Have any of you thought about the possibility that Quickstep is a handycapped person who cannot dance himself, but studies books and videos and dream about dancing himself? I have this strange mental image of a man on a wheelchair who writes the stuff that he writes here. I did not mean any offence to any handycapped people. And I know there are wonderful wheelchair dancers, even though it is not same with the ballroom dance we know of.

I hadn't thought about the wheelchair concept, but definitely quesion the talent and intelligence of someone who clearly spends more time reading about dancing than actually doing it (also doesn't seem to be going anywhere with all this). I suspect if he were getting good advice from talented professionals he wouldn't have so much time to chit-chat! (As John Wood would say, "so you see we have an awful lot of work to do!") Somebody needs a good coach!

According to the book. The difference between a Walk in the Quickstep. The step will be slightly shorter than in the Foxtrot owing to the quicker music.For the same reason the knees will not relax quite so much as in the slower tempo. I wont give what page that is on Because you have a reading problem.
In the Waltz it must be understood that a complete circle in six steps is never danced the construction being based on diagnal lines which require only 3/8ths of a turn on each THREE Steps. So then if we are an intelligent person we will then find out if the very first step is straight to the end of. What does the written words say and the charts show. Maybe you would like to tell Alex.
Answere Please. What is there that differs to anything that I have copied and written.
Now let us hear the usuall abuse when you are beaten for an answere.
You haven' t fallen in yet have you. I'll explain. You or anybody can play two world champions chess at the same time and either win one and lose one or draw both.You will not lose two. All you would do is duplicate the moves. The two champions are playing each other. I just sit in the middle. Which I have done with you most of the time. You have been arguing with Alex Moore for weeks and weeks without knowing it. What I have given you is most of the time word for word is from the technique book.
I am still waiting for details of the book or books which you in your infinite wisdom believe say anything different to what I have written. I'm sure Alex if were possible would like to hear also.
P.S. Are you still teaching that the left shoulder leads into the first step of a Reverse Turn Foxtrot and that on the second step you are backing diagnal to the wall. Your a fool.

Quickstep. You're still not listening. What people are trying to tell you is that there is a whole technique OUTSIDE what Alex Moore wrote down THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW ABOUT OR ARE UNAWARE OF. And that technique outside the book does not contradict and in fact supports AMoore.

In simpler words: do you realize there's technique beyond what Alex Moore wrote?

Please give detailes of the book or persons you are quoting from. Let us have the technique beyond what Alex Moore wrote. I will save you the trouble of answering. You will find nothing that contradics that Technique book. That first step goes straight to its end before it changes. Before it turns , commences to rise, or goes straight on rising at the end of. I don't think there is much else a person can do. We only have two legs and three or four beats of music in a one bar.
I think I wrote before that some teachers have been known to get a couple to do a Foxtrot to a Waltz music. I wonder why. Could it be they are proving a point.

"According to the book. The difference between a Walk in the Quickstep. The step will be slightly shorter than in the Foxtrot owing to the quicker music.For the same reason the knees will not relax quite so much as in the slower tempo. I wont give what page that is on Because you have a reading problem."

That's one of the more obvious differences, yes. But if you really understood the dancing that is described in your book, you'd understand that it's only the start of the difference between the way a step is taken for these two different purposes.

"In the Waltz it must be understood that a complete circle in six steps is never danced the construction being based on diagnal lines which require only 3/8ths of a turn on each THREE Steps. So then if we are an intelligent person we will then find out if the very first step is straight to the end of. What does the written words say and the charts show."

You apparently haven't noticed, but no one is disagreeing with you about the step needing to be straight. The differences we are talking about are mostly in the vertical plane. I'm sure things are slightly different in the horinzatonal too (don't forget that there is plenty of rotation during step one, even as the direction of movement remains unchanged), but nobody here has yet chosen to argue for a difference in how this should be done, so there's no need for you to keep refuting an argument that simply hasn't been made.

"You have been arguing with Alex Moore for weeks and weeks without knowing it."

No, in fact what I have been trying to do is to explain to you what that book you love to misquote actually says, and what it means when you understand not just the individual words, but their combined effect.

"What I have given you is most of the time word for word is from the technique book."

Sometimes, but quite often divorced from the context about which it was written. I can take the book and a pair of scissors and construct any quote I want... you've come pretty close to that with your random selection of out of context quotes.

"Are you still teaching that the left shoulder leads into the first step of a Reverse Turn Foxtrot"

Am I trying to do it? You bet. You think I'm going to argue with the Blackpool champ who put me onto that idea? I sure don't.

That left side lead thing is so old. It would be some ten years ago that some twit of a teacher tried to teach me that. If that is right I said .I must have a right shoulder leading into Natural. We fell out very quickly.

"That left side lead thing is so old. It would be some ten years ago that some twit of a teacher tried to teach me that."

Sounds like you are tempted to call one of the world's most sought after ballroom teachers a "twit". You have to learn to react better to ideas that are beyond your present ability - it may not be for you now, but it's something for the future.

"If that is right I said .I must have a right shoulder leading into Natural. We fell out very quickly."

FATALLY FLAWED LOGIC. There are many ways in which the natural and reverse turns are NOT mirror images of each other!

QUICKSTEP:

HERE'S WHAT GUEST WROTE:
"And that technique outside the book does NOT contradict and in fact supports AMoore. "


TO THAT, YOU(QUICKSTEP) ANSWERED WITH:
"I will save you the trouble of answering. You will find nothing that contradics that Technique book."

NOW: TELL US THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE TWO.

NONE. NADA, ZILCH, NOTHING, NYET. POOF.



You're so busy showing you know so much (also known as SHOWING-OFF), you're not EVEN READING what you're replying to.

READ AND UNDERSTAND. READ AND UNDERSTAND. READ AND UNDERSTAND.

COME ON DUDE!

CHILL ALREADY.

In one sentence you write. And the technique outside the book does not contradict and in fact supports Alex Moore.
In the very next sentence you write In simpler words. Do you realize theres technique beyond what Alex Moore wrote.
Considering we are disccusing one half of one complete step and it clearly states at the end off that one half of one step where any differences occure. Why dont you simply say either he was correct or he wasn't.
Verticle is straight up and down. Horizontal is parallel to the plane of the horizon.
Your paragraph four it appears that the horizontal plane of the three steps in the three dances is the same when you write I'm sure things are slightly different on the horizontal plane. What is being discussed is the horizontal plane of those three steps in the three dances. Not your insane belief that the body is travelling in front of the front foot and we are going to fall onto the next steps.. Food for thought. What happens . What is our natural reaction when if our foot hits an imoveable object on the ground and we trip. Without thinking or foot goes out at twice the speed the body is moving. It is unnatural for the body to go ahead of the feet or foot. Our feet with this inbuilt reaction will not allow it.