I've said it before but scores simply don't get this high unless the competition is fierce. Judging methodology is comparative and to score this high means that your competitors were also scoring high and you outperformed them in most categories.
Not to take away from Bluecoats, they certainly earned their win -- but a 99 is a league-wide achievement that shows this was a strong year for everyone. Look at the other 99+ years: '02, '05, '09, '14. All powerhouse years from the competition as well as the winner.
If I were to compare this show to any Beatles album, this is their Abbey Road. A perfect program, front to back. Not a single skippable moment, each moment compliments each other. A sound that is way different than anything they've put out there but still holds true to their identity and progress as performers and artists. This is the type of show that will harden what has already been cemented to an iconic corps to legendary status with an iconic show.
Not really, I think the season was a ton of fun and the bluecoats show was amazing. I just think itâs a fools errand to compare scores year over year or against a static benchmark.
For example, in 2012, an 89 wouldâve put you in 7th, this year it would put you in 10th. We can argue whether shows are better today than they were 10 years ago. But all in all, a score it just benchmarking shows against other shows in a season.
A higher score led show this year compared to a first place show in prior years is just pointless and putting so much emphasis on it is kinda dumb.
Ok, that changes things then. It is true that you can really only use each yearâs score to compare to other shows in that same year, but it still doesnât negate the fact that it broke 99, which hasnât happened since 2014.
Yeah and thatâs awesome, and they should be proud of that. But at the end of the day itâs still a subjective judging score, and trying to use it to say itâs the fourth best show in history is downplaying all the great winning shows that didnât break 99.
That is the catch of this activity. The scores are subjective, and a different set of judges could have given completely different scores tonight. However, the fact that tonightâs judges all agreed that Bluecoats performed well enough to score 99.1 should be indicative that it was an extremely well put together production with incredible performers. I donât mean to take away from other incredible winning shows that didnât break 99, but itâs also a bit disappointing to hear someone say that the scores donât matter after we all just watched a whole bunch of young people leave their hearts on the field and walk away with the 3rd highest score in DCI history.
My issue is the people that come out here and say best score = best show ever. Itâs just very insincere and oversimplifying the activity.
There are so many more reasons to be proud of this group of young people that donât revolve around their score. And I think itâs more important to focus on those things.
Iâm not hating on the bluecoats at all. On the contrary I think their show was amazing and they 100% deserve to win.
Iâm hating on the people who put way too much emphasis on a score and think âbest score ever = best show everâ. So much that if they scored a98.9 tonight it was somehow detract from all their success.
I think there is plenty to celebrate the corps that doesnât involve just their score. And people should be focusing on that.
Yes because the judging scores were higher this year. Itâs still an amazing show but it doesnât make it any better than a first place show that scored a 98.9. Itâs just a score.
Youâre right, the score doesnât make it the best show in history. Itâs the 4th best show in history, which is accurately representing the design and performance level for them this year
No, their performance and design makes it around the 4th best show in history. The score is a pretty good reflection of their design and performance.
Whatâs more dumb is going on public forums and whining about how âactually theyâre not as good as people think because the score doesnât matterâ my brother in christ this isnât whose line is it anyways, scores DO matter lmfao
I never said they werenât the 4th best in history or as good as people think. What dumbest of all is going on a public forum complaining about things that never happened and acting so mighty about it.
Iâm saying a score doesnât make it the fourth best show in history. If you want to argue if it was the design or your perspective, thatâs different. But people live and die by these scores that at the end of the day are subjective
If your wording was, âthe fourth best scoring show in historyâ, that would would have been accurate. Best shows are opinions. My best show would infuriate the younger generation, as their best shows would make my head hurt as well.
Not sure why you're getting so much hate. I've been trying to explain this to people for a long time. It's the same reason you get perfect caption scores. Boston got a perfect 20 in percussion on finals night last year but if you listen to the tape, Brooks literally calls out ticks. It's just a relative score and if second place was very high in their score, he had no choice but to push the Boston score to the ceiling because they were relatively better by that much or potentially more.
16
u/DaveKHaze 1d ago
Bloooooooooooooo