partnerdanceonline.com
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 21, 2014, 07:58:39 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
116470 Posts in 1856 Topics by 221 Members
Latest Member: EVE_Dance
* Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
+  partnerdanceonline.com
|-+  Partner Dancing
| |-+  Dancesport
| | |-+  General dancesport issues (Moderators: QPO, Rugby)
| | | |-+  Pro/Am & Am/Am rules
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Print
Author Topic: Pro/Am & Am/Am rules  (Read 5060 times)
ttd
Open Bronze
*
Posts: 642


« Reply #15 on: April 20, 2009, 05:24:21 PM »

I had a real problem with that rule (pro-AMs can not teach but AM-AMs can) since it establishes the pro-am as a distinct, and I think inferior AM.  The reason is obvious - it would undercut the income of the pro and has nothing to do with dancesport. 

What happens if a dance does both AM and pro-AM (as I do) it means that now I am an AM that is not allowed to teach - and ironically, I probably support Dancesport more than other AMs and have much higher costs.

[its actually a moot point for me as AMs can not teach in Canada.  oh, unless you are  Canadian champion (or was it finalist) - so we too have our byzentine laws....]

I don't have a problem with that on higher levels (I think on open level it's a fair game). I do have a problem with having this on closed levels, where basically a newish pro couple which would look out of place even in pro rising star goes ahead and competes against bona fide pro-am couples, just to gain competition practice.
Logged
elisedance
Administrator
Blackpool Finalist
*****
Posts: 35013


ee


« Reply #16 on: April 20, 2009, 10:05:50 PM »

yes but its taking a chance - what if they loose Wink
Logged

If you must leave the house, go build a home...

The limit of your love is also the limit of your art...
standarddancer
Open Bronze
*
Posts: 590



WWW
« Reply #17 on: April 21, 2009, 05:02:00 PM »

This might not be a problem if there was a site (or section on dancesportinfo) which tracks pro-am results.
[/quote]

It could make situation slightly better if dancesportinfo agrees to track pro-am results. However the real problem is those partnerless adult girls CANNOT afford pro-am, they might be able to find a champ am who's willing to take a fraction of what a big name pro is charging for pro-am for taking the girl to a pre-champ comp to help her out. Now no champ am would be doing that since this risking losing am status. The partnerless girl I know put together most of her saving and paid a good pro for dancing US open as an pro-am student, got into final, but the cost is so outrageous for her and she even had difficulty to pay her rent that month, and had to stop competing pro-am for next few months to be able to recover; her finalist results did not display on website for some strange reason, and she broker her bank but still had difficulty to get tryouts. If the rule permits her to hire any champ am to dance with her, she could afford dance more comps to build up experience and tracks of results records without exhaust all her funds for one comp.

A lot of partnerless am girls like this, number of male and female dancers are not in proper ratio for adult level, not just junior level, sigh...

I see where the NDCA rules come from, to protect the pros' making their living, but the truth is there are different types of students/clientiles pros and champ ams would get, clientiles of the pros are these ladies who truly have the financial resource to compete pro-am on a regular basis, while poor adult partnerless girls could only afford a fraction of a regular pro-am rate for amateurs.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2009, 05:09:57 PM by standarddancer » Logged

Selling my amazingly beautiful dresses! NEW ADDITIONS!!!
http://public.fotki.com/standart/ballgown-for-sale/
elisedance
Administrator
Blackpool Finalist
*****
Posts: 35013


ee


« Reply #18 on: April 22, 2009, 10:43:20 PM »

To be cynical I'm not sure they really care that much about poor partnerless girls.  Not at all perhaps.  Pro-am still is mostly (not all of course) about making money for 'real' (read pro or am) dancing.  However, there is a serious contingent and sooner or later that contingent is going to demand some rules - and if there are to be rules then there has to be a body to administer them that is recognzied by the competitors.
Logged

If you must leave the house, go build a home...

The limit of your love is also the limit of your art...
elisedance
Administrator
Blackpool Finalist
*****
Posts: 35013


ee


« Reply #19 on: April 22, 2009, 10:44:30 PM »

BTW I corresponded with the owner of dancesportinfo about tracking pro-am couples but it was both too much work and not really of interest to him - they are located in europe I believe where pro-am is rather small.
Logged

If you must leave the house, go build a home...

The limit of your love is also the limit of your art...
ttd
Open Bronze
*
Posts: 642


« Reply #20 on: April 23, 2009, 04:08:16 PM »

To be cynical I'm not sure they really care that much about poor partnerless girls.  Not at all perhaps.  Pro-am still is mostly (not all of course) about making money for 'real' (read pro or am) dancing.  However, there is a serious contingent and sooner or later that contingent is going to demand some rules - and if there are to be rules then there has to be a body to administer them that is recognzied by the competitors.

I think there are two camps when it comes to am halves of pro-am partnerships. There is a group, which would like to see the rule on am teaching removed or modified (i.e. you can't teach higher than 1 or 2 levels below your competitive level - i.e. if you compete in silver, you cannot teach above newcomer or beginner bronze). And there is a group which does not want to see any teaching at all on the am side because it is perceived that the ams who teach have unfair advantage (and it's not like teaching is the only way to finance your dancing). My personal POV is that teaching by ams in pro-am partnerships should be restricted to open levels.
Logged
mamboqueen
Newcomer

Posts: 5



« Reply #21 on: April 23, 2009, 04:19:14 PM »

the absurd thing is that there are pro/am students out there teaching away...so, why bother with the rule if it's not going to be enforced?  Either you let everyone do it, or you actively enforce the rule. 
Logged

Dance first.  Think later.  It's the natural order.  ~Samuel Beckett
elisedance
Administrator
Blackpool Finalist
*****
Posts: 35013


ee


« Reply #22 on: April 24, 2009, 06:09:57 AM »

the absurd thing is that there are pro/am students out there teaching away...so, why bother with the rule if it's not going to be enforced?  Either you let everyone do it, or you actively enforce the rule. 

who's to enforce?  there is no pro-am oversight organization so its a total paper tiger.
Logged

If you must leave the house, go build a home...

The limit of your love is also the limit of your art...
standarddancer
Open Bronze
*
Posts: 590



WWW
« Reply #23 on: April 26, 2009, 10:53:53 PM »

I agree one of the above posts which allow pro-am students to teach but restrict to open level. In fact, same girl couild be doing am/am at champ level, but if she loses her am partner, but still wishes to compete and dances competitively, she might put up all her saving, dances pro-am, should she be penalized for depriving her teaching rights (assuming she teaches while she dances am/am for earning extra income to help out her dancing) the meanwhile she lost her am partner? It's really hard to find male partner, the girl might want to keep up her competitive level while searching for a new parnter, without being able to staying in good shape, it's even harder to find new male partner, but the financial resource required to "stay in shape" is just enormous, Just think about this.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2009, 10:57:26 PM by standarddancer » Logged

Selling my amazingly beautiful dresses! NEW ADDITIONS!!!
http://public.fotki.com/standart/ballgown-for-sale/
elisedance
Administrator
Blackpool Finalist
*****
Posts: 35013


ee


« Reply #24 on: April 27, 2009, 06:20:31 AM »

I agree - actaully arguing the case on a sex discrimination basis might work very well indeed....
Logged

If you must leave the house, go build a home...

The limit of your love is also the limit of your art...
Rugby
Moderator
Gold
****
Posts: 3599



« Reply #25 on: April 27, 2009, 10:02:58 PM »

I think all of you who do Pro/Am should start your own organization.  Really I mean it.  You have the power.  The Pros and comps make too much money off the Pro/Am people to not heed your needs.  Instead of being the one that gets taken advantage of or made to feel second class you can decide on your future and build a group that makes Pro/Am a recognized event. 
Logged

Everyone tries to rush up through the syllabus levles and think once they are at the top they have arrived.  What they don't realize is that by doing this it is like skimming through a book, you may get the gist but you will never understand the story.
elisedance
Administrator
Blackpool Finalist
*****
Posts: 35013


ee


« Reply #26 on: April 28, 2009, 03:50:19 AM »

I tired R.  The biggest force against it - is the pro-ams themselves.  And there is some favor to this.  Right now pro-am dancing is expensive enough - an organization would add yet another cost.  Also, our experinece with organizations is that one of the main things they do is to stop people dancing (not kidding, its like lawyers - as soon as there is one organization another sprouts and they compete for territory). 

the other problem is that an organization for the AMS would be thrust into dispute with the pros - a nightmare scenario in some cases....
Logged

If you must leave the house, go build a home...

The limit of your love is also the limit of your art...
Rugby
Moderator
Gold
****
Posts: 3599



« Reply #27 on: April 29, 2009, 12:26:16 PM »

Perhaps an organization that is made of both Pros and Ams.  If you get some good Pros perhaps they can keep the bad ones in check.  It would also give some rules and regulations to Pro/Am to make things fair to everyone and help make it more legit.   
Logged

Everyone tries to rush up through the syllabus levles and think once they are at the top they have arrived.  What they don't realize is that by doing this it is like skimming through a book, you may get the gist but you will never understand the story.
ttd
Open Bronze
*
Posts: 642


« Reply #28 on: April 29, 2009, 01:17:05 PM »

I tired R.  The biggest force against it - is the pro-ams themselves.  And there is some favor to this.  Right now pro-am dancing is expensive enough - an organization would add yet another cost.  Also, our experinece with organizations is that one of the main things they do is to stop people dancing (not kidding, its like lawyers - as soon as there is one organization another sprouts and they compete for territory). 

the other problem is that an organization for the AMS would be thrust into dispute with the pros - a nightmare scenario in some cases....

Both are good points - I definitely do not want to be a member of organization which will pit me against my teachers.

Besides, the whole idea sounds too much like a union, and I am very much against unions in principle, especially being in profession highly resistant to unions.
Logged
elisedance
Administrator
Blackpool Finalist
*****
Posts: 35013


ee


« Reply #29 on: April 29, 2009, 05:03:39 PM »

IMO it will never happen - not without a seismic shift.  The pros will not let the ams set up an organization that will regulate them and vice versa.  And both are totally against anorganization that represents both.

OTOH if we loose the distinction between pro/am accross the board (pro-ams included) then there will be more organizations than we canpossibly satisfy!. 
Logged

If you must leave the house, go build a home...

The limit of your love is also the limit of your art...
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!