Thanks Anonymouse. My studies were originally based on Guy Howard's book which, perhaps for that reason, appears more logical and suits my engineering background. I then moved on to the ISTD manual and generally only refer to my collection of Alex Moore when questions arise in forums such as this.

Whilst I am happy with the idea that the time value of the step is not completed until the feet pass, that definition of the end of a step seems inconsistent with the charted descriptions. For example, if step 2 ends when the LF passes the RF on its way back down the LOD, why does the description of step 3 say "continue to turn on ball of RF".

Guy Howard explicitly defines the foot positions and alignments in his charts as "at the end of the step" which makes logical sense to me when describing the action, if not the timing.

Interestingly the ISTD handbook completely avoids the issue!

At the end of the day of course it makes no difference to the way the figure is danced. The only figure where the books really differ is the three step. Again, Guy Howard's LRL version makes more sense to me.

"Whilst I am happy with the idea that the time value of the step is not completed until the feet pass, that definition of the end of a step seems inconsistent with the charted descriptions. For example, if step 2 ends when the LF passes the RF on its way back down the LOD, why does the description of step 3 say "continue to turn on ball of RF"."

The baseline situation here is that we have rotation of the standing RF during the time when the Left foot is moving towards the right foot but has not yet passed it.

I think the answer is that the description you quote doesn't come from a chart as used in the revised technique or its descendent the ISTD manual, it comes from an older-style word description which was written in plainer language in terms of the leg swing associated with step 3, rather than in terms of the strict step boundary system limits of step 3.

In actuality, in the chart system of the revised technique, turn is usually notated as being between the steps - not that it occurs instantly on the dividing lines, but that it generally corresponds to the angle between the given alignments for each step.

"Anonymous. Does Marcus or our own Jonathan not step to a position that is backing LOD."

POSITION or ALIGNMENT???

"Try to understand that the right foot is turning all the way to backing LOD. It doesn't stop half way."

Of course it doesn't STOP, but in fact the given alignment is in the middle of this turn. The given alignment is backing DW. Obviously the foot turned to reach DW, and it will continue right on turning until it reaches something on the order of backing LOD. But DW is the given alignment.

I wonder if you will ever figure out why that is the case?

"Alex Moore"

Yes, and while we are dragging dear old Alex into it, let's please look at his drawing where we see the footprint backing DW and then overlayed a second outline in that position backing LOD. I think that makes the reality of the situation of initial vs final alignment sufficiently clear, don't you?


"Once again watch the examples given and if either of them have picked an alignment that is backing diagnal to the wall at the end of step two"

You will never learn, will you. Nobody is debating the alignment at the END of step two, because that is not the point in the step at which alignments are given. Everyone agrees the alignmment at the END is backing LOD, but the given alignment is backing DW because that happens first.

Will you ever understand why they wrote it that way?

"You seem to believe as you have written The right foot continues to turn as step three is taken."

No, that mistaken answer was someone else. The proper answer is that the right foot continues to turn as step two is CONCLUDED.

The chart in Alex Moore's book shows a double outline for the man's right foot for step 2. The black outline is the position at the end of step 2 and the white outline shows the extra turn made as step 3 is taken which allows the feet to brush and the step (3) to be taken back down the LOD.
There is nothing unusual in partners having slightly different alignments. It happens very often during turns because the partner on the inside of the turn usually makes the turn over one step while the partner on the outside of the turn requires two steps to complete the turn.

Apart from the YouTube video not being the ideal medium and camera angle for detailed examination I suspect we will both see what we expect to see during the turn. The only difference will be the point in time we choose as "the end of step 2" so I don't think either of us needs to be converted.

The 'Learn the Dances' video on this site does not play on my PC with Firefox browser, but I note the written description agrees with the three major texts I suggested in giving the alignment of step 2 as backing DW.

Social Dancer. There are three different videos of the Basic Foxtrot by Marcus Hilton . It is a clear as day on all of them that the second step is a side step and he is completely around on the second step. On the video there are several Reverse Turns or the first four steps of a Reverse . One has a Check and a Weave the other into a Wave as well as the first which is a normal Reverse Turn clearly seen.
A bit stupid don't you think if you think the lady can be stepping in one direction and you in another. To follow your suggested alignment she would be stepping diagnal to the wall wouldn't she. How on earth could she continue to turn to step down the LOD.
To make it easy right at the beginning after the Feather Step which he starts diagnal to the centre. He does a Reverse Turn, the camera is dead behind him. He goes all the way around to back the LOD in one go. Is balanced on the RF and steps directly back on the LF after the feet have brushed. If you can't see that , or anybody else, then a visit to either an optician or failing that there is always the mental health clinics
If anybody is interested. On the video the Foxtrot being played is by the Ray Conniffs Orchestra. " The way you look Tonight ".

"It is a clear as day on all of them that the second step is a side step and he is completely around on the second step."

By the END of the step perhaps, but not when it is placed. And that's where you keep getting into arguments. The book alignment is correct as stated and shown, but then after the book alignment the foot continues to turn and ends up backing LOD.

"A bit stupid don't you think if you think the lady can be stepping in one direction and you in another. To follow your suggested alignment she would be stepping diagnal to the wall wouldn't she."

A bit tellingly ignorant of you to say "stepping diagonal to wall". Diagonal to wall is not the DIRECTION of her partners step, it is the ALIGNMENT of his foot. And that is where you are getting confused. Partner's foot ALIGNMENTS often differ, but that does not mean that their DIRECTIONs of movement are incompatible.

Nobody stepped to DW - the man moved diagonally to the center, placing his foot initially backing DW and continuing to rotate it until it backed LOD.

Anonymous. You've got that one wrong. Marcus and any other you may care to look at go around in one movement on two toes, which is a side step, and not a backward step on step two of a Reverse Turn in the Foxtrot.. I would suggest that you copy them or make sure that you do have CBMP on the third step of the Feather. Is it too much trouble to see the example of a Reverse Turn on this site. You've made a statement now back it up with what you can see and come back and let us know what you think is wrong with the example Because wrong is what you are saying aren't you.

"Anonymous. You've got that one wrong. Marcus and any other you may care to look at go around in one movement on two toes, which is a side step, and not a backward step on step two of a Reverse Turn in the Foxtrot.."

Of course it's a side step, which is why I never said it was a backwards one.

"You've made a statement"

No, you are making things up again.

What was actually said was:

"Nobody stepped to DW - the man moved diagonally to the center, placing his foot initially backing DW and continuing to rotate it until it backed LOD."

Nowhere in that is a backwards step stated or even remotely implied.

One of you anonymous's wrote 2.5.08. Quote Nobody stepped DW - the man places his foot initially backing DW and continues to rotate it untill it backed LOD.
Nowhere in that is a backward step stated or even remotely implied.
The man places his foot initially backing DW. End of Quote.
That completely fools me. I really thought you said places his foot initially backing DW. Hold on. That's what you did say. Now I am confused.
Next. Steps 5 and 6 is the Feather Finish. Go to page 208 for the Feather Finish at the end of a Reverse Weave you will se it is refered to as a Feather Finish as are all steps that finish with a Feather Finish.
Once again nobody is game enough to say whether the alignments used by Marcus Hilton Chris Hawkins Timothy Howson, which can all be seen on youtube are correct or not. I would say by the silence that they are correct as well as the one on this web-site in Learn the Dances.

I'ii put my two bobs worth into this one.
If i turn only as far as to back diag to wall as a man , and then take step three, i will either be going into a Check and Weave or a Revers Wave. That will not be a Reverse Turn.
I would have expected some of you ladies to have come into this one and say. " Now i know why that idiot of a partner of mine pulls me off my Heel Turns " .