Ohio Star ball - "Collegiate" comp...yeah right

[Casayoto]

Why is it that the Collegiate National Championships are always overrun by non-students? When I was a student, it always annoyed me to see people competing(and winning) who I knew for a fact weren't students. Now that I'm an alumni, I feel like the only person that respects the rules. Every time I get asked if I'm going, I say "no, I'm not a student". The answer is always something along the lines of, "So what? Neither am I.", followed by a confused look. This is the only competition in the country that I know of that specifically lists being a full time student as a requirement. Should they get rid of that rule since they don't enforce it anyway, in the same way that USA Dance got rid of the amateurs being paid rule? Or should they actually start enforcing it? Or should I just ignore the rule like everyone else and compete there?

[etp777]

I'd vote for enforcing it.

[BasicsFirst]

They probably should change rule and if I was member of appropriate association I'd lead that charge. However, I like the saying (to be applied loosely here): "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me." If the unwritten rule is to ignore certain stated written rule, well you wouldn't have to tell me twice... I'll play the game.

[cshorte]

Why is it that the Collegiate National Championships are always overrun by non-students? When I was a student, it always annoyed me to see people competing(and winning) who I knew for a fact weren't students. Now that I'm an alumni, I feel like the only person that respects the rules. Every time I get asked if I'm going, I say "no, I'm not a student". The answer is always something along the lines of, "So what? Neither am I.", followed by a confused look. This is the only competition in the country that I know of that specifically lists being a full time student as a requirement. Should they get rid of that rule since they don't enforce it anyway, in the same way that USA Dance got rid of the amateurs being paid rule? Or should they actually start enforcing it? Or should I just ignore the rule like everyone else and compete there?

personally i don't mind, and in fact encourage others outside of college/school to join the collegiate community, it adds for an interesting social group such as the one around here in dc, bigger network, more competition... i believe that "you are only as good as those you train around" having a strong community regardless of age has many benefits, and personally i don't see these people as "oh they graduated (or are youth) so they shouldn't be here" i see them as any other person/college student, fun loving people that like to be around people of different/similar backgrounds, i mean if anything ballroom has been a great way to bring "us" together

on another note, around here its not just strictly competitions that we see older couples, we go out, hang out, party... etc etc :P

even if some of these alums/older/youth peops are kicking major tail, its good to aspire to get to that level, its great to see great dancing and have it within your community, its good to have competition, and on top of that i still think most collegiate comps still have that warm vibe that i don't find anywhere else, regardless of who ends out in the finals... i dunno, i could go on forever about this but basically i encourage these couples to continue to come out to comps

[syncopationator]

If I had to guess why the "rule" is not enforced its probably because of money.

Let's be honest, amateur competitions do not generate huge $$$ for the organizers so if I was an organizer of such a competition, I'd probably look the other way. Afterall, someone has to pay for the judges, floor, ballroom etc etc etc...

[kimV6]

but basically i encourage these couples to continue to come out to comps

agreed. plus for me, the place where i would see conspicuous "non-students" is at the higher levels, and at ohio especially, i don't particularly mind them there. last year, the pre-champ standard field was only 5 couples as it was, and the novice field was only a quarter IIRC. as someone who likes competing against people regardless of age/affiliation over an empty floor, if a non-students wants to play with us instead of going upstairs, more power to them.

and honestly, below gold, there's like 100+ couples anyway. i'd probably encourage non-students to compete just to get more people to be interested in ballroom. otherwise where would they go?

moreover, i understand that the name "national collegiate championships" is sort of invalidated if you don't limit non-students... but honestly, who's really walking around pimping their silver title from NCC, outside of to their school administration for more funding?

[hustleNflow]

agreed. plus for me, the place where i would see conspicuous "non-students" is at the higher levels, and at ohio especially, i don't particularly mind them there. last year, the pre-champ standard field was only 5 couples as it was, and the novice field was only a quarter IIRC. as someone who likes competing against people regardless of age/affiliation over an empty floor, if a non-students wants to play with us instead of going upstairs, more power to them.

and honestly, below gold, there's like 100+ couples anyway. i'd probably encourage non-students to compete just to get more people to be interested in ballroom. otherwise where would they go?

moreover, i understand that the name "national collegiate championships" is sort of invalidated if you don't limit non-students... but honestly, who's really walking around pimping their silver title from NCC, outside of to their school administration for more funding?

Ditto to everything you said. I think if they enforced the "you have to actually be in college to compete in this comp" rule, we'd see some of the higher levels disappear altogether, as sometimes 4 years (and sometimes more, assuming said competitor dances for their entire college career, and possibly through grad school) isn't long enough for collegiate competitors to reach that level. And then there's the dilemma of where to make the cut-off of what is considered college age and what isn't - I know on my college team, the bulk of competitors were graduate students, and some were in their late 20s to early 30s, sometimes older. Would they be disallowed to compete just because they weren't part of the traditional 18-22 "college age"? And someone pointed out earlier the "community" factor of college dancing - it's not so much about trying to cater to a certain demographic or to shut out older dancers, it's about just trying to get people interested in dancesport. It's that "the more, the merrier! come play with us!" attitude that has made collegiate dancing so popular in recent years, and is likely to bring in dancesport competitors for life.

And just like kim just said, as cool as it may sound to outsiders, being a collegiate champion doesn't really carry much weight in the dance community. Winning collegiate pre-champ Latin probably won't ever be as "cool" as winning adult pre-champ Latin, but it is a stepping stone. The competitors really looking to improve their dancing and status will go to compete at the adult level. Let's keep college dancing as it is :cool:

[wyllo]

Would they be disallowed to compete just because they weren't part of the traditional 18-22 "college age"? And someone pointed out earlier the "community" factor of college dancing - it's not so much about trying to cater to a certain demographic or to shut out older dancers, it's about just trying to get people interested in dancesport.

A "collegiate competitor" traditionally has been defined as a full-time college student with an age limit of 35. That's more than liberal enough to include most graduate students.

I am all for alumni and adult competitors participating with and helping collegiate teams. It can be a huge asset for the team. But that has nothing to do with whether or not we let these non-students compete in the National Collegiate Championships where the rules say "students only." It's the RULES people. If you don't like it and don't think its fair then petition to have them changed. Otherwise, you are cheating.

Would you knowingly encourage a pre-champ dancer to dance bronze in order to fill the ranks and to win for your team? I think most of us would find that to be offensive. I don't see how it is any different when teams encourage their non-student open dancers to compete.

[SDsalsaguy]

I have to agree with wyllo. Not saying that the rules should stay as they are, but they should either be enforced or changed.

[hustleNflow]

A "collegiate competitor" traditionally has been defined as a full-time college student with an age limit of 35. That's more than liberal enough to include most graduate students.

I am all for alumni and adult competitors participating with and helping collegiate teams. It can be a huge asset for the team. But that has nothing to do with whether or not we let these non-students compete in the National Collegiate Championships where the rules say "students only." It's the RULES people. If you don't like it and don't think its fair then petition to have them changed. Otherwise, you are cheating.

Would you knowingly encourage a pre-champ dancer to dance bronze in order to fill the ranks and to win for your team? I think most of us would find that to be offensive. I don't see how it is any different when teams encourage their non-student open dancers to compete.

Yes, you make a good point about "students only" being a rule, wyllo; however, who seems to be enforcing this rule? If it were as important as it should be, than you would think that competition organizers would be making greater strides to ensure that no "non-students" were slipping through the cracks - whether that be checking ID or what have you. But never once have I been asked to prove at a collegiate comp that I was, in fact, a college student. I daresay that, as someone mentioned earlier, these competition organizers aren't necessarily making a ton of money off collegiate comps, and thus don't really care who is competing and who isn't - as long as there are couples paying the entry fees.

And as for "filling the ranks", I think I should explain myself further. Many of the higher-level college dancers (at least on my team) began dancing at the collegiate level, in syllabus, and dancing in open events at the collegiate level just seemed like a natural progression for them, even though some of them "aged out" of collegiate in the process. It wasn't as though they were already dancing at the adult amateur level and we asked them to "dance down" in order to "fill the ranks"; it was their own choice, as they felt more comfortable on the collegiate floor than they did on the adult one, since that's where they "grew up". My team would NEVER have knowingly asked an advanced dancer to "dance down" in order to improve our team standing. In fact, we were one of the few teams we knew of that religiously followed the proficiency point system, even when it wasn't as strictly as enforced. I myself moved up out of bronze, not because I felt ready to (lord knows I was TERRIFIED to dance silver against some of the other competitors I'd seen!), but because I had pointed out and it was the right thing to do. I can't speak for other college teams, but I knew we followed the "honor system".

And a final word about the "collegiate" status - should it really be so much about age? Yes, while 18-35 is a pretty broad spectrum, there are people in college that are outside of it. We had an exchange student on our team that was 37 and working on her bachelor's degree. Would she not be considered a "collegiate" competitor because of her age, even though she was learning to dance under the same circumstances as every other collegiate competitor (i.e. same financial situation, same course load, same amount of time to devote to dancing, same difficulty finding/coordinating schedules with a partner)? And what about the couple that had dropped out of college for financial reasons, and was still of "collegiate" age, but wanted to participate in the team? They had the exact same training the rest of us had, in the same facilities, under the same coaches. Would they be disqualified from competing in the same comps their teammates did, just because they weren't in college?

[Laura]

But never once have I been asked to prove at a collegiate comp that I was, in fact, a college student.
All the college competitions I've ever been to (all in California) do allow and encourage non-students to compete. I also know a number of student dancers on college teams who have non-student partners. So in the case of individual college's competitions, I can see how it doesn't matter. I also see how these practices could get people into the habit of thinking that the NCC is open to anyone.

[Joe]

I'm of the opinion that the "studentness" rule should be enforced (age range is another issue). If they want to give a grace period (say, a year or two) for partnerships where one person has graduated and the other person is still a student, that's up to the organizers, and it's fine if they decide to do that. I've been invited to compete in the event "because so-and-so is doing it and they're not students," even though I haven't been a student for over a decade, but I've declined. I was there to dance in the adult events, which is where any non-student should be competing at OSB.

[and123]

A number of comps charge lower rates for collegiate vs. adult competitors. If it's so easy to lie and not have your ID checked, comps can lose money from the dancers who lie about their status.

[wyllo]

Yes, you make a good point about "students only" being a rule, wyllo; however, who seems to be enforcing this rule? If it were as important as it should be, than you would think that competition organizers would be making greater strides to ensure that no "non-students" were slipping through the cracks - whether that be checking ID or what have you. But never once have I been asked to prove at a collegiate comp that I was, in fact, a college student. I daresay that, as someone mentioned earlier, these competition organizers aren't necessarily making a ton of money off collegiate comps, and thus don't really care who is competing and who isn't - as long as there are couples paying the entry fees.

As Laura pointed out, many collegiate competitions allow and encourage non-student competitors. I think that's a great practice and as a non-student have taken advantage of it.

The issue is the NCC at Ohio Star Ball which has rules that explicitly limit the competition to college students only. I believe that as a competitor it is your job to know and follow the rules of each competition to the best of your ability. It would be nice if this particular competition could make it clearer through enforcement that you must be a college student, but just because they don't does not invalidate the rule and there are many teams out there that prohibit their non-students from attending the competition.

If the organizers really didn't care as to the student status of the competition then they would get rid of the rule (and attract a much larger pool of competitors).

[Daphna]

Hi to All, I'm writing today as the Registrar for the NCC. As someone stated, the rules for competing at the NCC is that (a) one is a college student with a valid college ID and (b) between the ages of 16-35, and (c) that one is a USA Dance competitive member. The age range allows many of the graduate students who are team members to compete with their teams.

When one registers for the event, one needs to list their college affiliation, and during the packet pick-up I ask everyone for their college ID. Do some people slip through? I'm sure they do. However, I do try to check everyone and make sure that they are students.

I want to thank everyone for their interest and would like everyone to know that the registration and website will be open for business next week (Sept. 22, 2008.)

See you in Ohio
Daphna

[SDsalsaguy]

Thanks for weighing in on this Daphna, and welcome to DF! :D

[Meagan]

In response to whether the rule should be changed, I think that it should be. As someone said it is all about the community and as we've seen at other competitions having non-students participate doesn't take away from the students and certainly doesn't overrun the competition with adults. (not to mention all the age issues and students who can't compete cause they don't have another student to partner them that others mentioned)

I think its great for syllabus dancers to see where they can progress to whether its in their 4 years of college, their 3-8 years of graduate school, or beyond. And if adult competitors want to get the vibe of a college comp I certainly don't blame them, they can be much more fun!

I am a student and I appreciate the Ohio comp for exactly what it is...which is why I plan on dancing in both the college and OSB portions of the comp. I think "collegiate" should be taken in the sense that it normally is, with events being fun and open to all. As much as I've been involved in USADance over the years and appreciate what they do, they already have so many rules that don't allow them to cultivate a "collegiate" atmosphere I don't really understand why they want to make more.

So yes maybe people should follow the rules, but in this case I think the rule should be scrapped altogether.

[Kitty]

Having an atmosphere is great, but Ohio collegiate is a "closed" event. Meagan, do you want to change that? why? there are plenty of "open to all" college comps,

why not have one closed event?

Just because people cannot stay organized for one competition and respect the rules?




So i guess the question is whether people want this to be "the biggest colege comp ever" or "the contest for best _student_ couples"

[Laura]

I'm in agreement with Kitty -- as a non-collegiate dancer I really like being able to dance in collegiate events, but I also see that it's a good and nice thing that there is an actual National Championship for actually-defined Collegiate dancers.

[Meagan]

I just think that keeping it a closed event takes away the fun of a college comp anyway. The fun of going to the comp isn't to say I was the best *student* couple at the blah blah blah in 2008, its to be a part of OSB but in the way that "collegiate" competitors (students or not) enjoy...

I prefer that "collegiate" refers more to the style of the competition than the person allowed to compete and I would be for the rules reflecting that.

[wyllo]

I understand the limitations these rules place on couples. At the moment I fully qualify for NCC but my partner does not so we cannot attend and will be doing the amateur portion of OSB. But I also think it's really nice to have one competition in the nation that is just a chance for legitimate students to represent their colleges and I suspect this is the motivation for holding the event. If you take that away, the end result may not be to allow non-students but rather to merge the event into the rest of the OSB events.

[wyllo]

When one registers for the event, one needs to list their college affiliation, and during the packet pick-up I ask everyone for their college ID. Do some people slip through? I'm sure they do. However, I do try to check everyone and make sure that they are students.

Unfortunately they do. Many colleges do not put expiration dates on college IDs so people just continue to use them after the graduate. I'm not sure how you would be able to check for that. But it might be simpler just to send a letter to all the teams and ask them to honor their rules. As this forum indicates many people seem to think that the rule is not meant to be enforced.

[skwiggy]

I've been invited to compete in the event "because so-and-so is doing it and they're not students,"

Yup. I feel like I have this conversation every single year with someone different who wants to fill up the sparse collegiate open events.

If they changed the rules, I would definitely enter. I would love to have more dancing packed into my trip. And I do enter plenty of collegiate comps that are open to non-students. But I don't think breaking the rules is any more fair just because "everyone else does it".

[xxtupikxx]

Generally speaking rules that are on paper should be inforced.

Hower, I would say that i have personally never been annoyed by an older (probably non-student) couple participating at a collegiate event. The greater problem to me seems that many couples reguardless of their age of status choose to dance down making it diffucult for new dancers to be successful in syllabus categories.

[reb]

Why is it that the Collegiate National Championships are always overrun by non-students? When I was a student, it always annoyed me to see people competing(and winning) who I knew for a fact weren't students. Now that I'm an alumni, I feel like the only person that respects the rules. Every time I get asked if I'm going, I say "no, I'm not a student". The answer is always something along the lines of, "So what? Neither am I.", followed by a confused look. This is the only competition in the country that I know of that specifically lists being a full time student as a requirement. Should they get rid of that rule since they don't enforce it anyway, in the same way that USA Dance got rid of the amateurs being paid rule? Or should they actually start enforcing it? Or should I just ignore the rule like everyone else and compete there?

Is this addressed by Daphna's response??

Hi to All, I'm writing today as the Registrar for the NCC. As someone stated, the rules for competing at the NCC is that (a) one is a college student with a valid college ID and (b) between the ages of 16-35, and (c) that one is a USA Dance competitive member. The age range allows many of the graduate students who are team members to compete with their teams.

When one registers for the event, one needs to list their college affiliation, and during the packet pick-up I ask everyone for their college ID. Do some people slip through? I'm sure they do. However, I do try to check everyone and make sure that they are students.

I want to thank everyone for their interest and would like everyone to know that the registration and website will be open for business next week (Sept. 22, 2008.)

See you in Ohio
Daphna

Welcome to DF Daphna - and thanks for joining the discussion.

[reb]

My experience is the same as Laura's for those competitions which allow and encourage non-students to compete.

All the college competitions I've ever been to (all in California) do allow and encourage non-students to compete. I also know a number of student dancers on college teams who have non-student partners. So in the case of individual college's competitions, I can see how it doesn't matter. I also see how these practices could get people into the habit of thinking that the NCC is open to anyone.

I guess a problem would arise here if a competitor 'expects' there to be no one at these comps over 35 (we're not to be trusted anyway, you know . . . ;)).

[etp777]

Old age and treachery....

[Kitty]

I just think that keeping it a closed event takes away the fun of a college comp anyway. The fun of going to the comp isn't to say I was the best *student* couple at the blah blah blah in 2008

Even if for you (and i am sure for many others) it takes away the fun, maybe for some other people it adds something, to be able to compete for "best student competitor" title.

The people who think it is less fun, can attend numerous other comps that are open to all.. that way everyone has an opportunity to compete in an event that they like.

[White Chacha]

I'm with wyllo. Each comp sets it's rules and the competitors are bound to abide by them as a condition for participation.

I think that if people like the energy and fun of a collegiate comp, perhaps they should strive to make other kinds of comps more fun in that way. Don't crash a comp who's rules state you're not eligible because *you* think it would be fun.

Having been a registrar for just one year of a local college comp, I was astounded at how many people try to cheat on the rules. And when you catch them at it, they try to rationalize and argue with you. Blech.

[cantskiforlife]

As someone who found his passion for dance in his senior year of college and has competed in collegiate events long after college ended, I would love to dance at OSB and compete against many of my friends. However, I do not think the rule should be changed. Imaging if we started allowing professionals to dance in amateur events or allow open steps in closed syllabus events.

On the other hand, there is little consistency in how collegiate competitions are run in terms of time and step restrictions so in many ways the thought of a national collegiate championship kinda makes me giggle. I don't know anyone who considers the collegiate events at OSB important. On the East Coast the championships might as well be MIT since the competition at this event is much stronger more globally distributed than at OSB.

Out of curiousity... Is there a youth restriction from collegiate competitions? I know many high-school students who typically compete in collegiate events but I can only recall seeing one or two of them at OSB.

[hustleNflow]

Out of curiousity... Is there a youth restriction from collegiate competitions? I know many high-school students who typically compete in collegiate events but I can only recall seeing one or two of them at OSB.

I don't think so. I think you can dance up an age level with no problems, but you can't dance down. When I started dancing on my college team my first semester of college, I hadn't yet turned 19 and wouldn't until the following semester...so I actually had the option of dancing youth for a semester. I opted not to, since 1) my partner was 2 years older than me, and 2) the youth bronze competition at the time was tighter than collegiate bronze. To this day I still wonder how things would have panned out had I decided to dance youth for a semester. But I opted to dance collegiate, and that was okay rule-wise...but had I waited until I was 19 and then wanted to dance youth, it would have been a no-go.

[Chris Stratton]

I too have heard a lot about not-quite-students competing at NCC over the years. The events there are somewhat unique in having a collegiate restriction, but similar problems tend to come up wherever such a restriction exists (the occasional college-only championship at an otherwise open comp, etc), and yes, with registration fees too.

But I want to take a different perspective on it for a moment. Unless I'm mistaken (and I could be), the NCC events are the only amateur syllabus events at Ohio that reliably have a substantial number of entries, right? It seems that really the only amateur events that are large in syllabus are the ones where the college teams form enough of a critical mass to make them interesting to dancers at that level, and by "hiding" those numbers in a restricted event, the healthy collegiate entries can't serve as an attractor for non-collegiate amateur participation in the syllabus levels. I don't know exactly what can be done about this, but some ideas:

- schedule and discount the regular NDCA-rules amateur syllabus events at Ohio to be an attractive add-on for those attending the NCC

- run a combined event but present an additional set of awards to college competitors only, or recall a collegiate-only final in addition to the regular one.

- do some combination of these based on entry sizes - combined events in a small divisions, seperate ones if there are enough entries.

- do nothing, it's just one comp, adult syllabus participation is low anyway, let those who dance in it worry if the rules are being enforced or not or if they care.

One final thought on the adult syllabus issue - there are a moderate number of opportunities on the east coast and in CA in the form of the unrestricted college comps and NY, NJ, and CA USA Dance comps, but with the possble exception of Nationals, NCC at Ohio is about the only time you will get an amateur syllabus quorum anywhere in middle America, and it's too bad that can't be more generally leveraged.

[cshorte]

Would you knowingly encourage a pre-champ dancer to dance bronze in order to fill the ranks and to win for your team? I think most of us would find that to be offensive. I don't see how it is any different when teams encourage their non-student open dancers to compete.

it is really up to the organizer(s) to spot such things and enforce some ruling on the fact that members of that caliber may not compete at lower levels and in most cases i have seen organizer(s) don't even notice couples dancing down unless someone brings it to their attention (which i have seen happen... before that couple even steps on the floor)

[Chris Stratton]

Would you knowingly encourage
it is really up to the organizer(s) to spot such things and enforce some ruling

It is ultimately up to the organizers, but realistically the first practical line of defense is the expectations set by the people who know dancers and their histories and status best - their teammates, especially their team officials, mentors, and (ahem) coaches.

There are of course individual violations that happen, but the most troubling ones are the habitual culture of doing it anyway situations that various teams have gone through over the years, both with level eligibility in general and student status at NCC.

[Joe]

Imaging if we started allowing professionals to dance in amateur events
Ah, but we already do! ;)

[cantskiforlife]

Ah, but we already do! ;)

Its not that we allow them.... I also can't ever recall seeing a pro dance in an amateur event. I know a few whom have petitioned to regain their amateur status, but otherwise .... My mind draws a blank.

[Chris Stratton]

Its not that we allow them.... I also can't ever recall seeing a pro dance in an amateur event. I know a few whom have petitioned to regain their amateur status, but otherwise .... My mind draws a blank.

Half and one and a half years ago respectively, the two organizations changed their rules to officially permit those who are in all ordinary respects full time professional dancers to compete in the "amatuer" category. The remaining distinction is that while they are fully professional, they are not allowed to wear that label, and are not allowed to work the pro/am events (or for that matter, to compete in them as students either).

This is a good example of a situation where what was already happening outside of the rules would have been essentially impossible to stop without a drastic system-wide "reset". The feasibility of completely enforcing collegiate status rules at NCC is also in some doubt (college ID cards don't mean what you think they do), but it's not yet clear that it will be impossible. One saving grace is that as just one comp, clamping down there does not destroy the current flexibility enjoyed in the rest of the circuit. On the other hand, the health of the rest of the unrestricted college circuit hints that having these rules might not be essential, but then events at Ohio may be more attractive to outsiders than those at your average college comp. Yet most of those mainstream competitors who could completely "take over" the collegiate events are collegiate-aged (or younger) amateurs anyway...

Hmm, maybe open-to-all syllabus and collegiate restricted open would be a workable balance? Post-syllabus the regular Ohio events should be a worthwhile alternative to those not elgible for a closed collegiate division.

[reb]

Imaging if we started allowing professionals to dance in amateur events or allow open steps in closed syllabus events.


Ah, but we already do! ;)

Its not that we allow them.... I also can't ever recall seeing a pro dance in an amateur event. I know a few whom have petitioned to regain their amateur status, but otherwise .... My mind draws a blank.

cantski - just wait until you get into Champ Amateur competition and you'll see what Joe (a champ Amateur competitor) is referring to - and what has been thoroughly/heatedly discussed here on DF.

There are Amatuers (not to be confused with pro/am students) whose training/talent far exceeds many pros, basically teach (not necessarily beginners, and very seriously at a high level), receive pay, are sponsored, are invited/paid to attend comps, you name it - that can be a sore point for x% of the Champ Amateur competitors who don't. And gives Joe a chance to have some fun . . . :D . . . so you'll sometimes see comments about these Amateurs being 'Pros'.

Not to divert this topic, but to answer your question (please PM me for more) - there's plenty of other threads for that discussion (and civility, perspective, and effort on everyone's part to understand another's situation is imperative to have that discussion).

Back to Ohio collegians -

[star_gazer]

cantski - just wait until you get into Champ Amateur competition and you'll see what Joe (a champ Amateur competitor) is referring to - and what has been thoroughly/heatedly discussed here on DF.

There are Amatuers (not to be confused with pro/am students) whose training/talent far exceeds many pros, basically teach (not necessarily beginners, and very seriously at a high level), receive pay, are sponsored, are invited/paid to attend comps, you name it - that can be a sore point for x% of the Champ Amateur competitors who don't. And gives Joe a chance to have some fun . . . :D . . . so you'll sometimes see comments about these Amateurs being 'Pros'. -Still..its kind of eye-opening that with all those liberties our amateur standard dancers enjoy none of them did too spectacularly well in the Grand Slam at Embassy.

[cantskiforlife]

Reb, I know what you mean as I know many of them. I disagree with the use of the term "professional" though. We can disagree on this point...... ::holds thoughts for a different thread::

Also, the number of competitors at that level who actually attend college competitions, including NCC is rather small. Last year I can't recall a single dancer of that caliber dancing at NCC. In fact most of the people who danced in any open events may have danced open routines, but their technique was far from open quality. Perhaps gold at best.

[cantskiforlife]

::Hijack::

I foresee this turning into a conversation about the quality of collegiate dancing versus that of the amateur world. Its kinda like having a middle-school varsity team compete against a D1 college team.

The technique required to call yourself a collegiate champ dancer is about the equivalent of an amateur silver dancer. ::/hijack::

[reb]

agree

[Chris Stratton]

I foresee this turning into a conversation about the quality of collegiate dancing versus that of the amateur world. Its kinda like having a middle-school varsity team compete against a D1 college team.

It's not nearly that simple. In the syllabus levels, the collegiate-comp attenders (student and non) pretty much *are* the amateur ballroom community. In the open divisions you have a few mostly ex-student who came up through that path, and then dominance by those who have trained in what is basically a pro track from youth. The latter probably aren't that interested in taking over college competitions, though many of them are college age or younger.

The technique required to call yourself a collegiate champ dancer is about the equivalent of an amateur silver dancer. ::/hijack::

This is a bit overstated, especially as it's largely the same people showing up on both sides of the amateur vs. collegiate fence. Yes, people typically belong half a level to a level lower in the amateur world than where they place in collegiate. And yes there is some very sloppy (sub-silver) open dancing on both sides of the fence. However it is unlikely that anyone who still "fits" into the norm of any amateur syllabus division is going to be making the finals of a full-sized 3-round college comp champ event.

[cantskiforlife]

It's not nearly that simple. In the syllabus levels, the collegiate-comp attenders (student and non) pretty much *are* the amateur ballroom community. In the open divisions you have a few mostly ex-student who came up through that path, and then dominance by those who have trained in what is basically a pro track from youth. The latter probably aren't that interested in taking over college competitions, though many of them are college age or younger.

This is a bit overstated, especially as it's largely the same people showing up on both sides of the amateur vs. collegiate fence. Yes, people typically belong half a level to a level lower in the amateur world than where they place in collegiate. And yes there is some very sloppy (sub-silver) open dancing on both sides of the fence. However it is unlikely that anyone who still "fits" into the norm of any amateur syllabus division is going to be making the finals of a full-sized 3-round college comp champ event.


Agreed - except that I am overstating anything.

If you define your syllabus levels by the standards of the current dancers, you have effectively eliminated standards. There is a specific skill set that is expected of a bronze, silver, gold, open dancer and if those skills are not present - then the dancer is not at that level, even if they say they are.

To give an example, I know many Brown, WPI, Harvard, and MIT students (I am leaving names out) who say they are gold or open but don't have a grasp of simple movement or musicality.

As a result, the levels at a collegiate competition are greatly skewed. I consider myself a silver dancer when it comes to technique. However, thanks to YCN points, I am now forced to dance open standard. Now consider that at USDSC this year, I placed 3rd in the silver standard pro-am final.

Chris, maybe you think I am being a bit harsh, i don't.

[kimV6]

::Hijack::
The technique required to call yourself a collegiate champ dancer is about the equivalent of an amateur silver dancer. ::/hijack::

not necessarily. while i definitely have seen collegiate "champ" dancers with terrible technique, it's usually within the american styles than the international styles. this is not to make any value judgment on them as dances, but once you pass silver in the collegiate world in american, there's not many people to compete against anyway (at least on the coasts). so one's idea of level is skewed by that.

but i think that statement is unfair when applied to international, where there are traditionally many more people to compete against, and levels are pretty much equitable. i can't recall a single person who competed at a certain level in collegiate international x, who didn't have similar amounts of success at the same level at an amateur comp. plus, your YCN point example relates directly to that. with rounds in silver that are barely semis, you earn points at a much faster rate than similar people in international, where fields are normally bigger. i haven't been to an am-am comp where the bronze/silver fields were bigger than the typical college comp.

so let's not go and make hasty generalizations about all college teams based on some experiences with some northeast schools :P


anyway, getting back to the subject; i agree with hustlenflow. it's not like i encourage in anyway to have any of the non-students that affiliate themselves with our team to dance; and actually none of them really wanted to either. they have a healthy respect for the rules. still, my salient point remains: while i don't plan on doing it myself when i graduate in a year, i'm not gonna begrudge anybody if they decide to go ahead and do it.

[Chris Stratton]

If you define your syllabus levels by the standards of the current dancers, you have effectively eliminated standards. There is a specific skill set that is expected of a bronze, silver, gold, open dancer and if those skills are not present - then the dancer is not at that level, even if they say they are.

It's tempting to go there... but the problem is that if you do, and learn to see through the energy and excitement, you'll discover that some of the skills silver dancers are "supposed to have"... are still missing on the finalists in national-level amateur champ events.

Seriously... get out your video camera, tape the events, watch it slowly and see how little of it is really "right". Impressive as all get out, but not fundamentally "right" in comparison to an abstract standard of how things are supposed to be done.

It's just not possible to run an event where you compete against the other dancers against an abstract standard of performance. In small fields you can divide the people up anyway you like and it still works; but as soon as you start getting hundreds of couples turning up, you really have to divide them into divisions that are a sensible sorting of the abilities represented.

And that doesn't turn out to be more than a half level to level different between collegiate and amateur, for the simple reason that most of the amateur syllabus community is the same group of students, alumni, and friends who attend college comps. What's missing from a college comp is simply 12 national-level champ couples at the top end, displacing everything else down a bit.

[hustleNflow]

Agreed - except that I am overstating anything.

If you define your syllabus levels by the standards of the current dancers, you have effectively eliminated standards. There is a specific skill set that is expected of a bronze, silver, gold, open dancer and if those skills are not present - then the dancer is not at that level, even if they say they are.

To give an example, I know many Brown, WPI, Harvard, and MIT students (I am leaving names out) who say they are gold or open but don't have a grasp of simple movement or musicality.

As a result, the levels at a collegiate competition are greatly skewed. I consider myself a silver dancer when it comes to technique. However, thanks to YCN points, I am now forced to dance open standard. Now consider that at USDSC this year, I placed 3rd in the silver standard pro-am final.

Chris, maybe you think I am being a bit harsh, i don't.

While I do agree with you about the level of skill of your average collegiate competitor being a bit below that of any regular adult competitor, I should point out that there are quite a few college couples who dance open that are just as good (if not better) than many adult amateur couples out there, so I don't really think it's fair to make the blanket statement that all collegiate couples are that way. I know a certain collegiate, championship-level college American rhythm couple who placed 4th in last year's adult championship at nationals...I daresay they are right on-par with their adult counterparts. And I'm really kinda sad that this thread has more or less turned into the "let's see how much we can devalue college dancing" thread. Last I checked, college was the time that many of today's top competitors were introduced to ballroom dancing. I remember an article I read in 2004 where USABDA praised certain pros for their involvement with college teams, as it considered the youth/college network to be a breeding ground for future champions and a catalyst for interest in dancesport altogether. Yes, college teams aren't necessarily the most skilled or organized competitors; however, the value of their greatest contribution - INTEREST IN DANCESPORT - cannot be overlooked. Who cares if they dance at a level that is below that of an adult competitor??? If they wanted to compete at the adult level, they would, and then maybe that would be the time to worry about disparity between skill levels. Until then, l think we should respect it for what it is - a bunch of college kids having the time of their lives and generating a lot of interest for ballroom dancing. And as for cantskiforlife pointing out examples of collegiate teams that aren't at the skill level of their adult counterparts, I should also point out that there are college teams that are just as good as their adult counterparts. You have to remember that these are COLLEGE teams, and they aren't known for having a whole lot of disposable income for the top teachers and coaching. Geography also plays a bit of a role, as certain teams in big cities (i.e. New York, L.A.) have a bit of an advantage as they have better access to top pros, who tend to gravitate towards the big cities. It's something that has to be considered on an individual basis.

[SDsalsaguy]

while i don't plan on doing it myself when i graduate in a year, i'm not gonna begrudge anybody if they decide to go ahead and do it.
This doesn't effect me in the least, but since the person responsible for monitoring "students only" at Ohio has weighed in and told us that the intent is to enforce, then anyone who intends to bypass this in being dishonest and cheating.

Please note that I'm not saying whether I even agree with this rule or not, but if it is the rule (as it is in this case), violating it is cheating.

[kimV6]

This doesn't effect me in the least, but since the person responsible for monitoring "students only" at Ohio has weighed in and told us that the intent is to enforce, then anyone who intends to bypass this in being dishonest and cheating.

Please note that I'm not saying whether I even agree with this rule or not, but if it is the rule (as it is in this case), violating it is cheating.

oh i totally agree. what i meant by that was merely that, all i, as individual competitor, can control is me. if somebody else wants to break the rules, whatever, it's just another competitor i can strive to beat. and if they get caught, that's cool too.
i just meant that i'm laissez faire about the enforcement of the rule, since it has marginally good and bad consequences on either side, and i just happen to think that the good ones outweigh the bad.

However, thanks to YCN points, I am now forced to dance open standard. Now consider that at USDSC this year, I placed 3rd in the silver standard pro-am final.

also, the difference between pro-am and am-am levels should be considered here, rather than impugn the dance abilities of college dancers.

[Larinda McRaven]

Last I checked, college was the time that many of today's top competitors were introduced to ballroom dancing.

Not true of ANY top pro competitors that I know, with the exception of one guy and one girl. And except me, I did start dancing my senior year in college, but not on a college team. I started in an adult studio. But honestly other than that I don't know of any good pro that came out of the college world.

Geography also plays a bit of a role, as certain teams in big cities (i.e. New York, L.A.) have a bit of an advantage as they have better access to top pros, who tend to gravitate towards the big cities.

The better teams in the US are not based in NYC or LA. And the top pros that gravitate to those areas are interested in their own careers first, not that of a college team. It is the retired pros that settle in to their afterlife that tend to nurture and support the teams. And pros that retire often leave those type of cities because the teaching environment there is fickle and once you are not on top you are discarded quickly.

[Laura]

However, thanks to YCN points, I am now forced to dance open standard.
What, you've done enough Amateur comps since April 2008 to be forced back into Championship level already?

I think you aren't aware that in April 2008 USA Dance started moving to a totally new point system, and to start competitors can declare their current level. So, all your YCN, NDCA, and USA Dance points have gone away, and if you want to call yourself a Silver dancer again you can.

There was a thread about this somewhere...if I can find it I'll bump it so that we don't go off on a tangent here.

[Chris Stratton]

So, all your YCN, NDCA, and USA Dance points have gone away, and if you want to call yourself a Silver dancer again you can.

Major nitpick: USA Dance only has jurisdiction over eligibility at USA Dance comps, not at NDCA comps and not at any collegiate comp other than NCC.

The only system in which points have been reset is USA dance. Definitely not collegiate as that has always worked differently. Did NDCA announce they were going along with USA Dance's new system or are they still on their version of the old shared one?

However I believe cantski is talking about have placed out of collegiate syllabus only. That's not surprising for someone who has been studying seriously for a while. However, if he has done so, he is probably also in a position to make finals in amateur gold. If he's consistently making finals in 3-round collegiate prechamp, on average I'd expect he'd be able to make the semi in 3-round amateur prechamp, etc. There's a difference, but only an incremental one.

[Laura]

Major nitpick: USA Dance only has jurisdiction over eligibility at USA Dance comps, not at NDCA comps and not at any collegiate comp other than NCC.
Oh right, good point. But does one's YCN points convert to NDCA in any manner or form? I know they converted to USA Dance.

And as far as I have heard, the NDCA hasn't said anything at all about how Amateurs accrue points. Last time I looked at the rule book it was what it has been.

[Chris Stratton]

Oh right, good point. But does one's YCN points convert to NDCA in any manner or form? I know they converted to USA Dance.

No, it only works the other way: sanctioned comp points import into the collegiate system, though how is a subject of some disagreement. USA Dance had their way which drastically devalued sanctioned comp results compared to collegiate ones; some schools simply total sanctioned comp placings as if they were collegiate comps - ultimately, how they import depends on the rules of the college comp for which eligibility is being determined. And it shouldn't be overlooked that USA Dance's conversion method is now unworkable given that their new point system has little that could be translated into a collegiate style point.

[Laura]

And it shouldn't be overlooked that USA Dance's conversion method is now unworkable given that their new point system has little that could be translated into a collegiate style point.
I believe that this is being worked on.

[Chris Stratton]

There's been a workable method in use for years now; simply count the sanctioned comps as if they were collegiate ones - the results should mean at least that much, but anything that gives them more weight than that is likely to be unpopular as you'd then be able to place out with perhaps one lucky break and one mediocre finaling.

[cantskiforlife]

Woah - so many posts in the last few hours. Took a bit to catch up.

So before I continue I want to add that I am intimately familiar with the collegiate scene as I have competed at most collegiate competitions on the east cost over the last 4 years and have had dance parters at almost every new england college. I don't think it is a stretch at all to say that collegiate dancing is of little comparison to amateur or pro-am competitions. I'll give the exception for smooth and rhythm since the fields are practically empty.

YCN POINTS - You cannot receive them without a semi-final and at the silver level in all styles I have always seen at at least a quarter final (except maybe at Holy Cross).

We should respect it for what it is - a bunch of college kids having the time of their lives.
I think this is an absolutely wonderful aspect of the collegiate scene. It would be much more accurate to call this a "club sport."

I should also point out that there are college teams that are just as good as their adult counterparts.
Could you please provide us the names of these teams.

the difference between pro-am and am-am levels should be considered here, rather than impugn the dance abilities of college dancers.

Yes there is a difference. That doesn't mean we should change the standards to which we identify someone as bronze, silver, gold, or open.

My point is that I believe there should be standards upon which students are judged to determine their ability. In the long run this lack of standards degrades the entire ballroom industry since many of these students become teachers but have no idea what they are doing. I can think of 4 off the top of my head.

[reb]

Not true of ANY top pro competitors that I know, with the exception of one guy and one girl.

The better teams in the US are not based in NYC or LA.


And to add one comment - BYU has an incredible 'real' program that is not club-level, but is treated like a serious sport/major. This is an exception to the rule, and an exceptional program.

[cantskiforlife]

I knew someone would mention BYU :) Others?

Edit: What are your thoughts on creating a better environment for breeding good dancers?

[Joe]

Yeah, aside from the university/Lee Wakefield-sanctioned BYU, what are the "better teams," and how was that established?

[Chris Stratton]

So before I continue I want to add that I am intimately familiar with the collegiate scene as I have competed at most collegiate competitions on the east cost over the last 4 years and have had dance parters at almost every new england college.

Sure, but what other scene with enough size of entries to have really sorted itself into meaningful level divisions do you have experience of? You are comparing it to an ideal division, not to the reality of some other.

The reason for that statement is simply that amateur syllabus is the very same people as collegiate comps with a few others thrown in, all shifted down a little bit. There's no substantial bulk of strong competitors who do not attend collegiate comps to establish a different level of performance in the amateur wold, until you get to championship and add in those who came up through the youth track. And so that's what the difference is - the presence of that community at the top displacing everything else downwards, but no actual presence in the syllabus divisions to fundamental change them beyond the impact of this downshift from the top.

And with pro/am, you just do not have enough competitors for the results to rank the participants across a wide spectrum. There are those who focus on details and dance in syllabus who are far stronger than many in open, but it does not matter since there is no real progression through the levels beyond personal choice.

If you were to extend your collegiate comp experience to large amateur competitions like NE Regionals, MAC, etc, what you would find is that anywhere below champ it's really the same group of people you'd be dancing against. If you can reliably make the finals in collegiate division with three rounds, you should be able to make at least the semi in an amateur one of the same size.

As for the comment about the college teams being just as good as their adult counterparts, it is entirely true. The only real group of people that the college programs and their alumni are not just as good as is those who came up through the youth track, many of whom are younger than the older college team members and alumni, and hardly any of whom are to be encountered in any amateur division below champ.

It is very rare that you will find some more adult amateur couple in pre-champ or below who is noticeably ahead of the stronger collegiate & alumni entires, for the simple reason that there are no systematic beginner-to-open amateur development programs in the US outside of the colleges and the youth circuit. Unfortunately anything else is hit or miss, one unique couple or individual making that journey but then a big gap until the next.

My point is that I believe there should be standards upon which students are judged to determine their ability. In the long run this lack of standards degrades the entire ballroom industry since many of these students become teachers but have no idea what they are doing. I can think of 4 off the top of my head.

Standards of knowledge are not the same as competition divisions. Competition divisions exist to divide the actual population of participants into reasonably sized sub-groups. If you want something standards-based you should look at medal tests and eventually teaching exams, not competition.

[hustleNflow]

College teams that (in my opinion, I'm sure some of you are going to argue this to death) are actually pretty good -

BYU -strong all-around

Purdue - phenomenal in rhythm, decent in Latin

Michigan - extemely strong in Standard Individual examples of competitors that have done well at both the college level and the adult am level:

Tze Chao Chiam & Rose Ravelo (Purdue) - 4th in Adult Champ Rhythm at 2007 Nationals
Jong Shuen Char & Annie Moy (Purdue) - 1st in Adult Novice Latin at 2007 Nationals
David Zage & Rose Ravelo (Purdue) - 5th in Adult Novice Latin at 2007 Nationals
Tulga & Illkin Ersal (Michigan) - 1st in Adult Pre-Champ Standard at Emerald Ball
Rahul Bhandari & Maria Vazquez (Purdue) - 1st in Adult Pre-Champ Latin 3-dance at OSB
Eduardo Torres & Cristina Acevedo (former Purdue, now pro) - quarterfinals of Pro Rhythm championship at OSB (they actually placed better than their former coaches!)

Pretty sure I'm gonna get eaten ALIVE for posting those, but you asked for it. I'm done with this thread, too much negativity...

[hustleNflow]

And for some odd reason, my javascipt is not working, so I apologize for the paragraph just kinda running together...don't know how to fix it.

[Larinda McRaven]

fixed. I hope it is kinda what you wanted...

[ChaChaMama]

I have no dog in this discussion, as I went to a college that didn't have a ballroom team, teach at a college that doesn't have a ballroom team, and didn't start ballroom until after 30.

From my outsider's perspective, here are some college teams whose names I haven't seen mentioned yet that I admire, with some info on coaches where I could find it easily. (I'm sure people plugged into the college network know a ton more.)

NYU--Coaches Stanley and Jennifer McCalla. Seem to consistently place dancers in the finals at almost all levels at large comps like MAC, NE Regionals. Puts on comps like the NYU Beginners comp coming up.

Columbia--Coaches: Andrew Phillips and Stanley McCalla. Again, this team always seems to place well in major events. Puts on Big Apple Challenge.

Maryland--Coaches include Dan Calloway. Team seems to be well represented at all levels. Puts on DCDI.

Harvard
Yale
Penn

CCM

[star_gazer]

Utah Valley University in Orem has a college ballroom program and at least three levels of teams. While not quite up there w/BYU (their budget is a tiny fraction of the BYU ballroom budget)they are part of a excellent dance department and their tour teams competed at Blackpool last May.

Also there is an extensive network of high school teams around here. But the kids don't actually get down to the basics until they sign up for syllabus classes at the college level which can be years after they have been dancing open youth.

It all makes for an unusual dance scene around here.

[hustleNflow]

Utah Valley University in Orem has a college ballroom program and at least three levels of teams. While not quite up there w/BYU (their budget is a tiny fraction of the BYU ballroom budget)they are part of a excellent dance department and their tour teams competed at Blackpool last May.

Also there is an extensive network of high school teams around here. But the kids don't actually get down to the basics until they sign up for syllabus classes at the college level which can be years after they have been dancing open youth.

It all makes for an unusual dance scene around here.

Must be something in the water in Utah...it's like a breeding ground for fabulous dancers! Between the BYU team, the Houghs, the Delgrossos, Chelsie Hightower, and Louis Van Amstel (last I heard, he had moved there), Utah is bustin' moves left and right...

[Larinda McRaven]

Last time I looked Michigan, Purdue, Utah aren't in LA or NYC...

[hustleNflow]

No need to be snarky...I just forgot about Utah. Not necessarily the first state that pops into my head when I think of large, metropolitan areas...I didn't think of it until star_gazer mentioned it.

[star_gazer]

Last time I looked Utah wasn't in LA or NYC...
I'm sitting on my porch looking at the mountains and it is definitely not LA or NYC.

[Larinda McRaven]

Not being snarky, just really trying to tie your posts together....

As well the only pro you mentioned only made one cut at Ohio. So I still fail to see even yourself supporting your own post #47 (http://www.dance-forums.com/showpost.php?p=603126&postcount=47) ... that NYC and LA are in the in lead, or that the pro champions are being bred and raised in the college circut.

[cantskiforlife]

HustleNFlow - a lot of the negativity is just Chris and I pushing each ohter's buttons while having a serious conversation.

I made the comment about my familiarity with the collegiate scene to point out that I was not talking out of my behind.

I guess my biggest problem is that I see a double standard in our definition of levels. If you have standards for metal tests, those same standards should apply to those levels regardless of where they show up.

I am going to start a new thread to discuss what denotes the difference between bronze, silver, gold, etc... (Not just steps).

ASIDE: Some good schools were mentioned. Although I do disagree with at least one of them as I have watched it fall apart over the last few years../ASIDE

[Larinda McRaven]

I'm sitting on my porch looking at the mountains and it is definitely not LA or NYC.

Must be quite beautiful...

[Larinda McRaven]

Cantski
:shock:
I think that is all I have to say....

[etp777]

Sure makes me wish my school had had a team.

Course, at the time, had no interest in dancing. But same motivation that worked here (women :D ) could have worked there.

[star_gazer]

Must be quite beautiful...Yes but I miss Massachusetts. I keep threatening to leave 'em all here and move home.

[Larinda McRaven]

ASIDE: Some good schools were mentioned. Although I do disagree with at least one of them as I have watched it fall apart of the last few years../ASIDE

Thank you for the edit.

[cantskiforlife]

Ok - back on topic -

Someone had a good point earlier that the only true SYLLABUS amateur competition at ohio is in the collegiate ballroom. For this reason alone, I think it would be wonderful to either open the NCC to all amateurs or urge collegiate competitors to dance in the actual amateur events. (I prefer the latter idea).

[Chris Stratton]

So I still fail to see even yourself supporting...that the pro champions are being bred and raised in the college circut.

The pros aren't coming from the collegiate circuit, but they sure aren't coming from the adult amateur syllabus ranks (anymore, if they ever did) either, so there's no point in trying to compare the collegiate and adult systems on that.

As we all know, the pros are mostly coming from overseas youth->amateur IDSF programs, and to a limited degree our own domestic youth amateur track which tends to hit the adult division already dancing in the championship category.

(Though of the few people who are or have come up through syllabus who could turn pro and compete some, most are from the collegiate world, as the more rapid progress there is about the only common way that someone making a late start might get ready in time)

[Joe]

Utah Valley University in Orem has a college ballroom program and at least three levels of teams. While not quite up there w/BYU (their budget is a tiny fraction of the BYU ballroom budget)they are part of a excellent dance department and their tour teams competed at Blackpool last May.
I know several of the Utah colleges have ballroom teams; I think some of it is because BYU does, and the other schools aspire to BYU status.

[star_gazer]

The ballroom programs at other schools in Utah definitely benefit from BYU's presence. But UVU and Southern Utah University (and maybe a couple others) are state-funded, public schools and an good option for dancers who do not want to attend a private religious school.

[Another Elizabeth]

But honestly other than that I don't know of any good pro that came out of the college world.
Dan Radler was on the original MIT Ballroom Dance Team, before it was dissolved in the early 80's and then reconstituted in 1989. I believe that Suzanne Hamby was at Brown when they started dancing together.

Not the current college world, and not competing pros any more (except in pro-am), but you didn't specify either of those....

[Chris Stratton]

I did not know there had been a previous team.

Where there college comps back then, or did they just do the amateur comps of the day?

[Another Elizabeth]

I did not know there had been a previous team.

Where there college comps back then, or did they just do the amateur comps of the day?

They mostly did formations, and the amateur comps of the day, as far as I know. Maybe you should ask Dan next time you see him. :)

[reb]

Also there is an extensive network of high school teams around here. But the kids don't actually get down to the basics until they sign up for syllabus classes at the college level which can be years after they have been dancing open youth.


This fits our impressions from the times we've competed at the NDCA Amateur Nationals in Utah - thanks for that explanation star gazer.

[reb]

I made the comment about my familiarity with the collegiate scene to point out that I was not talking out of my behind.


Of all the interesting comments you've made, this one comes with a visual of Ace Ventura - Pet Detective
;)

[cantskiforlife]

Of all the interesting comments you've made, this one comes with a visual of Ace Ventura - Pet Detective
;)



Eewies!

[Daphna]

Just wanted to let everyone know that the NCC registration is open for business. Please go to the website (http://cdcusabda.accessdance.com (http://cdcusabda.accessdance.com/)) for the competition and then click on the registration link.

Hope to see you there.
Daphna

[reb]

Just wanted to let everyone know that the NCC registration is open for business. Please go to the website (http://cdcusabda.accessdance.com (http://cdcusabda.accessdance.com/)) for the competition and then click on the registration link.

Hope to see you there.
Daphna

From the website: • During check-in at the event, registrants will need BOTH their USA Dance Student Athlete Membership card and College Student ID. That's clear as a bell.


Wow - if I read this correctly . . . Friday and Saturday evening events costing $60 per person each night for everyone else - here's a good deal for the collegiate competitors:

Note: Competitors will receive free entry into the Ohio Star Ball Friday and Saturday night events with your registration fee of $70.

:D

[Chris Stratton]

From the website: • During check-in at the event, registrants will need BOTH their USA Dance Student Athlete Membership card and College Student ID. That's clear as a bell.

Some schools no longer print accurate expiration dates or even differentiate student from staff ID's - they are really just a token to offer up to the mag stripe reader for validation against the institution's own computers, not something administered in a way that is necessarily meaningful to third parties. Unfortunately, asking for anything more wold be almost certain to shut out a number of real students.

For such as simple and obvious idea, student-only events turn out to be surprisingly hard to implement.

[Laura]

Unfortunately, asking for anything more wold be almost certain to shut out a number of real students.
I worked a comp once where if there wasn't an actual date on the college ID, the student had to bring a copy of their registration for the semester. I've been to six different institutions of higher learning in four different states, in three different time zones, and I always have been given one of those after registering for classes. So it can't be that much of an imposition to ask for that sort of document, as they appear to be commonly issued.

[reb]

Some schools no longer print accurate expiration dates or even differentiate student from staff ID's - they are really just a token to offer up to the mag stripe reader for validation against the institution's own computers, not something administered in a way that is necessarily meaningful to third parties. Unfortunately, asking for anything more wold be almost certain to shut out a number of real students.

For such as simple and obvious idea, student-only events turn out to be surprisingly hard to implement.

Ahhhh, I think I'm beginning to see part of the problem (besides being raised by parents who told me to tell the truth . . . and I believed them!) - and worse than being a bouncer trying to figure out 50 state drivers licenses, this involves motivated smart people with time on their hands to accomplish an end such as how to prove one is from Stony-Brook-something-or-other-U . . .

Any ideas on how to handle??

Since I'm apparently subsidizing their $120 of Friday and Saturday evening tickets, I'd like to know!

[reb]

I worked a comp once where if there wasn't an actual date on the college ID, the student had to bring a copy of their registration for the semester. I've been to six different institutions of higher learning in four different states, in three different time zones, and I always have been given one of those after registering for classes. So it can't be that much of an imposition to ask for that sort of document, as they appear to be commonly issued.

Sounds good!

[Daphna]

Hi, for those of you who have tried to register for NCC in the last couple of days, the server hosting the website has had some technical difficulties :confused: for which they needed to get a new part. They hope to have everything up and running by the end of today. Due to this difficulty, we have decided to extend the registration deadline for NCC to Friday, Nov. 14, 2008. :cheers:

Thanks for your patience.
Daphna, NCC Registrar

[Joe]

Can't people just register using the link on the O2CM site?

www. o2cm.com/forms/entry.asp?event=ncc

[kathyt cupcake]

Can't people just register using the link on the O2CM site?

www. o2cm.com/forms/entry.asp?event=ncc

I just tried this, and I'm not really sure that it worked-- I can add entries that are saved after I logout and log back in but I don't show up in the list of competitors and the charges/entry fees don't look right either. My TBA, TBA partner shows up in the list of ppl that tickets can be added for, but I don't and my existing partner don't.

[Joe]

Sometimes it takes a short while for entries to show up in the list. And since O2CM is a separate entity from Accessdance, I don't see what the problem would be in just registering.

[Daphna]

Website is back up and running :kissme:. The deadline for registration has been extended to Friday Nov. 14, 2008.

See you in Ohio
Daphna