Rate your own dancing out of 10

[Little Monkey]

Go on then!!

Nope. As I said, everyone's got different opinions to what makes a good dancer. Also, some dancers you'll 'click' with, others you don't, so you might dance extremely well with one person, and like a three legged elephant with others. When spectating people also look for different things - some are in awe of the big showy moves, some look for technique, others again rate musicality highest, etc. That's why DJ rates me as a 8-9, and Minnie rates me as 7, and other people again will probably rate me anywhere between 0 and 10!

There's also dancers out there who I really admire, and who I only like to dance with to one specific genre of music. So I might rate someone very highly as a bluesy dancer, or latin style dancer, but not so highly when it comes to faster or funkier tracks.

I'm actually quite happy about my dancing at the moment. I feel I have improved a lot in the past 6 months in some areas, but realise there's still lots to learn and improve. So I'll just keep dancing and trying to be the best dancer I can.

[tanjive]

Of course how you measure your own or others dance ability is very subjective. The poll would be of more educational use if others rated youa, rather than rating yourself, assuming you are wanting some feedback.

There are not that many I know on the forum and those I probably only see at weekenders sparsely. For my edification it might be interesting to rate me via PM. I'd post the average in a few days. Curiosity is a dangerous thing.

Anyway it is just for fun and I am generally happy with how I dance. I respect the fact everyone has different views and tastes. One persons muck is someones brass.

[straycat]

But I am wondering whether it's better to take a different view. If you give the best you can when dancing and try to make every dance enjoyable for yourself and your partner and you are improving at a rate with which you are happy then why should you not rate yourself a 10 rather than assessing your current level against the current perceived level of Dance God A (or Dance Goddess Z)? I know the OP's point was that after watching people he felt were much better he rated his own dancing as a 0 but I think my methodology equally valid.

I do see your point, but I would feel dishonest rating myself like that. I would not be happy to rate myself a ten. I am quite happy that I am not rating myself a ten, or even close to it. Why shouldn't I be?

In my book, so long as there is room for improvement, I can't rated 10 / 10. An as long as I keep improving, I'm going to keep shifting those goalposts. I need to bear in mind that the original goalposts I had when I started are so far behind me now that they're more-or-less out of sight... if I'd simply stuck to those, reached them, and rested on my laurels thinking I was now good enough, I'd be much the poorer for it...

[Baruch]

if I'd simply stuck to those, reached them, and rested on my laurels thinking I was now good enough, I'd be much the poorer for it...

True, but sadly that does seem to be the most common approach to goal-setting and improvement in MJ circles. Not that I would expect everyone to achieve the dizzying heights of perfection, but surely it must get boring after a while if you're not really improving or learning anything new. Come to think of it, that may explain MJ's generally high turnover rate.

[Gus]

Not that I would expect everyone to achieve the dizzying heights of perfection, but surely it must get boring after a while if you're not really improving or learning anything new. Come to think of it, that may explain MJ's generally high turnover rate.

And the 'higher' you get. the fewer people there are to learn from.

[NZ Monkey]

I'd score myself as a 4, I think I've probably done the hardest steps on my dancing ladder, yet there is so much I can see that I would like to achieve that I don't think I can say I am half-way through yet.

Obviously, there are probably lots of things I would like to achieve that I don't even know yet. So even if I progress, I'm likely to remain around 4 for a while...

In my experience with focused practice* you not only get better at what you know now, but also learn to pick up new techniques or concepts faster as well.

I guess the implication is that although we don't quite know half of what we're aware is out there that doesn't mean we're less than halfway through the journey.

Of course, then theres the stuff we're not aware of at all yet - so we still haven't gotten past the moving goalposts hurdle As a friend so wisely said to me once while watching a bunch of ninja wannabe's in a local park...... "it's the ninja's I don't see that worry me".

And the 'higher' you get. the fewer people there are to learn from.

True, but often the higher you get the more observant and self aware you become as well. You can learn a lot more in a short space of time when you do get a chance to spend time with the even higher people.

Having said that, it's better still to have access to the top people from day one.

*I don't mean just any old social dancing here. I mean learning from people who really know what they're talking about and actively trying to include their advice while social dancing. Preferably with someone much better than you...

[straycat]

I guess the implication is that although we don't quite know half of what we're aware is out there that doesn't mean we're less than halfway through the journey.

I sincerely hope I'm less than halfway through the journey... the journey's so much fun, and I want to enjoy it for as long as possible. The destination's just an arbitrary point that I keep changing if there's ever any danger of reaching it

[Miss Flicts]

Nope. As I said, everyone's got different opinions to what makes a good dancer. Also, some dancers you'll 'click' with, others you don't, so you might dance extremely well with one person, and like a three legged elephant with others. When spectating people also look for different things - some are in awe of the big showy moves, some look for technique, others again rate musicality highest, etc. That's why DJ rates me as a 8-9, and Minnie rates me as 7, and other people again will probably rate me anywhere between 0 and 10!

There's also dancers out there who I really admire, and who I only like to dance with to one specific genre of music. So I might rate someone very highly as a bluesy dancer, or latin style dancer, but not so highly when it comes to faster or funkier tracks.

I'm actually quite happy about my dancing at the moment. I feel I have improved a lot in the past 6 months in some areas, but realise there's still lots to learn and improve. So I'll just keep dancing and trying to be the best dancer I can.

I was only teasing! I totally agree. I wouldn't want to rate anybody else, even if I knew who anybody was!!

[Andy McGregor]

even if I knew who anybody was!!

You know me and "The Tramp". Who else do you need to know?

p.s. I score you a 10 - and your dancing is lovely too

[Gus]

Was thinking about this rating thing again. It really doesn't have to be an exact science but it can be useful ... but it has to be in context. '10' has to be the ultim ate score so you need to calibrate it against 'The Best' ... so that was, and may still be, the likes of Viktor, Amir Lily, Kate, Nigel and Nina. Now, these dancers are all very different styles and background but, irrelevant of competition performances, are regraded by many as the best. However, though they may be awesome dancers, you may not like their style or you may not be able to dance well with them.

Maybe the trick is to pick the dancer who best fits your personal idea of '10' then benchmark yourself against them ... unless of course you thing Andy McG is a '10' then you are in more trouble than mortal man can cope with ... I mean, where the heck are you going to get such well fitting ladies dresses and shoes?

[Astro]

The thing I love about dancing is that it is a never ending journey.

[David Bailey]

Was thinking about this rating thing again. It really doesn't have to be an exact science but it can be useful ... but it has to be in context. '10' has to be the ultim ate score so you need to calibrate it against 'The Best' ... so that was, and may still be, the likes of Viktor, Amir Lily, Kate, Nigel and Nina. Now, these dancers are all very different styles and background but, irrelevant of competition performances, are regraded by many as the best. However, though they may be awesome dancers, you may not like their style or you may not be able to dance well with them.

Oh, are we sticking to MJ then? Well, then I'm a 20, easy

Maybe the trick is to pick the dancer who best fits your personal idea of '10' then benchmark yourself against them ...

Gustavo Naveira. I'm at about 0.02 on that scale.

Being serious, for a second, even the best MJ dancers aren't really competitive with the standard of other disciplines. I suspect many of us aren't limiting ourselves to MJ when we're considering our levels.

[Gus]

Being serious, for a second, even the best MJ dancers aren't really competitive with the standard of other disciplines. I suspect many of us aren't limiting ourselves to MJ when we're considering our levels.

Uhhhhh??? Then on that scale if you want to compare yourself to the top Salsa, Ballet, Ballroom, Tango dancers ... none of us would score more than 2. Not sure that I see the point. Is it not fair to assume that on a MJ Forum where the vast majority only do MJ, that we are rating ourselves in MJ only?

[Little Monkey]

Uhhhhh??? Then on that scale if you want to compare yourself to the top Salsa, Ballet, Ballroom, Tango dancers ... none of us would score more than 2. Not sure that I see the point. Is it not fair to assume that on a MJ Forum where the vast majority only do MJ, that we are rating ourselves in MJ only?

I was, like you, assuming we were just talking about MJ here... Because otherwise I'd only be a 1!

I was thinking of people like Amir etc on 10, and total newbies on 1 (people who've never danced - 0). If we were comparing ourselves to others at our regular, local venues, the scores would probably be very different again.

A poll like this is never going to be very serious, though. Some people have low self esteem, and will rate themselves low. Others will rate themselves at 10 just to be funny. And some are humble (or falsely modest) and rate themselves at 0. Of course, some people are also afraid of appearing big headed, and opt for a lower score than they really think they are... Etc.

[NZ Monkey]

I sincerely hope I'm less than halfway through the journey... the journey's so much fun, and I want to enjoy it for as long as possible. The destination's just an arbitrary point that I keep changing if there's ever any danger of reaching it

Perhaps I should have written my statement as "I guess the implication is that although we don't quite know half of what we're aware is out there that doesn't mean we're less than halfway through the journey."

What it does mean is that the goal posts will keep moving as you find out more, so you'll never reach your goals. That doesn't mean you were less than halfway before you moved them the first time though

[ducasi]

I think a numerical rating is pointless unless everyone is working to the same scale – some people are using a logarithmic scale, some people are including other dance styles – the result is that one person will call themselves a "4" (say), while another person might rate themselves a "7", but still believe they are a poorer dancer. I think you have to use comparative terms when rating any dancing.

So, I think I'm a "good" dancer, which puts me at above average, but amongst "good dancers", I'm probably only average. (Though if anyone would like to put a numerical figure on that, go right ahead... )

As for being happy or not with my dancing – I would like to be better, but I think I'm now good enough to give most partners I dance with a reasonably enjoyable dance, and if my partner enjoys a dance, that helps a lot in making me enjoy a dance. This is my main target for improvement.

[batnurse]

I think a numerical rating is pointless unless everyone is working to the same scale – some people are using a logarithmic scale, some people are including other dance styles – the result is that one person will call themselves a "4" (say), while another person might rate themselves a "7", but still believe they are a poorer dancer. I think you have to use comparative terms when rating any dancing.

So, I think I'm a "good" dancer, which puts me at above average, but amongst "good dancers", I'm probably only average. (Though if anyone would like to put a numerical figure on that, go right ahead... )

As for being happy or not with my dancing – I would like to be better, but I think I'm now good enough to give most partners I dance with a reasonably enjoyable dance, and if my partner enjoys a dance, that helps a lot in making me enjoy a dance. This is my main target for improvement.

A definate 10

[robd]

I was thinking of people like Amir etc on 10, and total newbies on 1 (people who've never danced - 0). If we were comparing ourselves to others at our regular, local venues, the scores would probably be very different again.

A poll like this is never going to be very serious, though. Some people have low self esteem, and will rate themselves low. Others will rate themselves at 10 just to be funny.

But why think of other people as the yardstick for rating oneself? Why should a 10 have to equate to being as good as those you perceive to be the 'best' dancers? I am not saying it is necessarily wrong to think like that but other points of view are equally valid. I wouldn't give the same maths test to a 7 year old as to an Oxford undergraduate - my expectation of their aptitude would be different and hence either or both may well score 10/10. Thus if the criteria I use to rank myself reflects my experience and expectations in MJ then I might well score myself a 10 (or a 0 or somewhere in between). The point is that no-one can tell me the score I give to myself based on my criteria can possibly be mistaken. It may well differ wildly from how others would rate me according to their criteria but it's still not mistaken.

[Trouble]

waffle waffle waffle........ bit more waffle..... and errr waffle..

err exactly....

anyway, im a 9. Im not quite a 10 because anybody i dance with drags my standard down a bit....

[ducasi]

But why think of other people as the yardstick for rating oneself? Why should a 10 have to equate to being as good as those you perceive to be the 'best' dancers? I am not saying it is necessarily wrong to think like that but other points of view are equally valid. I wouldn't give the same maths test to a 7 year old as to an Oxford undergraduate - my expectation of their aptitude would be different and hence either or both may well score 10/10. Thus if the criteria I use to rank myself reflects my experience and expectations in MJ then I might well score myself a 10 (or a 0 or somewhere in between). The point is that no-one can tell me the score I give to myself based on my criteria can possibly be mistaken. It may well differ wildly from how others would rate me according to their criteria but it's still not mistaken.

Well if we choose to set "10" to be as good as we are, then we're all 10's.