Wrong again .. i did a national congress lecture on Amer. style smooth three yrs ago, and it has been introduced on a wide scale, and being taught by many schools..

Where was I wrong before? If all you can do is snipe, I assume that you have nothing to say.

As for American Smooth, the place where you are most likely to see it in the UK is on 'Strictly Come Dancing'. As for dance schools, a few dabble a bit (largely as a commercial response to pupils seeing it on TV), but it is not much danced socially outside London (which is a melting pot of every style imaginable, as you would expect in a major City).

Just remind me - on which page of the Current IDTA Syllabus will I find the American Smooth syllabus? Someone new to dance might look at the Association's website, and be drawn to the page called "What styles of dance are there?", and be none the wiser.

There is an Examiner who travels regularly to the W country teaching Amer. style to teachers..there is also a well known Pro in the ldn area, who bases his Wedding dance program ,in some areas, on the Amer.style.. and, as I understand, there are syllabi in the works with the major Soc.

I still teach this standard to all my beginners ( the older generation are not interested in strict tempo )

And my apology.. I posted the WCS comment in the wrong place.. should have been the geezer


It is also included as a dance in the US championship ( Pro/Am ).

One examiner, and one London teacher (of wedding couples), hardly represents a wide scale. I'm sure there are others, but 'wide scale'? Honestly, I see no sign of it at all. "Wrong again"? I don't think so.

In response to my question, you forgot to confirm that American Smooth isn't even mentioned within the covers of the Pro or Amateur Syllabus of the UK Association of which you are a member; so that however keen an individual advocate of the style might be, you cannot be examined in it, either as a professional or as an amateur. The current online view of the Association (what styles are there?) is that it doesn't exist.

I did a google search on 'American Smooth' for just UK sites: the results were interesting (and few in number).

heres something you need to consider.. I spoke with the Gen. Scty, of the WDC, at length about 8/9 months ago.. he had just sent out 40 plus e mails ,to different countries advocating a Pro/ Am style comp. set up..as many of the countries already teach and use the Amer. style syl.

Last yr... there was a pro/am comp. held in Argentina ( 40 countries attended ) and.... apart from the U.S. many of them danced in the amer. style div.

So.. whether you like it or not, its not going away .. remember.. "they" said the same thing about Disco. !!

As I said.. syl. is in the proverbial works..

I have not said whether I liked the style, or not (and no one asked); whereas you have yet to make your case for me being "wrong again". You can hardly cite the competitive dance scene in Argentina in support of your theory - there are few places in the world further away, geographically, or culturally, now, are there?

To go back to the original topic: do YOU think that a dancer capable of a decent mark in an amateur gold medal test is, in any useful sense of the word, an "advanced" dancer?

Advanced is a relative term.. period..

When it is applied to a level that is two off the bottom, in a series of twenty, then I guess it must be. I see now where I was wrong.

So, yes, an advanced level of dancing: just without "good poise, deportment and characterisation", and without "continuity, fluidity of movement and musical interpretation".

Advanced? Hmm.

To be blunt, I don't think you are going to get a tolerable feather out of anyone with less than several month's intense experience.

"I was wondering if someone was willing to put in the most effort. How long would it take them to go from beginner bronze to silver, gold, master?"

It depends on the syllabus. Some are simplistic and designed to show pseudo progress rather than real results. Others are hard. Although I haven't looked at it lately, the Fred Astaire supreme gold syllabus was sufficiently difficult so as to eliminate many people (including FADS instructors) who didn't have the physical coordination to perform the patterns, let alone look good doing them.

That being the case, if you want to devote that kind of effort (8 hour days) to your dancing I'd recommend one hour of instruction to every three or four hours of practice. Find an instructor who has a good track record, thus proving he or she can dance but is clearly able to impart that dancing knowledge to someone else. You'd be surprised how many can dance but can't teach.

From someone else: "That takes months and frustration and tears and sweat and cursing..."

It doesn't. Moreover, this kind of thing exemplifies exactly what is wrong with the ballroom dance industry today, and what was wrong with it fifty years ago. When you finish a lesson, you should be feeling a little better about your dancing situation than you did one hour ago. If you don't, cross that instructor off your list and move on - quickly! The frustration, tears and cursing are not the student's fault. It's the fault of the instructor and his or her inability to teach.