Reaching Out to all **CURRENT** Dancers/Captains

[sahab]

Got a chance to process everything in this thread up. I'm gonna break down what I think into points and try to be as concise as possible.


1. Was there a specific instance that caused the original post by Sahil? Or are there multiple causes? I honestly felt this came out of no where. Regardless of the thread's initial cause, I believe there is good discussion. Threads like this are key for continuous improvement, and any entity needs continuous improvement to stay successful. It's funny, I see this thread as a weird, disorganized kaizen event.


2. Nationals: This part got lost in everyone talking about translating songs and judges. I've been thinking about a nationals system for a loooong time, and here's my potential model.

• 10 comps are selected to be bid comps, either fall or winter. For example 10 comps this year I would select, Burgh, Boston, Buckeye Mela, Nashvhille, Blowout, Fever, NDC, BAB. Cant name 10 right now of the top of my head but I'm sure there are more lmao. Get international comps in there Australia and UK.
  
• To be a bid comp: The comps must be running for 2+ years. There should also be an application process.
  
• "What if 1 teams wins 1st at 2 bid comps?"-Point system. So even if you don't win a bid comp but still place you have a chance to go to nationals.
  
• "But Sahab, there are so many ways that a bhangra team can be good? Folk vs Modern"- The Nationals that I had in mind would segregate teams that produce more folk sets and do more traditional bhangra. However, I believe there are multiple ways to entertain a crowd and there are multiple ways to win a comp. BEST EXAMPLE: GMU at Blowout 23. They had a folk set (with gimmicks sprinkled in) and they placed 2nd. They beat a lot of teams who were much more modern at a comp that I would consider is modern. They placed 2nd with a judging panel that I would consider is modern too. So teams that do more traditional bhangra and sets, they are at at a slight disadvantage but I believe still can be successful in this system.
  
• "When should it be??"- Well, I believe that Bruin Bhangra is the perfect timing and comp for this model. My thinking is that Bruin Bhangra should implement this model, and maybe change their name to Bruin Bhangra- The International Bhangra Championship (yea i know that name is too long and sucks lol). Others may disagree and the bruin committee may not want to lose their identity, but that late may, memorial day weekend is perfect as it's just a perfect way to end the season. Also, Bruin already brings the best teams.
  
• Someone brought up that we should not focus and nationals but rather focus on having more comps overall. I have a counter to this point. Nationals can act as a way to incentivize comps to happen and to reoccur year after year. Also, it would create a sort of tier system: ranking the comps on difficulty and the level of the teams competing.. Where newer teams would go to non-bid comps, and it would give newer teams the chance to perform and place without getting their asses handed to them by better teams.
  
• Overall, I believe that nationals would be the biggest thing to happen to the bhangra circuit since elite 8, and I think it's the next step to bettering the circuit because it would create excitement and "fire". My model, I'm sure has many flaws, but I think it's comprehensive and covers main issues.

3. Judging and Rubrics- I agree with almost everything Sahil and others said. Do I think all of these things will get implemented or are they necessary for proper judging? Simple answer, No to both. But even if 20-30% of these changes/impovements get implemented then I think everyone and the circuit will benefit. It's the responsibility of the competition committees and judges to implement these changes. As I said, continuous is key to any successful system.

 

[Mr. Mankiran]

2. Nationals: This part got lost in everyone talking about translating songs and judges. I've been thinking about a nationals system for a loooong time, and here's my potential model.

• 10 comps are selected to be bid comps, either fall or winter. For example 10 comps this year I would select, Burgh, Boston, Buckeye Mela, Nashvhille, Blowout, Fever, NDC, BAB. Cant name 10 right now of the top of my head but I'm sure there are more lmao. Get international comps in there Australia and UK.
• To be a bid comp: The comps must be running for 2+ years. There should also be an application process.
• "What if 1 teams wins 1st at 2 bid comps?"-Point system. So even if you don't win a bid comp but still place you have a chance to go to nationals.
• "But Sahab, there are so many ways that a bhangra team can be good? Folk vs Modern"- The Nationals that I had in mind would segregate teams that produce more folk sets and do more traditional bhangra. However, I believe there are multiple ways to entertain a crowd and there are multiple ways to win a comp. BEST EXAMPLE: GMU at Blowout 23. They had a folk set (with gimmicks sprinkled in) and they placed 2nd. They beat a lot of teams who were much more modern at a comp that I would consider is modern. They placed 2nd with a judging panel that I would consider is modern too. So teams that do more traditional bhangra and sets, they are at at a slight disadvantage but I believe still can be successful in this system.
• "When should it be??"- Well, I believe that Bruin Bhangra is the perfect timing and comp for this model. My thinking is that Bruin Bhangra should implement this model, and maybe change their name to Bruin Bhangra- The International Bhangra Championship (yea i know that name is too long and sucks lol). Others may disagree and the bruin committee may not want to lose their identity, but that late may, memorial day weekend is perfect as it's just a perfect way to end the season. Also, Bruin already brings the best teams.
• Someone brought up that we should not focus and nationals but rather focus on having more comps overall. I have a counter to this point. Nationals can act as a way to incentivize comps to happen and to reoccur year after year. Also, it would create a sort of tier system: ranking the comps on difficulty and the level of the teams competing.. Where newer teams would go to non-bid comps, and it would give newer teams the chance to perform and place without getting their asses handed to them by better teams.
• Overall, I believe that nationals would be the biggest thing to happen to the bhangra circuit since elite 8, and I think it's the next step to bettering the circuit because it would create excitement and "fire". My model, I'm sure has many flaws, but I think it's comprehensive and covers main issues.

There is little to no organization in the circuit, its just comp after comp, year after year. There is no incentive to change anything up when your team gets into each comp you KNOW it will get into and you know EXACTLY who will place 98% of the time within 3 sec of the lineup being released.


A point system may help create more diverse lineups instead of the same teams forming practically the same lineup 3 comps in a row. For instance, a first/second place team at a few comps may have their spot locked up and just focus on preparing for the natty instead of competing and placing 1st/2nd 5 times a year. Big time comps with high stakes will result in everyone stepping up their game and teams that stick their head out of the ground once every few years may actually become frequent flyers.


This needs to happen and I hope those who have influence take this seriously.

 

[sahab]

2. Nationals: This part got lost in everyone talking about translating songs and judges. I've been thinking about a nationals system for a loooong time, and here's my potential model.

• 10 comps are selected to be bid comps, either fall or winter. For example 10 comps this year I would select, Burgh, Boston, Buckeye Mela, Nashvhille, Blowout, Fever, NDC, BAB. Cant name 10 right now of the top of my head but I'm sure there are more lmao. Get international comps in there Australia and UK.
• To be a bid comp: The comps must be running for 2+ years. There should also be an application process.
• "What if 1 teams wins 1st at 2 bid comps?"-Point system. So even if you don't win a bid comp but still place you have a chance to go to nationals.
• "But Sahab, there are so many ways that a bhangra team can be good? Folk vs Modern"- The Nationals that I had in mind would segregate teams that produce more folk sets and do more traditional bhangra. However, I believe there are multiple ways to entertain a crowd and there are multiple ways to win a comp. BEST EXAMPLE: GMU at Blowout 23. They had a folk set (with gimmicks sprinkled in) and they placed 2nd. They beat a lot of teams who were much more modern at a comp that I would consider is modern. They placed 2nd with a judging panel that I would consider is modern too. So teams that do more traditional bhangra and sets, they are at at a slight disadvantage but I believe still can be successful in this system.
• "When should it be??"- Well, I believe that Bruin Bhangra is the perfect timing and comp for this model. My thinking is that Bruin Bhangra should implement this model, and maybe change their name to Bruin Bhangra- The International Bhangra Championship (yea i know that name is too long and sucks lol). Others may disagree and the bruin committee may not want to lose their identity, but that late may, memorial day weekend is perfect as it's just a perfect way to end the season. Also, Bruin already brings the best teams.
• Someone brought up that we should not focus and nationals but rather focus on having more comps overall. I have a counter to this point. Nationals can act as a way to incentivize comps to happen and to reoccur year after year. Also, it would create a sort of tier system: ranking the comps on difficulty and the level of the teams competing.. Where newer teams would go to non-bid comps, and it would give newer teams the chance to perform and place without getting their asses handed to them by better teams.
• Overall, I believe that nationals would be the biggest thing to happen to the bhangra circuit since elite 8, and I think it's the next step to bettering the circuit because it would create excitement and "fire". My model, I'm sure has many flaws, but I think it's comprehensive and covers main issues.

There is little to no organization in the circuit, its just comp after comp, year after year. There is no incentive to change anything up when your team gets into each comp you KNOW it will get into and you know EXACTLY who will place 98% of the time within 3 sec of the lineup being released.


A point system may help create more diverse lineups instead of the same teams forming practically the same lineup 3 comps in a row. For instance, a first/second place team at a few comps may have their spot locked up and just focus on preparing for the natty instead of competing and placing 1st/2nd 5 times a year. Big time comps with high stakes will result in everyone stepping up their game and teams that stick their head out of the ground once every few years may actually become frequent flyers.


This needs to happen and I hope those who have influence take this seriously.

If anyone is interested in helping me organize/gather more ideas/brainstorm on nationals, pm me.

 

[Saab]

So I was the one the recommended we don't have a Nationals, but I respect all of your viewpoints, so Ill try to summarize a response/additions to your points as well as present mine.




1. Don't mind the concept of Nationals, but don't think its going to generate the hype you are talking about from a competition participation perspective. The idea of why I was against Nationals is that while I am not against the idea, I think if we were to prioritize pursuing Nationals and spring boarding and sustaining new competitions, I would focus on the latter. Don't think these items need to be mutually exclusive, but they will probably require parallel work efforts which I think will need different teams/skills to make successful


2. Think Bruin is fine and makes a lot of sense. As it stands, I break down comps into the following Tiers anyway:


Tier 1 - Elite "Name" Competitions(where people want to go and has sustained impact on the circuit)
Burgh, Boston, Bruin, Blowout, BAB


Tier 2a - Up and Comers
Srujan, AKD, Nachde Nashville - comps supported by universities and with fusion lineups are huge draws


Tier 3b - Stable
Fever, BAB, MCBNKD, That one at Gtown(terrible at names) - named comps with a stable presence with 1-2 years out of the circuit


Tier 4 - Net New/Nameless
Big Ten, bunch of other shit here.


As above, its hard to name a lot of names here(there is a lack of new comps), but there is not a lot of meat in tiers 2a/2b which should be a priority in the circuit. Will edit this post with comp database shortly.




3. I agree with most everything else said, but I think looking at bhangra from a geography, demographics perspective, and legacy model, there are some areas where we really need to focus on for bhangra growth outside of a bid comp/Nationals system:


Major Cities in the US:


1. NYC - BAB/probably could do another comp
2. LA - Bruin/same shit here
3. Chicago - No comp, huge hole here
4. Philadelphia - Tashan
5. DC - Gtown comp/Blowout are good starts here
6. Houston - Clutch, but maybe another comp
7. Phoenix - none(AZ/AZ st have bhangra teams?)
8. San Diego/San Jose - there was DDA(and that could get brought back), but area could be ripe for a comp or two(DRP hosted comp?)
9. Dallas - Again, none
10. Boston - BBC/Check
11. State of Florida - nothing big after Bayside(bring this back)




^ There are some major gaps where large populations/minority populations reside. Doesn't need to be in the city proper either, but having a big presence in at least 8 of the above 11 areas would be big for the circuit.


Also, at schools, especially big ten schools that dominate the middle of the country:
1. Michigan/MUS - would be HUGE for bhangra to have something in Michigan
2. U illinois/U chicago - again would tap big chicago market
3. Seattle - know abc had a comp here before, but having a UW presence would be also huge
4. SEC country - Georgia, UF, South Carolina, U Tennesee, etc
5. Virginia Suburbs - AVAP was clutch back in the day at VCU
6. West Coast - Cal Berkely/UC schools in general would be huge


Again, some shared areas above, but big picture is that bringing back named comps and growing in major markets should be key for bhangra moving forward, and we should really help foster that.


4. What does that mean - ram do you have a lot of money to make this happen?
I think the community should work on getting together some base materials - sponsorship, ticketing, media, lighting and sound, liaisons, etc - just general "How-To" or "Dummies guide for ___" on key areas of competition organization and hosting and start circulating that around. Having a consistent experience and sharing of ideas on successful money generation ideas would be helpful to kick-starting and maintaining these competitions and helping expand bhangras footprint into the areas above, which is key for growth of the market. Putting together these materials and potentially having quarterly workshops for competition organizers, new and old, I think would be a helpful way to help bring much needed stability to the circuit. A growth plan that parallels this(1-2 new comps a year) would also be a good strategic goal to at least "maintain" fire in the circuit.

 

[kman58]

1. NYC - BAB/probably could do another comp
2. LA - Bruin/same shit here
3. Chicago - No comp, huge hole here
4. Philadelphia - No comp since bell - bringing back bell or another comp at drexel/penn/etc would be huge
5. DC - Gtown comp/Blowout are good starts here
6. Houston - Clutch, but maybe another comp
7. Phoenix - none(AZ/AZ st have bhangra teams?)
8. San Diego/San Jose - there was DDA(and that could get brought back), but area could be ripe for a comp or two(DRP hosted comp?)
9. Dallas - Again, none
10. Boston - BBC/Check
11. State of Florida - nothing big after Bayside(bring this back)

Just want to point out the incorrect statement here regarding the perceived lack of bhangra competitions in Philadelphia. Tashan just finished our second year (very successfully might I add) as a competition hosted by and at Temple U, and we will continue to play host to this competition year after year which we are proud to call a great first semester comp that teams have enjoyed competing at immensely. I do agree with the points about other major markets (like Chicago) getting student groups or south asian groups together to organize consistent, steady competitions.

 

[Saab]

1. NYC - BAB/probably could do another comp
2. LA - Bruin/same shit here
3. Chicago - No comp, huge hole here
4. Philadelphia - No comp since bell - bringing back bell or another comp at drexel/penn/etc would be huge
5. DC - Gtown comp/Blowout are good starts here
6. Houston - Clutch, but maybe another comp
7. Phoenix - none(AZ/AZ st have bhangra teams?)
8. San Diego/San Jose - there was DDA(and that could get brought back), but area could be ripe for a comp or two(DRP hosted comp?)
9. Dallas - Again, none
10. Boston - BBC/Check
11. State of Florida - nothing big after Bayside(bring this back)

Just want to point out the incorrect statement here regarding the perceived lack of bhangra competitions in Philadelphia. Tashan just finished our second year (very successfully might I add) as a competition hosted by and at Temple U, and we will continue to play host to this competition year after year which we are proud to call a great first semester comp that teams have enjoyed competing at immensely. I do agree with the points about other major markets (like Chicago) getting student groups or south asian groups together to organize consistent, steady competitions.

Thanks for calling me out - getting old and appreciate the feedback.

 

[Mans]

3. I agree with most everything else said, but I think looking at bhangra from a geography, demographics perspective, and legacy model, there are some areas where we really need to focus on for bhangra growth outside of a bid comp/Nationals system:


Major Cities in the US:


1. NYC - BAB/probably could do another comp
2. LA - Bruin/same shit here
3. Chicago - No comp, huge hole here
4. Philadelphia - Tashan
5. DC - Gtown comp/Blowout are good starts here
6. Houston - Clutch, but maybe another comp
7. Phoenix - none(AZ/AZ st have bhangra teams?)
8. San Diego/San Jose - there was DDA(and that could get brought back), but area could be ripe for a comp or two(DRP hosted comp?)
9. Dallas - Again, none
10. Boston - BBC/Check
11. State of Florida - nothing big after Bayside(bring this back)

^ There are some major gaps where large populations/minority populations reside. Doesn't need to be in the city proper either, but having a big presence in at least 8 of the above 11 areas would be big for the circuit.

6. West Coast - Cal Berkely/UC schools in general would be huge

In terms of Bay Area and West Coast in general we got a lot of comps that have hosted for a couple years and some up on the come up. SF Bay Area has got LOB(Legacy of Bhangra) which just recently hosted their second year as a comp and we also have BABG (Bay Area Bhangra and Giddha) which is the live only competition a lot of people were asking for this year. In the Sacramento area we got BSM (Bhangra State of Mind) that is about to host for its 3rd year and West Coast Bhangra at UC Davis which this year is an invitational match up based comp. In SoCal there is Bruin Bhangra of course but you also got CSUN Bhangra at CSU Northridge and Nachle Dewane at UC Santa Barbara, even Seattle is hosting a comp this year. I think the only area on the West Coast that could use improvement is in Fresno considering that their is a huge Panjabi population there. Maybe Bulldog Bhangra could make a comeback?

 

[angeblah]

Replying to Rohan, Ram, Howie, Sahab, and other people who have chimed in on the "Nationals" topic:


First, this year the Desi Dance Network introduced a new Bollywood/fusion championships that eschews the BA auto-bid system. It's called Legends, and it's an ELO points-based system that is intended to more fairly reward teams for consistency. I recommend Bhangra circuit dancers look more into this: http://www.legends.desidancenetwork.org/elo-1


Long story short, to produce fairer championship lineups, both BA and Legends chose NOT to designate certain competitions as "auto-bid" this year. If our circuit chose to implement something similar, you would need all teams to be able to regularly compete in bid competitions. This will necessarily push out those special collaboration teams and international teams, who may have made valuable contributions to our scene, but cannot consistently participate in enough bid competitions.

I'm also echoing Ram's concerns about whether or not the number, diversity, and quality of the competitions/judges in our circuit could even sustain a points system. A couple people suggested that we have our different approaches (e.g. live, music, folk, modern) be segregated into different points systems, but are there enough competitions to do so? Are there ample judges to evaluate all these teams fairly?



I'm all up for rebuilding and shaking up our circuit, but I'm on the fence about whether our circuit has enough resources for doing this points system justice.

 

[rbansal4494]

Replying to Rohan, Ram, Howie, Sahab, and other people who have chimed in on the "Nationals" topic:


First, this year the Desi Dance Network introduced a new Bollywood/fusion championships that eschews the BA auto-bid system. It's called Legends, and it's an ELO points-based system that is intended to more fairly reward teams for consistency. I recommend Bhangra circuit dancers look more into this: http://www.legends.desidancenetwork.org/elo-1


Long story short, to produce fairer championship lineups, both BA and Legends chose NOT to designate certain competitions as "auto-bid" this year. If our circuit chose to implement something similar, you would need all teams to be able to regularly compete in bid competitions. This will necessarily push out those special collaboration teams and international teams, who may have made valuable contributions to our scene, but cannot consistently participate in enough bid competitions.

I'm also echoing Ram's concerns about whether or not the number, diversity, and quality of the competitions/judges in our circuit could even sustain a points system. A couple people suggested that we have our different approaches (e.g. live, music, folk, modern) be segregated into different points systems, but are there enough competitions to do so? Are there ample judges to evaluate all these teams fairly?



I'm all up for rebuilding and shaking up our circuit, but I'm on the fence about whether our circuit has enough resources for doing this points system justice.

The ELO system is super cool, I remember looking into it when Legends first announced it. Points would be better at auto-bid as this prevents a team from showing up out of the blue once a year, winning a comp and getting to go to nationals over other teams that are consistent throughout the whole year.


I do believe that we do have enough competitions to sustain the point system (judges is questionable as many competitions just use the same judges). This fall semester alone there was Bhangra in the 6ix, BAB, GBC, AKD, Burgh, BBC, DKD, tashan, and i think 1/2 west coast comps I'm forgetting about. Some of these competitions are new but having attended a new competition (GBC) I would easily say the competition was run well and could stand as a bid competition.


In terms of folk vs live vs modern etc. I remember at Bruin 2015 Royal-SPD went live and was judged to the same rubric from a live perspective (since judges had live experience) and did pretty well against the music teams. I think with proper judges and revisions of a rubric, there would be the potential to have live and music compete against one another. or maybe thats being a little unrealistic to please everyone who knows ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[guranshsingh]

Could a potential national/championship competition format be about 10 teams, with 6/7 designated spots for "auto-bid" teams from earlier comps, such as the aforementioned Burgh, Buckeye, LOB, BIT6, GOT, etc and maybe even Bhangra Down Under or TBC, and the remaining 3/4 spots for miscellaneous teams for those potential collaborations or come-out-of-retirement teams?


Thoughts?

 

[Prabhzy]

Could a potential national/championship competition format be about 10 teams, with 6/7 designated spots for "auto-bid" teams from earlier comps, such as the aforementioned Burgh, Buckeye, LOB, BIT6, GOT, etc and maybe even Bhangra Down Under or TBC, and the remaining 3/4 spots for miscellaneous teams for those potential collaborations or come-out-of-retirement teams?


Thoughts?

Its a good idea but it only would work in reality if the winners of each of competitions mentioned by yourself were different teams. If one team wins 3 comps in the list then how will the others be chosen?

 

[sdadoo15]

The ELO system is super cool, I remember looking into it when Legends first announced it. Points would be better at auto-bid as this prevents a team from showing up out of the blue once a year, winning a comp and getting to go to nationals over other teams that are consistent throughout the whole year.


I do believe that we do have enough competitions to sustain the point system (judges is questionable as many competitions just use the same judges). This fall semester alone there was Bhangra in the 6ix, BAB, GBC, AKD, Burgh, BBC, DKD, tashan, and i think 1/2 west coast comps I'm forgetting about. Some of these competitions are new but having attended a new competition (GBC) I would easily say the competition was run well and could stand as a bid competition.


In terms of folk vs live vs modern etc. I remember at Bruin 2015 Royal-SPD went live and was judged to the same rubric from a live perspective (since judges had live experience) and did pretty well against the music teams. I think with proper judges and revisions of a rubric, there would be the potential to have live and music compete against one another. or maybe thats being a little unrealistic to please everyone who knows ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

So I finally had the chance to sit down and think about all this "Nationals" talk. While I do agree with Ram that certain regions in the US are missing competitions, I do also agree with the fact that there are enough large competitions out there right now to convert into bid competitions. Also going off of Rohan's comment I do think that a rubric can be created that can match live teams against music teams in a fair way, and hopefully the new judging project that is going on will have some ideas for how to implement such a rubric. I think a widely varied judging panel (in terms of live vs music experience) can allow teams to be judged based on how well they perform their unique style (live vs music, energetic vs clean, gimmicky vs raw bhangra, etc).

However, I will say that I think I prefer partly auto-bid, sort of how the fusion circuit has it right now. While yes, it may result in some teams performing once, winning, and getting an automatic bid to nationals, but I also don't see that as a bad thing. Easiest example I have is NJW, who generally doesn't perform often but when they do bring insane amounts of fire. If NJW were to come to a certain auto-bid comp (ex. Burgh 2015), and place first, I don't see why they don't deserve to compete at nationals. Also it allows international teams (BASS, MOB Sydney, UK teams, etc.) to have an equal shot at getting a "nationals"/"internationals" bid since they can focus on sets for auto-bid competitions only. Doing this will allow teams to compete less and focus more on certain competitions in order to claim that top spot and get an auto-bid, or some amount of "points" towards a nationals bid. The way the circuit is set up now, the only way for teams to really claim the spot as "top dog" is to essentially win the most amount of competitions as possible. And I think nationals with partial auto-bid is the solution.

 

[Howie Magz]

I would give you a bid Sahil.

 

[sdadoo15]

@Howie Magz you didn't tag me bro

 

[rbansal4494]

If NJW were to come to a certain auto-bid comp (ex. Burgh 2015), and place first, I don't see why they don't deserve to compete at nationals. Also it allows international teams (BASS, MOB Sydney, UK teams, etc.) to have an equal shot at getting a "nationals"/"internationals" bid since they can focus on sets for auto-bid competitions only. Doing this will allow teams to compete less and focus more on certain competitions in order to claim that top spot and get an auto-bid, or some amount of "points" towards a nationals bid.

@sdadoo15 I think the problem with this (and what the fusion circuit realized) was it doesn't prove the team deserves to go to Nationals based on one comp alone. For example, would a team that placed 1st then goes to maybe one other comp and place 4th or 5th really be more deserving than a team that gets 2nd or 3rd at three or four comps. This is main reason why RAS has just stuck to a point system rather than auto bid

 

[sb123]

Thanks for the post, @sdadoo15 . Clearly late to this party (you can like things now?), but as a member of GU Jawani I want to provide some thoughts on the challenges of a less established team.

The main concerns discussed here -- video release, judging, nationals -- are all important, and are concerns we wish we had. We pretty much started from scratch last year and, frankly, our foremost concern is making it to a competition. Obviously the easiest solution here is to have a better tryout video, and to that end we're doing our best, soliciting feedback from outside the team, etc. Would welcome any suggestions on this.

However, as Ram and others discussed, competitions at various tiers would help tremendously. Many competitions, even young ones, seem to gun for the all star lineup -- and why wouldn't they? You want to sell out and have to dopest comp possible. But that seriously makes it difficult for unestablished teams lacking recent comp performances.

It's particularly disheartening to hear that some competitions directly reach out to well-established teams to solicit applications without a video requirement. That undermines the effort (and comp fees...) all other teams put in, and makes lineups a reputation game. If bhangra is going to thrive at both large and small college campuses, which have long been an important space for promoting the dance and culture, there need to be competitions that are accessible to teams at various abilities.

Again, I'm not trying to make excuses here. Bottom line is that strong tryout videos will standout. (S/o MBT, was great climbing back onto the circuit two years ago). But for the longevity and quality of the circuit, its important that young teams continue to have opportunities. This should be an important concern to keep on the radar moving forward.

As a sidenote, I'd love to hear from other collegiate teams on how you combat graduation turnover and are sustainably strong over multiple seasons.

 

[Howie Magz]

Thanks for the post, @sdadoo15 . Clearly late to this party (you can like things now?), but as a member of GU Jawani I want to provide some thoughts on the challenges of a less established team.

The main concerns discussed here -- video release, judging, nationals -- are all important, and are concerns we wish we had. We pretty much started from scratch last year and, frankly, our foremost concern is making it to a competition. Obviously the easiest solution here is to have a better tryout video, and to that end we're doing our best, soliciting feedback from outside the team, etc. Would welcome any suggestions on this.

However, as Ram and others discussed, competitions at various tiers would help tremendously. Many competitions, even young ones, seem to gun for the all star lineup -- and why wouldn't they? You want to sell out and have to dopest comp possible. But that seriously makes it difficult for unestablished teams lacking recent comp performances.

It's particularly disheartening to hear that some competitions directly reach out to well-established teams to solicit applications without a video requirement. That undermines the effort (and comp fees...) all other teams put in, and makes lineups a reputation game. If bhangra is going to thrive at both large and small college campuses, which have long been an important space for promoting the dance and culture, there need to be competitions that are accessible to teams at various abilities.

Again, I'm not trying to make excuses here. Bottom line is that strong tryout videos will standout. (S/o MBT, was great climbing back onto the circuit two years ago). But for the longevity and quality of the circuit, its important that young teams continue to have opportunities. This should be an important concern to keep on the radar moving forward.

As a sidenote, I'd love to hear from other collegiate teams on how you combat graduation turnover and are sustainably strong over multiple seasons.

Hey Shivum (Rocky),

You have danced with me in 2015 on MBT during our rebuilding year and you saw the struggles we faced in getting into competitions. You saw the struggle that we had when Pratik and I first became captains and only had 4 dancers on the team and had to recruit 8 new people and train them for the spring semester. I would say that sometimes reaching out to a competition after their decision to not take you as a team in the lineup work in your favor. Back in 2015, MBT applied to Fever and straight out got rejected. From there, we saw other teams drop the competition and reached out to the Fever committee again asking them to reconsider the offer since they just had three teams drop. This was two weeks before the comp was about to begin. Guess what, they took us in the lineup. Other word of advice, reaching out to committees and telling them a bit about your bhangra resume doesn't hurt either. There have been numerous times where I leveraged that I use to dance/captain AEG and that I captained MBT in the past to help committees understand that taking us as a team would be a decision that they wont regret. In your case Shivum, you use to dance on FCB. Letting a committee know that you use to dance with them and now captain GU Jawani can only work in your favor. Also captains of lesser known teams, you need to start establishing connections and network in the circuit if you want to help bring your team to the next level. It's the same principal as going to your university's networking event. No one will know who you are or who your team is if you don't meet the right people or for god sake at least introduce yourself to the committee.