Good sized competitive team

[raghuveer132]

What is a good sized competitive team when you have a choice of upto 16 dancers? Im thinking the best would be 12 or 16, but not 14....


what size do you guys see fit? and it would be great if you guys could give a supporting reason.

 

[hardeep_singh]

Re: Good sided competitive team

sized
proof read before posting to save yourself the embarrassment of looking dumb

 

[Waleed]

Re: Good sided competitive team

sized
proof read before posting to save yourself the embarrassment of looking dumb

vocabulary police on patrol, watch out

@raghuveer132: 8 of your best dancers is always a good launching point but if you have enough talent, you can push for 12

 

[hardeep_singh]

Re: Good sided competitive team

sized
proof read before posting to save yourself the embarrassment of looking dumb

vocabulary police on patrol, watch out

@raghuveer132: 8 of your best dancers is always a good launching point but if you have enough talent, you can push for 12

lol i didnt know correct spelling, at least in the heading, was too much to ask for

 

[Sue Sylvester]

Re: Good sided competitive team

sized
proof read before posting to save yourself the embarrassment of looking dumb

vocabulary police on patrol, watch out

Let me be a vocabulary policewoman for a moment here to point out that in Hardeep's case, it would actually be "spelling" police, not "vocabulary" police. LOL


And I agree with Waleed. Having more dancers can be a curse if they're not at the same level. A lot of times, teams will mistakenly strive for the magic 12 or assume that if they have (y) number of potential dancers that they can perform with all of them. Speaking from personal experience, you can normally get away with (n+2) number of dancers if you have n solid, strong dancers at the same level if you're smart with hiding dancers with formations..etc. The weakest jodi cannot be abysmal or that bad even, but due to the limited scope/view of the judges, you can still blend them in even if they haven't reached everyone else's level without noticeable consequences.

 

[Waleed]

sized
proof read before posting to save yourself the embarrassment of looking dumb

vocabulary police on patrol, watch out

Let me be a vocabulary policewoman for a moment here to point out that in Hardeep's case, it would actually be "spelling" police, not "vocabulary" police. LOL


And I agree with Waleed. Having more dancers can be a curse if they're not at the same level. A lot of times, teams will mistakenly strive for the magic 12 or assume that if they have (y) number of potential dancers that they can perform with all of them. Speaking from personal experience, you can normally get away with (n+2) number of dancers if you have n solid, strong dancers at the same level if you're smart with hiding dancers with formations..etc. The weakest jodi cannot be abysmal or that bad even, but due to the limited scope/view of the judges, you can still blend them in even if they haven't reached everyone else's level without noticeable consequences.

touche my friend. now i feel dumb

 

[raghuveer132]

Lmao, sorry for the spelling error hardeep, i looked over it. big deal.


Anyways, 12 sound like a decent place to start, thanks a lot for your input Sue and Waleed!

 

[Saleem]

Agreed with 12. Make sure you keep the other 4 involved so they can build their skills and you'll have a strong pipeline for future years.

 

[raghuveer132]

There are two teams: local and competitive. The other 4 people will be placed along with the rest of the dances in the local team.


The basis of both teams routine will be the same, so if needed, people can be switched from one team to another. Competitive team will strictly have only...lets say....12 people, and the local has 16. If anyone has to leave from the competitive team, there will be always someone from the other team ready to replace that person.


I was just trying to decide if 12 was a good goal for the competitive team. How does the structure sound?

 

[Sue Sylvester]

What you just described is called "having alternates/back-ups/spares". Almost any type of competitive dance team will and do have them. Just have one team and make your weakest 4 dancers alternates. I'm assuming that the local team does non-competitive performances. But having that team be 16 creates logistical issues. If you have 1 person who cannot do the 16 man routine, then you have no options for the non-competitive performance. Creating one 12 person team allows you to:
1. Only have to create one 12-person routine as oppose to formations for 12,16.
2. Continuous practice of only 1 routine. If people have to memorize 2 sets of formations, 1 for competitions and 1 for local, then you're wasting time.
3. Have 4 back-up dancers that show up to your practices and practice with you which ensures that you will have 16 dancers potentially ready for any 12 person performance whether competitive or local.

An alternative method is to determine 8 core-dancers, your strongest, smartest and most dedicated dancers. The remaining spots are up for grabs. The remaining 8 people compete for the remaining 4 spots. This is better than having back-up dancers, because dancers are forced to maintain their spot if they are not core. Back-up dancers will often quit or not work as hard if they dont think they'll have a chance, so this method would help alleviate that problem and solves most of your problems, for the most part. (Dancers may have to learn new formations depending on the "spot" they take, but its only 1 routine as oppose to a 12 man set and a 16 man set.

 

[sonehdataweet]

Is it bad to say you guys just made my day with this thread