Tom & Karen Peashey <tpeashe1@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
You people will never get it... the problems were the same in the tick >system - only worse... I give up... I guess you had to be there ticking to >appreciate it... or worse... trying to teach somebody how to tick... >control tolerance... and still properly rank, rate and evaluate without >writing someone off the sheet...
See? I knew there had to be a response. :-)
Yes, I'm aware of the problems under the tick system. Jeff Mitchell has outlined them quite nicely for us. But I dare say we have the problem in
the opposite direction under the build-up system. Where the tick system might go too far and write a corps of the sheets, the build-up system has
too much slotting allocated to it. And it completely breaks down when a corps has a truly outstanding or terrible show. See 1989 finals for an example. SCV gets a 98.8? Whatever. (And I *love* SCV and that show.)
The scoring failed due to problems in slotting in the early corps that
night. And I still have yet to hear a good argument for Garfield getting perfect 10s in 1987. The judges had a feeling? Still, what if BD whupped Garfield's collective asses in percussion? It's a total breakdown of the system. (And I still maintain that Garfield did not have a 0.5 point advantage over SCV in percussion that show. That's a huge gap. I sure haven't heard differences in execution that would justify that gap in the score from any of the recordings I've heard.) Maybe, just maybe, the tick system might have distinguished the differences in execution a bit better that evening in Madison.
This discussion over the judging systems has been rehashed so many times
it's scary. We're not going to resolve any of it here. I still say one build-up judge and one tick judge in the musical execution categories
(brass and percussion) would be great to see, but DCI can't afford it.
Such is life.
-- Stuart
In article <372BB751.1E4A5608@earthlink.net>,
Shane Connor <carshacon@earthlink.net> wrote:
Yes they did get a perfect. They had an awesome line!!
Garfield was good that year, but IMO not good enough to deserve perfect
10s with BD still to perform. I don't know how many times I've said this, and no one has ever replied with anything that would make me change my
mind. What I do know is this -- Tom Float's BD drumline had taken the previous four high percussion awards. Why did the judges count them out before they even took the field? The best the drumline could do was get perfect 10s, even if they blew Garfield off the field.
Sorry, it's a big peeve of mine. Almost up there with those who feel the rifle drop cost Phantom Regiment the title in 1978. (Hi Whitney! I'm
still alive!) :-)
Still got to hand it to Garfield in '87. The disappearing/reappearing company front still amazes me!
-- Stuart
Stuart wrote:
Garfield was good that year, but IMO not good enough to deserve perfect
10s with BD still to perform. I don't know how many times I've said this, >and no one has ever replied with anything that would make me change my >mind. What I do know is this -- Tom Float's BD drumline had taken the >previous four high percussion awards. Why did the judges count them out >before they even took the field? The best the drumline could do was get >perfect 10s, even if they blew Garfield off the field.
I agree, Stuart. I think a "perfect score" is theoretical. Perfect? I could find lots of errors. That's a fundamental flaw in the "subjective" scoring system. It rewards impossible results.
VKG
"We are the people our parents warned us about"
Remove "byte-me" from address to respond by e-mail
Hence, their 3rd place (tie) finish in percussion performance. >Remember..Garfield's drumline basically BLEW in 1984... brass and visual (andActually, I was talking about Madison 88. Does anybody know what the drum placements were for that year?
GE!) overcame to win them the championship.
Paul Muncy
Remember..Garfield's drumline basically BLEW in 1984... brass and visual (and
GE!) overcame to win them the championship.
Yeah, and don't I wish they'd blown it juuuuust a little more...2/10th
would have done it for me...I was in BD that year!
Then again, had we still been on the tick system, I think we would've
won, because, frankly, Cadets just couldn;t stay in phase while
marching.
Great horn line, though
Sam Signorelli
I've got a thought on the whole "perfect score/10" discussion. On thing that has always bugged me about the subjective scoring system is the simple fact that if a corps goes on early in the evening, their score will often be "lower"
than it would have been had they performed latter in the night. leaving room for subsequent corps always seemed to me to be short-changing the early corps,
in the cases of nearly equivalent performances.
So here's my thought: Why does the subjective system have to have an absolute
top barrier? That is, since the subjective system does not judge perfection/mistakes, what meaning does that top-end "perfection" barrier have?
If the Guam Pomerianians Drum and Bugle Corps had gone to DCI in '87 and had a
drumline that was, in every way one could concieve, better than Garfields, would that mean that Garfield didn't deserve a 10? Would that mean that Garfield's "perfect" drumline wasn't *as* "perfect" as Guam's? What if the Cavaliers had a sudden, universal mutagenic accident on their drum bus, resulting in a drumline that could best both Garfield's and Guam's, would that
make them even more "perfect"?
Of course, I don't have a coherent solution to the quandry, but complaining
feels good.
Richard, Euph
Don't sweat the petty things--and don't pet the sweaty things
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 14:25:00 |
| Calls: | 6,645 |
| Files: | 12,190 |
| Messages: | 5,326,927 |