You're welcome.

Incidentally, how old are you?

jj

Old enough to have very quickly got the measure of you !

By whining like a baby that you don't want me to "correspond" with you on this message board? You really stuck with that position, didn't you?

Please show me in which post you "got the measure of me". And by the way, the expression is "take the measure" of someone.

Have you found those manuals that define foot rise in degrees of angles yet?

Have you ever shown enough class to thank some of the people on this board - including myself - who answered the questions that you kept repeating?

You claim to be a successful amateur dancer. Successful at what? Do you have an amateur partner? I ask because someone with dancing experience would never pose the kind of questions that you have.

As I told you in a previous post, grow up.

jj

jj

i posed a question about the relative maximum rise in F vs W. i think this is a reasonable question given the potentially confusing terminology used in the technique books and the vaguaries of the english language.

you posted an answer which was in line with my understanding of the standardised technique.

someone else pointed to evidence of another technique (different from the one you originally referred to) now being used in practice. my original question did not really embrace that issue, but in response to that poster i agreed that this was the case.

at that point you re-entered the fray disputing our interpretation of that evidence.

you subsequently accepted that interpretation and went on to talk abut the rise and fall issue in terms of the alternative technique, but proceeded to insult me by telling me i must be incompetent not to have understood the basic principles you were by this time referring to (this aggressive response when challenged with an alternative view was when i got the measure of you).

when i objected to the manner of your response, i was further insulted, and accused of being immature and thin-skinned.

you tiresomely point out more spelling mistakes, you really can't help yourself can you.

then you expect me to thank you for it.

and - yes - there are no manuals which specify foot rise in any quantitative way - believe it or not i do realise that !

you have an unfortunate manner, at least on the web. there was a recent tango thread in which you were so rude to someone it was unbelievable. are you the same in real life ? i would expect that if you were you must have real problems. if you get away with it is probably because people are too exasperated to respond. perhaps it explains why you seem to spend so much time on this web-site.

perhaps your manner also explains why so few people seem to contribute to the technical threads on this site. it would be nice to find a site in which technical issues can be thoroughly aired without fear of being ridiculed or insulted. sadly, thanks to you probably, this site is not it.

as for maintaining my position, yes as i said before, do NOT correspond with me again.

Your characterization of those exchanges is inaccurate and dishonest.

You conveniently omitted your obnoxious repetition of requests for precise angles in foot rise and your refusal to acknowledge honest responses which explained why such a question reflects a misplaced focus.

The same folks seem to be posting here that were posting when I first joined the boards.

Yes, when someone gets in my face, I push back. Ialso have very little tolerance for nonsense.

I'll respond to your posts when I feel like it. Chances are that I'll ignore most of them because you really have nothing to contribute.

I notice that you failed to respond with details about your "successful" amateur career.

jj

You are clearly deranged.

I do not believe that close scrutiny of foot rise (through angles or whatever else) represents a misplaced focus.

I think I asked twice for details of foot rise. Once the question was posed to Polished and again to invite a more general response. Hardly repititious and no reasonable person could consider it obnoxious, even if they thought it irrelevant (and yes depending on your technical preference it might be irrelevant).

The same folks might be posting as when you started. But have you ever considered why there are relatively few newcomers ?

Telling me I have nothing to contribute just shows how up-yourself you really are. I doubt however I will contribute to the forum - the reason being I do not relish the atmosphere you create on it.


I have not given you more details of my background - because that is my personal business.


You are not the only one that can push back ! But some of us do it because we believe in good standards of behaviour not just out of vanity and conceitedness.

Interested. There are some people who cannot help themselves from giving personal remarks. Be like me and ignore it. Any sensible person reading are aware of how rude some of the remarks can be. They are not going to write in and say so but they do realize I'm sure. Keep writing your questions and theories I know there are many out there who will listen to you . They might even comment if you appear to get insulted. Keep Writing.
There is a saying. If you are going to live among wolves. First you must learn to howl like one. I prefere not to.

I wonder if there was already a discussion on Ballroom Dancing in the Olympics. My take on that is: If ballet isn't in the olympics, why should ballroom dancing be?

jj. Thanks for the reply re. Kim. But I don't think that's it: Julian's partner in the scenes you mentioned was Melissa Dexter, who plays herself. The plot thickens ...

There is no such thing as competitive ballet, or ballet-sport.

It's not a reasonable comparison.

"There is no such thing as competitive ballet, or ballet-sport."

You're right, of course. But that was precisely my point. Even if there may be, e.g., piano competitions or band competitions, all of which may have a sporting aspect, I don't think any of them has ever been seriously considered as a potential olympic sport.

Surely you'll agree that fitness plays a great part in all these activities, just as in ballroom dancing. I believe, however, that this is in the service of artistry. Do we really need the kind of "excitement" (read 'hype') and popular appeal that the olympics or other such sporting events bring? Do we really need the Reverse Wave to develop into the Quad Reverse Wave just to please the judges and the crowd?