Should teachers be allowed to enter more categories at comps?

[DavidB]

Run the first round of the Open first. Anyone that doesn't get through goes into the first round of the Advanced.

Similarly anyone who doesn't get through the Advanced Round 1 goes into the first round of the Intermediate.

And anyone that doesn't get past the first 2 rounds of the Intermediate can dance again in another division (so you end up with Intermediate A and B).

Teachers would have to enter the Open. But if they are not good enough they fall through into the Advanced. Noone would be allowed to fall through 2 levels (ie from Open to Intermediate).

The idea is to get everyone to dance at least twice.


You could also have couples moved up from one division to a higher one after the first round. (This has been in effect at Weston for the last few years, but only one couple has ever been moved.)

David

[Gus]

I fear you'd get people who'd abuse the system and enter at a lower level, to win a prize... could one be disqualified for being 'too good'? how would this be regulated?

Hasn't that already been the case? As there are only 2 sections at C2D there is consequently far more incentive to 'move down' to be able to shine. Similarly at the Ceroc Champs, as there is the same attractive prize for both Intermediate and Advanced ... why not just move down a level and have a better chance of winning something really worthwhile?

Re rating teachers v punters at the top level, well (IMHO) the best female dancer in the N West isn't a teacher (Clarabell) and three of the very few top male dancers (again IMHO) are also non-teachers ... Pistol Pete, Ste and Graham (Gladrags). We have very few, if any, instructors who would trouble the judges in the Advanced section at the Majors

[Lory]

Run the first round of the Open first. Anyone that doesn't get through goes into the first round of the Advanced.

~snip~

This seems like the best solution all round to me!

It helps everyone, especially those entrants who don't know which category to enter. They wouldn't run the risk of exposing themselves to the critisism of others, who may have a different opinion of whether they should have entered 'higher' or 'lower', either way!

[Achaeco]

Seemed pretty straightforward to me. You've listed a load of things that you say teachers have that will give them an advantage in a comp. I disagree with most of what you said. Having seen lots of teachers, and having been to lots of comps...

No. A lot of teachers aren't doing that. And a teacher saying 'you can style it out this way' means nothing either. Sure, you can style it out that way. That way may also look, to be blunt, crap. Anyone can say that you can style it out anyway, doesn't mean diddly squat really. One particular teacher I've seen at some point in the last 8 years, teaches a styling point that makes me cringe everytime I see it. Let's see that teacher enter intermediates to try to win!

Teacher training usually involves a week (if they're lucky, and most independents or teachers for any organisation other than Ceroc) of learning how to deliver the beginner moves from a stage to a standard level. There is no training given on how to improve ones own dance style as part of teacher training.

And yes, a teacher may have an advantage in that they are a better dancer. Or they may have been asked to teach because they are nice, friendly people who explain things well! Are you going to penalise all the 'better' dancers in this way (of course, it would be nice if there was a grading system in place, but that's just pie-in-the-sky). As I've said before, I know plenty of teachers that would struggle to make an intermediate final at a national comp - I can think of at least 10 off the top of my head. So, they have the choice, of going into the Open (and possibly feeling like they're making fools of themselves, as well as paying money to do 1 heat, with no chance of getting through), or not going in at all. Which do you suppose that most/all actually do? How about being fair to them too?

You disagree with most.... that then leaves.... you agree with some.
This then means teachers have an advantage over a none teacher.

Thanks for that Mr Tramp.

[David Bailey]

This then means teachers have an advantage over a none teacher.

People who get paid for working in the partner dance arena, on average, will be better than people who don't. So the average MJ teacher will be a better dancer than the average punter.

But I'm not convinced that the average MJ teacher is significantly better than the average MJ competition-dancer - after all, MJ teachers spend their time teaching, whilst an amateur couple could spend more time practicing or watching.

So I'm not sure that it makes much sense to discriminate against teachers at all. Do we have any, you know, actual information that discrimination / lack thereof has any real effect? Or are we all just guessing here?

Oh, and MJ competitions are definitely Evil. But everyone knows that.

[TheTramp]

You disagree with most.... that then leaves.... you agree with some.
This then means teachers have an advantage over a none teacher.

Thanks for that Mr Tramp.

Oh. F F S. If you're going to try to twist what I say, then at least do it in a semi-reasonable manner, idiot-boy.

[Andy McGregor]

Oh. F F S. If you're going to try to twist what I say, then at least do it in a semi-reasonable manner, idiot-boy.

I think he was trying to put something in your mouth - he's obviously never witnessed you eating

[Martin]

People who get paid for working in the partner dance arena, on average, will be better than people who don't. So the average MJ teacher will be a better dancer than the average punter.

on average

But I'm not convinced that the average MJ teacher is significantly better than the average MJ competition-dancer - after all, MJ teachers spend their time teaching, whilst an amateur couple could spend more time practicing or watching.

When I got more serious about competing, I gave up teaching 3 nights a week, to focus on comps.

Some people can do well at both, like Trampy and Adam - but they are not "Average"

[ducasi]

Run the first round of the Open first. Anyone that doesn't get through goes into the first round of the Advanced.

[...]

You could also have couples moved up from one division to a higher one after the first round. (This has been in effect at Weston for the last few years, but only one couple has ever been moved.)

I really like the idea of promotion to higher divisions. I hadn't considered this "relegation" system as an additional measure. It sounds like a really good idea.

Do you think you would get dancers who deliberately under-perform in the first round of the Open to get into the lower Advanced level where they are more likely to do well? Or am I being too cynical?

[Andy McGregor]

I really like the idea of promotion to higher divisions. I hadn't considered this "relegation" system as an additional measure. It sounds like a really good idea.

Do you think you would get dancers who deliberately under-perform in the first round of the Open to get into the lower Advanced level where they are more likely to do well? Or am I being too cynical?

This would be similar to a plate competition. The plate us usually for the people who get knocked out in the first round or two. It's a great way of giving competitors a fuller day. After all, it's a long way to travel to get knocked out in the first round. If you knew you'd get another round, either in the main competition or the plate you might be more likely to enter.

[Achaeco]

Oh. F F S. If you're going to try to twist what I say, then at least do it in a semi-reasonable manner, idiot-boy.

Ooo i think a dummy has gone missing.

Idiot boy, i think not. I have 3 degree's (play them all the time)

If you dont want me to coment on what YOU have said, dont comment.

[David Franklin]

You disagree with most.... that then leaves.... you agree with some.
This then means teachers have an advantage over a none teacher.

Thanks for that Mr Tramp.

It's clear you think you've made an absolutely devastating point here - it's just a pity I can't for the life of me work out what it is.

But in any event, it seems pretty clear the vast majority of posters don't see any reason to restrict the categories teachers can enter, so I'm not really sure what the problem is.

[Ghost]

Do you think you would get dancers who deliberately under-perform in the first round of the Open to get into the lower Advanced level where they are more likely to do well? Or am I being too cynical?

Yeah that occurred to me too. I think you have to reach a point where you just go "Oh well, if it really means that much to you" otherwise it just becomes totally impractical.

People do know you can buy trophies right? - you can get them engraved with anything you want

[Baruch]

Run the first round of the Open first. Anyone that doesn't get through goes into the first round of the Advanced.

Similarly anyone who doesn't get through the Advanced Round 1 goes into the first round of the Intermediate.

And anyone that doesn't get past the first 2 rounds of the Intermediate can dance again in another division (so you end up with Intermediate A and B).

Now that sounds like a simple and effective way of doing things. Is there any precedent for this system, or is it your idea?

[Jamie]

Ooo i think a dummy has gone missing.

Idiot boy, i think not. I have 3 degree's (play them all the time)

If you dont want me to coment on what YOU have said, dont comment.

I have to say, from what you've written on the forum in these past few posts, I'm quite sure you've put quite a few people off competing at Blackpool...

You have me...

[DavidB]

Now that sounds like a simple and effective way of doing things. Is there any precedent for this system, or is it your idea?

I got the idea after reading about the UEFA Champions League. The first 2 teams in each group qualify for the next stage. The 3rd place team get put into the UEFA Cup.

Andy correctly identified the Intermediate A & B as a 'Plate' competition. He was the first person I heard suggest it for dancing.


I realise there are several problems with any ideas like this.
- It takes more time, and most comps don't have a lot of spare time.
- It can get confusing for the competitors, especially if they doing several different divisions. They no longer know when they may be dancing, so trying to sort out things like 'when to eat' becomes harder.
- You have to be able to enter and collate the marks a lot quicker, and have a better way of publishing the results.
- It makes the management of the competition a lot harder (no-shows, withdrawals, disqualifications, balancing numbers in rounds, etc)

[David Bailey]

Run the first round of the Open first. Anyone that doesn't get through goes into the first round of the Advanced.

Similarly anyone who doesn't get through the Advanced Round 1 goes into the first round of the Intermediate.

And anyone that doesn't get past the first 2 rounds of the Intermediate can dance again in another division (so you end up with Intermediate A and B).

Teachers would have to enter the Open. But if they are not good enough they fall through into the Advanced. Noone would be allowed to fall through 2 levels (ie from Open to Intermediate).

The idea is to get everyone to dance at least twice.

Brilliant.

It's a built-in natural filtering / assessment system, combined with a competition.

Apart from the complexity, I think a main problem would be the culture change - people might find it difficult to understand or not like such a radical change. Maybe calling the filtering dances something different would help - for example, call the first one "Open Free-for-all" rather than "Open first round", something like that?

People do know you can buy trophies right? - you can get them engraved with anything you want

Ooh, can I have one please? "World Champion of Grumpiness" sounds good

[ducasi]

A variation which may be simpler for the contestant who doesn't know which level to enter and/or doesn't want the humiliation of being "demoted" to a lower division is to remove the ability of the contestants to pick the level they are entering at – they just enter "the competition". Then on the day, get them to dance in batches and ask the judges to assign them to the appropriate level.

I suppose there is still the possibility that people will end up dancing at a lower level than they (or others) thought they would (humiliating) or at a higher level (frightening.)

[Andy McGregor]

I suppose there is still the possibility that people will end up dancing at a lower level than they (or others) thought they would (humiliating) or at a higher level (frightening.)

All competitions are "humilating" and "frightening". If you aren't prepared to accept this and celebrate the fear you shouldn't be entering competitions.

[Gadget]

Andy correctly identified the Intermediate A & B as a 'Plate' competition. He was the first person I heard suggest it for dancing.

It's how a lot of Fencing competitions work, especially the "fun" ones (I've ran a few)

Basically it's the one "open" competition with everyone competing - the best and the worst together. After round 1 all the competitor's are listed in result order, then the lines are drawn to split into the different categories: top 8/16/32 into the 'main' (Open) level, the rest into a 'plate' (Intermediate) level.

Pools are then created by deciding how many people you want on the floor at any one time, (so you know the number of 'pools' you will have) and 1st rank goes into pool#1; 2nd into pool#2 ... when you have one person in each pool, the next person goes into pool#1 again. This should give each pool a 'fair' split of abilities.

If you know the numbers before hand, the timing of the competition can be prepared (& posted) so you know which pools follow on from which at which times - Let people know what pools they are in and they can sort themselves out. (Normally it's only the organisers that do without lunch )

{Edit: there is another way of running "fun" competions where you maximise the amount of time people are actually on the floor and everyone gets the same amount of dancing (no matter the ability) - but it's point based for final results and a lot of work for judges & organisers}