Hi Nod
Doing the splits? I'm not sure where this happens in the natural turn. In any case, the movement is dynamic, not static. If someone is just doing the splits, a force must come from somewhere to raise them up out of it - difficult as you say. But when dancing ,even in a semi-splits position (i don't know where that would be, but let's assume we're into it) there would be a source of energy from the horizontal movement which would be converted into the necessary rise. That's sort of what happens, but i would dispute the 'splits' part.

For a pendulum swing, the rise height is proportional to the square of the velocity (travel distance / beat time) at the bottom of the swing, so it should not be a matter of trading distance for rise - both should increase together.

If you are doing a split and getting stuck between your feet, that's not a tradeoff between travel and rise, it's simply dancing inefficiently. On the other hand, if you are matching your travel and rise, you may get your legs quite far apart, but you won't be stuck there because you won't be extending your legs further than you have momentum to coast your body.

Hi Suomynona
I can certainly FEEL the difference between a leg that is driving and one that is 'cycling' or coasting through the same motions, so i'm sure there is a visual difference too. The other points we would probably agree on if we could meet and demonstrate what we mean

The next time anybody who is interested is at a studio or wherever they go dancing. Just look and record what you actually see. Do you see a rise and fall as it should be done. With this fresh in your memory go to a tape of a major competition. Is it the same. Is it important. I went to a lecture given by a person everybody would know by name
He was asked if he thought that adjudicators would be better on a stage judging. The answere was definately no. He likes to be at ground level so that he can see correctly the rise and the fall.That's in all the dances bar Tango. I am still not conviced that a massive first step followed by a massive second step, with only 2 seconds to complete a bar of music will not result in the loss of rise and fall or timing.I think I should change the word fall to lower. Because we see fall too often. Falling out of the step that is.
.

After writting a few minutes ago it suddenly struck me. Why not go to the book and put a measure to the diagrams which I believe are to scale. Alex Moore obviously new and thought that the second step in the Natural Turn is smaller than the first. Maybe he meant for there to be a bit of time going up instead of along.

Mr Alex may not have drawn it that way, but the second step can safely be large because the full development of a side lead and sway allows the entire body to position the free foot. Contrast with the first step where the rotation of the hips actually subtracts from the stride length, the body is vertical, and the thigh can't come so far forward as to hit the partner's crotch.

But you have to have already started the upswing in step one, and not try to go further on step two than your energy can carry you. Watch ordinary competitors and you will see both stalled second steps and overshot second steps... aiming precisely so the rise will absorb your motion takes practice, and cooperation from the partner on the inside of the turn.

Simple test for improper split on the second step: if your left toe is in advance of the line from your left shoulder to left hip, you are doing an improper split.

The proper split is a break of the right side at the hip - you leave the departing right leg behind, though of course this will straighten out at the extreme of the stride.

Can someone remind me when Alex Moore's book was written, and do we have any videos from that time?
May i suggest the movement analysis be done using some more modern teaching tapes by recent world champions.
In my job, i would be criticised for recommending a text even just 10 years old.
Suomynona is correct about a lot of competitors stalling the second step, and it destroys the flight.

It's old, but the best competitors still dance in accordance with it. The human body hasn't changed much - the general population has put on weight, but dancers have if anything gotten thinner.

And more impatient, but that's another story.

In every other sport, there has been huge progression over the last 50 years. Training methods have improved, there is more knowledge about diet, physiology, motivational psychology....and of course the tesching environment is much better. Even this discussion page, which has its own useful leatures, only existed recently. So things are very different. Human bodies start out the same maybe, but the top dancers keep dancing for longer, and this in itself will progress the sport, and 40 and 50-year-old sports people of today are in much better shape than 40-or 50-year old sports people in the past