Cutbacks in Comp Prizes?

[pnoisette]

Has anyone else noticed that recent competitions are getting, shall we say, stingy about prizes and awards? An upcoming comp I will be attending now has no actual cash prizes for "scholarship" categories, only vouchers for next year's comps--which we may or may not be in. Another recent comp had no trophies (and no award presentations). Participating gifts are no longer the classy looking statuettes but cheap bags that fall apart in a week, etc., etc. Understood that comps are getting expensive, but I thought the whole point of cash awards for scholarship categories was to enable students to pay for more lessons? And yes, there is the joy of dancing at a competition but not meaning to sound greedy, sometimes tangible awards are nice too.

[Laura]

I don't win enough to notice that the prizes have gotten smaller!

[tanya_the_dancer]

I'd say I didn't notice it, at least on the closed levels. At one comp though, I was mildly annoyed when they cut prizes in half if they had less than 5 couples in the scholarship, yet they offerend the scholarship in 3(!) age categories: under 35, 35 -55 and 55+, even though there are usually few under 35 competitors compared to the other 2 groups. Another similar sized comp I've been to didn't have age categories for scholarships at all.

[fascination]

and I spend too much on a comp for most awards to even be relevant...and I really don't care much...as long as the organizers are friendly and helpful, I'm good

[elisedance]

Its a pit-filled road: currently many comps are funded by Pro/Am competitors, cutting scholarships will undoubtedly reduce the number of entrants at the higher level - which will likely make the comp less of a 'must do' down the line. It would be interesting to compare the number of entrants in comparison to the 'pot'. One tight comp I recently went to had almost no scholarship entrants at all

One comp, where the entrace was $35 per heat was giving a $5/2/1 coupons for 1-3rd place. Frankly, I that find that insulting and would much rather have a trophy, however gaudy, to stack in the basement and show a future grandchild.

[Laura]

cutting scholarships will undoubtedly reduce the number of entrants at the higher level
I don't know about that -- it really depends on how it's done and what the rest of the comp is like. The women I know doing high level scholarships certainly aren't doing it for the money. There simply is not enough money involved to even make a dent in the cost of the competition. Rather, they do it because the Scholarship events are considered to be the most prestigious, and because they are often run at night when there is an actual audience to dance in front of. For me the "actual audience to dance in front of" is the biggest draw.

One comp, where the entrace was $35 per heat was giving a $5/2/1 coupons for 1-3rd place. Frankly, I that find that insulting and would much rather have a trophy, however gaudy, to stack in the basement and show a future grandchild.
I have the reverse feeling -- I throw out the trophies, or give them to my local ballroom club where they are recycled into prizes for the Pre-teen and Junior events. I'd much rather have the $5 coupon. I once got a coupon for one free entry for coming in 6th in a Scholarship, which was nifty to me because previously the places below 3rd never got anything at all. I figure a coupon worth $35 was better than nothing!

[cornutt]

The women I know doing high level scholarships certainly aren't doing it for the money. There simply is not enough money involved to even make a dent in the cost of the competition. Rather, they do it because the Scholarship events are considered to be the most prestigious, and because they are often run at night when there is an actual audience to dance in front of.

This touches on a point that I thought about bringing up earlier on one of the "how do we encourage more adult-start competitors" threads, but didn't because it didn't quite fit in. I was going to start a new thread for it, but I think it fits in here.

I believe that for many of the closed and syllabus-level competitors, their main motivation for competing, other than self-motivation to improve, is recognition. This doesn't necessarily mean a cash award, but it does mean that success is acknowledged somehow. The main means for achieving this acknowledgement is the awards announcements/ceremonies. The actual prizes I think are secondary -- it's receiving the announcement and the tangible acknowledgement of the accomplishment that matters.

Which brings me to the topic. I've noticed a trend the past few years for comps to break up awards periods and spend as little time as possible on them. A comp will blow through 50 heats' worth of awards in five minutes, announcing winners only by first names or numbers, and doing it so fast that even the competitors themselves, armed with their heat lists, can't keep up. Not much satisfaction in that. And the awards periods aren't necessarily done on a schedule; the organizers just throw them wherever they have a few minutes free. That means that competitors that have left the ballroom, perhaps to change or get ready for dinner or whatever, sometimes miss their awards altogether. People go home not even knowing how they did in half of their heats, and have to wait another week until all the results are posted on the Web site.

There's got to be a better way somehow. I know that doing a long ceremony with medals and people standing on Olympic platforms just isn't practical for every heat. Maybe the awards annoucements for the syllabus heats needs to be dispensed with altogether, as currently all it does is waste time and it doesn't really satisfy anyone. I could envision something like a video screen with a scrolling list of results for the current session, into which the scruitneer's computer inserts results as soon as the scrutineer has completed entering each heat. (A similar system could be used for posting callbacks, so that competitors don't have to wait until the semi/final to find out if they are called back or not.) I also think a printout should be posted at the end of each session that everyone can go look at. Things like prize coupons could be compiled at the end of each sesssion, and each competitor could pick theirs up from the registrar. (Hint: A sufficiently clever computer system could print the prize coupons for each competitor automatically.)

[elisedance]

I don't know about that -- it really depends on how it's done and what the rest of the comp is like. The women I know doing high level scholarships certainly aren't doing it for the money. There simply is not enough money involved to even make a dent in the cost of the competition. Rather, they do it because the Scholarship events are considered to be the most prestigious, and because they are often run at night when there is an actual audience to dance in front of. For me the "actual audience to dance in front of" is the biggest draw.


I know its not a lot compared to the thousands that a comp costs but for me a cash award of $250 actually does make a difference - at least it covers my enterance fees. Since most competitions do not give a trophy (or anything else) in the scholarhip event, the cash award is also symbolic of the value of winning (whether you like it or not).


I have the reverse feeling -- I throw out the trophies, or give them to my local ballroom club where they are recycled into prizes for the Pre-teen and Junior events. I'd much rather have the $5 coupon. I once got a coupon for one free entry for coming in 6th in a Scholarship, which was nifty to me because previously the places below 3rd never got anything at all. I figure a coupon worth $35 was better than nothing!

Sorry, but I am a bit confused from from the paragraph above: you consider a $5 coupon (or $35 entrance fee) better than nothing but a $250 (or more) award to be dispensible?

If you are going to get an award the entrance fee should be the very minimum at 1st place. Anything else is disingenuous since the organizers are still making a profit from your performance.

[Laura]

I've noticed a trend the past few years for comps to break up awards periods and spend as little time as possible on them. A comp will blow through 50 heats' worth of awards in five minutes, announcing winners only by first names or numbers, and doing it so fast that even the competitors themselves, armed with their heat lists, can't keep up. Not much satisfaction in that. And the awards periods aren't necessarily done on a schedule; the organizers just throw them wherever they have a few minutes free. That means that competitors that have left the ballroom, perhaps to change or get ready for dinner or whatever, sometimes miss their awards altogether. People go home not even knowing how they did in half of their heats, and have to wait another week until all the results are posted on the Web site.
This is simply poor planning on the organizer's part. It is 100% completely possible to reasonably estimate how much time it takes for awards and to schedule awards breaks. Really, it all depends on who is setting the schedule for the competition. We don't really have this problem in my area, because there is one local person who tends to scrutineer and set the schedule for the majority of the local comps. She has been quite willing to teach others how to do what she does, and in fact I learned everything I know about setting schedules for a comp from her.

When I set a schedule, I put an awards break every 45 minutes to 1 hour (and as time goes on I'm getting closer to hitting it every 45 minutes), and I know how to figure out based on the number of heats danced and the number of competitors per heat how long I should make the awards break. This, then, can all go into the printed program so that people will know what is up.

Now, sometimes when a comp gets behind for whatever reason, the Chairman of Judges will decide to plow on ahead to get the comp back on schedule. After all, a daytime session needs to end on time so that the ballroom can be cleaned up and re-set for the evening session. But still, if the session is appropriately planned, then this is all doable.

Sometimes the best laid plans go out the window, though, because in Pro/Am comps it is basically policy to NEVER turn away a late entry, so long as there is some way to shoehorn it in. This can result in more heats being run between awards breaks, or awards being hurried. But this is an exception rather than the rule, because a skilled planner usually leaves a little extra slop in the schedule here and there to accommodate the inevitable last-minute additions.

(A similar system could be used for posting callbacks, so that competitors don't have to wait until the semi/final to find out if they are called back or not.)
This is already possible, again it's just a matter of style. In competitions that use O2CM, this can happen pretty much instantaneously and the recalls can be shown on a screen in the ondeck or warmup area (this is what we do at our local USA Dance comps). At comps that use CompMgr, a good Scrutineer still inputs the recalls as the runners hand them in, and a recall sheet can be printed and posted in short order. Often the recalls are handed to the deck captain, and competitors can go check to see if they made the next round or not.

Now, sometimes the organizers or Chairman prefer that people be held in suspense, and so will only announce the recalls from the podium just before the event. This is not my favorite way of doing things, but some people consider it to be "traditional" and so still choose to do it this way.

I also think a printout should be posted at the end of each session that everyone can go look at.
You mean of the marks? Again, this depends on the organizer and Scrutineer. When I work at a comp that uses O2CM, I print out the marks at each Awards break and put them into a three-ring binder that sits at the Registration table. People can come by at any time and look at their marks. I used to tape them to the wall, but various venues did not like the tape marks being left behind, plus there was a big problem with people taking the marks down and walking off with them -- even though it explicitly states in the NDCA rule book that removing the marks like that is grounds for discipline. When I work at a comp that uses CompMgr, I don't get the marks out quite as fast, but still either I or the Scrutineer prints them as we go, and one of us puts them in the book.

Things like prize coupons could be compiled at the end of each sesssion, and each competitor could pick theirs up from the registrar.
I'm curious to know where you are going to comps, because once again, the comps that I have been working at are already like this. In fact, when I worked at the International Grand Ball, I had all the prize certificates printed out on IGB letterhead in advance. I gave them to the Scrutineer, and as she got the results she'd fill in the correct names on the coupons so they could be handed out as the awards were announced.

Really, cornutt, you are not asking for anything that isn't already being done by on-the-ball-people who strive to make the events they work at be as competitor-friendly as possible.

[Laura]

I know its not a lot compared to the thousands that a comp costs but for me a cash award of $250 actually does make a difference - at least it covers my enterance fees. Since most competitions do not give a trophy (or anything else) in the scholarhip event, the cash award is also symbolic of the value of winning (whether you like it or not).



Sorry, but I am a bit confused from from the paragraph above: you consider a $5 coupon (or $35 entrance fee) better than nothing but a $250 (or more) award to be dispensible?
No, I never said that a $250 award was dispensable. I just said that I don't dance the Scholarships in hopes of winning the $250, or whatever the amount is. Getting the $5 or $35 coupon or the $250 check is nice, it's just that I'm not one to go picking comps based on how much money they happen to be giving out as Scholarships. I don't count on that money, I don't even think about that money.

I did say that a trophy was dispensable.

If you are going to get an award the entrance fee should be the very minimum at 1st place. Anything else is disingenuous since the organizers are still making a profit from your performance.
I am a bit shocked by you statement, and my reaction is "and who are you to stipulate what the prizes should be?" Look, if you don't like the awards a particular comp gives out, then don't go to it, but be aware that not everyone shares your views.

And of course the competition organizers profit from your performance. If they didn't, if they lost money on people's performances, then there would be little incentive to hold competitions. This is even true for non-Pro/Am comps like collegiate comps and all-Amateur comps. Organizers of these want to run an event and not lose money. And if they make some money, all the better. Organizers of Pro/Am comps do it as a business venture, and thus wouldn't keep doing it if it didn't generate profit. This is not to say that "they're only in it for the money," but rather a statement of fact. I mean really, Safeway isn't there for altruistic means of getting food to the general populace, they are there to make money selling food. Comps are a business. I don't have a problem with this, and in my experience I've been to very well-organized comps where I am treated well and have a good time, and thus have not ever felt "taken" by the organizers.

If there are specific comps and specific organizers that are problematic, then avoid them. But don't paint the whole system with the same brush, as there are other comps that are really well-run.

[tanya_the_dancer]

I would rather have a $ coupon for my single dances, especially at the comps which I am likely to visit repeatedly. I was really pleased that St. Louis Starball switched from giving out stickers to coupons for the next year's entry. The only thing I don't like about these coupons is that they're only valid for next year's comp. I would prefer them to have a shelf life of 2 or 3 years, this way I can alternate between which comps I go to and not lose these coupons. And if I win some money at the scholarship, it does offset costs, even if it is only 10-15% of what I spent to compete.

Also, touching on cornutt's point about awards, I really don't care that much about my awards in single dance events. The ones I do care about are the multi-dance events, like scholarships, and for those they usually do line-up photos and announce your names and all that recognition thing. I don't think it is possible to do more at for the single dance awards without extending competition.

[elisedance]

Also, touching on cornutt's point about awards, I really don't care that much about my awards in single dance events. The ones I do care about are the multi-dance events, like scholarships, and for those they usually do line-up photos and announce your names and all that recognition thing. I don't think it is possible to do more at for the single dance awards without extending competition.

I agree entirely - the single dances are great for warm up and to try something new . But some comps they can be quite dismissive also of pro/am mulitdance events such as by skipping the line up or omitting the results from their published record. At one comp that I was at there was a field of 10 couples and a semi - but the organizers saw it fit to not only skip the line up but to not even mention the 4th to 6th placings.

[syncopationator]

I am a bit shocked by you statement, and my reaction is "and who are you to stipulate what the prizes should be?" Look, if you don't like the awards a particular comp gives out, then don't go to it, but be aware that not everyone shares your views.

And of course the competition organizers profit from your performance. If they didn't, if they lost money on people's performances, then there would be little incentive to hold competitions. This is even true for non-Pro/Am comps like collegiate comps and all-Amateur comps. Organizers of these want to run an event and not lose money. And if they make some money, all the better. Organizers of Pro/Am comps do it as a business venture, and thus wouldn't keep doing it if it didn't generate profit. This is not to say that "they're only in it for the money," but rather a statement of fact. I mean really, Safeway isn't there for altruistic means of getting food to the general populace, they are there to make money selling food. Comps are a business. I don't have a problem with this, and in my experience I've been to very well-organized comps where I am treated well and have a good time, and thus have not ever felt "taken" by the organizers.

If there are specific comps and specific organizers that are problematic, then avoid them. But don't paint the whole system with the same brush, as there are other comps that are really well-run.

I don't think Elisedance has said anything wrong and she certainly does not deserve your criticisms.

The whole point of this forum is for fellow dancers to post their thoughts on a variety of topics which is exactly what she did.

The truth is that each competitor has a different motivation for entering a competition. Some do it for fun, some for the love of competiting, some for exercise, some for recognition (i.e. trophies/awards, etc), and yes, some for the prize money, among other reasons I'm sure. There is no right or wrong reason. The smart organizers understand this and find creative ways to attract entries.

[Laura]

I agree entirely - the single dances are great for warm up and to try something new . But some comps they can be quite dismissive also of pro/am mulitdance events such as by skipping the line up or omitting the results from their published record. At one comp that I was at there was a field of 10 couples and a semi - but the organizers saw it fit to not only skip the line up but to not even mention the 4th to 6th placings.
That's a real shame.

I heartily suggest that you come out for the San Francisco Open next year. For the Scholarships, even the Syllabus ones, the finalists get lined up behind a curtain on the dais. Then they each get announced one at a time and walk through the curtain and down a few steps onto the floor. It is very fun that each Pro/Am team gets to make a "big entrance" like this.

When the awards are given out, the finalists are brought onto the floor, and each place is announced, and everyone lines up and does the "kiss kiss" thing while the photographer takes their picture.

I can't speak for how much money you stand to win in the Scholarship (you can find that out the web site), I do know that this organizer sometimes give vouchers for lower places rather than a check, but it's a good comp and a lot of fun. Also, since they run some Pre-Teen/Junior and Adult Amateur events in the same daytime session as the Pro/Am, there's actually a decent sized audience there to cheer the competitors on.

[mamboqueen]

I didn't get lined up behind a curtain and get announced in SF. Maybe they just started this? I'm actually glad it didn't happen when I was there...I'm sure I would have tripped.

[Laura]

I don't think Elisedance has said anything wrong and she certainly does not deserve your criticisms.
I'm sorry, but I do think I needed to say something. And I don't feel that I heaped criticism on her other than me saying that I found her comment about how much money the organizers should give out to be shocking. I have over 10 years experience dancing in Pro/Am comps and furthermore I am becoming more and more involved with organizing and running competitions. Therefore I feel I have a rather unique perspective on what is done, how it is done, and why.

When it comes to Pro/Am competitions there are definitely problems, and areas that can be improved, but I also think that people make requests and demands not understanding how and why things are the way they are, and what can be changed. These comments are always interesting, and it is always useful to hear what people have to say. I certainly do not intend to stifle conversation at all, and it is unfortunate that you took my remarks that way.

[Laura]

I didn't get lined up behind a curtain and get announced in SF. Maybe they just started this? I'm actually glad it didn't happen when I was there...I'm sure I would have tripped.
Let's see that was 2006, right? The organizer started it at the IGB in 2006 so that was after the 2006 SF Open. Now, this is no guarantee that the organizer will continue to do this forever, but it has happened and it was fun!

I know what you mean about tripping...I was terrified I'd trip when I had to do it. I don't think I've ever actually seen someone trip, though!

[and123]

....and then there are those of us who can only afford single-dance events and don't dance championships/scholarships b/c many those comps stipulate that you must enter X # of single events to be eligible for them. So for some people the single-dance events are just fulfilling an obligation or warming up; for others, they *do* matter. Not picking on anyone here - just reiterating that we all compete for different reasons and have different limitations on what we can and cannot do. Nobody should be denied the chance for recognition in any event. Announcing placements/awards every hour or so instead of squashing them all into one ugly confusing unrecognizable mass is preferable.

[mamboqueen]

yeah, as much as I can handle being out on the floor performing in front of a crowd, I have comfort knowing I'm too focused on what I'm doing to be conscious of others looking at me, plus there are others out there with me. Put the spotlight on me and I'm Lucille Ball!

I am hoping to do SF again next year. Have to speak to pro about it. Really loved the comp AND the city.

P.S. If you have any pull, Laura, maybe you can convince them to go back to the old way ;)

[syncopationator]

I am becoming more and more involved with organizing and running competitions. Therefore I feel I have a rather unique perspective on what is done, how it is done, and why.

Then I hope you take note of what is being discussed on this forum in a positive manner and use it to make your competition better because: the customer is always right.

[Laura]

....and then there are those of us who can only afford single-dance events and don't dance championships/scholarships b/c many those comps stipulate that you must enter X # of single events to be eligible for them.
This is one of my big beefs about the Scholarships -- the only comp I've ever been to where you didn't have to "qualify" by dancing a certain number of single-dance events was the Ohio Star Ball. I wish more comps were like this. It just seems silly to have this so-called "qualification" where there isn't really any "qualifying" done other than spending money!

Fortunately, in my area at least, the DanceSport Series events and the Global Spectrum events are usually run separately from the Scholarships and do not have a "minimum single dance" requirement. This is a good way for Pro/Am teams to get to dance in a multi-dance event without having to put out $$$ for all the single dances. Also, again in my area, there are Pro/Am multi-dance Championships offered that cost less than the Scholarships and do not have a "minimum single dance" requirement.

[Laura]

Then I hope you take note of what is being discussed on this forum in a positive manner and use it to make your competition better because: the customer is always right.
Well, that depends. When there is a problem that can be fixed by the customer being right, then the customer is always right. But there are times and places when the customer is just nuts, and then one has to figure out how to make them feel like they are getting something even if it's not what they wanted at first. For instance, if a customer insisted to me that they should enter a B-age group event when they aren't old enough, then they can't possibly be always right. Or, the time someone insisted to me that I was double-charging them for their tickets and events -- even though there was 100% no record of them ever paying at all, and after the fact we found out that the customer was in fact wrong, that they had never paid us at all. (I made that one right by telling them that they could pay me the original fees, sans late charges, and that if we found out that they had paid us already we would refund 100% of the overcharge.)

Anyway, I get that the message here is "more money given out as Scholarship awards is preferable to less money!" As an organizer I'm all for giving out more money, provided the budget can support it. And I'm also in favor of heaping on other prizes. At the International Grand Ball this year not only were Scholarship checks given out, but also certificates for dance shoes, practice wear, jewelry, hair/makeup sessions, and discounts on dancesport costumes. And this was at various levels, not just the Open Scholarship.

However, this is a very different conversation than "an organizer is being disingenuous by giving out less money in the Scholarship than they take in from the entry fees for it, because the organizer is profiting off of my performance."

Also, please note that I am NOT the organizer of the SF Open or the IGB, I just help with various aspects of comp production for those events (I've done some PR work, a lot of advance work with registration, scheduling, and program production, and was in customer service at the event itself where I did things like straighten out people's ticketing issues, re-arrange people's heats, and handle drops and adds including creating new heats in the schedule when needed). The comps I can claim being on the organizing team of thus far are all USA Dance all-Amateur comps. But as I am very interested in this whole planning thing, I hope to become more involved in larger events in the future.

[Another Elizabeth]

I wish more comps were like this. It just seems silly to have this so-called "qualification" where there isn't really any "qualifying" done other than spending money!
The comparison with USDSC Regionals here is difficult not to draw (although I understand that there are other reasons for the Regionals requirement).

However, this is a very different conversation than "an organizer is being disingenuous by giving out less money in the Scholarship than they take in from the entry fees for it, because the organizer is profiting off of my performance."
I don't think the complaint was that the prizes were less than what the organizers take in from entry fees for the whole Scholarship competition, but that the "prize" for winning an event is less than the amount it takes for one couple to enter that event. It's like setting up a raffle where the tickets cost $5 but none of the prizes are worth more than $3 - why would anyone buy a ticket? The answer, of course, is that the competition itself is fun even if there were no prizes whatsoever. But I can sympathize with the viewpoint that if you can't come up with a first place award that's more valuable than the entry fee, you would be better off giving out nothing at all.

[Laura]

The comparison with USDSC Regionals here is difficult not to draw (although I understand that there are other reasons for the Regionals requirement).
If you mean the USA Dance Regionals, I do follow your comparison. Personally, I would like the Regionals to start to mean something -- like people need to make a placing, or something, to go on to Nationals. Then it would be more like other sports. However, if that had been done right off the bat when the "must attend a Regionals" rule was instituted in 2001, I think a lot of people would have screamed about how "unfair" it was to suddenly make there be a real qualification. Perhaps the time has come to move forward on this.

I don't think the complaint was that the prizes were less than what the organizers take in from entry fees for the whole Scholarship competition, but that the "prize" for winning an event is less than the amount it takes for one couple to enter that event.
Okay, I get you...so, going by what the comps I dance in usually charge: $35 * 5 for the "qualifying" single-dance events (although some only charge $30, and some only make you dance in 4 single-dance events), plus another $125 for the Scholarship event itself (although some only charge $95 for the Scholarship entry fee). That means that first place would be acceptable if it were $300 or more. I guess this point went right by me because at the last year's worth of comps I've been to, first place in the Scholarship has never been less than $300, with some as high as $600 or $800. (I admit I had to go look that up just now, because I usually don't even pay attention to what the prize money is...I looked it up to see if the organizers in my area are "cheap" that way, and by this measure they are not.)

All the competitions I go to publish their prize money on their web sites or in their entry materials, so fortunately people who would like to are able to check in advance to see if the prize money is worth the trouble or not. To answer the original question that was posed in this thread, I do not see any cutbacks in comp prizes. Perhaps levels have been reduced from prior years (I have no way of checking), but not below the $300-for-first-place level I came up with. Here are the comps I used for comparison:
International Grand Ball
Embassy Ball
Hawaii Star Ball
Autumn Dance Classic
Pacific DanceSport
Holiday Dance Classic
California Open
San Francisco Open

[fascination]

Its a pit-filled road: currently many comps are funded by Pro/Am competitors, cutting scholarships will undoubtedly reduce the number of entrants at the higher level - which will likely make the comp less of a 'must do' down the line. It would be interesting to compare the number of entrants in comparison to the 'pot'. One tight comp I recently went to had almost no scholarship entrants at all

One comp, where the entrace was $35 per heat was giving a $5/2/1 coupons for 1-3rd place. Frankly, I that find that insulting and would much rather have a trophy, however gaudy, to stack in the basement and show a future grandchild.not me ...show me the money;)

[fascination]

I don't know about that -- it really depends on how it's done and what the rest of the comp is like. The women I know doing high level scholarships certainly aren't doing it for the money. There simply is not enough money involved to even make a dent in the cost of the competition. Rather, they do it because the Scholarship events are considered to be the most prestigious, and because they are often run at night when there is an actual audience to dance in front of. For me the "actual audience to dance in front of" is the biggest draw.


I have the reverse feeling -- I throw out the trophies, or give them to my local ballroom club where they are recycled into prizes for the Pre-teen and Junior events. I'd much rather have the $5 coupon. I once got a coupon for one free entry for coming in 6th in a Scholarship, which was nifty to me because previously the places below 3rd never got anything at all. I figure a coupon worth $35 was better than nothing!
exactly...it is not unsual for me to toss down 5-6k for a comp...a 250 scholarship is nice but not really relevant at that point

[fascination]

This touches on a point that I thought about bringing up earlier on one of the "how do we encourage more adult-start competitors" threads, but didn't because it didn't quite fit in. I was going to start a new thread for it, but I think it fits in here.

I believe that for many of the closed and syllabus-level competitors, their main motivation for competing, other than self-motivation to improve, is recognition. This doesn't necessarily mean a cash award, but it does mean that success is acknowledged somehow. The main means for achieving this acknowledgement is the awards announcements/ceremonies. The actual prizes I think are secondary -- it's receiving the announcement and the tangible acknowledgement of the accomplishment that matters.

Which brings me to the topic. I've noticed a trend the past few years for comps to break up awards periods and spend as little time as possible on them. A comp will blow through 50 heats' worth of awards in five minutes, announcing winners only by first names or numbers, and doing it so fast that even the competitors themselves, armed with their heat lists, can't keep up. Not much satisfaction in that. And the awards periods aren't necessarily done on a schedule; the organizers just throw them wherever they have a few minutes free. That means that competitors that have left the ballroom, perhaps to change or get ready for dinner or whatever, sometimes miss their awards altogether. People go home not even knowing how they did in half of their heats, and have to wait another week until all the results are posted on the Web site.

There's got to be a better way somehow. I know that doing a long ceremony with medals and people standing on Olympic platforms just isn't practical for every heat. Maybe the awards annoucements for the syllabus heats needs to be dispensed with altogether, as currently all it does is waste time and it doesn't really satisfy anyone. I could envision something like a video screen with a scrolling list of results for the current session, into which the scruitneer's computer inserts results as soon as the scrutineer has completed entering each heat. (A similar system could be used for posting callbacks, so that competitors don't have to wait until the semi/final to find out if they are called back or not.) I also think a printout should be posted at the end of each session that everyone can go look at. Things like prize coupons could be compiled at the end of each sesssion, and each competitor could pick theirs up from the registrar. (Hint: A sufficiently clever computer system could print the prize coupons for each competitor automatically.)meh...maybe I am just goofy but my second and a half of knowing I have beaten someone who is really good or just having placed first b/c I danced well...is really all I need to make the months of agony worthwhile...I don't need any of the frou frou...I know I won.... that is more than enough

[etp777]

I feel same way fascination. Though since I've only done the one comp so far, do still like having that plaque on the wall. :) But that chacha heat where I beat Stan, knowing in general he's better than I am, that was great.

[danceronice]

I still have horseback riding ribbons from day camp when I was ten. I like getting stuff. (Also the stickers from the single dances at Manhattan were useful as I could stick them in my program next to the heat they were from.)

And IAWTC that any little bit helps. Even if it doesn't totally offset the cost of competing, it's still money that I wouldn't otherwise have. Assuming I get good enough that I place high enough to win any money.

[Nik]

I have noticed this too durring the past few months. Some competitions like Heritage have a HUGE Amateur Scholarship but there are not many comps that give anything at all.

From a certain point of view, its fine to not get money because its the amateur division, BUT at least give a trophy for first place. I don't understand the little $0.50 metals, when you could spend $10 for a nice trophy that would at least serve a purpose, not be thrown on a table in the ballroom.

[Laura]

I have noticed this too durring the past few months. Some competitions like Heritage have a HUGE Amateur Scholarship but there are not many comps that give anything at all.
Are you coming out for Embassy? Top six amateur couples in Latin and Standard get $600 each, couples 7-12 get $300 each. That's not huge, but it sure does help to defray the cost of plane tickets.

[mummsie]

I find it strange that you have to pay an entry fee for each event you enter. I guess that helps to pay for the prizes. Here in Australia there is one entry fee to get in the door and you can enter as many events you are entitled too. We recently danced at the Megastars here at the Gold coast. We paid $77 per day each over a 2 day event which for us was a very expensive competition but the organiser had to pay big money for the 2 floor shows - Christopher and Justina Hawkins and Michael Malitowski & Joanna Leunis and it was worth it. The best floor show we have ever seen. We were lucky enough to get 2 placings - 1 third in the Level 4 New Vogue and a 1st in the Level 3 Standard which gave us enough elevation points to go up to level 4 (level 5 is open). For our third place we got a bronze medal and for our 1st place we got a cup. Most comps here these days just have cheap medals for 1st, 2nd and 3rd. Some of the smaller comps you just get a certificate for all placings. Its actually better to get the certificate because at least you can put it in a folder and doesn't take up much space. :-) My son also danced at a recent country comp which cost about $20 to get into and came away with 2 cups and saucers - all place getters got cups for that one :-) I am just happy to come away with a job well done and a piece of paper. Mummsie :-)

[Laura]

Here in Australia there is one entry fee to get in the door and you can enter as many events you are entitled too.
Some competitions in the USA are run this way, too. My ballroom club tends to run our competitions this way. It kind of weirds people out -- you would not believe how many emails I get asking "so what do I owe?" and when I say "nothing, once you've paid to get in the door" they don't quite believe me at first :) I'm speaking about all-amateur competitions here. The last event we did, a very small, low-key, one afternoon/evening kind of thing was priced at $15 USD per person for adults, and $5 USD per person for 18-and-under.

Collegiate/University comps in the US are also often run as "one fee to get in the door -- all you can dance included after that", too. As a non-student, I would usually pay $20 USD per person. Actual students paid significantly less.

Pro/Am comps have always been run as business ventures/profit centers, so per-event entry fees are the way things are done. I know of no Pro/Am comps that are priced as "one fee -- all you can dance".

The Professional comps I've dealt with are usually "one fee per dance event -- includes admission to the ballroom." Of course, broken down, this single fee is enough to cover two general admission ballroom tickets and a modest event entry fee, but it's packaged at one price...guess this is kind of a psychological thing. In my experience, this runs abuot $70 USD - $150 USD per couple.

Its actually better to get the certificate because at least you can put it in a folder and doesn't take up much space. :-)
Ha! I know what you mean...that's why I usually give trophies and plaques away--in 10 years of dancing even a middling competitor like myself can accumulate a lot of stuff!! I saved a really nice medal from a comp I was in earlier this year, a brass trophy cup from something I did last year, and a few ribbons that my last amateur partner & I won in 2005, but I don't keep all the little participation plaques around. But that's just me. I know someone who hangs *everything* on the wall. His living room is like a shrine to competitive dancing :)

[pnoisette]

I know its not a lot compared to the thousands that a comp costs but for me a cash award of $250 actually does make a difference - at least it covers my enterance fees. Since most competitions do not give a trophy (or anything else) in the scholarhip event, the cash award is also symbolic of the value of winning (whether you like it or not).


Don't know about others but I am a working person and dancing is expensive--so while the idealism of competing for all the good reasons exists there is, ultimately, the reality of budgets. The whole point of scholarships is that there is a monetary reward that will help further one's dance education. I was told that originally scholarships actually went directly to dance teachers but NDCA rulings changed so that the money would go to the student who would in all likelihood funnel it back to his/her lessons.

This is another one of the things in dance comps that makes me uneasy-- it's a truth in business issue--calling it a "scholarship" while giving out coupons for next year's competitions seems to be a bit of a bait and switch move. I would hope that the whole point of comps is to encourage, motivate and support dancing and by slowly taking away the incentives that have been mentioned by various people on this thread I think people are going to think a little harder about participating. At an upcominng comp all the pro-am scholarships are vouchers but there is a great trumpeting about how ther top teacher purse has been increased--i.e. teachers who bring in the most students and participate in the most heats. As the "am" part of the pro-am, you better believe it made me hesitate entering this one.:rolleyes:

[samina]

.

However, this is a very different conversation than "an organizer is being disingenuous by giving out less money in the Scholarship than they take in from the entry fees for it, because the organizer is profiting off of my performance."



i don't think that's what elise said... your words here give a whole different meaning. i wasn't the least put off by what i understood her to say, that the first place amount should at least equal what the cost was to enter the scholarship. i don't find that the least shocking... completely reasonable, and i fully agree.

what you've stated here is that what the organizers take in for entry fees should equal what's given out... that's definitely shocking in that from a business perspective, there would be no business...

unless i've misconstrued the intent, perhaps you heard something a bit amiss?

[Laura]

The whole point of scholarships is that there is a monetary reward that will help further one's dance education.
From another perspective, the whole point of the Scholarship is a marketing ploy to attract people to enter the event :) The amounts that will attract people, as shown in this thread, are different from person to person. The justification for giving prize money to Amateurs, who under NDCA rules are not supposed to be making money off their dancing, is made by calling the prize a "Scholarship."

Not the answer you were looking for, I'm sure, but I really think that's how the logic for this thing goes. Maybe I'm cynical, but I just don't think that Pro/Am Scholarships are given out of some sense of altruistic duty to helping deserving dancers further their education.

I do know some people who do have that sense of altruism, and they donate money for Amateur-couple Scholarships to various dance competitions. So it's not all completely venal :)

This is another one of the things in dance comps that makes me uneasy-- it's a truth in business issue--calling it a "scholarship" while giving out coupons for next year's competitions seems to be a bit of a bait and switch move.

You are in Southern California, so I'm trying to figure out which competition you mean. If it's Embassy, note that the Pro/Am events that are handing out the vouchers are not called "Scholarships," but rather "Multi-Dance Events" (I found this out by digging around the web site and the entry forms.) So when it comes to truth-in-business/bait-and-switch word usage for this particular comp, the organizer's aren't using the word "Scholarship." Not that it makes the comp any more lucrative or interesting to you, but since word usage was brought up I thought I'd say something.

By the way, if you're thinking of going to Pacific DanceSport, be aware of this bit of information that is prominently posted in the "Prize Money" section of their web site:

A minimum of 6 couples must compete in each Scholarship Division for scholarships to be awarded in that division. 50% of purse will be awarded when participation requirements are not met.

It's not bait-and-switch if they warn people in advance :) But check the results from last year -- it's quite likely that, based on last year, the comp won't be big enough to award the full amounts this year.

[tangotime]

Are you coming out for Embassy? Top six amateur couples in Latin and Standard get $600 each, couples 7-12 get $300 each. That's not huge, but it sure does help to defray the cost of plane tickets.


Ya,ll would be very disappointed if you competed in the UK !! ( I know,,we can WALK to many of our events :rolleyes: )

[tanya_the_dancer]

i don't think that's what elise said... your words here give a whole different meaning. i wasn't the least put off by what i understood her to say, that the first place amount should at least equal what the cost was to enter the scholarship. i don't find that the least shocking... completely reasonable, and i fully agree.

what you've stated here is that what the organizers take in for entry fees should equal what's given out... that's definitely shocking in that from a business perspective, there would be no business...

unless i've misconstrued the intent, perhaps you heard something a bit amiss?

The way I understand the situation - if I have to enter 4 single dances to do the 4-dance scholarship, and I pay $30 per dance and then $70 for a 4-dance scholarship, I basically have to pay $190 to dance the scholarship. Then the 1st place should definitely pay more than $190. Which is usually the case (the smallest award for a closed scholarship I know of is $250), unless we have undercontested situation and they halved the payout.

And personally, the only problem with vouchers I have is that they expire next year. I would love to be able to use them 2 years later.

[Another Elizabeth]

If you mean the USA Dance Regionals, I do follow your comparison. Personally, I would like the Regionals to start to mean something -- like people need to make a placing, or something, to go on to Nationals. Then it would be more like other sports. However, if that had been done right off the bat when the "must attend a Regionals" rule was instituted in 2001, I think a lot of people would have screamed about how "unfair" it was to suddenly make there be a real qualification. Perhaps the time has come to move forward on this.
Yes, that's what I meant. I'm old, and still using the old terminology. :) (I actually haven't been a member since before the switch to "USA Dance".)

Suzanne Hamby has a great story about prizes when she and Dan Radler were living and competing in England as amateurs. The small competitions would get an assortment of "stuff" donated for prizes, and the couples could choose which item they wanted - first place couple chose first, etc. The policy resulted in their getting a toilet plunger as their first place award for one comp! She said that was the only item in the pile that they really needed. :)

[Laura]

And personally, the only problem with vouchers I have is that they expire next year. I would love to be able to use them 2 years later.
That is a very good point. As a competitor, I agree with you. As someone who also looks at things from the point of view of an organizer, I don't see what the problem would be other than that extending the expiration date might change how predictable the "non-revenue" stream is from year to year. Also, I'm guessing that part of the purpose of the expiration date is to stimulate the voucher holders to come back to the comp the next year, to create some kind of year-on-year repeat traffic. But still, none of this seems unreasonable to me, and it definitely would be a nice thing to do for the competitors. (However I don't have enough experience to know what the business impact of this would be.)

The policy resulted in their getting a toilet plunger as their first place award for one comp!
Ha! I love it! I wonder what a Pro/Am Scholarship winner would think of something like that! :)

I once unloaded a bunch of instructional dance videos at a small local USA Dance comp by handing them out to the winners of various events. In retrospect, I wonder if they should have gone to the 2nd place (or last place?) couples.

[samina]

The way I understand the situation - if I have to enter 4 single dances to do the 4-dance scholarship, and I pay $30 per dance and then $70 for a 4-dance scholarship, I basically have to pay $190 to dance the scholarship. Then the 1st place should definitely pay more than $190. Which is usually the case (the smallest award for a closed scholarship I know of is $250), unless we have undercontested situation and they halved the payout.

yes, you're right... the cost of entering the single dances is part of the cost of entering the scholarship. i quite agree here. "win the scholarship and we'll foot the cost of having entered". which does nothing to defray the thousands spent to prepare for the comp... :)

it's a biz, thru & thru, and i don't have a problem with that. it's not a charity, and i feel the comp organizers should be able to make a thriving profit.

i would like to see how business plans could be adjusted to accommodate significantly larger pro/am scholarship purses, tho... i do happen to think that raising the purses would create more incentive for increased participation and therefore increased profits. i wonder what that balance point of risk would look like...

[Laura]

i do happen to think that raising the purses would create more incentive for increased participation and therefore increased profits.
What you say makes sense, but the comp that bills itself as having the World's Largest Scholarship Purse is consistently, shall we say, under-attended. Meanwhile another comp in the same geographic area that doesn't even give out Scholarship money draws thousands more entries and has Quarter-finals in their Multi-dance events (they don't call them "Scholarships").

So I'm thinking that there is a lot more to this than just purse size.

[samina]

yah, i'm sure there is. and i'm personally extremely under-informed as to the complexities involved in increasing both attendance & the purse. you're in a very advantageous position to sort that out, laura...

what is the comp, btw?

[Laura]

and i'm personally extremely under-informed as to the complexities involved in increasing both attendance & the purse.
I think increasing attendance is in some ways more of an art than a science. But it's also a case of supply and demand. Like, a big comp that is already getting lots of entries might not need to step it up to attract competitors. Look at the Ohio Star Ball, for instance. It doesn't even say on their web site what the Scholarship awards are (or at least, I couldn't find that data quickly). Yet EVERYONE goes to Ohio. The last year I went there were four rounds in my Scholarship event!

What would be interesting is that if a smaller comp upped their scholarship money -- say, doubled it -- without changing any other aspects from one year to the next. Then we could see what kind of difference changing the prize money has. Sure, it would be a financial risk, but I'm just talking about a scientific experiment here :)

My ballroom club did a little experiment with prize money once. Participation in our Championship level events had dropped off, so we offered a $100 first prize scholarship in Latin and in Standard. It didn't make a difference. In fact, we begged couples in the Pre-Champ event to dance up into Championship so they could win the money, and they said no because they didn't have a good Paso yet. But this was for a small all-Amateur comp, which has rather a different dynamic from a Pro/Am comp, so I don't really think this anecdote is proving any points.

[samina]

I think increasing attendance is in some ways more of an art than a science.

yep... make people feel cared for & welcome... and make them feel sexier in some way for having attended. works in restaurants like a charm... :)

What would be interesting is that if a smaller comp upped their scholarship money -- say, doubled it -- without changing any other aspects from one year to the next. Then we could see what kind of difference changing the prize money has. Sure, it would be a financial risk, but I'm just talking about a scientific experiment here :)

exactly -- that's the kind of thinking i'd like to hear & experimentation i'd love to see. would take lots of talking up beforehand, tho, so people really get what's going on, otherwise it would need a two-year investment to make anu useful determination. actually a two-year, well-marketed experiment by a single organizer for all its events would be excellent.

how much money would an organizer stand to risk, i wonder? any though on that, laura? can't really be that much when compared to the overall profit, can't it?

[Laura]

how much money would an organizer stand to risk, i wonder? any though on that, laura? can't really be that much when compared to the overall profit, can't it?
Well, let's do a thought experiment here. Take smaller comp that is kind of struggling but is decently run. Say they are currently offering what is common in my area for Scholarships, that is $300 for 1st, $200 for 2nd, and $100 for 3rd. That's $600 per event. Say they do the customary three levels: Bronze, Silver, and Open (a lot of comps I've been to don't bother with a separate Gold Scholarship). So that's $1800 per style. Multiply that by the four styles, and we've now got $7200 in Scholarship money going out.

Now say that we follow my thought experiment and change nothing but doubling the Scholarship money. That means the organizer has an extra $7200 on their expense sheet.

Without knowing the rest of the expense sheet and what the profit targets are, it is impossible to say how big a risk this is. I don't even want to hazard a guess at this point, because it would be so blind as to be meaningless.

[samina]

there might be an additional fund-raising/marketing activity the organizer could implement at the same time, to offset the risk...

the more comps i attend, i'm sure some specific practical business-making ideas will come to me. as yet, i'm still a newb getting my comp legs...

[mamboqueen]

What you say makes sense, but the comp that bills itself as having the World's Largest Scholarship Purse is consistently, shall we say, under-attended. Meanwhile another comp in the same geographic area that doesn't even give out Scholarship money draws thousands more entries and has Quarter-finals in their Multi-dance events (they don't call them "Scholarships").

So I'm thinking that there is a lot more to this than just purse size.

Which two are you referring to? It could be that the price to get there and compete is particularly high. I thought Millennium had some of the better scholarships?

[Laura]

there might be an additional fund-raising/marketing activity the organizer could implement at the same time, to offset the risk...
Well, I figured something very easy out...this is just a thought experiment, so don't be alarmed :) If entries were raised by $5 each, a small comp of 1440 entries would have the money to offset the $7200 extra in Scholarship money.

So...would people rather have a bigger purse, or save $5 per entry? In other words, in this experiment, would people rather spend an extra $30-$90 in the hopes of possibly winning $600 rather than $300, or would they rather save the money up front?

Or is the real answer something like "I think organizers are making too much money on their comps anyway, and therefore they should just risk it out of their own pocket, and who knows they'll probably make it up on increased volume anyway."

(Obviously the best solution is finding an additional outside stream of revenue, but I was going for EASY here in this thought experiment.)

[meow]

The majority of comps here don't offer prize money at all. There are a couple that do but this doesn't seem to be the defining factor in whether it is considered a 'good' comp. The attendance of comp is dependant on the 'prestige' and 'organisation' - the prize money really doesn't seem to have much of an effect. Also, when prize money is offered, it is usually only for the Pro event and the Open events (Gold). Lower levels don't receive any money. And, as I said, there are not many that offer it anyway.
Most people are happy to be acknowledged - usual practice is for 1st - 3rd to be announced and presented with a trophy; 4th - 6th numbers read out. Major championships will present all finalists, but these can be comps that run for 3 days, like the Aussies.

[fascination]

Well, I figured something very easy out...this is just a thought experiment, so don't be alarmed :) If entries were raised by $5 each, a small comp of 1440 entries would have the money to offset the $7200 extra in Scholarship money.

So...would people rather have a bigger purse, or save $5 per entry? In other words, in this experiment, would people rather spend an extra $30-$90 in the hopes of possibly winning $600 rather than $300, or would they rather save the money up front?

Or is the real answer something like "I think organizers are making too much money on their comps anyway, and therefore they should just risk it out of their own pocket, and who knows they'll probably make it up on increased volume anyway."

(Obviously the best solution is finding an additional outside stream of revenue, but I was going for EASY here in this thought experiment.)forget the purse...cheaper entry plz

[tanya_the_dancer]

yes, you're right... the cost of entering the single dances is part of the cost of entering the scholarship. i quite agree here. "win the scholarship and we'll foot the cost of having entered". which does nothing to defray the thousands spent to prepare for the comp... :)

it's a biz, thru & thru, and i don't have a problem with that. it's not a charity, and i feel the comp organizers should be able to make a thriving profit.

i would like to see how business plans could be adjusted to accommodate significantly larger pro/am scholarship purses, tho... i do happen to think that raising the purses would create more incentive for increased participation and therefore increased profits. i wonder what that balance point of risk would look like...

I guess I don't look at the lessons as part of the cost to prepare for the comp. I mean, even if I decided against going to a certain comp, I would still continue taking lessons in the same quantities. So, the comp-related expenses are: travel (airfare, hotel, food), teacher's travel, teacher's fee, cost of entries, hair appointment, video. If a scholarship win results in 10% of the total for those, I am content.

[danceronice]

I've only done one away comp, but my expenses were travel (train, will be airfare for Ohio, assuming I don't have a full-on panic attack and decide to drive--I am severely phobic about flying), food, per-dance fee (covers teacher's fees and entry fees, same for every comp), video, photos, program (learned my lesson THERE), and session entry fees. ANYTHING that offset that would be good. Heck, that's why I have three jobs lined up and am looking for #4.

[Laura]

Here's another thought experiment...several people have expressed frustration and/or displeasure with the cost of Pro/Am competitions. It seems to me that there might be a market for lower-cost Pro/Am competitions.

Are there any low-cost Pro/Am competitions?
If there were, would you attend them if they were more modest one or two-day affairs, using locally available judges rather than people flown in from all around the country, and without high ticket production items like Pro shows, prize money, fancy lighting, and so on?
Would you care if the competition had no Pro events (and therefore would fall under the NDCA's "Small Comp" rule meaning that the cost of sanctioning the event by the NDCA is very small as compared to regular Pro/Am comps, thus keeping the price down)?
Would you care if it were held in a sports facility rather than in a business hotel?
If there weren't quite as many sub-levels and age-groups offered?
How low is "low" cost to you? $20/single dance entry? $15? $10?
If the entry fees were low enough, would you care if there were Scholarships or not?
Most importantly, would your teacher even be willing to participate in such an event without Top Teacher money being offered?
If some of the sub-levels and age groups were collapsed, would you teacher still be willing to participate seeing that he or she might not be able to bring as many students as they would to a more traditional, hotel-based NDCA comp?

[rjcbear]

Laura,

The Studio where I take lesson has a one day competition that is gear mostly to the ama/ama but some students dance with their pro since they might not have a amateur partner. Is a small comp that might have between 6 - 10 school that are within driving distance to the studio location.

I will love to go to small comp specially if there is lots of heats that are ama/ama. Myself I will not care for scholarship money I will be so happy just to dance with other amateurs that are at the same level as me or a little bit higher.

[Laura]

Is a small comp that might have between 6 - 10 school that are within driving distance to the studio location.
I like this idea of a kind of "intramural" event. A long time ago there were three studios in my city that would take turns hosting comps for each other. They were one afternoon affairs and the entry fee was something like $5 or $7 per event. It was for Pro/Ams, and I don't recall if we paid our teachers since the whole thing was sponsored and run by the studios (i.e., the studio paid the teachers for their time, like they would if the teachers were required to show up for a social dance party).

Obviously it was not a prestigious event, nor did it bring in a lot of money for the organizers, but it was fun and it gave purpose to a lot of students' lessons.

[fascination]

I'd go if it closely preceded a major comp I planned to attend....otherwise not likely

[fascination]

the great race in south bend meets about 3/4 of those criteria Laura

[elisedance]

Here's another thought experiment...several people have expressed frustration and/or displeasure with the cost of Pro/Am competitions. It seems to me that there might be a market for lower-cost Pro/Am competitions.

Are there any low-cost Pro/Am competitions?
If there were, would you attend them if they were more modest one or two-day affairs, using locally available judges rather than people flown in from all around the country, and without high ticket production items like Pro shows, prize money, fancy lighting, and so on?
Would you care if the competition had no Pro events (and therefore would fall under the NDCA's "Small Comp" rule meaning that the cost of sanctioning the event by the NDCA is very small as compared to regular Pro/Am comps, thus keeping the price down)?
Would you care if it were held in a sports facility rather than in a business hotel?
If there weren't quite as many sub-levels and age-groups offered?
How low is "low" cost to you? $20/single dance entry? $15? $10?
If the entry fees were low enough, would you care if there were Scholarships or not?
Most importantly, would your teacher even be willing to participate in such an event without Top Teacher money being offered?
If some of the sub-levels and age groups were collapsed, would you teacher still be willing to participate seeing that he or she might not be able to bring as many students as they would to a more traditional, hotel-based NDCA comp?

Actually, yes, yes and yes! I have stopped doing pro/am for a bit but up till this year pro and I always went the local pro/am comps. They were a chance to mix with our local dancers - supportive fun low key - and lots of chance to be seen and admired for your dancing. If you have any in your area I would strongly recommend them! Obviously, my pro feels the same way - there are practical and emotional reasons for attending these - most of the local judges are there and these events give you a chance to be seen - after all, these are the judges that you will be most exposed to for all your dancing development.

[tanya_the_dancer]

Here's another thought experiment...several people have expressed frustration and/or displeasure with the cost of Pro/Am competitions. It seems to me that there might be a market for lower-cost Pro/Am competitions.

Are there any low-cost Pro/Am competitions?
If there were, would you attend them if they were more modest one or two-day affairs, using locally available judges rather than people flown in from all around the country, and without high ticket production items like Pro shows, prize money, fancy lighting, and so on?
Would you care if the competition had no Pro events (and therefore would fall under the NDCA's "Small Comp" rule meaning that the cost of sanctioning the event by the NDCA is very small as compared to regular Pro/Am comps, thus keeping the price down)?
Would you care if it were held in a sports facility rather than in a business hotel?
If there weren't quite as many sub-levels and age-groups offered?
How low is "low" cost to you? $20/single dance entry? $15? $10?
If the entry fees were low enough, would you care if there were Scholarships or not?
Most importantly, would your teacher even be willing to participate in such an event without Top Teacher money being offered?
If some of the sub-levels and age groups were collapsed, would you teacher still be willing to participate seeing that he or she might not be able to bring as many students as they would to a more traditional, hotel-based NDCA comp?

I think $15 is low.

My teacher probably would not want to go without pro events.

Also, if I have to fly to such competition, location (hotel vs. sport complex) matters. It is a difference between staying in the same hotel and having to rent a car and drive to the venue.

[samina]

having pro/am events where my pro is also competing minimizes travel & hotel costs i'd otherwise have to pay for my pro... he has to be there anyway. if it were an event that did not intersect with his own plans, my costs would go up to accommodate him.

[mamboqueen]

Yeah, but I don't think it means that every pro doesn't still have you pay for some of their travel expenses. I think we've had this discussion before.

[Laura]

I'm still trying to gauge how important offering Scholarships -- especially large ones -- really is. Look at Ohio Star Ball, for instance. People flock to that competition (even people who have said on this thread that the Scholarship amount offered is quite important in their decision whether to attend a comp or not) -- but Ohio doesn't even offer Scholarship events for Syllabus dancers. What makes people willing to go to Ohio (in November, of all times) for a competition that only has a Scholarship event for Open-level Pro/Am teams? It's not like you have a chance of recouping any of your expenses when going to that competition. You don't even get a voucher for the next year.

[mamboqueen]

I don't want to go to Ohio because there is no multi-dance event at all for syllabus dancers. I don't particularly care that it is $$ or not, but I don't personally want to just do single dances. I think a lot of people may be drawn to that event for the Pro events, though. I contemplated it...but the budget does not allow.

[tanya_the_dancer]

I'm still trying to gauge how important offering Scholarships -- especially large ones -- really is. Look at Ohio Star Ball, for instance. People flock to that competition (even people who have said on this thread that the Scholarship amount offered is quite important in their decision whether to attend a comp or not) -- but Ohio doesn't even offer Scholarship events for Syllabus dancers. What makes people willing to go to Ohio (in November, of all times) for a competition that only has a Scholarship event for Open-level Pro/Am teams? It's not like you have a chance of recouping any of your expenses when going to that competition. You don't even get a voucher for the next year.

The way I see it - OSB is an important high-profile event. It's nice to have it on your dance resume, so to speak. Its entry costs are relatively low (I think last year it was $30 per single dance), compared to some other high-profile events, like USDC. Its timing isn't as bad either, again, compared to USDC, or comps during December holiday season. But comps which are not as visible and/or share the weekend with 2-3 other comps have to have extra incentive for people to come.

[samina]

Ohio doesn't even offer Scholarship events for Syllabus dancers.

i did not know that. why indeed...

my first inclination is to change my plans & not go... i guess i could do bronze & silver in two age categories instead? but... well... why do they not do scholarships for syllabus, i wonder!

[Laura]

Samina, I suggest you check the rules for Ohio before you make any more plans. They have restrictions on how many levels and age groups people can enter. Why? Because the comp is so huge and they need to control the number of entries or else it would run for two weeks!

On the plus side, being huge is exciting. The last time I went I was dancing Silver Syllabus. I did two levels in one age group. There were quarter-finals in my single dance events! I also entered the Open Scholarship -- my teacher and I were like "what the heck, it will be exciting and fun" even though I had no hope of even getting out of the first round. We danced it, I enjoyed the excitement of it all, and even got a few recalls to the quarter-final. So, it was all very exciting and satisfying for me.

Another big comp that pulls in people is USDSC, which also does not offer Syllabus Scholarships. Like Ohio Star Ball, it also doesn't even offer Syllabus multi-dance events. Yet people still go.

[tanya_the_dancer]

Samina, I suggest you check the rules for Ohio before you make any more plans. They have restrictions on how many levels and age groups people can enter. Why? Because the comp is so huge and they need to control the number of entries or else it would run for two weeks!

On the plus side, being huge is exciting. The last time I went I was dancing Silver Syllabus. I did two levels in one age group. There were quarter-finals in my single dance events! I also entered the Open Scholarship -- my teacher and I were like "what the heck, it will be exciting and fun" even though I had no hope of even getting out of the first round. We danced it, I enjoyed the excitement of it all, and even got a few recalls to the quarter-final. So, it was all very exciting and satisfying for me.

Another big comp that pulls in people is USDSC, which also does not offer Syllabus Scholarships. Like Ohio Star Ball, it also doesn't even offer Syllabus multi-dance events. Yet people still go.

USDSC offers syllabus multi-dance now. Also, I've heard that it became smaller in recent years.

[Laura]

USDSC offers syllabus multi-dance now.
Ahhh -- I must have missed it when I was looking at the entry forms just now.

[tanya_the_dancer]

Ahhh -- I must have missed it when I was looking at the entry forms just now.

It's the 3rd entry form.

[Laura]

Yep -- I saw the age groups but didn't read all the way across the page to see the Syllabus levels.

I wonder if they've added these events due to the drop-off in registrations that you mentioned? Seems like a way to draw people back. But no prize money, so is the prestige of the event plus being able to watch the other high-level pro and amateur events enough for people?

Anyway, I'm getting the picture that the possibility of winning money seems to be a device that can attract people to a comp that they might not necessarily go to otherwise. And that if a comp is big enough and exciting enough, like Ohio, then such prizes aren't really necessary.

[samina]

Another big comp that pulls in people is USDSC, which also does not offer Syllabus Scholarships. Like Ohio Star Ball, it also doesn't even offer Syllabus multi-dance events. Yet people still go.

the USDC? they have syllabus multi-dance... we established that when i started that thread a few weeks ago...

[samina]

Ahhh -- I must have missed it when I was looking at the entry forms just now.

yes, i found them confusing at first as well

[syncopationator]

Ohio doesn't even offer Scholarship events for Syllabus dancers

This is definitely a huge drawback for me it OSB, not because of the scholarship money, but because I don't get to compete against the ladies. I wish they at least had co-ed syllabus championships or made the single dances co-ed. My OSB competition is usually 2-3 other men in the individual dances - not exactly a competition in my opinion.

But to answer your question of why OSB is so well attended, I think its because OSB has become the national convention for pro/am and; therefore, anyone who is serious about dancing pro/am and can afford it, will make the trip.

[samina]

why would it be the national pro/am convention if they don't offer syllabus scholarships, tho? just seems... backwards.

[Laura]

I think its because OSB has become the national convention for pro/am
I've often felt that OSB was more of a National Pro/Am Championship than the UDC (USDC, previously known as UBC).

OSB does have 30 years of tradition & great comps behind them, that's for sure. It's not like they are a new comp trying to find its way. And they've always kept the momentum, so it's not like they are a comp that used to be good and then kind of fell apart and slipped away.

[samina]

but just for open competitors, i guess... the bulk of pro/am is not open, correct?

[syncopationator]

why would it be the national pro/am convention if they don't offer syllabus scholarships, tho? just seems... backwards.

I meant "national convention" in theory only. Its not really the the national convention for pro/am. It just seems like it is.

[syncopationator]

but just for open competitors, i guess... the bulk of pro/am is not open, correct?

correct

[samina]

I meant "national convention" in theory only. Its not really the the national convention for pro/am. It just seems like it is.

oh yes, i know... my comment still stands. not challenging yours... just the general regard for the comp, which also seemed until now in my own mind the pinnacle for pro/am. but without the scholarships, it excludes me... so i don't get why the regard if the bulk of pro/am competes at the syllabus level.

too bad.

[syncopationator]

oh yes, i know... my comment still stands. not challenging yours... just the general regard for the comp, which also seemed until now in my own mind the pinnacle for pro/am. but without the scholarships, it excludes me... so i don't get why the regard if the bulk of pro/am competes at the syllabus level.

too bad.

Well for you at least you have multiple rounds in each individual syllabus heat, even. Kinda like they do at Blackpool for the pros.

[Laura]

so i don't get why the regard if the bulk of pro/am competes at the syllabus level.
I think the regard comes from it being a very well-run comp with a lot of excitement and tradition behind it. After all, it's the one comp that non-dancers in the US say that they've seen on TV :)

Ohio Star Ball is exciting to me because it's the only Pro/Am comp I've ever been to where there were quarter-finals in my single dance events. I think a lot of people go just because a lot of people go -- even though the Bronze events might start at 8am or earlier. I think the year I danced Silver my roommate was doing Bronze, and her first event was at some god-awful early hour like 7:30am! Winning some single-dance event at a smaller comp, dancing against 3 or 4 other couples, is nothing like dancing through two rounds of eliminations and then waiting to see if you made the final. For some people that kind of thing makes it worth the trip.

My point here is that Ohio Star Ball clearly does not need to entice people with Scholarships to get a good field. And the schedule is so packed (two ballrooms going all day, sometimes split floors are used in the Regency Ballroom) that there's really no place they can add Scholarship events without adding another day to the competition -- which already starts on Tuesday and goes through Sunday.

[samina]

that does sound exciting. i can appreciate that.

my 2nd comp, our single dance events started at 7:30 and i remember how amazed i was that the ballroom was in full bustling regalia... looked like 11pm at a ball. impressed me how dedicated dancers in our community are to accept that as norm... lol

[Laura]

impressed me how dedicated dancers in our community are to accept that as norm... lol
Ha...or CRAZY.

Getting back to the original point of this thread...I wonder if people kvetch about Scholarship events and money only when they don't feel like they are getting enough value otherwise out of the comp? Like, it might not matter so much if a local comp doesn't give out a lot of Scholarship money -- a student might enter it anyway because they don't have to pay any travel expenses for their self or their teacher. But if expenses start to mount, then for some people the possibility of winning money is seen as an offset to the cost of the competition, so some people will be drawn to events with decent purses. But then there are "high value" comps like Ohio that a lot of people will go to anyway, so many that the comp will be very well attended even without the lure of Scholarships, even though some will choose not to attend (for instance, Ohio really isn't high value for syncopationator).

Bringing me to my next question: other than the lure of the possibility of winning a bit of prize money, what gives a comp value, and how many items of value are necessary for a comp to start being thought of as "high value?"

[samina]

Bringing me to my next question: other than the lure of the possibility of winning a bit of prize money, what gives a comp value, and how many items of value are necessary for a comp to start being thought of as "high value?"

prestige of judging & respect given to the competitors. frankly, i would put this at the top of the list, with sensible & comfortable amenities (am not meaning luxurious or recreational by this) following behind.

[etp777]

Quality and amount of competition, esp as a young guy. Age bracket, at least at comps around here, tends to be pretty bare, so I normally see the same two guys only. Think even the FADS nationals here in Chicago I didn't see anyone in our bracket (neither me or the other two guys here in area were competing). That's partly because I'm just doing the FA closed comps so far, but I know that's an ongoing complaint about comps in general. Of course, only way to fix that is to answer your more general questiona bout what creates value, and make sure that those thigns happen. Hrmm, think I'm in a loop here. :)

[Laura]

sensible & comfortable amenities (am not meaning luxurious or recreational by this)
Do you mean as in a well-set-up competition facility with decent changing rooms that aren't miles from the ballroom, places to get food and water, a warm-up area, and so on? That's not a pain in the butt to get to or park at?

[Laura]

prestige of judging
How do you define this? All "big names"? Some "big names"? What about people who are known and respected in their region, but you don't really know who they are because you're from the opposite coast? Foreign judges? If so, how many?

And besides...there might be 25 judges hired for an event, but you're only going to get 3-5 of them for a single-dance event, and probably 5-7 for a multi-dance event or Scholarship. You don't know the panel for your events in advance, you just know who the pool of 25 are. How much does a difference does this make?

respect given to the competitors
What constitutes this, in your mind?

[samina]

exactly... convenience, cleanliness, attention to detail (mirrors, chairs, places to hang thing in changing room...)... water, place to warm up a bit.

and a pervasive sense of welcome & helpfulness.

[Laura]

exactly... convenience, cleanliness, attention to detail (mirrors, chairs, places to hang thing in changing room...)... water, place to warm up a bit..
I think I must really get out and go to comps in other parts of the country, because I'm so used to seeing all this I just assumed it as a basic element of holding a comp, not as an 'extra' that would attract people. Although I can certainly see how the lack of any of this would repel competitors!

(Actually, some of the comps I've been to I've stayed in comp hotel, so I have no idea what all the changing rooms look like.)

[tanya_the_dancer]

In no particular order.

Convenient location, preferably accessible by a shuttle from the airport.
Good floor. I will not go back to a comp which had a particularly crappy floor, unless I hear they got a better one.
Reasonably sized floor in the practice area. I've seen many times the room for the practice area was huge, but the floor they had in it was tiny.
Splitting age group 18-35 into 18-25 and 26-35 is a bad idea, especially at a smaller comp.
Heat lists and detailed results online.
I don't like it when they half scholarship payouts. I think it's cheap. For the record, our local comps don't do so.
Convenient schedule. Now that is different for everyone depending on what styles you do, but having all stuff pertaining to one style in one day helps.

[meow]

Presige of comps here basically is decided by the calibre of competitors it attracts. The top dancers don't bother with small comps so it is the major comps more people want to attend - to compete against top dancers and to watch top dancers. Prize money is basically none existant.
Question: Do you, in the US, have to pay per event entered and/or an entry fee into the comp?
Here, we pay an entry fee only and can dance as many events as we like as long as we remain in our levels and age groups. This is for minor and major comps.

[tanya_the_dancer]

Presige of comps here basically is decided by the calibre of competitors it attracts. The top dancers don't bother with small comps so it is the major comps more people want to attend - to compete against top dancers and to watch top dancers. Prize money is basically none existant.
Question: Do you, in the US, have to pay per event entered and/or an entry fee into the comp?
Here, we pay an entry fee only and can dance as many events as we like as long as we remain in our levels and age groups. This is for minor and major comps.

We have more than one group of comps: USA Dance (amateur), collegiate (also amateur, affiliated with universities) and NDCA, which usually have a mix of pro, pro-am (main target)and am-am. I go to NDCA comps as a pro-am dancer (I compete with my teacher), you pay for each event (it can be a multi-dance event or a single dance), but there are is a possibility to win some money. Maybe posters who have experience with other groups can tell you how it is done there.

[meow]

We have more than one group of comps: USA Dance (amateur), collegiate (also amateur, affiliated with universities) and NDCA, which usually have a mix of pro, pro-am (main target)and am-am. I go to NDCA comps as a pro-am dancer (I compete with my teacher), you pay for each event (it can be a multi-dance event or a single dance), but there are is a possibility to win some money. Maybe posters who have experience with other groups can tell you how it is done there.

We run basically like USA Dance - Dancesport Australia. The rest don't exist here.

[Laura]

Do you, in the US, have to pay per event entered and/or an entry fee into the comp?
It varies, and it totally depends on the competition, regardless of which organization it is run under. Some comps have you pay for tickets to the ballroom and for a per-event entry fee. Some have you pay for an admission ticket only, and you can dance as many entries as you want. Some comps have you pay for entries, and your admission tickets to the ballroom are included in that fee. Fees vary widely. Sometimes there are different policies for Pros, Pro/Ams and Amateur couples all at the same comp.

In summary, pretty much anything goes, it all depends on what the people organizing the comp want to do.

[meow]

Some have you pay for an admission ticket only, and you can dance as many entries as you want.

This is the only way it is done here. Perhaps due to not having Pro-Am; not sure. But, again the dance industry here is always whinging about the cost of dancing so I don't think a comp who tried to charge per event would get any attendance. I think we are pretty lucky in lots of ways - dancing in the US must really cost a fortune.:eek:

[latingal]

I think we are pretty lucky in lots of ways - dancing in the US must really cost a fortune.:eek:

Yes it does (pro-ammer speaking), but at least we have an opportunity to try it....for that I'm grateful.

[tanya_the_dancer]

Yes it does (pro-ammer speaking), but at least we have an opportunity to try it....for that I'm grateful.

Yes, considering how women outnumber men, when it comes to dancing...

[latingal]

Yes, considering how women outnumber men, when it comes to dancing...

Agreed, and as long as the costs don't get TOTALLY out of hand, I do not mind "supporting" pro dancers - through pro-am revenue - who have spent the majority of their young lives learning to dance and dance well (oh yeah, and teach!). At least they have a chance at making a pretty good living here with their current skills.

[meow]

I can see the pro's (ignore the pun):rolleyes:and con's of Pro/Am. As in all things, there are always up sides and down.:)

[elisedance]

One big pro is that it gives women who are serious and want to eventually compete a chance to become good enough to attract a partner. I did pro/am for 6 years up to gold and starting schollarship - and finally got 'the call' to try out with an AM partner. Now we dance/train 7-10 hrs a week and will do our first comp in three weeks! Cross your fingers....

The expense is just a fact. I actually wonder how women get training in other countries. When I take with DP most of the training is on him to lead - sometimes I feel almost like an afterthought. It works well for the male since he has to have his partner there to learn each lead. For this reason I still take privates by miself with my pro/am coach - it means 100% focus on my ability to dance and follow. Its not 'fair' in a sense that I pay for my lesson and also half of our joint one but, as said, its just how it is. The other reality is that because there are so many women who want to dance, the smart ones will, if possible, keep their abilities a bit in advance of their partners.

Just my thoughts - maybe someone with more experience than I would comment if they agree?

[meow]

One big pro is that it gives women who are serious and want to eventually compete a chance to become good enough to attract a partner. I did pro/am for 6 years up to gold and starting schollarship - and finally got 'the call' to try out with an AM partner. Now we dance/train 7-10 hrs a week and will do our first comp in three weeks! Cross your fingers....

The expense is just a fact. I actually wonder how women get training in other countries. When I take with DP most of the training is on him to lead - sometimes I feel almost like an afterthought. It works well for the male since he has to have his partner there to learn each lead. For this reason I still take privates by miself with my pro/am coach - it means 100% focus on my ability to dance and follow. Its not 'fair' in a sense that I pay for my lesson and also half of our joint one but, as said, its just how it is. The other reality is that because there are so many women who want to dance, the smart ones will, if possible, keep their abilities a bit in advance of their partners.

Just my thoughts - maybe someone with more experience than I would comment if they agree?

I have less experience than you but I can see and agree with what you are saying. Here, women have private lessons with a coach but unless they have an AM partner they cannot compete. And, practice is difficult as they have to do this alone as well. Basically, for them to find a partner is to have their coach look around and advertise themselves on the websites here for partners.
Sometimes, if lucky, you can find someone to practice with even if you don't want to partner up with them. But, we don't have Pro/Am. (I know, a different thread so I won't go on).
So, the ones who want to compete have extra lessons to get better, sometimes spread themselves around coaches etc., to get a better chance of finding someone.

[meow]

:DOh, and the very best of luck at the comp!:friend:

[elisedance]

:DOh, and the very best of luck at the comp!:friend:


I have a bigger hurdle to get over first with work - that finishes on the 15th which probably means htat I am going to have an adrenalin explosion on the 16th (with the comp just 5 days away). Gonna be an interesting fall!

[and thanks for the sweet wishes :kitty:]

[pnoisette]

Good floor. I will not go back to a comp which had a particularly crappy floor, unless I hear they got a better one.

I have just come away from the Embassy Ball and am really upset not by a crappy floor but by competitions that don't apply the NDCA ruling of the number of couples allowed on the floor. They crammed 11-12 couples in some heats for advanced levels and it was virtually impossible during the routines like V. Waltz. Couldn't complete half the figures in my routines without having another couple/couples running into us. Not even sure even how the six judges all standing along one side of the floor could even see through the tangle of dancers on the other side. This was the second comp I've been in in the last two months where not only the floor size but where the restrictions about the number of couples on the floor seemed to be disregarded. When dancers work hard practising for the event (not to mention paying a lot of money to participate) it does seem a waste when the facilities get in the way of allowing you to show your best.

[elisedance]

pnoisette
How disappointing and upsetting I assume this was in pro/am? How they treat you on the floor and during the awards tells a lot about if they really appreciate your style of competition or whether just see them as a necessary funding source for the 'real' (read amatuer couple, professional) dancing.

[pnoisette]

EliseDance
if they really appreciate your style of competition or whether just see them as a necessary funding source for the 'real' (read amatuer couple, professional) dancing.

The cynic in me is trying not to see this but it certainly feels like it at times to us pro-ams. But as the more level headed and dedicated of you out there will probably set me straight by saying comps are business. :(

[Laura]

I think before anyone goes condemning the organizers of the Embassy Ball, it might be good to get a clear understanding of what was happening.

They crammed 11-12 couples in some heats for advanced levels and it was virtually impossible during the routines like V. Waltz.
Was this a semi-final or a quarter-final for something? Because it is completely allowed to have more couples on the floor for rounds other than finals. On a floor the size of Embassy's, assuming that a "split" ballroom is not in force, it's acceptable to put 14 couples on for Standard or Smooth, or 16 for Latin or Rhythm. A Semi-final may have up to 14 couples in it. A quarter-final may have up to 28 couples in it (they would dance in two heats of 14). (Note that this is not in the rules anywhere, but is considered acceptable common practice.)

Or, were you in the situation where there were several different competitions being run simultaneously? In that case, I'm not exactly clear on what the rules for numbers of Pro/Am couples mean (III.D.33.b, which I quote below). This is an interesting point and I'm going to ask more knowledgeable people what exactly is meant because I'm curious.

Were you in the situation where the ballroom floor was "split" into two halves, with different dancers and judging panels on each half?

Which NDCA rules are you referring to? I noticed this one:

III.D.33: In Pro/Am events where “multiple competitions” are danced at the same time, no more than eight ( 8) couples may be judged at the same time.
a. Organizers are allowed to “split” the dance floor into two or more “ballrooms”, in which case each panel of judges can adjudicate a maximum of 8 couples at the same time.
b. When the dance floor is split for Pro/Am events no “ballroom” may be smaller than 1,080 square feet.

This was the second comp I've been in in the last two months where not only the floor size but where the restrictions about the number of couples on the floor seemed to be disregarded.
I don't know if you were subjected to "split" floors, but if so the minimum size of 1,080 square feet for Pro/Am events is much less than the rule for minimum size of 2772 (66' x 42') for Championship Pro-only and Amateur only-events. The floor at Embassy is definitely MUCH larger than this 2,772 minimum, which split would create two ballrooms that are both over 1,080 square feet. Unless they've reset the ballroom since 1am this morning, the floor size in there is perfectly legal size for NDCA Pro/Am competitions, even if they used a "split floor." 1,080 feet is quite small.

That said, I despise the use of split floors for Smooth and Standard for anything past Silver level, and would love to see a rule prohibiting it for post-Syllabus level Pro/Am events (i.e.,. Open Gold and higher).

Woah, earthquake (10:29am Pacific). Very minor, just a bit of rocking that lasted about a second. Like a big truck driving by when you are on a bridge. This is the first quake I've ever felt when in Southern California. Fun! :)

[elisedance]

Pro/am at comps are business - but so are am and pro events and that is certainly no excuse for bad treatment. Not in my book anyway. The real problem as I see it is that unike pros and ams, pro/ams have no organization to represent them (we have discussed this before here, maybe ad nausiam! - there are plusses and minuses to it and I really do not mean to stir it up again) they can be treated without concern for any set of rules.

Not only can there be far too many couples on the floor, there is no adjudication for illegal steps in so-called closed heats (have you ever seen a couple called on this - compare it to am comps where often there are several names called each heat) and some competitions cut the music to almost vanishingly short times (try timing it). As we discussed elsewhere recently, the awards can be reduced to nothing (while this is understandable for the single dances which are often uncontested or with very few couples, I have seen them also do so for multidance events even when there has been a semi).

Thats NOT to damn all competitions with the same brush. Many are well run, appreciate the difference between pro/am and its related competitions - and make the whole thing a very worthwhile and enjoyable event. Still, the poor ones will carry on as long as we, the dancers and sponsors of these events, keep participating.

[mamboqueen]

I hate split floors for latin...and I'm sure I'll be terrified when I have to do an open routine on one some day.

[Laura]

In case anyone is curious, I found out that the floor size for Embassy is 48x87, making it the largest NDCA competition floor on the West Coast of the US, and making it (at worst) the third largest NDCA competition floor in the US. By contrast, the rule for the NDCA minimum is 42x66. The person I asked thought that the only competitions that might even have larger floors would be the Ohio Star Ball (I don't know whether the Battelle Hall or the Regency Ballroom floor was meant), and USDC (although this year it's moving to a new location).

[reb]

I have just come away from the Embassy Ball and am really upset not by a crappy floor but by competitions that don't apply the NDCA ruling of the number of couples allowed on the floor. They crammed 11-12 couples in some heats for advanced levels and it was virtually impossible during the routines like V. Waltz. Couldn't complete half the figures in my routines without having another couple/couples running into us. Not even sure even how the six judges all standing along one side of the floor could even see through the tangle of dancers on the other side. This was the second comp I've been in in the last two months where not only the floor size but where the restrictions about the number of couples on the floor seemed to be disregarded. When dancers work hard practising for the event (not to mention paying a lot of money to participate) it does seem a waste when the facilities get in the way of allowing you to show your best.

Hopefully pnoisette will return with answers to the questions raised of 'was this a split floor' scenario, etc. Since pnoisette did not specify - yet did mention 6 judges on one side of the floor which leads me to assume (until and unless we get more info) that it was a full floor event. I was there for a good portion of the silver and above smooth where I saw a full floor in use.

Number of couples/Rules
Thanks Laura for posting the pro/am rule - I don't know any better about the pro/am rules. If it's the 2nd time for you, pnoisette, then you and your pro are . . . prepared. For rule violations - I'm assuming pro/am here - your pro was to go to the chairman of judges (there is both a chair and and co-chair at this event) or try the scrutineers (two also) and they handle your concerns, particularly rules concerns, as you've stated.

Floor
As Laura said - this floor was HUGE! The width seemed normal to me, and in addition, it was really long (looking back I see Laura now posted the actual dimensions!). We're used to pegging the corners to the point of having to go easy on small floors, but this floor was much larger and better than most - and we had a lot more room on the long side to work with. The floor was consistent, without sticky or slick areas.

Recommendation to up-and-coming competitive dancers who read these discussions
For competitive dancers coming up the ranks, while it is good and necessary to engage in healthy debate - and incredibly important to be inquisitive and learn everything there is to know - beware the dark side which leads to distraction from what you can/should control . . . read/reread 'Dance To Your Maximum' by Maximilaan Winkelhuis and go to his workshops - where among other things, you learn to
(a) notice distractions so you can
(b) learn to ignore distractions, and then
(c) concentrate on what you can control - your dancing.

Couldn't complete half the figures in my routines without having another couple/couples running into us

Even if this were a small floor (half the size of this floor) or if there were too many people on the floor (like more than 12), I have one thought . . . leaders' floorcraft.

We probably should rejoin the Embassy discussion for Embassy specifics and leave this thread to the question of cutbacks in prizes - now, how can I do that by example . . .

[Laura]

Okay, so about the prizes. I noticed that Embassy is giving out statuettes of dancers as the Pro/Am participation award. While this particular statuette was not to my own personal taste, I do think it's more interesting/niftier than a flat plaque.

I got a cool statuette at Holiday Ball in Vegas last year, it has an Erte' look about it, and I actually display it on a shelf in my loft. And then at SF Open this year, I got a demitasse set, which I adore.

I wonder if the organizers are spending more on the participation awards that everyone gets, rather than simply putting more money into the Scholarships, which only a few people get?

It will be interesting to see what happens with all this as Pro/Am comps grow larger, and as the growing group of competitors become more sophisticated. I'm really starting to see signs that we are coming out of the "drought" of the past 5-6 years. (And hot damn, I'd better get to working my butt off because some of the up-and-coming Pro/Ams I saw today in the Standard are *awesome*.)

[Casey]

I just track the open scholarship prize money, and have noticed that the Hotlanta money has dropped in recent years. The Global Open 1st used to be $1,000 and now is $800. The B & C Scholarships used to be $600, 500, 400 and something for 4th 5th and 6th and now 1st is $500 and 2d is $300 and decreasing amounts for 3d - 6th. Michael Chapman advertises $1,000 prize money for his open scholarships, but although 1st is $1,000, 2d is only $300 and 3d is $200. There is nothing for 4th - 6th. Heritage also only has prizes for 1st, 2d, 3d -- $500, $300, $200. Manhattan has Global C scholarships, and the prizie money used to be $500 for 1st. Manhattan went up this year, though - 1st is $700. 1st - 6th get prize money. I don't see the prize money for Ohio 2007, but it has been $600, $500, $400, $300 and something for 5th and 6th also.

[Laura]

Well, there we have it: direct proof. Thank you for compiling and sharing this information, Casey.

[reb]

Casey - Thanks!

love data

[Casey]

No problem - my brain is primed for data collection - too bad that's antithetical to "dancing" my routines as opposed to analyzing my way through them!

[elisedance]

Casey,

Is there any similar data for entries? I mean, if entries have also dropped it would make sense.

[Casey]

I don't know about entries except for Hotlanta a couple of years ago being fairly decimated because of falling on a religious holiday. Maybe someone who knows Eddie & Nancy could ask them if there's a connection. But Gary going up in the prize money for Global C is a big plus -- Manhattan is part of the Global series and the prizes for the other Global scholarships was the $1,000 that Hotlanta Global Open used to be. $700 still isn't $800, though and $800 isn't $1,000, to be a bit critical. People have been talking about how big Manhattan is getting, but again, Gary would know why he increased prize money. Michael Chapman and Heritage haven't changed anything, but prize money for 1, 2, 3 only seems pretty lame.

[waltzgirl]

prize money for 1, 2, 3 only seems pretty lame.


How big are the fields? I once saw a pretty bad dancer win $100 for coming in 3rd in a three-couple scholarship.

[elisedance]

WG - thats business - from the am perspective! As has been mentioned, such prizes are a drop in the bucket when you consider the actual cost of competing - entries, pro-fees, travel, hotels, costumes, pro's costs, etc etc. I don't begrude her(?) a penny.

[waltzgirl]

WG - thats business - from the am perspective! As has been mentioned, such prizes are a drop in the bucket when you consider the actual cost of competing - entries, pro-fees, travel, hotels, costumes, pro's costs, etc etc. I don't begrude her(?) a penny.

Oh, I know. I just wish I'd entered that one. I'd have come in third in that field!

[elisedance]

You never know, you might have come in first - the thing is to try (voice of experience there!!).

[reb]

At David Hamilton's Nashville Starz comp in January, the scholarships are:

Open Amateur and Pro-Am Open Events
$500, $400, and $300

Pro-Am Closed Events
$300, $200, and $100

We felt this was great and are grateful (athough it's probably not newsworthy that someone's happy!)

We also saw one couple who entered at the last moment at this comp and captured a 3rd place Open scholarship. More power to them!

[waltzgirl]

You never know, you might have come in first - the thing is to try (voice of experience there!!).


No, it was a bronze scholarship. I was a beginning/intermed. bronze dancer at the time (as I think was the 3rd place dancer) and the first two places were taken by obviously experienced full bronze dancers (wouldn't be surprised if they also danced silver).

[pnoisette]

your pro was to go to the chairman of judges (there is both a chair and and co-chair at this event) or try the scrutineers (two also) and they handle your concerns, particularly rules concerns, as you've stated.

Reb: yes, my pro did complain. The response was that there were 600 late entries they had to shoe horn into the day's program. I am sympathetic to the headaches of the organisers. My own teacher entered late (for which I am not especially thrilled) and I personally think that if a competition deadline is set then it should be observed because if it isn't, well you see the confusion that happens. Heat sheets were not available down to the wire and often voided. Having to cram more people into existing heats is evidently what happened--which did nothing to help the dancing.

No, they did not split the floor. These were single dance heats, separate events.

Yes, the pros will say concentrate on your dancing, don't bother with what you can't control--but that comes with experience, rising levels of skill and familiarity with the whole competition environment. All of which the student dancer has to learn about and integrate over time into his/her experience.
IMO to demand all this of a student without remembering the teacher's own early experience with his/her dancing doesn't exactly bespeak well of the teacher.

[Laura]

IMO to demand all this of a student without remembering the teacher's own early experience with his/her dancing doesn't exactly bespeak well of the teacher.
Perhaps you might want to consider going to smaller comps for a little while until you build your comfort level?

[Joe]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with running 12-person heats on a full-size floor. Are you expecting a semifinal to be run as two heats?

[mamboqueen]

fyi - the Hotlanta closed scholarships are also combined - bronze/silver AND A&B.

I was thinking that maybe instead of the participation gifts (got a frame/clock in SF, a couple of statues and a nice bag from Yankee, a bag from Hotlanta, nothing from Manhattan -- unless pro missed the boat), they might consider giving out a gift certificate to (for instance) the photography or video vendor. I don't really need all the "chatchkies", as nice of a gesture as they are.

[Me]

So much discussion! The scholarship thread caught my attention.


RE Scholarship heats:

If a $50 academic scholarship had a $100 application fee, what kind of an idiot would apply? Don't tell me they'd apply for the glory of filling out the paperwork! It is all a matter of perspective. :) I think it is perfectly understandable for a competitor to question the 'worth' of a 'scholarship' round - that is, after all, the nature of a scholarship, and is what allegedly distinguishes that particular heat from others.

I know that some competitions out there do offer nice scholarship awards, and I think that is wonderful and wish more comps would do that. It's a nice way of saying, "Keep up the good work. We really want you back next year."

[pnoisette]

I guess when I started this thread I really wanted to ask the question: Who and what are competitions for. Pros, amateurs and students, comp owners, the public? To promote ballroom as an art? To make money? Any way it looks as if some comps want to do it all--be all things to all people and the end result is something has to give. if you have big name stars and big time rising star comps the lower end has to give. I noticed Embassy had a lot of Judges from Europe who probably would have been paid fees commensurate with the Euro and we don't have to be reminded about the gap between the dollar and the euro/pound. Not surprisingly at the low end what students/ams got (instead of monetary prizes) were "vouchers." The annoying part of it is that I am willing to bet that it is income from students/amateurs that support these comps--someone correct me if I am wrong--and I am perfectly capable of being off the wall at times--I think of the people who enter thousands of heats and the money these entrie generate--so shouldn't their "returns," rewards, whatever, be a little better than cheesy vouchers or cheap gee gaws?

If comp owners are able to more clearly define their target I think it may help the rest of us decide which ones to enter and which to avoid. Right now due to my bitching and moaning some people have advised I concentrate on smaller comps. I try but find the "size" designation isn't helpful at present because small comps sometimes also tend to weight their
goals along the linbes of the big ones. There a lot of people who will tell you they are boycotting comp X or Y since they are clearly out to make money and they have become so big as to be nothing short of being circuses.

[Laura]

they might consider giving out a gift certificate to (for instance) the photography or video vendor
City Lights Ball in San Francisco used to give every entry -- Pro/Am or Amateur couple -- a certificate for a free posed shot with their photography vendor. It was a really nice gesture. I think we also all got water bottles with the City Lights Ball logo on it, which was a useful gesture!

[Laura]

Who and what are competitions for. Pros, amateurs and students, comp owners, the public? To promote ballroom as an art? To make money?
I think when it comes to the big hotel-based comps, the first order of business is to make money. It is the money that allows the comp organizers to do what they want with their comps. And so, after that, the comps start to differentiate.

Embassy, as viewed from the outside, looks like a "prestige" event. This comp is structured to host high-profile IDSF and WDC events -- heck, last year they hosted the WDC Latin World Championship. So, ensuring that the budget will cover these events, and structuring the event so that these events are showcased, is the priority. Hosting a high-level IDSF event is quite expensive -- someone once told me that because of rules concerning how large the floor must be, how many foreign judges must be brought in, and how many foreign couples must be brought in, it can cost over $100k just for that one event. There are a certain number of foreign couples who must be invited, have their transportation and hotel paid for, etc. That's partly why USA Dance has never hosted an IDSF event, even though the IDSF has asked us to. Instead, someone with money and experience needs to host the event, such as the Embassy Ball.

Hotlanta, on the other hand, bills itself as "The Blackpool of Pro/Am" and from that I'm guessing that they focus on the experience the Pro/Am competitors will have. (Heck, pnoisette, if you want to try a big event again, that one sounds like the best possible choice. But then you have to pay to travel to Atlanta.)

Other comps try to strike a balance between showcasing Amateur events, giving the "prestige" Pro/Am events (i.e., the Championships/Scholarships) some play in the evening sessions, and attracting prestige pros from the US and outside.

Still other comps seem to run year in and year out simply because the people who organize them like to organize them.

The annoying part of it is that I am willing to bet that it is income from students/amateurs that support these comps--someone correct me if I am wrong--and I am perfectly capable of being off the wall at times--I think of the people who enter thousands of heats and the money these entrie generate--so shouldn't their "returns," rewards, whatever, be a little better than cheesy vouchers or cheap gee gaws?
I personally feel that if tangible "returns", such as purse money, vis-a-vis entry fees are that overarchingly important to someone, then they might consider turning Pro. That has the added benefit of allowing them to write off some of their competition expenses against their taxes.

As for the people who enter lots of heats, even a $1000 first prize would be spare change compared to what they spend to get to the comp. However, these big players sometimes get returns that the rest of us don't necessarily see. For instance, you know those tables on the risers that were alongside the dais at Embassy? The ones with the signs that said no one was allowed up there unless they had a ticket for those tables? The big money heavy-hitter Pro/Am students from Hong Kong were mostly seated up there.

If comp owners are able to more clearly define their target I think it may help the rest of us decide which ones to enter and which to avoid.
.
.
.
I try but find the "size" designation isn't helpful at present because small comps sometimes also tend to weight their goals along the linbes of the big ones.
Why don't you just ask a lot of questions in advance of the Entry Deadline, and make your decisions based on that? Only you know what is most important to you, and not everyone shares your priorities. This seems to be the only way I can think of (short of actually going to the comp) to decide which competitions are best for you. There are plenty of Pro/Am students on Dance Forums, so I'll bet someone here has gone to pretty much any Pro/Am comp in the country.

There a lot of people who will tell you they are boycotting comp X or Y since they are clearly out to make money and they have become so big as to be nothing short of being circuses.
Do you mean "boycott" (as in, a protest of non-attendance in hopes of causing economic damage and therefore changing the organizer's ways) or simply "choosing not to attend" (because the comp isn't one that the person would enjoy)? For instance, last year I chose not to attend Ohio because I don't like the schedule. It's all just too early in the morning for me, especially coming from the West Coast. I've gone before, and I will go again sometime, but only when I'm really feeling so excited about going that it outweighs what I don't like about the schedule.

You really seemed to hate Embassy, so it is obviously not the comp for you. I've been twice, last year as a Pro/Am competitor and this year just to watch. I found it to be well organized, well set up, well run, and generally fun to be at. Last year I particularly enjoyed that that were quarter-finals in my Pro/Am Championship event. If I had danced this year, there also would have been a quarter-final. Since having a big field to dance against is a big attraction for me, Embassy is kind of an ideal event. Another big priority for me is how/when the events are scheduled. It's much better for my teacher if he does not have to dance any Pro/Am events in the same session as his Professional event -- and there are some comps out there that put the Open Pro/Am on in the same evening as the Professional event in the same style! To me that is poor planning, so I tend to avoid those competitions. Another factor is airfare and hotel costs --- I could drive to Embassy if I wanted, and the room rate was only $129/night, so it was more attractive to me than Manhattan was, which required a $400 air ticket and over $200/night for the hotel. So, as you can see, my priorities are completely different from yours.

Think about what you really want, and then ask around to see if people can recommend a competition that suits your needs.

[reb]

Not surprisingly at the low end what students/ams got (instead of monetary prizes) were "vouchers."
No opinion or judgement implied here . . . it seems to me that scholarships are where its regarding 'money'.

I'll bet:

The stickers (1st, 2nd, 3rd) are more important for beginners than for more experienced dancers
The vouchers have some relevance for those planning on returning (but mostly as a marketing tool for the organizers - and I don't know how useful they prove to be)I guess I think of scholarship money and the stickers/vouchers/trinkets as separate issues - maybe its just me - I'm sure there are many people to whom both are important.