how can u compare 2 different forms of dances?

This has been in my mind for sometime and is probably the bane of all dancing shows

when 2 dancers dance classical, you can decide and tell who did a better job

when 2 dance hip hop, again you can say who did a better job

but how on earth would you compare western and indian in the same round... they are just completely two different stuff...


i have tried both... but they are as different as chalk and cheese!

it is unfair to the dancers and the judges
Edited by carolinecj - 14 years ago

If you view it as a performance on the whole then it is comparable...

@carolinecj..u do have a point but i agree more with desicrowd..
i think that it wouldnt be fair if the contestants are asked to do something they arent good at..
if they are good at hip hop they should be allowed to do that n if they are good at classical then they should be allowed to do that..
as per the judging is concerned.. the judges should judge if the contestants were good enough in the form of dance they attempted.. if a person doing hip hop competes against a person doing classical , then the one who is better technically is given more marks..
so its not the dance form actually which is compared, it is the perfection which is compared..... if 2 people, one doing contemporary and the other doing classical do their forms to perfection then obviously they re given equal credit but if one of them is better in the dance form he attempted then he is given more credit..
in conlusion.. the performance is compared to its form.. if is it good enough... it should be given credit..
i hope im not too vague..
Edited by cuppycake990 - 14 years ago