PDA

View Full Version : Measuring the difficulty of a dance



Brady
17th-October-2005, 06:07 PM
I understand that WCS is a difficult dance to learn, it seems that you're also saying that it's also incredibly difficult to teach any aspects of it. I wonder what the training and teaching qualifications are to be able to call yourself a WCS teacher? It certainly seems that the entry bar is raised quite high.

I don't know if I would term it as "difficult to teach", rather that there are more details that one must get across to people in a class than would normally be conveyed to get somebody dancing MJ. This is the same with any dance and just depends on the complexity of the dance. For example, there is a rating system for dances in terms of their difficulty level. Salsa is typically considered a 1 (lower the number, the easier) because it only has single and double rhythm footwork. Swing dances tend to start at a 2 (given they work off of the triple rhythm footwork) and progress up the scale depending on what footwork patterns are being introduced (i.e. delayed synchopated doubles, etc.). I would think that how difficult a dance is to teach can be related to the level of the dance.

There are a couple organizations in the US that I know of that do teacher qualifications that cover WCS. Most of these require numerous hours of attendance of workshops covering general dance techniques, etc. I think I posted a while back the requirements for the one I'm doing just now. Will grab the stuff and put on the details tomorrow.

Brady

Lindsay
17th-October-2005, 07:28 PM
I understand that WCS is a difficult dance to learn, it seems that you're also saying that it's also incredibly difficult to teach any aspects of it. I wonder what the training and teaching qualifications are to be able to call yourself a WCS teacher? It certainly seems that the entry bar is raised quite high.
Nope- there's no entry bar. Watch the progress of the class... what have people learned, and what do they say about your classes? You can train for years as a teacher but does that make you 'good'? If the class are enjoying it, the environment is safe, your material is fantastic, and you follow the basic principals of teaching (e.g. observation, correction, comprehension, entertainment, communication, delivery of information- visual, verbal, tactile, reinforcement, etc etc)... it'll be great! Many (most?) Lindy, Balboa, and WCS teachers in the UK have no formal qualifications, and most are brilliant. Reputation and feedback is vital. You'd really need to attend their class prior to making any judgement I would think.

Franck
17th-October-2005, 07:53 PM
Nope- there's no entry bar. Watch the progress of the class... what have people learned, and what do they say about your classes? You can train for years as a teacher but does that make you 'good'? If the class are enjoying it, the environment is safe, your material is fantastic, and you follow the basic principals of teaching (e.g. observation, correction, comprehension, entertainment, communication, delivery of information- visual, verbal, tactile, reinforcement, etc etc)... it'll be great! Many (most?) Lindy, Balboa, and WCS teachers in the UK have no formal qualifications, and most are brilliant. Reputation and feedback is vital. You'd really need to attend their class prior to making any judgement I would think.So presumably, a trained Ceroc teacher (such as Paul F for example), with years of teaching experience, keen interest and suitable dancing experience should have a marked advantage then!

Gadget
17th-October-2005, 10:39 PM
For example, there is a rating system for dances in terms of their difficulty level. Salsa is typically considered a 1 (lower the number, the easier) because it only has single and double rhythm footwork. Swing dances tend to start at a 2 (given they work off of the triple rhythm footwork) and progress up the scale depending on what footwork patterns are being introduced (i.e. delayed synchopated doubles, etc.). I would think that how difficult a dance is to teach can be related to the level of the dance.
So the more difficult the dance, the more footwork it has. So something that has no intrinsic footwork like MJ should be a, what, zero? :rolleyes: :D

Brady
17th-October-2005, 11:04 PM
So the more difficult the dance, the more footwork it has. So something that has no intrinsic footwork like MJ should be a, what, zero? :rolleyes: :D

Not exactly. The difficulty of the dance is not necessarily based on more footwork, but rather the complexity of the rhythm patterns used. For example, a double rhythm which is 2 weight changes done over 2 beats of music (that's two musical beats or in most cases one MJ count) is one of the rhythm patterns for salsa, a level 1 dance. A delayed synchopated double on the other hand still only has two weight changes, but the rhythm pattern is more complicated than just changing weight on the musical beats (this is a whole different course!). It's not necessarily about taking the most steps, as I've not heard of a dance that does more than a triple in a single beat of music.

I was afraid to ask about MJ while on my course as I was afraid I'd have to get up and show it, but if you care to do a demo video I'll take it along with me in January and ask the question! :what:

Brady

Tiggerbabe
17th-October-2005, 11:26 PM
I was afraid to ask about MJ while on my course as I was afraid I'd have to get up and show it
Afraid you couldn't do it - or afraid they might notice that you can? :whistle:

spindr
18th-October-2005, 12:07 AM
I've not heard of a dance that does more than a triple in a single beat of music
http://www.celticcafe.com/Dance/JamesDevine must be pretty close?
SpinDr.

Tiggerbabe
18th-October-2005, 12:11 AM
must be pretty close?

38 taps per second - Wow!

Gadget
18th-October-2005, 01:04 AM
The difficulty of the dance is not necessarily based on more footwork, but rather the complexity of the rhythm patterns used.
So what about modern dance where the rhythm pattern can be non-rhythmic or the rhythm can change with every pattern?

{I take it that by "Pattern" you are talking about dancing with your whole body rather than simply your feet? If so, how can you quantify rhythmic patterns that ebb and flow with the music as MJ does?}

Hasn't it all got closer ties with the music than simply the rhythm? You can perform Salsa steps to the Gorillaz, but is it Salsa?

David Bailey
18th-October-2005, 08:05 AM
Not exactly. The difficulty of the dance is not necessarily based on more footwork, but rather the complexity of the rhythm patterns used.
I have to say, I think that's a very weird and limited way of judging how difficult a dance is.

Argentine Tango is the most difficult dance I've tried, and the basic rhythm patterns (so far) are just walking.

Have you got a link for this ratings system? I'd like to see what the ratings are for different dances.

Brady
18th-October-2005, 09:25 AM
Afraid you couldn't do it - or afraid they might notice that you can? :whistle:

Don't think I need to answer this. :rolleyes:

After the comments I heard from Jordan about MJ, I didn't dare get up in front of Skippy's WCS crowd and show it.

David Franklin
18th-October-2005, 09:56 AM
Not exactly. The difficulty of the dance is not necessarily based on more footwork, but rather the complexity of the rhythm patterns used.

I have to say, I think that's a very weird and limited way of judging how difficult a dance is.
A scoring system Skippy Blair was involved in, that just so happens to put "basic" WCS above Salsa, although WCS "goes on up from there". I'm shocked, shocked I tell you... :devil:

Without wanting to rag on Skippy (I've taken a workshop from her and she was great - notwithstanding being in her 80's), she does have a habit of taking things that are a matter of opinion (such as how to evaluate difficulty) and writing them down as undisputable scientific fact. [Actually, from experience of 'guru' level experts in other fields, I suspect it's more her followers than Skippy herself].

There's also a somewhat unlovely belief amongst the WCS posters on rec.arts.dance to the effect of WCS dancers (possibly inc. Lindy) are the only people who actually dance lead and follow. Ballroom? It's all routines with no connection. Modern Jive? Yank and crank. It seems to extend to a belief that their WCS knowledge lets them take 3 cha-cha lessons and lecture about correct cha-cha technique as well. But then rec.arts.dance has gone to hell in a handbasket... :mad:

azande
18th-October-2005, 10:11 AM
Don't think I need to answer this.
C'mon Brady, don't put yourself down, a few revision classes with a couple of Taxi-Dancers should sort you out............... :what: :rofl:

David Bailey
18th-October-2005, 11:12 AM
A scoring system Skippy Blair was involved in, that just so happens to put "basic" WCS above Salsa, although WCS "goes on up from there". I'm shocked, shocked I tell you... :devil:
Well, I've got no problems with salsa and MJ being treated as simple dances compared to others. They are - if by "simple" you mean "relatively easy to get started with", at least.

As long as people don't equate "simple" with "bad", I've got no beef, mainly because I think "Simple" just means the dance gives you more rope to hang yourself with.


There's also a somewhat unlovely belief amongst the WCS posters on rec.arts.dance to the effect of WCS dancers (possibly inc. Lindy) are the only people who actually dance lead and follow.
:rofl: Well, it's hardly a major shock - all dance fans think their dance is the One True Dance.

However, I'd still like to see a link for this comparison between dances, because I'm interested in the system. Couldn't find anything online... :sad:

CJ
18th-October-2005, 11:28 AM
:rofl: Well, it's hardly a major shock - all dance fans think their dance is the One True Dance.


The one true dance is the horizontal tango.

Everything else is playing at it...:whistle:

ChrisA
18th-October-2005, 11:38 AM
There's also a somewhat unlovely belief amongst the WCS posters on rec.arts.dance to the effect of WCS dancers (possibly inc. Lindy) are the only people who actually dance lead and follow. ..... Modern Jive? Yank and crank.
To be fair, even an impartial observer would have to watch quite carefully at an average MJ club night to see much that would disabuse him or her of that impression.

TA Guy
18th-October-2005, 12:02 PM
As a famous football manager once said, "Everybody thinks they have the prettiest wife at home".

Brady
18th-October-2005, 12:41 PM
Without wanting to rag on Skippy (I've taken a workshop from her and she was great - notwithstanding being in her 80's), she does have a habit of taking things that are a matter of opinion (such as how to evaluate difficulty) and writing them down as undisputable scientific fact. [Actually, from experience of 'guru' level experts in other fields, I suspect it's more her followers than Skippy herself].

I'm not saying that Skippy's word is gospel, but I think you would agree that she is more experienced and knowledgable than probably anybody on this forum. I'm sure she didn't just wake up one day and decide on this system; it surely has some background thought put into it.


There's also a somewhat unlovely belief amongst the WCS posters on rec.arts.dance to the effect of WCS dancers (possibly inc. Lindy) are the only people who actually dance lead and follow. Ballroom? It's all routines with no connection. Modern Jive? Yank and crank. It seems to extend to a belief that their WCS knowledge lets them take 3 cha-cha lessons and lecture about correct cha-cha technique as well. But then rec.arts.dance has gone to hell in a handbasket... :mad:

I would disagree with this opinion. I have also done ballroom and there is certainly lead and follow in ballroom, although any many of the dances the connection with the partner is much different visually and physically than in WCS or lindy.


C'mon Brady, don't put yourself down, a few revision classes with a couple of Taxi-Dancers should sort you out...............

Will you be at the Edi. class on Thur? I'm thinking I might come across for a couple lessons if you'll be about!


However, I'd still like to see a link for this comparison between dances, because I'm interested in the system. Couldn't find anything online...

I don't know of anything about this online. I will get in touch with Skippy and get more firm details from her and post them shortly.

Brady

clevedonboy
18th-October-2005, 12:42 PM
As a famous football manager once said, "Everybody thinks they have the prettiest wife at home".
What are you doing with my wife? :)

CJ
18th-October-2005, 12:46 PM
What are you doing with my wife? :)


All those things that you dont!!:D

Brady
18th-October-2005, 12:50 PM
I wonder what the training and teaching qualifications are to be able to call yourself a WCS teacher?

Have dug out details of the program I'm doing just now. There is an initial preliminary exam, but most don't take that till after they've done at least one or more intensive training course. After passing this further study is required through additional intensive courses, home study, private tuition. When ready one can take the Registered exam. After passing the Registered exam you must submit a video of yourself teaching a class. If all goes well, you can become certified with this particular organisation. Currently there are over 1000 people certified through the program I'm doing. I'm not fully up to speed with the Ceroc teaching qualification, but presumably this is reasonably comparable?

Brady

David Bailey
18th-October-2005, 01:14 PM
I'm sure she didn't just wake up one day and decide on this system; it surely has some background thought put into it.
Let's hope so, but until I see something written down (and I've spent some time looking), I can't comment. There's nothing on her website (http://www.swingworld.com/), and I've scoured Google over lunch - still nada.

(I know a lot more about Skippy Blair now, but nothing more about comparison of dance difficulties :sad: )


I have also done ballroom and there is certainly lead and follow in ballroom,
Of course there is - any partner dance has lead-and-follow. I'm just printing out a 138-page (!) FAQ (!!) on lead-and-follow...

For me, the most intense connection I've so far encountered has been in Argentinian Tango, but that could be just because it's new to me. On this issue at least, I keep an open mind.

If I had to do a quick-and-nasty "difficulty" rating for the dances I've tried, I'd say, in increasing order, they are:
1. MJ
2. Salsa
3. Ballroom
4. Argentinian Tango

I'd be surprised if WCS were any harder than some ballroom dances, and amazed if it were harder than Argentinian Tango. But that's just an off-the-cuff personal opinion.


I'm not fully up to speed with the Ceroc teaching qualification, but presumably this is reasonably comparable?
That sounds pretty similar to the CTA stuff to me - possibly a bit harder than the CTA, but generally on the same lines I think.

ChrisA
18th-October-2005, 01:31 PM
I'd say, in increasing order, they are:
1. MJ
2. Salsa
3. Ballroom
4. Argentinian Tango

I'd be surprised if WCS were any harder than some ballroom dances, and amazed if it were harder than Argentinian Tango. But that's just an off-the-cuff personal opinion.

Ballroom (and Latin) is ten dances, not one, so you can't really make this comparison.

Is Argentine Tango ten times harder than Foxtrot? Clearly not, I'd contend.

As I've said elsewhere, I think the skill of those that are really good at all ten dances, is hugely underestimated.

David Bailey
18th-October-2005, 01:49 PM
Ballroom (and Latin) is ten dances, not one, so you can't really make this comparison.
I know, I said it was quick-and-dirty...

But those 10 Ballroom and Latin do share a lot in terms of teaching methods and rules, more so than the others I think.


Is Argentine Tango ten times harder than Foxtrot? Clearly not, I'd contend.
:confused: Where'd you get ten times from? I'd contend that (for me), it's the most difficult, but then that could be just me being dumb. I don't pretend to have a proper system or anything...


As I've said elsewhere, I think the skill of those that are really good at all ten dances, is hugely underestimated.
Sure - but that's not the issue. Every partner dance style has really good dancers, the discussion is "how to measure difficulty?".

For which I'm still awaiting an answer...

clevedonboy
18th-October-2005, 02:11 PM
All those things that you dont!!:D

not much then - never fancied playing Majong myself

El Salsero Gringo
18th-October-2005, 02:17 PM
To be fair, even an impartial observer would have to watch quite carefully at an average MJ club night to see much that would disabuse him or her of that impression.I've not been to many WCS club nights, or many Ballroom club nights - but for those that I have visited exactly the same could be said. As it could of many Salsa nights.

ChrisA
18th-October-2005, 02:17 PM
:confused: Where'd you get ten times from?

Only from the fact that ballroom/latin is ten dances.

It would be legitimate to compare Argentine Tango with Foxtrot, for instance, and ask which is more difficult (though I haven't done enough Tango to be able to answer that question, even subjectively), and then include them both in your easiest-to-hardest list.

But (even if you're referring only to the ballroom dances, and excluding the Latin ones), it seems hardly fair to rate "ballroom" as easier than tango, given that there are five of them to learn. Admittedly the things they have in common probably make it less than five times as bad as one but still...

If you don't exclude the latin dances, it's much harder still.

ChrisA
18th-October-2005, 02:25 PM
I've not been to many WCS club nights, or many Ballroom club nights - but for those that I have visited exactly the same could be said. As it could of many Salsa nights.
Where have you seen as much yanking and cranking at a WCS night as you'd get at a MJ night?

CJ
18th-October-2005, 02:27 PM
not much then - never fancied playing Majong myself

It's a GREAT game... yer missus loves it!!:D

David Bailey
18th-October-2005, 02:27 PM
Only from the fact that ballroom/latin is ten dances.

It would be legitimate to compare Argentine Tango with Foxtrot, for instance, and ask which is more difficult (though I haven't done enough Tango to be able to answer that question, even subjectively), and then include them both in your easiest-to-hardest list.
Oh, right, je comprends at last.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to say that learning all 10 dances is easier than learning Argentine Tango. I meant that each of those 10 is (to me) at about the same level, but Argentine Tango is harder than the average ballroom / latin dance - for example, it's harder than Rumba or Cha-cha.

Boy, this system stuff is harder than it looks, huh? :whistle:

El Salsero Gringo
18th-October-2005, 02:28 PM
Where have you seen as much yanking and cranking at a WCS night as you'd get at a MJ night?Much of the leading and following at Cat's classes is not in the world class category, I'm sure you'll admit, and much of the freestyle - mine included, obviously - looks distinctly unimpressive.


BTW, (more) on-topic, I dispute that a lack of complex footwork patterns makes a dance easier. It certainly makes it harder to look impressive.

David Franklin
18th-October-2005, 02:55 PM
If I had to do a quick-and-nasty "difficulty" rating for the dances I've tried, I'd say, in increasing order, they are:
1. MJ
2. Salsa
3. Ballroom
4. Argentinian Tango

I'd be surprised if WCS were any harder than some ballroom dances, and amazed if it were harder than Argentinian Tango. But that's just an off-the-cuff personal opinion.For what it's worth, I'd put WCS about equal to Salsa; I find it easier, but then it is closer to MJ than Salsa is. Salsa also has very different music and is considerably faster, both of which I find tricky.

I think there's also a distinction between difficulty of "getting through a track without major mishap", and difficulty of "making the dance look and/or feel really good". I'd argue the open, loosely connected dances are much more forgiving at a elementary level; as MJ beginners demonstrate, you can get through a track with only the vaguest idea of the beat, connection, etc. And with MJ you can't even be on the "wrong" foot! But when you want the dance to really work, you have to start getting all those things right, and it's probably harder to do so with an open connection and with no set footwork. The phrase "easy to learn, difficult to master" comes to mind.

David Franklin
18th-October-2005, 03:08 PM
I'm not saying that Skippy's word is gospel, but I think you would agree that she is more experienced and knowledgable than probably anybody on this forum.Sure. Coming from a science background, my objection is more about the presentation (as if the ideas had scientific rigour and precision, when they are largely subjective), rather than the actual content.

[e.g. It's not exactly a direct example, but I'm never going to be resigned to the "Center point of balance" - it's a horrible, horrible term that is guaranteed to confuse any physicist, and from previous discussions I've had, most layman dancers as well]

David Bailey
18th-October-2005, 03:15 PM
For what it's worth, I'd put WCS about equal to Salsa; I find it easier, but then it is closer to MJ than Salsa is. Salsa also has very different music and is considerably faster, both of which I find tricky.
It doesn't have to be - it's just this silly fad for very very fast music at the moment. But you can salsa quite nicely to a decent boogaloo track.


{ snip very good points }
But when you want the dance to really work, you have to start getting all those things right, and it's probably harder to do so with an open connection and with no set footwork. The phrase "easy to learn, difficult to master" comes to mind.
Yes - in that you have fewer tools to work with, you need to be good to get the best out of the tools you have. So I'm skeptical about any "difficulty" rating, but I'd still love to see how it's supposed to work.

ChrisA
18th-October-2005, 03:39 PM
Much of the leading and following at Cat's classes is not in the world class category, I'm sure you'll admit, and much of the freestyle - mine included, obviously - looks distinctly unimpressive.

Agreed. But we're beginners. I'd suggest that while we look distinctly unimpressive, as you say, I dont think we look as bad as beginner Cerocers do. Some of that is probably because we've at least done some dancing, so hopefully some of that initial gawkiness has gone, but my point was that you don't get the yanking and cranking in WCS - or at least you have to be pretty determined to do either, since it's so contrary to the way it's taught. I look at the beginners (including myself) in Cat's class, and think "aw bless, we're beginners", whereas I look at the beginners in a Ceroc class and the subsequent freestyle, and often wince at the stress in the joints.



BTW, (more) on-topic, I dispute that a lack of complex footwork patterns makes a dance easier.

.... :yeah:

Strongly agree.



It certainly makes it harder to look impressive.
Absolutely. To make MJ look impressive, you have to be able to invent your own footwork, and execute it, without compromising the lead/follow aspects, and without the concentration showing on your face. :what:

Now that is hard.

azande
18th-October-2005, 03:43 PM
Will you be at the Edi. class on Thur? I'm thinking I might come across for a couple lessons if you'll be about!
Probably, I'm not sure who is taxiing this week but if you really need me to, I'll introduce you to them, but please, don't ask me to hold your hand, you are a grown up now. :what:

Jive Brummie
18th-October-2005, 06:07 PM
One thing that seems to run true through this thread is that people often do other dance forms to self-improve...something I've always admired...so Brady and Lindsey, when you get time can you come east side to give us a few lessons...ta

WCS done well looks fantastic and to those who try and don't necessarily always succeed, surely you have to admire their determination to experiment and give it a bash:worthy:

JB x x

*pretty pointless post in the midst of all this but just wanted to get it off my chest....well done to all those who can see outside the box:flower: *

Lory
18th-October-2005, 06:27 PM
Argentine Tango is the most difficult dance I've tried,
:yeah: :yeah: :yeah:

For me, its NOT the walking bit i'm finding hard, it's the 'letting go', 'waiting' to be lead and being completely 'passive' that I'm finding nearly impossible! :sick:

I get so frustrated with myself sometimes I could scream :devil::tears: but equally, when I occasionally get it right:waycool: its soooooooooooo rewarding! :clap: :clap: :clap:

bigdjiver
18th-October-2005, 09:47 PM
...[e.g. It's not exactly a direct example, but I'm never going to be resigned to the "Center point of balance" - it's a horrible, horrible term that is guaranteed to confuse any physicist, and from previous discussions I've had, most layman dancers as well]OT: I remember being confronted by a loo door covered with inscriptions, and in the middle of them all seeing a little dot with a downward pointing arrow entitled "centre of grafitti".

Brady
19th-October-2005, 12:55 PM
[QUOTE=Jive Brummie]One thing that seems to run true through this thread is that people often do other dance forms to self-improve...something I've always admired...so Brady and Lindsey, when you get time can you come east side to give us a few lessons...ta

WCS done well looks fantastic and to those who try and don't necessarily always succeed, surely you have to admire their determination to experiment and give it a bash:worthy:
QUOTE]

Would love to come up and do some WCS up your direction. I know that there are several there who have done WCS previously, so would be great to get them going again and get other interested people started. And even give those unsure of WCS a chance to try it out. Will keep you posted if/when we can make this happen.

Would agree on your second point as well. I admire everybody who is willing to try new dances whether WCS or whatever. It is hard for an experienced dancer to again be a beginner. Plus with WCS it will take more than 1 night to get to grips and feel comfortable with it. For a lead, having to think about footwork and what move is coming next is not an easy task when they start, but once the feet are trained and naturally do their thing, then it becomes much easier and a lot more enjoyable.

Brady

Lindsay
19th-October-2005, 01:06 PM
One thing that seems to run true through this thread is that people often do other dance forms to self-improve...something I've always admired...so Brady and Lindsey, when you get time can you come east side to give us a few lessons...ta

:hug:
Speak to Heather.. it's in the pipeline.

Re Salsa/WCS debate - having done both, WCS, imho, is without doubt more complex....

David Bailey
19th-October-2005, 01:33 PM
Re Salsa/WCS debate - having done both, WCS, imho, is without doubt more complex....
Well, fair enough. You may well be right - and as I said, as long as you don't equate "more complex" with "better", I've no problem with that.

But (and, grrr), WHY? What's the system? How can you judge? I genuinely want to know. Does it all just boil down to personal preference or what?

I'm beginning to think this is like the "how many dancers are there in the UK" question, my curiosity will again go unfulfilled because no-one can really give me an answer :tears:

Is it just me who's interested in different dances and comparing them? Based on anecdotal evidence, most other (non-MJ-focussed) dancers seem to treat other partner dances with either contempt or indifference...

Franck
19th-October-2005, 01:38 PM
WCS done well looks fantastic and to those who try and don't necessarily always succeed, surely you have to admire their determination to experiment and give it a bash:worthy: I admire everybody who is willing to try new dances whether WCS or whatever. It is hard for an experienced dancer to again be a beginner. Yeah, I would definitely agree with you on that, I wish more MJ / Ceroc teachers would experiment beyond their comfort zone and own style and join other classes, did more workshops with a variety of teachers and dances.
I personally wish I had more time to dedicate to my own developments, not easy when dancing so often already, which is why the big week-end with inspiring teachers have made such a difference to me.

Tessalicious
19th-October-2005, 03:56 PM
Well, fair enough. You may well be right - and as I said, as long as you don't equate "more complex" with "better", I've no problem with that.

But (and, grrr), WHY? What's the system? How can you judge? I genuinely want to know. Does it all just boil down to personal preference or what?

I'm beginning to think this is like the "how many dancers are there in the UK" question, my curiosity will again go unfulfilled because no-one can really give me an answer :tears:

Is it just me who's interested in different dances and comparing them? Based on anecdotal evidence, most other (non-MJ-focussed) dancers seem to treat other partner dances with either contempt or indifference...It depends why you want to know.

If knowing that one dance is inherently and objectively harder than another is your only criterion for wanting to learn one over the other (which I find very unlikely), then you can only really take the word of dance professionals who are well versed in every style.

If your concern is that you want to learn a dance but not if it is too hard/easy for you, then the best way to gauge this is probably exactly what you've just been doing - ask around, of dancers of a similar standard or progressive ability who have tried different dances, and see what opinions come from those who are closest to you in their style and ability.

After all, every dance, and every dancer, is different. Some who have grown up with R'n'B/hiphop music feel WCS or brake-dancing in their bones, so all they have to do is learn the detail, but put them in a salsa class and they'd be lost. Similarly many salsa dancers would be ok picking up the ballroom latin dances, but not the true ballroom dances, because the floor-progression and elegance might be completely alien to them. And believe it or not, there are even really good dancers who find MJ really hard for various reasons, at least to start with - for example, ballet prodigies who have never had to follow or improvise in their lives, or even club dancers who can't stop wiggling!

Ergo - the only person that can really tell you how hard a dance is is yourself.:nice:

CJ
19th-October-2005, 04:08 PM
Ergo - the only person that can really tell you how hard a dance is is yourself.:nice:

Well, Tess...

when we danced, I hope you didn't find it too hard.:whistle:

David Bailey
19th-October-2005, 04:12 PM
It depends why you want to know.
Well, originally, I wanted to know because I was informed by Brady that there is a Proper System to measure dance difficulty, and I was curious as to what this system was.

I certainly wouldn't choose to learn a dance based on how difficult I thought it was; I want to know what this Magic System is. (And yes, OK, I'm expecting I'll be slagging it off as well, so that'd be fun).


If knowing that one dance is inherently and objectively harder than another is your only criterion for wanting to learn one over the other (which I find very unlikely), then you can only really take the word of dance professionals who are well versed in every style.
Well, yeah, that's exactly what I was trying to do with the Skippysystem, if I can ever find out anything about it...


Ergo - the only person that can really tell you how hard a dance is is yourself.:nice:
Ah, but apparently not - hence my interest...

Trish
19th-October-2005, 04:36 PM
After all, every dance, and every dancer, is different. Some who have grown up with R'n'B/hiphop music feel WCS or brake-dancing in their bones, so all they have to do is learn the detail, but put them in a salsa class and they'd be lost. Similarly many salsa dancers would be ok picking up the ballroom latin dances, but not the true ballroom dances, because the floor-progression and elegance might be completely alien to them. And believe it or not, there are even really good dancers who find MJ really hard for various reasons, at least to start with - for example, ballet prodigies who have never had to follow or improvise in their lives, or even club dancers who can't stop wiggling!

Ergo - the only person that can really tell you how hard a dance is is yourself.:nice:

:yeah: That's exactly what I wanted to say - have some rep. My cousin for example is an exellent dancer with her own dance school, she teaches all the b/l dances, ballet, tap, modern, salsa... I was mucking about at my sister's wedding trying to teach her MJ and she found it really difficult - mainly because she hadn't got any set footwork, and either wanted to go into salsa or ballroom jive. It also depends as you say on what music/style you like.

Me for example - One of these days I'll hopefully try to learn Salsa and Lindy - I like the music and the little tasters I've done (personally I found Salsa easier than Lindy). I love blues and am looking forward to trying ballroom for the first time properly in a few weeks, but as far as the taster sessions I've had in it, WCS leaves me cold and I can't see what the fuss is about (I've not tried enough to say if it's easy or hard just for me it's uninspiring to learn - I'd be happy for someone to try to inspire me given the chance, but can't guarantee anything). Each to their own though!

David Bailey
20th-October-2005, 08:38 AM
WCS leaves me cold and I can't see what the fuss is about
:eek: How dare you say such a thing?

Don't you know this is the Second Coming of Dance, the next Big Thing, and the Best Thing Since Sliced Bread all rolled into one?

:whistle:

tiger
21st-October-2005, 08:22 PM
A fabulous reply,Tessa...(post 44).

David Bailey
22nd-October-2005, 03:13 PM
OK, seeing as it looks like I'm not going to get an answer on this Skippy Blair SuperSystem stuff (impatient, moi?), I'll knock up my own comparison-based system for criticism.

I'm about as far from a guru as it's possible to get, but at least I've done a few different dances, and don't have any particular hobby-horse to ride or agenda to promote.

OK, so the David Dance Difficulty (DDD :) ) system is as follows - here's my list of things that make a dance difficult to learn:

Footwork
Styles / moves
Leading and following techniques
Music

If all of the above are complex or unfamiliar, you get a dance that is difficult to learn.

So, revising my list, I'd say the difficulty levels of the dances I've tried are (on a scale of 1-10, 1 being easy, 10 being very difficult):


MJ: 1 (nothing complex at all)
Salsa: 3 (some footwork, unfamiliar rhythms)
WCS: 3? (Based on comments above, I don't know myself)
Cha-cha-cha and Rumba: 4 (more footwork, more style)
Waltz: 5 (footwork, style, plus the beat is unfamiliar)
Argentinian Tango: 8 (everything is complex and then some)


Note: The difficulty of a dance has little or no relationship to how "good" that dance is, or how "good" dancers in relevant disciplines actually are. Good dancers are where you find them, to paraphrase Robocop.

Anyone else want to comment?

Tessalicious
22nd-October-2005, 03:32 PM
Anyone else want to comment?:confused: If Argentine Tango only gets an 8, what on earth merits a 10?

Also, I'm guessing those are from the leader's point of view - IMHO many would be different for a follower, so here's my version:


MJ: 1 (nothing complex at all)
Cha-cha-cha: 3 (more footwork, more style)
Salsa: 4 (some footwork, unusual body movements)
Waltz: 4 (footwork, plus the beat is unfamiliar)
Rumba: 5 (style and sensuality, control at slow speeds)
Foxtrot and Quickstep: 6 (unpredictable footwork patterns)
WCS: 8 (at least, if attempting to do it properly - as for foxtrot plus the flexi-feet aspect and faster, without the body contact to keep control)
Argentinian Tango: 10 (everything is complex and then some)

MartinHarper
22nd-October-2005, 03:56 PM
delayed synchopated doubles

Nobody else has asked, so I assume they all know, but what does this mean? Are we talking about a "stomp-off", or a ball-change?

David Bailey
22nd-October-2005, 08:05 PM
:confused: If Argentine Tango only gets an 8, what on earth merits a 10?
I'm sure (well, relatively sure) that there are more difficult dances out there - and I like to leave a bit of wiggle-room.

Maybe it's the superb teaching I'm receiving, maybe it's a dance I'm attuned to, or maybe I'm just deluding myself, but Argentinian Tango isn't quite as hard for me as I thought it'd be. I actually found myself almost-dancing last Thursday, even with an iffy ankle... :eek:

Gadget
24th-October-2005, 09:02 PM
Hmmmm.... difficulty in exactly what then? Learning to dance, becoming proficient at the dance, becoming good, mastering it...?

Brady
24th-October-2005, 10:43 PM
Nobody else has asked, so I assume they all know, but what does this mean? Are we talking about a "stomp-off", or a ball-change?

Pretty close! I'm not quite sure what you're terming a 'stomp-off'. A 'ball-change' (a term taken from tap I believe) is normally just a delayed double and not synchopated. But, to get the delayed synchopated double, simply move the 'step, step' of the 'ball-change' to the '&a' and hold on beat 2 and there you have it! :clap:

David Bailey
24th-October-2005, 11:39 PM
Hmmmm.... difficulty in exactly what then? Learning to dance, becoming proficient at the dance, becoming good, mastering it...?
I assumed it was "difficulty in learning the dance" - at least that's what I'm using in the DDD thing, but that's clearly useless because I just made it up.

Other levels might require different criteria - for example, one could make a case that MJ is very hard to master because it provides so few tools beyond the basics, but that's another discussion.

Brady, any reply back on how this Skippy Blair system works? I've been patient, honest...

Anna
28th-October-2005, 04:27 AM
So, revising my list, I'd say the difficulty levels of the dances I've tried are (on a scale of 1-10, 1 being easy, 10 being very difficult):


MJ: 1 (nothing complex at all)
Salsa: 3 (some footwork, unfamiliar rhythms)
WCS: 3? (Based on comments above, I don't know myself)
Cha-cha-cha and Rumba: 4 (more footwork, more style)
Waltz: 5 (footwork, style, plus the beat is unfamiliar)
Argentinian Tango: 8 (everything is complex and then some)


Note: The difficulty of a dance has little or no relationship to how "good" that dance is, or how "good" dancers in relevant disciplines actually are. Good dancers are where you find them, to paraphrase Robocop.

Anyone else want to comment?


hmmm..

MJ: 1

Salsa: 3

WCS: 3

Ballroom: 3

Latin Ballroom: 3

Argentine Tango: 8

Brazilian Street Samba: 10!!!!!!!

DavidB
28th-October-2005, 08:19 AM
Here is an alternative way of looking at it. Suppose you wanted to get really good - how easy is it to find people with the ability to teach you?

By this definition:

Ballroom & Latin 1
Argentine Tango 1
WCS 1 (in the USA)
Salsa 2
MJ 10

Once you get to a certain level in MJ, you are on your own. You have to learn from your own mistakes, and not from years of knowledge of other people's mistakes.

However, based on how quickly you can get to this level, I would rate the dances as:
Ballroom & Latin 10
Argentine Tango 9
WCS 9
Salsa 4
MJ 2

David Bailey
28th-October-2005, 08:28 AM
how easy is it to find people with the ability to teach you?
...
Ballroom & Latin 1
Argentine Tango 1
WCS 1 (in the USA)
Salsa 2
MJ 10
I think you're being way too generous in your estimation of how easy it is to find Salsa God Teachers, I'd put salsa at 7 or 8 on that scale at least, and I might even say it's more difficult than MJ after a certain point. Angels, pins, heads of...


Once you get to a certain level in MJ, you are on your own. You have to learn from your own mistakes, and not from years of knowledge of other people's mistakes.
I'd totally agree with this, and I think most superb MJ dancers got that way through learning other dance techniques and importing them into MJ.


However, based on how quickly you can get to this level, I would rate the dances as:
Ballroom & Latin 10
Argentine Tango 9
WCS 9
Salsa 4
MJ 2
Interesting - you'd rate Ballroom and Latin as more difficult than AT? Is that because AT is still more of a "street dance", with less of these rule things?



Brazilian Street Samba: 10!!!!!!!
OK, I'll bite - what makes that so difficult?

David Franklin
28th-October-2005, 08:33 AM
Suppose you wanted to get really good - how easy is it to find people with the ability to teach you?

By this definition:

Ballroom & Latin 1
Argentine Tango 1
WCS 1 (in the USA)
Salsa 2
MJ 10

Once you get to a certain level in MJ, you are on your own. You have to learn from your own mistakes, and not from years of knowledge of other people's mistakes.

However, based on how quickly you can get to this level, I would rate the dances as:
Ballroom & Latin 10
Argentine Tango 9
WCS 9
Salsa 4
MJ 2And, "obviously" (i.e. I'm pulling this out of CJ's tattoo), the total difficulty of a dance is
difficulty of learning x length of time you need to spend learning.According to this metric, in ascending order of total difficulty, we have:
Salsa 8
WCS 9
Argentine Tango 9
Ballroom & Latin 10
MJ 20 - the winner, and by a big margin!

Now there's a result I think we can all agree on! :clap:

DavidB
28th-October-2005, 11:43 AM
Interesting - you'd rate Ballroom and Latin as more difficult than AT? Is that because AT is still more of a "street dance", with less of these rule things?It has nothing to do with rules, or prescribed technique, or anything like that. It is just based on the amount there is to learn.
I would say that Argentine Tango is harder than Ballroom Tango, just as I would say that WCS is harder than Ballroom Jive. When you have people who specialise in just one dance, then they can push the level higher. But you don't just learn Ballroom Tango - you learn all 5 ballroom dances.

David Bailey
28th-October-2005, 11:53 AM
It has nothing to do with rules, or prescribed technique, or anything like that. It is just based on the amount there is to learn.
I would say that Argentine Tango is harder than Ballroom Tango, just as I would say that WCS is harder than Ballroom Jive. When you have people who specialise in just one dance, then they can push the level higher. But you don't just learn Ballroom Tango - you learn all 5 ballroom dances.
Oh yes, I keep forgetting. :blush:

Another dumb question - why is that? Why not learn one dance at a time? Is it because they all share so much commonality?

It seems strange, when you think about it (a bit) - I mean, you don't learn all the Romance languages at once even though they share a lot, you learn one, then hopefully it's easier to learn the others.

Or is it simply because of commercial considerations, in that everyone will hopefully find one dance they like out of the 5?

Or is it because that's the way the competitions are structured, and the curriculum is competition-oriented rather than social-oriented?

alex
28th-October-2005, 12:03 PM
Or is it because that's the way the competitions are structured, and the curriculum is competition-oriented rather than social-oriented?
you really are the most competition-obsessed person on this forum. way more than any of the competitors

David Bailey
28th-October-2005, 12:09 PM
you really are the most competition-obsessed person on this forum. way more than any of the competitors
Well, yes, it's true. :blush:

But in this case I was trying to think of any potential reasons for the "learn all five" structure and convention in ballroom / Latin dancing, it wasn't a competition-bash, I was genuinely curious. It may be a dumb question, but then I'm often dumb.

Have you got any suggestions on this? Or is your input limited to (admittedly justified) David-knocking?

DavidB
28th-October-2005, 12:16 PM
Another dumb question - why is that? Why not learn one dance at a time? Is it because they all share so much commonality? Most people tend to learn 3 ballroom dances (waltz, foxtrot and quickstep) and 3 latin dances (rumba, cha-cha and jive) at the start. When you go to a ballroom night, these probably account for 90% of the music, so you can dance almost all of the time. If you just learnt Waltz, then you could only dance to 15% of the music.

There is also a psychological effect that some people get put off by the idea of being good at one thing, but being an absolute beginner at something very similar.


It seems strange, when you think about it (a bit) - I mean, you don't learn all the Romance languages at once even though they share a lot, you learn one, then hopefully it's easier to learn the others.But when you go to Italy you don't speak for 3 minutes in Italian, then switch to French for 3 minutes, then to Spanish, and then to Portugese before going back to Italian. You speak Italian.

Whereas in Singapore where they speak a mixture of English, Hokkien and Malay, you learn little bits of each.

mooncalf
28th-October-2005, 12:27 PM
But when you go to Italy you don't speak for 3 minutes in Italian, then switch to French for 3 minutes, then to Spanish, and then to Portugese before going back to Italian. You speak Italian.


What about Switzerland?

alex
28th-October-2005, 12:36 PM
Have you got any suggestions on this?in answer to the original question?

from a personal point of view, if i can do a dance id rate it as easy. if i can't do it, id rate it as hard.

considering the potential in each dance, they are all 10

considering how far people have got to fulfilling that potential, then MJ is maybe 4/10, salsa a bit higher, and ballroom, WCS and AT are all about 8/10

with the availability of teachers to show anything more than basics, then MJ is 3/10, WCS 4/10, AT is 6/10 and ballroom is 9/10 (availability is a combination of the number, location, knowledge, teaching ability and communication skills of teachers.)

alex
ps the ballroom & latin curriculum is about medal tests, not competitions.

DavidB
28th-October-2005, 12:37 PM
What about Switzerland?You ski

mooncalf
28th-October-2005, 12:50 PM
You ski

Actually I've got a bad knee - so I spend my time listening to check out girls go through their repertoire of languages trying to find one I understand and failing.

spindr
28th-October-2005, 01:14 PM
Well, if we're taking alternate approaches, just use the BPM of the music.
Faster == harder, as you have less time :)

So the difficulty goes:
Waltz
Argentine Tango
WCS
Modern Jive
Salsa
Lindy
Balboa

----------

Or say that it's harder to dance on your own than with a partner -- you have no one to hide behind.

Or say that it's harder to dance with a partner -- you have lead and follow.

Or maybe, it's harder to do both?

In that case:
Salsa and Lindy are more difficult than WCS, AT and MJ.

----------

Anyway, I reckon ballet / contemporary has to be the most difficult :)

SpinDr
P.S.
Have you seen the new orange ad' with the couple dancing round the house -- absolutely phenomenal -- even with the benefit of TV editting.

David Bailey
28th-October-2005, 02:28 PM
Most people tend to learn 3 ballroom dances (waltz, foxtrot and quickstep) and 3 latin dances (rumba, cha-cha and jive) at the start. When you go to a ballroom night, these probably account for 90% of the music, so you can dance almost all of the time. If you just learnt Waltz, then you could only dance to 15% of the music.
Yes, I've just lunched with someone who knows Lots About This, and this has now been explained to me. She also said that Viennese Waltz is a damned silly dance, which I think we can all agree on... :whistle:

And I've had (in great detail) the "Ballroom / Latin" split explained to me. I'm not sure I completely agree, I still think Jive and most Latin dances are uneasy bedfellows, but certainly there are enough technical similarities in terms of hold, non-progression etc. to justify it.


But when you go to Italy you don't speak for 3 minutes in Italian, then switch to French for 3 minutes, then to Spanish, and then to Portugese before going back to Italian. You speak Italian.
Yes - I didn't realise that both the social scene and the medal structure were organised around a multiple-dance structure. So that makes sense.

On the other hand, one could argue that this grouping is somewhat artificial and occasionally arbitrary - and you don't really get a chance to focus on the the dances you really like. For example, you can't really go to classes to just learn to Waltz, you'd generally need to get private lessons if you wanted this.

On the third hand, I could argue anything, so I'll shut up about it.


in answer to the original question?
Actually, no - in answer to "Why are they grouped that way?" - but I think I now understand it.


ps the ballroom & latin curriculum is about medal tests, not competitions.
Yes, I was being clearly evil in lumping medals, exams and competitions in the same group, they obviously have no relationship to each other.

Whitebeard
28th-October-2005, 02:50 PM
Most people tend to learn 3 ballroom dances (waltz, foxtrot and quickstep) and 3 latin dances (rumba, cha-cha and jive) at the start. ........
Interesting that it's changed and broadened somewhat from when I was doing a little ballroom dancing.

Then it was just waltz, foxtrot and quickstep; with, very optionally, a latin flavour provided by the tango. And, of course, the music played at social dances reflected these components.

alex
28th-October-2005, 02:57 PM
Yes, I was being clearly evil in lumping medals, exams and competitions in the same group, they obviously have no relationship to each other.glad you agree

Mr Cool
1st-November-2005, 07:59 PM
I would say it is much more difficult to dance with style to slow music than fast.
Slow smooth swing dancing is so much more difficult than the fast version.
I would rate AT as the most difficult to dance well.
Smooth lindy hop which i prefer to call smooth swing i would rate next.
Rumba would be my next choice a wonderful dance
WCS which is music based and not move monster based would be next.
The waltz and fox trot would be fifth done well there a dream to watch
MJ is an easy way for people to start dancing quickly however to dance it well is not easy its strength is its adaptability done well it rates higher than sixth.

Salsa im sorry guys and gals but for me this dance is a mess, badly taught boring music and designed for move monsters.
99% of people ignore the music they just wiggle ther butts out of tune.
I have yet to see it performed well. :waycool: :waycool: :waycool: :waycool:

David Bailey
1st-November-2005, 10:00 PM
I would rate AT as the most difficult to dance well.
I dunno - surely all of them are equally difficult to dance well?

But that's not really the question, this thread started up more about what this fabled system of dance difficulty comparison was. Why yes, I am single-minded, why do you ask?


Salsa im sorry guys and gals but for me this dance is a mess,
Whoo, them's fightin' words where I come from...


badly taught
Well, yes, mostly :blush:


boring music
Again some truth here :blush: :blush:


and designed for move monsters.
I don't agree - hell, I doubt if there are more than a couple of dozen common moves, from what I can tell most teachers make sequences up from a few basic concepts. I know I do...


99% of people ignore the music they just wiggle ther butts out of tune.
Yeah, but you could say that about most any dance really, at least in salsa they're wiggling something.


I have yet to see it performed well. :waycool: :waycool: :waycool: :waycool:
I've seen it performed much better than any MJ routine I've seen, does that count? :whistle:

Anna
2nd-November-2005, 08:13 AM
...I have yet to see it performed well. :waycool: :waycool: :waycool: :waycool:

Come to NZ and we'll show you how it's done :waycool:

Mr Cool
2nd-November-2005, 09:01 PM
[
QUOTE=DavidJames]I dunno - surely all of them are equally difficult to dance well?

I agree 100% even the simplest move in any dance done well is a joy to see and can be so difficult to perform well





Whoo, them's fightin' words where I come from...

Im sorry but I do not understand why with all the wonderful latin music out there that people put up with the same old boring music.
Why dont they dance to a wider variety of music allowing time for musicallity?












Yeah, but you could say that about most any dance really, at least in salsa they're wiggling [B]something
I believe musicallity is paramount Manic moves always look a mess

Give me a Rumba wiggle to the music any time


I've seen it performed much better than any MJ routine I've seen, does that count?
I would argue lead and follow is real dance, routines are not what its about.
Thats the Beauty of AT
:waycool: :waycool: :waycool: :waycool:

Paul F
7th-November-2005, 03:41 PM
Interesting thread. Cant believe I hadnt seen it before.
I started reading the 'Sunday Blues' thread in 'LTAD' section and then found this. Why is it in the Intermediate section? :confused:

Edit: Ah , silly me. It DID redirect me to the Intermediate area and that then redirected me to the 1000 island area.

Well, at least I know where I am now. :blush:

Will
16th-November-2005, 05:25 PM
Has anyone tried learning Lambada? Very difficult in my experience...