I'm wondering to myself "what are we learning from this discussion?"

Phil. I hope we are going to learn the the feet are kept straight in the Standard style of dancing. The angle at the foot remains constant.If we are going to follow the book. The very slight toe turned on a Reverse Turn for instance, is relatively new, and can hardly be seen. On a forward step heel lead, turning your foot into the turn is out.. That is one of the main things about Modern Waltz Foxtrot Quickstep and V. Waltz. Whatever happens dont even think about turning your toe out on a Heel Lead. . Leave that for Latin which is Ball Flat and then turned out.Knees straight, toe turned out to about 5 to 1 on a clock face. Modern both feet facing 12. Got to go Soccers on TV.

"Phil. I hope we are going to learn the the feet are kept straight in the Standard style of dancing. The angle at the foot remains constant.If we are going to follow the book. The very slight toe turned on a Reverse Turn for instance, is relatively new, and can hardly be seen. On a forward step heel lead, turning your foot into the turn is out.. That is one of the main things about Modern Waltz Foxtrot Quickstep and V. Waltz. Whatever happens dont even think about turning your toe out on a Heel Lead. . Leave that for Latin which is Ball Flat and then turned out.Knees straight, toe turned out to about 5 to 1 on a clock face. Modern both feet facing 12. Got to go Soccers on TV."

Quickstep, you misunderstood the comment you are replying to.

The angle mentioned was the vertical (pitch) angle of the ankle, not the horizontal (yaw) angle.

"Which has nothing to do with . Is a heel lead in the Waltz any different to a heel lead in the Foxtrot. The moving leg in both cases comes to a point of balance underneath the body, which can also be called a neutral position, with flexed knees.The difference is at the end of the step. On one we commence to rise. on the other we rise at the end of the heel lead..If it had been intended that there being a difference it might have said. This is a Waltz, therefore we commence to rise at the beginning or half way through. Which if the step is carried out as it is written wouldn't be possible anyway."

What you are unaware of is that while the rise may be conceptually thought of as beginning around the end of the step, the actual path of movement is of course smoothly continous during the entire step. This means that the precise details of action much earlier in the step will have to be consistent with the type of rise that will occur at the end of the step. Since waltz and foxtrot are obviously different at the end of the step, on a skilled dancer they will also be different at the middle of the step, as the middle of the step must foreshadow the unique end in each dance.

And keep in mind that each dance has a variety of different sorts of heel leads itself!

I can only feel a deacceleration at the end of the step if there is to be a turn. Otherwise we are midway between the two feet at th extent of the stride just the same in the Foxtrot and Waltz.
Aren't you one of those who take the second step of the Natural Turn on the same line as the first step.

"I can only feel a deacceleration at the end of the step if there is to be a turn."

If that it the case, then you aren't doing it right.

"Otherwise we are midway between the two feet at th extent of the stride just the same in the Foxtrot and Waltz."

No, not the same. The movement is along a different path, thus the midpoint of that path cannot be the same.

"Aren't you one of those who take the second step of the Natural Turn on the same line as the first step."

Yes, but the vertical component of hte movement will be different between various types of figures, even between various types of natural turns. Also the CBM will be different. There mere fact that the foot goes in the same direction for two steps does not in any way mean that the step is the same!

You have to learn to look beyond the tricial details, to the core of the matter. Or else you will never be a dancer, just a sophmore who likes to misquote books.

I don't see anything which says there is any difference in one driving step in the Waltz compared to the same step in the Foxtrot. The flexing of the knee is the same. At the extent of the stride the knee is straight. The heel is on the floor. The back knee is also straight and is on the toe. The weight is momentarily divided between the front and rear feet. With the body still moving forward bring the left foot forward with a bit of pressure on the ball of the foot and bring it under the body. Both knees will be flexed. I am ready to either continue forward or step to the side with turn depending on the dance. Why would it be neccesary to do anything that is different to the technique book

"I don't see anything which says there is any difference in one driving step in the Waltz compared to the same step in the Foxtrot."

That's because you aren't looking at what accomplishing the overall step requires must happen during this particular action.

"The flexing of the knee is the same."

No, it is different!

"At the extent of the stride the knee is straight."

For DIFFERENT MEANINGS of "straight". There is no absolute straight! It is all shades of application, depending on both the nature of the movement and its size.

"The weight is momentarily divided between the front and rear feet."

There you go again - quoting a comment from a WALK and trying to fool everyone into thinking it applies to an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT SITUATON.

"Why would it be neccesary to do anything that is different to the technique book"

We aren't really talking about doing things differnetly from the technique book, we are talking about your inability to SEE THE BIG PICTURE while reading the technique book!

OK. Its obvious that at the extent of the stride your knee is bent. I've gathered this from your previous writting. This puts you on the spot doesn't it. You will have to answer yes it is, or it isn' t. Everybody I think is aware that the knee is not rigid or locked. So don' t try to slide out that way.
Try moving around the room and towards the extent of the stride make a visible attempt to straighten the knee. It doesn't happen by magic, you must do it. If you watch our better dancers this can be seen.
So I would ask you. At the extent of your stride what is happening.. By all means quote the technique books.
Isn't this as usuall a polite letter.No snide remarks Not clouding the issue. Straight to the point in easy to understand words.

"OK. Its obvious that at the extent of the stride your knee is bent. I've gathered this from your previous writting."

It's not obvious at all. The only thing that is obvious is that I do what is appropriate for each specific circumstance, both the nature of the movement and the scope of it. Sometimes that means the knee remains slightly bent, other times it means it is fully straight. To do otherwise is to dance ignorantly - there is no single answer for all circumstances, much as in your infantile stupidity you might wish to pretend there were.

"So I would ask you. At the extent of your stride what is happening.. By all means quote the technique books."

Please quote what the technique book says about the extent of the stride for the following SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. Don't try to pass off OTHER SITUATIONS, quote EXACTLY WAHT IT SAYS ABOUT THESE:

1) step one of a waltz natural

2) step one of a feather

3) step one of a quick open reverse

4) step one of a foxtrot reverse

Again, no dishonest substitutions - quote EXACTLY WHAT IS SAYS ABOUT THESE FIGURES, NOT ANY OTHERS.

Time to put up or shut up, bozo.

"Isn't this as usuall a polite letter.No snide remarks Not clouding the issue. Straight to the point in easy to understand words."

Yeah, well instead of polite and dishonest, try RUDE AND TO THE POINT.

Quote accurately or shut up - you DISHONESTY WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.