Studying The Hiltons footwork I discoverd that I have been dancing the wrong rise for YEARS. It is the second step where we place our weight from the first. There is NO foot rise. We rise stongly from the back foot(one). It is the body swing onto the recieving foot that gives us the gradual rise(continue to rise) or in the feather step at the same leval. Whenever I try to sway instead of letting it happen, I will rise(push up) on that second step,so in my feather step I have not been completing the rise on the back foot(first step) and instead have been pushing up on that second step. But it is happening everywhere,curved feather,three step,DRS,etc. I mention this because I know lots of people do the same thing. If you try not to sway you should be dancing it correctly.

Hi Dave
Thinking of 1-2-3 waltz natural turn, doesn't the rise start end of 1 and continue through 2? I land on a (low)toe on beat 2 (i mean my heel is close to the floor)while rising, and then continue to rise (i'm sure it's a leg AND foot rise)until my feet close, which happens pretty well on beat 3. The technique book, of course, talks about steps starting when the feet pass, so it would define step 2 differently.
The technique book defines step 2 as being the time between the left foot passing the (standing) right foot (still talking 1-2-3 natural turn) and the right foot closing to the left, so during all this time we should be rising. I'm sure this is what most people are doing. My understanding is that the rising movement should last between 1 and 1.5 beats (end of 1, to 3)

Phil. The NT is a little different because we are closing our feet, but we don't close our feet very often when we dance. The heal does come up off the floor more on the second step when our weight is over the ball. I think I should have said there is no leg rise on the second step and not foot rise. The point is we are up at the end of one and any further rise is through body swing and not from straightening the knee on the second step.

"Phil. The NT is a little different because we are closing our feet, but we don't close our feet very often when we dance. The heal does come up off the floor more on the second step when our weight is over the ball. I think I should have said there is no leg rise on the second step and not foot rise. The point is we are up at the end of one and any further rise is through body swing and not from straightening the knee on the second step."

Actually it is not a function of foot closure, but of the desired action for the person on the inside of the turn. If that person is going to do a lady's heel turn (foxtrot natural turn) then the leg will already be essentially straight during step two, as the rise must be completed on step 1. But for waltz rise, the leg remains more flexed as in step two and straightens during step two.

This gets somewhat confusing in that the legs may still be straight in the waltz action when the feet are apart, it is having the leg more or less straight when the body is over that foot that develops later in the case of waltz rise than it does in foxtrot rise.

One thing the book does not handle so well is that there are really at least three kinds of rise, which it attempts to reduce to two: the foot closure waltz, the open turn, and the heel turn.
The book would give the rise for an open turn in foxtrot as the same as for a lady's heel turn, which abstracts out a critical difference. This may go back to what was said the other day about the book rise and fall being primarily foot action, with the inclusion of body action the result of an incomplete revision. And of course there is also the man's heel turn and heel pull where there is not rise until the second step.

Dave. Foxtrot Man Feather Step there is rise at the end of step one for the man. The lady on the same step will have no rise. If you are worried about lifting on step two don't. Many of the best teachers do teach that. John Wood teaches that you can lift you front , the left. Or if you like lower your back hip. Which ever way suits your way of thinking.Bill Irvine in a lecture which I have a copy of given in Singapore. He actually teaches that the first quick is the most accentuated. If you watch carefully you might pick this up. In my years of dancing I have learnt not to take anything for granted By this I mean have no preconceived idea of how you think the step is being demonstrated. Look at the feet first before looking at the rise and fall. Heres a simple one to check.Waltz.Step three of a Reverse Weave coming from a Whisk or an Open Impetus. How much does Marcus lower through the right knee before the next step which is back left with CBMP with the lady stepping outside.When you've got it practice it for the next few weeks or more untill you have the best Reverse Weave around the place.

"Foxtrot Man Feather Step there is rise at the end of step one for the man. The lady on the same step will have no rise."

Please review the standard technique, as your statement is incorrect. Both Man *and lady* have rise end of 1. Although the lady does not have foot rise here, it would be a serious mistake to say that she does not have rise.

Suomynona. The lady rises through the knees and not rising onto the toes. That's NFR. When the technique of a step calls for "No Foot Rise or no Body Rise It means that the rising action should be only taken through the straightening action of the knees, and not by rising on ones toes.
Foot rise comes from the feet and ankles. The action occurs when one rises onto the toes ( assuming the feet are flat to start with ). Jonathan . As you can see your words didn't fall on deaf ears but on open eyes.

"Suomynona. The lady rises through the knees and not rising onto the toes. That's NFR."

More of less, yes. But this is very different from your previous incorrect statement that the lady has no rise. No foot rise does not mean no rise. The lady's rise is given as the same as the man's in the feather, only with the added distinction that she does not use foot rise to achieve it.

When the technique of a step calls for "No Foot Rise or no Body Rise"

Please provide an example where "no Body rise" is used?

Suomynona. Ask Jonathan. Probobly from Henry Jaques book. If I rise through my knees then how do I not have body rise. The two are one if you read the article correctly.

No Don, we all know about "no foot rise" but what I want to know is when the "no body rise" you mentioned in this statement is called for:

"When the technique of a step calls for "No Foot Rise or no Body Rise""