" Going from a heel to a heel lead. The heel of the passing foot will be past the toe of the standing foot before the heel of the sanding foot leaves the floor.
As it is written. Quote page 9. As the RF passes the toe of the LF."

First off, you've MISQUOTED YET AGAIN. The actual word is "as", IT DOES NOT SAY "BEFORE" at all!!!

Second, you didn't pay any attention to my comment of yesterday. To refresh your memory, here is what is said:

"Going from HT towards HT, with zero rise and fall and at a medium altitude - in other words, doing the walk written in the book, the HEEL WILL RISE EXACTLY AS THE FEET PASS."

In other words, I already pointed out the the SPECIFIC SITUATON DESCRIBED IN THE BOOK will have - ready for this - precisly the action described in the book. Imagine that!

But there are OTHER SITUATIONS WHICH HAVE DIFFERENT DETAILS - again from the same post which you completely misread:

Going from a TH towards a H, the standing heel WILL NOT RISE UNTIL *AFTER* the feet pass.

Going from a HT towards a T, the standing heel will RISE BEFORE THE FEET PASS.

And - the one that's going to really confuse you as you still don't understand the geometry: Going from a Heel to a HT, at a lowered altittude (such as between a feather and a three step), the standing heel will stay down UNTIL AFTER the feet have passed. Because the body will be much lower than in the walking exercise, the standing foot must stay flat longer - pick up the heel earlier, and you will not be making full use of the foot. As you well know the rise in this situaion does not begin until the second heel lead step.

"The way you have written going from a HT to a T you are incorrectly rising on the step and not the end of the step."

No, I am doing it properly, AS SPECIFICALLY INSTRUCTED _IN PERSON_ BY ONE OF THE VERY TEACHERS YOU LOVE TO MISQUOTE. Someone you have obviously never actually talked or danced with, or your wouldn't be so horribly misrepresenting his teaching.

"To sum up. Two of your comments are as I have been trying to instill into you from way back."

No, my comment is an accurate restatment of the book, while yours is a prejudiced misquote - you can't resist chaning "as" to "before" to try to back up your wrong ideas.,

"In your last paragraph you are lifting your heel from the floor too early. Stay on the standing leg longer. The foot has past."

I am staying on my standing leg long after this - what is happening is that I am picking up my heel at the proper time to CREATE AN UPSWING ACTION USING THE STANDING LEG. I didn't make this up... the basic idea of it is in the book, and it's a major point in the private lesson offerings of a number of the world's most sought after teachers. Fail to do it, and your error will be pointed out.

"There is no need to change the action of the step"

I'm not changing anyting - I am dancing the proper and unique footwork for EACH UNIQUE SITUATION. It is by trying to force fit one uniform way to every situation that you whitewash the true characteristics of the dance and change them into a bland nothing.

At the end of the step. Not half way through or at the beginning the supporting heel will leave the floor .
Rise at the end of step one. Not when the moving foot is level. But as it passes the toe of the supporting foot the heel will begin to rise.I think I will end this discussion. You just have not the experience to understand. I have asked for quotes repeatedly and got none at all. Not one that I can remember. No where will you find anything that even slightly suggests that the weight is imbalanced and that we fall onto the following step. This includes the lady according to your writting. Absolute rubbish.
Signing off

"At the end of the step. Not half way through or at the beginning the supporting heel will leave the floor ."

Depending on the NATURE OF THE SPECIFIC STEP BEING PERFORMED, it MAY NEED TO HAPPEN EARLIER OR LATER.

One again, you IGNORE THE OBVIOUS DIFFERENCES BETWEEN VARIOUS TYPES OF STEPS.

"Rise at the end of step one."

In general terms. But to commence the rise at the end of step one, the heel will need to be lifting slightly before the end. This is what creates upswing, as you would well know if you bothered to study with teachers having any real expertise.

"You just have not the experience to understand."

Unlike you, I seek out the best teachers alive anywhere in the world, and then spend entire lessons discussion specifics such as these. Wheras you are content to misread your book. You've never actually discussed any of this in person with any of the leading teachers... wheras I do so regularly.

"Absolute rubbish."

If that's how you choose to characterize the teaching of the Blackpool champions who are training the current champions, well... best you find a new hobby...

Excuse me. Unlike you I seek out the best teachers alive anywhere in the world. Are you suggesting I dig up the dead. I think this needs rewording.
The heel of the supporting will not be lifted untill the heel of the moving foot is passing the toe of the standing foot. Even then the action is of a foot rolling from the heel to the toe. Not a sudden rise . Stay on the standing foot longer.
Does anyone do as the new book suggests. That is supporting yourself with one hand touching a wall for balance.
Extend the RF to the heel at your own maximum pace. The rear foot is to the toe or the ball of the foot.
You are now suspended between the two feet. Simply send your weight forward lowering the front foot to the floor and arrive with the moving foot under the body, this is called neutral or a balance point.
From there send the LF forward untill it is level with the toe of the standing foot which is the RF. As it passes lift the heel of the standing foot by rolling onto the ball of the foot. Not too early Keep your body upright.
If you do as above you are well within the covers of the Technique books. Just do it and find out for yourself this perfectly natural movement.

"Excuse me. Unlike you I seek out the best teachers alive anywhere in the world. Are you suggesting I dig up the dead. I think this needs rewording."

The meaning is obvious - while you are content with pre-canned "knowledge" - and persist in grossly misunderstanding, I WILL NOT SETTLE FOR ANYTHING LESS THAN ASKING THESE VERY QUESTIONS OF THE WORLDS BEST TEACHERS _IN PERSON_. Yes, I study the books - but not in isolation. Rather, I study them in the context of discussing these issues with the most univerasally respect authorities available in the world today. And after each batch of lessons, I come home and consider what I've learned in the context of the book. Are there any conflicts? Quite rarely - usually the "surprisung" or "unconventional" points of the lessons simply turn out to be areas of technique in which which the book is COMMONLY MISUNDERSTOOD - once you've been exposed to the correct method by an expert, the book makes so much more sense and all those old misconceptions and misreadings go out the window. Or they would, if they weren't persisting here...

"The heel of the supporting will not be lifted untill the heel of the moving foot is passing the toe of the standing foot."

In many cases, it actually will need to be rising earlier than that. That is direct from one of the most respected teachers in the world today, someone you yourself respect enough to frequently misattribute some of your outrageously distorted ideas to.

So go ahead and deny it if you want - all you prove is that YOU HAVE NEVER BEEN EXPOSED TO SERIOUS BALLROOM TRAINING. There's a cadre of these champion teachers, and all serious competitors, regardless where they are from, work with them - because they reliably put in so many of the critical details that everyone else ignores, or covers only inconsistently at best.

"Even then the action is of a foot rolling from the heel to the toe. Not a sudden rise ."

Nobody said anything about a sudden rise, in fact, making the rise more gradual is one of the key resons why the heel rises earlier in those cases - it's the first action of the rise. If it were later, all the actions would have to occur at the same time and the rise would be too abrupt.

"Stay on the standing foot longer."

That's exactly what this is an example of - staying on AND FULLY USING the standing foot. There's a heck of a lot more dancing still to be done after this point before you should be putting any thought into switching to the moving foot.

"You are now suspended between the two feet. Simply send your weight forward"

You had better already be sending your body center forward long before your moving foot has even finished moving. During that time the PRESSURE of your weight will indeed be on the STANDING FOOT ONLY, but the POSITION OF THE BODY WILL HAVE TRAVELED FAR BEYOND THE STANDING FOOT.

The position of the mass is NOT the same thing as the position of the weight pressure - the pressure of the weight can and often does remain in the standing foot long after the body is NO LONGER OVER THE STANDING FOOT.

If as you say The heel is up as the feet are passing. Nobody ever taught you to do that. From there you would fall onto the next step. Stay on the supporting leg longer and only rise as it is passing the toe. There is absolutely no benifit in going to an imbalanced position and falling onto the next step. Why. It won't make you travell any further It will actually shorten what should be the driving step. The drive must come from a compressed knee which has stored energy. The more the compression the more energy there is to use. The more drive there is at your disposal
If there is anything in the above that doesn't comply with the correct technique then I would stand corrected. I think I had better sit down.

"If as you say The heel is up as the feet are passing."

In some situations.

"Nobody ever taught you to do that."

And how can you know that? You werent' in the lesson where one of the very people you love to misquote TAUGHT ME TO DO EXACTLY THAT. And I'm by no menas unique in having gotten that lesson.

You really don't know what your are talking about. You sit there in the middle of nowhere with your treasured bible, but you've never gone out and ACTUALLY DISCUSSED IT WITH AN EXPERT TEACHER.

I have.

"From there you would fall onto the next step."

No, from there I rise and project towards the next step.

"Stay on the supporting leg longer"

I AM STAYING ON THE SUPPORTING LEG *LONGER THAN YOU ARE*. What I am not doing is staying OVER IT - because unlike you, my body moves smoothly without the starts and stops that you advocate.

"There is absolutely no benifit in going to an imbalanced position and falling onto the next step."

It's pretty much a requirement to move smoothly, and essentially all dancers do it on the majority of their steps. But you do not have the analytical ability to see this, because you insist on viewing dancing through a very distorted set of preconceptions.

"The drive must come from a compressed knee which has stored energy."

It is a physical fact that a compressed knee cannot store energy for such a long perod of time. During a very quick bounce action, maybe, but your muscles are not really springs over the length of time involved here. All of the energy you put into the knee will escape as heat.

"If there is anything in the above that doesn't comply with the correct technique then I would stand corrected."

You already are, over and over an over again, but you don't have the ability to realize it.

Surely you are not inferring that to come into a balanced position is a stop start type of action. You had better take that up with John Wood.
Commpressed knees. Where do you get your ideas from. If I bend to a squat position with the knees bent. I can stay there as long as I wish and then spring into the air. I will not loose the energy stored in my bent legs. I think we used to call them Frog Leaps.

"Surely you are not inferring that to come into a balanced position is a stop start type of action."

Not if you pass through it without stopping.

But if you try to STAY in balance, you can only do that BY STOPPING THE PROGRESS OF YOUR BODY until such time as your moving foot has stopped moving and is ready to receive your weight.

Remaining in balance requires that your body move in a start-stop fashion.

If you try to move your body with a more ordinary degree of smooth continuity, you will be passing through quite brief periods of balance, with long phases of IMBALANCE IN BETWEEN THEM.

"If I bend to a squat position with the knees bent. I can stay there as long as I wish and then spring into the air. I will not loose the energy stored in my bent legs."'

There is no energy storage involved in that! You have taken your original energy and surrendered it as heat. Your new rise comes from the metabolism of your wheatabix or whatever you had for breakfast. Only in a very quick "bounce" type of action can your muscles (and the floor under your feet) function as springs to actually store energy from compression to rexetension. There aren't any tissues in the body that form real springs which can store energy for more than the briefest fraction of a second.

Anonymous. It is worth looking at this one once again. From the way you have written it seems you are forgetting that the body is moving. The feet could be still but the sides can rotate and of course we have rise and fall. This covers the part which we call a balanced position which is as we come into a neutral position, lower and our sides changing from one line to another. Try the end of the third step of the Feather as we lower counting 4 and. That is one of your balance points.