You should have started dancing before the instructors found so many ways to make it really hard to learn to dance.

Back in the old days, we counted one when the first foot hit the floor.

New dancers picked this up quickly. If you have studied music, you might ask why dancers now split measures in their Cha

Again, that is a fairly new thing. Fifty years ago, people danced their figures within a measure.

Believe it or not, almost everyone was able to count, "one, two, three and four". Of course, back then most folks learned to dance from friends and family. The purpose of teaching dance was to get new dancers.

At as much as $150, for a short hour of lessons, one could question the motives of some of the new teachers. (The more difficult you can make it, the longer your student must keep paying your rent.)

I do question why the folks who Choreographed the music, put those little bars around groups of four beats. Could it be that those bars meant something?

Of course, the International people will tell you that they copied what they do from the original dancers who danced in bars in South America.

I do not buy it. My guess is that the original dancers were either prostitutes, (Believe it or not, there was a time when ladies were not allowed in bars.), or they were low skilled workman who had just been paid.

I have been in bars that had dirt floors. I can assure you that people who were drinking, and dancing on crowded dirt floors, did not do anything like what modern ballroom competitors do.

Michael

And exactly WHEN, were " back in the old days ?"...

And the only ones I know of in my profession commanding $ 150 per, are world class coaches..in fact, in pretty much all amer. US cities, one can find excellent instruction from anywhere between $ 50 and 75 an hr.

AS to " splitting " bars, rhythms etc.. its called interpretation . Not everything is packaged in a neat bundle of four..and specificially in latin ,when there are clave changes in rhythm ..

I gather from most of your posts, that you are quite " jaded " with my profession ( I know its not perfect ) but.. if you have a better system.. please do tell ?

And.. comparing Comp. style dance, has little to do with the premise .

Apples and Oranges in the popularity "stakes ".Its a fair bet, that 95% of students NEVER get involved in the Comp. world..and "they" do turn out some pretty good dancers at social levels ..

terence,

World class coaches and Fred Astaire Dance Instructors (trained and untrained) hmmmmm....something's wrong with the picture.....

Know what ya mean.... was D.D. for several yrs with them ( and A/M ).. you should have seen it then !! ( with some exceptions )..

They did , however produce 2 world class dancers ( whom I had the privilege to intially train ) and subsequently ,numerous others, from the late Bobbie Medieros and Vernon Brock ( and partners ) to Rufus Dustin( still coaching ) and the many European comp. dancers that are now employed by them.

The smaller schools, as in all cases, do tend to suffer much more from lack of continuing dance education on a regular basis..but,, we could say that about most dance schools outside of Metro areas..

"Again, that is a fairly new thing. Fifty years ago, people danced their figures within a measure."

Suggest you examine some technique books of that era and count how many of the given figures, especially basic ones, are a integral number of measures long, and how many aren't...

You will of course have to account for the overlap cases, but even afterwards your claim will be shown untrue for the foxtrot, quickstep, swing, and tango. It will probably hold for the fast and slow waltzes, rumba, and chacha however.

"But in dancing, it seems I'm suppose to pickup my left foot when the music starts then wait to count one until I put that foot back down"

That's a somewhat unusual dance class if you are spending time with a foot noticeably off the floor.

Think of your foot as the stick, and the floor as the surface of a drum. Your body is an instrument in the band.

What you want to do is be, "Almost late".)

As I said, you would play your body as you would play a drum. You should be able to count the music exactly as your foot hits the floor.

Again, this is the old way.

So, in the waltz; by the time the drummer counts 3 the dancers are counting 2?

This seems unnecessarily odd to me. I wonder why it is done that way.

"So, in the waltz; by the time the drummer counts 3 the dancers are counting 2?"

I sure hope note. Anyone who wants to go anywhere with their dancing will quickly realize that the step numbers do not equal the beat numbers. If you are going to be pronouncing numeric words while dancing, those had best be the beat numbers or their fractions and not the step numbers.

If you want to be pronouncing something that matches the steps, use words that share the timing properties of the steps, such as slows and quicks and their subdivisions.

Wow ! After reading all of the resposes even I am getting light headed.

You did not mention the dance in Question but here are some rules any good dancer should know. # 1 never "pick up your foot from the floor" Even in a smooth or Standard dance where you will start off with a heel step, you should slide the insde edge of the ball forward until it becomes necessary to strike with the heel.

Assuming there is no starter step,your body weight should be received fully onto the foot on the beat. The knee should be lowering towards the floor slightly to get the weight down into the floor (on 1) As the free foot passes under the body,(brushing) You can imagine being able to reach down with both hands and pick up two buckets of water. (now you have arrived on 1 and ready to proceed.

By the way, advanced dancers will use a starter step at the very end of the previous musical phrase (the right foot)