sorry, that got cut off, look for something like 'bracing of the legs' in the books discussion of rise and fall between the various dances.

This difference becomes obvious as the body moves onto the receiving foot - which is to say, long before the end of the step.

Hi Quickstep
I'm not quite sure of the point of this discussion. However, to comment on some things:
1)PLEASE don't take Alex Moore's book as the 'bible' (I mean no disrespect at all to christians here). It was never meant to cover advanced dancing techniques. It could not possibly do this anyway. It is a good start with good basics
Just 1 example - Look at the waltz natural turn - that is not how advanced dancers do it.
I keep Alex Moore's book at the side of the bed (i know - sad, isn't it? ) but i rely on my coach to tell me the real story.
2) Leg and foot action allows the body to move and achieve the flight required for the different dances. Slow waltz is an undulating, turning dance. Foxtrot is a more linear, free flowing dance. The body flight characteristics are different. THis MUST be reflected in the leg and foot action - probably in subtle ways of course.
If i do an exact waltz step 1 in my foxtrot, the lead in to step 2 will be a waltz lead-in, and eventually, my foxtrot will look like a waltz.
Maybe the way the heel strikes the floor on step 1 is similar, but a lot else must be different
3)I thought on waltz step 2 we "continue to rise" and we're up on 3. In foxtrot we rise on 2 and stay up on 3 (feather step this is). Maybe i'm wrong, i'll check
4) If you go from a change step into a natural turn in waltz, you're starting the natural turn from a closed feet position. THere is no corresponding position for the foxtrot. So there must be a difference in this first step.

But what is all this about?? What's the hidden agenda here?

Phil. The arguement as usual got way off from how it started. I quoted from the Technique book that there is no difference between a step in the Waltz and a step in the Foxtrot. And I wrote that a p turned upside down is a d. In the book there is not a different technique for the actuall steps.
This is where the difference lays, It is what happens after the foot is in place , if this is a Waltz on the and count between the two beats. The way the moving foot is brought under the body in both dances. I'll say again the way the moving foot is placed into a balanced position under the body. This I was told. A step is just a step. It is inbetween the steps where we dance. After the step is taken whether we bend the knee more or less has nothing to do with it. It becomes a different story. If you were asked from a feet together position to take one driving step forward. Would you ask is this a Waltz a Foxtrot or a Quickstep because I need to do each one differently. But to go back to the beginning. There is no visible difference on the prep step and the first or second or the step into the Reverse Turn in the Foxtrot for the lady who is extending to the toe which then becomes a ball. The third step has CBMP. Who would like to say that those steps do not all have the same technique.

"Phil. The arguement as usual got way off from how it started. I quoted from the Technique book that there is no difference between a step in the Waltz and a step in the Foxtrot."

You did not such thing - THE BOOK DOES NOT SAY THAT, because it is NOT TRUE.

You made that silly idea up all by yourself, and if you hadn't notices EVERYONE is finding fault with it.

"In the book there is not a different technique for the actuall steps."

Yes there is. See the comment that mentions something like the 'bracing of the legs' being applicable to some dances/figures and not to others. This occurs well within the period of step one, as it occurs while the body is moving towards the foot, long before the feet close.

"This is where the difference lays, It is what happens after the foot is in place , if this is a Waltz on the and count between the two beats."

Sneaky... trying to shift it to beats rather then steps, when we already established that STEP ONE IS NOT THE SAME AS BEAT ONE. The difference is downright obvious well before the ends of STEP one. On a skill dancer, it can be felt even early than that - probably before the strike of beat one.

"This I was told. A step is just a step. "

People usually oversimplify when talking to beginners...

"If you were asked from a feet together position to take one driving step forward. Would you ask is this a Waltz a Foxtrot or a Quickstep because I need to do each one differently."

Yes, I would, if I expected that the correct details were desired. There no such thing as a standard driving forwards step, it is entirely DEPENDENT ON THE CONTEXT OF ITS APPLICATION.

"But to go back to the beginning. There is no visible difference on the prep step and the first or second or the step into the Reverse Turn in the Foxtrot for the lady who is extending to the toe which then becomes a ball."

There had better be a difference!

(But if you don't LEAD THE DIFFERENCE, what's she supposed to do, make assumptions based on the music?)

"The third step has CBMP. Who would like to say that those steps do not all have the same technique."

Of course they do not, THEY ARE DIFFERENT STEPS, EACH WITH ITS OWN TECHNIQUE!

Maybe you can enlighten me. Exactly what is the dfference between the prep step and the first of the Feather. Apart from that one is a LF and the other a RF

"Maybe you can enlighten me. Exactly what is the dfference between the prep step and the first of the Feather. Apart from that one is a LF and the other a RF"

Think about it for a minute: the prep step is basically a step 3 action, though begun halfway through so it's usually danced as onto a flat foot (ie, slightly a heel) rather than a toe lead.

The prep step is basically a shallow downswing. The first step of the feather containes the bottom of the swing, and the all critical get-it-going-up-gain.

They have extremely differnet roles, and so on a dancer who understands the overall flow of the dance, they will be noticeably different.

Hey quickstep, could you explain how YOU define a step? And explain why do you think a heel lead should be the same for all the dances? And do us all a favor okay? Try not to quote Alex M when you do. Try defining it yourself for a change.

Seems to me that you wrote a lot of words down on this thread, but you didn't really say or explain anything.

You know, CLAIMING something without backing it up with a clear and logical explanation is simply bad form here on the Internet. And simply quoting somebody (such as a well-known name) to give credence to your argument without elaborating on why it was said (commonly known as parroting or weaseling) is even worse IMO.

I'm trying to understand this thread and understand why you think the heel step is the same. But I can't seem to.

IMO if you want to be listened to and believed, especially on advanced dance topics like this, you'll have to back it up at least with SOME reasonable, coherent, and well-thought of content. Otherwise, IMO, you end up looking like a common dilettante, and that's not what you want us to think, is it?

I would not attempt to rewrite a book that has stood for so many years.
What I try to do on one step forward. Is more what I try not to do. I try to go to the end of the step before I turn. My moving foot will come into a balanced position under my own hip line. I am trying not to turn into my step. I try not to turn my foot into the step. I try very hard to use the whole of both feet. Going backwards I try to keep my weight over my standing foot by flexing the knee and extending as far back as I am able before I shift my body backwards. I practise lowering my heel to the floor only as my moving foot comes under the body. Thats enough. All of this you will find is the same as the book and the diagrams in the book.
One clue that might help us to understand. There is very little difference between 1 2 3 of a Natural Turn in the Waltz and the S Q Q of a Feather Step. In fact the Feather step was more than likely to have been taken from the Waltz and just let the foot pass. If you think of it that way I could start moving and after the first step you could call out Waltz or Foxtrot and I could turn it into either. Do you finally get the message.
That's given you something to think about hasn't it.

"Do you finally get the message.
That's given you something to think about hasn't it."


NOPE. Doesn't give me anything new. Your understanding of dance is where I was ten years ago. Like you, I was very proud and persistent about what I (so obvious to my teachers) misunderstood. I too, took AM's book literally. What's worse (and like you), I was very arrogant about what I THOUGHT I knew.

The hardest skill in ballroom dance is to LISTEN. LISTEN. LISTEN. You need to open your mind to other ideas, because there are others out here who understand it better than you do. What's worse is they can see how little you truly understand. One day, you'll eat humble pie. Believe me I know, because I went through the same thing you're going through. Until then, sadly, you'll never make anything of your dance.

Thank you for replying, but I'm standing down from this discussion. IMO it is pointless to further discuss such matters with such a closed mind.

"The hardest skill in ballroom dance is to LISTEN. LISTEN. LISTEN. You need to open your mind to other ideas, because there are others out here who understand it better than you do. What's worse is they can see how little you truly understand. One day, you'll eat humble pie. Believe me I know, because I went through the same thing you're going through. Until then, sadly, you'll never make anything of your dance."

Yes, confused, that's pretty much the size of it.

Consider this gem from Quickstep for example:

"If you think of it that way I could start moving and after the first step you could call out Waltz or Foxtrot and I could turn it into either."

Sure - one could force a difference that late. But a DANCER would never accept this as a general practice.

The more advanced the dancer, is, the more subtle nuances they will incorporate earlier in the action. This both telegraphs their intent for the benefit of the partner, and also already adapts their own movement to their goals in terms of nature of the dance an musicality.

To a beginner A and B might be identical, but to a more advanced dancer while A and B have some strong similarities, they are very different things.

For a beginner such as quickstep to try to argue that the two are the same, based on his lack of understanding of their differences, is a STRATEGICALLY LOSING PROPOSITON. He can't win, because his argument is based not in his knowledge, but in his ignorance. All someone has to do is point out something he's been unaware of (which happens around here a few times a day) and the whole thing crumbles.