Encuentros - pros and cons

[tangomaniac]

About half of Encuentros attendees are longtime life or tango partners over fifty. This is not very exciting for them, they make decisions based on common interests. So the tanguero may not have advantages from the gender balance, but the line is "happy wife - happy life", something that can get difficult at local milongas.

I went to my first one and it exceeded my expectations. The organizer posted expectations on the website for all to read before registering. There aren't any skill requirements for festivals and marations but there ARE skill requirements for an encuentro. Everybody has to bring their A game and your A game has to be as good as everybody's else's A game. The quality of dancing was off the scale.

It was just like Buenos Aires where cabeceo was used and dancers were segregated by gender. The music was all traditional.

I'm looking forward to returning to it next year. It's on my calendar so I remember to register EARLY.

 

[itwillhappen]

You can do things at a semi-private event like an encuentro that wouldn't be possible at a public event. This doesn't just apply to the codigos. For my next event, for example, there is a list of participants with names on which you have to write down what you plan to bring for the buffet.

 

[Bailango]

You can do things at a semi-private event like an encuentro that wouldn't be possible at a public event. This doesn't just apply to the codigos. For my next event, for example, there is a list of participants with names on which you have to write down what you plan to bring for the buffet.

It is called potluck

 

[itwillhappen]

It is called potluck

In France?

 

[pianistamediano]

In France?

Le potchance, pas vrai?

 

[Brummbaer]

what you plan to bring for the buffet.

In France?

La Table de Saint-Jacques? Un repas à la fortune du pot, un repas partagé.

 

[Bailango]

In France?

French don’t do potluck?

 

[itwillhappen]

I just read some figures from a popular encuentro in southern Europe. Rationally, everything is clear, but personally I don't take rejections easily. At least I'll skip it next time, more I'll look for events where I'm better connected.

After eliminating duplications and resignations communicated in the following days, we were left with 417 registrations, of which 166 were leaders and 251 followers.
*** has the capacity of 160 participants. It is not difficult to understand the extent of the difficulties we had. *** continues to not be a meeting just for our friends.
*** will have 72% participants who have already participated in at least one previous edition and 28% participants who have not participated in any of the editions, of which 15 people we do not know personally. We believe that everyone will make their contribution so that *** is a beautiful experience for everyone.
Defining the list of participants is the most difficult moment for us as organizers. The experience of previous years does not make this moment easier nor lighter. We had to send a different email than we would have liked to some people who are very dear to us in order to give the opportunity to live this experience to new participants who are, for us, fundamental to keeping the *** encuentro alive. We also managed to open the doors to some people (unfortunately not all) who, despite having been on the waiting list in previous years, did not give up on the ***. Thank you for not giving up.

 

[Bailango]

I just read some figures from a popular encuentro in southern Europe. Rationally, everything is clear, but personally I don't take rejections easily. At least I'll skip it next time, more I'll look for events where I'm better connected.

I was wondering what were all those “ *** “ till I figured out that the you were masking the name of popular encuentro in southern Europe

They can easily be fair to everyone:

1. All the repeat participants wanting in will be drawn randomly from lottery for all registrations received by a certain date. The random lottery drawing can be online live so no perceived underhand is alleged. Random drawing will stop when the number of lucky winners equal 76% of the allocation.
2. Repeat the random lottery for a different bucket which only has new first time registrations. Stop at 15%.
3. Third lottery bucket for those who were waitlisted in previous years more than x number of times.

Fair and something everyone can agree.

Since it is so popular and so many people want to attend may be split it on two consecutive weekends. 160 on first weekend and next 160 on the following weekend.

 

[itwillhappen]

They can easily be fair to everyone:

It may be that something seems fair, but as an organizer you can't make everyone happy.

There's the marketing. People want to register for an event, pay for flights and accommodation, to dance with the best of the best. (Even if in reality they can only be the good of the average.) So in my opinion, if you argue for a lottery of two events for everyone, the organizer ends up with double the costs and half the attendees.

And then there are people like me who don't give a damn about the noble motives the organizer claims for themselves. If I take part and am subsequently rejected, then that is an affront for eternity.

 

[opendoor]

..the noble motives the organizer.. If I ..am subsequently rejected, then that is an affront for eternity.

What makes you think that organizers act out of noble motives? If a well-organized and well-attended encuentro ends up with plus/minus zero, the organizer can still be sure of a growing reputation.

The first encuentros in Europe were closed shops to guarantee more dance fairness, but is that still the case today?

 

[itwillhappen]

What makes you think that organizers act out of noble motives?

My words were: "the noble motives the organizer claims for themselves". I don't claim to know their motives.

The first encuentros in Europe were closed shops to guarantee more dance fairness, but is that still the case today?

The first encuentros in Europe were closed shops to enforce the códigos by selection. A little later, a gender balance was introduced, for a kind of fairness.

The business model that good dancers pay to dance with good dancers still seems to me to be more lucrative than to organize lavish festivals.

 

[itwillhappen]

I am watching with fascination how encuentros are born.

The nucleus here is private workshop groups, I see three on my radar, have access to one. These groups put together a maximum of 4-6 pairs for a workshop, are implicitly fully booked from the start and homogenized for optimal learning success. The organizer looks around to see which top teachers are currently touring at festivals or so and negotiates into a gap in their schedule where they actually want to relax but don't shy away from pleasant work. Money is not an issue, it is simply thrown into the ring.

At two groups, the location is exquisite, including buffet service, and is ideal for a private milonga with 100+ people, so let's do it. The owner is delighted, finally quiet and honest guests, not drunken party people. The private FB group grows rapidly to 200+ members. Money is not an issue, it is simply thrown into the ring.

One organizer has already announced the encuentro, that's just a last, small, logical step...

 

[itwillhappen]

The point is that the format often is chosen in such a way that the deficits are not noticeable. For me it is obvious that the dancers without skills meet at encuentros. In an open comparison they would have no chance at all.

Exactly. You wanted to reach the roof of the tango world until your knees prevented you. Your partner doesn't dance at all anymore because she can't wear high heels anymore.

You don't have to dance at encuentros all the time, but perhaps networking there in good time(!) as part of a resilient tango life plan can be a smart move. And before you can't travel anymore, for local dancing you might have further adapted your expectations to reality in good time(!).

In a way, I currently exchange the subliminal message "I want you to dance tango, and I'm investing considerable resources in that" with around ten women once or twice a year. And I suppose that's a good thing.

 

[itwillhappen]

I'm not. Attendees are just some self-selecting group** who think they belong in that club.

**I know that there's allegedly some 'vetting', but it's within that group, so they select each other.

Where others think they (might) belong in that club, to be precise, finally the the organizer. I don't know of some 'vetting'.
And obviously it works somehow, because you only see the event formats for the second time that work.