Substantially closer to my front foot? This is not what i'm seeing on the Sinkinson tape, which i've just been studying in close detail. It's his teaching tape 'Come Dancing' -the slow waltz section. He starts with a natural turn and i played it frame-by-frame (20 frames per beat) to measure as accurately as i could how he controls his foot plant. For the right foot plant on 1 there is about 1/5 - 1/4 beat between the initial heel strike and the foot going flat. It would be longer than this before the weight rolls onto the ball of his foot. His body moves over the standing foot almost exactly 1/2 beat after the foot plant. The same thing happens with a reverse turn.
The detailed timing on his natural turn is very interesting though.
If my body were 'substantially' closer to my right foot (for the step on '1') wouldn't i be over this foot very early in the beat, and my body flight be curtailed into beat 2? i might try it to see what happens. However, Sinkinson doesn't appear to do this.

Phil. If it helps this is the latest bit of information given to me. It has come in a round about way to me from a former Blackpool winner. That is, on the sole of our shoe we have four points in a square. On the heel we have the same.We must use every point on our shoe. A person can talk on and on about when to put what part of the shoe to the floor. It all comes to a mstter of timing. When do I put the second row to the floor after a heel lead which has the first two points down. And now the other four which are on the sole coming onto the last two. All this to tell a person that they must use the whole of the foot. Let's not forget that we have two feet with both of them working. Isn't that a much simpler way of explaning the use of the whole of the foot.

Thanks, Jonathan! Your description made perfect sense. And the thread on "waltz downbeat" also helped.

Ellen. I think we are all aware that two professionals both having been British champions. Both on videos recomend that the Waltz basics be split into half beats. That is six half beats to do the first three of a Natural. The half which we call ( and ) will come after the first beat, making it 1 and. Counting on we have 2 and then 3 and. So there is no misunderstanding you do close the feet on the ( and ) after the two making it 2 and closed on the and. If you want to get a further understanding . Just for information purposes but never as you are dancing. Give each half beat a full number. So we will have 1 2 3 4 5 6. Your feet are together on 4 leaving 5 6 to rise and lower. The step which can cause some confussion is 2 and is not a true step but a position underneath the body before going out to the side. It is recomended on the tape that the 1 and. 2 and. 3 and. be counted aloud by both while dancing. Richard Gleave said that before a competition or a demonstration he and his partner always did this.It's all on the tape.

On looker.You start closing the feet on 2& with feet closed on three. Dave

Dave. I can see were you are coming from. On the Wood's tape he is closing the feet on 2& and blending the step into 3&. He goes on to say that if the is music fast or is slow an adjustment is needed. In my words it might not be possible to dance at your old normal pace. Something I am finding different is the first step into a turn is called turn. Then & is swing. Followed by sway.I don't know if I doin a good job pointing out the differences her. The thing is to look for ones self. It is certainly different that the old 1 2 3 which is the most taught here by the old school.

Don. NOthing has changed. Mirko Gozzoli on his dvd counts 123. What has changed is our understanding of it. My old teacher had me control the tempo by dragging the Rf in to slow down.

Dave . I think the most debatable part of this is. Step 1 which will also include turn. On (and) the moving foot comes into nuetral under the body. This is it. Flex the right knee and push out to the side on 2. There is another way of doing this step that does not emphasis the flexing of the right knee. These are all the man's steps. Ladies turn them around the other way.

Quickstep. We seem to be talking about different things. I would not say the lady's is opposite the man's. (NT) The lady sets the swing path for the man .She swings her rignt leg back (from the hip)and into place pointing down the LOD. She has set the diagonal line. The man swing his shoulders along this path,he slides past and not through the lady so body contact can be light. His lead is felt more from the swing and rotation of his shoulders than through his body. So swing and CBM are not the same thing since swing starts at the top of the previous figure and CBM starts later. The mans backward swing is similar to the lady's . I hope I got this wright

"(NT) The lady sets the swing path for the man ."

Hogwash... she doesn't allegedly even know what the figure is going to be, so there's no way she's setting his path. The path of his swing was chosen in the previous lowering, and the path of his movement subsequent to step two is yet to be hinted at.

"She swings her rignt leg back (from the hip)and into place pointing down the LOD. She has set the diagonal line."

Nope, the direction of movement is pre-existing. The amount of turn is not yet evident. The position of her pointing leg will evolve through the course of step two as the goal of his swing becomes evident.