NDCA registration to be required for Pro/Am students

[lucia_l]

IndyLady,
I'm not in data. But my training is mechanical engineering. I agree they need to get data and look at it before making rules. Perhaps run tests on the data to see what the rules allow and prevent and make sure it's what you want to happen. I also agree no system will be perfect. Right now it looks like there is practically nothing to enforce any sort of rule at the Pro-Am level, whether good, bad or indifferent.

I also agree that (depending on the precise definition of Newcomer) some Newcomers aren't going to "look" like someone who was taking private lessons for less than a year, and three weeks before her first competition said, "What the heck! I'll enter!" (I did have group lessons before. And I had done an in studio match dance with an audience of other studio students. That's what inspired me to say "What the heck!!")

FWIW: Now I know that if remaining Newcomer was important, I shouldn't have impulsively entered and at least waited to enter something I'd spent time actually preparing for. But... hey. It was fun and it doesn't really matter. But still, I'd like Newcomer to mean something and for that to be enforceable even if it doesn't mean the scant level of preparation I had! I shouldn't for example be able to say "Oh. I was an idiot! That first one shouldn't count." and then continue as Newcomer just because there's no tracking.

 

[Purr]

That is good research, and in line with my estimate of 4000. Agreed, it sounds like profit seeking, and as I understand it, the NDCA is for profit (right?), So they can do that.

Thank you. Another point - assuming that data entry gets off the ground and all point values are available for everyone - how is it going to be policed? When's the enforcement? When a competitor's entries are sent in? Or when a competitor's results are sent into the database, meaning after the fact. Somewhere in between, if another pro or competitor objects? Food for thought for today.

 

[snapdancer]

Plus one on data-driven design.

But I think they already have a set of data available from which there could be some rule design. A lot of the competitions use Competition Manager. I suggest that NDCA could look back at the major competitions for a couple of years and see what patterns are there, have it reviewed by some of the experienced judges, and come up with some initial rules designed to push people along through the levels but erring on the side of not pushing them too fast. Then after operating under these rules for a year or so there would be a better set of data for adjusting the rules, probably would tighten the rules but would have a better idea of how much to tighten them.

 

[lucia_l]

Purr,
In my opinion, sensible rules should be written to allow someone to compete based on their points at the time of entry. Suppose the enter 10 things in a single competition and pass some hurdle of points after winning their first 2. They should certainly still be allowed to continue through that competition.

Admittedly, I don't know if that is the rule, but I think it ought to be.

As for other competitions they hypothetically might have entered but not yet danced in, I think it's a toss up on what's fair, but as a practical matter, I suspect it doesn't matter. I don't know how frequently really addicted Pro-Am students or others compete. But my entry for Harvest Moon was submitted this week. The competition starts Oct 11 and ends Oct 14. Assuming that most competitions have registration about 1 month before the competition, I think people finding they suddenly graduated out of the competitions the sign up for will be fairly rare. Perhaps pros compete 4 times in one month, but I suspect that's not common.

If lots of people do compete more than once a month, it might be best if the rules at least said anyone who "graduated" out of their level would get to cancel the competitions they didn't qualify and elect to either (a) get their fees back or (b) dance the similar dance at the next higher levels. (I suspect most would take (b). But I guess they might not because of their routine might not fit a syllabus.)

Alternatively, you just grandfather their right to compete at the level they signed up with at the time they registered. This wouldn't persist more than a month, which I think doesn't matter.

The rule has to be one or the other, but a competitor shouldn't be locked out of competing and lose their money and so on just because they won and moved to another "point" level.

 

[ChaCha1]

I go back to the original issue. Unless the comp organizers are going to enforce the rules, registration doesn't mean anything. BTW I looked at Crystal Ball, they state that a beginner 1 has had less than 50 private lessons... Yeah, that one can be enforced. Over the last 15 years, I have had this conversation with so many new dancers, competitions aren't designed to be fair. I love to compete, but there have been sandbaggers forever. The longer I am around, the less it bothers me.

Also, they voted to have registration to start a ranking system without a plan to get there? Isn't this the cart before the horse? Shouldn't the question be: We want to start ranking pro/am students, how do we want to do this? Points (we all know this game), winning scholarships, do single dances count?? Then determine how to get there, registration, central entry system, other? This also only works if they get results from the comp organizer, why not a way to opt out if you only compete once a year? No planning at all!

 

[debmc]

I’m still confused on how students would be ‘ranked’. Currently, various circuits rank students according to some sort of score/amount of entries....with probably more weight going to the latter. Will the NDCA rank the same way? If so, it would not be very useful.
I also wonder how it will differentiate between different competitions. The quality of dancers varies greatly from comp to comp, so placing in a comp like Emerald, Embassy, USDC or Ohio, would be very different than placing at another comp, even if there were a quarter final round. I would like to see NDCA clearly communicate how their ranking status would be determined.
That being said...$25....sure, I’ll pay it.

 

[Spookisgirl]

I am also curious about how foreigners will be handled. Our pros don't have to be registered with the NDCA, just their national organization, so do the students have to register with the NDCA, but not the pros?

My biggest issue with this is the idea that pros can register students and there is nothing that says students have to even know about it. But perhaps this is the beginning of treating students like adults who are responsible for their own dancing.....but then again considering the new rule about sponsorship and that sponsors can only talk to a student's pro...

Also curious how a ranking system will play out. Right now almost every comp has different categories and ages some have 3-5 'sub-levels' in single dances. Not to mention that pro/am also has 'open' syllabus events. How are those going to be ranked?

I also agree with those about in order for any system to be effective it has to be enforced at all comps!

 

[snapdancer]

Are there any pro/am dancers who are sponsored? Pro/pro sure. But pro/am?

 

[lucia_l]

Larinda,
Do you know what the thinking is behind the rule that sponsors can only tale to the pro-am students pro.

Mind you, it doesn't bother me. I'm not good enough for them to want me to sponsor them... but I just was wondering what the thinking is. (I can actually imagine some good reasons and some not so good ones.)

 

[snapdancer]

Let's be clear about what "sponsor" means in the context of this rule. The "sponsorship" would be the student's patronizing of the judges other businesses (workshops, coaching sessions, studio, the judge's own competition, etc).

What would you feel if as a pro/am student dancer you were approached before your heat by a judge at that comp who asked you "Will you be attending my competition next month?" Particularly if that competition wasn't in your budget.

...... I'm not good enough for them to want me to sponsor them... but I just was wondering what the thinking is. ....

Trust me, if you can walk and have the $$$, you're good enough.

 

[lucia_l]

Thanks snapdancer. I thought they meant someone wanting to pay me to wear their clothes or shoes for advertising purposes. So I had their definition of sponsorship totally backwards!

 

[ChaCha1]

FYI.... So I wouldn't sponsor a pro/am, but I do sponsor a few pros. I provide their jewelry, for use during competition. This is done for advertising purposes and the jewelry is returned to me after comp. This is how most dressmakers work as well. Often you will see a sponsor dress, and I have sponsor jewelry that gets sold as "slightly" used. I sell at a reduced price, but I wouldn't say that about most dressmakers.

I can say I patronize several judges other business. I have had coaching from several judges, and they do know me by name and I attend their competitions and workshops. That is normal in the ballroom world. I want to learn from the people judging me as well as my teacher.

 

[DanceMentor]

What would you feel if as a pro/am student dancer you were approached before your heat by a judge at that comp who asked you "Will you be attending my competition next month?" Particularly if that competition wasn't in your budget.

Please tell me that doesn't happen!

 

[Lai Lai]

What would you feel if as a pro/am student dancer you were approached before your heat by a judge at that comp who asked you "Will you be attending my competition next month?" Particularly if that competition wasn't in your budget.

That is an extreme example. But in reality, I don't see much difference if I am approached at another time and place, or using my teacher as a liaison. From what I've heard, even Pro's stopping patronizing the judge's business might reflect on his pro/am student's scores.
In this ballroom world, having independent judges and avoiding conflict of interest seems impossible.

 

[Lai Lai]

The sponsorship rule appears to be solely for the benefit of studio owners and teachers.