Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 22, 2014, 07:47:20 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
A lot of people are visiting Smiley Smiley
Undecided Undecided but not many are posting....
please say hi Cheesy
116434 Posts in 1855 Topics by 221 Members
Latest Member: EVE_Dance
* Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
|-+  Recent Posts
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10

 on: July 20, 2014, 03:39:19 AM 
Started by QPO - Last post by QPO
Hi there stranger!  What a European tour that was.  How did you both manage to get so much time off?

we are entitled to 20 days per year annual leave in Australia. and I don't go on leave for 18 months so we can then have up to six weeks. I now pick comps that are on Saturdays so I dont have to take time off of work. I also work through my lunch hours most weeks and my boss then does not mind if I leave early on a Friday to travel. Cheesy 

If I run out then it is leave without pay, but I have not had to do that yet.

 on: July 20, 2014, 03:34:42 AM 
Started by phoenix13 - Last post by QPO
Happy Birthday Rugby...we are in the same month Cheesy hope you ad a good day

 on: July 19, 2014, 04:54:59 AM 
Started by Some guy - Last post by elisedance
I should add the caveat that quite a lot of AM partnerships involve cash too.  The common example is the ace male dancer from an economically disadvantaged area that is imported and supported for the aspiring, and rich, female dancer.  Its not often talked about but really is a pro-am relationship.

 on: July 19, 2014, 04:52:07 AM 
Started by Some guy - Last post by elisedance
Hey, wanna dance? 

There is an additional difference between AM-Am and Pro-Am - at least in most cases: money.  At least in AM-AM you get together as a team to challenge other couples and you ultimately both have to make sacrifices for the partnership to survive, let alone succeed.  Thus, you have the feeling that its us against them.  Of course this is only the competitive aspect of dance, with respect to the artistic, emotional and, yes affectionate, aspects its not that different from pro-am.

In pro-am you are (usually) not even teaming up to challenge other couples.  The whole way its set up is that the pro is an expert dancer and you are a relative beginner - that's why they call you a 'student'. It would not matter if you had just retired as the world AM chamption, once you started dancing with a self-styled pro you would automatically be a 'student' to their perfection.  Often the pros go even further and distance themselves from their AM partners to make it very clear who the expert is.  They talk about 'their student did very well' which I think is insulting since it demeans the ability of the AM to allow the pro to dance.  IMO an amateur should be referred to as a student while they are in syllabus but once they reach championship level they should be referred to as an AM partner, to recognize their achievement and individual skills. 

This is of course a generalization there are also wonderful pro-am partnerships where there is clearly a mutual respect but even there the partnership only survives as long as the pocketbook is fed.  This is a reality that one can not get away from, at least I can't.  Thus, while AM couples dance together out of a mutual need to compete and perform, pro-am ones do so for that reason to varying degrees but also with the elephant-in-the-room of cash.

SG: I think what you are referring to is way onto another plane, and its dancing not dancesport.  What you need is a woman that appreciates and needs your artistry and expression and who feels likewise from you.  We say that finding a dance partner is far harder than finding a life-partner.  What you seek is both in the same person.  Oh, I wish so so much that I could find you that person because your dancing would be truly devine.  Think of the occasional couple that really click emotionally and dancewise - Luca and Lorraine (in earlier times of course), William Pino & Alessandra Bucciarelli etc

 on: July 19, 2014, 03:26:55 AM 
Started by QPO - Last post by elisedance
Hi there stranger!  What a European tour that was.  How did you both manage to get so much time off?

 on: July 19, 2014, 12:15:26 AM 
Started by QPO - Last post by QPO
In a way it has kind of happened since there are judges that are in both organizations so judge for both.  Of course, and thus the reason dancing will not get into the Olympics any time soon, I have heard in some cases that the judges favour the couples, who say were from WDC in a WDSF comps or vice versa, that they themselves were more aligned with.  I am sure QPO has seen or heard of this too.

Hey ladies. so for waiting for a response. Internet was not good while traveling. but the divide is well entrenched here and judges penalise dancers depending on their preference. We also had that in Europe too. Our results were much better at at ADC comp than WDSF.

I will write more later about my expereince

 on: July 18, 2014, 02:11:23 PM 
Started by QPO - Last post by Rugby
Yes, musicality is very important.  I agree with what you are saying.

 on: July 18, 2014, 01:05:43 PM 
Started by Some guy - Last post by Some guy
I get how in Pro-Am there might be the feeling that the pro's main driving force is not the enjoyment of dancing with his/her am partners, but realistically, how many partnerships are there where the partnership is about the... well.. partnership?

In my experience, most amateurs, even pros, are dancing with whoever they're dancing with because that's the best they could get their hands on.  If a better prospect presents themselves, the partner will be gone in a heartbeat.  That means that it's the results and placing that takes center stage, while dancing with someone you like to dance with is... these days, a rare bonus.  This doesn't refer to the partnerships where there is romantic involvement, obviously, but those are not what I'm referring to.

It's interesting what EE said in another thread about the reason she's not dancing pro-am.  Coincidentally, it's the reason I'm not dancing am-am.  I want a partner who wants to dance with me, not use me as a means to an end.  To me, it's about the dancing and the enjoyment of it.  Most people who ask me to dance are only doing so because they're thinking about the potential in terms of placing and performance.  It has NOTHING to do with who I am, what my philosophy is on dancing, what I define as "dancing", what makes me enjoy it, or why I do it.  So I'm under no delusion to think that the person dancing with me is dancing because they want to dance with me.  It took me a while to realize what dancing is all about to me, and once I did that, the partnerships of yore didn't cut it for me.  So I guess I my point is, pro-am is driven by factors other than the partnership itself, but that's not very different from a lot of am-am partnerships is it?

 on: July 18, 2014, 07:52:50 AM 
Started by QPO - Last post by elisedance
So I see it as 60% art 40% emotion.  Athletics is only a tool that allow you to achieve those two goals and should never really be noticed.  Indeed, if I do notice it I mark the couple down as having to try too hard.

Its like playing in tune.  Music is not nice if out of tune - but if you play perfectly so you sound no different from a simulated MP3.  You have to generate an in-tune note with nuances of expression (meaning going out of tune).  I don't want to think 'wow that person is playing in tune'  I want to think 'wow that person is expressing the music so well'.

 on: July 18, 2014, 07:49:02 AM 
Started by phoenix13 - Last post by elisedance
I did the usual work as a team, support dancing regardless of who is putting on the comps etc.  The upper level dancers support and help the lower, studios work together to promote ballroom to bring more people in and of course the getting sponsors and making the dancers feel like they are important regardless of level and listen to what they say.

Any work on 'Amateur National Champions have to be WDSF?'  Or is that too close to the bone...

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!