SMB BEGINNINGS AND HISTORY
By Ted Bazany – April, 2009
By Ted Bazany – April, 2009
The early days of the SMB competition had some interesting twists and turns. Joey Orefice asked me to write a short history of the SMB for the website.
SMB was started in the early 1990s as part of the Jenison Marching Band Invitational. A little background is needed to understand why Ted Bazany, Joey Orefice and a few directors from West Michigan felt a new marching band competition format was needed. In order to understand why change was needed, we need look at the early years of MCBA, (called MCBDA at that time).
MCBA during the 1970s and 1980s used their own judging sheets, judges, rules and guidelines, and the classifications were Flight I and Open Flight with directors choosing their flight. As participation in MCBA grew, it became evident more flights were needed. MCBA experimented with a variety of classification and flight formulas which included classification by band size (not too popular with smaller schools) and finally settled on four flights determined by school size with the same number of bands in each flight. MCBA sheets and points were always being discussed. One of the big questions was whether percussion and auxiliary scores should be a part of the total score. It was my feeling that percussion and auxiliary had too much weight of the total score, 10% for each category. It wasn’t until the late 1990s that MCBA solved many of the above problems by going to the Bands of America judging sheets and classification system.
In 1990,MCBA required bands to become members of MCBA which amounted to $75 a year in order to participate in any marching band invitational using their sheets and judges. At that time, most of the West Michigan Bands were not members of MCBA and had no desire to enter the MCBA finals held in late October or early November. Previous to this requirement, bands participating in the Jenison Marching Band Invitational that were not members of MCBA paid a $10 judging fee as part of their invitational entry fee to cover MCBA costs. This new requirement would eliminate the majority of bands coming to the Jenison Invitational, so I felt it necessary to look into alternatives.
I decided to develop a new system for the Jenison Marching Band Invitational which would be more user-friendly to all participating bands. The new system was called the West Michigan Marching Band Competition and later changed to the Scholastic Marching Band Competition (SMB). Joey Orefice encouraged me to use a scoring system that puts all scores between fifty and one hundred, rather than the one to one hundred that was being used by all other marching band competitions, mainly drum corps, BOA, MCBA and other state competitions (notably Indiana). In the late1970s and throughout the 1980s, many of the bands in West Michigan were switching from high step marching to corps style marching and were just learning how to develop an effective competitive marching band show. Their scores were often times well below fifty, which was not a true evaluation of their music program. These low scores were hard to explain to the administration, parents and students. Many of these bands were receiving scores of seventy to one hundred in the MSBOA Marching Band Festival when MSBOA used a number scoring system versus the letter grade system. I am happy Joey convinced me to use this inflated scoring format, even though it is a little harder on the judges to crunch the numbers.
I studied the judging sheets used by MSBOA, MCBA, BOA and Indiana and developed the present sheets used by the SMB. I came up with four judging sheets to evaluate every band: Music Performance (30 points), Music Effect (25 points), Marching Performance (25 points) and Visual Effect (20 points). The percussion and auxiliary evaluations were incorporated into the judging sheets mentioned above with all judging taking place from the press box rather than having two judges on the field. For each contest, I hired a Percussion judge and Auxiliary judge to give additional comments in both of these areas. My philosophy was to reward student performance more than the way the show was written (music arrangements and drill design). The other major difference was giving more points for Music Performance and Music Effect (55%) versus Marching Performance and Visual Effect (45%).
I believed MSBOA had the best and fairest classification system, dividing bands into classes by school size. The five classifications were: D, C, B, A, and AA. This gave the smaller schools a chance to be successful by competing against schools of their size. Even when MCBA had four flights, many of the Flight IV bands were small Class B schools at that time. In the early 1990s, most of the bands that were competitive in West Michigan were Class B schools (14), so I divided this class by school size into two sections, B and BB to have more winners. Many of these Class B bands are Class A today, and many of the Class A bands are now Class AA.
I also introduced the Achievement of Excellence Awards for each caption area: Music Performance, Marching Performance, Percussion and Auxiliary. Basically, a band had to receive the equivalent of a superior performance in a caption area to receive this recognition, with larger schools needing a higher percent of the score than smaller schools. A band could feel good about their performance, even though they may not have won their class.
Since it was an invitational for Jenison, I was able to hire my own judges for each caption area. I used MSBOA judges, MCBA judges, outstanding band directors, percussion and auxiliary specialists and occasional out of state judges. Since a training session was not needed to judge, there was a learning curve for some of the MSBOA judges as they dealt with numbers and rankings of each band within a class for the first time. I felt the judges almost always ranked the bands in the right order, but there was a fluctuation from week to week with the total score. I talked to many of the judges after the Jenison Invitational and asked for suggestions on how to improve their particular judging sheet. This input was invaluable as I fine-tuned the sheets over a period of about five years. Joey Orefice was instrumental in developing the judging guidelines and tote sheets in the late 1990s. This made it much easier for the judges using the system for the first time. Many of the band directors are appreciative of the positive and constructive tapes they receive from the SMB judges, in particular the music tapes.
The rules and regulations were developed by looking at other competitive band venues. During the 1980s there were many rules pertaining to sideline violations, timing requirements and sideline percussion requirements. Because I was developing a new system, I was able to change any of the rules on a yearly basis. Basically I tried to keep current with the BOA, MSBOA and MCBA guidelines. The help I received from the Jenison Invitational Committee was invaluable. I kept them busy, not only fine tuning the Jenison Invitational, but with typing the changing rules, judging sheets and festival guidelines. A special thank you goes to my colleagues, Marty Otto and Tom Weider, for their help and encouragement as we developed the SMB competition.
The SMB format has provided Michigan Bands with an additional choice or type of marching band competition to showcase their musical talents. In particular, it is a user friendly venue for first-time competing bands, growing programs, new directors and bands with limited funds for staff, travel, music arrangements and drill. Some directors just do not want to build their program with an emphasis on competition and just want to entertain. The beauty of being done with marching band by the middle of October is a perk for some directors. By not having a year-ending competition, many bands end the season feeling good about their accomplishments.
Joey Orefice has done a wonderful job with updating the judging sheets, hiring judges by school request, scheduling all SMB competitions and keeping everybody informed since my retirement in 2000. Joey and I have met on a yearly basis over the last 9 years to address concerns of the present participating directors. As a result, we feel we are keeping current with the needs of SMB. The growth of SMB across the state is tremendous. I would like Joey to follow up this history with his insight and thoughts. I would encourage him to include the names of the individuals who have helped with the SMB, the total number of participating bands using SMB, and the location of the sites used this past year. He might also include some comments from the host directors that have kept the SMB so positive.
I would like to thank all of the directors, judges and individuals who have shared their thoughts and suggestions helping with the growth and development of the SMB. I have enjoyed judging and seeing the many wonderful shows performed with excellence over the last 18 years. Bravo!!!
____________________________________________________________________________
May, 2010
Joey suggested that the judging score sheets need to be updated and refined to better assist the bands and judges in understanding the scoring system, making it easier to see how each band is evaluated, and where each band falls into the linear scale of 100. The sheets needed updating for the judges as well so they can better assign the numbers in the sub-caption boxes, each box now worth 100 points rather than a variety of numbers. The updated sheets will place added emphasis on the music and student performance. Joey and I met a number of times during April and May of 2010 to make these changes. The revised judging sheets will be on line for directors input by the end of May. The changes made should make it easier for the judges to be more consistent with number management. Also revised was the SMB Rules & Procedures.
SMB was started in the early 1990s as part of the Jenison Marching Band Invitational. A little background is needed to understand why Ted Bazany, Joey Orefice and a few directors from West Michigan felt a new marching band competition format was needed. In order to understand why change was needed, we need look at the early years of MCBA, (called MCBDA at that time).
MCBA during the 1970s and 1980s used their own judging sheets, judges, rules and guidelines, and the classifications were Flight I and Open Flight with directors choosing their flight. As participation in MCBA grew, it became evident more flights were needed. MCBA experimented with a variety of classification and flight formulas which included classification by band size (not too popular with smaller schools) and finally settled on four flights determined by school size with the same number of bands in each flight. MCBA sheets and points were always being discussed. One of the big questions was whether percussion and auxiliary scores should be a part of the total score. It was my feeling that percussion and auxiliary had too much weight of the total score, 10% for each category. It wasn’t until the late 1990s that MCBA solved many of the above problems by going to the Bands of America judging sheets and classification system.
In 1990,MCBA required bands to become members of MCBA which amounted to $75 a year in order to participate in any marching band invitational using their sheets and judges. At that time, most of the West Michigan Bands were not members of MCBA and had no desire to enter the MCBA finals held in late October or early November. Previous to this requirement, bands participating in the Jenison Marching Band Invitational that were not members of MCBA paid a $10 judging fee as part of their invitational entry fee to cover MCBA costs. This new requirement would eliminate the majority of bands coming to the Jenison Invitational, so I felt it necessary to look into alternatives.
I decided to develop a new system for the Jenison Marching Band Invitational which would be more user-friendly to all participating bands. The new system was called the West Michigan Marching Band Competition and later changed to the Scholastic Marching Band Competition (SMB). Joey Orefice encouraged me to use a scoring system that puts all scores between fifty and one hundred, rather than the one to one hundred that was being used by all other marching band competitions, mainly drum corps, BOA, MCBA and other state competitions (notably Indiana). In the late1970s and throughout the 1980s, many of the bands in West Michigan were switching from high step marching to corps style marching and were just learning how to develop an effective competitive marching band show. Their scores were often times well below fifty, which was not a true evaluation of their music program. These low scores were hard to explain to the administration, parents and students. Many of these bands were receiving scores of seventy to one hundred in the MSBOA Marching Band Festival when MSBOA used a number scoring system versus the letter grade system. I am happy Joey convinced me to use this inflated scoring format, even though it is a little harder on the judges to crunch the numbers.
I studied the judging sheets used by MSBOA, MCBA, BOA and Indiana and developed the present sheets used by the SMB. I came up with four judging sheets to evaluate every band: Music Performance (30 points), Music Effect (25 points), Marching Performance (25 points) and Visual Effect (20 points). The percussion and auxiliary evaluations were incorporated into the judging sheets mentioned above with all judging taking place from the press box rather than having two judges on the field. For each contest, I hired a Percussion judge and Auxiliary judge to give additional comments in both of these areas. My philosophy was to reward student performance more than the way the show was written (music arrangements and drill design). The other major difference was giving more points for Music Performance and Music Effect (55%) versus Marching Performance and Visual Effect (45%).
I believed MSBOA had the best and fairest classification system, dividing bands into classes by school size. The five classifications were: D, C, B, A, and AA. This gave the smaller schools a chance to be successful by competing against schools of their size. Even when MCBA had four flights, many of the Flight IV bands were small Class B schools at that time. In the early 1990s, most of the bands that were competitive in West Michigan were Class B schools (14), so I divided this class by school size into two sections, B and BB to have more winners. Many of these Class B bands are Class A today, and many of the Class A bands are now Class AA.
I also introduced the Achievement of Excellence Awards for each caption area: Music Performance, Marching Performance, Percussion and Auxiliary. Basically, a band had to receive the equivalent of a superior performance in a caption area to receive this recognition, with larger schools needing a higher percent of the score than smaller schools. A band could feel good about their performance, even though they may not have won their class.
Since it was an invitational for Jenison, I was able to hire my own judges for each caption area. I used MSBOA judges, MCBA judges, outstanding band directors, percussion and auxiliary specialists and occasional out of state judges. Since a training session was not needed to judge, there was a learning curve for some of the MSBOA judges as they dealt with numbers and rankings of each band within a class for the first time. I felt the judges almost always ranked the bands in the right order, but there was a fluctuation from week to week with the total score. I talked to many of the judges after the Jenison Invitational and asked for suggestions on how to improve their particular judging sheet. This input was invaluable as I fine-tuned the sheets over a period of about five years. Joey Orefice was instrumental in developing the judging guidelines and tote sheets in the late 1990s. This made it much easier for the judges using the system for the first time. Many of the band directors are appreciative of the positive and constructive tapes they receive from the SMB judges, in particular the music tapes.
The rules and regulations were developed by looking at other competitive band venues. During the 1980s there were many rules pertaining to sideline violations, timing requirements and sideline percussion requirements. Because I was developing a new system, I was able to change any of the rules on a yearly basis. Basically I tried to keep current with the BOA, MSBOA and MCBA guidelines. The help I received from the Jenison Invitational Committee was invaluable. I kept them busy, not only fine tuning the Jenison Invitational, but with typing the changing rules, judging sheets and festival guidelines. A special thank you goes to my colleagues, Marty Otto and Tom Weider, for their help and encouragement as we developed the SMB competition.
The SMB format has provided Michigan Bands with an additional choice or type of marching band competition to showcase their musical talents. In particular, it is a user friendly venue for first-time competing bands, growing programs, new directors and bands with limited funds for staff, travel, music arrangements and drill. Some directors just do not want to build their program with an emphasis on competition and just want to entertain. The beauty of being done with marching band by the middle of October is a perk for some directors. By not having a year-ending competition, many bands end the season feeling good about their accomplishments.
Joey Orefice has done a wonderful job with updating the judging sheets, hiring judges by school request, scheduling all SMB competitions and keeping everybody informed since my retirement in 2000. Joey and I have met on a yearly basis over the last 9 years to address concerns of the present participating directors. As a result, we feel we are keeping current with the needs of SMB. The growth of SMB across the state is tremendous. I would like Joey to follow up this history with his insight and thoughts. I would encourage him to include the names of the individuals who have helped with the SMB, the total number of participating bands using SMB, and the location of the sites used this past year. He might also include some comments from the host directors that have kept the SMB so positive.
I would like to thank all of the directors, judges and individuals who have shared their thoughts and suggestions helping with the growth and development of the SMB. I have enjoyed judging and seeing the many wonderful shows performed with excellence over the last 18 years. Bravo!!!
____________________________________________________________________________
May, 2010
Joey suggested that the judging score sheets need to be updated and refined to better assist the bands and judges in understanding the scoring system, making it easier to see how each band is evaluated, and where each band falls into the linear scale of 100. The sheets needed updating for the judges as well so they can better assign the numbers in the sub-caption boxes, each box now worth 100 points rather than a variety of numbers. The updated sheets will place added emphasis on the music and student performance. Joey and I met a number of times during April and May of 2010 to make these changes. The revised judging sheets will be on line for directors input by the end of May. The changes made should make it easier for the judges to be more consistent with number management. Also revised was the SMB Rules & Procedures.
