Why Do University Teams Spend Big $$$ on World Class Couples to Perform a Show?

[syncopationator]

I am on the fence about the issue (i.e. I'm neutral on the matter) but this has been on my mind for a couple of weeks now.

I've had the opportunity to compete at pro/am NDCA comps, USA Dance comps and Collegiate comps. Needless to say, I've seen them all from a participants point of view. This is my viewpoint:

NDCA - its a business and selling tickets by bringing in a show couple makes sense.

USA Dance - I have not experienced any shows and don't think this fits in with the non-profit model.

Now to my main question. Why do university clubs spend the big cash to bring in a show couple? Wouldn't the money be better spent on bringing in coaches for workshops, lessons, etc?

Of all the dance circuits, the university comps are the ones that are best attended from what I have seen. There are hundreds or thousands of collegiate dancepsport athletes and a ton of them show up a the many comps (at least the ones I have attended). I don't think the show couple is the reason for attracting all the entries, but rather the passion of dance and competition.

Don't get me wrong, I think its great to see some of these show couples, but my question goes back to is there a better use for this money. IMHO If the cash is there, it should be used for furthering the learning of the collegiate dancers primarily through workshops or through larger scholarship prizes in the lower levels to help students pay for private coaching, etc.

I guess I'm not so neutral after all :eek:

Just my own opinion, but curious to see what others think, especially those involved in organizing the university comps.

[and123]

I think often the show couple does give workshops/privates. Not sure of the return on investment in terms of getting more competitors to register for the comp though.

[Warren J. Dew]

The quick answer is, because it's free. These shows typically bring in as much in ticket sales and sponsorships as they cost. If they didn't spend the money for the show they wouldn't have the money to spend for something else.

The longer answer is, there are also dance related reasons. First, some people think it's inspirational to see world champions even when one is a beginner dancer.

Second, the shows do attract some top collegiate competitors that would otherwise not show up. That attracts competitors just below those, who want a chance to dance against them, and so on down the line.

There is competition amongst the collegiate competitions for who puts on the biggest and most prestigious college comp, and shows do help in achieving that end.

[wooh]

Of all the dance circuits, the university comps are the ones that are best attended from what I have seen. There are hundreds or thousands of collegiate dancepsport athletes and a ton of them show up a the many comps (at least the ones I have attended). I don't think the show couple is the reason for attracting all the entries, but rather the passion of dance and competition.


If it's just the passion of dance and competition, then why are those better attended than the USA Dance comps? Perhaps part of it is the show couples, giving the attendees not just entertainment, but something to aspire to.

[Chris Stratton]

If it's just the passion of dance and competition, then why are those better attended than the USA Dance comps? Perhaps part of it is the show couples, giving the attendees not just entertainment, but something to aspire to.

They were large before the era of world class shows, too. So I would tend to suspect the combination of being more competitor friendly and inexpensive with vastly less red tape, along with the group registration of college team members forming a critical mass that makes them large enough to be interesting to unaffiliated adults.

The shows (along with increasing prizes) may have helped draw top champ couples but also become a way that the college comps compete with each other for interest.

[danceronice]

Slight tangent, perhaps, but it's a common false assumption that non-profits are not in business to make money. If they don't have either a big endowment or hugely generous donors, then they need to make money or they don't stay in business at all. A good NFP ends their financial year with a profit, not breaking even or in debt. The definition of a nonprofit is an organization who puts their profits back into operating costs and towards their mission. If they spend the money to get a good show, they bring in more money than they spent and have money to spend on other things.

[Benjy]

Because they are fun to watch...?

Collegiate teams exist so that college kids can have fun, not to promote dancing. Whatever you may think, the vast majority of collegiate dancers are in it strictly for fun. That's why college dancers who decide to make a career out of dance often (in my experience) attempt to distance themselves from the collegiate scene... it's hard to be taken seriously as a dancer when you're connected with that. I tell anyone who asks that I only still dance collegiate for the registration subsidies, and it's true.

[syncopationator]

There is competition amongst the collegiate competitions for who puts on the biggest and most prestigious college comp, and shows do help in achieving that end.

I thought about this but didn't want to get into it in my original post, but I agree that prestige is a big factor. Which is why one would reach out to the top world class couples instead of some of the domestic talent who may not be ranked highly in the world stage, but can put together a great show nontheless.

[syncopationator]

If it's just the passion of dance and competition, then why are those better attended than the USA Dance comps? Perhaps part of it is the show couples, giving the attendees not just entertainment, but something to aspire to.

They are better attended because of the volume of collegiate dancers as well as the support of the team to go to the competitions as a large group and achieve economies of scale.

I don't believe DCDI had a show couple (although they did invit the top champ couples do a showdance) yet it was a very sucessful comp with a large amount of entries and a big turnout for the evening session. I was at BADC which had a big time show couple which was also well attended and probably would have been well attended without the show couple.

[Leonid Turetsky]

i agree with most posts here and yeah i think its motivating to see high level dancers and the tickets sold make up for the money being spent...and usually the couple would give some workshops as well... more tick sales...

[syncopationator]

Because they are fun to watch...?

Collegiate teams exist so that college kids can have fun, not to promote dancing. Whatever you may think, the vast majority of collegiate dancers are in it strictly for fun.

and this is probably the part I did not consider, if indeed it is true. I suppose if everyone agrees with this then my question is answered.

[Chris Stratton]

I would strongly disagree that college teams exist to have fun and not to promote dancing. Obviously there is an element of both, but the kinds of large scale development they accomplish would not happen if there was not a culture of willingness to put in a lot of work. Often there's a determined core group with that, surrounded by a larger and more casually involved group - both of which turn out to be critical, in that neither can thrive without the presence of the other.

[Benjy]

I would strongly disagree that college teams exist to have fun and not to promote dancing. Obviously there is an element of both, but the kinds of large scale development they accomplish would not happen if there was not a culture of willingness to put in a lot of work. Often there's a determined core group with that, surrounded by a larger and more casually involved group - both of which turn out to be critical, in that neither can thrive without the presence of the other.

How many high level (nationally competitive championship or higher) couples do you know of who started as collegiate dancers? I can name... maybe 5 tops. Ballroom dancing clubs at universities are... clubs. That is, they are for fun. Look at BADC. How many of the finalist in championship anything were collegiate dancers? I believe Samantha Mang started dancing standard when she was 18... but I believe that was after many years of dance training in other disciplines, and I'm quite certain she would never call herself a collegiate dancer. Looking at the results from nationals in Champ Standard... Derek and Jen were collegiate, I think Kat started in college, and John Mason is college age, but I don't know if he's studying right now... I think he sacrificed a lot for dance. That's everyone in the quarter final and above.

Sure, collegiate dance does a lot to promote dancesport... as a hobby. Not as a competitive end in and of itself. Mostly because by the championship level, dancing isn't a hobby, it's basically a job, albeit one that hopefully all dancers do love.

[Joe]

Though it has been many years since I was in college, I came up from the collegiate ranks. I don't care who is performing a show at a competition. I go to a competition for the competitors.

I'll concede that it's possible that the show may attract the competitors that attract me.

[DavidB]

It is a long time since I was at University, but I was lucky enough to see some very good demos (Stephen & Lindsay Hillier, John Wood & Anne Lewis and Marcus & Karen Hilton are the ones I can remember).

We normally wouldn't know who was doing the demo until we got there, so the actual couple had no impact on whether we went or not.

However, had I not seen top-level dancing at these events, I'm pretty sure I would have stopped as soon as I finished my degree.

[Chris Stratton]

How many high level (nationally competitive championship or higher) couples do you know of who started as collegiate dancers?

A few - which is to say the majority of those who reached that point from having started dancing so relatively late in life.

And dont forget that in terms of "promoting dancing" the people dancing champ are the top of the pyramid. The reason that college teams can graduate a few adult beginners to champ is that the start huge numbers on a practical path, and maintain large numbers through intermediate divisions where the impracticality of most other adult offerings tends to cause a die-back to a token couple or two per location.

College programs themselves rarely reach beyond gold, if even that far. But that's not the point - the point is that they are the only large scale effort to expose adults to the experience of what would be involved in rising to a point from which they can decide if they wish to go further on their own.

[dlgodud]

I would say that it is a good way of promoting a competition. For me, I don't compete at those collegiate competitions. So, if there were no performances by professionals, I probably would not go and watch.

I did not go and watch the BAC this year, but I had attended past two years. I would say the $$ to pro would be covered easily by selling VIP tickets? Even top pros would not get that much out of competitions if they don't place 1st, 2nd, or 3rd at biggest competitions in the world.

[and123]

Many college dance groups have both a CLUB and a TEAM. AFAIK, club is essentially for fun. Team members are expected to be more dedicated and committed, i.e. miss a lesson or practice w/o a very good reason, and wet noodle lashings will commence, or you get demerits and lose your standing on the team, or whatever. This is not to say the two entities do not mix and mingle together, but the expectations are often very different. Wasn't there a thread here not that long ago about having to try out for the ballroom team? If you're a more casual dancer, chances are you wouldn't bother doing that, and if you did, you'd likely not make it.

[syncopationator]

How many high level (nationally competitive championship or higher) couples do you know of who started as collegiate dancers? I can name... maybe 5 tops. Ballroom dancing clubs at universities are... clubs. That is, they are for fun. Look at BADC. How many of the finalist in championship anything were collegiate dancers?

You are making the assumption that only Championship level couples are competitive.

The beauty of dancesport is that you can be a total beginer and still be competitive because you compete against other couples at your level.

You are right in that the majority (prob 99.9%) of the couples that start their dancing in college will no reach this status; however, that does not mean that they are doing this "for fun" and are not competitive.

[syncopationator]

I would say the $$ to pro would be covered easily by selling VIP tickets?

probably, but this is more for the comp organizers to answer

Even top pros would not get that much out of competitions if they don't place 1st, 2nd, or 3rd at biggest competitions in the world.

This is not true. Depending on where and when the performance is, even not-so-top level competitors (both pro and amateur) command a pretty hefty fee to perform.

[Benjy]

You are making the assumption that only Championship level couples are competitive.

The beauty of dancesport is that you can be a total beginer and still be competitive because you compete against other couples at your level.


People can be very competitive at Scrabble too... they are still doing it for fun.

[Larinda McRaven]

I hope ALL competitors are having fun... regardless of level or style or profession. They may not simply live up to someone elses expectations of what a "real competitor or champion" is.

[Larinda McRaven]

I do find that a lot of the colleges, in the Northeast anyway, are very competitive with who can outdo who in regards to their show couple. And I do think this is a bit wierd because when I talk to collegiate dancers I ask them if they even know who is "XYZ the show couple"... often times the answer is "No, who are they?", even though the show couple is a current or former world champion. Which is totally ok, when I was young and new I asked Jonathan Wilkins "so who is this Peter Eggelton guy on my panel anyway?"

Many of the young dancers never realize the golden opportunity they have in seeing these couples and never fully appreciate it. And I wonder if having slightly less expensive shows that are just as entertaining might be just as valuable, if not to also provide them an opportunity to see different styles.

And I do know what these couples charge for transportation, housing, lesson minimum, and show. I really wonder if the hosting team actually recoups their investment, even with VIP sales.

[Chris Stratton]

I know what they charge too, but i doubt the teams would keep doing it if it was generally a loosing proposition. That said, I'm not in general in favor of it.

[kathyt cupcake]

I think the collegiate comps bring in the show couples to increase paid ticket attendance- this probably works best in markets where there are enough ppl outside the university scene who know about ballroom eg. NY, Boston. But even in venues where there isn't an outside market, if you can squeeze another $20 or $30 from 80% of the competitors for the show, that would probably help to break even for the cost of the pros.

Probably most of our beginners don't have any idea who the show couples are but I think the longer they stick around, the more likely they've gotten onto youtube and have a clue.

[syncopationator]

People can be very competitive at Scrabble too... they are still doing it for fun.

But as you stated they are competitive at scrable.

I will be the first to admit it: I have a lot of fun dancing... But I don't dance for fun.

[syncopationator]

I do find that a lot of the colleges, in the Northeast anyway, are very competitive with who can outdo who in regards to their show couple... And I wonder if having slightly less expensive shows that are just as entertaining might be just as valuable, if not to also provide them an opportunity to see different styles.

Which I think is a real shame because we are bypassing an opportunity to showcase our domestic couples as well as the American styles.

[benm]

On our college team, the competition show is generally not a huge moneymaker nor a huge liability, so it's more a question of "why not?" Fitting it into the schedule is probably a bigger challenge than the money.

Personally, I would not otherwise have had the opportunity to see dancing of that level in person. The naysayers can just not buy tickets. :)

[Joe]

I must say, the best dancers are not necessarily the most entertaining dancers. At OSB how often does the winner of the competitive event also win the showdance event? Not often.

[White Chacha]

...

Many of the young dancers never realize the golden opportunity they have in seeing these couples and never fully appreciate it. And I wonder if having slightly less expensive shows that are just as entertaining might be just as valuable, if not to also provide them an opportunity to see different styles.

...

It's true that many newer dancers won't fully appreciate seeing the world's best dancing. But that doesn't mean there won't be many dancers attending who do appreciate it. And the more you witness the best dancing, the more discriminating you'll become in what you like.

So why not show people the best there is, by the standards of the day? Part of the collegiate experience is about learning. Seeing the best dancing possible is certainly a learning experience about the art.

As benm already indicated, the money for the hosting team can be a wash.

[Benjy]

I must say, the best dancers are not necessarily the most entertaining dancers. At OSB how often does the winner of the competitive event also win the showdance event? Not often.

Very true... Luca's show at MIT 2009, though it was coming from a Standard lesson, was just... not a great show. I mean, I didn't regret watching it, but it wasn't entertaining, just interesting. He was amazing, but it wasn't a show... more like a lecture and demonstration of phenomenal standard with some wannabee smooth inserted to make it not a competition routine.

Arunas and Katusha at BADC 2008... ways and away the best show I have ever seen. But they're pretty high up there, so...

[and123]

If I wanted to be entertained, I'd go to a movie. I'm more interested in the dancing, and frankly get rather irritated when the show couple or MC tries to "whoop" up the crowd and get them screaming and excited. Chances are I've been dancing all day and/or up since the crack of bird crap and just want to sit and watch some exquisite dancing.

But that's just me. I can understand how non-competitors or outsiders might want more of a show.

[DL]

Very true... Luca's show at MIT 2009, though it was coming from a Standard lesson, was just... not a great show.

Well, "in matters of taste, there can be no dispute." So, OK, but speaking for myself -- I thought it was quite good indeed.

[Ithink]

Yup, definitely a matter of taste. Re Luca and Loraine's show, I really must wonder if we were watching the same thing. Because I thought it was the most mesmerizing, astonishing piece of dancing I've ever seen and I saw Blackpool live this year (not to mention Mirko and Alessia's MIT show two years prior)... When he began with the VW with control, musicality and balance most rarely achieve in the slow waltz, I thought I was gonna lose my mind, lol... I may have forgotten to bearthe during it too! IMO, they were NOT competition routines either, despite the supposed lack of "smooth material"; I firmly believe it was even partially ad-libbed.

As a fellow dancer, do you really need lifts and monkey tricks to think something is a good dance show? Personally, like and123 said, I am there to see dancing not stupid human tricks, comedy, entertainment, etc.

From what I saw of Arunas/Katusha's show at BADC (I didn't see the whole thing), it was actually very forgettable... I will never ever forget the way Luca and Loraine moved, ever.

[Benjy]

As a fellow dancer, do you really need lifts and monkey tricks to think something is a good dance show? Personally, like and123 said, I am there to see dancing not stupid human tricks, comedy, entertainment, etc.

From what I saw of Arunas/Katusha's show at BADC (I didn't see the whole thing), it was actually very forgettable... I will never ever forget the way Luca and Loraine moved, ever.

I hate lifts in standard actually... rarely does anything strike me as more fake. For me, a show is about doing something special to music, and from what I saw, Luca and Lorraine, while they moved magnificently (I'm not arguing that, it was very impressive, I understand why they were and are the best in the world), didn't do anything special. Not to mention the ego involved... oy:rolleyes:. I felt like I was expected to all but bow down for two people doing less than what I felt they could do. It's a show... the point is to entertain.

[DL]

Not to mention the ego involved... oy:rolleyes:. I felt like I was expected to all but bow down for two people doing less than what I felt they could do. It's a show... the point is to entertain.

As for ego -- I see what you're saying, but:
* that's a separate matter from the quality of a show
* that's very hard to judge about anybody, without personal interaction over time (which a show doesn't offer)

There's a flip side, where I often sense fawning in the dance community over this or that show couple. I absolutely respect the dedication and commitment that goes into achieving that sort of proficiency; but personally, I try keep it down-to-earth.

As for, "the point is to entertain" -- I for one, was entertained.

[Chris Stratton]

... the point is to entertain.

So first you distance yourself from the collegiate scene because its too much about just having fun and not serious enough for you, then you criticize their selected performers for laying bare the essence of dances without enough entertaining wrapping...

[Benjy]

So first you distance yourself from the collegiate scene because its too much about just having fun and not serious enough for you, then you criticize their selected performers for laying bare the essence of dances without enough entertaining wrapping...

Yes, that's sounds about correct. Is this an appropriate forum for finger pointing, because that was never the impression I was given.

[Larinda McRaven]

Luca's ego is well far from being egotistical. I trained with them, and with him being Italian... well there is a certain amount of "posing" that goes into even the most basic and casual conversation. Talking directly to him is a completely "other-worldly" experience, you honestly feel that there is no conversation more important in the world at that moment, he is very intense.

I always loved watching his attention to even minute expression and find it rather charming and enchanting. And she is a perfect demure foil for him. To me that is the show of Luca and Loraine.

As for finger-pointing, I did not see CS as doing anything other than pointing out apparent self-contradictory ideology in your posts.

[tunape]

Everyone has different tastes and reasons to attend a show. If a show was too much catered to one person, then only one ticket would be sold.

[Warren J. Dew]

I know what they charge too, but i doubt the teams would keep doing it if it was generally a loosing proposition.

I've seen quite a few of the competition financials, and it's not. It is sometimes a losing proposition, but on average, it works out well financially.

I would note that the financials often involve money from sources other than direct sales to the public.

Part of the collegiate experience is about learning. Seeing the best dancing possible is certainly a learning experience about the art.

One of the risks of these shows is that new dancers will think that it's the world's best dancing, when in fact it's only one couple's doing their best.

[samina]

mebbe it's just a matter of clout and the image of "seriousness" of the club's culture? marketing, if you will? just speculating... have no direct experience of that culture.

[wooh]

If I wanted to be entertained, I'd go to a movie. ... just want to sit and watch some exquisite dancing.

But that's just me. I can understand how non-competitors or outsiders might want more of a show.

Is there any reason that a show can't combine exquisite dancing and what others are calling entertainment? Like does a couple go and say, "Ok, we're going to choreograph to go with the feel and highlights of this particular song, maybe even throw in a lift, let's make sure that our dancing sucks when we do it!"

[wooh]

One of the risks of these shows is that new dancers will think that it's the world's best dancing, when in fact it's only one couple's doing their best.

There's certainly plenty of people that think DWTS celebs (note I didn't say pros) are the world's best dancers. People are going to be impressed by whatever they see until they learn better.
So I wonder, is this an argument not to waste money on top pros for these shows when they could just pay me and my husband with a free meal and we'll stop by, do a quick cha cha and the uneducated audience members would be just as impressed.:p

[Chris Stratton]

Is there any reason that a show can't combine exquisite dancing and what others are calling entertainment? Like does a couple go and say, "Ok, we're going to choreograph to go with the feel and highlights of this particular song, maybe even throw in a lift, let's make sure that our dancing sucks when we do it!"

No, but people might be less likely to notice the mastery of fundamental elements if they are intermixed with flashy crowd-pleasing steps, than if the performance is intentionally focused on transparency.

For an audience composed primarily of participants - and by majority dancers working on syllabus material - seeing a world class interpretation of things they are working on is probably the most useful.

The question of course could be asked if the visiting teams might better spend their money on building a library of these couples basics dvd's - and indeed tbey might. But that wouldnt be as much fun ;-)

[syncopationator]

The question of course could be asked if the visiting teams might better spend their money on building a library of these couples basics dvd's - and indeed tbey might. But that wouldnt be as much fun ;-)

Maybe this gets us back to the original topic of this thread. Where could the money be better spent?

You could pay less for a domestic couple (since you don't have the costs assocated with travel, hotel, meals, etc.) and bring in some coaches to do workshops with the money you save.

[latingal]

I for one try to remember that each person, like each judge in a competition, might value some aspects of the dancing over another given the setting. Perhaps we should refrain from saying either is "wrong", just that different people look for different things given the circumstances.

[reb]

I'm not sure of the value proposition, but I am grateful for the many comp organizers who brought in world-class talent because I will always have that visual of their dancing in my mind's eye without having to watch it on youtube!

[White Chacha]

...One of the risks of these shows is that new dancers will think that it's the world's best dancing, when in fact it's only one couple's doing their best.

Well, when I was a rookie, I thought the silver dancers were the world's best dancers.

Someone mentioned DWTS. That, including the pro performances for the most part, is designed as pure entertainment and not so much about the dancing.

So really, there's lots of dancing to go watch, and you can choose what suits you at any given time. That's the beauty of a marketplace.

Go out and watch some dancing!

[Warren J. Dew]

Well, when I was a rookie, I thought the silver dancers were the world's best dancers.
Pedagogically this may be better than watching a world champion show that early. Beginners will overtake silver level dancers within a few years if they stick with it, at which point they'll lose the misperception that anyone is perfect.

After watching a world champion couple, they may be trying to emulate the champions' flaws as well as their good technique for many years.

And the flaws are usually easier to emulate.

[DL]

Pedagogically this may be better than watching a world champion show that early. Beginners will overtake silver level dancers within a few years if they stick with it, at which point they'll lose the misperception that anyone is perfect.

Not so long ago I was at a comp with some good champ-level entries. I was having fun watching them. However, when I overheard someone next to me say, "I want to dance like that," I barely resisted the urge to quip, "None of them do..."

But anyway I think there's a lot of value in having chances to observe as big a spectrum of skill levels as possible, from "just stepped onto a dance floor," to "has won multiple world championships." For that matter, dancing with people from across that spectrum seems pretty valuable, too.

[White Chacha]

Pedagogically this may be better than watching a world champion show that early. Beginners will overtake silver level dancers within a few years if they stick with it, at which point they'll lose the misperception that anyone is perfect.

After watching a world champion couple, they may be trying to emulate the champions' flaws as well as their good technique for many years.

And the flaws are usually easier to emulate.

Maybe I'm just a good boy and try to do what my teachers are trying to teach me, rather than imitate what I see in a video ;-)

I got good competitive advice from a former amateur latin coach on my team. He suggested that one think about what it takes to beat the people dancing just above your level, and always reach for that.

[wooh]

And the flaws are usually easier to emulate.

If they're going to do something silly like emulate others, isn't it better that they emulate the flaws of the truly great rather than the flaws of the mediocre?

[Warren J. Dew]

If they're going to do something silly like emulate others, isn't it better that they emulate the flaws of the truly great rather than the flaws of the mediocre?

The flaws that world champions still have are likely the ones most difficult to eradicate. Why pick them up if you're a beginner who hasn't learned them yet?

[DL]

The flaws that world champions still have are likely the ones most difficult to eradicate. Why pick them up if you're a beginner who hasn't learned them yet?

If what you say is true, what are the odds that those flaws won't be picked up regardless?

Alternatively, sometimes teachers take the approach of telling their students to avoid certain bad habits that were the teachers' nemeses in the teachers' early years. Of course, that just means that the good things the teachers *did* focus on, will receive less emphasis with the students, in favor of the teachers' revised focus.

The more carefully I think about this issue, the more I believe that it's foolish to approach any learning process with an effort to "avoid the bad thing."

[wooh]

The flaws that world champions still have are likely the ones most difficult to eradicate. Why pick them up if you're a beginner who hasn't learned them yet?

You know, if the beginners just lay quietly in bed 24 hours a day, they'll avoid lots of bad habits!

[New in NY]

Pedagogically this may be better than watching a world champion show that early. Beginners will overtake silver level dancers within a few years if they stick with it, at which point they'll lose the misperception that anyone is perfect.

After watching a world champion couple, they may be trying to emulate the champions' flaws as well as their good technique for many years.

And the flaws are usually easier to emulate.
Not to be rude, but as a beginner I find your statement a bit condescending.

My husband and I are social dancers who plan to attend (as spectators) our first comp this month. Just last night, we had a discussion on this topic of whether we should plan to get tickets to watch the bronze and silver dancers and enjoy seeing a level of dancing that we might possibly hope to attain one day, or to attend on novice/champ night and enjoy watching dancers who can perform at a level well beyond anything we will ever experience. I think either will be a pleasurable experience.

I'm a DWTS fan, but even before I started taking lessons I could tell the difference between the dancing on DWTS and the comps I would sometimes watch on PBS.

[Quixotic]

All I can say is that I'm grateful to be able to pay a small fee to compete in a collegiate comp and then later in the evening enjoy an inspiring world-class showcase live. I think we should give individual dancers more credit, whether or not they are beginners emulating professionals correctly or incorrectly. They'll figure it out sooner or later, but the important part is they left the performance with a strong sense of wanting to become good dancers themselves (thus they will seek out their own way as students of dance).

Addressing an earlier remark about hiring local competitors, the universities near where I am here in Norcal do this to some extent. I've seen Vaidas and Jurga perform at Stanford a few years back, Maria Shibalova and Genya Mazo (at one point 2nd in the US amateur division behind Eugene and Maria) performed at Berkeley, and I hear that a local couple will be performing at Berkeley competition this year. These are some of the performances I can remember off of the top of my head, and just in latin.

[Chris Stratton]

If what you say is true, what are the odds that those flaws won't be picked up regardless?

I suspect the reference is to arching the lower back to project the belly, something that is not likely to develop unless under the influence of those who are willing to resort to that.

[Warren J. Dew]

I suspect the reference is to arching the lower back to project the belly, something that is not likely to develop unless under the influence of those who are willing to resort to that.

That's one. There's also lack of heel leads, lack of shoulder parallelism, pushing through with the inside hip when going outside partner, etc. Not all on the same couple, of course, but all from world champions.

[Chris Stratton]

That's one. There's also lack of heel leads, lack of shoulder parallelism, pushing through with the inside hip when going outside partner, etc. Not all on the same couple, of course, but all from world champions.

Now you've got me interested - in what types of situations where heel leads missing? Lowering beyond the lowering step onto the rising one?

[syncopationator]

Not to be rude, but as a beginner I find your statement a bit condescending...I'm a DWTS fan, but even before I started taking lessons I could tell the difference between the dancing on DWTS and the comps I would sometimes watch on PBS.

I don't think WJD meant it to me condescending. When I attended my first dance lesson I thought my teachers were amazing, yet they were maybe mid-bronze level dancers.

Its easy to tell that DWTS is not the same quality as ABC - for one, you already know that half the partnership is a beginner.

[Warren J. Dew]

Now you've got me interested - in what types of situations where heel leads missing? Lowering beyond the lowering step onto the rising one?

Primarily in forward steps in tango on the part of the lady, if I recall correctly. Not all of the heel leads were missing, though it seemed like all of the toe releases were.