Judging in DCI

[Casaba]

:blah: this should end spectacularly

[Tom Brace]

I believe this year is like "Anything Can Happen Day." I just seriously dated myself. it wasn't bad...bought myself a Coke and tried to feel me up in the backseat of the car...but to the point.

The judging this year...at least early on...indicates that more than anytime I can remember...note that I earlier dated myself...the judging is being conducted very fairly. It is truly more of a competitive evening of drum corps without so many things predetermined. Anyway, that's my thoughts for what they are worth.

I'm going to go back to dating myself and then a cigarette afterward. See you all in about 12 minutes.

[CowboyKen]

You are missing the point. DCI judging is 100% subjective. The score you get is in direct proportion to how much your performance pleases the judges. By definition, it cannot be unfair. It's all based on opinion, not fact, reality or any kind of objectivity.

Now, if you ask, is DCI judging a fair reflection of either 1. objective quality (number of mistakes, level of difficulty, etc) or 2. how effective a show is at entertaining the average fan, then no, it is not fair. But, then neither is any other system.

So basically, fairness has nothing to do with DCI judging. Scores are just a reflection of how pleased a small group of individuals is with your program at any given moment.

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.

It's just that at the end of the night, one group of performers will feel that they have somehow accomplished more than another group. They may even get some medals and a flag or trophy. So what? That and $3.50 will get you a mocha frappucino.

You aren't serious are you?!?! b**bs b**bs b**bs

[Tom Brace]

You are missing the point. DCI judging is 100% subjective. The score you get is in direct proportion to how much your performance pleases the judges. By definition, it cannot be unfair. It's all based on opinion, not fact, reality or any kind of objectivity.

Now, if you ask, is DCI judging a fair reflection of either 1. objective quality (number of mistakes, level of difficulty, etc) or 2. how effective a show is at entertaining the average fan, then no, it is not fair. But, then neither is any other system.

So basically, fairness has nothing to do with DCI judging. Scores are just a reflection of how pleased a small group of individuals is with your program at any given moment.

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.

It's just that at the end of the night, one group of performers will feel that they have somehow accomplished more than another group. They may even get some medals and a flag or trophy. So what? That and $3.50 will get you a mocha frappucino.

A Kiltlifter is $4.50 and if you can get me one, I'd appreciate it 'cause I'm completely out. I think i gave too many away.

Anyway, to your point. From some judges I know from the Midwest, some..eh, I'd agree with. But, there are some who your comments do a disservice. This activity has been adjudicated since before the Combine and will most likely continue the trend until at least we can all vote instantly on our cell phones from the stand. An audience favorite award winning corps could get mocha frappucinos!

Anyway, other judges...particularly one from 2000 didn't deserve to step on the field with the corps he was there to judge. Yes, it was a windy Friday night at NIU, but why he ever let that yellow sheet of legal paper fly off his clipboard.

Ah well, some stories are better left untold.

[igor230]

cmon people, so you're saying the shows are FIXED? That's what your saying if your saying the judges base scores on anything besides what happens during the performance. When i've judged i know i have way too much to think about before, during, and after the show to consider any political reason to cheat and give an incorrect score. Judges, esp. field judges, might "miss" significant error but that's why there are so many shows and why it takes 3 nights to crown a champion in front of 24 diff. people, 3 diff. panels. Put up or shut up if you think judges cheat.

[Tom Brace]

cmon people, so you're saying the shows are FIXED? That's what your saying if your saying the judges base scores on anything besides what happens during the performance. When i've judged i know i have way too much to think about before, during, and after the show to consider any political reason to cheat and give an incorrect score. Judges, esp. field judges, might "miss" significant error but that's why there are so many shows and why it takes 3 nights to crown a champion in front of 24 diff. people, 3 diff. panels. Put up or shut up if you think judges cheat.

The year was 2000 and the show was at NIU. The circuit was DCM. It was a visual judge whose name I'll leave out. He was suspended indefinitely.

[ShortAndFast]

The year was 2000 and the show was at NIU. The circuit was DCM. It was a visual judge whose name I'll leave out. He was suspended indefinitely.

Since you're recalling that incident, you might also recall that the numbers on the sheet were not the ones he himself awarded at the contest. Rather, they were recent scores in the caption he was judging.

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.

So, in your view, what does the NIU incident illustrate?

[vferrera]

A Kiltlifter is $4.50 and if you can get me one, I'd appreciate it 'cause I'm completely out. I think i gave too many away.

Anyway, to your point. From some judges I know from the Midwest, some..eh, I'd agree with. But, there are some who your comments do a disservice. This activity has been adjudicated since before the Combine and will most likely continue the trend until at least we can all vote instantly on our cell phones from the stand. An audience favorite award winning corps could get mocha frappucinos!

Anyway, other judges...particularly one from 2000 didn't deserve to step on the field with the corps he was there to judge. Yes, it was a windy Friday night at NIU, but why he ever let that yellow sheet of legal paper fly off his clipboard.

Ah well, some stories are better left untold.

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.

Edited July 3, 2007 by vferrera

[Tom Brace]

Since you're recalling that incident, you might also recall that the numbers on the sheet were not the ones he himself awarded at the contest. Rather, they were recent scores in the caption he was judging.

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.

So, in your view, what does the NIU incident illustrate?

Your ascertion is open to speculation. Who is to know what those numbers represented? Anyway, it was not quite cricket otherwise he would not have been suspended. And to this day, I do not believe the gentleman has been asked to judge a drum corps contest. I could be wrong...I've been so in the past, but the facts are that a questionable listing of scores for corps yet to appear was discovered. It came from a judges clipboard. There was a suspension of that judge by the circuit charged with adjudicated the contest and the person in question has not judged drum corps since to my knowledge.

I would say that is what it illustrates. We were asked to give an example, I had one, so I offered it.

[Tom Brace]

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.

I'll air mail you a Kiltlifter. I had never seen that study. Fascinating. hey, is it better when I'm trying to be nice? Or is it just sappy? I trust your opinion on this.

Edited July 3, 2007 by Tom Brace