PDA

View Full Version : Two tier system



Gus
4th-April-2007, 07:53 PM
As my travels round the MJ clubs of the East Midlands continue, I've started to appreciate the very real differnce between clubs that cater for 'the masses' and those that try to cater for the next level up. The Forum is predominantly reflective of the needs of the more developed dancer so the discussion tends to be more about the clubs/teachers/music that allow dancers to develop. I remeber once being convinced that MJ clubs needed to cater for the better dancers ... now I'm not so sure.

Most Ceroc clubs make a good living out of keeping to the baiscs, dragging muggles off teh streets, showing them a few moves and letting the new Cerocers just enjoy themsleves. The result is a healthy profit but few dancers of note. But is this a bad thing? This does create the opportunity of a two tier system. Ceroc, and similar ventures, covering the main masses wheras there seems to be an available niche for clubs that address the needs of the more discerning dancers.

I remember when there were clubs like Ceroc Nottingham (in the days of Boy Robin) who really pushed the dancers ... probably one of the earliest super-clubs. Then of course there was Hipsters and more recently Jangos at Kent House. These no longer exist as once they were. Could the two-tier approach still work. If so, why does it not appear to have done so so far?

Little Minx
4th-April-2007, 09:06 PM
There was a time when I would have said that a two tier system was a bit elitist & who do all these so called 'good' dancers think they are, however, I have to admit now fours years on in dancing years - i know still a baby to some - that I do find myself sometimes with local clubs asking who can dance to this, when my favourite slower, more bluesy track:whistle: comes on. I dont think though it is just down to profiteering & getting people in off the street regardless, just that more people are aware of it & that as there are more & more venues opening now, it is much more accessible. I still dont think however, a two tier system is good for dancing, afterall dancing is subjective and who gets to decide who is 'better' or not.

FoxyFunkster
4th-April-2007, 09:38 PM
As my travels round the MJ clubs of the East Midlands continue, I've started to appreciate the very real differnce between clubs that cater for 'the masses' and those that try to cater for the next level up. The Forum is predominantly reflective of the needs of the more developed dancer so the discussion tends to be more about the clubs/teachers/music that allow dancers to develop. I remeber once being convinced that MJ clubs needed to cater for the better dancers ... now I'm not so sure.

Most Ceroc clubs make a good living out of keeping to the baiscs, dragging muggles off teh streets, showing them a few moves and letting the new Cerocers just enjoy themsleves. The result is a healthy profit but few dancers of note. But is this a bad thing? This does create the opportunity of a two tier system. Ceroc, and similar ventures, covering the main masses wheras there seems to be an available niche for clubs that address the needs of the more discerning dancers.

I remember when there were clubs like Ceroc Nottingham (in the days of Boy Robin) who really pushed the dancers ... probably one of the earliest super-clubs. Then of course there was Hipsters and more recently Jangos at Kent House. These no longer exist as once they were. Could the two-tier approach still work. If so, why does it not appear to have done so so far?

I think the 2tier system is already emerging to be honest with the demand for places like Utopia and Jango nights selling out fast, a couple of points though, 9/10 cerocers are people who go once a week and can take it or leave it as to whether they go dancing or not, and Ceroc also only retain 1in10 new customers so obviously they are trying to up that ratio......the consequence of that though is the more experienced dancer will after a while go less to the regular ceroc night with the usual music played and seek more of what nights like Utopia has to offer......WCS is becoming more and more popular as is AT and other styles, so i don`t believe the 2 tier system will emerge at regular venues, but it will work as a concept i methinks........

TA Guy
4th-April-2007, 10:04 PM
You see this in sport too. The better 'players' migrate to the better clubs -> local leagues -> county leagues, maybe to representing county level -> International level etc. etc.
With each level you go up, the number of clubs catering to that level drops markedly.
I don't think it's a perfect comparison because the the aim of sport is to be the best/win. While there is an element of that for some dancers, I don't think it applies to the majority. I think the dynamic of a dance night is slightly more complex in terms of what people want to get out of it than a night of competitive sport.

So, although at those 'better' dance nights you do get a higher level of dance, other important parts of the jigsaw, for example, the socializing side, the 'buzz', takes a hit simply because of the lesser numbers.
That's why I think single room advanced nights struggle sometimes.

Add to that the fact that 'better' sportsmen or dancers tends to be more specific in exactly what they want, and arguably more fickle about it.


I think the best way to approach it is the two room method. Cater to the beginners/masses, have another room for the more advanced however you define that. It seems to be the way more and more places are approaching it and it seems to work.


I am watching the Utopia startup with interest. I don't wish it any failure whatsoever, and I hope it's so successful it expands down my way :) but I am dubious as to whether it is long term sustainable given the historic track record of single room advanced nights.....

Wouldbe
7th-April-2007, 10:59 AM
Perhaps being a little too idealistic (Me..? Never!) but the Ceroc ethos is fun, and although as has been said some, if few, very good dancers come out of it, this is almost a by-product.

The Ceroc venue is a social night, raising the profile of dancing as entertainment for its own sake. There's no emphasis on how good you are per se, just that you enjoy yourself. Those who really get into it may invest time and money into improving their dancing in the effort that they will dervie more enjoyment out of dancing even better.

Some teachers at various venues will encourage this more actively than others. Their venues become magnets then for better dancers, but beyond more complex intermediate moves and more frequent pointers on style and technique, there's nothing really that can be done to push those dancers even further within the context of an evening. Meanwhile, they might be scaring off newer dancers, coming across as snobby or elitist. This I've seen, and although I'm a reasonably confident dancer now, I still feel intimidated going to these places because of the perception the people there have of their own capabilities and who they're prepared to dance with.

Other venues value their beginners (and recent intermediates) more and incorporate more of the basics to build confidence and hopefully enjoyment for those dancers. I'm sure the retention figures will reflect that more new dancers will continue at these sorts of venues than the 'more advanced'. The expectation then on crew is to support these venues so that those newer to dancing do have the opportunity to improve, rather than being left to dance only with each other and perhaps not develop.

I don't think, having said that, that this is particularly problematic, although I think it would be a bad idea to formalise a 2-tier system. Once "on the circuit", people will make up their own minds based on hear-say as to where they want to dance. If a franchise were to publicise venues as level 1, level 2 etc, I think this would polarise Ceroc and undermine its most valuable offering - a fun, sociable night out. Why should 'better dancers' expect to have a venue to themselves and not to dance with the less experienced? Who would judge anyway? Surely the best compromise is to take the weekly venues for what they are (and should be?). If this isn't catering for your needs, find a way of advancing yourself through a different context, such as workshops, weekenders, courses or even alternative dance styles. Then come back and share your expertise!:grin:

bigdjiver
7th-April-2007, 12:38 PM
MJ is a performance dance as well as a social one, something to watch as well as something to do. I believe that once the watchable element separates off then the social side will wane. Unfortunately I believe that the process is inevitable. We are already seeing "Utopia" nights drawing away the more ambitious dancers. I am allfor keeping the traditional format for as long as possible as I believe it is the best for introducing lots of people to dance.

Gadget
9th-April-2007, 01:02 PM
MJ is a performance dance as well as a social one, something to watch as well as something to do. I believe that once the watchable element separates off then the social side will wane.
I beleive that the "watchable" element is only for competitions and is a minor part of the MJ dance. Once it seperates off, it will take all the rules and red tape and "this is/this is not" MJ with it and leave the social side to thrive while the performance side wanes.

The dancers who think on themselves as "better" than the rest and want a night devoted to themselves will probably be able to set one up.
And it will probably run well for a few months.
But then it will get even more of a snobish and elitist attitude, and less people will go, then people want things tailored to them, then even less folk are interested, then it will start to dissapear up it's own rectal cavity.

I think that a 'two tier' system is a good idea because it takes all these people who think that they are too good to dance with beginners and can't learn anything from the basics, and removes them from the usual classes. This encourages {what I see as} a better attitude and a more open atmosphere.

{I also think that it's doomed before it starts, but vocal people will rave about it and then moan when it's gone.}

bigdjiver
9th-April-2007, 01:33 PM
I beleive that the "watchable" element is only for competitions and is a minor part of the MJ dance ...If MJ was just "social" I would have been long gone. My dance owes just as much to the inspiration of watching others as to the enabling that I got from classes.

Gadget
9th-April-2007, 01:37 PM
The inspirational dancers: Did they dance to show you how good they were, or did they dance socially for their partners?

It may be '"watchable", but only as a side-effect. {IMHO}

bigdjiver
9th-April-2007, 02:04 PM
The inspirational dancers: Did they dance to show you how good they were, or did they dance socially for their partners? ... I never thought to ask.

OTOH I do know that some of my partners and myself do take a delight in "strutting our stuff". For my part I have no illusions about being "good". My motive is to show that there is another dimension, because it was the fact that there is another dimension that inspires me. It is not that "I can do this", but that "You can do this, if you want to."
I had three explicit requests for moves outside of the "social" yesterday.