Anonymous. There is no beat four in the Waltz so why refere to something that isn't there as a beat. It is four steps within the space of three beats. You conveniently forgot to answer Alex Moore contibution.
Are you serious. Did I get this right when you say. The step must leave before the beat and finish after the beat. Have you heard the count one and, and, is where the step ends.The musical beat will last untill the next is struck which will be two. That's beat two with step two. And at the beginning we have three and.
The argument is too silly for words. Of course the foot leaves before the beat. The foot can't arrive if it doesn't leave can it. Who ever heard of a train arriving at the next station before it left this one. So all we are concerned with is arriving on the beat. If you want to delay your step then do so, if you want to land after the beat then do that also, or before the beat. But don't drag beginners with you into what you think is arguably right. The instructions should be RF forward on the beat of one. Or whatever it says in the technique book. Remembering Alex Moore does mention beats with steps.

"Did I get this right when you say. The step must leave before the beat and finish after the beat."

No, you got it wrong. What I said was:

"It a step is going to land "on" the beat, then it must start BEFORE the beat and end AFTER the beat."

Which if you would bother to pay attention to how a step is defined is so obviously true that there is really no point in your continue to argue with it.

"Have you heard the count one and, and, is where the step ends."

If you are dividing beats in half, and trying to match beats to steps at that crude level of precision, then the steps will begin on the half beats, which is to say each step will begin on an and.

So for example you would have one half beat of time between the and after three and the strike of beat one, which would constitute the first half of STEP one.
The placement of step one - which occurs when the step is about half done - would fall squarely on beat one. And then you would have a half beat of time between beat one and the and after one, which would constitute the second half of step one.

"The argument is too silly for words. Of course the foot leaves before the beat. The foot can't arrive if it doesn't leave can it."

Yes - and that period of travel from feet passing to step placement is defined to be part of the current step.
Yet if you want the foot to land on the beat, that period of travel that constitutes the first part of a step will have to occur during the "and" of the PREVIOUS beat.

Don't you see now, how the beats are offset from the steps?

"But don't drag beginners with you into what you think is arguably right."

All I am doing is expressing what would actually have to happen in order for your desire to land steps on the beats to be accomplished. Stated in the langauge of technique it doesn't look pretty, does it? Which is why I strongly recommend not worrying about this. Learn to create the rise and fall at the appropriate points in the action without regard to the music. Then learn to fit the whole thing to the music, not on the level of half beats, but rather on the order of entire measures.

"The instructions should be RF forward on the beat of one."

Absolutely incorrect. It is right foot LANDS on the beat one according to you - which obviously means that the right foot must start forward well before beat one - specifically during the second half of beat three.

"Or whatever it says in the technique book. Remembering Alex Moore does mention beats with steps."

Not in the way you keep imagining. He does not NAME the beats. Instead, he assigns a period of time measured in beats to each step - but in this case, the names for that period would be much closer to "and one" than to "one and". At least if you still are wanting your foot to land on the beat!

Anonymous. To prove in writting where your weight is. With an ordinanary chair . Stand behind with the front of your body touching the back of the chair. Do you push the chair forward at that point and step. Or do you lower first, slide the foor forward about seven inches and then push the chair. All without stopping. This would be the Waltz first step. Mine of course is the second one. The lesson here is when is the chair moved

"Or do you lower first, slide the foor forward about seven inches and then push the chair."

By the time my standing heel had touched the floor (if not before) you would see the chair moving. As you would if any skilled dancer did this exercise. The second part of the lowering (in the knees) coincides with rather dramatic movement - such movement is really the whole justification for bothering to do it!

Anonymous. Now you are lowering verticle. If you were not the chair would have been pushed forward as you arrived.

"Anonymous. Now you are lowering verticle. If you were not the chair would have been pushed forward as you arrived."

When the feet have closed on the last step, the first part of the lowering will be nearly vertical. But the second part of the lowering - the bending of the knee after the heel has touched down, will have a growing horiztonal travel that soon becomes huge. Thus as soon as my heel touches down, if not before, you would see the chair moving.

Anonymous. Now you are not falling forward. And the partner will thank you no end. She will not be pushed off her step.
I can claim very little credit for the use of a chair. It came from a Latin class only this week. We did in the Cha a Back Basic a Chasse and arrive to the chair without knocking it about, and to prove the front Basic was a checking action.
For those just reading this. The chair is an ordinary kitchen chair with the back of the chair towards your front.

"Anonymous. Now you are not falling forward. And the partner will thank you no end. She will not be pushed off her step."

Oh, I most certainly am falling foward, but I am falling into my own space rather than onto my partner, because my body remains vertically aligned as I fall forward. I am falling forward, not leaning forward.

Male chauvinist. How do you propose that the lady falls onto her next step. Have you tried it. If the ladies kneecap was the other way around maybe she might do it.

"Male chauvinist. How do you propose that the lady falls onto her next step. Have you tried it."

Indeed, falling through her step is exactly what she must do.

"If the ladies kneecap was the other way around maybe she might do it."

Actually it's a heck of a lot easier to do backwards than forwards given the way the knee does bend.

If you want a hard action, look at what the lady has to do between steps 3 and 4 of a natural or a spin turn - there she has to lower and create movement from a position of foot closure. Men now pretty much avoids this beyond the beginner level (where movement is not important anyway) by using a descending prep step. But at least once in the competition, the lady has to prove her ability to create a full forward movement while lowering from foot closure - and step 3 to 4 of the first natural spin turn in the first dance may be the only time in the competition when anyone still attempts to do that!