USA Dance Nationals 2011--Back to Baltimore!

#22
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.
 

wooh

Well-Known Member
#23
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?
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.
 

wooh

Well-Known Member
#25
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.
 

Joe

Well-Known Member
#27
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.
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.
 

Joe

Well-Known Member
#28
I'm not sure about that actually. I worked the entire 2009 Nationals, and even with it being on the East Coast, I seem to remember the organizers being very worried about even breaking even.
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.
 
#29
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.
Yes, I agree with this.
 

ChaChaMama

Well-Known Member
#33
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.
 
#34
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.
 
#35
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.
 

Joe

Well-Known Member
#38
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.
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%.
 

JANATHOME

Well-Known Member
#40
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.
 

Dance Ads