Time for competitions to evolve ?

[RobC]

So, with Blackpool, Ceroc & Bristol gone, Scotland just around the corner and Britroc on the horizon, it's time to start looking forward towards next year's competitons. Now is the time for us competitors to make our voices heard and hopefully for the organisers to listen.

Throughout this year there has been much debate - quite heated at times - about the various categories and how people enter. Some people has been voiciforous in their support of the 3 category (Intermediate / Advanced / Open) approach, while others favour the 2 categories that Blackpool use. Each have their pro's and con's, but one thing which most people seem to agree on is that it would seem unfair to prevent people from entering a freestyle category just because they fit someone's definition of a teacher.

So, here's a thought for you to mull over. Is it time to think about a different way to categorise the competitions ? As some of you may know, I come from a ballroom competition background, and over the years I have seen how ballroom competitions have evolved, both in the student circuit and on the open amateur circuit. The student competition format used to use the 2 category approach: beginners (people dancing less than a year) and open (everyone else). Then there was the Basic categories. These were open to all, but the dancers were restricted to just dancing moves from a defined list of basic steps.

On the amateur circuit, they have a multiple category approach: Beginners, Novice, Intermediate, Pre-Champ & Amateur. There is no time limit on you being a beginner, and you can enter multiple categories if you wish. You are only forced out of a category and up to the next level when you win 2 competitions at that level. However, the beginners and novice categories are restricted to basic steps and novice is a 2-dance, Intermediate a 3-dance & Pre-champ a 4-dance competition. The student circuit, after many years of debate have also gone down this multiple category approach as well.

Obviously this 2,3,4-dance approach is not applicable in modern jive, and there are a lot less MJ competitions each year than ballroom comps, so the win 2 and move up might need to be win one and move, however what do people think about restricting the moves people can use in a competition ?

Could there ever be a concensus on what the defined 'Basic' moves were ? Could the various competition organisers be persuaded to all use the same definition ? The Ceroc list of beginners moves could be a starting point. Do LeRoc have a similar list ?

Could a multiple category approach work, where there are no restriction on who enters the categories, but the lower categories are restricted to 'Basic' steps ?

Does anyone else have any radical (or not so radical) ideas on how the copmetition category situation could be improved ?

I open the floor to the debate......

[Lou]

Could there ever be a concensus on what the defined 'Basic' moves were ? Could the various competition organisers be persuaded to all use the same definition ? The Ceroc list of beginners moves could be a starting point. Do LeRoc have a similar list ?
I don't have any particular viewpoint on competitions (as I don't compete!), however, if it's any use to you, the Elmgrove LeRoc website lists the following beginners moves:

Arch (Archie Spin), Basket, Short Butterfly (a variation on the Butterfly), Change Places (Man's Spin), Figure of Eight, First Move, Hatchback, Ladies Spin (Free Spin), Loophole (Variation on Octopus), Neckbreak, Nigel's Move (Springer), Overhead Change (Hallelujah), Push-Pull (Arm-Jive), Secret Move, Closed Sway, Windmill, Wurlitzer, Yo-Yo.

Personally, I'd drop the Short Butterfly & Secret Move, as I don't know anywhere else that teaches them as a beginner move. I'd add a Travelling Return, Side to Side, Comb, and possibly a Shoulder Slide (simplified Shoulder Drop), based on what's taught at other LeRoc classes.

[Andy McGregor]

I don't know what to think. On the one hand, competitions should be about finding the best dancers. On the other hand they should be a rip-roaring fun day out.

I think that MJ is a social dance and competitions should be treated as fun first and serious second.

Speaking from my own point of view, I can not imagine that the things I've done at recent competitions would have been permitted at Ballroom competitions. I'd probably have been banned - but at Weston our double trouble team won the Champion of Champions prize. If I'd minced across the judges table dressed as a lap-dancer at a ballroom competition I'd have been escorted outside by security :tears:

But, as everyone knows, we won the day :clap:

[serious mode] Some people will take MJ seriously and competitions are the place to do that. But, I think the most serious aspect of a competition is to make sure the competitors know what they're being judged on and how those scores are calculated to find the winners - at the moment the mighty Ceroc in London will not tell anyone how they do it :angry: This needs to be fixed before we can think about anything new. [/serious mode]

.. and they need a decent venue. And they need to stop treating their competitors like they have no feelings*.

*This year at the Ceroc London comp they wouldn't announce the people that had been promoted until just before the heat. That meant that you were waiting, in costume, next to the dance floor, only to not hear your number called, how demoralising was that? :tears: And, at the last moment, they changed the order of the heats so you were probably in the wrong costume anyway :angry:

And I didn't even get my bottle of 'Old Git' wine.

[rant mode]So, 'How should competitions evolve?' There is such a thing as survival of the fittest. Is the Ceroc championships fit to survive while it treats its competitors like the hired help, poor venue, keeping competitors in the dark, changing things at the last minute. Sure it was OK for the spectators but the competitors had paid more and had been served badly IMHO.[/rant mode]

So, I'd like to see more competition between competitions. I'd like to see so many competitions that people running them have to treat competitors like human beings or have no competitors at all. No music so fast you can't dance to it properly (the organisers call this 'challenging'); transparent judging; categories so clearly defined that we don't have to argue among ourselves about which is the right one; a timetable that can be kept to; enough judges that the whole competition isn't delayed if one or two are late; and finally, venues that RobC likes :flower:

[Andy McGregor]

Did I say all that? :whistle:

[DianaS]

Perhaps we can think about having something to include and develop our community more.
In martial art competitions we competed in bands made of groups of belts and had a veterans class for oldies, it was a good idea cas they were far too good for us! Style wise it would be difficult for a sixty year old couple to compete against people in their 30's but its so nice to see how people with 40 years experience travel move and interprete music.
I would also really like to see a youngsters group to encourage our younger people, it needn't be too formal just a little bit of space for them to do something on either on their own or with a partner. When they go to see their parents compete its nice if they can have a sense of inclusion.
Competitions for me are very much about participating and sharing, I don't feel "good enough" but after being around for a while longer I'll come along to a local competion on cheer you all on!

[Gordon J Pownall]

Perhaps we can think about having something to include and develop our community more.
In martial art competitions we competed in bands made of groups of belts and had a veterans class for oldies,

What do they do in Oz...

Don't they have bronze silver and gold depenmding upon experience or something - I was told ages ago but have forgotten.

Perhaps our Antipodean Forumites could enlighten us...???

[Divissima]

Perhaps it is time to dust off an old idea of ChrisA's... and found the UK Modern Jive Dancers' Assiciation (or Federation) - a federation for dancers to have their own voice, separate from the teaching and competition organisations. The MJDA could lobby for things like transparent judging criteria, standardised categories (maybe even :eek: an accepted definition of beginner, intermediate and advanced). They could also organise a national league table of dancers with rankings, if people were interested in having one. They could represent the interests of all MJ dancers - maybe by providing information on dance-related matters (maybe a list of dance physio and other therapists), print cool t-shirts, negotiate discounts with dance events, and generally be good eggs...

OK, so I'm half joking, but I'm also half serious. I think dancers could benefit from having a voice, independently of the ceroc, leroc and other organisations. I particularly think that competitive dancers would benefit from having a voice in relation to the competition organisers - but we competitors are in a very small minority when compared with the number of MJ dancers in the UK. What do people think? If enough people think I'm not completely off my rocker, I could look into it further (look at what the BDF and other organisations do for their members).

[Gordon J Pownall]

If enough people think I'm not completely off my rocker, I could look into it further (look at what the BDF and other organisations do for their members).

You are off your rocker - totally and completely in a scary kind of lovely way...

However you speak sense above and that is very different - like the idea but would you be able to get all the organisers of competitions to subscribe or is there a risk that we would end up with another competition that offers a UK National Dance Champions title / status...???

Good idea Bat(wo)man..... :worthy: :worthy:

[Divissima]

What do they do in Oz...

Don't they have bronze silver and gold depenmding upon experience or something - I was told ages ago but have forgotten.

Perhaps our Antipodean Forumites could enlighten us...???
I think it depends on the competition - I could be wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me if the categorisations differ from one to another. The Ceroc Australia competition last year had categories something like this:

Beginner
Rising Star
Intermediate Championships
Advanced
Open

But there might have been a couple I've missed out. It was particularly notable that where in the UK we have one category - intermediate - they had three to cover the same spectrum of ability and experience. When we entered we had to provide details of our number of years dancing, any competitions entered - which category, how far we progressed, if we placed, etc. There was more form filling but we felt the categories were fair.

[Gordon J Pownall]

I think it depends on the competition - I could be wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me if the categorisations differ from one to another. The Ceroc Australia competition last year had categories something like this:

Beginner
Rising Star
Intermediate Championships
Advanced
Open

But there might have been a couple I've missed out. It was particularly notable that where in the UK we have one category - intermediate - they had three to cover the same spectrum of ability and experience. When we entered we had to provide details of our number of years dancing, any competitions entered - which category, how far we progressed, if we placed, etc. There was more form filling but we felt the categories were fair.

I know their classes are also graded as to which class you should / could / can attend as well...???

[Divissima]

You are off your rocker - totally and completely in a scary kind of lovely way...

However you speak sense above and that is very different - like the idea but would you be able to get all the organisers of competitions to subscribe or is there a risk that we would end up with another competition that offers a UK National Dance Champions title / status...???

Good idea Bat(wo)man..... :worthy: :worthy:You misunderstand me, little one. I don't mean to organise another competition, but rather to have some kind of weight to negotiate with the current organisers - and ask for rules to be changed (and standardised). A bit like a dancers' union, if you like. If enough competitors joined, then the MJDA would be able to say 80% of our members (your competitors) are unhappy with the rule about (for example) the definition of an airstep because it is different from the rule in X, Y and Z competitions.

By running UK rankings, Modern Jive Champions of the Milky Way who have won a DWAS competition in Skegness would rank below UK Ceroc Champions so the calibre of the holders of the title would be more clear (where there are so many similar titles)

Don't know, maybe it's crazy....

[Gordon J Pownall]

Don't know, maybe it's crazy....

No - makes loadsa sense - the crazy thing is imagining people will sign up to it - mind you...??? :rolleyes:

[Divissima]

I know their classes are also graded as to which class you should / could / can attend as well...???I believe that is right - although as they tend to do more acrobatic moves as standard, there needs to be some way to ensure dancers have enough experience to be safe with the moves. I think I've exceeded the limits of my knowledge - have to call upon the lovely Gary or Robert to explain further....

[Gordon J Pownall]

I believe that is right - although as they tend to do more acrobatic moves as standard, there needs to be some way to ensure dancers have enough experience to be safe with the moves. I think I've exceeded the limits of my knowledge - have to call upon the lovely Gary or Robert to explain further....

Perhaps a MJ passport would be a good idea...Kind of a whaty you've done / vwhere you've been sort of thing..... :confused:

[spindr]

I think that to remove "surprises" perhaps each category might specify the bpm range for the music to be used.

Maybe replace the "veterans" competition with a blues one?

SpinDr.

[Gary]

I believe that is right - although as they tend to do more acrobatic moves as standard, there needs to be some way to ensure dancers have enough experience to be safe with the moves. I think I've exceeded the limits of my knowledge - have to call upon the lovely Gary or Robert to explain further....
Beginner class: anyone can do it, no dips.

Intermediate class: beginners are encouraged to check with a teacher before moving up, but it's not enforced. There's almost always a dip or drop in the Intermediate lesson.

Intermediate/Advanced class (once a month at most venues): more challenging moves, higher pace. There's a separate rotation group for people with Intermediate/Advanced cards, which they get by dancing with a teacher who gives you a card or feedback to improve.

Advanced class (less frequently): more challenging again, bigger moves. You must have an Intermediate/Advanced card to participate. At the same time in another room they run an Intermediate class (as well as the Beginner Progression class in yet another room). For this class there are again two rotation groups: one for people with Intermediate/Advanced cards, another for people with Advanced cards (obtained in a similar way).

There's generally not a huge gap between the Intermediate and the Intermediate/Advanced classes (some of the normal Intermediate classes are pretty challenging). The Advanced class is a bigger jump. The biggest jump, though, is still going from Beginner to Intermediate (we're still working on helping with that, tinkering with the Beginner Progression class (which runs in parallel to the Intermediate class)).

The acrobatic moves are taught in workshops, though, not classes (but maybe we've got different ideas about what is "acrobatic").

[Andy McGregor]

I think that to remove "surprises" perhaps each category might specify the bpm range for the music to be used.

Maybe replace the "veterans" competition with a blues one?

SpinDr.

Are you saying 'Boogie Woogie Choo Choo Train' isn't Blues. I thought it needed speeding up when they played it in the Old Gits at the Ceroc champs :tears:

No, I'm kidding. I thought it was a bad choice for a competition track and a particularly bad choice for an over 45s age group where competitors are supposed to be showing style rather than endurance.

I think Divissima is right. There's only about 50 of us that compete regularly, we all know each other. Why don't we tell the organisers what we want? All we'd need to do was agree it among ourselves...

..but, just imagine if we could agree. How brilliant would that be? Competitions would improve and we wouldn't get Mr Organiser telling us to stop making a fuss, we're just 'there to entertain the audience' (I was told this, but I'm not saying by whom :devil: )

Maybe we could run it like party politics. In party politics we argue/debate in private and vote in private but, when we go to the public we present a united front and support whatever policy the majority voted for - whether we voted that way or not (at least that's the objective).

Maybe Franck could set up a competitors zone on this forum. It could be password protected and we could have polls with closing dates. We could then come up with a 'Competitors Manifesto'. Of course, we'd have to be prepared to use the ultimate sanction of not entering a competition if we really didn't agree with the organiser - solidarity and all that :clap: Hopefully we'd be a force for good and never have to use that weapon. But the organiser would know we could always ask our membership to stay away if we really didn't like what he was proposing :tears:

[under par]

Perhaps a MJ passport would be a good idea...Kind of a whaty you've done / vwhere you've been sort of thing..... :confused:


So long as there wasn't the need for a passport photo....Andy, Rob and Gordy would take months shopping for the outfits and wigs :whistle: .....never get any dancing done :wink:

[under par]

Perhaps it is time to dust off an old idea of ChrisA's... and found the UK Modern Jive Dancers' Assiciation (or Federation) - a federation for dancers to have their own voice, separate from the teaching and competition organisations. The MJDA could lobby for things like transparent judging criteria, standardised categories (maybe even :eek: an accepted definition of beginner, intermediate and advanced). They could also organise a national league table of dancers with rankings, if people were interested in having one. They could represent the interests of all MJ dancers - maybe by providing information on dance-related matters (maybe a list of dance physio and other therapists), print cool t-shirts, negotiate discounts with dance events, and generally be good eggs...

OK, so I'm half joking, but I'm also half serious. I think dancers could benefit from having a voice, independently of the ceroc, leroc and other organisations. I particularly think that competitive dancers would benefit from having a voice in relation to the competition organisers - but we competitors are in a very small minority when compared with the number of MJ dancers in the UK. What do people think? If enough people think I'm not completely off my rocker, I could look into it further (look at what the BDF and other organisations do for their members).

Not off your rocker at all, the competitors lobby is a great idea and one could get that going easier than a total dance lobby because the numbers to deal with initially would be smaller. :clap:

The competitors at the few competitions I have been to all appear to be having similar complaints , comp categories , music speed and changing facilities etc. of the organisers. But this is always after the event and then everybody trudges on to the next Comp, muttering then again having similar complaints.

Does anybody listen???

All for one and one for all. :yeah:

It would take someone with drive and devotion to get it off the ground. If there is a ground swell of opinion for it are you volunteering? :worthy:

[Andy McGregor]

Did I say all that? :whistle:

I've just received negative rep for the above post the comment was 'no content' - it was unsigned :tears:

I thought there might be others who didn't get it so I just thought I'd explain. The 'did I say all that?' referred to the massive post above which was full of content, much of it contentious.

IMHO giving someone negative rep for 'no content' is getting the rep system wrong. I think you should give negative rep for someone saying something rude or agressive or for being a complete prat. About 10% of my rep is negative and it's usually been constructive(ish) and I've welcomed the honesty. I don't usually complain about negative rep, but this one is just nasty - it doesn't add anything to anyone's day.

Rant over.

N.B. Hopefully people will see this post has a purpose. That purpose is to add to the debate on the use of the reputation system. I chose this thread to show this example because it's where I made the post that got the, IMHO, inappropriate negative rep.

[Gadget]

~snip~could lobby for things like transparent judging criteria, standardised categories ~ organise a national league table of dancers with rankings, ~ represent the interests of all MJ dancers ~ providing information on dance-related matters (maybe a list of dance physio and other therapists), print cool t-shirts, negotiate discounts with dance events, and generally be good eggs...~ I think dancers could benefit from having a voice, independently of the ceroc, leroc and other organisations. I particularly think that competitive dancers would benefit from having a voice in relation to the competition organisers - but we competitors are in a very small minority when compared with the number of MJ dancers in the UK.
:confused: So what does this forum do?

- It is (relatively) independent - views are aired from every MJ corner no matter what the organisation.
- There have been discounts for forum members to various events in the past; it's up to the organisers to arrange this, but perhaps a bit of pro-active marketing of the forum to competition organisers may help.
- there is all manor of dance related information here
- people make their views known about competitions, judging and events.
- there are numerous discussion topics about definitions; beginner, intermediate, advanced, modern jive... we still haven't come to a unified conclusion.
- you want a cool forum T-shirt? see Emma.
- you want a good egg? see <strike>Andy</strike>, <strike>Chris</strike>, <strike>Mikey</strike>, <strike>Smurf</strike>, erm... well, I'm sure there are some here :innocent:

The only thing I see absent is a "league table". How would you work it? You can't just award points for places, since the level of competition may be harder... I see another thread looming.:)
Although perhaps a space in the user page for results and qualifications would be quite cool.

Back on-topic, competitions are all about seeing who is best and seeing how you compare to everyone else; a level indicator for your dancing. Correct? Although there is an element of "fun", this (rarely) has anything to do with the actual dancing or ability of the dancers - which is what the competition is judging.
So you need to find a way to compare dancers and rate them against each other - if you want to judge the 'visual look' of the dance, then you have outside people watching. This is how every dance is judged. But MJ is not every dance. {IMHO} MJ is about the 'feel' of the dance; the connection with your partner; the emersion in the music. Can you rely on "outside" witnesses to see this? Will this be judged higher than flashy moves and 'crowd pleasers'?

The actual schematics of how the competition is run is fairly un-important: there are several methods and styles of competition, in the end it's about how you are judged; how you perform is open to their interpretation and where you are placed is dependant on their decision.
The best competitions try and make sure that there is nothing to detract from how you perform and that the judging is fair; if you have these two premise at the heart of the organisation process, then everything else should fall into place.

[Andy McGregor]

The only thing I see absent is a "league table". How would you work it? You can't just award points for places, since the level of competition may be harder... I see another thread looming.:)

Come on Gadget, as a fencer you know where a model for this is - or were you leaving something for me to say :wink: British fencing have run a national ranking scheme for years: the, rather complicated, instructions are here (http://www.foilcommittee.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/international-rules/SENIOr-ranking-2003-4-vers2.htm) . The ranking points you receive for each competition is based on the number of ranked fencers and the ranking of those ranked fencers.

It would probably take a year or two for this kind of thing to pan out and it would be for different categories - which equates to the different weapons in the fencing ranking. In theory, it would be possible to assign scores to competitors based on the last few MJ competitions. Everyone knocked out at each level would get the same score of course. All we'd need would be the lists of competitors and how far they'd got, who'd like to see if they can get hold of it? We'd only need names, not email addresses etc so there'd be no breach of confidentiality. And it would need to be an individual ranking as many couples change - but their individual ranking would need to be based on the position each couple reached.

I think it would work - who's willing to bet the Tramp is the UK No 1 ?

p.s. Enough content? :mad:

[latinlover]

:The only thing I see absent is a "league table". How would you work it? You can't just award points for places, since the level of competition may be harder... I see another thread looming.:).

as a non-competitor (beach boogie blues comp last week was our first ever comp,) this seems like a totally logical idea
FWIW I agree with Mr Gadget that the Forum has gone a long way towards acheiving some of these goals (I tried to rep Divissima but was prevented)

Certainly the level of communication is something I have found very stimulating(as well as time -consuming! :whistle: )
I have no idea how it could be actioned practically ,but surely with all the professional expertise in evidence here it must be possible to formalise things somehow?Andy's fencing comparison seems a good place to start

From my inexperienced position I would have no idea how to categorise our own dancing level (we certainly felt like novices on Friday :eek: :confused: :sick: ) if we were to enter another competition ,and it would also help to know how the "opposition" was rated IMHO

[TheTramp]

I think it would work - who's willing to bet the Tramp is the UK No 1 ?
Not me. That'd undoubtably be Clayton.... :worthy:

Trampy

[Andy McGregor]

Not me. That'd undoubtably be Clayton.... :worthy:

Trampy

As we've only got a few competitions (compared to sports like Fencing) all competitions would have to count. And as Clayton doesn't do them all his score would suffer. A rating system has got to be about competition performance - if you aren't in the competition your performance is zero.

On the other hand, The Tramp does them all, gets placed in every one he enters so he'd probably be the best of the best - that's overall of course :clap:


p.s. How's my content?

[Divissima]

:confused: So what does this forum do? No need to be confused, Gadget. I agree that the forum does all the excellent things you mention. However, I guess the difference would be that a separate federation would aim to represent dancers (or competitive dancers) rather than simply provide a forum for them to air their views - by that I mean, the MJDA would actually approach competition organisers (for example) and try to achieve change. Of course, if comp organisers read the forum, they can read people's views and decide whether they think what is being suggested is a good thing and whether to make changes.

As Andy suggested, if you can organise dancers together you maybe get a bit more clout. But then, have you ever heard even two dancers agree on what the definition of an intermediate dancer it, much less 50+ dancers :wink: But I guess the aim would be to arrive at some kind of consensus about what dancers want to see happen, and then to work towards change with the organisers (ie without thinking you have all the answers, but at least giving dancers a voice - and maybe some power - with the organisers). So not really a political body as such, but an interest group to be consulted.

[Emma]

~snip
I think Divissima is right. There's only about 50 of us that compete regularly, we all know each other. Why don't we tell the organisers what we want? All we'd need to do was agree it among ourselves...

~snip
Maybe we could run it like party politics. In party politics we argue/debate in private and vote in private but, when we go to the public we present a united front and support whatever policy the majority voted for - whether we voted that way or not (at least that's the objective).

Maybe Franck could set up a competitors zone on this forum. It could be password protected and we could have polls with closing dates. We could then come up with a 'Competitors Manifesto'. Of course, we'd have to be prepared to use the ultimate sanction of not entering a competition if we really didn't agree with the organiser - solidarity and all that :clap: Hopefully we'd be a force for good and never have to use that weapon. But the organiser would know we could always ask our membership to stay away if we really didn't like what he was proposing :tears:I'm really still trying to decide if this says 'clique' or 'union' to me...my original reaction was union, but I guess that to me idea of something along these lines only including the '50 regular' (really??) competitors seems more like a clique. An organisation set up as a voice for all competitors, that would be open and available to all dancers whether or not they compete regularly strikes me as more of a union.

It's also worth bearing in mind that (amazingly) not *all* dancers have access to this forum. There are some poor unenlightened fools out there who don't have internet access (or do and don't use it, though clearly they are just weird).

Obviously I have very little competition experience, and no experience of any other danceform competition at ALL...but...don't the people who do fairly regularly come on here and saying things along the lines of 'I would hate to see MJ competition going in the same direction as ballroom'?...and...isn't the idea of introducing more competition classes and league tables rather doing that? :confused:

[Divissima]

I'm really still trying to decide if this says 'clique' or 'union' to me...my original reaction was union, but I guess that to me idea of something along these lines only including the '50 regular' (really??) competitors seems more like a clique. An organisation set up as a voice for all competitors, that would be open and available to all dancers whether or not they compete regularly strikes me as more of a union.That was kind of what I had in mind when I was musing aloud last night - although I find is easier to see the kind of things the MJDA could do for competitive dancers (although I'm quite sure that's because I enjoy competing :blush: )


It's also worth bearing in mind that (amazingly) not *all* dancers have access to this forum. There are some poor unenlightened fools out there who don't have internet access (or do and don't use it, though clearly they are just weird).Good point :waycool:


Obviously I have very little competition experience, and no experience of any other danceform competition at ALL...but...don't people who do fairly regularly come on here and saying things along the lines of 'I would hate to see MJ competition going in the same direction as ballroom'?...and...isn't the idea of introducing more classes, and league tables rather doing that? :confused:You are quite right, Emma. Lots of dancers feel that way. I think that bringing more definitions and rules into MJ would probably lead in the direction ballroom has gone in - and I think the result could be some kind of split in the dance. But it can't be denied that some MJ dancers take their dancing (and competing) seriously, and train for it as they would for another kind of dancing or competitive sport and whereas, historically, I believe MJ has lost a lot of 'serious' or 'advanced' dancers (call them what you will) to other forms of dancing, I think now many of these dancers want to stay within MJ and are looking for MJ to accommodate them. Historically, it seems to me that MJ hasn't been about that sort of dancing (recently we've touched in discussion on what is the 'spirit of ceroc'), but that doesn't mean it can't evolve in that way. I'm not sure it would necessarily be a good thing - I'm just musing aloud (again).

Apologies for my rambling....

[Divissima]

I might also add that I've met lots of dancers who used to do ballroom who moved to MJ precisely because they didn't like the rigid rules of ballroom.

P.S. Rob - I feel like I've made a mess of your original thread. Sorry :blush:
Should we request for it to be split?

[Stuart M]

Obviously I have very little competition experience, and no experience of any other danceform competition at ALL...but...don't people who do fairly regularly come on here and saying things along the lines of 'I would hate to see MJ competition going in the same direction as ballroom'?...and...isn't the idea of introducing more classes, and league tables rather doing that? :confused:
As one of those folk Emma's talking about, I'd have given her rep for saying that but I'm not allowed to give her any at the moment. So I have to agree in a post. The more structured the competitions become, the more competition obsessives you end up with, and 50-odd is quite enough, thanks.

I always hate the way competitions skew general public opinion of partner dancing, because they become such a focus. Quite often when non-dancers ask me about it, one of the first questions they ask is something like "So you do it for competitions then?". "Erm, no, I do it to have fun: do you go to a gym in order to enter weightlifting tournaments?"

Anyway, broken record and all that. Oh, and Come Dancing did nothing to dispel the competition perception among the masses, did it?

:nice:

[Emma]

P.S. Rob - I feel like I've made a mess of your original thread. Sorry :blush:
Should we request for it to be split?Not sure there'd be much of it left if I split it..:)

As Franck and Sheena are both away at the moment, I'm the only one moderating right now: so please bear with me things don't get tidied up as quickly as usual (even *I* have to step away from the computer occasionally!!) :blush:


As one of those folk Emma's talking about, I'd have given her rep for saying thatAwww :hug:

[bigdjiver]

... IMHO giving someone negative rep for 'no content' is getting the rep system wrong. ... Off topic :mad:

[Gadget]

...the MJDA would actually approach competition organisers (for example) and try to achieve change. Of course, if comp organisers read the forum, they can read people's views and decide whether they think what is being suggested is a good thing and whether to make changes.
...so people who compete would discuss things, then come to an agreement and then approach a body, asking that things be changed. The promoter asks why, and the MJDA says "because we say so". hmmm...
If i were a promoter, I would rather be a part of that discussion, raise points from my side of things and see exactlywhy a request was being made. How would I do that then? the Forum perhaps?
So the only link in the chain missing is sugesting to the organisers to ask for (or read) any feedback here.


(... but at least giving dancers a voice - and maybe some power - with the organisers). So not really a political body as such, but an interest group to be consulted.
and the forumites are not and interested group? As the recent Mikey incendent demonstrates, this forum has tendrils weaving throught the whole MJ community - it has a voice. Many recent competitions and weekend events have been discussed here and changes have been made as a result of these discussions: How much more power with the organisers do you want?!

As to having it like a political party: (meeting and discussing/arguing in private then puting on a united front {ie lie}) all I can say is AAAAAAAAARG!!!! :what::what:
Discussion. Open discussion is the only way to settle disputes: you wonder why people disstrust politicians. It's because they discuss things that affect people behind closed doors. If there ever becomes such a thing in MJ, i want no part of it.

[Andy McGregor]

Off topic :mad:

Now I know who you are, why pick on me for going off topic? :angry: Everyone does it, that's how conversations go. The moderators are there to decide what is completely off-topic - and they do a great job :clap:

[Dreadful Scathe]

there is all manor of dance related information here

Yes...mostly rubbish though, unless it has a David B label at the top ;)



- there are numerous discussion topics about definitions; beginner, intermediate, advanced, modern jive... we still haven't come to a unified conclusion.

oops sorry....we have, we just forgot to inform you - heres the link ( http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/everything.html )



- you want a cool forum T-shirt? see Emma.

Literally ? Now i would buy that especially if it had colourful dancer pics on it :)



- you want a good egg? see <strike>Andy</strike>, <strike>Chris</strike>, <strike>Mikey</strike>, <strike>Smurf</strike>, erm... well, I'm sure there are some here :innocent:

My name isnt Smurf and I shouldnt be included in the same sentance as those reprobates :) Anyway, Chris doesnt come on anymore :)



Back on-topic, competitions are all about seeing who is best and seeing how you compare to everyone else; a level indicator for your dancing. Correct?


Only if you want it to be. "Best" is relative, and you are only comparing to "everyone else" who as actually at the competition. Its not true to say thats what comps "are all about" as everyone has a different reason for doing comps. Dancing at comps for me is more about forcing extroverted behaviour on myself as a sort of thrill thing and in the knowledge that its good for me :), i find writing on the forum brings out the same traits. I would dance much better if i went the extra yard in my dancing and lost all my inhibitions, but im not often like that informally and comps are much more stressful. My confidence, believe it or not, is not the greatest :). For partners that dont dance with me much, the pained looked I have sometimes is due my thoughts of "damn i buggered that up - aah she noticed - aah concentrate" which leads to me to get worse as I cant concentrate on dancing and still dance. I've been told that my perception isnt always the truth, but some of those at least, were people just being nice. :) See I have confidence issues. Maybe Im neurotic or something.

Ill start an Agony Smurf thread so you can all tell me your problems. Doctor Scathe is in :)



So you need to find a way to compare dancers and rate them against each other - if you want to judge the 'visual look' of the dance, then you have outside people watching. This is how every dance is judged. But MJ is not every dance. {IMHO} MJ is about the 'feel' of the dance; the connection with your partner; the emersion in the music. Can you rely on "outside" witnesses to see this? Will this be judged higher than flashy moves and 'crowd pleasers'?

David B did a nice post on this somewhere - about dancing for yourself, partner, crowd or judges - or possibly a mix of them all. Its a good enough idea to rate dancers but it can only ever be from the competition point of view. passports, scores for non-competing people, karate belts wouldnt work Keep it simple and score based on results in comps , everything else depends on too many variables. e.g. Gilbert from Edinburgh - great dancer, hates competitions. So with no comp results...we could only rate him on how good a dancer other people perceive him; he needs to be watched if its the crowds point of view or danced with if you want to "score" based on the followers point of view, but it would have to be just a few people who get to "score" every other dancer the same way if you want a comprehensive rating system (more than a few "raters" and its down to so many other variables, opinions etc.to make the results pointless), and as there are hundreds of beginners, people who stop going at some point etc...and just general movement in the MJ community, who would judge which dancers to rate and when to rate them and then organise going to rate them and when they themselves woud get rated..and...er...? Rate people who go to competitons and enter .....its the only sensible option > Big Points for winning things, small points for getting into semi-finals/finals and the big comps carry more weight ? s'easy :)

sheesh is that the time....

[Andy McGregor]

As to having it like a political party: (meeting and discussing/arguing in private then puting on a united front {ie lie}) all I can say is AAAAAAAAARG!!!! :what::what:
Discussion. Open discussion is the only way to settle disputes: you wonder why people disstrust politicians. It's because they discuss things that affect people behind closed doors. If there ever becomes such a thing in MJ, i want no part of it.

That is what democracy is all about. You debate and then you vote. Then you act on the wishes of the majority - if you don't agree with that you live in the wrong country. How do you suggest a country is run then Mr Gadget?

Of course, I refer generally to nationhood and specifically to the democracy we're proposing for dancers. The way Gadget is talking he seems to think the debate is everything - IMHO it's important, but at the end of the day it's what the majority want that's going to save the day :clap:

[Sparkles]

Does everyone really want such a distict split between competitors and non-competitors?
I agree that it seems some of the things in comps need to be sorted out, but surely you can just speak to the organisers and ask them - I'm sure if it's a reasonable request (like having a bit of a closer look at the music they play, which should be a simple matter to sort out) they'll do everything they can to help.
Also, have any of the competitors ever run a dancing competition? It's bl**dy hard work! I'm sure you all appreciate that and enjoy the comps, but it must be a bit disheartening for those running them that they put in all this work to make the comps good and enjoyable and then everyone just goes on the forum and moans about them...
Anyway, I'll back off now. I wasn't trying to be rude, I just think the organisers could do with a bit of slack and a bit of support here.

[Gary]

Back on-topic, competitions are all about seeing who is best and seeing how you compare to everyone else; a level indicator for your dancing. Correct?
Not for me. For me they're mostly about doing the best "performance" dancing I can. Other important drawcards are seeing what the groovy interstate/international dancers can do, and getting to dance with them, and often some great workshops. Towards the bottom of my list of priorities is finding out who an unavoidably flawed judging system says are "the best". Of course that's just me.


Although there is an element of "fun", this (rarely) has anything to do with the actual dancing or ability of the dancers - which is what the competition is judging.

Maybe I'm naive but I think that a dance couple having fun would have an edge in performance over another couple who aren't.

[Divissima]

I agree that it seems some of the things in comps need to be sorted out, but surely you can just speak to the organisers and ask them - I'm sure if it's a reasonable request (like having a bit of a closer look at the music they play, which should be a simple matter to sort out) they'll do everything they can to help.I don't disagree with you, Sparkles. I know that people have spoken to the organisers of some of the comps this year about changing things like music, or category rules. I've done this myself by email in the past and always found the organisers happy to hear feedback and a little constructive criticism.


Also, have any of the competitors ever run a dancing competition? It's bl**dy hard work! I'm sure you all appreciate that and enjoy the comps, but it must be a bit disheartening for those running them that they put in all this work to make the comps good and enjoyable and then everyone just goes on the forum and moans about them...My recollection from this year's comps (and in fact from previous years') is that people come on the Forum and give a lot of praise where it's due, as well as moaning about the things they didn't like so much. I think organisers appreciate suggestions on how to make improvements for competitors - I'm not just moaning :blush:

Anyway, I'll back off now. I wasn't trying to be rude, I just think the organisers could do with a bit of slack and a bit of support here.Not being rude at all :hug: but I think the organisers get both slack and support - as well as criticism - from the Forum.

[Divissima]

...so people who compete would discuss things, then come to an agreement and then approach a body, asking that things be changed. The promoter asks why, and the MJDA says "because we say so". hmmm...
If i were a promoter, I would rather be a part of that discussion, raise points from my side of things and see exactlywhy a request was being made. How would I do that then? the Forum perhaps?
So the only link in the chain missing is sugesting to the organisers to ask for (or read) any feedback here.Gadget, I think you have misunderstood my post. To save you having to go back and read it, here are the relevant bits:

MJDA would actually approach competition organisers (for example) and try to achieve change....As Andy suggested, if you can organise dancers together you maybe get a bit more clout....the aim would be to arrive at some kind of consensus about what dancers want to see happen, and then to work towards change with the organisers (ie without thinking you have all the answers, but at least giving dancers a voice - and maybe some power - with the organisers). So not really a political body as such, but an interest group to be consulted.I was suggesting that it would be a dialogue - I certainly wasn't suggesting the MJDA would rock up, slap a list of demands on the table and say 'do this immediately or our members boycott your comp'.

I agree with you that the members of the Forum are an interested group. I'm sure some of the comp organisers do read the threads about their comps - I guess I'm just thinking that the MJDA (who might have members who are not also Forum members) would be able to claim it spoke for its members (whereas, on the forum, we have lots of members each with their own views). But the weakness with the idea is, of course, the members would premably have to agree on something (which may be harder than it sounds :wink: :rolleyes: )


As to having it like a political party: (meeting and discussing/arguing in private then puting on a united front {ie lie}) all I can say is AAAAAAAAARG!!!! :what::what:
Discussion. Open discussion is the only way to settle disputes: you wonder why people disstrust politicians. It's because they discuss things that affect people behind closed doors. If there ever becomes such a thing in MJ, i want no part of it.Again, that's not what I said. I said it should be like an interest group - consulting, discussing, working with other bodies (not just competitions but also the teaching organisations) to develop changes.

[Gadget]

That is what democracy is all about. You debate and then you vote. Then you act on the wishes of the majority - if you don't agree with that you live in the wrong country... The way Gadget is talking he seems to think the debate is everything - IMHO it's important, but at the end of the day it's what the majority want that's going to save the day
All for the majority at the exclusion of the minority! What a battle slogan. :devil: The majority of people don't dance MJ - let's just disband the organisations and stop dancing. The majority of MJ dancers do not compete - so let's just stop competitions. The majority of competitors don't get placed - so let's just remove the judging and ranking so everyone is the same. The majority of competitors think that the completions are run well - so why form a group to criticise.
Let the majority speak!

I think you will find that it's actually the minority who take some decisive action that have the 'power'. It's only the minority who care enough to speak out that contribute to the debate. This is why the debate is important. Decisions are reached not by the majority, but by negotiation from all interested parties - with give and take from all sides. Everyone gets a voice, not just the majority.


Does everyone really want such a distinct split between competitors and non-competitors?
I agree: that's the way it seems this is heading. MJ splits into Competition MJ and Social MJ. There is already a small crack: People devoting lots of time and effort into practice with a specific partner: Workshops on how to perform for a competition: Judges judging a performance rather than a dance... ranking IMHO is another wedge to divide the dance into two.


For me they're mostly about doing the best "performance" dancing I can...
Who are you performing for? Why limit your "performance" to only competitions?
From what you said in the rest of your post, I would assume that you would prefer to go to weekenders than competitions: same level of dancers, same non-judging audience, same social scene... what's the difference except it's more relaxed, there is no pressure and no judging.

Maybe I'm naive but I think that a dance couple having fun would have an edge in performance over another couple who aren't.
But the reason they have the edge is because they are dancing better - perhaps not technically, but they will have a better 'connection'.


I guess I'm just thinking that the MJDA (who might have members who are not also Forum members) would be able to claim it spoke for its members (whereas, on the forum, we have lots of members each with their own views).
nope, still don't get it: The MJDA would act like a single individual approaching an organisation, but have more clout - yes? Where does this 'clout' come from? How will the organisation recognise the 'clout'? Why let a only one idea/solution be presented to the organisation when the discussion before it may have raised a better solution to the organisation, but was ignored because the majority did not consider it 'worthy'? Would it not be better to involve the organisation in the discussion used to draw that one idea/solution together, then it cuts out the end stage of presenting the idea and arguing it's merits - it's already been done.

Again, that's not what I said. no, it's what Andy said - I was more responding to him than you. Perhaps I should have quoted him before that passage; my apologies.

[Andy McGregor]

As someone who has organised a competition and written a judging method I think it's important to get people's views. I even got a lot of help from forumites on this subject last year (thanks guys :flower: ). However, each individuals view was just that, the view of one individual. If I'd listened to everyone I'd have been unable to make any progress because many people's opinions were opposites or incompatable to each other. So, Gadgets idea that an organiser can trawl through the Forum to find out how to improve his competition is basically flawed. For a start, there'd be many dance luvvies who would be saying 'fab, don't change a thing' - which, if it was listened to would lead to stagnation.

What I think Divissisma is suggesting is that dance competitors speak to organisers with one voice. Once the organiser knows that an individual is speaking for 50 or 100 or so regular competitors they'd take notice. And I really don't think they'd be worried about a boycott, they'd see it as an opportunity to attract the top competitors to their event.

As usual this is a carrot and stick situation. And we're all so nice, I think we would be much more likely to show the carrot than use the stick.

[Andy McGregor]

All for the majority at the exclusion of the minority!

Gadget really is having a problem understanding democracy :confused:

And, even in a democracy the minority exist and they are catered for - however, they do not say how the country is run. That's life, at least in the free world.


I agree: that's the way it seems this is heading. MJ splits into Competition MJ and Social MJ. There is already a small crack: People devoting lots of time and effort into practice with a specific partner: Workshops on how to perform for a competition: Judges judging a performance rather than a dance... ranking IMHO is another wedge to divide the dance into two.

So, here we go again :yawn: This is arguing from the particular to the general. The particular thing we're talking about it competitors getting together to debate and agree who competitions could be improved. It's only about competitors and competitions. There is no suggestion that competitors should influence "Social MJ". In fact, there'd be no reason why a non-competitive dancer would need to know about competitions, competitors, organisers, etc: it is irrelevant to them. So why would they, like Gadget seems to be doing, object to competitors getting together with the objective of improving competitions?

Also, Gadget doesn't seem to like the idea of ranking. Here's a positive benefit I've just thought of; consider this definition of 'intermediate'

Any dancer outside the top 100 in the national ranking table.

Be difficult to argue with that one :waycool:

[Gadget]

Gadget really is having a problem understanding democracy.

And, even in a democracy the minority exist and they are catered for - however, they do not say how the country is run. That's life, at least in the free world.
I wasn't discussing how the country is run {that's a whole different ball game/thread} - I was discussing how the perfect political democracy could be applied in relation to competition dancing; the whole political model proposed breeds distrust and discrimination. Two things I would like to see kept well away from MJ.


The particular thing we're talking about it competitors getting together to debate and agree who competitions could be improved.
Which is what we do here (on the forum) is it not?


There is no suggestion that competitors should influence "Social MJ". In fact, there'd be no reason why a non-competitive dancer would need to know about competitions, competitors, organisers, etc: it is irrelevant to them.
To say that competition dancing does not influence social dancing is asking to be shot down - there are so many ways they are intertwined.

Competitions are just now billed/promoted as social events with parties before/after and freestyle thought. They are promoted from the stage at regular class venues. Non-competitive dancers may want to enjoy all the social side, but not compete. Competitive dancers dance at the same venues, don't change partners, and influence the whole social scene: "Irrelevant" is a bit strong.


So why would they, like Gadget seems to be doing, object to competitors getting together with the objective of improving competitions?
I am not objecting to people getting together to discuss/improve competitions; it's an excellent idea: I just think that we have the perfect forum already set up for it and organisers currently have the facility to tap into and contribute to it. If they can't take the time to read/listen to feedback, then (as you rightly say) it will stagnate.

Isn't it up to the organisers to be pro-active about feedback rather than sitting and waiting for the competitors to take the first step in the dialogue?


Also, Gadget doesn't seem to like the idea of ranking. Here's a positive benefit I've just thought of; consider this definition of 'intermediate'

Any dancer outside the top 100 in the national ranking table.

Be difficult to argue with that one
Not at all: it is the one main benefit of having a ranking system. However my main argument against ranking is that it will be used to assess the quality of dancers (socially) - and this is seriously flawed.

[Sheepman]

David B did a nice post on this somewhere - about dancing for yourself, partner, crowd or judges - or possibly a mix of them all. . .

So with no comp results...we could only rate him on how good a dancer other people perceive him;The main rating that I am after, is that my partners want to dance with me. If I get enough enthusiasm and repeat requests in a night then that does it for me. OK it is fun to do competitions too, but a lot of that fun for me is in the practice, working with a partner to improve my dancing, which hopefully has a longer term effect than a few minutes under the judges scrutiny.

Is it inevitable that some sort of rating system comes along? I think it will lead to elitism, so I hope it can be avoided, OK we probably all have our own informal lists. My "top 10 dancers" list is something that changes every time I go out dancing, and I'm not planning to commit it to paper.

Competition organisers should be seeking feedback, I think taking account of views expressed here is perfectly sound, as I doubt that there is anywhere else that such a cross section of (mostly) informed views can be found. Have I ever bothered to express my views directly to an organiser? No. So I suppose that means either I don't feel strongly enough about things that I want changed, or that I don't think my lone view would have any impact on the organiser. This is where in principle something like an MJDA sounds good to me, but in practice, I could imagine it being too beaurocratic, and too difficult to achieve consensus.

This is probably all far too woolly, because I agree with arguments on both sides, but here's an idea bringing together various threads. At the BFG we will have lots of committed dancers, lots of regular competitors, and presumably lots of great dancers that have never competed. How about testing the "feel" of the dance. Each interested dancer could have say 10 cards with their name on it, so for 10 dances (preferably with strangers; though this is probably impossible for Trampy) you hand over your card, and that partner marks it based on one simple question "How did the dance feel?" before handing it to a score keeper. Ideally this should be a light hearted fun thing, no prizes, just kudos.

Part of me says this would be a fun thing to try, part says it should never happen . . .

Greg

[Andy McGregor]

Which is what we do here (on the forum) is it not?

Partly. But if someone shouts loud and long any observer might think that's the opinion of the majority - it might even reach the point in the debate where people who disagree keep quiet because they think they're the only one who holds a different or opposing opinion.

The only way to make a group decision is to debate something until everyone has come up with their argument and counter arguments - then, when everything that can be said has been said there needs to be a vote.

Otherwise people might get others to act on their opinion on the strength of their personality but actually be in the minority or even a lone voice.

I suggest we have a vote to see if we should be a democracy :wink:

[TheTramp]

preferably with strangers; though this is probably impossible for Trampy
There's lots of guys I don't know. Maybe I could do it as a follow?? :whistle:

Trampy

[under par]

I suggest we have a vote to see if we should be a democracy :wink:


I agree as long as I am allowed to abstain if I want to! :yeah: :angry:

[Simon r]

I agree: that's the way it seems this is heading. MJ splits into Competition MJ and Social MJ. There is already a small crack: People devoting lots of time and effort into practice with a specific partner: Workshops on how to perform for a competition: Judges judging a performance rather than a dance... ranking IMHO is another wedge to divide the dance into two.

Surely this is not dividing the dance in two but adding to the whole freestyle scene. Do others not watch and learn from these couples and the time that is spent inventing and adapting new moves then runs in to everyday freestyle. From here these moves are then taught by local teachers...
Try not to forget a lot of these people work hard together and are happy to share with others on the MJ scene..
I see no divide and feel there is good intergration at all the venues that i have been to

[Emma]

Is it inevitable that some sort of rating system comes along? I think it will lead to elitism, so I hope it can be avoided, OK we probably all have our own informal lists. My "top 10 dancers" list is something that changes every time I go out dancing, and I'm not planning to commit it to paper.:yeah: :clap:


This is probably all far too woolly, because I agree with arguments on both sides, but here's an idea bringing together various threads. At the BFG we will have lots of committed dancers, lots of regular competitors, and presumably lots of great dancers that have never competed. How about testing the "feel" of the dance. Each interested dancer could have say 10 cards with their name on it, so for 10 dances (preferably with strangers; though this is probably impossible for Trampy) you hand over your card, and that partner marks it based on one simple question "How did the dance feel?" before handing it to a score keeper. Ideally this should be a light hearted fun thing, no prizes, just kudos.

Part of me says this would be a fun thing to try, part says it should never happen . . .This reminds me of Chicklet's idea (on another thread which I will find and add a link to..er...later :wink: )

[bigdjiver]

http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2770&highlight=jack+jill

[Dreadful Scathe]

I agree: that's the way it seems this is heading. MJ splits into Competition MJ and Social MJ. There is already a small crack: People devoting lots of time and effort into practice with a specific partner: Workshops on how to perform for a competition: Judges judging a performance rather than a dance... ranking IMHO is another wedge to divide the dance into two.


the way this seems to be heading ? I don't see a simple forum conversation about competitions and rankings as the beginning of a split between "competition" and "social" modern jive. Have you been at the Vimto again ? :)
So someone introduces a ranking system and some people are on it, why should that have a negative effect on anything we have just now ? Workshops are there to serve the needs of the public that will never change, judges judge based on their own or the competitions criteria , no change there then.... and people practice the way they want to for whatever reason they think of. Surely this isnt rocket science*, if rankings turns out to be a bad idea it will simply fail - with a cry of "you bunch of rankers" no doubt! :)



* not a well known fact but rocket science isnt that difficult, its far more difficult to juggle eggs on a tightrope tied between 2 mountains 3000 feet up , for example.

[Daisy]

Surely this is not dividing the dance in two but adding to the whole freestyle scene. Do others not watch and learn from these couples and the time that is spent inventing and adapting new moves then runs in to everyday freestyle. From here these moves are then taught by local teachers...
Try not to forget a lot of these people work hard together and are happy to share with others on the MJ scene..
I see no divide and feel there is good intergration at all the venues that i have been to

:yeah: :clap:

__________________________________________________ _____________

My taste in life is simple......I only want the best! :flower:

[Emma]

Thanks Bigdjiver :flower:

the way this seems to be heading ? I don't see a simple forum conversation about competitions and rankings as the beginning of a split between "competition" and "social" modern jive.I agree...though I confess I don't feel at all easy about the introduction of a ranking system, I also don't see this so-called 'split'. There is a relatively small group of people who are very serious about competing. Does this mean they will no longer take part in the social dancing scene? I know I started a thread about people removing themselves from the rotation but as I have (repeatedly) stated I wasn't referring to people working for competition. Most people that I know who compete regularly still go to classes and happily dance with whoever asks them (even if we lowly types have to have a stiff gin before we ask them!!). Of course there's a minority who don't, but then arrogant people exist in all walks of society, and on all social scenes.

[Dreadful Scathe]

Thanks Bigdjiver :flower:
I agree...though I confess I don't feel at all easy about the introduction of a ranking system, I also don't see this so-called 'split'. There is a relatively small group of people who are very serious about competing. Does this mean they will no longer take part in the social dancing scene? I know I started a thread about people removing themselves from the rotation but as I have (repeatedly) stated I wasn't referring to people working for competition. Most people that I know who compete regularly still go to classes and happily dance with whoever asks them (even if we lowly types have to have a stiff gin before we ask them!!). Of course there's a minority who don't, but then arrogant people exist in all walks of society, and on all social scenes.
you should have used the word "hotshot" in there somewhere too - give the people who think you meant THEM something more substantial to complain about. :)

[Emma]

you should have used the word "hotshot" in there somewhere too - give the people who think you meant THEM something more substantial to complain about. :)Don't think it didn't cross my mind!! :rofl: