USABDA vs NDCA

[superbimmer]

How about starting a controversial topic.

I find myself torn by the slowly escalating disagreements between these organizations. I'm a board member for our USABDA, but also a close acquaintance with top officials with the NDCA ... so I hear both sides. The problem seems to be one of "customer beware". Should anyone control who teaches dancing? If a student wants to pay an fairly inexperienced "teacher" for lessons ... should that be their right? At the same time, however, those charging for dance lessons (even one or two) should not be allowed to compete as amateurs. Too bad we don't have a more systemized way of certifying dance instructors, and classifying who is a pro, and who isn't.

I do sympathize with top amateur competitors who need to "raise" funds for their continued travel and training. We need a better system. But unless we do away with the amateur & pro classifications, so that everyone is level, there will always be this question. What to do ...

[Porfirio Landeros]

Maybe they (the NDCA) could operate more like the Better Business Buruea, in that they don't necessarily certify or regulate what teachers instruct, but they open complaint files and help mediate disputes. These files could be public, and both USABDA and the NDCA can refer people to this information, especially before a student signs a contract for lessons.

I know they already have a means to suspend members that break the law or violate terms of membership, but the NDCA has gone pretty soft on some people - people that have closed studios and left town without giving refunds, extortion, etc...

On the otherside, USABDA could campaign to encourage people to only take from certified instructors, although, they could get accused of playing favorites by un-certified pro's.

[twodance]

One of the top amateur couples last year made over $125,000.00 from doing coaching and shows. This is what they did for a living last year. How can real amatuers who take only one or two lessons a week compete against them fairly. There is a lady in this town that owns a ballroom studio, has teachers working for her, teaches privates and group classes and spends 40 hours a week on her dancing, yet competes as an amatuer. She does this in pro/am and am/am competitions. These are the people that the NDCA has a problem with. The World Dance Council sanctions two governing bodies in each country. One for pros the other for amateurs. The problem is if both bodies get paid for thier services which one is the real pro body? :?

[Sagitta]

Okay I'm getting really confused here!! (I'm also a ballroom newbie!!) I have heard of the USABDA, which holds quite a few dances etc in my area, but have not heard of the NDCA. And this conversation is not making things any clearer for me. :? :oops: Is one supposed to be for pros and another for amateurs as twodance suggests? How do they differ?

[KevinL]

Sagitta,

Check out: www.usabda.org

According to their website:
In furtherance of its educational and charitable purposes and goals, USABDA:

Serves as the National Governing Body for amateur ballroom dancing and DanceSport, the competitive version of ballroom dancing, in the United States subject to the statutes of :
the International DanceSport Federation (IDSF); and
the United States Olympic Committee (USOC);

Organizes and supports programs for the recreational enjoyment of ballroom dancing by all ages and creates affordable opportunities for the general public to participate in ballroom dancing and DanceSport;

Promotes amateur DanceSport as a sport both nationally and internationally and fosters its inclusion in the Olympic and Pan American Games;

Organizes and supports amateur DanceSport events internationally and nationally, including national, regional and local championships;

Selects the elite DanceSport Athletes to represent the United States in the IDSF World DanceSport Championships and the World Games and finances their participation;

Promotes and supports ballroom dance programs in colleges and secondary schools;

Applies special programs to attract beginners to ballroom dancing and to both encourage and assist these dancers in meeting their goals;

Emphasizes to the public the healthful aspects of ballroom dancing; its physical, mental and social benefits;

Organizes and supports programs to increase the number of dancers and to assist in the elevation of dancing skills among amateurs, both competitors and recreational social dancers.


and www.ndca.org


The National Dance
Council of America (NDCA) is the official governing body for dancing in the United States.

Its purpose is to provide, on a nation-wide basis, a united inter-association agency to represent the interests of those in the dance profession and other dance-related entities and organizations and to act as the agency for cooperation with similar councils in other countries.

To also conduct a continuing campaign for the establishment and the maintenance of high standards in dance education, and to acquaint the public with the nature and benefits of these standards and to recognize the status of qualified dance teachers affiliated to member organizations of this Council.

Based on that information it seems that USABDA is for amateurs, and NDCA is for professionals. I should mention though, that USABDA is an affiliate member of NDCA, so any distinction between them is unclear to me.

In my opinion an amateur is someone who doesn't earn money from their art or sport. As soon as someone earns money they are no longer an amateur.

[Sagitta]

Thanks Kevin!! It seems that the organizational descriptions don't really match the reality, or that there is some ambiguity related to NDCA.

[Porfirio Landeros]

I guess you have to start outside the U.S. to get the clearest distinction between the NDCA and USABDA...

The IDSF (International DanceSport Federation) is the world body for amateur dancesport. They were/are working toward getting dancesport in the Olympics. In the meantime, they regulate the official circuit that amateurs compete in. Each country can have a member organization to control the regional amateur dancesport. In the case of the U.S., this is (still) USABDA. For example, when you win the USABDA national championships, you are the OFFICIAL U.S. amateur champion. This would also be the structure for picking the Olympic athletes for dancesport, following the guidelines of the IOC.

The WD&DSC (World Dance & DanceSport Council) is the world's professional body for dancesport. They have acknowledged that the NDCA is the official governing body for professional dancesport in the U.S. The big-time private owned competitions are also part of this circuit, which also allow amateurs to compete as well. You are the official professional U.S. champion if you win their professional nationals competition.

In the not-so-long-ago old days...

The NDCA used to recognized the USABDA membership, and allow you to register for their competitions. This was a nice system, from the perspective of the amateur competitor, because you can find at least one NDCA competition to compete at in any month, and be well seasoned for the "meaningful" USABDA Regional and National championships. Even though the NDCA did not get member fees from amateurs, the organizers collected your entry-fees to participate in their events. So, it seemed everyone won.

What happened? The NDCA was also not happy to know that there were amateurs making money in dancesport, and felt USABDA was not doing a good enough job controlling this. USABDA was actually moving toward the more contemporary view of 'amateur' by allowing top-level competitors to earn some money to help cover their dancesport expenses. As the disagreements became more prevalent, the NDCA decided to stop recognizing the USABDA membership for their competition, and requires amateurs to be members of the NDCA if you want to do their comps.

Now there are two amateur circuits, because the NDCA now has their own "amateur championships" which is held at BYU, and consists mainly of the BYU ballroom dancers.

As an amateur competitor, you're pretty much forced to join both, because USABDA comps are either not frequent enough in your area, or you're sick of competing in gymnasiums, and would enjoy a glamorous NDCA competition from time-to-time.

Also, even though an NDCA event may not be "official" in the eyes of USABDA, the competition is as good as the people that show up, so many NDCA events are just as exciting for amateurs as a USABDA one would be, because you've got the top-Ams there anyway.

Regardless of the NDCA allowing amateurs, they are still very different orgs for structural reasons...

USABDA is a non-profit org, which consists of mostly social dancers, but every member is allowed to vote and/or run for office.

The NDCA is an organization comprised of other organizations that vote for the board. But, if you ask me, the NDCA is pretty much a private company, because not much has changed in the way of offices in a very long time.

I hope this helps you out a little more about distinction between these orgs, and I know that there are people that can fill in some gaps that I left out, or they may have different twists on what was posted here. I'm just summing it up as I have followed the news/gossip...

Feel free to ask anything else about this, as I am an amateur member of both, and compete on both the circuits.

[d nice]

There are many standards at which one can be judged to be a professional. Making money at something is one, the level of ability is another.

I prefer a combination of the two. If someone gains championship status by winning a high level compeition they cease to be amatuers in my mind. They have shown they have a level of skill beyond the norm. If someone makes $5000 in a year they cease to be an amatuer (this shows that they either have been paid regularly for their services or a few large paychecks through performance or competition that they should be comepeting at a professional level. If you are good enough to take money away from professional instrucotrs you are good enough to face them in competition.

[superbimmer]

My wife and I are members of both, for the reasons Porfirio mentioned ... and his description of the governing bodies shows the complexity of the situation. If you're a little confused ... you're NOT ALONE.

I believe that is entirely foreseeable, that the distinction between ams and pros will, someday, be reduced to non-existent. In this, I agree with d nice. For now, serious competitors need to belong to both organizations ... to cover all the significant comps.

Good explaination Porfirio!