I've started this on a new thread. Very briefly for those who belive that in the Waltz the steps are taken in between the beats. At the end of step one on an and count, it would appear that the left foot is in between. But is it. Are the thighs together but the feet apart. Therefore where is the weight. Therefore which step are we on.
That's all. I leave it to you to take it to its logical conclusion on all the other steps.

"I've started this on a new thread. Very briefly for those who belive that in the Waltz the steps are taken in between the beats. At the end of step one on an and count, it would appear that the left foot is in between."

No, the end of that step is defined to be the point where the feet pass.

"But is it. Are the thighs together but the feet apart."

If so, that would not be the end of the step yet. Indeed, I send my body beyond the foot before my feet pass.

"Therefore where is the weight. Therefore which step are we on."

Which foot the weight is on does not define the endpoints of the step. The point of feet passing is what defines the endpoints of the step.

Now, perhaps you would prefer to speak in terms of steps that span the time between weight changes. You are welcome to do so, but you would be speaking your own private language, so you would need to do two things:

1) Preface you comments with an introduction to your personal langauage/definition of a step

2) Translate everyone else's comments to your points of reference. So for example if the book says rise end of 1, but you are calling that point in time the middle of step 1, then you would need to say rise middle of 1 in order to be dancing the same way as someone following the book.

Anonymous. Waltz. Pass means go past.Front means where I am facing at the end of that step. Being that my next step is to the side it doesn't get in front. To me the end of the step is as it turns. What do you think.
Again you do not give the dance you are refering to.
I take it you are now on Foxtrot when you say send your body get ahead of your feet. Do you know I have probably got as big a collection of videos that you will find anywhere. If I ever find on even one of them where it is said the body gets ahead of the feet I will let you know. I think you and I will be waiting a long time.

"Anonymous. Waltz. Pass means go past.Front means where I am facing at the end of that step. Being that my next step is to the side it doesn't get in front. To me the end of the step is as it turns. What do you think."

I think you have constructed your own private world which is at odds the with official langauge and the official technique.

First, the defined endpoints of steps are quite clearly specified. If you change them, you are making up your own incompatible langauge.

Second, although the second step ends up as a side step, it swings as a forwards step. It does not really become a sidestep until the moving foot stops moving, which is the point at which both feet swivel to accomplisht he majority of the turn.

"Again you do not give the dance you are refering to."

I am simply responding to the mistakes in your posts as you wander from topic to topic. The above was obviously waltz.

"I take it you are now on Foxtrot when you say send your body get ahead of your feet."

Foxtrot or waltz or quickstep... doesn't matter for that detail.

"Do you know I have probably got as big a collection of videos that you will find anywhere."

Good, try watching them frame by frame and you might see the truth - even when it is not mentioned in the verbal instruction.

Anonymous. Waltz First three Natural
A couple of questions on paragraph four. To make what is a side step a forward step is not the way it is in the technique book .Is it ?.
Who first introduced it this way, and are they still teaching it that way. Which way is the most favoured at this present time among competitors and teachers.

I'm definitely with anonymous here. 1-2-3 natural turn waltz. OK the technique book (which technique book, by the way?)may say step to the side (having turned 2/8 on the right foot before planting the left)but i think you will find (check on the videos) that the best competition dancers give an impression of 'forward, forward'on steps 1 and 2. i did a serious frame-by-frame study of an ex world champion teaching tape, and he had turned 1/8 on his right foot at the point his left foot planted. The swing translates into rotation. Another 1/8 on the left foot (approx) and then another 1/8 during the closure.
There is nothing wrong with taking steps between beats, or on the beats. Even the technique book doesn't specify. I plant my feet on the beats (for 1 and 2 anyway) because it seems to me everyone does this.
Fortunately in music, the start of a beat is specified, unlike dancing. this doesn't of course stop musicians applying musical interpretation.
Please specify which technique book you're referring to

"To make what is a side step a forward step is not the way it is in the technique book .Is it ?."

Quite simply, the step STARTS FORWARDS
but ENDS SIDEWAYS

Phil. I'm glad this one has come up. According to the book by Alex Moore the second step goes across the LOD starting diagnal to the wall. I don't think there is any argument there. I also have a tape by Richard Gleave who introduced that the second step is straight forward on the same line as the first step near enough. And he says drive it forward. I also have a tape by Steven Hillier who actually says that Alex Moore in his book was wrong and the step does not go across the LOD. Both of these tapes are dated, very much so. So where are you as the feet are closing. You are backing diagnal to the centre. It is then necassary to turn on the spot to find the LOD. This for me is where it falls down. If I am from an Overturned Spin Turn go into Turning Lock I am in one hell of a mess. The tape I study the most is John Wood, whos teaching is the same as my teacher. For those who do the first example will take their fourth step down the LOD. For those who step across will take their fourth step diagnal to the wall. I've yet to find out if the fore mentioned gentlemen still teach that way. They weren't very big on bending the knees at that time and the lady was more central with her stance. As I said I have John Wood and three by Marcus Hilton. I know which I prefere. So I'm with Alex Moore on this one. I just had a look at Richard giving a demo and guess what where the second and fouth step of an Open Imputes Turn went.

"Phil. I'm glad this one has come up. According to the book by Alex Moore the second step goes across the LOD starting diagnal to the wall. I don't think there is any argument there. I also have a tape by Richard Gleave who introduced that the second step is straight forward on the same line as the first step near enough. And he says drive it forward."

This is patently obvious - you commence to move DW, and continue doing so. It is only as you lower from the third step that the direction of movement becomes backing LOD.

Now the non-obvious part is that this concerns only the direction of movement. During the course of this, the body has rotated, even before the direction of movement changed. That is why we can describe step two as a side step - by the end of the step, the action has become sideways by virtue of the fact that the body rotion means that the original and still mainted direction of movement is now appropriately called sideways.

"I also have a tape by Steven Hillier who actually says that Alex Moore in his book was wrong and the step does not go across the LOD."

You obviously misunderstood, as it is quite obvous that the step will go across the LOD, given that the direction of movement is still to DW.

"You are backing diagnal to the centre. It is then necassary to turn on the spot to find the LOD."

It is not really necessary to orient to LOD until partway into the next step... "always have a side left to swing" sound familiar?

Note that this means that your thighs will strongly close as your body rotates as you move into that next step.

"This for me is where it falls down. If I am from an Overturned Spin Turn go into Turning Lock I am in one hell of a mess."

No, you will be fine. Keep your direction of movement clear. Let your body slowly swing through neutral, and onwards as you are presumably aiming for the side lead of promeande.

"For those who do the first example will take their fourth step down the LOD. For those who step across will take their fourth step diagnal to the wall."

What you really mean is that those who step SIDEWAYS across the LOD, instead of swinging forwards across it as they rotate, fail to control the movmentum of their natural turn. Due to this failure of control, they are unable to direct the next step in the proper new direction of movement (down LOD) and instead let it drift off to the wall. In plain English, they have dances a quarter turn from the quickstep rather than a natural turn from the waltz.

I'm glad that Alex Moore's book is being specifically quoted here. Let's just remember that dancing has changed considerably since that book was written. Even Alex Moore himself i believe 'warned' against slavishly adhering to everything. He did a great job on producing a solid grounding, but it would be wrong, in my view, to dance exactly as specified in the book.
The diagrams for 1-2-3 natural turn very clearly show the left foot being placed sideways to the direction of travel, with a 1/4 turn having been made on the right foot.
Even at my level (and i'm not a championship grade dancer) i dance this forward - forward. My left foot plants at about 45 degrees to my line of travel and i continue to turn on it as my right foot closes. I believe that's how many top dancers dance it. I've studied teaching tapes in slow motion.
You can't argue that, because my left foot is 'across' my original direction of travel when the right closes to it, that the original step 2 was across the line of travel. At the START of step 2 (which remember is officially when my left foot is alongside my standing right foot) the movement of the leg and foot is definitely forward. When my feet close i am actually into step 3 (officially) as anonymous has correctly pointed out. So at no time during step 2 is my left foot across my original direction of travel. By any reasonable definition of the expression "to the side" my body would have to have turned by nearly 1/4 turn so that my action would be "to the side". I'm always very uncomfortable when the meanings of expressions like "to the side" have to be manipulated and 'forced' to fit the modern ways of dancing.
When i learnt to dance, i did turn on my right foot on 1 and performed step 2 "to the side". It served me well. But i've moved on.