An open letter to IHDA president Billy Fajardo

[swingandhustle]

It was a pleasure seeing everyone in person at the IHDA meet and greet
at MadJam Saturday March 7, 2009!
During the meeting’s announcement period, IHDA president Billy Fajardo
got up and announced the formalization of the new IHDA Hustle syllabus
that the society has assembled. By all accounts, the syllabus is well
thought out, and codifies NY styled hustle very well. In some cases,
it will clarify competitive objectives and make judging more
consistent.

But there are some very serious potential problems:

Those of you in attendance at the meeting saw me ask Billy the
following question - "How will the enforcement of this new syllabus
affect our ongoing attempt to get young people into hustle?"

Billy responded with two points -

1.) he said - Because I have not traveled as extensively as he, I have
not seen all of the young people doing hustle in Sweden, and Mexico,
etc. [point one - there ARE plenty of young people doing hustle - but
they're in some other country].

2.) His second point was implicit - that since there ARE young people
doing hustle in foreign countries - we don't really have a problem.

Permit me to remind Billy what was written on his own election
platform, and what the job as president is supposed to mean to those
who elected him. Billy - your own election platform on the IHDA site
run by you (written last year in march ) already acknowledged the
problem of 'missing youth' and your commitment to resolve this well
understood problem. So it's a little late now to assert that there “is
no problem". Secondly - members of the IHDA may need to be reminded
about where this question was being asked, at MadJam in Virginia.
Dave Moldover got out and praised you in from of all Saturday night
for assisting in the LARGEST hustle registration of ANY event on the
east coast. Which means - we don't need to find young hustle dancers
in a pool hall in Angola – because if they aren't coming to any of our
events - even this biggest of them all - they're off the radar.

The IHDA may want a world view of hustle, but as of today, all of our
officers and all of our sanctioned events are in the US of A. If
every time we ask an IHDA officer "where are all the young people" or
"what are you all doing about the problem" - the answer can't always
be - they're somewhere else - and you'd need a big jet to fly there.
By midnight that same night, I was in the back hustle room at this
largest of all east coast hustle events dancing with the exact same 50
year old crowd I've seen for the last 15 years. Nothing has changed –
all the young people were out in the west coast room as always .
Remember folks - when you're at the very largest hustle event - you
don't need to fly around the world to find dancers elsewhere – because
THEY already COME to YOU - that's what made MadJam the biggest.

Here's the answer to the question I asked Billy - for anyone who is
interested: “What effect will enforcing a syllabus have on the
young?"

In short - it will be fatal for two reasons:

1.) First - the economy is rotten, so very few people will want to
prioritize $65/hour lessons to get with Billy’s mandated program.
2.) The syllabus eliminates all the fun stuff kids want to join a
dance for, as already proven in lindy and salsa. By eliminating all
the tricks and turns at low levels - the dance will become the domain
of the 50 plus generation - and kids will just retreat to salsa.
3.) Remember folks – kids haven’t rejected hustle. They have only
rejected NY styled hustle. Billy’s syllabus will create a situation
where no one can win w/o doing NY style. And no promoter will hire
anyone as a teacher who isn’t a champion somewhere. This syllabus
will create a monopoly around a style that has NO YOUTH COMPONOENT
what so ever. And any dance lacking young people – has no future.

Adding a syllabus to hustle (outside of the college programs) will
have the same effect on hustle that it has had on the ballroom world.
It will become a 50 plus world of older students, served by a very
small group of certified pros. Considering the economy, and Billy's
campaign promise to address the problems of missing youth - this is a
disastrous time to burden hustle with this kind of short sighted
agenda.

David Flynn

[S***@webtv.net]

He's baaaaaack!

Same story, lost track of which verse.

I bet no IHDA officers even read this forum.

Just to please David....

Swing "I don't have a dog in this hunt" Poop

There are only two ways of telling the complete truth - anonymously and
posthumously.
Thomas Sowell
****************************
I should never believe in a God who would not know how to dance.
Nietzche
****************************
Left wing, right wing? I'm for the whole bird.
****************************
Don't do any kinky stunts!
Houdini
****************************
Leave Naturally

[a***@uymail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
Here's the answer to the question I asked Billy - for anyone who is
interested: “What effect will enforcing a syllabus have on the
young?"

Very little. For the vast majority of dancers, of any age,
competition and syllabus are of little or no value. Most
dancers who dance Hustle have never heard of the IHDA.

[swingandhustle]

For hustle event promoters:

Each of you receiving this notice is a Hustle event promoter with a
major dance event scheduled to occur in the next calendar year.
So it will be of some importance to you to get details on the coming
IHDA sanctioned hustle syllabus scheduled to take effect this
competitive season. I don't have to remind any of you that in an
economic depression - registrations for most of you will be way lower
than normal. Any change that further reduces registrations in any of
your events damages your profitability. You may therefore wish to
contact to IHDA to ferret out some of the questions below that could
effect your bottom line:

1.) Who will pay to train the judges for syllabus based hustle rounds
- when they occur? Will it be the event promoters?

2.) Will legacy students (or new young people) be willing to spend $65
an hour in a depression to learn the approved moves?

3.) Will a large number of people simply refuse to enter syllabus
rounds out of fear of being disqualified if they didn't buy all the
private lessons?

4.) Who is certified to teach the syllabus to people who DO want to
pay?

5.) Who is certified to judge the competitive rounds according to the
syllabus?

6.) Will the IHDA provide a list of certified instructors and judges?

7.) When will this list of approved teachers/judges be available?

8.) Will the IHDA provide financial assistance on training judges we
use at our events?

9.) Will this added requirement make certified judges and teachers
MORE expensive or hard to get because of their added skills/
certifications?

10.) Will this added requirement be one more obstacle against getting
new young people into hustle?

11.) If we DO go with a syllabus, do we want one enforcing a hustle
style that young people don't seem to like?

12.) In the absence of certified judges and teachers, how will we
enforce competitive consistency event to event?

Once these questions are resolved, and the economy gets better - that
addition of a hustle syllabus for certain rounds of competition might
be a good thing. But solving our dwindling attendance problems and
missing youth are far more important problems that probably don't need
a burden like this added right now.

David Flynn

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
2.) Will legacy students (or new young people) be willing to spend $65
an hour in a depression to learn the approved moves?

Most syllabus (ballroom) competitors are not learning the syllabus in
private lessons, they are learning it in group classes targeted at
that syllabus level. Numerically, the majority would be learning it
in extremely low cost and accurately targeted classes organized by
their college teams.

In either case, private lessons are for refining execution, not for
the initial learning of syllabus figures.

[swingandhustle]

CS_Post - you need to re-read what I wrote and realize that I
purposely bracketed out college students from the discussion.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
CS_Post - you need to re-read what I wrote and realize that I
purposely bracketed out college students from the discussion.

You bracketed out hustling college students.

If you bracket out ballroom college students, you basically bracket
out the majority of adult-division syllabus ballroom community.

The problem you face isn't a question of syllabus or not, it's a
question of cultural resonance and practical presentation.

Ballroom gets cultural resonance in depth in large part because it has
deep inherited establishment - it's an old idea in the US ripe for
individual rediscovery, and of increasing importance an idea already
well established in the minds of second and first generation
immigrants (and foreign students) from east european and asian
countries.

In comparison, hustle isn't disinteresting - people take to the
ballroom form like other dances - but it's basically seen as the dance
partner of the music of the 70's, and so it's not in general more
popular than that music is - in other words, an interesting novelty
but not something to focus on. The result is that most of the young
people who will dance what they think of as hustle are those doing it
amidst their other ballroom dances, and probably not in a way of any
interest to someone who really does hustle as a specialty. That's
your real challenge - how do you get specialty interest in what's seen
as a novelty subject?

In terms of syllabus, what it comes down to is that in dances which
present real technical challenges to achieving fluency, a well
presented focus on thorough in-depth study of a good subset of
material is what can enable average students to become above average
dancers. Your typical collegiate scene for example, consists of a
core group studying strict bronze and silver syllabus for competition
purposes, surrounded by a larger social group doing more typical,
varied, complicated to the point of semi-practical studio social
material. Most of the competitive students start out taking both sets
of classes, but it soon becomes apparent to everybody that the
competitive students are pulling far ahead in their overall
capability, regardless if that's being applied to the competition
entries or to their social dancing in the larger group. Usually
after a term or two they stop attending the social classes when they
realize that there's not much benefit to what is being presented
there. In other words, syllabus doesn't automatically make things
better, but an in-depth focus on a well chosen subset of material does.

[swingandhustle]

Post by c***@hotmail.com
In comparison, hustle isn't disinteresting - people take to the
ballroom form like other dances - but it's basically seen as the dance
partner of the music of the 70's, and so it's not in general more
popular than that music is - in other words, an interesting novelty
but not something to focus on.   The result is that most of the young
people who will dance what they think of as hustle are those doing it
amidst their other ballroom dances, and probably not in a way of any
interest to someone who really does hustle as a specialty.   That's
your real challenge - how do you get specialty interest in what's seen
as a novelty subject?

I'm sorry, but I'm afraid no one could agree with you on any of this
[you asserted - so it's not in general more popular than that music
is ]. No one believes college ballroom students are sitting around
listening to mambo and Cha Cha on their IPods - thus explaining their
preference for ballroom over hustle. Kids will always prefer the
stuff on popular radio stations over that ballroom stuff - and the
stuff on the radio is a closer fit to hustle than any other dance.

You still seem all caught up on the college example, despite my
admonition. Let me clarify - the reason we bracketed out college
students is because of the Open letter that started this thread - and
that is about hustle. Though there IS an active college ballroom
program - there isn't an active college hustle program. In fact (as
if it isn't obvious) this entire thread is about the fact that there
are NO kids in hustle. So naturally any comparison can not be made to
the kids behavior as syllabus ballroom dancers.

This thread is about the missing youth from Hustle. College programs
notoriously discount all lessons and programs (coaching etc.) making
the matter even MORE non comparable.
creating an "unscalable Financial wall" in front of kids to join or
compete in hustle is bound to fail. and dance purists who advocate
that will hurt hustle all the more in the process.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
I'm sorry, but I'm afraid no one could agree with you on any of this
[you asserted - so it's not in general more popular than that music
is ]. No one believes college ballroom students are sitting around
listening to mambo and Cha Cha on their IPods - thus explaining their
preference for ballroom over hustle. Kids will always prefer the
stuff on popular radio stations over that ballroom stuff - and the
stuff on the radio is a closer fit to hustle than any other dance.

The difference is that hustle has not made the transition from partner
of its music to independent cultural establishment with a life beyond
its music. I doubt the non-dancing public even knows what hustle is -
they recognize its founding musical genre readily enough, but I don't
see what they would know of the dance apart from its association with
that music. Wheras ballroom is an established cultural entity - maybe
misunderstood, but the idea of it is there at least. And it's no
accident that young participation over-represents immigrant
populations coming from countries where it's even more of an
established cultural entity than it is in the US.

Post by swingandhustle
You still seem all caught up on the college example, despite my
admonition. Let me clarify - the reason we bracketed out college
students is because of the Open letter that started this thread - and
that is about hustle. Though there IS an active college ballroom
program - there isn't an active college hustle program.

The first thing that's important about the collegiate ballroom program
is that it's the only large scale implementation in the US of syllabus-
based teaching done right. So if you want to debate the merits of a
syllabus approach, you have to look at both the situations where it
does work (the colleges being the most ready examples, but there are
occasional studio settings that get it right), and the situations
where the ideas are perverted around to accomplish the exact opposite
of the original intent - in other words, the studios that use long
lists of pointless steps to distract students from the fact that they
aren't really learning anything fundamental about dancing.

Post by swingandhustle
In fact (as
if it isn't obvious) this entire thread is about the fact that there
are NO kids in hustle.

Well perhaps you need to ask why there are both kids (youth division)
and college students (adult division) in ballroom, but not in
hustle. I already pointed out hustle's lack of cultural
establishment, so other thing to consider would be the practicality of
programs people might try to run. The college ballroom programs
weren't original inventions - they were cases of people (some of whom
used to post here) taking the best of what ever happened in a studio
environment, and consistently offering it in a low-cost practical way,
semester after semester, until it got huge. They didn't invent the
practical syllabus approach to ballroom - they merely lived up to it.

Post by swingandhustle
This thread is about the missing youth from Hustle. College programs
notoriously discount all lessons and programs (coaching etc.) making
the matter even MORE non comparable.
creating an "unscalable Financial wall" in front of kids to join or
compete in hustle is bound to fail. and dance purists who advocate
that will hurt hustle all the more in the process.

Seems to me if you want younger participation, you need to create
either college programs, or similarly low cost community equivalents
(the ballroom world itself has not yet managed to export the
practical, low-cost collegiate group class dynamic off campus), or
create a youth program that works like ballroom youth programs.

You may not like the latter though - while ballroom collegiate
programs take social & competitive dancing hand in hand for mutual
benefit, youth programs are traditionally narrowly competition-focused
in a non-social way. There was actually a big "war" a few years back
when someone tried to re-organize a college team along anti-social
youth-program lines.

But my real point, is that if you want to get youth into your
activity, you can either look at what is happening in other partner
dances and evaluate it through the lens of the differences in the
dance forms... or you can choose to ignore it.

[swingandhustle]

You said:

Seems to me if you want younger participation, you need to create
either college programs, or similarly low cost community equivalents
(the ballroom world itself has not yet managed to export the
practical, low-cost collegiate group class dynamic off campus), or
create a youth program that works like ballroom youth programs.


I respond:

Absolutely correct! If we program FOR young people - rather than
programing for the convienience of dance teachers - we would win.

[Jenny]

Post by c***@hotmail.com
Seems to me if you want younger participation, you need to create
either college programs, or similarly low cost community equivalents
(the ballroom world itself has not yet managed to export the
practical, low-cost collegiate group class dynamic off campus), or
create a youth program that works like ballroom youth programs.
Absolutely correct!  If we program FOR young people - rather than
programing for the convienience of dance teachers - we would win.

Wonderful ideas from both of you, nice to see some agreement on this
topic.

I would note also that ballroom is not the only dance that is popular
and affordable for college students - Lindy is big also, even though
it is a retro dance with little or no current music used. So being an
older, or specialty dance, in and of itself, does not seem to be a
problem. I'm curious to know why Lindy has done so well among the
college crowd, it might make an interesting model to follow.

[swingandhustle]

Post by Jenny

Post by c***@hotmail.com
Seems to me if you want younger participation, you need to create
either college programs, or similarly low cost community equivalents
(the ballroom world itself has not yet managed to export the
practical, low-cost collegiate group class dynamic off campus), or
create a youth program that works like ballroom youth programs.
Absolutely correct!  If we program FOR young people - rather than
programing for the convienience of dance teachers - we would win.

Wonderful ideas from both of you, nice to see some agreement on this
topic.
I would note also that ballroom is not the only dance that is popular
and affordable for college students - Lindy is big also, even though
it is a retro dance with little or no current music used.  So being an
older, or specialty dance, in and of itself, does not seem to be a
problem.  I'm curious to know why Lindy has done so well among the
college crowd, it might make an interesting model to follow.

Agreed jenny - Linda and salsa are faster paced and higher energy than
ultra slow NY styled hustle

Kids ahven't rejected hustle - they have rejected NY styled hustle.

[swingandhustle]

Post by Jenny

Post by c***@hotmail.com
Seems to me if you want younger participation, you need to create
either college programs, or similarly low cost community equivalents
(the ballroom world itself has not yet managed to export the
practical, low-cost collegiate group class dynamic off campus), or
create a youth program that works like ballroom youth programs.
Absolutely correct!  If we program FOR young people - rather than
programing for the convienience of dance teachers - we would win.

Wonderful ideas from both of you, nice to see some agreement on this
topic.
I would note also that ballroom is not the only dance that is popular
and affordable for college students - Lindy is big also, even though
it is a retro dance with little or no current music used.  So being an
older, or specialty dance, in and of itself, does not seem to be a
problem.  I'm curious to know why Lindy has done so well among the
college crowd, it might make an interesting model to follow.

Great points jenny!

Lindy and salsa are both far more popular than hustle or ballroom, and
have little current radio play.

Kids haven't rejected Hustle - just dealy slow NY styled hustle - that
this crowd is busy pushing.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
Absolutely correct! If we program FOR young people - rather than
programing for the convienience of dance teachers - we would win.

The evidence would seem to suggest that for a dance with substantial
technical challenges (and I'm going to leave it up to your if hustle
is in that category) a good syllabus favors the students, not the
teachers. The reason is that it organizes and contains the number of
ideas that have to be mastered to gain practical ability. It's
compatible with group class presentation, even group class
presentation of the technique, which holds down costs compared to
private lessons. And in the process, it means the students make
enough focused progress that they start to see through the empty
offerings of less skilled teachers - they come to demand teachers who
are really worth the money.

A bad syllabus on the other hand supports the kinds of questionable
business practices that see the list of things to be accomplished at
leave level expanded as a way to slow down student progress in key
fundamentals to the point where they can be serviced by incompletely
trained junior staff - a way to keep collecting money without building
much capability.

But I don't really think that's the problem... I think the problem is
the lack of interest in hustle as a specialty (vs a minor side dish to
ballroom), which goes hand in hand with the lack of any large
community of people in the age group you want to target who do it as a
specialty, and perhaps the lack of any real public awareness of it as
a dance form.

Quite seriously, what has it got to offer that some already more
entrenched in that age group dance form doesn't?

[swingandhustle]

Post by c***@hotmail.com
Quite seriously, what has it got to offer that some already more
entrenched in that age group dance form doesn't?

I respond:

You're right. NY styled hustle offers FAR less than salsa or Lindy to
young people.
I believe we should use other hustle styles that DO work at night club
speeds.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle

Post by c***@hotmail.com
Quite seriously, what has it got to offer that some already more
entrenched in that age group dance form doesn't?

You're right. NY styled hustle offers FAR less than salsa or Lindy to
young people.
I believe we should use other hustle styles that DO work at night club
speeds.

And what do those have to offer that partner dance forms already
entrenched in that age group do not?

It sure sounds to me like you are trying to use your own style
preference as ammunition in a fight within your tiny community -
without any shred of evidence that anyone outside cares about that
difference.

You don't really think young people take up partner dance to do it at
clubs, do you?

It's pretty common knowledge that partner dance is mostly for its own
venues, clubs have been about something else for over a generation now.

[d***@aol.com]

Post by c***@hotmail.com

Post by c***@hotmail.com
Quite seriously, what has it got to offer that some already more
entrenched in that age group dance form doesn't?

You're right. �NY styled hustle offers FAR less than salsa or Lindy to
young people.
I believe we should use other hustle styles that DO work at night club
speeds.

And what do those have to offer that partner dance forms already
entrenched in that �age group do not?
It sure sounds to me like you are trying to use your own style
preference as ammunition in a fight within your tiny community -
without any shred of evidence that anyone outside cares about that
difference.
You don't really think young people take up partner dance to do it at
clubs, do you?
It's pretty common knowledge that partner dance is mostly for its own
venues, clubs have been about something else for over a generation now.

Stop feeding the troll.

David Koppelman

[swingandhustle]

CS_Post -

I am concerned that i am in a debate with someone under 35 years old.
Are you under 35?

People who have been around the clubs in 1979 all know how many people
were doing hustle, and what style was used, and how fast we danced.
Those same people know that what we have today is a slower style to
different music and not in the clubs at all.

Frankly - i am a little shocked therefore that they even can really
call what they do today "hustle". I certainly has some hustle like
figures, but slowed way down.

No one calls Waltz Viennise, or fow trot quick step - so why do we
call their new slowed down "clubless" dance hustle? Becuase they have
control over what people "think" hustle is.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
People who have been around the clubs in 1979 all know how many people
were doing hustle, and what style was used, and how fast we danced.

This is beside the point once you realize that clubs are not in this
generation much about partner dancing.

People who take up partner dancing today don't do it to dance in
clubs, they do it because they enjoy it, and then they go to special
places where they can dance it.

If you want younger people doing a partner dance, the thing to do is
not to complain about what others are doing, but to get out there and
organize classes and events for the target population yourself.

You may find however, that you have some difficulty establishing any
real interest.

[swingandhustle]

So we can establish then that you ARE under 35.

This changes things - and now I need to start you out from scratch:

CS_Post - let me create an example to catch you up on the 15-20 years
of experience you lack:

Lets say that in 1985 or so, we took all the DJ's out of night clubs
and put in guys playing accordions.

And then we had a night club licensing organization come up - and
train the accordion players to only play slow stuff kids didn't like.
In fact, they even would have accordion competitions, and accordion
training programs established so that no one could even BE a champion
unless you were judged according to THEIR standard of what club music
was.

Then, you get out on the internet and say "You know folks - years ago,
we had TONS of people in our now empty night clubs. But back in those
days, we had disc jockeys. Then some smart A@@ kid comes along and
says - well I think you're just a DJ pedaling your own stuff. Kids in
clubs today don't listen to DJs!!! Maybe you should go out and get a
liquor license, buy a club, hire a staff, and put in a DJ one night a
week - but I don't think there'd be much interest.

You would probably say to the kid - "Are you smoking crack? We had
tons of kids in clubs back when things where the way I am suggesting
we return to."

Hope you liked this little story. And please don't insult all of our
intelligence by saying "bad analogy".

David

[swingandhustle]

So we can establish then that you ARE under 35.

This changes things - and now I need to start you out from scratch:


CS_Post - let me create an example to catch you up on the 15-20 years
of experience you lack:


Lets say that in 1985 or so, we took all the DJ's out of night clubs
and put in guys playing accordions.


And then we had a night club licensing organization come up - and
train the accordion players to only play slow stuff kids didn't like.
In fact, they even would have accordion competitions, and accordion
training programs established so that no one could even BE a champion
unless you were judged according to THEIR standard of what club music
was.


Then, you get out on the internet and say "You know folks - years
ago,
we had TONS of people in our now empty night clubs. But back in
those
days, we had disc jockeys. Then some new kid comes along and
says - well I think you're just a DJ pedaling your own stuff. Kids
in
clubs today don't listen to DJs!!! Maybe you should go out and get a
liquor license, buy a club, hire a staff, and put in a DJ one night a
week - but I don't think there'd be much interest.


You would probably say to the new kid - "Are you kidding? We had
tons of kids in clubs back when things where the way I am suggesting
we return to."


Hope you liked this little story. And please don't insult all of our
intelligence by saying "bad analogy".


David

[c***@hotmail.com]

So we can establish then that...

The only thing we can establish is that you are looking to blame
unrelated social trends for the unpopularity of your preferred dance.

[swingandhustle]

This isn't about me CS_Post, despite your efforts to make it seems so.

If I were dead tommorrow, this problem would still be here just as
bad.

Neither is this a problem of my making. I would like a roole in the
fix however.....

Perhaps now is a good time to tell us how old you actually are....
because it could well explain your stated positions here assuming i am
right with my guess.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
This isn't about me CS_Post, despite your efforts to make it seems so.
If I were dead tommorrow, this problem would still be here just as
bad.
Neither is this a problem of my making.

Well... it's your personal opinion that the present situation
constitutes a problem - an opinion which I don't happen to share. To
my mind, hustle as a focus was a bit of a fad, that has perhaps come
and gone - sure, some will continue to specialize in it, and that's
great for them, but the rest of the world moves on - to newer partner
dances, and newer depths of involvement and development of older ones.

Post by swingandhustle
I would like a roole in the fix however.....

Then get out there and teach classes and organize events aimed at
young people.

How some existing hustle organization chooses to organize their events
or competitions shouldn't really matter to your efforts, because
realistically you are not going to get younger people turning up to
those cold anyway. If you want to recruit young people, you have to
take the dancing to them - and you can choose to take whatever form
you personally feel will have the most appeal. Later on, they might
or might not start venturing to established hustle events, and they
might or might start to represent a lobby for some changes there.

Case in point - the college kids are dancing ballroom primarily at
their own competitions, under their own hosting-team-chosen rules, and
only occasionally venturing out to usual adult competitions (though
increasingly as they advance in level). When they attend
establishment comps, there's often some grumbling about the rules
there, but it's limited because those events represent only a fraction
of their opportunities.

[swingandhustle]

CS_Post,

now offense - but if you can't see the problem here (missing youth
from hustle) you're really not qualified to comment at all.

Nearly everyone here is older than you and all know how many young
people used to be in hustle. The change over to NY style ended any
utility the young could have had in a swing like resurgence of hustle
- so THAT is the core problem.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
now offense - but if you can't see the problem here (missing youth
from hustle) you're really not qualified to comment at all.

Calling it a problem presumes that hustle is something that should
continue as something popular with the general public.

The view that it should is a personal opinion. One that I don't
share. To my mind, it was more of a fad, now replaced by other dances
and other non-dance activities.

If you think it should continue, you either need to find a way to
continue it with those who are already interested, or find a way to
market what you feel is unique about it.

Post by swingandhustle
The change over to NY style ended any
utility the young could have had in a swing like resurgence of hustle
- so THAT is the core problem.

If you seriously believe that is the real problem then you should be
out there promoting your alternative style of hustle. Note that r.a.d
does not qualify as "out there" - you target audience isn't here any
more than it is at IHDA events.

[R.Nicholson]

Post by swingandhustle
CS_Post,
now offense - but if you can't see the problem here (missing youth
from hustle) you're really not qualified to comment at all.

He's not seeing your "problem", and he is qualified to comment
because he's seeing the current reality. College kids *are*
showing up at ballroom dance classes (and WCS dances as well).
He knows where the kids who do partner dance actually show up.
You seem not to.

And the fact that Foxtrot music is slower than your preferred
"club" tempo doesn't seem to be driving them away from those
ballroom classes and dances.

.

IMHO. YMMV.
--
rhn A.T nicholson d.0.t C-o-M

[swingandhustle]

Guys - you are strugling to make this into a College Ballroom issue.
Struggling!

I bracketed that out to start with for a reason. Hustle is a non
syllabus FUN club dance.
College programs are discounted WAY below what the IHDA will charge
for hustle lessons.

Try to understand the point before you change it to something off the
subject please.

[a***@uymail.com]

Post by R.Nicholson
College kids *are*
showing up at ballroom dance classes (and WCS dances as well).
He knows where the kids who do partner dance actually show up.
You seem not to.

My observation is that this issue is pretty irrelevant anyway.
Only a very tiny percentage of college ballroom dancers
continue on dancing after graduating, as the realities of
life (careers, dating, family, etc.) make hobbies unaffordable,
in time, money, and relationships. There's also the "been
there, done that" factor.

Lots of the "adult" young people (20s, 30s) started dancing
after college, and I estimate that more than two thirds of
partner dancers start after mid-30s, when they can finally
afford it. I consider only a small fraction of the (large
number of) 20-something club dancers "partner dancers"
because, to me, partner dancing requires a fair amount
of devotion to learning to move well as partners, not
just free-styling or winging it.

[swingandhustle]

Post by a***@uymail.com
My observation is that this issue is pretty irrelevant anyway.
Only a very tiny percentage of college ballroom dancers
continue on dancing after graduating, as the realities of
life (careers, dating, family, etc.) make hobbies unaffordable,
in time, money, and relationships.  There's also the "been
there, done that" factor.

Agreed - and that is why I bracketed College programs out of the
discussion.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle

Post by a***@uymail.com
My observation is that this issue is pretty irrelevant anyway.
Only a very tiny percentage of college ballroom dancers
continue on dancing after graduating, as the realities of
life (careers, dating, family, etc.) make hobbies unaffordable,
in time, money, and relationships. There's also the "been
there, done that" factor.

Agreed - and that is why I bracketed College programs out of the
discussion.

What you've done is bracket your target population right out of the
discussion...

If you want young people, your are going to have to meet them at least
half more - more realistically, you are going to have to promote your
activity where they can't avoid stumbling across it.

Or you can continue to practice your activity in the way that you
enjoy, for yourself and for your fellow enjoyers - and accept whatever
trickle of people find their way to you.

Both approaches have their merits. Probably, the best is to cast a
wide net by putting the idea under people's noses, but also to realize
that your best recruits are the ones who will gradually prove willing
to follow the art back to its usual home, wherever that be. So again
with the collegiate example - the beginner students stay on campus,
and if they compete do mostly collegiate comps, but gradually the more
experienced couples move out into the surrounding world, to the point
where collegiate alumni basically constitute the core of the non-
professional-track adult amateur ballroom competitor population.

[Bob Wheatley]

Post by c***@hotmail.com

Post by swingandhustle

Post by a***@uymail.com
My observation is that this issue is pretty irrelevant anyway.
Only a very tiny percentage of college ballroom dancers
continue on dancing after graduating, as the realities of
life (careers, dating, family, etc.) make hobbies unaffordable,
in time, money, and relationships. There's also the "been
there, done that" factor.

Agreed - and that is why I bracketed College programs out of the
discussion.

What you've done is bracket your target population right out of the
discussion...
If you want young people, your are going to have to meet them at least
half more - more realistically, you are going to have to promote your
activity where they can't avoid stumbling across it.
Or you can continue to practice your activity in the way that you
enjoy, for yourself and for your fellow enjoyers - and accept whatever
trickle of people find their way to you.
Both approaches have their merits. Probably, the best is to cast a
wide net by putting the idea under people's noses, but also to realize
that your best recruits are the ones who will gradually prove willing
to follow the art back to its usual home, wherever that be. So again
with the collegiate example - the beginner students stay on campus,
and if they compete do mostly collegiate comps, but gradually the more
experienced couples move out into the surrounding world, to the point
where collegiate alumni basically constitute the core of the non-
professional-track adult amateur ballroom competitor population.

You're way too smart to be falling into this.
You assume the idiot's premise has merit.
Young people just want to shake their asses and grind when it comes to
music.
Past that, most Hip Hop music is around 90 BPM.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beats_per_minute


Bob Wheatley

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by Bob Wheatley
Young people just want to shake their asses and grind when it comes to
music.

When they are in that mood I figure it's not worth trying to reach
them.

Instead, it's only worth considering the portion who could at times be
interested in something more elegant, during the times when they are
in the mood for it.

I don't think revising dances to try to give them greater appeal to
the more or less uninterested majority of the public is a very wise
move in the long run - it usually doesn't work, but the changes do
tend to generate opposition in the existing population of skilled
dancers. Better to recognize that dances are cared for by the people
who actually care about them enough to do them.

[a***@uymail.com]

Post by Bob Wheatley
Young people just want to shake their asses and grind when it comes to
music.

Yup. And they're doing it in junior high these days.

Interestingly, many partner dancers train/practice to move
this way, but they really don't "mean" it, as many are
really quite shy/reserved at heart.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by a***@uymail.com
Only a very tiny percentage of college ballroom dancers
continue on dancing after graduating, as the realities of
life (careers, dating, family, etc.) make hobbies unaffordable,
in time, money, and relationships. There's also the "been
there, done that" factor.

If you mean competing, the drop off may be pretty steep, but if you
mean continue dancing I don't think it's all that bad. Realize that
the current strength of the college programs is only 10-15 years old,
so it will not have penetrated that far into the post-college world
yet. But even those who stop, stop with partner dance skills more
developed than 95% of the rest of the public - a public that generally
doesn't have a clue where partner dancing is concerned.

Post by a***@uymail.com
Lots of the "adult" young people (20s, 30s) started dancing
after college, and I estimate that more than two thirds of
partner dancers start after mid-30s, when they can finally
afford it.

Part of what changed is the cost of what needs to be afforded. If you
aren't talking pro/am, if you aren't even talking splitting a private
lesson a week with your partner, it's not that expensive to stay
involved in at all. What the college programs did is make a group-
class centered approach viable, in an industry that had gotten in the
habit of resorting to private lessons for everything, not just at the
point and for the topics where they are warranted.

Post by a***@uymail.com
I consider only a small fraction of the (large
number of) 20-something club dancers "partner dancers"
because, to me, partner dancing requires a fair amount
of devotion to learning to move well as partners, not
just free-styling or winging it.

To me, a partner dancer is someone who realizes that whatever you do -
be it made up or preplanned, it has to work for two bodies, and not
just one.

[a***@uymail.com]

Post by c***@hotmail.com
If you mean competing, the drop off may be pretty steep, but if you
mean continue dancing I don't think it's all that bad. Realize that
the current strength of the college programs is only 10-15 years old,
so it will not have penetrated that far into the post-college world

No, collegiate dancing has been around for well over
25 years, in far smaller scale than today. So the
pattern of penetration has had plenty of time to
develop. People's post-college priorities simply
change. In many ways, partner dancing detracts from
the goal of career (takes away time from work), dating
(socializing with non-target members of opposite sex,
in environment that's too "safe"), and finances (too
costly for classes and venues).

Post by c***@hotmail.com
yet. But even those who stop, stop with partner dance skills more
developed than 95% of the rest of the public - a public that generally
doesn't have a clue where partner dancing is concerned.

This issue, again, is irrelevant. Having prior skills
in something doesn't mean they will ever be used down
the road. Many people played football in their youth,
but stopped completely by mid-20s.

There's a good reason why 98% of the population has
no partner dance skills... it takes too much time/effort
to develop and has little practical use in the game of
life.

Post by c***@hotmail.com
Part of what changed is the cost of what needs to be afforded. If you
aren't talking pro/am, if you aren't even talking splitting a private
lesson a week with your partner, it's not that expensive to stay
involved in at all. What the college programs did is make a group-
class centered approach viable, in an industry that had gotten in the
habit of resorting to private lessons for everything, not just at the
point and for the topics where they are warranted.

Dance instruction for adults has evolved to use of
private lessons because full-time dance professionals
have to make a living. Many people with 3+ years of
experience end up teaching (at least part-time), which
adds to the glut of instructors.

Post by c***@hotmail.com
To me, a partner dancer is someone who realizes that whatever you do -
be it made up or preplanned, it has to work for two bodies, and not
just one.

Yup.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by a***@uymail.com

Post by c***@hotmail.com
If you mean competing, the drop off may be pretty steep, but if you
mean continue dancing I don't think it's all that bad. Realize that
the current strength of the college programs is only 10-15 years old,
so it will not have penetrated that far into the post-college world

No, collegiate dancing has been around for well over
25 years, in far smaller scale than today. So the
pattern of penetration has had plenty of time to
develop.

No, the kinds of numbers present today were not there, so you will not
yet be seeing their full impact on participation rates in people's
30's and 40's. The massive college competitions, and the teams that
support them, and the social clubs that surround those teams - this is
a new scale, and those classes have not yet hit mid adulthood.

Post by a***@uymail.com
People's post-college priorities simply
change. In many ways, partner dancing detracts from
the goal of career (takes away time from work), dating
(socializing with non-target members of opposite sex,
in environment that's too "safe"), and finances (too
costly for classes and venues).

People will stop dancing every day of the week, sure. But every day
is only the right answer for a tiny slice of people (even in the
college programs, level of intensity varies a lot). Moving on in
life an occasional friday or saturday night is more likely - and these
people will retain the knowledge that they can go out and do that if
the mood strikes them.

Post by a***@uymail.com
This issue, again, is irrelevant. Having prior skills
in something doesn't mean they will ever be used down
the road. Many people played football in their youth,
but stopped completely by mid-20s.

Stop playing it seriously, sure... but say you've got some informal
occasion outdoors with a lot of families, it's not out of the question
you could get a casual parents and kids game going. Most of the
population has some idea how to do that. But not for partner
dancing. Except for atypical groups in the population such as the
former members of the collegiate programs who actually do have a
workable knowledge of it.

Post by a***@uymail.com
There's a good reason why 98% of the population has
no partner dance skills... it takes too much time/effort
to develop and has little practical use in the game of
life.

Being an every-day a week dancer has little practical benefit. Being
able to do something simple in the way of partner dancing on the other
hand is not useless. It's just that the uses to which it could be
put may not seem like much from the perspective of a more intense
dancer used to dancing in settings carefully chosen to present dance
opportunity. And getting to that point does not required a lot of
investment - more like a semesters or two of hanging out with a
college club or team.

Post by a***@uymail.com
Dance instruction for adults has evolved to use of
private lessons because full-time dance professionals
have to make a living. Many people with 3+ years of
experience end up teaching (at least part-time), which
adds to the glut of instructors.

Serving the needs of low-to-moderate skilled instructors is not the
purpose of dance participation. Rather, people get to work as dance
instructors when they have something to offer. By making class
organization about what needs to be done, rather than about business,
it becomes much more practical and cost effective - the instructor is
not offering a class and hoping for attendance, they are hired to
teach agreed upon subjects to an already existing group. And it will
not just be any instructor, it will be one of the best available in
the local area.

[swingandhustle]

This needs to be brought back to center;

can we get some comments on how you all think a syllabus or required
figures in competiton will affect hustle's attempt to attract the
young?

how did adding all that to country dancing affect them?

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
This needs to be brought back to center;
can we get some comments on how you all think a syllabus or required
figures in competiton will affect hustle's attempt to attract the
young?

Adding it to existing events probably won't matter, because it seems
doubtful that they will receive much interest from younger dancers
either way.

It might or might not play a useful role in trying to organize new
events aimed specifically at a younger population. Those would
probably start out local in geographic region anyway, so you could
sort of reach a local consensus of what works best, perhaps after some
experiment.

[Bob Wheatley]

Post by swingandhustle
This needs to be brought back to center;
can we get some comments on how you all think a syllabus or required
figures in competiton will affect hustle's attempt to attract the
young?
how did adding all that to country dancing affect them?

"Codification" of a dance can bring some legitimacy to it, and bring some
respect from other genres assuming that some generally accepted dance
standards are adhered to.
A "syllabus" on the other hand will be a failure unless there is some sort
of studio infrastructure to enforce it. That's what happened when Country
tried to legislate a syllabus for the Newcomer divisions.
We simply did not have the organized studios or teaching organizations to
make it happen. They made the rule limiting Newcomers to a closed syllabus,
created a video of said syllabus. They then found that the Newcomer division
entries plummeted because it was simply easier for some instructor in
Podunk/USA, that may not have seen the video, to enroll in a division that
wasn't closed syllabus. Or worse, enter one time and have their students
crushed because of the rules infractions.
So, good luck with the syllabus. I happen to think codification is a good
thing, but closed syllabus competitions are a bad idea if you don't have the
education infrastructure in place.


Bob Wheatley

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by Bob Wheatley
So, good luck with the syllabus. I happen to think codification is a good
thing, but closed syllabus competitions are a bad idea if you don't have the
education infrastructure in place.

One may also ask if the intent of a syllabus is literally about the
exact steps on it, or more generally about trying to encourage
thinking in terms of interchangeable, leadable units, as an
alternative to set-piece choreography.

For example, in international style ballroom, the syllabus is pretty
literal, and works because the (relatively small in the US) studio
teaching efforts and much larger college program efforts focused to
support it. One the other hand, the american style syllabi are much
less literal in part because there are several of them, so it's more a
question of requiring that everyone dance syllabus-like material (in
particular avoiding common open variations) than one of a step being
literally on a list in that exact form (unless you are doing an
internal competition of one of the studio chains, where they can say
our list and our list only).

[Bob Wheatley]

Post by c***@hotmail.com

Post by Bob Wheatley
So, good luck with the syllabus. I happen to think codification is a good
thing, but closed syllabus competitions are a bad idea if you don't have the
education infrastructure in place.

One may also ask if the intent of a syllabus is literally about the
exact steps on it, or more generally about trying to encourage
thinking in terms of interchangeable, leadable units, as an
alternative to set-piece choreography.

Just for the record - The mentioned syllabus was just that. Not
choreography.
It was no different than something you might expect in Ballroom.
A group of movements that could be used in any sequence you wanted to, or
was possible. Which brings to mind......
Most dance forms have a fairly short list of what I refer to as "developed"
positions.
eg: Ballroom = closed and promenade (among others)
Two Step = side by side forward and side by side back (among others)
These "developed" positions are a common and repeated element that is
shared by whatever movements for that dance. These "developed" positions are
the "links" that allow the multitude of movements to tie seamlessly together
from one movement to another and still look like that specific dance.

I apologize for spelling errors. I just got my new custom computer and I
think Ed Jay put some kind of fix in on me. It seems my spell checker only
offers French!
I'm killin' the guy the first chance I get.:>))


Bob Wheatley

[Ed Jay]

Post by Bob Wheatley
I apologize for spelling errors. I just got my new custom computer and I
think Ed Jay put some kind of fix in on me. It seems my spell checker only
offers French!
I'm killin' the guy the first chance I get.:>))

Moi? Moi????

Je suis désolé, Bob, mais vous devrez trouver quelqu'un d'autre pour tuer.
Je casse seulement mon propre ordinateur. ;-)

[Bob Wheatley]

Post by Ed Jay

Post by Bob Wheatley
I apologize for spelling errors. I just got my new custom computer and I
think Ed Jay put some kind of fix in on me. It seems my spell checker only
offers French!
I'm killin' the guy the first chance I get.:>))

Moi? Moi????
Je suis désolé, Bob, mais vous devrez trouver quelqu'un d'autre pour tuer.
Je casse seulement mon propre ordinateur. ;-)

I have no idea what you said....
But I can tell you spelled correctly! :-))


Bob Wheatley

[Ed Jay]

Post by Bob Wheatley

Post by Ed Jay

Post by Bob Wheatley
I apologize for spelling errors. I just got my new custom computer and I
think Ed Jay put some kind of fix in on me. It seems my spell checker only
offers French!
I'm killin' the guy the first chance I get.:>))

Moi? Moi????
Je suis désolé, Bob, mais vous devrez trouver quelqu'un d'autre pour tuer.
Je casse seulement mon propre ordinateur. ;-)

I have no idea what you said....
But I can tell you spelled correctly! :-))

LOL! :-))

I don't know what I wrote either, but it sounds romantic. (It isn't --
don't get your hopes up!) :-))

[Gene E. Bloch]

Post by Ed Jay

Post by Bob Wheatley

Post by Ed Jay

Post by Bob Wheatley
I apologize for spelling errors. I just got my new custom computer and I
think Ed Jay put some kind of fix in on me. It seems my spell checker only
offers French!
I'm killin' the guy the first chance I get.:>))

Moi? Moi????
Je suis désolé, Bob, mais vous devrez trouver quelqu'un d'autre pour tuer.
Je casse seulement mon propre ordinateur. ;-)

I have no idea what you said....
But I can tell you spelled correctly! :-))

LOL! :-))
I don't know what I wrote either, but it sounds romantic. (It isn't --
don't get your hopes up!) :-))

I think the part about "Je suis désolé" relates directly to many romantic
adventures :-)

The part about "Je casse seulement mon propre ordinateur" shows a
commendable virtue on your part.

Somehow, though, both of those quotes upset my spell checker.

[Ed Jay]

Post by Gene E. Bloch

Post by Ed Jay

Post by Bob Wheatley

Post by Ed Jay

Post by Bob Wheatley
I apologize for spelling errors. I just got my new custom computer and I
think Ed Jay put some kind of fix in on me. It seems my spell checker only
offers French!
I'm killin' the guy the first chance I get.:>))

Moi? Moi????
Je suis désolé, Bob, mais vous devrez trouver quelqu'un d'autre pour tuer.
Je casse seulement mon propre ordinateur. ;-)

I have no idea what you said....
But I can tell you spelled correctly! :-))

LOL! :-))
I don't know what I wrote either, but it sounds romantic. (It isn't --
don't get your hopes up!) :-))

I think the part about "Je suis désolé" relates directly to many romantic
adventures :-)

You can say that again and again and... :-)

Post by Gene E. Bloch
The part about "Je casse seulement mon propre ordinateur" shows a
commendable virtue on your part.

Not really. Nobody is dumb enough to let me get close enough to theirs.

Post by Gene E. Bloch
Somehow, though, both of those quotes upset my spell checker.

You need to accompany it with a decent Bordeaux.

[swingandhustle]

Post by Bob Wheatley

Post by swingandhustle
This needs to be brought back to center;
can we get some comments on how you all think a syllabus or required
figures in competiton will affect hustle's attempt to attract the
young?
how did adding all that to country dancing affect them?

"Codification" of a dance can bring some legitimacy to it, and bring some
respect from other genres assuming that some generally accepted dance
standards are adhered to.
A "syllabus" on the other hand will be a failure unless there is some sort
of studio infrastructure to enforce it. That's what happened when Country
tried to legislate a syllabus for the Newcomer divisions.
We simply did not have the organized studios or teaching organizations to
make it happen. They made the rule limiting Newcomers to a closed syllabus,
created a video of said syllabus. They then found that the Newcomer division
entries plummeted because it was simply easier for some instructor in
Podunk/USA, that may not have seen the video, to enroll in a division that
wasn't closed syllabus. Or worse, enter one time and have their students
crushed because of the rules infractions.
So, good luck with the syllabus. I happen to think codification is a good
thing, but closed syllabus competitions are a bad idea if you don't have the
education infrastructure in place.
Bob Wheatley

I think Bob's rendition of this from the country world has a lot of
wisdom. Acceptance of the syllabus from street dancers to the
ballroom studios is precisely the challenge the IHDA faces. there
teachers and staff haven't the standing or certifications in the
ballroom world to get their work accepted - so there is no real
infrastructure to back their bid.

And yes - what Bob predicts competitors will do is EXACTLY what will
happen - decimating any attempt to attract the young.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
I think Bob's rendition of this from the country world has a lot of
wisdom. Acceptance of the syllabus from street dancers to the
ballroom studios is precisely the challenge the IHDA faces. there
teachers and staff haven't the standing or certifications in the
ballroom world to get their work accepted - so there is no real
infrastructure to back their bid.

Why would you care if ballroom people accept a hustle group's hustle
syllabus?

Surely you aren't counting on ballroom studios to recruit and train
people who will eventually come to your events?

Ordinary studios play little role in recruiting even for ballroom
comps, unless you get into the whole pro/am thing which is practically
more an end in an of itself.

[a***@uymail.com]

Post by c***@hotmail.com
No, the kinds of numbers present today were not there, so you will not
yet be seeing their full impact on participation rates in people's
30's and 40's.

By the time these ex-collegiate dancers reach mid-30s
and get back to dance (if at all), they are no longer
"young," in the context of this discussion. There are
far more dancers who start mid-30s who have no
previous dance experience or have non-collegiate
(ballroom) dance experience (ballet/jazz/tap/modern/etc.)
than ones who did collegiate dancing.

The point is, between 23 and 35, most ex-collegiate
dancers have far too many practical concerns in
life than "wasting" time/money on dancing. I'd say
that less than 1% of the "young" Salsa dancers I
encounter are ex- or current collegiate ballroom
dancers.

Post by c***@hotmail.com
The massive college competitions, and the teams that
support them, and the social clubs that surround those teams - this is
a new scale, and those classes have not yet hit mid adulthood.

... still numerically insignificant to the number
of "young" dancers who just do "club" dancing.

Post by c***@hotmail.com
People will stop  dancing every day of the week, sure.   But every day
is only the right answer for a tiny slice of people (even in the
college programs, level of intensity varies a lot).   Moving on in
life an occasional friday or saturday night is more likely - and these
people will retain the knowledge that they can go out and do that if
the mood strikes them.

This "knowledge" is "worthless," esoteric knowledge
as far as the casual dancer is concerned. Most
people have "fun" without being encumbered by
technical understanding/details.

Post by c***@hotmail.com
Stop playing it seriously, sure... but say you've got some informal
occasion outdoors with a lot of families, it's not out of the question
you could get a casual parents and kids game going.   Most of the
population has some idea how to do that.   But not for partner
dancing.  Except for atypical groups in the population such as the
former members of the collegiate programs who actually do have a
workable knowledge of it.

And... does workable knowledge somehow make the
party any livelier? Only techno-geeks think that way,
and use that "knowledge" to validate some kind of
self-worth.

Post by c***@hotmail.com
Being an every-day a week dancer has little practical benefit.   Being
able to do something simple in the way of partner dancing on the other
hand is not useless.   It's just that the uses to which it could be
put may not seem like much from the perspective of a more intense
dancer used to dancing in settings carefully chosen to present dance
opportunity.   And getting to that point does not required a lot of
investment - more like a semesters or two of hanging out with a
college club or team.

Fooling around with partner dancing for a year or two
really doesn't make one that competent (Ed posted
some article some time ago indicating that competence
typically requires 10+ years of experience). If anything,
dancers with ~3 years of experience are just going
through the fat-head syndrome, thinking they are far
superior/knowledgeable than they really are.

Post by c***@hotmail.com
Serving the needs of low-to-moderate skilled instructors is not the
purpose of dance participation.   Rather, people get to work as dance
instructors when they have something to offer.  By making class
organization about what needs to be done, rather than about business,
it becomes much more practical and cost effective - the instructor is
not offering a class and hoping for attendance, they are hired to
teach agreed upon subjects to an already existing group.  And it will
not just be any instructor, it will be one of the best available in
the local area.

What idealistic world do you live in? There is no grand
plan on how instruction is offered, and teaching/learning
is a haphazard process of matching instructors with
students.

[d***@aol.com]

Post by c***@hotmail.com
If you want younger people doing a partner dance, the thing to do is
not to complain about what others are doing, but to get out there and
organize classes and events for the target population yourself.

This has been suggested to Mr. Flynn repeatedly.

I repeat: Stop feeding the troll.

David Koppelman

[swingandhustle]

Well Dave - would you say that the reason we don't have
cars that run on fuel cells is because no one knows how to build one
and put it under the hood of your car?
Or maybe people think there'd be no demand for a car that goes 100,000
miles w/o refueling.

Perhaps if you started a little fuel cell startup company - you could
solve ALL the world's energy problems - single handedly.

Or maybe the lack of fule cell vehicles has something to do with all
the people who profit from gasoline technology. And maybe,
nobody solving a problem like this in any other part of modern
industry would try to go it alone either. Now - that just might have
something to do with it.

You suggestion is nieve and is a borderline attempt to out right
decieve anyone too stupid to think through the real problem needing
correction here.
Frankly - no post you have offered up till now recomends that you even
understand the underlying problem - rather, just your distate for this
author or that.

[d***@aol.com]

Post by swingandhustle
Well Dave - would you say that the reason we don't have
cars that run on fuel cells is because no one knows how to build one
and put it under the hood of your car?
Or maybe people think there'd be no demand for a car that goes 100,000
miles w/o refueling.
Perhaps if you started a little fuel cell startup company - you could
solve ALL the world's energy problems - single handedly.
Or maybe the lack of fule cell vehicles has something to do with all
the people who profit from gasoline technology. �And maybe,
nobody solving a problem like this in any other part of modern
industry would try to go it alone either. �Now - that just might have
something to do with it.
You suggestion is nieve and is a borderline attempt to out right
decieve anyone too stupid to think through the real problem needing
correction here.
Frankly - no post you have offered up till now recomends that you even
understand the underlying problem - rather, just your distate for this
author or that.

I'm not constantly complaining about the lack of fuel cell cars. I
think we'll have fuel cell cars when the marketplace demands them and
they can be built and sold profitably. Just as I would expect dance
instructors and promoters to offer a particular form of dancing when
there is a demand for said form of dancing and it can be offered
profitably.

David Koppelman

[swingandhustle]

I'm not constantly complaining about the lack of fuel cell cars.  I
think we'll have fuel cell cars when the marketplace demands them and
they can be built and sold profitably.  Just as I would expect dance
instructors and promoters to offer a particular form of dancing when
there is a demand for said form of dancing and it can be offered
profitably.
David Koppelman

True Dave - you're not asking for fuel cells. You're happy as hell
paying $2 a gallon for gas though - right? In fact - if you hear
anyone else complain when it goes up to $4 a gallon - just tell the to
stop complaining and start their own refinery. And tell them if
people really WANTED cheap gas - we'd have it - the fact that we don't
must mean there's really no desire for it.

Sure....

[d***@aol.com]

I'm not constantly complaining about the lack of fuel cell cars. �I
think we'll have fuel cell cars when the marketplace demands them and
they can be built and sold profitably. �Just as I would expect dance
instructors and promoters to offer a particular form of dancing when
there is a demand for said form of dancing and it can be offered
profitably.
David Koppelman

True Dave - you're not asking for fuel cells. �You're happy as hell
paying $2 a gallon for gas though - right? �In fact - if you hear
anyone else complain when it goes up to $4 a gallon - just tell the to
stop complaining and start their own refinery. �And tell them if
people really WANTED cheap gas - we'd have it - the fact that we don't
must mean there's really no desire for it.
Sure....

Nifty change of your analogy there from the existence, or lack
thereof, of a market for a new product, to complaints about the cost
of an existing product. You really are quite an outstanding troll, as
evidenced by the way you get people like me to respond to you against
our better judgement.

In a capitalist marketplace, not everyone gets what they want.
Products and services are offered only when a sufficient marketplace
for them exists and a profit can be made by providing them. If
products are offered that the market doesn't want, the producer loses
money. If it is smart, the producer then tries to adjust to what the
marketplace wants.

In this instance, of course, you are far from a simple consumer.
Rather, you are yourself a service provider. The very people about
whom you complain so vociferously- Billy Fajardo, in this instance-
are actually in precisely the same business as you. The difference is
that they have invested time and money in the successful development
of their business based upon the business model they percieve to be
the one most likely to succeed in the marketplace. But rather than
offering a competing business model, you just complain about theirs.

So you see, you're not the guy at the gas pump. You're GM complaining
about Toyota. The only difference is that GM understands that it is
up to them to put a competitive product of their on the market. They
know Toyota isn't going to start selling Buicks.

And I've now wasted way too much time on you.

David Koppelman

[swingandhustle]

You are calling me a troll and excusing yourself for replying to me?
How understanding of you David!

Reagrding your post -

Nonsense David! - I am not teaching any dance class you can pay for,
and work as an engineer full time. I certainly could teach a class in
a crunch - but have nothing to sell at this time. You really need to
read what people write more carefully before you put yourself out
there. Try gooling my name and test your own crazy theory before
telling everyone something trollesque.

Try "David Flynn" and "Class schedule" or something else inter sting.

You are too reliant on you own old dogma - you need to start using
your head a little here.

Billy runs a dance studio and a major dance event.

So David - all I can say to you now is "Go away Troll"

[d***@aol.com]

Post by swingandhustle
You are calling me a troll and excusing yourself for replying to me?
How understanding of you David!
Reagrding your post -
Nonsense David! - I am not teaching any dance class you can pay for,
and work as an engineer full time. �I certainly could teach a class in
a crunch - but have nothing to sell at this time. You really need to
read what people write more carefully before you put yourself out
there. �Try gooling my name and test your own crazy theory before
telling everyone something trollesque.
Try "David Flynn" and "Class schedule" �or something else inter sting.
You are too reliant on you own old dogma - you need to start using
your head a little here.
Billy runs a dance studio and a major dance event.
So David - all I can say to you now is "Go away Troll"

I googled you and found you listed here, three spots below Billy:

http://www.mjames.org/ronninstructors.html

If you're not a hustle instructor perhaps you should stop advertising
yourself as such.

David Koppelman

[Nanci]

David -

How is your under 30 Hustle team doing? You should have hundreds of
students by now and you should be promoting it in your local clubs.
Why are you so concerned with what Billy does? If it's not your
"thing", don't attend, don't compete, and leave all NYers to do their
thing. I noticed you couldn't get anyone to comment on your last go
round, nor on F.A.S.T. Can't you see that we just aren't interested
in what you have to say (other than the interest one has in watching a
train wreck -- you really don't want too, but you just can't look
away).

Nanci

[swingandhustle]

Odd that you say no one commented Nanci. Lottsa people have commented
- but privately. They all fear the IHDA and their judges/supporters,
and or just becoming unpopular. I have even gotten numerous phone
calls, and some emails from promoters not quoted here - of MAJOR
events.

Here's a few quotes w/o names:

"David has a legitimate concern - that the hustle community needs to
attract young people. I agree."

and

"I can't stand the guy, but I agree with him. "

and

Hi David,

Wow! That was so generic! I'm impressed!

Who is he again in the IHDA? The President? Yes, the "I" stands for
international which includes the States (in my opinion,
primarily!).Wow!
What can I say?

And where is Keith Gussoni in this all? He is the vice! Never heard a
word from him on any related subject! I'm sure Keith "loves" the young
dancers idea, and on that point, I agree with you that we need to
build
a new young people dance foundation to grow with a faster pace. Of
course, we need to respect the older folks who have been there and
done
that and who still want to enjoy a slower pace due to mobility issues.

I myself have great respect for those long-time dancers who are still
out there trying to shake it up, but it is true they will not attract
many young people. There are only a handful of old-timers who can
still
"rock" in Hustle like they used to many years ago - but for a much
shorter period of time, of course! :-) I mean, by 10:30 p.m. they want
to go home!

Talk to you soon!

and

David,, I get all this.. and it would be great to have young.. But
look at the flip side .. the community of hustle dancers are tight and
we have a lot of life experience in common….. the west coast swing
has become very young and I actually would feel out of place at most
events being older than all the 20 year old pros who were maybe 7 when
I started in West Coast in 92. So there are some good and bad. If too
many young people come in we will lose our family ,.. This has
happened in West Coast except maybe at Festa’s event and Floor play
where the crowd was older. Jeannie Tucker, Mark Trainer. WCS names
from the past… I’m just sayin….

[swingandhustle]

Oh, and Nanci - once again you mistake my role here as needing to
solve the problem you all have created with my OWN team or business.
My team is MY lifeboat - not yours. The gang here - and I - will
continue on just fine w/o NY hustle.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
Well Dave - would you say that the reason we don't have
cars that run on fuel cells is because no one knows how to build one
and put it under the hood of your car?

No one knows how to build one that will run for any useful length of
time in the real world at a practical price. The catalysts get
damaged by impurities in the fuel.

[Bob Wheatley]

Post by c***@hotmail.com
This is beside the point once you realize that clubs are not in this
generation much about partner dancing.

I agree with most of your comments, excluding the fact you're debating a
troll.
However, the above is a faulty premise based mostly on your own dance style.
I would say that "most" dance styles, excluding ballroom, are born and live
and evolve in clubs.
The idiot you're debating can't accept the last part.




Bob Wheatley

[swingandhustle]

Post by Bob Wheatley

Post by c***@hotmail.com
This is beside the point once you realize that clubs are not in this
generation much about partner dancing.

I agree with most of your comments, excluding the fact you're debating a
troll.
However, the above is a faulty premise based mostly on your own dance style.
I would say that "most" dance styles, excluding ballroom, are born and live
and evolve in clubs.
The idiot you're debating can't accept the last part.
Bob Wheatley

Bob (er - Swingpoop);

You never said who the troll here was - but you did say "The idiot"
wouldn't accept that most dance styles live and evolve in the clubs.
As you know very well - I have been saying that about hustle all
along. It is and always was a club dance - born in the clubs. And
returning it to the clubs is a central thesis of mine. So are you
saying then that CS_POST is the idiot - or the troll?

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
You never said who the troll here was - but you did say "The idiot"
wouldn't accept that most dance styles live and evolve in the clubs.
As you know very well - I have been saying that about hustle all
along. It is and always was a club dance - born in the clubs. And
returning it to the clubs is a central thesis of mine. So are you
saying then that CS_POST is the idiot - or the troll?

No, he's saying that you won't acknowledge that dance styles in clubs
evolve - as in, change over time.

[swingandhustle]

Certainly dance styles change over time. But some are dead ends -
especially when young people reject the style choice we pick in error.

That error in choice would be NY style.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
Certainly dance styles change over time. But some are dead ends -
especially when young people reject the style choice we pick in error.
That error in choice would be NY style.

It's the people who are out there dancing who get to pick which style
survives, by voting with their feet for what they attend, volunteer to
help organize, etc. They appear to have picked (either personally,
or endorsed by attendance choices) as style different than the one you
would pick.

Regardless if they are unwise in their choice, or even if they are
wise and it is you who is unwise, the basic fact remains that you
don't get to tell them how to spend their energy - you only to get to
tell yourself how to spend your own.

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by Bob Wheatley

Post by c***@hotmail.com
This is beside the point once you realize that clubs are not in this
generation much about partner dancing.

However, the above is a faulty premise based mostly on your own dance style.
I would say that "most" dance styles, excluding ballroom, are born and live
and evolve in clubs.

I acknowledge what you are saying, but I think that once you put a
dance name in front of a club - "salsa club" "hustle club" whatever,
it's an acknowledgment that it's a special purpose event, not a club
of the sort the general public would go to. Salsa maybe almost
makes it into the general public's eye, and maybe in some places other
styles are locally popular.

But the real problem with the clubs premise is that it's difficult to
use them to recruit a target population different from the existing
participant population, doubly so if the two populations have as
likely age segregated themselves into two different sorts of club
venues.

[Bob Wheatley]

Post by c***@hotmail.com

Post by Bob Wheatley

Post by c***@hotmail.com
This is beside the point once you realize that clubs are not in this
generation much about partner dancing.

However, the above is a faulty premise based mostly on your own dance style.
I would say that "most" dance styles, excluding ballroom, are born and live
and evolve in clubs.

I acknowledge what you are saying, but I think that once you put a
dance name in front of a club - "salsa club" "hustle club" whatever,
it's an acknowledgment that it's a special purpose event, not a club
of the sort the general public would go to. Salsa maybe almost
makes it into the general public's eye, and maybe in some places other
styles are locally popular.

Depends on where you live. Here in Houston CW is done socially and mostly by
people have never - and never will - compete.
There's also a respectable Salsa and Swing and Hustle community.
While there are specific genre clubs, quite often the DJ's play to the crowd
and not necessarily the dancers. So you end up with a variety of dance
styles at any one club.
If you think about it, even most the Ballroom styles started life as social
dances.
Before we started letting the English sell our dances back to us.:>)

Post by c***@hotmail.com
But the real problem with the clubs premise is that it's difficult to
use them to recruit a target population different from the existing
participant population, doubly so if the two populations have as
likely age segregated themselves into two different sorts of club
venues.

Yeah, I'm not even attempting to address the moron and his delusions.


Bob Wheatley

[swingandhustle]

Can we get back to the point:

For hustle event promoters:

Each of you receiving this notice is a Hustle event promoter with a
major dance event scheduled to occur in the next calendar year.
So it will be of some importance to you to get details on the coming
IHDA sanctioned hustle syllabus scheduled to take effect this
competitive season. I don't have to remind any of you that in an
economic depression - registrations for most of you will be way lower
than normal. Any change that further reduces registrations in any of
your events damages your profitability. You may therefore wish to
contact to IHDA to ferret out some of the questions below that could
effect your bottom line:

1.) Who will pay to train the judges for syllabus based hustle rounds
- when they occur? Will it be the event promoters?

2.) Will legacy students (or new young people) be willing to spend $65
an hour in a depression to learn the approved moves?

3.) Will a large number of people simply refuse to enter syllabus
rounds out of fear of being disqualified if they didn't buy all the
private lessons?

4.) Who is certified to teach the syllabus to people who DO want to
pay?

5.) Who is certified to judge the competitive rounds according to the
syllabus?

6.) Will the IHDA provide a list of certified instructors and judges?

7.) When will this list of approved teachers/judges be available?

8.) Will the IHDA provide financial assistance on training judges we
use at our events?

9.) Will this added requirement make certified judges and teachers
MORE expensive or hard to get because of their added skills/
certifications?

10.) Will this added requirement be one more obstacle against getting
new young people into hustle?

11.) If we DO go with a syllabus, do we want one enforcing a hustle
style that young people don't seem to like?

12.) In the absence of certified judges and teachers, how will we
enforce competitive consistency event to event?

Once these questions are resolved, and the economy gets better - that
addition of a hustle syllabus for certain rounds of competition might
be a good thing. But solving our dwindling attendance problems and
missing youth are far more important problems that probably don't need
a burden like this added right now.

David Flynn

[JeffM]

[...]There was actually a big "war" a few years back
when someone tried to re-organize a college team
along anti-social youth-program lines[...]

I think you meant
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=asocial
Asocial: You don't go to the party.
Anti-social: You go to the party and try to kill everyone there.

[c***@hotmail.com]

I think you meanthttp://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=asocial
Asocial: You don't go to the party.
Anti-social: You go to the party and try to kill everyone there.

More like,

asocial - you don't care if people got to parties.
anti-social - you try to convince people that going to parties is a
bad idea

[c***@hotmail.com]

Post by swingandhustle
Adding a syllabus to hustle (outside of the college programs) will
have the same effect on hustle that it has had on the ballroom world.
It will become a 50 plus world of older students, served by a very
small group of certified pros.

If you are going to cite what's going on in ballroom as an example,
then you had better get your facts right.

Most of your newer ballroom dancers of sound capability are college
aged or recent college graduates, and have spent a few years doing
nominally syllabus material to build skills and technique. It was
specifically that focus on basic elements that is how they got to be
more capable than typical older studio students taking typical studio
classes built around more complicated steps and routines that often
even the teachers can't demo very well. That's not to say that they
feel themselves constrained by a syllabus - most are doing additional
things on the side, but that concentration on a core initial focus
builds stronger foundation skills, and more confidence to later tackle
advanced material with the hope of finding it comfortable, instead of
merely survivable.

However, just slapping a restriction list on things isn't a functional
answer - a syllabus is not ultimately a list of restrictions, it's
really a plan for teaching, and if it's not well thought out it's not
going to work. That might be a better area for argument.

I suspect the real problem with hustle is that it simply doesn't have
the same depth of appeal - it's seen and practiced by younger dancers
of other styles as a novelty add-on, not a core focus.