"I don't think so. If you were looking at the tape I have been looking at both the man and lady have a complete arch in the back. The lady more than the man. This is done over three different dances not only to music, but with two slow teaching counts on each different dance."

Again, you are mistaking the visual effect for the actual body position used to create it.

If I were to say the dancer is on the same arc as if he was on a giant excercise ball.The lady even more so. If the arc created was to continue it would eventually come back to where it started. That won't happen if the body is verticle. It will go straight up.
Again this is the only time the man will arch his back or is allowed to. Not so the lady.

"If I were to say the dancer is on the same arc as if he was on a giant excercise ball.The lady even more so. If the arc created was to continue it would eventually come back to where it started. That won't happen if the body is verticle. It will go straight up.
Again this is the only time the man will arch his back or is allowed to. Not so the lady."

And that is precisely the BEGINNER-LEVEL mistake in your understanding.

It is not actually an arch when done right. It is mostly a leg position and a slight twist.

It looks like an arch to the untrained eye, but that is NOT how it is CREATED.

Do you have beginners trying to do a Throwaway Oversway. Haven't you got a restricted sylabus where you dance. If you are a none competitor you can do as you please. But in the lower grades as a competitor . A beginner and a Throwaway Please.

"Do you have beginners trying to do a Throwaway Oversway. Haven't you got a restricted sylabus where you dance. If you are a none competitor you can do as you please. But in the lower grades as a competitor . A beginner and a Throwaway Please."

You seem to completely misunderstand.

Someone attempting to arch their back in a throwoway clearly has no more than a beginner-level understanding of dance technique.

Some impressive performers may fall into that categery, but all this shows is that their physical capability (youth, strenth, etc) can temporarily trump their lack of knowledge.

Remember when you see back arch, one of two things is happening:

- you are seeing a poorly trained couple

- you are a poorly trained observer, mistakenly interpreting something else that might look like back arch, but actually is more a position of legs, hips, and a slight back twist.

Isn't it strange that Harry -Smith Hampshire in writting uses the word Arc in the Throwaway Oversway. So I will in future use the word Arc instead of Arch.

"Isn't it strange that Harry -Smith Hampshire in writting uses the word Arc in the Throwaway Oversway. So I will in future use the word Arc instead of Arch."

Use whatever word you like.

You will still be WRONG if you think that it exists in the BACK.

What is being described is a shape of the OVERALL BODY. Which does indeed appear as an arch. But if you carefully study a truly expert dancer, you will find a STRAIGHT LINE from pelvis to sternum or higher. It's an OVERALL arch, approximated by STRAIGHT LINES - one in the back, on in the upper leg, one in the lower leg, etc.

In plain English. If you draw the shape both male and female in pencil on paper will there be an arc . Or will the line of the bodies go straight up verticly. Which is it.

"In plain English. If you draw the shape both male and female in pencil on paper will there be an arc . Or will the line of the bodies go straight up verticly. Which is it."

As was already posted: the overall body shape appears as an arc, but it is made up of STRAIGHT LINE segments.

There is no arch of the actual back on a skilled dancer, instead the shape is created between body parts.