Why does Ballroom Dance have different versions...

[SwinginBoo]

This is probably the stupiest question ever, but why does ballroom dance have different versions of various dances? For example ballroom Rhumba, WCS, and ECS are different from just the regular versions of dances - at least from my understanding of it. :?

[pygmalion]

This is SO not a stupid question, and I'm only beginning to understand some of the complexities of it myself. First, yes, the ballroom styles of many dances are different from the less formalized club styles or C&W styles. I suspect that a lot of the differences developed because, as the dance studio system developed, there was a desire to standardize things in order to make dance easier to teach and to measure progress against some standard. Also, as competitive dance developed, a whole set of rules and conventions developed as well.

But it's not as simple as that, unfortunately. Within ballroom itself, there are many differences, within some large categories. This idea has been alluded to in some other threads. Within standardized ballroom, there are four major categories of dance -- American Style Rhythm, American Style Smooth, International Style Latin, and International Style Standard. American Style Rhythm is similar to International Style Latin and American Style Smooth is similar to International Style Standard, although some dances are different between the categories.

There are some fairly major differences in how even the same dance is done in American Style versus International Style -- things like the tempo of the music, whether open dance figures are allowed, when and where to use a bent or straight leg in certain figures. It gets complicated pretty quickly. There are websites out there that explain this a little, and I'll try to pull one down for you so you can read more.

Fortunately, some things are pretty universal. A box step is a box step is a box step. Thank goodness. :D But how it's executed can differ pretty dramatically depending on where you're doing it -- in a club or in a ballroom.

[SDsalsaguy]

This is probably the stupiest question ever, but why does ballroom dance have different versions of various dances? For example ballroom Rhumba, WCS, and ECS are different from just the regular versions of dances - at least from my understanding of it. :?
Ok, this is a fairly bare-bones response, but I think this is a great question. I know that, until I understood a lot more, all the ballroom mambo I saw just looked like really rough and choppy salsa to me. Anyway...

One of the major reasons for the differences you note is the different purpose of the dances. The social dance forms are meant to be precisely that...social. The ballroom versions were codified for teaching but also developed for competitive purposes. As such there's a different focus, including a drift toward more voluminous movements (to be seen from further away, by both judges and spectators). Similarly, very clear and punctuated timing became a focus. Even the social forms of ballroom (which all American style originally was) have this as a background, hence many of the differences you've noted...

[pygmalion]

Yes! SD. I thought about that while I was drifting back to sleep. To answer this question fully, one would have to touch on so many issues, and I really didn't want to write a forty-page dissertation as an answer for SwinginBoo. Plus, I doubt she'd want to read it. :lol: I'd prefer to have some of the other knowledgeable ballroom people out there chime in. (You KNOW who you are! Don't make me have to name names. :lol: )

Some of the other issues involved, IMHO, are social dance versus competitive -- how do the styles differ? (You got that one, SD) Dance syllabi and manuals, what are they, how did they develop, and how are they used? What is the medals system? Why get certifications at all? What are some of the more technical aspects of the different dance styles? What are the dances within each category of ballroom dance? What about those "minor" ballroom dances? How come the International Style competitors come to the U.S. and kick butt competing in American style, though they've spent their careers training in International style? And many more ...


Come on, you ballroom folks, put in your two cents worth. :D

[pygmalion]

Check out this website (http://www.dancesport.uk.com/training/index.htm)

It doesn't go into deep technical detail, but gives a good overview of some ballroom-related frequently ask questions, such as definitions of the various dance styles.

[SwinginBoo]

Thanks so much you guys. :D I had been wondering if it had to to with dance studios and measureable performance for competitions and such. I will defintiely check out that website Jenn.

[SDsalsaguy]

Largely yes but, at least to my mind, more then anything else, social dancing is designed to be able to be done in tight floor conditions while the underlying premise of ballroom (as a performative/competitive form) is volume...a distinction which gives rise to myriad other dynamics.

[smoothdancingirl]

Some of the other issues involved, IMHO, are social dance versus competitive -- how do the styles differ? (You got that one, SD) Dance syllabi and manuals, what are they, how did they develop, and how are they used? What is the medals system? Why get certifications at all? What are some of the more technical aspects of the different dance styles? What are the dances within each category of ballroom dance? What about those "minor" ballroom dances? How come the International Style competitors come to the U.S. and kick butt competing in American style, though they've spent their careers training in International style? And many more ...


Come on, you ballroom folks, put in your two cents worth. :D

OK lets try to answer one at a time.
The dances themselves came first. Then someone thought they should describe the steps in a book so other people can learn the steps from a book and not a teacher. I guess in case they didn't have one available or as a supplement to their training. Like a text book I suppose. In these manuals the steps are presented in dance notation describing things like direction, amount of turn, hold, which foot to use, etc. Of course to the untrained eye these notations probably look like ancient hieroglyphics. Anyway the purpose of these books are a way to standardize ballroom. Why is this important? Well could you imagine all the teams in the NFL playing by their own rules? What a mess! Eventually some teams wouldn't be playing football they would be playing a whole other game. Same idea applies to competitive ballroom. It's a way for us to play the same game. The manuals are like our rule book. Of course we can be creative with the dancing still as long as the basic rules are met.
Now all the franchise schools and most independent schools have a sylabus that they use to teach their students from. Again a way to standardize. Only this applies to teaching. Several reasons for this. Too many to get into but just know it makes it easier for the teachers, students and the studio.

The medal system is again another way of standardizing ballroom dancing. It is a way of rating the difficulty the patterns. Bronze being the least difficult and Gold (or Gold Bar, Gold Star, or Gold something) being the most difficult. This is also a method teachers use to train their students. Kind of like the belt system in martial arts.

Certifications are important because I believe and some may not agree that it is good to fully understand each level of dancing. Kind of like going to academic school. You must first go to 1st grade, then 2nd, then so on. You can't understand algebra before you learn to add, subtract, multiply and divide. So it's hard or impossible to understand Gold material if you don't know your Bronze. Even teachers are subject to this system. We must pass certification exams in order to teach various levels or later on to be a judge. As a teacher I feel if my students pass their test then they know the material and they are ready to move on to more difficult dancing.
Ok let me answer more in another post. :)

[pygmalion]

Anyway the purpose of these books are a way to standardize ballroom. Why is this important? Well could you imagine all the teams in the NFL playing by their own rules? What a mess! Eventually some teams wouldn't be playing football they would be playing a whole other game. Same idea applies to competitive ballroom. It's a way for us to play the same game. The manuals are like our rule book. Of course we can be creative with the dancing still as long as the basic rules are met.


Yes. And yes. The manuals do look like hieroglyphics, to the untrained eye (or to the semi-trained eye, like mine! :lol: ) But there is a wealth of information in a very small space. Direction of movement, foot position, amount of turn, footwork, rise and fall. It's all spelled out. So if you know the notation scheme, and some technique, you can read the books and do the dancing.

I also like your NFL analogy. Very much. Left to their own devices, the dances could evolve into totally different "games." Not such a bad thing for club or freestyle dancing, but for a competitive sport where people are being judged against one another, there has to be a standard, IMHO. :D

[pygmalion]

Now all the franchise schools and most independent schools have a sylabus that they use to teach their students from. Again a way to standardize. Only this applies to teaching. Several reasons for this. Too many to get into but just know it makes it easier for the teachers, students and the studio.


Yes, franchise schools do have their own syllabi, usually similar to each other, but with some small differences in terms of the actual patterns from school to school. I think the differences are as much for copyright reasons as anything else. But it does appear that all the syllabi share some basic dance concepts at each level -- bronze, silver and gold. And they're used to measure student progress against a standard, as well as to make life easier for the instructors.

[pygmalion]

Ok let me answer more in another post. :)

I truly hope you will. :D

Thanks so much for your posts, smoothdancingirl! :D It's great to have an experienced ballroom female in the forums. Nice to have your perspectives, and nice to have someone who understands the ballroom world, and who will freely share her thoughts. You are appreciated. :D

Jenn

[SwinginBoo]

Welcome to the forums Smoothdancingirl! And thanks for your response. I'm starting to get the big picture now.

[smoothdancingirl]

Thanks for the nice warm welcome everyone!! I hope I will be able to help you answer some of your questions. There wasn't a forum for me to ask when I started in ballroom. I think this is terrific! :D

[smoothdancingirl]

Another reason studios have a sylabus is because it is helpful if all the teachers working in the same studio know the same material they are trying to teach their students. Like if you attend a large studio you more than likely learn from two or more of the teachers. For example...I co-teach almost all of my students with the other teachers. My students also take group classes and I don't necessarily teach the class they attend. So it can cause a lot of problems if they don't know some of the basic rules (the sylabus, again the game analogy). It makes it look like you don't know what you're talking about or the other teacher doesn't know what he/she is talking about. Like one time I trusted another teacher to get my students ready to take their exam in Rumba. It turned out to be a disaster because the other teacher had not taken the time to really learn the material. And this person is a top ranked competitor! Needless to say my students had to re-learn things. This was a waste of their time & money! I had to volunteer my time to re-teach them. Without being paid. (Not good when teaching is your full time job) So like I said it makes thing a lot easier is there is a standardized way to teach at least within the same studio. I agree it is partly marketing however it is a lot easier to have a system that takes your students from point A to B that everyone in your studio uses.

[smoothdancingirl]

[quote="pygmalion"] How come the International Style competitors come to the U.S. and kick butt competing in American style, though they've spent their careers training in International style? ]

International Standard is exactly the same as American Smooth in almost all aspects. The biggest difference is you must remain in closed position in Standard whereas in American Smooth you can use all forms of closed and open positions. (two-hand hold, one-hand hold, side-by-side, etc.) They kick-butt as you say because the Standard dancers are usually much better crafted at closed hold technique. But I think you'll find many Americans are starting to par up on their closed technique. Just look at the current champions Ben and Shalene Archer.

The Latin and Rhythm are two different animals. However because of the Euro invasion the two styles are getting more alike. There's a big controversy over this, too. Some people (competitors, judges, teachers) feel that the should be distictly different and others do not. So when
latin dancers dance rhythm it may or may not be judged to be better.

All of this is due to the fact, as I've said before, ballroom dancing in Europe is a huge sport. Much like ice skating is here in the states. So they train their kids in ballroom. Unlike here where everyone is trained in ballet, jazz, tap and modern. (of course those types of dancing help you when you're doing open work) It is really different dancing with a partner than by yourself. Trust me, I have seen some strictly Standard dancers look uncomfortable trying to dance open parts in their Showdance. Anyway I have seen a recent trend for American studios to start incorporating children into their studio. And have seen more children appearing at competitions than there used to be.

[pygmalion]

All of this is due to the fact, as I've said before, ballroom dancing in Europe is a huge sport. Much like ice skating is here in the states. So they train their kids in ballroom. Unlike here where everyone is trained in ballet, jazz, tap and modern. (of course those types of dancing help you when you're doing open work) It is really different dancing with a partner than by yourself. Trust me, I have seen some strictly Standard dancers look uncomfortable trying to dance open parts in their Showdance. Anyway I have seen a recent trend for American studios to start incorporating children into their studio. And have seen more children appearing at competitions than there used to be.

Yes. To me, it's kind of like the U.S. and soccer (football everywhere else in the world :lol: ). Only recently has the US started focusing on soccer for kids and taking soccer seriously as a sport. The US can barely support its national soccer teams, yet expects to be compettive internationally. Wrong! The way to get US soccer teams competitive is to get kids playing soccer early, IMHO.

Same thing with ballroom. Until the US starts taking it seriously as a sport, and at early ages, it will be difficult for the US to compete on the world stage.


Thoughts, anyone?

[pygmalion]

When I was searching the web today, I found this interesting link which gives a pretty good analysis of the differences between International Style and American Style ballroom, with some suggestions about the origins of each.


http://www.eijkhout.net/rad/dance_specific/am-intl-ballroom.html

[DancingMommy]

[quote=pygmalion] How come the International Style competitors come to the U.S. and kick butt competing in American style, though they've spent their careers training in International style? ]

International Standard is exactly the same as American Smooth in almost all aspects. The biggest difference is you must remain in closed position in Standard whereas in American Smooth you can use all forms of closed and open positions.

That is true in general, but in specific, American Smooth is more theatrical in nature and has (in the past) been characterised by a more "loose" feel and is mostly choreography or "open work", whereas Standard is 98% syllabus material it is just arranged "creatively".

American Smooth has "precedes and follows" but in the Open divisions, that is mostly thrown out the window in favor of choreography while Standard can't necessarily do that without being marked down. Although, it has been noted that some dancers like Andrew Sinkinson have been known to mix up the "precedes and follows" successfully.

Also, and this is a generalization, but I've noticed that a lot of American Smooth dancers (not of European origin) are pretty sloppy dancers. While not true of *all*, it can be noted that there are many in past pro comps that should have their ankles whacked by their coaches for being so sloppy. The reason that the Euro-transplants do so well is that their training is so much more rigorous dance position/technique wise. Most American training consists of learning choreography with very little emphasis on frame, etc. It's easier to "loosen up" than to "tighten up".

I've noticed this in my own dancing. As a social dancer, I wsa pretty good at all dances. As I progressed as a teacher, I was told to spec out in Rhythm since I wasn't "cut out" to be a Smooth dancer. It turns out that as an amatuer Standard dancer, I've excelled beyond my expectations as a Rhythm dancer/teacher. It was hard at first to transition to the discipline of frame/tone/shape, etc, but now that I'm accustomed to it, it seems much easier. :-)