I don't think this is true for all steps. Take for example the backword steps of the slow foxtrot natral weave,we have to give the Lower Leg more time to swing back into position just like the third step of the fox RT. Eager feet can cause slight reaching of the back foot if you wan't to stick with the basic timing of all quicks.

"I don't think this is true for all steps. Take for example the backword steps of the slow foxtrot natral weave,we have to give the FOOT more time to swing back into position just like the third step of the fox RT"

There's a small element of truth here, but it's much smaller than you might think.

In continued weave action there is no body swing. As a result, there's not much leg swing either - an an extent, the legs are simply doing a return swing from their trailing position to under the body - yes, a little ahead of where it is now, but it's not a full-out leg swing to a large leg extension. Also note that the knees are flexed - the weave is definitely an example of "nice and easy does it".

The reverse turn has a body swing, which will be continued in a leg swing. (continued, NOT preceded by)

Many top dancers will dance the first three steps of the reverse foxtrot turn "nice and easy" do they not,as they also do with the feather step?

"Many top dancers will dance the first three steps of the reverse foxtrot turn "nice and easy" do they not,as they also do with the feather step?"

Sure, but there's still a difference in the foot to foot action in the presence of swing, vs the foot to foot action without swing, as you have in the middle of a weave.

If you weave looks like your feather or reverse, one of the figures isn't right.

Silkinsons and other top dancers dance the weave as sqqsqq with the swing of a feather finish so why should not any one else?

"Silkinsons and other top dancers dance the weave as sqqsqq with the swing of a feather finish so why should not any one else?"

Yes, but that is a different figure.

If you dance an extended weave sequence SQQQQQQQ.... there is no swing in the series of QQ because after each pair of QQ you are back in exactly the same situation you started them in, so there's no change to swing through. Only when you finish the sequence by going to another shape do you get to swing. The smallest figure you see this in is probably the middle QQ of the weave from PP SQQQQQQ - there's swing at the start, and swing in the feather ending, but not in the middle.

Hi 3xuschanp,
Why Rhumba with an 'h'and not Rumba?

"You should swing the weight of the free leg only after the swing of the weight of the body is well underway."

I agree

Many dancers seem to be obsessed with minutae here, feel the weight of the foot? Please, concentrate on the important things

Anony.I have seen the Silkinsons dance the fox Nweave as sqqsqq.step swing up and step swing out instead of sqqqqq. What do you say about that? Is that important enough for you. >

"Anony.I have seen the Silkinsons dance the fox Nweave as sqqsqq.step swing up and step swing out instead of sqqqqq. What do you say about that? Is that important enough for you?"

cdroge, actually ...no it is not important enough for me,
I'm really not concerned about their choice of choreography, i was commenting in general about a fundamental principal of movement.
When i was studying with Bill Irvine in England he would teach the figures by explaining what we were doing & not referring to the figures by name
"after the swoosh, come around her, take off, ba da da da daaah, maybe ..."
when i questioned him, he said "the steps aren't important, it's the dancing"
Hmmmmm
next lesson Benny Tolmeyer and he basically says the same thing.
Ok
So now i am Wally Laird's and out of the blue he says"You know when i wrote the book, i could have created any pattern for the basic, They're just steps"...
cdroge do u see where I'm going here?
steps & choregraphy are what we utilize to demonstrate the fundamentals of the dance,
they are just tools to help us achieve something more