[Callers] Difficulty rankings?

[Dugan Murphy via Callers]

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
dugan at duganmurphy.com


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 13:53:01 -0400
> From: Maia McCormick via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: "callers at lists.sharedweight.net" <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> Subject: [Callers] Difficulty rankings?
> Message-ID:
>         <CAHUcZGPHaCuWAZv+d+6EX1aJ7D25CDSvJUFD=
> VLYV8g43Fyr6A at 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
>
> ***************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20150420/b693232c/attachment.htm>