And that goes back to what I stated !!--IF you are earning ANY remuneration then by its very nature and definition, you should NOT be determined as an Amat .

This is a declaration by which 99% of Prof agree .

Now let me give you this food for thought-- I come from a very different era than you-- I worked and trained etc. for 14 yrs to achieve a level of competancy, to allow me to TRAIN to teach-- add all the other multi yrs to get to my current level--

NOW-- do you think YOU would feel any differently, if someone was allowed to walk thru an " open " door policy , than do I ?
And-- this isnt about competance -- its all about putting in time and serving your dues .

And ya know -- if you want to look back at ALL the great dancers, that came out of the system ,that NEVER taught lesson one, until qualified, then thats , in my opinion, a very defensible position .

You may parse the sentence however you wish-- it does not change the incontravertible meaning of the word .

Terence. We now live in a different world. To go back to those Lilywhite days would mean the end of those IDSF competitions we like to see on TV. In those far off countries they are the ones that would miss out the most. We would once again become individuall countries isolated from each other as far as International Amateur Competitions are concerned. except for that once a year pilgrimage to Blackpool.
Your pharagraph three and four. The people under the microscope who have reached a ranking of top 20 or there abouts have worked very hard to get to where they are which allows them to be invited to go to the other side of the world to compete. You have to understand that in your early days you followed the rules that existed at that time. Today your story would have been completely different than it was then.

Believe me-- I do live in todays world !!--

again, you may try justify the nomenclature all you wish-- it still ( the last time I checked the dictionary ) had the meaning I described.

And ya know-- in todays world, many of the Amat. make considerably more financially, than in the past . And-- add to that-- world class coaches now visit all the competing countries.

Ive had a couples that I coached , for some time, that never taught, both worked, and managed to do pretty much all the comps they needed to achieve the exposure desired ( and this wasnt in the UK ).
remember-- Ive been on both sides of this fence-- and am not against progress-- just against mixed clarification of roles, within the industry .
This type of discussion has arisen on another site, and, as usual, all the Amat. want a piece of the teaching " pie "-- or the opportunity .

I guess we are in an intractable position, so the point becomes moot .

"And that goes back to what I stated !!--IF you are earning ANY remuneration then by its very nature and definition, you should NOT be determined as an Amat .

This is a declaration by which 99% of Prof agree ."

Then how come they allow professional dancers to compete in the amateur divisions at their competitions and teach in their studios? It must not be a very strong feeling, as they've allowed it to be over ridden by business opportunity.

"NOW-- do you think YOU would feel any differently, if someone was allowed to walk thru an " open " door policy , than do I ?"

It's always been an open door. Professional status is self assigned.

Hi terence
you're getting a bit of stick here!! I'm sure you can well deal with it, but in any case, i agree with you completely on the concept that an amateur doesn't receive remuneration (expenses of coures) for what they do.
These days, the definition is 'manipulated' and there are all sorts of compromises to allow amateurs to offset the costs of their competitive dancing. Competitive dancing is benefitting of course.
I'm not comfortable with criticisms of the past as to judge the past by today's standards is grossly unfair. Isaac Newton was very mis-guided - by today's standards.

Thanks-- ya know what really concerns me the most ?-- that because someone reaches a level of dance proficiency-- it automatically declares that teaching competancy has been achieved !!-- I,m not questioning capability-- but to blanket approval, by dance results, seems to me like saying-- why bother with exams ????

teaching is an " art " ,and takes many yrs to perfect the craft ( and some never do ) also, qualifs. dont guarantee competancy ( not at any level ) i was always under the eye of a prof. who had" served " his time in a recogn. school of dance-- learning my craft .
This not really about a matter of then or now , but about loopholes that have been created, to appease the ever present proverbial " squeeky wheel ".
I believe that the profession needs to retain its integrity, and if they want to re classify ALL dancing ( like the Olym. ) OK-- but dont straddle the fence !!

Terence. It really boils down to... To be a dance instructor, not like a Plumber or an Electrition who must be licenced. Anybody can be a dance teacher. No law is being broken. I would hope that any of those top Amateuers who are teaching would teach what they are being taught. And if they are at the top they most certainly are being taught themselves by the best teachers around. In a round about way they are helping to improve dancing world wide.
Are you going to correct a few letters above about Professionals competing in Amateur divisions. I thought you would have jumped on that one.

ANYONE ? can be a teacher-- now you are displaying your complete lack of understanding. And by the way-- that statement is about to change in the UK ---
Do you really believe, that all it takes is " Parotting " the words from a book or what you think the answer may be to a q ?-- dance is about theory as well as techn.

Ive taught a sufficient amount of Amat. who are not up to par with the theoretical side of dance , to realise that there would be more inadequate " teachers " out there than you can begin to believe .

On top of all this-- its impinging on MY livelyhood -- I made a promise-- I wont do electrical work, plumbing etc -- if they dont teach dance !!

The nuances that exist, are endless, and it does take yrs of experience and training, to resolve the many issues that comes with the job of imparting knowledge to others.

By the way, I dont know which post you are refering to ( Pros comp etc ) the answer is-- I do NOT condone any prof. partaking in an Amat comp.- where specifically was this ?-- and if it was so blatant -- I feel sure there will be repercussions .

Lastly-- I am assuming you are an Amat ?-- so I suggest you follow your own dictum , and commence to take your future lessons from Amateurs .

"By the way, I dont know which post you are refering to ( Pros comp etc ) the answer is-- I do NOT condone any prof. partaking in an Amat comp.- where specifically was this ?-- and if it was so blatant -- I feel sure there will be repercussions ."

Blackpool, UK Open, just about any international competition's amateur division as well as that of every IDSF competition, is full of dancers who are fully professional.

As Serndipity described these competitors "Dancing at this time in my life is where I would earn my living."

That's a description of a professional dancer. That they are allowed to compete in a division labeled "amateur" is a historical oddity, but they are what they are: professionals.

Their theoretical capabilities as teachers or lack thereof doesn't really figure into it - the fact is that they are earning substantial money at it, and that makes them professionals.

Maybe in your book -- but NOT in mine -- thats only half of the equation-- and from my point of view , the one that requires the least effort .