Anonymous.Your second Paragraph. What exactly do you think I have been saying for the past few weeks. Where we will differ is what I have been taught is the body is to be pushed by the standing leg. Yes the body is moving but the foot the front foot will always beat the body. Even though the move is instigated by the body at the pelvic area it will not get in front of the front foot. It will be in front of the back foot we know that, its commom sense. How could we push if our weight was behind the foot we are pushing with. I think we would go straight up.
For those doing Rumba the body weight going to the point of imbalance is correct, but the foot will always move faster than the body and catch, otherwise you are flat on your face on the floor.
Last but not least .No two people dance exactly the same. To try to make them is stupid. Even among those that have been the best. Marcus doesn't dance the same as John or Richard or Michael or Andrew.and at the bottom of the list me. So to try to influence any dancer young or older into your way is plain stupid. Even your going to the point of imbalance, maybe you have bigger feet than me or John. Do it but keep it to yourself. But if it is the conventional way then by all means.
Let us also remember that stepping and in particular the lowering is going to be different in both Waltz and Foxtrot. So don't move from one to the other and try to say the technique isn't different. As an example . Try to go to the point of imbalance on the 123 of a Waltz, or try a verticle lowering in the Foxtrot.

"Yes the body is moving"

Then I trust you've given up trying to lower against doors?

"but the foot the front foot will always beat the body."

Only towards the end of the leg swing. Earlier, the body is ahead of the moving foot in most cases, especially if we are talking about the right foot in an action with natural CBM.

"Even though the move is instigated by the body at the pelvic area it will not get in front of the front foot."

It most certainly will get in front of the front foot in many cases. In all passing cases, the body starts out ahead of the front foot, and for the modern knee-usage style should be beyond the standing foot before the moving foot passes (yes, this is different than the stiffer knee style in your textbook)

"It will be in front of the back foot we know that, its commom sense."

So it will also be off balance then.

"How could we push if our weight was behind the foot we are pushing with."

Good point. For that matter, pushing is a function of being slightly off balance. Though not perhaps permanently off balance. If you support your weight from the middle of your foot, you can overbalance and push, but if your weight has not passed the strong part of your toes, you can still recover balance on that foot. If it has - as it will in a full action - then you cannot recover balance on that foot and are committed to the next step.

"For those doing Rumba the body weight going to the point of imbalance is correct, but the foot will always move faster than the body and catch"

An action which plays a far greater and more widely recognized role in the standard dances than it does in the latin ones. You aren't incorrect about doing that in latin, but you are fatally choppy and muscle-centric if you leave it out of your standard.

"No two people dance exactly the same. To try to make them is stupid."

No, however many people are trying methods that physically cannot accomplish the goals they claim to want to achieve. Succesful competitors all have methods that do accomplish their goals - but those methods aren't always what you would think they were from a few out of context quotes.

"Even your going to the point of imbalance, maybe you have bigger feet than me or John. Do it but keep it to yourself. But if it is the conventional way then by all means."

It is the conventional way, and it is something they both are most certainly doing, regardless if they choose to talk about it or not.

"Let us also remember that stepping and in particular the lowering is going to be different in both Waltz and Foxtrot. So don't move from one to the other and try to say the technique isn't different. As an example . Try to go to the point of imbalance on the 123 of a Waltz, or try a verticle lowering in the Foxtrot."

Something you haven't figured out yet is the closing your feet does not mean you should dance any knee portion of the lowering vertically. Try dancing your waltz natural from closed feet flat on the floor rather than a prep step, and make it as big and smooth as it normally is with normal through the knees. When you can almost do that, you will have discovered the proper way to lower from foot closure - which is to say, you will have learned to use imbalance as a tool to lower while moving your body, even as your feet are not yet moving.

Anonymous. You've lost me on the feet together flat on the floor is there any other way. I will take a prep step ,my feet will at some time be side by side. The right foot which is the moving foot isn't flat to the floor, but it is down as is the LF
I doubt if you would be able as we do to move forward backward to the side to the side rise and lower. With only the forefingers touching. With the weight imbalanced you would be pushing your partner over.And she you.

"Anonymous. You've lost me on the feet together flat on the floor is there any other way. I will take a prep step ,my feet will at some time be side by side. The right foot which is the moving foot isn't flat to the floor, but it is down as is the LF"

I am asking you not to take a prep step, but instead to learn to start a full natural turn from an exercise position of both feet flat on the floor, closed, normal standing height. When you've discovered the trick to lowering from that position, you will have discovered the element of body progression that is missing from your lowering in more ordinary dance contexts. And you will also be in a position to dance a killer step 4 of natural or spin turn as lady (and understand why its so rare to see a lady get a good action on that step)

"I doubt if you would be able as we do to move forward backward to the side to the side rise and lower. With only the forefingers touching. With the weight imbalanced you would be pushing your partner over.And she you."

You still are not reading the reality of the situation being described to you. Imbalance does not imply any force against the partner - instead, it implies dancing the physics of movement, falling together in perfect coordination - but WITHOUT PUSHING ON EACH OTHER.

Coordination, not force.

It's quite clear that the reason you fear falling and imbalance is that you personally would push on your partner in such a situation. Practice until you can aim your fall, and you will be able to make appropriate use of imbalanced positions in your dancing.

Anonymous. No Prep step. Even with my feet together starting into a Natural Turn from a lowered position with the right foot. I will always flex the left knee. Call it what you like it is still a preperation otherwise to move I will have to fall forward. If the lady lowers correctly on the count of three and.. the weight will be over the left foot which has lowered. And as we all know the right heel has not lowered to the floor the second step being a toe only. I'm not sure if you believe we lower and step at the same time. That was years ago before they knew we had knees.

"Anonymous. No Prep step. Even with my feet together starting into a Natural Turn from a lowered position with the right foot."

Not from a lowered position, but from normal standing height. Lowering from there into the downswing is the point of the exercise. Specifically, lowering by sending your standing knee forward and down with your body moving forward in vertical alignment directly over it

"I will always flex the left knee."

Yes, but will your hip be over your knee as it should, or will you try to sit down and keep your hip in place over your foot? That sending your hip and body forward with your knee, instead of trying to sit down, is the missing skill which you have not yet learned about.

"Call it what you like it is still a preperation otherwise to move I will have to fall forward."

Yes, it is a preperation - but it is a prep step of zero length. You have to learn to move the body in this downswing even though the foot that will support it has already been placed. And you will have to learn to do that and fall forward the proper way - which is to say, keeping the body aligned vertically as you fall.

"If the lady lowers correctly on the count of three and.. the weight will be over the left foot which has lowered."

If she does it correctly, her weight will start over her standing foot, but once her standing heel has touched the floor her weight will move forward. A man in this situation would probably want to sit down, holding his weight stationary. But the lady usually isn't allowed to do that as the man insists she move - so she falls heavily onto the ball of her right foot. Only with practice can either dancer learn to convert the lowering to fall as the knee bends and the body moves forward, and the fall in turn into a graceful step that will be a soft heel lead, and not a heavy thump onto the ball of foot.

"And as we all know the right heel has not lowered to the floor the second step being a toe only."

That would be a difference between actual dancing and the exercise I asked you to do - but when you finally learn to do the exercise, you will realize that particular difference is of no importance, because the exercise concerns the body motion that takes place before the moving foot has even started to move.

"I'm not sure if you believe we lower and step at the same time. That was years ago before they knew we had knees. "

You lower and send the body weight forwad. Some unschooled intermediates, upon disocvering that they do in fact have knees, seem to have forgotten about the progress of the body weight, and taken up this odd habit of trying to sit down in place. You need to re-learn how to move your body as you lower - and even more so if you are going to bend your knee than if you aren't.

Anonymous. You just won't go to a video, simular to the one I am currently looking at. Which is from the letter service. And look. If you did you would have to change your ideas especially your weight distribution. You are making yourself look ridiculous when anybody reading your rubbish can go and see for themselves.. Getting to the point of imbalance as you have said enough times which included the lady who is going backwards.Way back when I copied from the technque book the exact words. you said that the lowering by by the lady was not as the moving foot foot came under the body. And to say that we have a verticle thigh over a bent knee is to stupid for words. All any one has to do is go and look for themselves. Would you like me to check back over some of your insane advice. How about the Back Lock have you given that one away. Do you remember. And the falling forward and having to catch your weight. Do you remember that one.And when asked what does the lady do at this time, you said the same, yes she also catches her weight. Never mind, you and your instructor may one day learn to dance correctly. Or maybe not. Or is there indeed and instructor.

"Getting to the point of imbalance as you have said enough times which included the lady who is going backwards."

Any natural walking action includes a phase of imbalance... if you can't see that, you are either blind or applying for a job with the ministry of silly walks.

"Way back when I copied from the technque book the exact words. you said that the lowering by by the lady was not as the moving foot foot came under the body."

You are taking things out of context again. I said that if you wished to dance the exact situation described in the book, then the lowering of the standing foot would coincide with the closing of the feet. I then went on to point out that such dancing is too high and small for today's purposes. To do todays more dynamic dancing and make full use of your knees, you must do things differently. This situation is enough different than the one for which the book gives you details that applying the same ideas as in the book will now require you to execute different details. One of these is closing the free foot later - near to the conclusion of the lowering, which won't happen until the conclusion of the knee bend - something occuring long after the standing foot has gone flat. If you insist on ignorantly applying the details of a different action to this situation, then you are a person obsessed with trivia and not a student of dancing.

"And to say that we have a verticle thigh over a bent knee is to stupid for words."

Your emotional bias is preventing you from seeing a very obvious physical truth.

"All any one has to do is go and look for themselves."

Indeed, if you examine truly expert dancers, you will see that you are wrong.

"Would you like me to check back over some of your insane advice."

I'd like you to stop arguing with it, and start dancing it.

"How about the Back Lock have you given that one away."

No, the mechanics of the back lock haven't changed in the past few weeks. They are still there for you to discover, if you can drop your preconceptions long enough to see and experment.

"And the falling forward and having to catch your weight."

Another essential skill you still aren't willing to work towards... Of course you keep mischaracterizing it as a pitching forward, ignoring the repeated explanation that the body stays vertical throughout the fall.

"And when asked what does the lady do at this time, you said the same, yes she also catches her weight."

Heaven forbid she should do something that matches what her partner is doing!