From: SFINE00@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU (Fineman, Stephen Elliot)
Subject: Re: drill (was Re: Creativity vs. Execution)
Organization: Rice University  
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 15:22:04 GMT

>In article <splooie.717820599@camelot> splooie@camelot.bradley.edu (Romeo Casiple) writes:
>>The coordiate system and straight path system is really good in that each
>>member never needs to guide off of any other member.  He is only responsible
>>for landing on his coordinate.  The belief here is that if the other guy
>>is wrong, you will be wrong too if you attempt to hit your set in relation
>>with him.  You will be right more often if you try to hit your set in
>>relation with the field & it's markings (hashes, numbers, X's) because the
>>field is NEVER wrong.  It is fixed.  So if the set happens to be a straight
>>line or a circle, that straight line or circle will be perfect if everyone
>>does his job and lands on his set.
 
    This may be rehash of an earlier thread, but I think we're seeing the diff-
erences between the two major styles of drill.  In Brubaker's Cavie drill (IMHO
) the most important element is the set.  One form becomes another form becomes
another form, but what takes place in between is not always easy to see.  If
there are reshapes or wraparounds, there could be breathing in the interval at
different places (leading to l l l llll l l l in between sets) or outright
collisions.  It's a tribute to Brubaker that his drill can be performed set-to-
set without any of these problems.  It shows remarkable construction, but it
also limits his capabilities.
 
    The other style (and here I will use examples that are more familiar to me)
is the one used by Zingali and Sylvester (and Crossmen designer John Miliauskas
(sp?)).  In this style, the forms are important, but so are the transitions
between sets.  Not only must a set hit properly, the corps must maintain form
and space in between sets.  Sometimes (in Crossmen, we were instructed to take
a straight path whenever possible, and always tried the straight path first
when learning drill) this can be done when each member takes a straight path
and consistent size step.  At other times, a curved path is necessary.  The
Cadets' parallelogram rotation is an *excellent* example of this.  If one takes
the start and finish of that move, and asks each member to take a straight path
, most of the corps will collide in the center.  The effect of the rotation
would be completely lost.  But with members taking curved paths, the parallel-
ogram actually shifts its orientation and rotates, _but_remains_a_parallelogram
throughout_the_move.  That makes a spectator say "Wow, what a cool move" and is
impossible using the set-to-set style.
 
    As splooie mentions (and as the Cavies performed) the set-to-set style of
drill is very precise.  From the moment one learns one's dots, he does the same
thing, and is completely independent of other marchers.  The other style is
much harder to clean, and as the season goes on, each member refines his path
and perfects each move.  One could track the progress of the Cadets' parallel-
ogram, and see that it got cleaner with each performance (especially at DCI
East compared to the night before).  In my corps, one 24-count move had two
"kidney beans" rotate, shift, and unravel to form a completely different set.
When we first learned it, everyone took a straight path and promptly collided.
But as each member figured out what he could do to make it better (on the in-
struction of the visual staff, of course), he affected the paths of those near
him.  If the euphoniua didn't start the move with a large step size in one
direction, the sopranos down the line would be squeezed out of a reshape and
unable to make their dots.  We continually worked on this one set, and it was
not until finals week that I was comfortable with this move.  Up until then I
would be thinking, "I hope there's room for me, I better make it, I hope my
path isn't too wide for so-and-so, . . ."  There were so many variables in the
motion that it took a very long time to iron out.  By contrast, there are very
few variables in the Cavies' style of drill, but that type of move would be
nearly impossible (I say nearly because of the magnificent inventions of sub-
sets, but that's for another post).
 
--
Steve (sfine00@ricevm1.rice.edu)
Crossmen sop line '92 ('93, '94?)