Re: Bracket 2 - Download & Discussion
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:03 pm
I wrote most of this before hellrazor's last post...
Yeah, the system I suggested was quite off-the-cuff, and it was only to cover the double-step aspect of the file - you could definitely go below 7/10 after considering other factors. But it's really more that a file with 8 double-steps should not be an automatic 2/10. There's a lot of ways those double steps can be expressed - some really bad, some neutral or even possibly good. And there's probably 350+ other steps (assuming the common 8+ footer) that need to factor into the scoring too. You can tell the difference between slop and design decisions. Yes, they could be forced with a freeze or mines (although I hear ITGers actually dislike this too), but they don't always need to be.
I'm just speculating, but I think this is the key right here - it's the strict, rigid, and seemingly one-dimensional nature of your judging that caused problems, whereas Excel and I are talking about "caveats", "exceptions" and the like.
Case in point: I hate short freezes - ones that you can't possibly miss even if you tap and immediately release. They throw off the scoring and don't add anything to a chart. The ITG community disagrees strongly with me on this - they're commonly used to accentuate notes that are held for that brief time. In reviews, I will note my distaste, and it might swing a file that's on the fence between points towards the down, but I'm not taking off a point per short freeze. I'm much more concerned with evaulating whether I enjoyed the file, and trying to determine why I enjoyed the file (or didn't). I don't always succeed on the last part, but I at least try. You can call it "favoritism" but I don't really think you can objectively judge creative works like this. And even when you define objective criteria, the ones you're choosing are subjective.
So when there's so few judges, and you weight one criterion so heavily, it ends up turning the competition into a "fewest double-steps" competition.
At least, that's where I speculate everything came from.
Hey! I resemble that remark!
---
Also, in Greg's original post on the topic, without the freeze, I would hit the down and right arrows both with my right foot. This avoids a crossover entirely. With the freeze, I have to cross my left foot over. It does restrict a two-way play down to a single play, so it is marginally different.
Yeah, the system I suggested was quite off-the-cuff, and it was only to cover the double-step aspect of the file - you could definitely go below 7/10 after considering other factors. But it's really more that a file with 8 double-steps should not be an automatic 2/10. There's a lot of ways those double steps can be expressed - some really bad, some neutral or even possibly good. And there's probably 350+ other steps (assuming the common 8+ footer) that need to factor into the scoring too. You can tell the difference between slop and design decisions. Yes, they could be forced with a freeze or mines (although I hear ITGers actually dislike this too), but they don't always need to be.
strict pad play
I'm just speculating, but I think this is the key right here - it's the strict, rigid, and seemingly one-dimensional nature of your judging that caused problems, whereas Excel and I are talking about "caveats", "exceptions" and the like.
Case in point: I hate short freezes - ones that you can't possibly miss even if you tap and immediately release. They throw off the scoring and don't add anything to a chart. The ITG community disagrees strongly with me on this - they're commonly used to accentuate notes that are held for that brief time. In reviews, I will note my distaste, and it might swing a file that's on the fence between points towards the down, but I'm not taking off a point per short freeze. I'm much more concerned with evaulating whether I enjoyed the file, and trying to determine why I enjoyed the file (or didn't). I don't always succeed on the last part, but I at least try. You can call it "favoritism" but I don't really think you can objectively judge creative works like this. And even when you define objective criteria, the ones you're choosing are subjective.
So when there's so few judges, and you weight one criterion so heavily, it ends up turning the competition into a "fewest double-steps" competition.
At least, that's where I speculate everything came from.
You can even have some really crappy straightforward streams that have you facing the screen at all times, but force you to go 219 bpm 32nds all over the pad.
Hey! I resemble that remark!
---
Also, in Greg's original post on the topic, without the freeze, I would hit the down and right arrows both with my right foot. This avoids a crossover entirely. With the freeze, I have to cross my left foot over. It does restrict a two-way play down to a single play, so it is marginally different.