Time for competitions to evolve ?

[Gadget]

~snip~could lobby for things like transparent judging criteria, standardised categories ~ organise a national league table of dancers with rankings, ~ represent the interests of all MJ dancers ~ providing information on dance-related matters (maybe a list of dance physio and other therapists), print cool t-shirts, negotiate discounts with dance events, and generally be good eggs...~ I think dancers could benefit from having a voice, independently of the ceroc, leroc and other organisations. I particularly think that competitive dancers would benefit from having a voice in relation to the competition organisers - but we competitors are in a very small minority when compared with the number of MJ dancers in the UK.

So what does this forum do?

- It is (relatively) independent - views are aired from every MJ corner no matter what the organisation.
- There have been discounts for forum members to various events in the past; it's up to the organisers to arrange this, but perhaps a bit of pro-active marketing of the forum to competition organisers may help.
- there is all manor of dance related information here
- people make their views known about competitions, judging and events.
- there are numerous discussion topics about definitions; beginner, intermediate, advanced, modern jive... we still haven't come to a unified conclusion.
- you want a cool forum T-shirt? see Emma.
- you want a good egg? see <strike>Andy</strike>, <strike>Chris</strike>, <strike>Mikey</strike>, <strike>Smurf</strike>, erm... well, I'm sure there are some here

The only thing I see absent is a "league table". How would you work it? You can't just award points for places, since the level of competition may be harder... I see another thread looming.
Although perhaps a space in the user page for results and qualifications would be quite cool.

Back on-topic, competitions are all about seeing who is best and seeing how you compare to everyone else; a level indicator for your dancing. Correct? Although there is an element of "fun", this (rarely) has anything to do with the actual dancing or ability of the dancers - which is what the competition is judging.
So you need to find a way to compare dancers and rate them against each other - if you want to judge the 'visual look' of the dance, then you have outside people watching. This is how every dance is judged. But MJ is not every dance. {IMHO} MJ is about the 'feel' of the dance; the connection with your partner; the emersion in the music. Can you rely on "outside" witnesses to see this? Will this be judged higher than flashy moves and 'crowd pleasers'?

The actual schematics of how the competition is run is fairly un-important: there are several methods and styles of competition, in the end it's about how you are judged; how you perform is open to their interpretation and where you are placed is dependant on their decision.
The best competitions try and make sure that there is nothing to detract from how you perform and that the judging is fair; if you have these two premise at the heart of the organisation process, then everything else should fall into place.

[Andy McGregor]

The only thing I see absent is a "league table". How would you work it? You can't just award points for places, since the level of competition may be harder... I see another thread looming.

Come on Gadget, as a fencer you know where a model for this is - or were you leaving something for me to say British fencing have run a national ranking scheme for years: the, rather complicated, instructions are here . The ranking points you receive for each competition is based on the number of ranked fencers and the ranking of those ranked fencers.

It would probably take a year or two for this kind of thing to pan out and it would be for different categories - which equates to the different weapons in the fencing ranking. In theory, it would be possible to assign scores to competitors based on the last few MJ competitions. Everyone knocked out at each level would get the same score of course. All we'd need would be the lists of competitors and how far they'd got, who'd like to see if they can get hold of it? We'd only need names, not email addresses etc so there'd be no breach of confidentiality. And it would need to be an individual ranking as many couples change - but their individual ranking would need to be based on the position each couple reached.

I think it would work - who's willing to bet the Tramp is the UK No 1 ?

p.s. Enough content?

[latinlover]

:The only thing I see absent is a "league table". How would you work it? You can't just award points for places, since the level of competition may be harder... I see another thread looming..

as a non-competitor (beach boogie blues comp last week was our first ever comp,) this seems like a totally logical idea
FWIW I agree with Mr Gadget that the Forum has gone a long way towards acheiving some of these goals (I tried to rep Divissima but was prevented)

Certainly the level of communication is something I have found very stimulating(as well as time -consuming! )
I have no idea how it could be actioned practically ,but surely with all the professional expertise in evidence here it must be possible to formalise things somehow?Andy's fencing comparison seems a good place to start

From my inexperienced position I would have no idea how to categorise our own dancing level (we certainly felt like novices on Friday ) if we were to enter another competition ,and it would also help to know how the "opposition" was rated IMHO

[TheTramp]

I think it would work - who's willing to bet the Tramp is the UK No 1 ?

Not me. That'd undoubtably be Clayton....

Trampy

[Andy McGregor]

Not me. That'd undoubtably be Clayton....

Trampy

As we've only got a few competitions (compared to sports like Fencing) all competitions would have to count. And as Clayton doesn't do them all his score would suffer. A rating system has got to be about competition performance - if you aren't in the competition your performance is zero.

On the other hand, The Tramp does them all, gets placed in every one he enters so he'd probably be the best of the best - that's overall of course


p.s. How's my content?

[Divissima]

So what does this forum do?

No need to be confused, Gadget. I agree that the forum does all the excellent things you mention. However, I guess the difference would be that a separate federation would aim to represent dancers (or competitive dancers) rather than simply provide a forum for them to air their views - by that I mean, the MJDA would actually approach competition organisers (for example) and try to achieve change. Of course, if comp organisers read the forum, they can read people's views and decide whether they think what is being suggested is a good thing and whether to make changes.

As Andy suggested, if you can organise dancers together you maybe get a bit more clout. But then, have you ever heard even two dancers agree on what the definition of an intermediate dancer it, much less 50+ dancers But I guess the aim would be to arrive at some kind of consensus about what dancers want to see happen, and then to work towards change with the organisers (ie without thinking you have all the answers, but at least giving dancers a voice - and maybe some power - with the organisers). So not really a political body as such, but an interest group to be consulted.

[Emma]

~snip
I think Divissima is right. There's only about 50 of us that compete regularly, we all know each other. Why don't we tell the organisers what we want? All we'd need to do was agree it among ourselves...

~snip
Maybe we could run it like party politics. In party politics we argue/debate in private and vote in private but, when we go to the public we present a united front and support whatever policy the majority voted for - whether we voted that way or not (at least that's the objective).

Maybe Franck could set up a competitors zone on this forum. It could be password protected and we could have polls with closing dates. We could then come up with a 'Competitors Manifesto'. Of course, we'd have to be prepared to use the ultimate sanction of not entering a competition if we really didn't agree with the organiser - solidarity and all that Hopefully we'd be a force for good and never have to use that weapon. But the organiser would know we could always ask our membership to stay away if we really didn't like what he was proposing

I'm really still trying to decide if this says 'clique' or 'union' to me...my original reaction was union, but I guess that to me idea of something along these lines only including the '50 regular' (really??) competitors seems more like a clique. An organisation set up as a voice for all competitors, that would be open and available to all dancers whether or not they compete regularly strikes me as more of a union.

It's also worth bearing in mind that (amazingly) not *all* dancers have access to this forum. There are some poor unenlightened fools out there who don't have internet access (or do and don't use it, though clearly they are just weird).

Obviously I have very little competition experience, and no experience of any other danceform competition at ALL...but...don't the people who do fairly regularly come on here and saying things along the lines of 'I would hate to see MJ competition going in the same direction as ballroom'?...and...isn't the idea of introducing more competition classes and league tables rather doing that?

[Divissima]

I'm really still trying to decide if this says 'clique' or 'union' to me...my original reaction was union, but I guess that to me idea of something along these lines only including the '50 regular' (really??) competitors seems more like a clique. An organisation set up as a voice for all competitors, that would be open and available to all dancers whether or not they compete regularly strikes me as more of a union.

That was kind of what I had in mind when I was musing aloud last night - although I find is easier to see the kind of things the MJDA could do for competitive dancers (although I'm quite sure that's because I enjoy competing )

It's also worth bearing in mind that (amazingly) not *all* dancers have access to this forum. There are some poor unenlightened fools out there who don't have internet access (or do and don't use it, though clearly they are just weird).

Good point

Obviously I have very little competition experience, and no experience of any other danceform competition at ALL...but...don't people who do fairly regularly come on here and saying things along the lines of 'I would hate to see MJ competition going in the same direction as ballroom'?...and...isn't the idea of introducing more classes, and league tables rather doing that?

You are quite right, Emma. Lots of dancers feel that way. I think that bringing more definitions and rules into MJ would probably lead in the direction ballroom has gone in - and I think the result could be some kind of split in the dance. But it can't be denied that some MJ dancers take their dancing (and competing) seriously, and train for it as they would for another kind of dancing or competitive sport and whereas, historically, I believe MJ has lost a lot of 'serious' or 'advanced' dancers (call them what you will) to other forms of dancing, I think now many of these dancers want to stay within MJ and are looking for MJ to accommodate them. Historically, it seems to me that MJ hasn't been about that sort of dancing (recently we've touched in discussion on what is the 'spirit of ceroc'), but that doesn't mean it can't evolve in that way. I'm not sure it would necessarily be a good thing - I'm just musing aloud (again).

Apologies for my rambling....

[Divissima]

I might also add that I've met lots of dancers who used to do ballroom who moved to MJ precisely because they didn't like the rigid rules of ballroom.

P.S. Rob - I feel like I've made a mess of your original thread. Sorry
Should we request for it to be split?

[Stuart M]

Obviously I have very little competition experience, and no experience of any other danceform competition at ALL...but...don't people who do fairly regularly come on here and saying things along the lines of 'I would hate to see MJ competition going in the same direction as ballroom'?...and...isn't the idea of introducing more classes, and league tables rather doing that?

As one of those folk Emma's talking about, I'd have given her rep for saying that but I'm not allowed to give her any at the moment. So I have to agree in a post. The more structured the competitions become, the more competition obsessives you end up with, and 50-odd is quite enough, thanks.

I always hate the way competitions skew general public opinion of partner dancing, because they become such a focus. Quite often when non-dancers ask me about it, one of the first questions they ask is something like "So you do it for competitions then?". "Erm, no, I do it to have fun: do you go to a gym in order to enter weightlifting tournaments?"

Anyway, broken record and all that. Oh, and Come Dancing did nothing to dispel the competition perception among the masses, did it?

[Emma]

P.S. Rob - I feel like I've made a mess of your original thread. Sorry
Should we request for it to be split?

Not sure there'd be much of it left if I split it..

As Franck and Sheena are both away at the moment, I'm the only one moderating right now: so please bear with me things don't get tidied up as quickly as usual (even *I* have to step away from the computer occasionally!!)

As one of those folk Emma's talking about, I'd have given her rep for saying that

Awww

[bigdjiver]

... IMHO giving someone negative rep for 'no content' is getting the rep system wrong. ...

Off topic

[Gadget]

...the MJDA would actually approach competition organisers (for example) and try to achieve change. Of course, if comp organisers read the forum, they can read people's views and decide whether they think what is being suggested is a good thing and whether to make changes.

...so people who compete would discuss things, then come to an agreement and then approach a body, asking that things be changed. The promoter asks why, and the MJDA says "because we say so". hmmm...
If i were a promoter, I would rather be a part of that discussion, raise points from my side of things and see exactlywhy a request was being made. How would I do that then? the Forum perhaps?
So the only link in the chain missing is sugesting to the organisers to ask for (or read) any feedback here.

(... but at least giving dancers a voice - and maybe some power - with the organisers). So not really a political body as such, but an interest group to be consulted.

and the forumites are not and interested group? As the recent Mikey incendent demonstrates, this forum has tendrils weaving throught the whole MJ community - it has a voice. Many recent competitions and weekend events have been discussed here and changes have been made as a result of these discussions: How much more power with the organisers do you want?!

As to having it like a political party: (meeting and discussing/arguing in private then puting on a united front {ie lie}) all I can say is AAAAAAAAARG!!!!
Discussion. Open discussion is the only way to settle disputes: you wonder why people disstrust politicians. It's because they discuss things that affect people behind closed doors. If there ever becomes such a thing in MJ, i want no part of it.

[Andy McGregor]

Off topic

Now I know who you are, why pick on me for going off topic? Everyone does it, that's how conversations go. The moderators are there to decide what is completely off-topic - and they do a great job

[Dreadful Scathe]

there is all manor of dance related information here

Yes...mostly rubbish though, unless it has a David B label at the top

- there are numerous discussion topics about definitions; beginner, intermediate, advanced, modern jive... we still haven't come to a unified conclusion.

oops sorry....we have, we just forgot to inform you - heres the link ( http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/everything.html )

- you want a cool forum T-shirt? see Emma.

Literally ? Now i would buy that especially if it had colourful dancer pics on it

- you want a good egg? see <strike>Andy</strike>, <strike>Chris</strike>, <strike>Mikey</strike>, <strike>Smurf</strike>, erm... well, I'm sure there are some here

My name isnt Smurf and I shouldnt be included in the same sentance as those reprobates Anyway, Chris doesnt come on anymore

Back on-topic, competitions are all about seeing who is best and seeing how you compare to everyone else; a level indicator for your dancing. Correct?

Only if you want it to be. "Best" is relative, and you are only comparing to "everyone else" who as actually at the competition. Its not true to say thats what comps "are all about" as everyone has a different reason for doing comps. Dancing at comps for me is more about forcing extroverted behaviour on myself as a sort of thrill thing and in the knowledge that its good for me , i find writing on the forum brings out the same traits. I would dance much better if i went the extra yard in my dancing and lost all my inhibitions, but im not often like that informally and comps are much more stressful. My confidence, believe it or not, is not the greatest . For partners that dont dance with me much, the pained looked I have sometimes is due my thoughts of "damn i buggered that up - aah she noticed - aah concentrate" which leads to me to get worse as I cant concentrate on dancing and still dance. I've been told that my perception isnt always the truth, but some of those at least, were people just being nice. See I have confidence issues. Maybe Im neurotic or something.

Ill start an Agony Smurf thread so you can all tell me your problems. Doctor Scathe is in

So you need to find a way to compare dancers and rate them against each other - if you want to judge the 'visual look' of the dance, then you have outside people watching. This is how every dance is judged. But MJ is not every dance. {IMHO} MJ is about the 'feel' of the dance; the connection with your partner; the emersion in the music. Can you rely on "outside" witnesses to see this? Will this be judged higher than flashy moves and 'crowd pleasers'?

David B did a nice post on this somewhere - about dancing for yourself, partner, crowd or judges - or possibly a mix of them all. Its a good enough idea to rate dancers but it can only ever be from the competition point of view. passports, scores for non-competing people, karate belts wouldnt work Keep it simple and score based on results in comps , everything else depends on too many variables. e.g. Gilbert from Edinburgh - great dancer, hates competitions. So with no comp results...we could only rate him on how good a dancer other people perceive him; he needs to be watched if its the crowds point of view or danced with if you want to "score" based on the followers point of view, but it would have to be just a few people who get to "score" every other dancer the same way if you want a comprehensive rating system (more than a few "raters" and its down to so many other variables, opinions etc.to make the results pointless), and as there are hundreds of beginners, people who stop going at some point etc...and just general movement in the MJ community, who would judge which dancers to rate and when to rate them and then organise going to rate them and when they themselves woud get rated..and...er...? Rate people who go to competitons and enter .....its the only sensible option > Big Points for winning things, small points for getting into semi-finals/finals and the big comps carry more weight ? s'easy

sheesh is that the time....

[Andy McGregor]

As to having it like a political party: (meeting and discussing/arguing in private then puting on a united front {ie lie}) all I can say is AAAAAAAAARG!!!!
Discussion. Open discussion is the only way to settle disputes: you wonder why people disstrust politicians. It's because they discuss things that affect people behind closed doors. If there ever becomes such a thing in MJ, i want no part of it.

That is what democracy is all about. You debate and then you vote. Then you act on the wishes of the majority - if you don't agree with that you live in the wrong country. How do you suggest a country is run then Mr Gadget?

Of course, I refer generally to nationhood and specifically to the democracy we're proposing for dancers. The way Gadget is talking he seems to think the debate is everything - IMHO it's important, but at the end of the day it's what the majority want that's going to save the day

[Sparkles]

Does everyone really want such a distict split between competitors and non-competitors?
I agree that it seems some of the things in comps need to be sorted out, but surely you can just speak to the organisers and ask them - I'm sure if it's a reasonable request (like having a bit of a closer look at the music they play, which should be a simple matter to sort out) they'll do everything they can to help.
Also, have any of the competitors ever run a dancing competition? It's bl**dy hard work! I'm sure you all appreciate that and enjoy the comps, but it must be a bit disheartening for those running them that they put in all this work to make the comps good and enjoyable and then everyone just goes on the forum and moans about them...
Anyway, I'll back off now. I wasn't trying to be rude, I just think the organisers could do with a bit of slack and a bit of support here.

[Gary]

Back on-topic, competitions are all about seeing who is best and seeing how you compare to everyone else; a level indicator for your dancing. Correct?

Not for me. For me they're mostly about doing the best "performance" dancing I can. Other important drawcards are seeing what the groovy interstate/international dancers can do, and getting to dance with them, and often some great workshops. Towards the bottom of my list of priorities is finding out who an unavoidably flawed judging system says are "the best". Of course that's just me.

Although there is an element of "fun", this (rarely) has anything to do with the actual dancing or ability of the dancers - which is what the competition is judging.

Maybe I'm naive but I think that a dance couple having fun would have an edge in performance over another couple who aren't.

[Divissima]

I agree that it seems some of the things in comps need to be sorted out, but surely you can just speak to the organisers and ask them - I'm sure if it's a reasonable request (like having a bit of a closer look at the music they play, which should be a simple matter to sort out) they'll do everything they can to help.

I don't disagree with you, Sparkles. I know that people have spoken to the organisers of some of the comps this year about changing things like music, or category rules. I've done this myself by email in the past and always found the organisers happy to hear feedback and a little constructive criticism.

Also, have any of the competitors ever run a dancing competition? It's bl**dy hard work! I'm sure you all appreciate that and enjoy the comps, but it must be a bit disheartening for those running them that they put in all this work to make the comps good and enjoyable and then everyone just goes on the forum and moans about them...

My recollection from this year's comps (and in fact from previous years') is that people come on the Forum and give a lot of praise where it's due, as well as moaning about the things they didn't like so much. I think organisers appreciate suggestions on how to make improvements for competitors - I'm not just moaning

Anyway, I'll back off now. I wasn't trying to be rude, I just think the organisers could do with a bit of slack and a bit of support here.

Not being rude at all but I think the organisers get both slack and support - as well as criticism - from the Forum.

[Divissima]

...so people who compete would discuss things, then come to an agreement and then approach a body, asking that things be changed. The promoter asks why, and the MJDA says "because we say so". hmmm...
If i were a promoter, I would rather be a part of that discussion, raise points from my side of things and see exactlywhy a request was being made. How would I do that then? the Forum perhaps?
So the only link in the chain missing is sugesting to the organisers to ask for (or read) any feedback here.

Gadget, I think you have misunderstood my post. To save you having to go back and read it, here are the relevant bits:

MJDA would actually approach competition organisers (for example) and try to achieve change....As Andy suggested, if you can organise dancers together you maybe get a bit more clout....the aim would be to arrive at some kind of consensus about what dancers want to see happen, and then to work towards change with the organisers (ie without thinking you have all the answers, but at least giving dancers a voice - and maybe some power - with the organisers). So not really a political body as such, but an interest group to be consulted.

I was suggesting that it would be a dialogue - I certainly wasn't suggesting the MJDA would rock up, slap a list of demands on the table and say 'do this immediately or our members boycott your comp'.

I agree with you that the members of the Forum are an interested group. I'm sure some of the comp organisers do read the threads about their comps - I guess I'm just thinking that the MJDA (who might have members who are not also Forum members) would be able to claim it spoke for its members (whereas, on the forum, we have lots of members each with their own views). But the weakness with the idea is, of course, the members would premably have to agree on something (which may be harder than it sounds )

As to having it like a political party: (meeting and discussing/arguing in private then puting on a united front {ie lie}) all I can say is AAAAAAAAARG!!!!
Discussion. Open discussion is the only way to settle disputes: you wonder why people disstrust politicians. It's because they discuss things that affect people behind closed doors. If there ever becomes such a thing in MJ, i want no part of it.

Again, that's not what I said. I said it should be like an interest group - consulting, discussing, working with other bodies (not just competitions but also the teaching organisations) to develop changes.