.