Apparently the NDCA is getting serious about amateur status not only for amateur competition, but for the amateur half of pro-am competition as well. The chairman of the amateur committee at the NDCA has asked some amateurs for input, including myself. While I've done some pro-am competitions, I've never done it very seriously, and I'd like to find out how people who are more serious about their pro-am competition feel on the subject.

So - what kind of professional background, if any, do you think constitutes 'unfair competition' for pro-am students? Presumably it would be unfair for someone with a long history of teaching and competing as a professional to start competing with another professional as the 'am' half of a pro-am couple, but what about a shorter period of teaching as an entry level professional at a chain studio? What if the person only taught a lesson or two? Does it matter how much money was involved? And under what circumstances would it be reasonable to reinstate someone to amateur status for the purposes of pro-am competition?

In addition, right now, there isn't any good way for a pro-am student to know what the rules are. Would it be better for pro-am students to get a copy of the rulebook so the rules can be better known and more equitably enforced? Would you, as a pro-am student, be willing to see a requirement for you and other pro-am students to register with the NDCA to make sure this happened? Or would it be better to hold the teacher responsible, and not involve the student?

I'm not sure how serious I am, but I compete pro-am in 5-6 competitions a year, including Ohio. This is an interesting, but tricky subject. There are so many varieties and levels of professional dancers, that it does not lend itself easily to "one-size fits all' types of rules, yet decisions on a case by case basis would be unwieldy and subjective.



Last year at a regional comp I saw (not in my heats) a pro competing "pro-am" with his former pro partner who had had her amateur status reinstated. I think that it had been about 2 years since they had competed together professionally. I remember thinking that it seemed a little iffy even though it was technically within the rules. It created a certain amount of buzz around the room and a number of eyebrows were raised.



In response to your questions:



I personally wouldn't use the amount of money made as part of the criteria. A less skilled dancer could teach a ton of group classes in beginning social dance and make more money than a more skilled dancer who taught fewer lessons at a higher level.



In general, I am less receptive to the idea of former competing pros becoming amateurs again than pros who have taught but not competed. However, I think that # of competitons and success would also have to factor in. I probably wouldn't have a problem with someone who decided to go pro and then realized they were in way over their head at the first competition they entered, but where does one draw the line?



I also think that elapsed time factors in. The effect of a one year gap would certainly be different than that of a 5 year gap, 10 year etc.



And reinstatement at what level? Any level of their choosing? Or do we assume that anyone who thought they were good enough to go pro should have to compete in open gold?



It seems as though some sort of matrix or weighted point system might have value.



For example, ascending point values could be assigned to various criteria. The higher the number of professional competitions entered,the higher the number of points earned. Do the same for the number of years teaching, and the reverse for the number of years since professional activity occurred (more years elapsed, fewer points). And any other relevant criteria. Add up the points and compare the total to some number that has been agreed upon as a reasonable limit to determne if the person is eligible to be reinstated.



As to the registration/rules issue, I wouldn't have a problem registering as long as pro-am interests were truly represented. I would want any communications, rules etc. sent directly to me. After all, I would be a member right?



Additionally, sending the materials through the pro could be a logistical nightmare for all concerned. Some pro-am dancers compete with more than one pro. Who decides which is "primary" and should receive the mail? Would a pro with a lot of pro-am students really want to have to deal with it?



Enough, it is late and I have to work in the morning to pay for all my pro-am dancing.



Michelle

This reminded me of something I saw at a decent sized comp which I completely forgot about. One female 'student' danced the 'am' part of the pro-am and then in the same comp danced the 'pro' part of the pro-am in another heat. I remember thinking - what's up with that. I was too busy competing myself and it didn't affect me directly so I didn't look into it that far. Unless my eyes were playing tricks - however, someone else I was with noticed the same thing which would make that seem unlikely. I would think this would be a but as a student I am pretty much as far as rules in competitive dancing go.

Why is the Chairman of NDCA's amateur committee asking amateurs what pro/am's want?

Terra, because she wants input from the amateur student half of the pro-am world, as well as the professional instructor half. Does that seem unreasonable to you?

No offense, but I think it's kind of odd that they asked you specifically, seeing that you don't dance Pro/Am now and, based on your comments here, don't seem particularly fond of many non-collegiate competitions anyway. I hope they also asked some of the currently active Pro/Am competitors (both teachers and students).



But I guess that's why you posted your comments and questions in the first place :-)

I think reinstatement is a nice idea in the case of low-level instructors who have never competed as pros (as in with a pro partner) and who have changed their minds about the whole teacher thing. Let's say they quit teaching and then wait a certain amount of time (I don't know how long, let's say a year for the sake of argument), and then they can be reinstated as amateurs again.