Don, you must re-read your post. You claimed that you had to deviate from the official technique to dance something well in competition. But in fact you followed the official technique for the figure you danced; you got confused because the closest figure in the book (a complete telemark) requires different technique. But that is because it is a different figure than the one you were dancing - if there were a written description of what you danced, it would be as you danced it.

Turning step one into the center remains simply wrong though... it is taught by those who do not know how to do it better. Specifically, those who do not fully understand how the traditional technique creates a smoother movement without resorting to this.

So you haven't come up with an example of where competition practice had to change from the official technique afterall - what you've come up with is cases where you guessed wrong about what the official technique would be (the footwork) and cases where you haven't been taught how to make the official technique work (no turn on step one, only CBM) and so instead must resort to an inferrior substitute.

Anonymous. Your second pargraph 2. concerning a Closed Telemark as an entry into an Oversway. To do it according to the book a person could find themselves falling into their Oversway with the rise and fall of, rise at the end of one, up for two and three, lower at the end of three. We all have done the old faithfull Fallaway Slip Pivot. Double Reverse Spin and we wish to finish with an Oversway. The steps after the Double Reverse Spin before the Oversway if it isn't a Closed Telemark what is it.
Let's get back to the Chasse in the Cha Cha. If you read Bailemos's comments this person obviously has a sound knowledge of Latin technique. To me its amazing that some people have tapes and yet fail to see what is in front of their eyes.I think it's called Tunnel Vision. If you look you will also see a slight turning of the hips to the left before the push into one which comes from a ball no lower on, in this case the RF.

"Anonymous. Your second pargraph 2. concerning a Closed Telemark as an entry into an Oversway. To do it according to the book a person could find themselves falling into their Oversway with the rise and fall of, rise at the end of one, up for two and three, lower at the end of three."

And that is where you are dead wrong. Book technique for this combination is as you danced it - rise on one, lower on two, then enter the oversway. Of course this combination is not given in the book, but if one really understands the material that is presented there, then is is clear that this is what is required.

Your mistake is confusing the complete telemark presented in the book with the incomplete telemark that must be used as a preced for an oversway. If the abbreviated telemark were to be added to the book, it would have to have the footwork HT TH, not the HT T TH used by the complete telemark. It's that simple.

You throw away the book not because it is inapplicable to competition, but because you have not really read what it has to teach you, which is to say the general principles of dancing that guide you far beyond the limited cases it spells out for you.

"The steps after the Double Reverse Spin before the Oversway if it isn't a Closed Telemark what is it."

It's an abbreviated telemark, not a full one.

"If you read Bailemos's comments this person obviously has a sound knowledge of Latin technique."

No - he has a sound knowledge of common practice.

"To me its amazing that some people have tapes and yet fail to see what is in front of their eyes."

They see, they just realize that what they are looking at is not optimal.

"If you look you will also see a slight turning of the hips to the left before the push into one which comes from a ball no lower on, in this case the RF."

It can just as easily, and perhaps more properly, come from the inside edge of a foot that has allowed the heel to lower.

Anonymous.Exactly which technique book are you quoting from. According to the book the second step is toe no lower, then a toe lower on three.. Originaly the name of the above was called a Telemark. The other one is called an Open Telemark. The lady has a Heel Turn in both. As you wrote above there is no discription of the Telemark into an Oversway. Why would there be they are two different steps. So where is the argument. If I wish to change the footwork or alignment nobody can say it is wrong as long as it looks good which is what I wrote in the first place.

"According to the book the second step is toe no lower, then a toe lower on three.."

You are looking at the WRONG FIGURE.
You are reading the description of a COMPLETE telemark, but the sequence you are dancing requires an incomplete one. It cannot have the same footwork if you follow the methods of dancing about which the book is written is it clear than in the case of your sequence you must use an abbreviated telemark action which lowers on step 2 (actually, it doesn't formally have rise and fall, though it does have HT, TH footwork).

"As you wrote above there is no discription of the Telemark into an Oversway. Why would there be they are two different steps."

There should be because the abbreviated telemark that must be used before the an oversway is a DIFFERENT FIGURE than the closed and open telemarks. However, as the oversway is not in the book (except for tango), the type of telemark it would require is not in the book either. Though actually, it is - see the notes for precedes for the oversway in tango, and guess what is there: the abbreviated telemark, tango style, though not by name.

"So where is the argument. If I wish to change the footwork or alignment nobody can say it is wrong as long as it looks good which is what I wrote in the first place. "

My argument is that not only is it not wrong, it's also not any sort of deviation from the book. The book requires that you dance it this way. However you have to learn this by reading and understanding the entire book, particularly related actions such as the natural twist turn in foxtrot, the zig zag in quickstep, and the telemark-like oversway entry in tango - because this particular combination is not illustrated as a case study there.

oh, and as for changing the alignment, it's wrong and it looks terrible on everyone who does it.

Anonymous. Before you condem try. As well as already written Sway on step two hold for three will give a shape before a person arrives ready for the Oversway.This is nothing new , its an old trick. But is best from a lowered position.

Don, are you totally unable to comprehend the English language?

Of course the oversway works better from a lowered position. Which is why the official technique requires that you enter it from such a position. Which is why the official technique does not preface the ovesway with a closed telemark, but instead with an abbreviated telemark that does not use rise and fall.

It's not your dancing that is bad, it's your reading.

Anonymous. You hit the nail right on the head when you mentioned a kind of Telemark into an Oversway in the Tango. As we all know the whole of that move is totaly flat. So do the same in the Waltz.

Yichen. You are aware of how a lady moves out of the Fan position. You draw your RF to the LF on beat two and switch to the LF and step out on three. Change the timing to (and one). Do the same action but this time square and moving sideways again to the count of and one. There you have the same action for a Chasse as you do in the Fan. Do you understand this, that the action in both is identical except in the Fan where the heel lowers on two. But the exagerated movement of the hips are there on a Chasse. Paul Kilick does exactly the same Chasse in his Rumba on my disk.