Sell me on the educational benefits of an expensive comp

[LordBallroom]

For a long time I've heard competitions being sold to students by promoting the benefits of having a goal. The student and teacher are both more focus and so work harder to prepare. That sales pitch is used to sell comps that cost $500-1000 and comps that cost $10,000+. I haven't seen an argument which justifies the extreme difference in price from an educational standpoint. If the main benefit is having a goal what difference does it make whether it's a local comp or a national one? This is for the student that doesn't care about competing beyond the educational benefits they receive. Are there educational benefits (improvement to one's dancing) which can justify spending 10 or 20 times more for a big time comp?

 

[ajiboyet]

I don't think people enter those comps with the intention to improve their dancing...but I'll let the competitors respond.

 

[vit]

Although I was competing for almost a decade, I never believed in educational benefits of competitions anyway.
Wandering how dancers in some other genres (ballet for instance) are becoming so good without participating in competitions

 

[Gorme]

Small comps are great for the students to get their feet wet. Put them out there on the floor in uncontested events and get some awards. It's good for a newcomer's morale. For the larger events, it's more of a motivational factor to improve by matching them with higher quality students.

 

[Janson]

I'm not entirely sure what would be meant by educational benefits but if someone wants to become a competitor then attending any size of competition will be beneficial in terms of knowing how they work, things to improve, highlight weak dances, how their floor craft is, the standard of the other couples etc.

Having a target to aim for is certainly a big factor in how much time and effort people put in though, so you could expect them to improve at a faster rate.

 

[opendoor]

... Are there educational benefits (improvement to one's dancing) which can justify spending 10 or 20 times more for a big time comp?

Another question was if only competing was a goal to bring students further. What about oienting them towards show or social dancing?

 

[GGinrhinestones]

I agree with what others have posted here about the educational benefits...you get them at either comp. But as a competitor, "educational benefits" are the last thing on my mind. When I first started competing, smaller comps were the way to go because I WAS learning about it - but it had nothing to do with the cost, rather it was about the size and "feel" of the competition (fun, welcoming, low competition, etc.) As I progressed, I did start going to the larger comps and pretty much cut out the smaller ones, because it went from being about having fun to actually competing.

IME, the cost of the comp goes DOWN as a competitor improves. Sure, the costs of dresses and hair and everything else goes up to look the part, but you start cutting corners in every possible way to keep the costs down because you now know the system.

Another question was if only competing was a goal to bring students further. What about oienting them towards show or social dancing?

Wouldn't work for me. When I started focusing on competion, the quality of my dancing improved dramatically. I pretty much dropped social dancing completely - it was no longer a challenge. Shows followed suit not long after...there is still benefit there, but the cost was too great when I could get more improvement for my money just working on getting ready for high level competition. The only reason I am working on a show again now is because I just recently switched styles and we need open routines - and the show is a great opportunity to work through choreography...for competition.

 

[GGinrhinestones]

For a long time I've heard competitions being sold to students by promoting the benefits of having a goal. The student and teacher are both more focus and so work harder to prepare. That sales pitch is used to sell comps that cost $500-1000 and comps that cost $10,000+.

One other note - IME, the great difference between costs of competitions has a whole lot less to do with the competition itself than it does with what the teacher/pro is charging. The competitions don't seem to vary their fees much overall. The only real difference in competition fees comes in when you start adding multiple days.

 

[fascination]

there are comps of varying degrees of quality in terms of who is going to show up, and where the price per heat and for package can vary vastly as well....experienced students know this, experienced pros know how to help other students navigate this as well...certainly, if one is not primarily into competing, a local comp serves as a good way to dip one's toe in the water..others may use them to prep for a big comp....comps in general don't influence what I learn, but they do motivate me to practice and give me an ongoing timeline with various benchmarks...but certainly it is only one way to progress....much as it is the preference of competitive pros to compete, and usually a way to make a better living, it is certainly not the only track for a serious student...

 

[Jananananana]

For a long time I've heard competitions being sold to students by promoting the benefits of having a goal. The student and teacher are both more focus and so work harder to prepare. That sales pitch is used to sell comps that cost $500-1000 and comps that cost $10,000+. I haven't seen an argument which justifies the extreme difference in price from an educational standpoint. If the main benefit is having a goal what difference does it make whether it's a local comp or a national one? This is for the student that doesn't care about competing beyond the educational benefits they receive. Are there educational benefits (improvement to one's dancing) which can justify spending 10 or 20 times more for a big time comp?

YES there are many benefits to a competition! In my opinion I think competitions are a great way to improve quickly because they motivate you to practice. However, I don't think the cost is necessary. There are ways of going to competitions for just the cost of a car ride and $35 (doing college comps and dancing am-am). You DON'T have to dance pro-am if your budget doesn't allow it.
On the other hand, if your budget does allow it, then, the cost doesn't even need justification because it's not an issue.

 

[bia]

comps in general don't influence what I learn, but they do motivate me to practice and give me an ongoing timeline with various benchmarks...but certainly it is only one way to progress.

This. I see a real difference in the focus of our practicing and therefore in our progress when we're preparing for a comp. Even though the comp itself is fun, I do it not for entertainment but because having the goal gives structure to our learning. I find bigger comps more satisfying for two reasons. One, as others have said, is in having a bigger and stronger field to compete against. While comp results aren't the be-all and end-all, a general pattern of improving comp results is one good indication of improvement in dance quality. Winning an uncontested heat or placing first out of two couples is not useless, but it gives less information. I also like bigger comps for spectating and inspirational purposes. As a syllabus level am-am dancer, I have my eye on a few particular champ level senior II and III couples -- that's who I want to be when I grow up.

That said, as am-am dancers, we have fewer expenses -- don't have to cover the travel, lodging, and dance time of a pro, have good comps available that include all ballroom entry with competitor registration, etc. But as others have said, there are ways to economize for everyone, as you get increasingly savvy. I personally would have a hard time arguing for big expensive comps that allow no flexibility at all, but those aren't the only options.

 

[dbk]

First and foremost, the purpose of competitions is not education, at least not for me. They're for competition; I train a competitive sport (even if others train only for recreation). Why train ice skating? BMX? Gymnastics? Swimming? They can all be done recreationally, and non-competitively… and yet they also attract Olympic athletes.

That said, they do have some educational benefits. They’re great for pointing out weak spots in my dancing, since I can’t stop and correct myself. They get me to a higher level of performance than I’m usually capable of, mostly in character and emoting. They let me track my progress, and compare my dancing to others in my level. And, probably the most important factor, they motivate me to improve more than social dancing ever could.

As for price... I’m lucky to be in an area where the collegiate amateur circuit is relatively competitive – and super inexpensive. Amateur in general is going to be a lot cheaper than pro/am. It also seems to be more competitive (in quality of dancing and number of competitors) than my local studio pro/am comps. We’re talking around $40 per competition, with hundreds of couples registered (including anywhere from 5 to a full quarterfinal at the Open levels). Coming from a completely amateur background, typical pro/am prices seem both 1) way too expensive for me, and 2) reasonable, considering you’re basically paying for a (close-to)-perfect partner.

 

[LordBallroom]

I think what he is asking is not "are competitions educational?" but rather...

"what is the educational difference between a $1000 comp and a $10,000 competition?"

Yes. This is my question. I'm hoping there's an answer. I've asked it of several people I know who are successful in the industry and I've never heard a satisfactory response.

 

[JudeMorrigan]

Oh, well, I don't think there's any sort of correlation between comp price and the competition's educational value. I think there's arguably educational value in competitions with larger fields (in the sense of getting more information about where you stand as a dancer), but that's not necessarily tied to the competition's price either.

But that doesn't mean that there are no benefits to pricier competitions. They can provide a very different experience. For example, Millenium is relatively expensive as far as comps go. But you're not going to get evening shows at small competitions like you will at that one. That may or may not have value for a given student.

 

[Bailamosdance]

The snarky answer of course is the difference is the overhead in running the chain studio, and also the 'get the money while you can' attitude when the instructors are 6 week wonders.