Judging in DCI

[Chris Scott]

OP goes first, I think generally and mostly the judges get it correct but I do believe that sometimes other considerations than the show on the field that night do come into play. Any time a champion is crowned by .1 one has to wonder how accurate that is due do the very nature of the activity and what that .1 nod to one corps over the other really reflects. I’ve heard judging conspiracy in my entire drum corps life; from Phantom being hosed in the 70s due to their rudeness to judges to Star being given second place in 1993 because it would have been hugely embarrassing for DCI if their reigning champion had left the activity.

And I don’t think it’s a bad lesson for the kids as long as they learn the lessons – life is not fair and seldom is one ever rewarded in life strictly upon their merits whether it’s a job promotion or acceptance to a school’s program (I really blew that interview, I think I said the wrong thing)

so vote alreay

I voted the latter. I don't think that the judges engage in cronyism as much as some people might assert.

I do think that judges are human. If the consistency of judges is in such question, then judge by committee. Have 3-5 judges per caption. Throw out the high and low, and award achievement through the ordinal system. That way the judging results are more consistent. but then you have 18 judges on the field.

Or...

Take it that sometimes judges miss. Most of the time they're pretty close.

[dans]

Cadets win = bad judgng, Cadets do not win = good judging; come on now, I no you people that think this are out there, don't be shy!

[Wadep66]

I'll bet you a kiltlifter on the following scenario: 1. Take a random human being with no special education or training. 2. Have them follow drum corps for one season. 3. At each show they attend, have them predict the scores in one performance category - visual, colorguard, brass or percussion - including subcaptions. My bet is that by the end of the season, this person will be able to predict the scores in that category for every corps at quarterfinals as well as any DCI judge who is not judging that night.

In other words, after one season, an ordinary person who simply goes to shows and pays attention will be able to judge one caption as well as any DCI judge.

Here's why I will win the bet. Psychologist have done numerous studies of the following kind - take 3 groups of people, secretaries, doctors, and doctors trained in psychiatry. Give them a set of symptoms from a diagnostic manual for psychiatric disorders. Show them a number of patients and ask them to diagnose those patients. Which group gave the most accurate diagnoses? The secretaries. After them came the regular doctors. The psychiatrists were dead last. Sometimes, the more you know about a subject, the less able you are to make objective judgments based on a defined set of criteria.

Wow, there apparently is no need to go to college or even school. Just follow around the professional of your choice and then take their job a year later.

Have you ever been exposed to a "random human being"? Either you are just pushing peoples buttons or you haven't been exposed to many people. This is the most flawed logic I have ever seen. Who decided the secretaries gave the right answer? It had to be someone with the correct diagnosis. Who was that? Apparently it wasn't a doctor since you say they're wrong. Who determined that there was a disorder in the first place. This sounds like typical urban legend/internet crap like the kidneys removed from the people in the bathtub of ice. Where is this study you mention?

What is your training and education in? Are you in the working world?

According to this logic, I should be able to take a random human being, show them a video of a heart transplant, then let them outperform a heart surgeon. Granted judging DCI isn't a heart replacement, but there are some very talented musicians whose character you are maligning.

[CadetsFan08]

And, no, it doesn't matter. If you met some DCI judges in person, you would find that their opinions aren't any more informed than the average person in the stands. Whatever you and your friends/family think of a performance is just as valid as what the judges think.

Having been around numerous judges in academic and professional situations, I heavily doubt this assertion. They're not average people in the stands. They are very qualified individuals.

[Orpheus]

To me this doesn't sound like the contest was "fixed" - where there was some conspiracy to determine the outcome. It doesn't even necessarily sound like an example of "slotting" where corps always get the same ordinal position as their overall ranking. Instead, it sounds like an insecure judge who wanted context of prior scores before awarding his own. DCI discourages this, but some band circuits (and WGI, I believe) explicitly encourage judges to study recent scores for groups that they will be adjudicating.

Gosh. Look at you trying to, like, bring the truth into this discussion. Shame on you.

[DCIBrassFan]

Having been in my fair share of critiques over the years, I would say that the majority of the judges would say that they felt they were unbiased and completely fair. I would also say that a large number of the staff's would say that the judges are not really qualified to be judging in the first place. There are many current judges with HORRIBLE band programs of their own. There are some current judges that have "questionable" activities they've done in their band programs that have caused them to have been fired. There are some current judges who have been proven to have "cheated" while judging in their respective areas and have been banned from judging there ever again. It also seems that there are a handful of judges that seem to "have it out" for certain corps. Corps "A" could have been consistently ahead of Corps "B" in a certain caption, and without fail, when a particular judge judges a contest, Corps "B" will win. Then for the next few weeks, Corps "A" will stay ahead until they see that one judge again. So all in all, would I say the actual judges are "fair?" Sure, most of them are. Would I say that the judging system is fair? No way.

[LAMystreaux]

Cadets win = bad judgng, Cadets do not win = good judging; come on now, I no you people that think this are out there, don't be shy!

Yup, comments like this have been going on all summer.

What was that thread that went on and on and never got closed? HTH are The Cadets winning?

[Meaghatron]

Yup, comments like this have been going on all summer.

What was that thread that went on and on and never got closed? HTH are The Cadets winning?

If it makes you feel better, The Cadets won tonight.

[vanguard8687]

The judging system in DC is subjective. It's unfortunate that it's that way. Very few judging systems are totally objective and based merely on facts or data. If we, as fans, feel the system is flawed, then we should do what we can to see the system is improved. The issue is that there will never be a truly perfect system and you will not be able to please everyone.

[LAMystreaux]

If it makes you feel better, The Cadets won tonight.

Why would I be feeling bad?

Its just the internet.