choreography vs. lead/follow in comps?
- Thread starter chachacha
- Start date
Purr
Forum Master
This would be very interesting. When I first competed, a very long time ago, I didn't have set routines. Lead and follow was it. I'm also reasonably confident in my ability to follow. So, to me this idea isn't that scary. I'd be more concerned about a leader's potential ability to lead, than my ability to follow.
Most of Teacher's students are social dancers. When we compete we agree on three figures we want to include and the student leads her. (There is a lot of emphasis on those figures in lessons leading up to the comp.)
She has one student that is primarily competition focused and wants choreography. She teaches him a routine and follows what ever he leads.
She has one student that is primarily competition focused and wants choreography. She teaches him a routine and follows what ever he leads.
I think the concept would appeal to some audiences more than others. I think the customers it might appeal to may be the one who are not as committed to the current ballroom model, and would not likely have the deep enough pockets to make it as financially rewarding as the current model for the Pros and organizers in the industry.
There are also hazards dancing with AMs. They will make mistakes - lots of them. And as you mentioned, sharing a very close proximity center makes stumbling, toppling and tripping more likely. Not something a lot of ballroom Pro/Am bread-and-butter customers would want to risk.
However, there might be a new generation of dancers intrigued by it.
But, I concede perhaps it could focus on specific rhythm/latin dances that don't require a consistent, close hold...
There could also be rules disallowing things like certain dips or lifts - as there currently are.
To offer a different competition experience. The objectives and teaching would have to be modified - maybe even turned on its head to work.
The musings of the possibility are interesting to me...
- A modified definition of a "good dancer" vs "good dancing". Good dancer - How well can you adapt and successfully dance with multiple partners. Good dancing - doing the above across different dancers while still looking decently competent. (Perfection would no longer be the ultimate goal for this type of competition.)
Quite a variant on the current model of how close to perfection can you get on set choreography with some who you've danced with for close to a decade and and also knows your real weight, smell of your hungry breath, and clothing size.
- Tests your dance vocabulary and ability to put together a solid dance while working with new partners. You would need common ground basics, but also a wider range of training to be prepare for what might be thrown at you during the competition.
- It's basically competitive social dancing which, as we've discussed on numerous threads, some ballroomers do not care to do, while others really enjoy it - and yet another subgroup that prefers social dancing only with a set group of friends.
There are colleges that have experimented with pairing leaders and follows up for TBA competition rounds. Usually one dancer is slightly more experienced than the other (by design).
But the possibilities have gotten my wheels turning...
Re: Jack and Jill. There is one local comp here that always holds a Jack and Jill event. Most years it is normal, social dancing. But one year I got paired with a fun guy. The music was rock and roll and he started ad libbing a frug. I said "You know this is a cha-cha.." He said "Yeah, I know". So I said," Ok here we go" and we both started doing all this crazy club dancing. Everyone around us was doing syllabus cha-cha. Long story short, we won. Actually I won 2 years. That started a few years of absolutely crazy Jack and Jills: pros swinging each other around, someone "dying" and getting CPR. It was a zoo. But the spark plugs left after a few years and now it is back to normal dancing. I think that crazy Jack and Jill was a way for people to blow off steam and relax during the stress of a comp.
Last edited:
> (Perfection would no longer be the ultimate goal for this type of competition.)
I've seen multiple videos of Jack&Jills where one of the couples had a major gaffe or mishap and still won due to a brilliant recovery. "Teamwork" is a major factor in scoring for most J&Js....
One example: follower trips and falls on butt. Two beats later, leader copies her "move"
@dncergrl2 I've also seen numerous Lindy and WCS J&Js where people do crazy stuff during the final all-skate, including stealing each others' partners.
I've seen multiple videos of Jack&Jills where one of the couples had a major gaffe or mishap and still won due to a brilliant recovery. "Teamwork" is a major factor in scoring for most J&Js....
One example: follower trips and falls on butt. Two beats later, leader copies her "move"
@dncergrl2 I've also seen numerous Lindy and WCS J&Js where people do crazy stuff during the final all-skate, including stealing each others' partners.
Warren J. Dew
Forum Master
Yes, when I was competing. The only time I used a prechoreographed routine in Standard was my first Standard competition, which was pro-am.
That said, I have always used groups and practiced them enough that my partner knew something about what was coming.
I did it with the MIT rookies when I was coaching them. That said, we did not teach them a lot of material, so they did not have a wide range of choices. They did well because we concentrated on technique rather than choreography.
I’ve also had success with this with both sons when they were starting out with partners. When 15 year old was doing Smooth, he did lead and follow without routines through all levels.
Interestingly, his partner ultimately looked much more comfortable in Smooth than in their other styles, Standard and Latin, where they always had routines. Perhaps not coincidentally, he also had about a year of rapid improvement in Latin and Standard when that partnership broke up, so his partner’s insistence on adhering to routines may have resulted in a reluctance to follow that held their - or his - dancing and learning back.
Joe
Forum Master
Isn't that why it would be such an interesting exercise? You would be able to tell who is actually leading and/or following, vs. just doing steps.
Quality of leading and following is visible even in pre-rehearsed sequence of figures (and you feel it while dancing). On the other side, to evaluate only quality of leading and following while not dancing pre-rehearsed sequence of figures, you need people to be dancing with random partners like in JnJ. And even there, it's also about luck getting a partner that is "compatible" with your body and way of movement, or that you already danced with him/her on previous JnJs or socially ...
I don't mind the element of luck. I know that as social dancers go I'm an 'ok' follow. Does that mean I'm great? No. But I'm ok. If I drew a great lead, we'd do ok. If I drew a terrible lead... no. So there will be luck. But I don't think "compatibility" with my body or way of movement is that big a deal.
But I know some leads who compete and do ok really, really can't or don't lead-- with any follow. Others can and do. We ladies talk.
It would be a fun thing to try and I'd enter. But sadly... it's not going to become a big thing.
ProgressNotPerfection
Forum Master
I'm here, answering my page!
I've been reading back through maaaaaaaaaany old posts, and found some really interesting discussions I'd forgotten about.
In Dec. 2022, in the “What I Learned At My Last Comp” thread, I was asked this question:
You know, I mentioned to my Pro that I have a friend who dances with her Pro at comps without a set routine to very good results. His take on it was that this method must do wonders to follow skills but couldn't possibly allow for full physical and emotional expression of movement because of the uncertainty factor. He felt it would be impossible to do open choreography especially without a prearranged (and practiced) choreography, at least with a competitive edge. Meaning, I guess (he didn't go into detail) that one hardly throws herself into a movement entirely without knowing exactly what is happening and how one will get out of that movement, not to mention timing. I was wondering what you thought of that? I never danced at a comp without a routine.
Here is my reply to her (from 3 years ago):
This is a really good question. I’ve only ever competed in bronze, so “full physical and emotional expression of movement” aren’t things that have ever been expected of me. Good thing, too; because while I won’t say they’re nonexistent in my dancing, I’d say they’re concepts I barely understand at an intellectual level, and am certainly not able to execute. I mean, heck - I’m still discovering what my full physical abilities are, and trying to develop them.
The emotions I feel when dancing might or might not be visible to an audience or a judge; and if they are, it’s not entirely under my control. I’m pretty good at preventing my face from showing thoughts like “oh sh-- I just totally effed up,” but that’s different from expressing my emotions through dance movement. (Which does not surprise me, as I’ve spent the last 45 years determinedly avoiding any acknowledgment of my emotions.)
Anyway, I asked my pro about this at my lesson yesterday. His view is that at the highest levels (he specifically said Open Gold and above), yes, he/I/we/one would need a choreographed routine to compete. But until then, at any closed syllabus level, he sticks with lead/follow. I asked him whether the follower’s need to pay such close attention to the lead would prevent her from being able to dance with full artistic and emotional expression.
He said, “yes, it’s harder, but I think that’s where the benefit comes from. Because you dance, say, quick quick slow” (he demonstrated the first half of a definitely-NOT-bronze rumba box, then held his position with one hip back), “and you’re focusing so much on this moment - and then I turn you to the left - you don’t need to know what’s coming next. I mean, I know…there’s a theory…that maybe if you’re paying too much attention to the lead, then quality might be missing. But quality is getting worked in. You’re learning how to work in the expression. Your brain reacts. You’re training your mind to create action at lightning speed, not just do a series of movements without thinking, like cows walking in.”
Once I stopped laughing at that mental image, he continued. “When we dance, I’m not improvising. I’m not creating stuff. [Dude! Did you just say that with a straight face? Have you BEEN at our lessons? You make stuff up all the time!!! But yes, ok, not at a competition.] I’m just taking initiative - taking responsibility - for which elements and combinations we’re gonna dance. We’re not dancing by winging it. Look. An open routine is an order of - it’s a sequence of elements known. But in silver, you know the same elements, except they’re not always in the same order. But you still know how to dance them. If you already know how to dance them, how much time does it take you to realize what I’m leading? You already recognize the combination probably from the very first move. That’s what your brain is getting trained for - to create action during the music.”
I said that when we were at Ohio doing open bronze rhythm, I knew which pattern/figure we were going to do first, but after that, I had no idea & didn’t really care. He said, “of course - because why would you care? What difference does it make - we have time for only maybe 3 or 4 patterns, why would you need to do them always in the same order every time? Whether you’re dancing with an order of steps, or dancing lead and follow, you’re still learning every single step to your fullest ability to execute it.”
I told him that I used to think I’d prefer a memorized routine, like a little 90-second mini-showcase for each dance. But now, I think I’d be more freaked out doing it that way, because if something changed - due to the floor, or other couples, or if one of us forgot something or messed up - that would be WAY worse for me than doing lead and follow. He agreed emphatically.
But he reiterated that in higher open levels, when you’re no longer doing recognized syllabus figures, then having a choreographed routine is pretty much a requirement. “I mean, we could just say ‘here we go!’ and start dancing when the music starts, but that’s very hard, even for professionals. That would be like doing a showcase without deciding on steps. That is winging it.”
And as for emotional expression, his basic summary was that you should always try to go as far as the music allows you to, if you can. He said, “bronze - most people can’t. Silver - you could. I’d like you to. And it gets attention if you do it well. And Open - you should. Probably must.”
Later, he said, “that’s what expression is, you know? The smoothness…the transitions…the lightness…the power…all the characteristics. AND the emotions.”
He concluded by saying, “as for lead and follow - it’s a personal preference. It’s how I want to teach. But I wouldn’t defend my theory. That’s just my way of dancing. I would always ask, ‘why would you need to know?’ If you can tell me that you’re dancing worse following, that for some reason you really need to know whether you’re next stepping sideways or back or forward…” he trailed off dubiously. I assured him that I am NOT saying that, and I’m happy to continue learning the way he’s teaching.
The emotions I feel when dancing might or might not be visible to an audience or a judge; and if they are, it’s not entirely under my control. I’m pretty good at preventing my face from showing thoughts like “oh sh-- I just totally effed up,” but that’s different from expressing my emotions through dance movement. (Which does not surprise me, as I’ve spent the last 45 years determinedly avoiding any acknowledgment of my emotions.)
Anyway, I asked my pro about this at my lesson yesterday. His view is that at the highest levels (he specifically said Open Gold and above), yes, he/I/we/one would need a choreographed routine to compete. But until then, at any closed syllabus level, he sticks with lead/follow. I asked him whether the follower’s need to pay such close attention to the lead would prevent her from being able to dance with full artistic and emotional expression.
He said, “yes, it’s harder, but I think that’s where the benefit comes from. Because you dance, say, quick quick slow” (he demonstrated the first half of a definitely-NOT-bronze rumba box, then held his position with one hip back), “and you’re focusing so much on this moment - and then I turn you to the left - you don’t need to know what’s coming next. I mean, I know…there’s a theory…that maybe if you’re paying too much attention to the lead, then quality might be missing. But quality is getting worked in. You’re learning how to work in the expression. Your brain reacts. You’re training your mind to create action at lightning speed, not just do a series of movements without thinking, like cows walking in.”
Once I stopped laughing at that mental image, he continued. “When we dance, I’m not improvising. I’m not creating stuff. [Dude! Did you just say that with a straight face? Have you BEEN at our lessons? You make stuff up all the time!!! But yes, ok, not at a competition.] I’m just taking initiative - taking responsibility - for which elements and combinations we’re gonna dance. We’re not dancing by winging it. Look. An open routine is an order of - it’s a sequence of elements known. But in silver, you know the same elements, except they’re not always in the same order. But you still know how to dance them. If you already know how to dance them, how much time does it take you to realize what I’m leading? You already recognize the combination probably from the very first move. That’s what your brain is getting trained for - to create action during the music.”
I said that when we were at Ohio doing open bronze rhythm, I knew which pattern/figure we were going to do first, but after that, I had no idea & didn’t really care. He said, “of course - because why would you care? What difference does it make - we have time for only maybe 3 or 4 patterns, why would you need to do them always in the same order every time? Whether you’re dancing with an order of steps, or dancing lead and follow, you’re still learning every single step to your fullest ability to execute it.”
I told him that I used to think I’d prefer a memorized routine, like a little 90-second mini-showcase for each dance. But now, I think I’d be more freaked out doing it that way, because if something changed - due to the floor, or other couples, or if one of us forgot something or messed up - that would be WAY worse for me than doing lead and follow. He agreed emphatically.
But he reiterated that in higher open levels, when you’re no longer doing recognized syllabus figures, then having a choreographed routine is pretty much a requirement. “I mean, we could just say ‘here we go!’ and start dancing when the music starts, but that’s very hard, even for professionals. That would be like doing a showcase without deciding on steps. That is winging it.”
And as for emotional expression, his basic summary was that you should always try to go as far as the music allows you to, if you can. He said, “bronze - most people can’t. Silver - you could. I’d like you to. And it gets attention if you do it well. And Open - you should. Probably must.”
Later, he said, “that’s what expression is, you know? The smoothness…the transitions…the lightness…the power…all the characteristics. AND the emotions.”
He concluded by saying, “as for lead and follow - it’s a personal preference. It’s how I want to teach. But I wouldn’t defend my theory. That’s just my way of dancing. I would always ask, ‘why would you need to know?’ If you can tell me that you’re dancing worse following, that for some reason you really need to know whether you’re next stepping sideways or back or forward…” he trailed off dubiously. I assured him that I am NOT saying that, and I’m happy to continue learning the way he’s teaching.
In that same thread, another member replied:I danced bronze and silver (for the first few years) without set routines, both rhythm and smooth. Then I moved to having two pros, one with routines and one without, dancing silver. When I was doing this I learned a few things. I became a very good follow, because in traffic even with routines I could change the routine to anything he led. I am a big ham on the floor, so my musicality and expressiveness wasn't much different. I placed well with both pros.
Now, full open for American style would need routines. I can follow my pro when needed, but to really compete in open we need things that can't be led. (drops, side-by-side sections, intros)
Now, full open for American style would need routines. I can follow my pro when needed, but to really compete in open we need things that can't be led. (drops, side-by-side sections, intros)
And still in that same thread, yet another member replied:
I did lead and follow for years, both in bronze and silver, whether open or closed. We never had choreographed beginnings and endings in open bronze or silver; I just had to follow his lead. When we reached open level, then I had a choreographed routine. New pro sticks to a choreographed routine but will deviate a bit for floor craft reasons. He’s great at communicating whatever changes he needs to make, and I am learning to adjust but it will take some time to feel really comfortable with that.
I think that personal expression can be done whether you have a routine or just doing lead and follow. Sometimes it’s actually better when you are doing lead and follow because it’s more natural expression rather than choreographed to match your routine. That’s just my humble opinion.
I think that personal expression can be done whether you have a routine or just doing lead and follow. Sometimes it’s actually better when you are doing lead and follow because it’s more natural expression rather than choreographed to match your routine. That’s just my humble opinion.
And another:
when I'm watching online or in person I much prefer lead/follow than routines. It just looks more "real" and less staged. It also gives more flexibility to adapt or change to the specific song being played. I'm not sure if that is just personal preference or if something actually looks more "real" about lead/follow. Maybe it's because you have to have a solid connection to dance lead/follow whereas you can do memorized routines side-by-side with no connection at all.
Also, my old pro said she won USDC A Gold 9-dance doing only lead/follow so it can be done.
Also, my old pro said she won USDC A Gold 9-dance doing only lead/follow so it can be done.
ProgressNotPerfection
Forum Master
Posts from April 2022, in the "Sticking to Your Level" thread:
From one member:
From another member:
From one member:
for syllabus, i always did lead/follow. usually my pros had habits, so we got into kind of a "routine" but it wasn't set. open routines are just that, routines, but there needs to be lead/follow whenever there is connection.
i did silver rhythm and smooth as lead/follow while i still did closed. there were figures that usually got put together because they flowed well, but not always.
From another member:
I did lead and follow through silver with one pro. We had a coach come in and insist that I get routines, so we moved to routines. It was definitely to my benefit, since anytime we had to go off routine, I had no issue following. Then I changed pros and the new guy pretty much did lead and follow for silver.
I am not sure how it would work to do completely lead and follow for open. There are too many moves where I have to know what is coming next to prep correctly. There are definitely some things that can be lead, but my current pro really feels that the follow should know their part including their lead portions. I completely agree with him on this point.
I am not sure how it would work to do completely lead and follow for open. There are too many moves where I have to know what is coming next to prep correctly. There are definitely some things that can be lead, but my current pro really feels that the follow should know their part including their lead portions. I completely agree with him on this point.
I had a feeling that OP question was about am-am, although reading it again it's not clear
Never did Pro-am, but - at least from experiences from social dancing - I think that especially in case Pro is a (good) leader, there is no need for the follower to know the choreography to be able to follow bronze or silver figures ...
But am-am where both partners are at about the same level ... it's a different story
Never did Pro-am, but - at least from experiences from social dancing - I think that especially in case Pro is a (good) leader, there is no need for the follower to know the choreography to be able to follow bronze or silver figures ...
But am-am where both partners are at about the same level ... it's a different story
The fact is - although it's a higher possibility that I will dance better with a good follower than with a beginner, it's not always the case. Also, with some followers I might dance better than most other leaders, while with some of them I might do worse than other leaders
It's not that different than in everyday life - some people go well together and some don't, and that "compatibility" is on various levels - not just technique, but many other things, from physiological to psychological ....
Agreed. There is always a level of compatibility that could help the dance go along better, but I think that luck and risk is a fun part of the inherent challenge.
Hypothetically the challenge would be - Are you a solid dancer who can truly dance with "anyone"?
To be more fair, I think it would be best if it required at least 2 partner changes for the 1st round, in case you end up with a terribly incompatible partner. (We've all experienced that really bad dance that we wished had gone better.)
I'm with Lucia. I'd totally enter, if it were ever offered. I think it would be a fun experience, and has the potential for some great self-awareness learning.