Anyone know status of B'room dancing as an Olympic sport?

#41
Chris Stratton said:
First guess: the TV audience didn't watch so it got cancelled
I'm sure that's why it was never televised on ESPN again but gives no information as to why the judging standard wasn't adopted.

Chris Stratton said:
Second guess: the competitors didn't like the format. Current competition trends tend to reward choreography and performance over clean execution of the classic figures from which compulsory material would probably be drawn. So a lot of couples would have to substantially retrain for such a format - they might benefit from it, but people who are good at what they do often resist changing the game to something they aren't yet good at.
Possibly, but what do you mean when you say "performance." To me a championship dance performance includes a clean execution of whatever coreography is in the routine, whether they be the classic figures or some new innovation. The format for the television broadcasts did allow for plenty of creative coreography to be integrated with the compulsory figures. I wonder if the champion caliber competitors would be less resistant if the cumpulsory figures weren't limited to the syllabus but instead were a set of more advanced figures to offer them more of a challenge. I don't expect anyone to give a definite answer to this, just a random thought for discussion
 
#42
Let's just say I think dancing would be a bit different at the regional/national level if there were compulsory figures being replayed on TV in slow motion...

Grab a typical competition video and have a look...
 
#43
Chris Stratton said:
Let's just say I think dancing would be a bit different at the regional/national level if there were compulsory figures being replayed on TV in slow motion...
It would certainly be different, there's no douibt about that. But what about at the international level? That's where potential olympic competitors would come from.

Chris Stratton said:
Grab a typical competition video and have a look...
What exactly do you mean by that?
 
#44
Angelo said:
Chris Stratton said:
Let's just say I think dancing would be a bit different at the regional/national level if there were compulsory figures being replayed on TV in slow motion...
It would certainly be different, there's no douibt about that. But what about at the international level? That's where potential olympic competitors would come from.
No, most of them would simply be the people winning their national selection events - they would not be the quality of say Blackpool finalists.

Chris Stratton said:
Grab a typical competition video and have a look...
What exactly do you mean by that?
Grab a video of a competition, go through it slowly, and look at the actual quality of execution. Very few competing couples below the absolute top level can stand up to this, becuase they train more to attempt a lot than to execute it well. Look for things like foot placement, relative body position, and unbroken shapes. And don't forget footwork...
 
#45
Chris Stratton said:
No, most of them would simply be the people winning their national selection events - they would not be the quality of say Blackpool finalists.
And how do you know this?


Chris Stratton said:
Grab a video of a competition, go through it slowly, and look at the actual quality of execution. Very few competing couples below the absolute top level can stand up to this, becuase they train more to attempt a lot than to execute it well. Look for things like foot placement, relative body position, and unbroken shapes. And don't forget footwork...
Quality of execution varies not only from couple to couple but also from attempt to attempt. If it were easy to do, the couples that CAN hold up to the highest standard in the most consistent way would not be so highly esteemed. This is the same for other sports as well. You seem to imply that the reason most couples do not hold up to this standard is because they focus on the wrong things in training. That's a pretty broad generalization to make. How may national level competitors have you observed in training before you formed your opinion?
 
#46
Angelo said:
Chris Stratton said:
No, most of them would simply be the people winning their national selection events - they would not be the quality of say Blackpool finalists.
And how do you know this?
How many countries are represented at the Olympics? How many are represented in the Blackpool finals? Semis? Quarters? The answer is only a handfull. Most dancers at an Olympic event would be far lower quality, trying to immitate what is done at the top but not managing it, in ways even a layman would see if compulsories were replayed with slow motion commentary. That is, until people started training for the compulsories - then things might be different.

You seem to imply that the reason most couples do not hold up to this standard is because they focus on the wrong things in training.
Absolutely. There is a real trend to try to immitate the look of the top dancers, without first developing a foundation equal to that of the top dancers. If the competition format involved direct comparison of the quality of some specific things, we might see more awareness of this.
 
#47
Chris Stratton said:
Most dancers at an Olympic event would be far lower quality, trying to immitate what is done at the top but not managing it.
Most dancers at Blackpool are also of far lower quality, that's why they don't make it into the semifinals and finals. You seem to imply that the couples in the final at Blackpool would not be the ones in an Olympic final. Perhaps you have some information that I don't, because I don't see why that should be the case.

You seem to imply that the reason most couples do not hold up to this standard is because they focus on the wrong things in training.
Chris Stratton said:
Absolutely. There is a real trend to try to immitate the look of the top dancers, without first developing a foundation equal to that of the top dancers. If the competition format involved direct comparison of the quality of some specific things, we might see more awareness of this.

Once again you make a broad generalization, stated as a fact, without bothering to back it up with any examples. No one is disputing that there are marked differences in the quality of execution between the top dancers and most other couples. That's why they are at the top. What is at dispute is that you are stating that you know the reason for it , based off of studying competition tape. You can see the effects but then you claim to know the cause just by observing the effects. In some simple cases this might be valid, but I doubt this is one of those cases.
 

Adwiz

New Member
#48
ponidancer said:
How in the heck d'ye judge skydiving? LOL
Skydiving actually has quite a competitive aspect to it, with competitions around the world (I was lightly involved in the sport for about three years).

Judging the landing is the easiest part. There's a pressure-sensitive circle about 10 inches in diameter that measures the point of weight as your foot touches the circle. The challenge is to get as close to the bullseye as possible.

But the landing is the most boring part. While the sport is certainly exciting for the competitors, it is hardly watchable for the audience. Television can put a jumper in the air, but it would be excrutiatingly dull for watchers on the ground.

I'm disappointed that dancing got placed so poorly in the poll, but I think it has as much to do with semantics as anything. Calling it "ballroom dancing" relegates the sport to an old image in the mind, something people can't relate to as a fresh, modern sport. We need to be more aggressive in promoting "DanceSport" as opposed to "ballroom dancing." I cringe when my wife tells people we compete in "ballroom dancing" because it leaves a completely different impression than saying we are "DanceSport competitors." You can see it in people's eyes. With the old phrase there is an understanding nod and the subject dies. With the newer term people might not relate, but they begin to ask questions and then they usually say "I love watching that on television!"
 

pygmalion

Well-Known Member
#49
Interesting discussion, Chris and Angelo ... 8)

Just wanted to raise a tangential issue while I'm thinking about it. How would Olympic eligibility relate to the whole pro versus am distinction? Okay. My question's out there. Consider it shelved until it becomes relevant. I just didn't want to forget to ask. :wink:

Okay, guys. Resume play ... :D
 
#50
The last time ESPN broadcasted Dancesport events were in early 2000. It appears that the first broadcast was on January 1, 2000, the last in early February. What a poor choice in timing to broadcast Dancesport; January 1st? When nearly all the top college football teams are playing for championships? Early February when the NFL has their All-Star game? No wonder ESPN hasn't broadcasted anymore Dancesport events.

Speaking of the term 'ballroom dancing'. Doesn't this term conjure up thoughts of something grandparents and parents do? Something seen on the Lawrence Welk show? I don't mean to offend folks but what our favorite activity needs is an injection of youth. I do dread, like Adwiz, of telling non-dancing folks that I do competitive ballroom dancing. I get wise cracks from my male friends about dancing with grandmothers and so forth.

Perhaps this is what ESPN tried to do but just couldn't come up with an audience. Somehow, cheerleading events, aerobic beauty contests, dog shows, find an audience, why can't Dancepsort?
 
#51
Angelo said:
Once again you make a broad generalization, stated as a fact, without bothering to back it up with any examples. No one is disputing that there are marked differences in the quality of execution between the top dancers and most other couples. That's why they are at the top. What is at dispute is that you are stating that you know the reason for it , based off of studying competition tape. You can see the effects but then you claim to know the cause just by observing the effects. In some simple cases this might be valid, but I doubt this is one of those cases.
Well, you study what you think is important and I'll study what I think is important, and since neither of us are going to the Olympics or likley to make it beyond the early rounds at Blackpool, we'll never really know who is right.
 
#52
Chris Stratton said:
Angelo said:
Once again you make a broad generalization, stated as a fact, without bothering to back it up with any examples. No one is disputing that there are marked differences in the quality of execution between the top dancers and most other couples. That's why they are at the top. What is at dispute is that you are stating that you know the reason for it , based off of studying competition tape. You can see the effects but then you claim to know the cause just by observing the effects. In some simple cases this might be valid, but I doubt this is one of those cases.
Well, you study what you think is important and I'll study what I think is important, and since neither of us are going to the Olympics or likley to make it beyond the early rounds at Blackpool, we'll never really know who is right.

I didn't say that tape study wasn't valuable. It is valuable, and I'm sure you've learned quite a bit from it. I only objected to your extrapolating what you see on the competition tape to making assumptions as to what competitors do in the training hall and stating it as some kind of fact. You may be right, but like you said, unless we get more information we may never really know.
 

Warren J. Dew

Well-Known Member
#54
cy_phi said:
Speaking of the term 'ballroom dancing'. Doesn't this term conjure up thoughts of something grandparents and parents do? Something seen on the Lawrence Welk show?
Not among today's collegiate youth, as far as I can tell. They're not old enough to have heard of the Lawrence Welk show, and their parents danced freestyle, not ballroom - heck, even their grandparents danced swing, not ballroom. When today's youth look around, what they see is that most "old people" dance swing and freestyle, if they dance at all. Sure, there are movies from the '20s with ballroom dance in them - but the people in those movies don't look old at all!

I don't mean to offend folks but what our favorite activity needs is an injection of youth. I do dread, like Adwiz, of telling non-dancing folks that I do competitive ballroom dancing. I gets wise cracks from my male friends about dancing with grandmothers and so forth.
Maybe it's your friends that need an injection of youth, if they can't handle an activity your grandmother could do. (Or maybe they're just worried that you'll get all the girls!)

Perhaps this is what ESPN tried to do but just couldn't come up with an audience. Somehow, cheerleading events, aerobic beauty contests, dog shows, find an audience, why can't Dancepsort?
Maybe the latin costumes aren't revealing enough?

Okay, just kidding about the costumes!
 
#56
Angelo said:
Chris Stratton said:
Most dancers at an Olympic event would be far lower quality, trying to immitate what is done at the top but not managing it.
Most dancers at Blackpool are also of far lower quality, that's why they don't make it into the semifinals and finals. You seem to imply that the couples in the final at Blackpool would not be the ones in an Olympic final. Perhaps you have some information that I don't, because I don't see why that should be the case.

You seem to imply that the reason most couples do not hold up to this standard is because they focus on the wrong things in training.
Chris Stratton said:
Absolutely. There is a real trend to try to immitate the look of the top dancers, without first developing a foundation equal to that of the top dancers. If the competition format involved direct comparison of the quality of some specific things, we might see more awareness of this.

Once again you make a broad generalization, stated as a fact, without bothering to back it up with any examples. No one is disputing that there are marked differences in the quality of execution between the top dancers and most other couples. That's why they are at the top. What is at dispute is that you are stating that you know the reason for it , based off of studying competition tape. You can see the effects but then you claim to know the cause just by observing the effects. In some simple cases this might be valid, but I doubt this is one of those cases.

I agree with Angelo. You have to ask, would Bryan Watson and Carmen want to compete in the Olympics? I would say a definite yes. What top couple wouldn't want to compete in a high profile event like the Olympics? You may have to catch the events at 2AM but so what? That's the purpose of VCRs! Heck, Blackpool is not even televised, something the organizers are proud of for some reason! Only available on tape!

Trend in imitating the top dancers? That's what competition and creativity is partly about. Take a look at the pro sports teams like football: how many teams have tried the West Coast offense? Take a look at music; the Beatles did many covers of other songs before they made their own sound.

This could very well be the case in Dancesport. I'm sure couples are influenced by other dancers and coaches that they include those influences in their routines, and with some years of experience, they'll create their own moves.
 

SDsalsaguy

Administrator
Staff member
#58
Angelo said:
SDsalsaguy said:
cy_phi said:
Somehow, cheerleading events, aerobic beauty contests, dog shows, find an audience...
Now, now... we mustn't forget poker, bowling, pool, darts and even spelling! :shock: :evil:
And don't forget the immortal hot-dog eating championships
:shock: You're right, how could I have forgot that that receives coverage on ESPN! :shock:
 
#59
Angelo said:
tasche said:
Worth checking out is http://www.nbcolympics.com/rhythmicgymnastics/about.html

Click on judging as they use a system that could concievably be adapted to dancesport

I don't see squat when I get to that page. Is it something you could paste as text into this thread?
Its all flash so I couldn't cut and paste it. It basically states they use 3 sets of judges to judge three types of things. Artistry, Composition and Execution
 
#60
Warren J. Dew said:
cy_phi said:
Speaking of the term 'ballroom dancing'. Doesn't this term conjure up thoughts of something grandparents and parents do? Something seen on the Lawrence Welk show?
Not among today's collegiate youth, as far as I can tell. They're not old enough to have heard of the Lawrence Welk show, and their parents danced freestyle, not ballroom - heck, even their grandparents danced swing, not ballroom. When today's youth look around, what they see is that most "old people" dance swing and freestyle, if they dance at all. Sure, there are movies from the '20s with ballroom dance in them - but the people in those movies don't look old at all!

I don't mean to offend folks but what our favorite activity needs is an injection of youth. I do dread, like Adwiz, of telling non-dancing folks that I do competitive ballroom dancing. I gets wise cracks from my male friends about dancing with grandmothers and so forth.
Maybe it's your friends that need an injection of youth, if they can't handle an activity your grandmother could do. (Or maybe they're just worried that you'll get all the girls!)

Perhaps this is what ESPN tried to do but just couldn't come up with an audience. Somehow, cheerleading events, aerobic beauty contests, dog shows, find an audience, why can't Dancepsort?
Maybe the latin costumes aren't revealing enough?

Okay, just kidding about the costumes!
Well, I guess ballroom dancing is what it is...and for those folks who have this impression in mind that ballroom dancing = old people activity, shame on them for passing up such a wonderful activity. It's for all ages.

Yeah, those guys probably need to grow up a little. Besides I'd rather be dancing with all the girls than swigging beer, and getting fat while watching sporting events, something I did often pre-dancing days.

I like the ladies Latin outfits skimpier... :)
 

Dance Ads