"Because of the timing in the waltz the rise is gradual . Again because of the timing in the foxtrot there is a quick rise at the end of the first step."

Someone watching quality foxtrot would not be inclined to agree that there s a quick rise at any point in a figure such as a feather step. Instead, this idea comes from a quirk of how the technique books explain the rise.

The key concept to understand is that the books mostly give attention to the component of rise that comes from the feet. In contrast, in foxtrot, the actual change in body altitude is quite gradual and comes about more from the position of the legs apart or together than from rise in the feet.

It's true that in foxtrot we get our foot rise at the end of one and officially no more after that, but the real peak of altitude comes only gradually as we get to the end of step two where our feet are together over fairly straight legs. We then start losing altitude as we head into step three, though we don't officially loose our foot rise until late in step three.

Another thing to realize about waltz rise is that notation of the rise continuing on two AND three results in part from the definition of where step 2 end and step 3 begins. when a step is followed by a closing step, the step is defined to end with the feet halfway closed, so the second half of the closing action and any rise that occurs during it are part of step three. If we instead dance a passing action, the entire closing and its rise would be contained in step 2.

I'm not sure I quite agree that the rise of a passing waltz figure will be the same as that of a foxtrot figure. Instead, I would say it is somewhat between that of a closing waltz figure and that of a foxtrot figure. In simplified form the action is comparable to foxtrot and without that steep upswing continuation of rise to stop us over closed feet, but the music and interpretation are still waltz, and the flavor of rise should reflect that to a degree.

janusz, for how many years have you been dancing Standard?

jj

Astair. Your answer is clear and easy to understand and gives all that is necessary to understand the rise in both Foxtrot and Waltz. If you freeze frame as the feet are together or about to pass you wouldn't know if you are watching a Waltz or a Foxtrot. The height of the heel from the floor is identical.
Also when the feet are together our body is lined over our feet which are under our verticle centre. Our shoulders and hips are lined up over our feet. It wouldn't matter whether you are on your toes or not. Any argument with that tell former British Champion John Wood.
In the Foxtrot is the rise quicker than the Waltz. Yes.
A step in the case of a walk forward or backward for instance, the time value of the step is not complete untill the moving foot is drawn up to to foot that is supporting the weight.
Alex Moore page 34

The technical advice posted on this question is accurate, but if anyone ever has to simplify it for someone just beginning, it seems that a good answer is to remember that a Waltz is a 1-2-3 in 3/3 timing, which makes the rise on 2 and 3 last longer than it would on the QQ end of a Fox Trot's 4/4 of SSQQ.
To make the Fox Trot truly glide, you really have to be moving right into the first S after QQ. To me, it sometimes feels like almost one motion. So the toe-toe part of heel-toe, heel-toe, toe-toe sequence happens fairly quickly.
And now that I've read this over, it seems more complicated than the other posts!

3 / 3 Timing ?????????

Dheun: ". So the toe-toe part of heel-toe, heel-toe, toe-toe sequence happens fairly quickly" What heel-toe,heal-toe, are you taking a preperation step?

Assuming that we're discussing a Feather, the first slow could be the last step of the previous figure.



jj

Doh! Thanks for catching the typo, Terence. Of course, it is 3/4 timing on the waltz. I can see by your series of question marks that I really had you baffled on that one!
The heel-toe, heel-toe, toe-toe is how I was taught the American Standard Fox Trot years ago and how my current instructor teaches it now. That really hasn't changed around here.
In the first class, they teach it forward, forward, side, together. Or slow, slow, quick, quick, or heel-toe, heel-toe, toe-toe... whichever clicks in with the student, I guess.
I like the heel-toe, heel-toe, toe-toe concept because it keeps the dancers more on the balls of their feet, as compared to kind of plodding or chopping through the steps. Again, I'm talking about beginners here, as it appeared the original poster might have been asking the question about the rise and fall for their own knowledge, but also to maybe be able to explain it to someone new?

You,re welcome... i was an examiner in Amer.style for many yrs.. the f/work you quote is incorrect.

If dancing the prog basic ( Fwd, Fwd, side, together )..taught initially with NO turn, which by the way never made sense.. but..( A/m got rich on it !)

The F/w basic, SSQQ should be.... H,...H,... I/E Ball/Whole foot..Whole foot .

If a prog. basic in SQQ rhythm.. H/T ...T ,... T/ H . What was odd..in Bronze , they taught it L.I.L. ! .

I have not seen a recent ( past 5/6yrs )techn. book from either chain, so maybe revisions have been made . There were some really bad figure "construction " in yrs past ( late fifties ), when I started working for them . I coached in many cities,for A/M and the standard was really poor, by and large .

Kimmins was the first to make an impact on technical development, and dance re construction .

I still have step lists thru Gold for A/M ( and Br vid. with Sam Sodano et al 1980 ? )

"it seems that a good answer is to remember that a Waltz is a 1-2-3 in 3/3 timing, which makes the rise on 2 and 3 last longer than it would on the QQ end of a Fox Trot's 4/4 of SSQQ."

The question was about the slow foxtrot, which has a characteristic timing of SQQ, and not the American Foxtrot with a characteristic timing of SSQQ.

In the slow foxtrot, the amount of time spent on the final two QQ's is actually comparable to the amount of time on the later two steps of each waltz trio, because foxtrot is not actually executed with a 2:1 ratio between slows and quicks, but with something substantially closer to equal time division.

The character of the action is, however, different between waltz and slow foxtrot. Despite polished's repeated mistakes on the subject, there is a very different action in rising to close than in rising to pass, and that differece is readily apparent at any point in the process.