Hi Maia, I used to organize my dance cards by difficulty, but currently, I use categories in my box that are largely based on dance-defining figures (Petronella, star promenade) and types of progression (slide left, circle-pass-through). I find that system of organization to be more useful when writing out a program for an evening.
Dugan Murphy du...@duganmurphy.com List-Post: callers@lists.sharedweight.net Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 13:53:01 -0400 > From: Maia McCormick via Callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> > To: "callers@lists.sharedweight.net" <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> > Subject: [Callers] Difficulty rankings? > Message-ID: > <CAHUcZGPHaCuWAZv+d+6EX1aJ7D25CDSvJUFD= > vlyv8g43fy...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > As I overhaul my contra deck and realize that my difficulty ranking system > is super incoherent, and most of my dance rankings are from way before I > had any idea what actually makes a dance easy or hard, I've been thinking > of scrapping this difficulty ranking system and just starting over. So I > was wondering: if you rank your dances by difficulty, what is your system, > what are your benchmarks for various difficulty levels, what sorts of > things do you consider when determining the difficulty of a dance? If you > DON'T > rank your dances, why not? > > Cheers, > Maia > > *************************************** >
