Bailamosdance
Forum Master
USA Dance? Anyone from USA Dance that can commit to a timeframe for this database?
When is the new USADance Proficiency Point Limit Becoming Effective?
- Thread starter Lorelei
- Start date
USA Dance? Anyone from USA Dance that can commit to a timeframe for this database?
SpinTurn
New Member
I just did some studying of the system and computed points totals for my partner and I. The change to 200 points is a big deal. Keep in mind that means 200 points total for the couple, or 100 points per individual, before you should move up (assuming you're in a consistent partnership). I was quite surprised to see how close we are to pointing out of some of our "regular" age/proficiency categories (we've only been competing about a year).
Assuming I really do understand the system, if you typically compete in consecutive levels (bronze and silver, for example) and consecutive age categories, you could point out of the lower level at the higher age quickly ... conceivably with just 'okay' finishes in just two or three well-attended competitions. For certain, if you compete in 3 or 4 NQE's plus nationals each year and regularly make the finals, you're probably going to point out of your current levels in 12-18 months or less.
I actually like the way the points system works (yes, I'm a geek
). There's logic to the way the points double into lower proficiencies and flow up to higher age categories. But it is a complex system and the change to 200 points has almost certainly pushed a lot of competitors up a level overnight.
That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I really wonder how many competitors know where they stand. (I do now, and I can testify that it takes some effort!) Without a central database, it appears we're on the honor system for now.
I have hope that a central system is on the way. USA Dance's decision to go from 300 points to 200 certainly included research into the point distribution among current competitive couples and an evaluation of how it would affect entries in upcoming comps. So perhaps this announcement itself is a sure sign of progress?
Assuming I really do understand the system, if you typically compete in consecutive levels (bronze and silver, for example) and consecutive age categories, you could point out of the lower level at the higher age quickly ... conceivably with just 'okay' finishes in just two or three well-attended competitions. For certain, if you compete in 3 or 4 NQE's plus nationals each year and regularly make the finals, you're probably going to point out of your current levels in 12-18 months or less.
I actually like the way the points system works (yes, I'm a geek
). There's logic to the way the points double into lower proficiencies and flow up to higher age categories. But it is a complex system and the change to 200 points has almost certainly pushed a lot of competitors up a level overnight. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I really wonder how many competitors know where they stand. (I do now, and I can testify that it takes some effort!) Without a central database, it appears we're on the honor system for now.
I have hope that a central system is on the way. USA Dance's decision to go from 300 points to 200 certainly included research into the point distribution among current competitive couples and an evaluation of how it would affect entries in upcoming comps. So perhaps this announcement itself is a sure sign of progress?
Chris Stratton
New Member
It could be argued that for comps with a hundred distinct couples entered overall in a style, to be regularly seeing overlap between the finalists of consecutive levels means that the points system has not been aggressive enough in moving them along.
But under the collegiate system thats a little bit better at spreading people out, you start to get complaints from coaches upset that their "bronze" students have been pushed into silver or higher. Which raises the question if the levels are really about abstract elements of dancing or mastery at all, or simply intended as a scheme of dividing up the entries.
But under the collegiate system thats a little bit better at spreading people out, you start to get complaints from coaches upset that their "bronze" students have been pushed into silver or higher. Which raises the question if the levels are really about abstract elements of dancing or mastery at all, or simply intended as a scheme of dividing up the entries.
Casayoto
Member
Spinturn, I'd say that if you're making the finals regularly at NQEs and nationals in two consecutive levels, then you probably shouldn't be doing the lower level any longer. As far as what it does for different age groups, I don't think the point system works quite as well there.
Joe
Forum Master
The way it's set up, it's basically an honor system. Just like it was before the new system was put in place...
19DancerBabyLin
Member
Lorelei
Member
I agree with SpinTurn's opinion that people may point out without realizing it, and it can happen fast, e.g. for someone who has been unpartnered but still taking lessons (level grows, but no points since the person is not competing). The system is certainly less obvious then the old one.
It would be a good idea given the coming nationals for people to try and figure out where they stand. If nothing else, to avoid costly financial mistakes, because if someone is pointed out and need to move up, the next level's event might be on a different day.
It would be a good idea given the coming nationals for people to try and figure out where they stand. If nothing else, to avoid costly financial mistakes, because if someone is pointed out and need to move up, the next level's event might be on a different day.
and123
Well-Known Member
But it is up to the comp organizers to do something about any potential infractions that have been reported. I know I've called out people in the past and more often than not, the organizers don't force the offenders to make things right. They may be informed of the situation, but are expected to "do the right thing" on their own.
19DancerBabyLin
Member
How is that a bad thing? I don't understand... Isn't the whole point of the points system to encourage people to dance at their "correct" levels? That unpartnered someone in your example is still improving despite not competing... which means if and when he finds a partner and competes, he should be dancing a higher level anyway, not dancing at the lower level to sweep the competition. Am I misinterpreting something?
Being partnerless should not be an excuse for anyone to stay in a level that they don't belong in. I feel like that's almost saying one can't possibly improve on their own, that improvement only comes in pairs. Or that both partners in a couple have identical rates of improvement. The thought that one's dancing is solely, or even mostly, dependent on one's partner makes me a sad puppy
Ithink
Active Member
I have no clue how many points I have but something tell me that we probably got a lot of points at this last MAC and with the new point total, we may be kinda close. But I have no idea how to figure out my total and USA Dance not coming up with a database for over a year since the system has been instituted just tells me that they don't really give a darn about enforcing it or having well-informed competitors who know what level they should be dancing.
Lorelei
Member
19DancerBabyLin,
I have not said it was a bad thing. I suggested that people check where they stand before nationals, as 200 or 300 points can go by much faster than people might have guestimated, particularly in my example (which is not unheard of), and especially now that the point quota has just been lowered by a third. This was my only point.
To respond to your other questions, I agree people should dance at their level, and my guess is it is one of the premises of the point system. There are other considerations, however. To name a few, outside competition one's level is rather subjective (i.e. a bronze dancer may think they are gold, but that does not mean they are competitive in gold, etc.). Another is that people tend to lose proficiency when they are off the floor, whether due to injury, or not as many practice hours (if any) or lessons when unpartnered, or not having a body to practice with, etc. Sure one can impove without a partner, question is at what rate? Suppose you were bronze and were unpartnered for 2 years, would you be ready to jump into gold right away if your peers from back then are now in gold?
My understanding is that the USADance rules recognize these considerations, as people who have been off the floor for any reason are entitled by the rules to compete at the level where the partnership have points remaining. USADance moreover has a procedure for applying for reduction of points when an athlete was away from competition. What a particular couple does within the rules is their call.
Chris Stratton
New Member
Im not sure I see how not competing is an example of pointing out fast.
If they come back and suddenly start placing well, the limited number of competitions likely means it will be many months if not a couple years to placing out. I forget if winning nationals is still an instant place out, but if it is, at least its one that comes with some obvious conclusions about position in the field.
Casayoto
Member
Winning nationals is no longer an instant place out. It's just counted like any other comp. Something I agree with at the syllabus level, since sometimes nationals isn't even the most competitive comp of the year below pre-champ.
Ithink, if you want me to figure out your points from MAC, pm me your name. I'd be happy to help.
Ithink, if you want me to figure out your points from MAC, pm me your name. I'd be happy to help.
Lorelei
Member
When they come back
Lots of people compete two levels. You multiply the number of points by two for all lower levels, no? Suppose couple dances bronze and silver and places in final where a 12-couple semi is danced, so in each level they can get 11 points. So, after one comp, the points in bronze could be 33 (11 plus 11x2). One can point out after 4 comps. If they are bottom of both finals, it could still be say 18 points in lower level, so 6 comps and you're out.
I initially thought it can happen even faster, because I was mistakenly counting points by number of entrants minus placement, but Casayoto corrected me that only placement in final or semi that counts.
Lots of people compete two levels. You multiply the number of points by two for all lower levels, no? Suppose couple dances bronze and silver and places in final where a 12-couple semi is danced, so in each level they can get 11 points. So, after one comp, the points in bronze could be 33 (11 plus 11x2). One can point out after 4 comps. If they are bottom of both finals, it could still be say 18 points in lower level, so 6 comps and you're out.
I initially thought it can happen even faster, because I was mistakenly counting points by number of entrants minus placement, but Casayoto corrected me that only placement in final or semi that counts.