Ergonomics of a dance floor (and why the Hippodrome won't work as an MJ venue)

[Spin dryer]

On the back of the threads concerning the "Jive Nation" launch party on Friday 20 October, I thought I'd express my views about why the Hippodrome, and clubs like it, will not make successful partner dance venues.

Aside from the fact that the dance floor at the Hippodrome is too small and uneven, the principal problem is that the floor is surrounded by a tiered platform, which itself is surrounded by rails. I believe that it is of crucial importance for the area surrounding a dance floor to be on the same level as the dance floor. This facilitates ease of access on and off the floor and circulation round it. Where the surrounding area is on a different level, this acts as a significant disincentive and barrier to finding your next partner. All spontaneity is lost, as it's necessary to hunt consciously for partners rather than just picking them up unconsciously.

As I see it then, the debate is not so much clubs v town halls, but whether there is ease of circulation. The former ceroc venue (now demolished) in Fulham provides a perfect illustration of this, as the venue was originally all on one level but was later refurbished and tiered platforms and rails installed.

In its guise as "The Hibernian Club" and later "The Gardens" the Fulham venue was a traditional dance hall along the Ashtons model (albeit that the fittings gave it more of a clubby feel). The dance floor was very large (larger than the one at Ashtons) and it was surrounded by an equally large flat area. In the early and mid 90s the Thursday nights here were phenomenally popular (far more so than the current very popular night at the town hall over the road).

In the late 90s, The Gardens was completely refurbished and became "The Leopard Lounge", which was very successful as a normal club. However, the refurbishment spoilt the venue from the partner dance perspective. Although the dance floor was still a decent size, it was now surrounded by platforms and metal rails. This made it impossible for people to circulate freely and the popularity of the venue plummeted.

"SW1" was another very popular night in the 1990s. Although this is a relatively small club, everything on the ground floor was on the same level as the dance floor so it worked very well.

[El Salsero Gringo]

I'd like to nominate the previous post for the Gadget Memorial Award for thinking far too hard about things.

[Feelingpink]

I'd like to nominate the previous post for the Gadget Memorial Award for thinking far too hard about things. Gadget's dead? Can't we just rename it "Another SB thread - get your knives out now?"

[ducasi]

On the back of the threads concerning the "Jive Nation" launch party on Friday 20 October, I thought I'd express my views about why the Hippodrome, and clubs like it, will not make successful partner dance venues.

Aside from the fact that the dance floor at the Hippodrome is too small and uneven, the principal problem is that the floor is surrounded by a tiered platform, which itself is surrounded by rails. I believe that it is of crucial importance for the area surrounding a dance floor to be on the same level as the dance floor. This facilitates ease of access on and off the floor and circulation round it. Where the surrounding area is on a different level, this acts as a significant disincentive and barrier to finding your next partner. All spontaneity is lost, as it's necessary to hunt consciously for partners rather than just picking them up unconsciously. [...]
An interesting perspective.

In Glasgow and in Aberdeen, there are a total of 3 nights in "Jumpin' Jack's" club venues. Both venues have a raised area around the main dance floor, with rails most of the way around it.

While it's sometimes not as easy to find the partner you are looking for, the fact that hundreds of people each week go along (in preference to a traditional dance hall arrangement) must say something for it...

[Spin dryer]

Gadget's dead? Can't we just rename it "Another SB thread - get your knives out now?"

This all seems a little one sided. I'm sure Boreland and co have read these posts, so it would be very interesting if they were to put their heads above the parapet and respond.

[Spin dryer]

I'd like to nominate the previous post for the Gadget Memorial Award for thinking far too hard about things.

Don't worry; the thought was effortless.

BTW - just who was Gadget?!

[Feelingpink]

This all seems a little one sided. I'm sure Boreland and co have read these posts, so it would be very interesting if they were to put their heads above the parapet and respond.Given the malicious things said on here in the past week, I wouldn't be surprised if Simon Borland chose not to respond. As for your initial post in this thread, it's one theoretical way of looking at venues (although Ducasi seems to have just disproved it) ... but fact in the way that you have so glibly stated it? Probably not. There are soooo many factors that go into making a dance venue successful, I doubt tiering or a lack of it would make it into the top 10.

[Lou]

...the fact that hundreds of people each week go along (in preference to a traditional dance hall arrangement) must say something for it...
:yeah: Was thinking the same myself. :D :rolleyes:

[El Salsero Gringo]

Don't worry; the thought was effortless.

BTW - just who was Gadget?!is... is! (I hope)

On the subject of successful and unsuccessful dancefloors, I'm told the bumble-bee is scientifically proven to be too heavy to fly - but that doesn't seem to stop it.

[Spin dryer]

Given the malicious things said on here in the past week, I wouldn't be surprised if Simon Borland chose not to respond. As for your initial post in this thread, it's one theoretical way of looking at venues (although Ducasi seems to have just disproved it) ... but fact in the way that you have so glibly stated it? Probably not. There are soooo many factors that go into making a dance venue successful, I doubt tiering or a lack of it would make it into the top 10.

I'm not saying that the absence of tiering will necessarily lead to a venue being successful. Obviously, there are many other crucial elements, for example the state of the floor and the music. However, it is received psychological wisdom that geographical proximity is an essential element for the establishment and continuation of most relationships. Thus, there is a good chance that you know your immediate neighbour but not much chance that you know your next door neighbour but three. If we move from this relative macro level to the micro level of interaction on a dance floor, I suggest that the same holds true. That is to say, where you have tiering and rails, then dancers will not interact to anything like the same degree, and this physical separation means that an event is less likely to succeed. I'm not saying it can't succeed (witness the Jumping Jacks example), but it certainly won't where all the other ingredients are missing (witness the Hippodrome).

[Minnie M]

I know this may sound very girly - but one of the things that annoys me at 'club' type venues is the sticky carpets - due to spilt beer and chewing gum :sick: my shoes get ruined :tears: sometimes the dancefloors aren't much better :what:

[Feelingpink]

I'm not saying that the absence of tiering will necessarily lead to a venue being successful. Obviously, there are many other crucial elements, for example the state of the floor and the music. However, it is received psychological wisdom that geographical proximity is an essential element for the establishment and continuation of most relationships. Thus, there is a good chance that you know your immediate neighbour but not much chance that you know your next door neighbour but three. If we move from this relative macro level to the micro level of interaction on a dance floor, I suggest that the same holds true. That is to say, where you have tiering and rails, then dancers will not interact to anything like the same degree, and this physical separation means that an event is less likely to succeed. I'm not saying it can't succeed (witness the Jumping Jacks example), but it certainly won't where all the other ingredients are missing (witness the Hippodrome).Hmmm, you're saying the Hippodrome will definitely fail? Remind me again which crystal ball you've seen this in - as being true & unshakeable fact? Actually, I was thinking that the Hippodrome's tiering, rails and inky darkness could have its uses .... I go with my friends, hang out in a certain spot so I can find them ... but can easily hide from Shirtman et al should I choose. I'm not so exposed to them ... could be good.

[straycat]

is... is! (I hope)

On the subject of successful and unsuccessful dancefloors, I'm told the bumble-bee is scientifically proven to be too heavy to fly - but that doesn't seem to stop it.

They've figured it out now (http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2528). Some of it, anyway. The bumbles were relieved, I'm sure.

[Spin dryer]

Hmmm, you're saying the Hippodrome will definitely fail? Remind me again which crystal ball you've seen this in - as being true & unshakeable fact?

Well, I certainly didn't see it in the much vaunted "biggest disco ball in Europe"! In any event, I have expressed an opinion that the venture will fail. The fact as to whether it does or not is not within my or your or anyone else's knowledge (absent that big ball!).

[ducasi]

I know this may sound very girly - but one of the things that annoys me at 'club' type venues is the sticky carpets - due to spilt beer and chewing gum :sick: my shoes get ruined :tears: sometimes the dancefloors aren't much better :what:
The main space in Jumpin' Jack's (in Glasgow) is all wooden flooring, with only the entrance and stair carpeted. I've never noticed it being sticky at all.

For the first time in a very long time I noticed a few fragments of broken glass on the main dance floor last night.

[Feelingpink]

Well, I certainly didn't see it in the much vaunted "biggest disco ball in Europe"! In any event, I have expressed an opinion that the venture will fail. The fact as to whether it does or not is not within my or your or anyone else's knowledge (absent that big ball!).Oh, of course, silly, silly little old me, for not knowing the difference. :flower: Pray tell, how am I to tell the difference in your posts between 'fact' and 'opinion' if your 'opinions' do not include such words as "I think", "my theory is..." or suchlike? :flower: :flower:

[spindr]

A defined exit/entrance point makes it easier to find a partner -- you just loiter nearby until an appropriate victim passes by.

SpinDr

[Spin dryer]

A defined exit/entrance point makes it easier to find a partner -- you just loiter nearby until an appropriate victim passes by.

SpinDr

The trouble is that I prefer to be at it all night long rather than waste time loitering!

[Trouble]

The trouble is that I prefer to be at it all night long rather than waste time loitering!


:D resist Michele resist......

[bigdjiver]

Thanks for the history lesson on one of my fave venues.


...In the late 90s, The Gardens was completely refurbished and became "The Leopard Lounge", which was very successful as a normal club. However, the refurbishment spoilt the venue from the partner dance perspective. Although the dance floor was still a decent size, it was now surrounded by platforms and metal rails. This made it impossible for people to circulate freely and the popularity of the venue plummeted... popularity plummeted? As far as I remember
it was only unpopular in a "nobody goes there, its too crowded" sort of way. I believe it was a Ceroc Venue right up until the venue closed down for demolition. Fulham Town Hall started just as crowded as the Leopard Lounge when it finished. I never had any reservations about the venue, except that it was too small. The fences stop talkers and drinkers infringing on the floor. Some other venues could do with introducing them.

[Spin dryer]

Thanks for the history lesson on one of my fave venues.

It wasn't only The Gardens/Leopard Lounge that made Fulham Thursdays so great. That was only half the evening. Around 150 of us would adjourn to "La Terrazza" tapas bar, where we had a lock in and dancing on the tables until 1,2 and on occasion, even 3am. Those really were the very best ceroc evenings ever. The story goes that the bar eventually got closed down because of the Thursday night lock ins. Fulham on a Thursday is still great, but it doesn't compare to those days.

[TheTramp]

BTW - just who was Gadget?!


is... is! (I hope)

He was very much an 'is' on Tuesday night. Apparently, he has currently lost his internet access. But he will be back....

[Lou]

Apparently, he has currently lost his internet access.
OMG! Poor Gadget! Could we arrange some charidee dances to raise funds, or something.... :D

[Stuart M]

However, it is received psychological wisdom that geographical proximity is an essential element for the establishment and continuation of most relationships.
I can hear George Orwell (http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm) spinning in his grave :rolleyes: - couldn't you just say "It's common sense that people get on better when they are nearer" ? :nice:

On the main point of the thread, I agree with ducasi, in fact I'd go further - in my (limited) experience, tiered venues tend to be busier because they're more attractive to dancers. Whether the tiered nature is a major factor in this I don't really know, but I can think of numerous plus points:

You can spectate better, which makes the experience more enjoyable for people who aren't dancing at any given point.
It's clear who's waiting for a dance vs. who's currently dancing.
People don't use the dancefloor for activities other than dancing (teaching if there's some other space available, chatting, drinking, etc.).
There's never a chair sticking out onto the dancefloor in a tiered venue...in fact, at level venues you end up with a "clutter zone" of chairs, bags, jackets, conversations, luvvies, traffic, and drink carriers around the edge encroaching on the dance space.
You have better visibility of the whole venue - particularly useful when the lighting is of nightclub standard.
You can intercept people coming off the floor easier, since there's only a limited number of exits.


Only issue I've seen is where the tiering creates an unusually-shaped dancefloor (e.g. Hammersmith's "excitingly chunky" layout if it hasn't changed since 2003), leaving you with little corners and choke points on the floor. JJ's in Glasgow is a squared-off area so that problem doesn't exist.


For the first time in a very long time I noticed a few fragments of broken glass on the main dance floor last night.
Noted. In future when I'm taxiing, I'll try to check the dancefloor before the class starts.

[Stuart M]

OMG! Poor Gadget! Could we arrange some charidee dances to raise funds, or something.... :D
I vote for a spelling bee :innocent:

[David Bailey]

On the back of the threads concerning the "Jive Nation" launch party on Friday 20 October, I thought I'd express my views about why the Hippodrome, and clubs like it, will not make successful partner dance venues.

Aside from the fact that the dance floor at the Hippodrome is too small and uneven, the principal problem is that the floor is surrounded by a tiered platform, which itself is surrounded by rails. I believe that it is of crucial importance for the area surrounding a dance floor to be on the same level as the dance floor. This facilitates ease of access on and off the floor and circulation round it. Where the surrounding area is on a different level, this acts as a significant disincentive and barrier to finding your next partner. All spontaneity is lost, as it's necessary to hunt consciously for partners rather than just picking them up unconsciously.
Which means that it engenders a much different atmosphere. Of course. It's a nightclub.

Again, going back to salsa for comparisons, The Finca in Kings Cross (going for, ooh, 15+ years now) has level problems, and it's got two tiny "get onto the floor" routes which always get clogged up because people stop to talk there.

But, it's a partner dance venue, running salsa nights pretty much every day of the week, and it's been going for 15 years.

The venue will determine the atmosphere, and "nightclub Jive", assuming that it's do-able, would necessarily have a different vibe to bog-standard Ceroc. At a guess, it'd have lots more atmosphere, more freestyle time, less percentage of time dancing, and more, ahem, socialising.

(On that note, it's interesting that, in recent years, the only two London MJ events where couples actually copped off to any degree at the venue were both nightclubs - Hippodrome and the last "Galtymore" party :whistle: )

In fact, it may in fact be that, in 10 years time, "nightclub Jive" atmosphere is such that asking someone to dance at such a venue will be seen as more of an "invitation" than it is now.

[Juju]

On the subject of successful and unsuccessful dancefloors, I'm told the bumble-bee is scientifically proven to be too heavy to fly - but that doesn't seem to stop it.

Only if you're using fixed wing aerodynamics.

If you use helicopter aerodynamics there's no problem. :D

[Gadget]

OMG! Poor Gadget! Could we arrange some charidee dances to raise funds, or something.... :D

Yes please :begging:

Rumors of my demise have been slightly exadurated. exadgerated. exagerated. exa.. bugger it: wrong.
{Oh, and I don't think it was thought through far enough...}

Re venues - the barrier is good in that it provides a viewing area where folk can be at the edge of the dance floor without them annoying the dancers or getting in the way when trying to exit/enter the floor.

Other than that, :yeah: to Ducassi's posts.

[Double Trouble]

The trouble is that I prefer to be at it all night long rather than waste time loitering!

That's funny......I hadn't noticed...!