Discussion in 'Ballroom Dance' started by ChaChaMama, May 25, 2010.
Nice of you to start this DF thread, CCM!
Lin, I agree that you work just as hard at a collegiate comp as any other. I'm the same way, almost every comp I do is collegiate, and I prepare and work as hard as I can for them. That being said, most collegiate comps have a lower standard than an NQE, and should have a lower standard than Nationals. There are a few exceptions. DCDI, Harvard, MIT, all have very large competitions that draw some of the top competitors...but not in the same way that something like MAC, or Nationals do. The Pre-champ finals at MAC were filled with couples that dance Champ at collegiate comps, and the Novice finals were full of collegiate Pre-champ couples. The Champ finals had National finalists.
Merely qualifying for and competing at Nationals should have some prestige, which it most certainly doesn't currently. As to why a couple instead of a partnership has to qualify...I'm not sure. Anyone know the reasoning behind that one?
ps. Should this be moved to another thread? I feel like we're getting a little off topic.
Maybe because it's "partner" dancing?
It's Nationals. I shouldn't be able to show up in a t-shirt and jeans after taking a couple lessons and deciding I want to compete (especially since I'm sure the zipper and buttons on my jeans would be considered "light-reflective" and I'd be breaking costume rules!) As a spectator, I'd want to see some people that have "worked" to get there. It's Nationals, not an "everyday" competition, there should be some minimal requirements. If you don't qualify this year, then wait until next year. Pretend it's the Olympics, you don't get to show up and hope you find a bobsled team when you get there. You have to qualify with a bobsled team you already have.
umm. That was a little vitriolic considering you were agreeing with all the points I made.
I think you're taking the bouncing off of your idea that I quoted as instead being a reply. I apologize that I didn't make that clear.
no problem. I was just confused.
Heck, we're lucky we only have to place in the top 75% of couples in our event at a regional to qualify for Nationals.
I am 100% certain a large part of the cost is the venue, and having a glitzier venue is only going to make that a larger part of the cost.
Yes, I agree with this.
Ditto to that
I can imagine the new rules will also lead to couples dancing multiple qualifying events, to am,ke sure they get into the top 75%.
Or maybe some of the couples in a more competitive region will travel farther to qualify in a less competitive field.
I actually have a question about this, and am embarrassed to ask it because the answer is probably clear to everyone except me. Let's say you compete in a very small event. If a couple finishes 2nd out of 2, is that couple in the "top 75%"? How about 3rd out of 3?
I get that if there are 4 couples, the top 3 would qualify and the bottom 1 would not, but I'm confused about smaller events.
That's a great question. I haven't read all the rules in detail, but perhaps there's a clause that there must be at least a final (or something similar) in order to enact the "top 75%" rule.
I don't believe there were any specifics in the rules as far as "size of event" exceptions. From my memory, it said top 75% and that was about it. I can definitely see people adding events, or traveling to different areas to qualify with this rule. I'm still a little unsure how I feel about the new qualifying rules.
And just to make perfecly clear, the 75% rule doesn't take effect until next year. For the upcoming Nationals, you just have to compete in the same event with the same partner at the same level.
Casayoto, I think I now have legitimate reason to go back to dancing in Bronze
Sure Lin, we can partner up and do Bronze at MAC next year.
I would say a couple that places last of multiple couples is always going to be in the bottom 100%, and therefore the top 0%, and therefore not qualifying. By the same token, a couple that places first will always be in the top 100%.
As long as you don't mind dancing in Bronze at Nationals (and still qualify for Bronze).
I understand the goal to make this event not just another competition and implementing certain rules to create a prestigious event. I just wonder if the new rules will get the desired results of less competitors, more spectators.
The question is who are the spectators? My guess is by and large the spectators are dancers and the question then becomes if you reduce your competitors by 25% will you also reduce your audience by 25%? Will this 25% who is not dancing at the event still incur the expense and travel to the competition to be a spectator? Although this rule change does make the event much more exciting for everybody (dancers and spectators) I still would not travel to the event if I was in the bottom 25% and not dancing. My dance dollars are going to go to events where I can be both a competitor and a spectator.
Even with the new rules I have no fears that syllabus will be eliminated. Lets face it the syllabus events are huge. I am not reading that the intent of the rule change is to create a “best of the best” determination but rather the “best of the best” in each category be it champ level or bronze.
Separate names with a comma.