Many top dancers will dance the first three steps of the reverse foxtrot turn "nice and easy" do they not,as they also do with the feather step?

"Many top dancers will dance the first three steps of the reverse foxtrot turn "nice and easy" do they not,as they also do with the feather step?"

Sure, but there's still a difference in the foot to foot action in the presence of swing, vs the foot to foot action without swing, as you have in the middle of a weave.

If you weave looks like your feather or reverse, one of the figures isn't right.

Silkinsons and other top dancers dance the weave as sqqsqq with the swing of a feather finish so why should not any one else?

"Silkinsons and other top dancers dance the weave as sqqsqq with the swing of a feather finish so why should not any one else?"

Yes, but that is a different figure.

If you dance an extended weave sequence SQQQQQQQ.... there is no swing in the series of QQ because after each pair of QQ you are back in exactly the same situation you started them in, so there's no change to swing through. Only when you finish the sequence by going to another shape do you get to swing. The smallest figure you see this in is probably the middle QQ of the weave from PP SQQQQQQ - there's swing at the start, and swing in the feather ending, but not in the middle.

Hi 3xuschanp,
Why Rhumba with an 'h'and not Rumba?

"You should swing the weight of the free leg only after the swing of the weight of the body is well underway."

I agree

Many dancers seem to be obsessed with minutae here, feel the weight of the foot? Please, concentrate on the important things

Anony.I have seen the Silkinsons dance the fox Nweave as sqqsqq.step swing up and step swing out instead of sqqqqq. What do you say about that? Is that important enough for you. >

"Anony.I have seen the Silkinsons dance the fox Nweave as sqqsqq.step swing up and step swing out instead of sqqqqq. What do you say about that? Is that important enough for you?"

cdroge, actually ...no it is not important enough for me,
I'm really not concerned about their choice of choreography, i was commenting in general about a fundamental principal of movement.
When i was studying with Bill Irvine in England he would teach the figures by explaining what we were doing & not referring to the figures by name
"after the swoosh, come around her, take off, ba da da da daaah, maybe ..."
when i questioned him, he said "the steps aren't important, it's the dancing"
Hmmmmm
next lesson Benny Tolmeyer and he basically says the same thing.
Ok
So now i am Wally Laird's and out of the blue he says"You know when i wrote the book, i could have created any pattern for the basic, They're just steps"...
cdroge do u see where I'm going here?
steps & choregraphy are what we utilize to demonstrate the fundamentals of the dance,
they are just tools to help us achieve something more

Well YES,all teachers have their swooc
sh,mine had rata tat tat and down the elevator and up the escalater,swoosh sounds like the golf swing to me,perhaps Bobby liked to play golf and mine play the drum

"Anony.I have seen the Silkinsons dance the fox Nweave as sqqsqq.step swing up and step swing out instead of sqqqqq. What do you say about that?"

I say that variation is well on the way to being a different figure, becuase when you dance a slow in the middle (assuming you also lower as it would imply) the action becomes very different.