Discussion in 'Ballroom Dance' started by Borbala_Bunnett, Aug 14, 2007.
Incidentally, Chris, your post #79 is brillant.
In South AFrica, the following rules are followed with FEDANSA (federation of dancesport south africa). (We have 2 dance organisations as well. This is just for 1 organization).
1 TWO WAY GRADING
Two way grading will be permitted under the control of the P.A.B. This implies that a person may be promoted to a next status or demoted to a previous status. This procedure is consistent with most Sport principles that are
currently being applied. It allows a competitor to change his level of commitment to his Sport and acts as an incentive. Regrading will be carried out by FEDANSA only.
3.1 In order for a section to be classified as a STATUS event, the requirements of Promotional Competitions and Championships must have been adhered to. Only Status Events will be considered for determining Promotion.
Points will be awarded to all couples in a final (based on the number of couples they have beaten).
3.2 Any change in partnership prior to promotion having been achieved will result in both partners forfeiting all points received in their current grading.
POINTS REQUIRED FOR PROMOTION
STATUS CATEGORY POINTS REQUIRED
LEVEL 1 TO 2 40 Points
LEVEL 2 TO 3 40 Points
LEVEL 3 TO 4 40 Points
LEVEL 4 TO 5 40 Points
LEVEL 5 TO NOVICE 50 Points
NOVICE TO PRE-CHAMP 60 Points
PRE-CHAMP TO CHAMPIONSHIP 80 Points
Corne, how are points awarded - only for wins or also for placements? And how many for a competition - and does it depend on the number of couples?
So here's a question: if you do point-in, should youth couples moving up (or dancing up) to adult transfer at their current level? Or should they have to earn points in that age division first? Most would quickly do so, but would the impact of having them rapidly move up through the adult mid-levels be good or bad for the system/community as a whole?
Doesn't the current system allow youth to dance one level down in Adult (ie. Youth Champion ship Standard + Adult Pre-Champ Standard)? If that's the case, it's probably a good way to handle the transition. Youth could enter Adult one level below their current Youth standing.
i think the details of the death of syllabus have been greatly exaggerated . i've been at competitions where there has to be a triple-octa-final (in excess of 96 couples, this one was in the neighborhood of 150), although it was merely called round 1.
one need only look at the registration for the newcomer and bronze level at either DCDI, or College Nationals in Ohio (both of which incidentally are usabda affiliated) to see that numbers wise, syllabus is doing okay for itself, even if only within the college age bracket (although i'd say college kids are still dancers too, even if we didn't start at age 6).
and i think that if you think of syllabus vs. open as a two-ladder system (which granted it is), then perhaps one could say that syllabus is the ugly stepbrother. but speaking from the perspective of a person who started in college, it always has been explained and viewed (at least in my circles) as one big ladder (which, in terms of learning necessary skills, it ought to be considered that way). and so costumes aren't a negative, but rather something to work towards, for example. so for me, getting to novice always seemed to me as a ridiculously good accomplishment. all things considered, since i feel the majority of ballroom dancers come from people who start post high-school, if not post-college, i would think that the majority of ballroom people would see syllabus as building blocks, like dancesport's version of AAA ball.
at least that's how i always viewed syllabus. and thus why i thought point-in wouldn't work.
I think that would be a "thirty-secondth of finals" if up to 112 couples and a "sixty-fourth of finals" if up to 224 couples. I hate it when people say "Round 1" as if that had any meaning.
i'm not completely sure how you got those numbers (i'm working based on 6-12-24-48-96, etc.)... but i agree that "round 1" is stupid. i'm also partial to the word octafinal, partly because i like how it sounds, and partly because it makes small achievements sound great.
I've been told its okta not octa okta==1/8, while octo would be x8. octa doesn't exist...
"Round 1" is a hideous abomination . since depending on the competition it since I've seen it used for anything from a semi-final, quarter final, oktafinal, or the two rounds thereafter. (Ie I've seen competitions that will call any first round (ie non cut into round) "Round 1", but they won't call a straight final "Round 1". Most other competitions seem to reserve it for rounds greater than quarter finals. But then Round 1 at one comp might be 5 cuts from a final, while at another competition its 3 cuts, etc)
pardon the mini-hijack, but any ETA on when this past Spring's collegiate points will be updated on ballroomregistrar?
Syllabus does do well within the collegiate age bracket, especially at college comps which do not follow arbitrarily restrictive USA dance rules, but instead operate under rules chosen by competition organizers who are often syllabus dancers themselves.
The issue is more that syllabus participation doesn't endure for more than a few years, especially beyond collegiate age, and participation rates tend to be lower when subjected to the sanctioned comp rulebook than when subject only to local rules.
The end result - syllabus divisions do not function as a path for adult-start dancers to catch up to youth-start dancers. They function as an environment to get your feet wet and get comfortable, but the real catch-up of skills (if it is going to happen) happens only while trying to make progress in the open levels.
Syllabus Dancer - best served by college comps with a occasional larger USA Dance comps
Novice/Early prechamp - about an even mix of collegiate & USA dance, plus occasional NDCA comps
later Prechamp/Champ - mostly NDCA comps with a few large USA Dance comps
I think I'm only missing MIT from the events I have access to. I'll have to double check, but I thought I already loaded the others....
The future of ballroomregistrar is uncertain though... the amount of time and money I've been spending on it, I can no longer justify... especially given the amount of "problems" its been causing and the lack of help I receive...
haha, nice to know. perhaps we've americanized the spelling because okta looks too german? in any event, the only other place i've even seen use of the word octafinal anyway, is in high school forensics.
the question is whether there is any way that adult-start dancers could ever catch up anyway. all other things held equal, people who have danced for longer will be better. especially because young people typically have less things both on their minds, and in their minds
just a mini-hijack. is there any possibility of seeing the events that were corrupted from MIT? those were four of my events, and i've been dying to see them for a couple months now.
Harvard, Holy Cross, MIT are missing I think.
Time for a guilt-trip so people quit complaining and start helping, perhaps? Not my area of expertise, I'm afraid. All I can offer you is emotional support :tongue:
Holy Cross will not be added since I don't have access to the information needed, or in a useful form.
I can look into Harvard/MIT... The missing events, no... Its at least 3-4 hours of reconstruction (from paper, no digital) work and I just don't have time.
I've tried guilt tripping people, I've had a lot of people say they want to help, but nothing ever materializes.
While it's not common, I can think of a few adult-start dancers who place right in the midst of the youth-start dancers in champ events.
I last posted at #18 and I see that this thread has picked up speed! After reading all of the previous posts it seems that there is a lot of droning on about what is better: point in or point out. I think the point is rather moot. Many sports use a point in, or some qualifying scheme, for their highest events and some method of rating to determine fair participation in lower events. Whether we use points or ratings doesn't ultimately matter (though I think rating are far superior and if people are so sensitive as to not want to feel compared then they should take up basketweaving - I apologize if that sounds harsh). What does matter is that we need to start tracking everyone. I contacted Eric N. a couple of years ago to discuss this and he wasn't keen on the idea...maybe he has changed his mind. This effort can be through USA Dance or it could be through some third party that wants to take up the challenge. I think the best way is for each organization to manage their registrants information and allow free flow of information. The system would work like this:
USA Dance would hold of the registration information on their computers. The NDCA would also do the same as well as any other competitor registration system (such as one for college competitiors that I would like to start). Then, every competition registration system would have to be approved to use the feed and would publish the results to the registering organization's database. Access to this could be open or only available to the members of the organization.
This is what many sports use, including squash (which is ahead of us to get on the olympic program). I think this is the direction we need to take. If anyone wants to seriously do this, PM me.
Are you training scrutineers for any new comps any time soon? Might be a good opportunity to get a bunch of willing drones to do the work for you...
Very sorry to hear! I hope you'll be able to get some help and the situation will be resolved.
what kinds of help do you need?
first of all i dont' think 2) would defeat the point of point in. This solution seems appropriate to me.
the actual rules about that in Russia seems to work like this:
a couple with mismatched class generally dances at the class of the leader.
if the leader is more than 1 class lower than the lady (co D class + B class lady) then the leader is allowed to dance 1 class up ( and the couple competes in the C class).
this seems to be a fair system since it determines pretty fairly the starting point, the starting class in which the couple competes. after that with mismatched couples we all know that either the couple will stay together and the level will substantially even out, or will split any way, not able to maintain such a mismatched partnership. If the couple stays together, they will very quickly place into the appropriate class by earning points.
the detailed rules from the official site here: http://ftsr.ru/docs/14_01.doc
in Russian only, sorry.
Separate names with a comma.