Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
  On 10/31/2022 at 9:26 PM, BandDad4 said:

TC has been chasing Keller for some time, they have a chance for finals I think after this past weekend.

Expand  

On the state schedule it says they go after CTJ, I’m not too educated on this but do you think going after such a talented band will hinder their chances for finals? I also believe keller will clean up rather well this week and will be able to push into finals, hopefully TC too.

Posted
  On 11/1/2022 at 2:37 PM, bandboi said:

On the state schedule it says they go after CTJ, I’m not too educated on this but do you think going after such a talented band will hinder their chances for finals? I also believe keller will clean up rather well this week and will be able to push into finals, hopefully TC too.

Expand  

More than likely if TC turns out with a strong enough performance then who they perform after won’t make a difference. 

Posted

With most Bands having great years so far, I'm wondering what y'all think state finals will look like placement-wise. Can't wait to see some new names.

Posted
  On 11/1/2022 at 2:16 PM, BandDad4 said:

I felt really bad for Keller Central. I always wondered what causes a band to fall from prelims like that. We saw it last year with Duncanville. Judging changes? Sloppy finals? Smaller group of bands lends itself to problems to stand out?

Expand  

So one of the judges, J. Whorton, had KC 2nd in music in prelims, but then 7th in finals. Conversely that same music judge had LD Bell 11th in music in prelims, then 3rd in finals. The Judges just had a different opinion of the bands in finals than prelims. 
 

My hypothesis for this occurrence is that the strengths of KC’s performance stood out better compared with the prelims bands better than it did with the finals band, while the opposite was true for Bell. And you could say the limitations/imperfections of both bands’ performances hindered them more in the round that they placed lower in. 

Posted
  On 11/3/2022 at 6:33 AM, 1998-2018 said:

“You’re entitled to your opinion.   I’m entitled to mine. Yours is informed by no better evidence than mine is..”

Objection. Facts not in evidence. This statement has no basis for support and is therefore purely speculative.

“But I will say that there is evidence.”

Anecdotal evidence is largely meaningless, only empirical evidence matters. Due to the nature of this forum and some participant’s preferences neither of us will be allowed to openly discuss the evidence and I have no desire to take this conversation outside the forum. I’ve been down this path enough times before. Hang on to your opinion if it helps you rationalize outcomes and enjoy competitions. It didn’t help me when I was getting started.

“I will say also that I have heard, with my own ears, directors communicating that the phenomena does occur.”

So have I, generally from Directors struggling to rationalize their programs difficulties breaking through to the next level. Saying something happens doesn’t make it true.

“I’ve heard judges say it does occur.”

No comment. Addressing this directly would require breaking our programs Code of Conduct. I’m not going to do that. However, I will add that I notice you didn’t indicate whether the judges you heard said they have personally made decisions based on reputation or if they were saying they know about others who admit to doing it.

 “So it’s not just my opinion.”

Correct. Unfortunately it’s a very widely held fallacy. Again, that doesn’t make it true.

“If you reread my original post, I don’t quibble with it.”

No need. I noted that the first time. I’m not convinced that bears any relevance on the subject.

“Your esoteric explanation really dances around the key word- it’s subjective.    Just like gymnastics and ice skating - and therefore it uses criterion that aren’t objective.”

This activity is a combination of science and art. Of course it’s subjective; I did not suggest otherwise. One of the issues in UIL judging is that the relative value of these subjective preferences are not well defined. For example, are musical and visual accuracy more or less valuable than demand? This example, to a certain extent, also falls on a sliding scale of subjectivity but that doesn’t mean it can’t be better defined through documented video training examples. The NFL and NCAA use this option to clarify pass interference rules changing from well defined objectivity in the ‘70’s to the highly subjective mess of today’s game. Another example would be whether music and drill demand have higher value when performed in combination versus being performed separately. This one is actually defined on the judging sheet but we routinely see some bands highly rewarded for what amounts to “park and play” even though this is clearly not in compliance with the current judging sheet. Adjudication based entirely, or even just heavily, on personal preferences is not sustainable. As for the esoteric nature of my comment, you seem to have missed the point. There are people on this forum who can, and will, learn when given the opportunity, simply because they want too.

“Like reputation.“

Where exactly is “reputation” on the judging sheet? I’m not saying there are no Judges that have ever been influenced by reputation. But I am saying that it is a very small minority and also highly inappropriate. All a Judge has is their own reputation which is why they don’t let a bands reputation influence the outcome of a competition. Each performance must speak for itself or integrity and credibility is lost.

“Boxing”

An interesting example. A few years ago I asked a Judge I’ve known for decades about his decision regarding First and Second place at DCI Finals in Indianapolis. He talked me through the details and then said, “If you want to beat the World Champion, you have to do it decisively and leave no question about it.” On the surface that statement might appear to support the idea of reputation influencing a Judge but further discussion revealed that’s not what he was talking about. If you want to break through to the next level, kick down the door. Win decisively. Leave no doubt.

“And that’s irrefutable.”

Hardly, but you have made it clear you have no intention of being persuaded which is why I originally indicated I was done with this conversation. I chose to reengage because of the possibility that someone else will be open to the information and learn a new perspective. Thereby giving up on a tired fallacy, while gaining a better understanding of the adjudication process and more satisfying enjoyment of the contests they attend. It worked for me.

Yeah, I know. My wife always tells me, “Too many words.” 🙄

Expand  

My whole philosophy if I were to be a judge of anything is simply: if they’re good enough, they’re good enough. This speculative “prove it to me” phase that groups supposedly have to go through has always just been unjust silliness to me when people try to bring it up. That’s not how it should work, and lately, we’ve seen pillars of UIL in this area, L.D Bell, and Duncanville miss out on a competition they’ve had a stranglehold on for decades. It’s great to see them back of course, but I always dislike this kind of discourse where groups that haven’t been there before have to navigate baseless biases that aren’t even there in the first place, we have to stop with this. And I definitely agree that each performance on the day for any school is much more impactful than any reputation may have.

Posted
  On 11/3/2022 at 6:33 AM, 1998-2018 said:

“You’re entitled to your opinion.   I’m entitled to mine. Yours is informed by no better evidence than mine is..”

Objection. Facts not in evidence. This statement has no basis for support and is therefore purely speculative.

“But I will say that there is evidence.”

Anecdotal evidence is largely meaningless, only empirical evidence matters. Due to the nature of this forum and some participant’s preferences neither of us will be allowed to openly discuss the evidence and I have no desire to take this conversation outside the forum. I’ve been down this path enough times before. Hang on to your opinion if it helps you rationalize outcomes and enjoy competitions. It didn’t help me when I was getting started.

“I will say also that I have heard, with my own ears, directors communicating that the phenomena does occur.”

So have I, generally from Directors struggling to rationalize their programs difficulties breaking through to the next level. Saying something happens doesn’t make it true.

“I’ve heard judges say it does occur.”

No comment. Addressing this directly would require breaking our programs Code of Conduct. I’m not going to do that. However, I will add that I notice you didn’t indicate whether the judges you heard said they have personally made decisions based on reputation or if they were saying they know about others who admit to doing it.

 “So it’s not just my opinion.”

Correct. Unfortunately it’s a very widely held fallacy. Again, that doesn’t make it true.

“If you reread my original post, I don’t quibble with it.”

No need. I noted that the first time. I’m not convinced that bears any relevance on the subject.

“Your esoteric explanation really dances around the key word- it’s subjective.    Just like gymnastics and ice skating - and therefore it uses criterion that aren’t objective.”

This activity is a combination of science and art. Of course it’s subjective; I did not suggest otherwise. One of the issues in UIL judging is that the relative value of these subjective preferences are not well defined. For example, are musical and visual accuracy more or less valuable than demand? This example, to a certain extent, also falls on a sliding scale of subjectivity but that doesn’t mean it can’t be better defined through documented video training examples. The NFL and NCAA use this option to clarify pass interference rules changing from well defined objectivity in the ‘70’s to the highly subjective mess of today’s game. Another example would be whether music and drill demand have higher value when performed in combination versus being performed separately. This one is actually defined on the judging sheet but we routinely see some bands highly rewarded for what amounts to “park and play” even though this is clearly not in compliance with the current judging sheet. Adjudication based entirely, or even just heavily, on personal preferences is not sustainable. As for the esoteric nature of my comment, you seem to have missed the point. There are people on this forum who can, and will, learn when given the opportunity, simply because they want too.

“Like reputation.“

Where exactly is “reputation” on the judging sheet? I’m not saying there are no Judges that have ever been influenced by reputation. But I am saying that it is a very small minority and also highly inappropriate. All a Judge has is their own reputation which is why they don’t let a bands reputation influence the outcome of a competition. Each performance must speak for itself or integrity and credibility is lost.

“Boxing”

An interesting example. A few years ago I asked a Judge I’ve known for decades about his decision regarding First and Second place at DCI Finals in Indianapolis. He talked me through the details and then said, “If you want to beat the World Champion, you have to do it decisively and leave no question about it.” On the surface that statement might appear to support the idea of reputation influencing a Judge but further discussion revealed that’s not what he was talking about. If you want to break through to the next level, kick down the door. Win decisively. Leave no doubt.

“And that’s irrefutable.”

Hardly, but you have made it clear you have no intention of being persuaded which is why I originally indicated I was done with this conversation. I chose to reengage because of the possibility that someone else will be open to the information and learn a new perspective. Thereby giving up on a tired fallacy, while gaining a better understanding of the adjudication process and more satisfying enjoyment of the contests they attend. It worked for me.

Yeah, I know. My wife always tells me, “Too many words.” 🙄

Expand  

I see you were more interested in some other point than the one that came before “full stop”.    And yes, tldr.     
 

Enjoy this week.    Time to move on.  

Posted
  On 11/4/2022 at 1:30 AM, balumni2023 said:

They changed the music at 3:47 in the leadup to the big hit and I think it sounds so much better. The previous passage they played was always kinda fuzzy and muddled and I'm glad they modified it. 

Expand  

I arrived to the stadium before their community performance a little early to see them practice and heard them in the lot playing that and wondered what it was. It works soooooo much better and I think it will help their scores. They just gotta sell it, just like the rest of the show.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...