The reason the differences exist are as follows .

A/M tried , where ever possible to have all dances commence with the mans Left foot......Freds were influenced largely by the side direction of Danzon....

The Rumba being taught was long before the mambo and Cha were introduced so it fitted in with their concepts .

This changed directionally the starting alignment of Mambo and Cha( which is side and back same as Bolero )


The reason that freds may be more correct,because it became an extension of Danzon, thereby imitating the Cuban origins.

I was D.D. for both chains in many major cities , and worked with many of the people who implemented the system, ALL national D.D. from John Monte ( in freds )to Bebe Black, , Barbara Paul and Nana Samaniego with A/M .
They would never agree on the direction of start for Rumba .
Interesting note, Johns brother was the world reknowned conductor Hugo Montenegro .

Oh and by the way, foot turnout is NOT taught in the American system as a general rule .

Being a former Examiner for a National Amer.Soc., when judging, we seldom penalised people( pro/ am ) for style and even in some cases content, providing they were in category .( never quite agreed with that in principle )

..."Oh and by the way, foot turnout is NOT taught in the American system as a general rule."....

I guess I can't make a statement for all American instructors about what is generally taught for foot turn-out because I haven't taken that many classes in all locations. However I have taken many classes in American Latin dances, and I have never had one that didn't teach foot turn out. All of those classes were for social dancing not for competition (necessarily). If you are referring to beginner level social classes that may be true because very little technique is taught in these classes (especially those in chain studios). The quality of instruction varies a lot depending on what city you are in, and there are some locations with poor instructors and they could be teaching most anything (unfortunately).

SmoothGeezer. Turn out of the feet meaning two. If you look at Slaviks DVD Karina demonstrates and explains clearly why keeping the feet straight is wrong. She shows both ways and by a simple turn out of the feet how it will eliminate any gap between the thighs which on a female, because of the costume worn, does not look good. Plus two straight feet. no balance.

I coached ALL over the US for 30yrs ( until 3 yrs back ) I have NEVER taught or examined anyone in Amer.style with Intern. style tech. in social latin at ANY level( And, yes I did A/M .. Freds and Indies )

In fact, at one particular school, I was followed in by a former US latin champ. who never taught "turnout" in the social Amer. latin.

The 2 styles are distinct, and should remain that way.

If things continue ( in some areas of teaching ) the 2 styles will be come 1. ( Intern.style links in social tango is a classic e.g. ).


The system has worked well for over 70yrs ( far longer than the english social system , who are just beginning to take on the Amer. style )

I teach that style in my classes here and as always, get very good results .

Terence. Don't you think that eventually The American Style will fall in to the International Style just because of the sheer weight of numbers. I dont think that the International Style would ever copy the American technique. Also most people have a natural turn out of the foot, and sometimes both feet. Which can be a problem in the Standard Syle. I for one have to concentrate in Modern that both feet point in the same direction. Anyway. Latin or Salsa, feet pointing to 11 and 1 on a clock face looks much better.

Anything is possible.

That for me, is not the issue . As to appearance ,we have differing opinions ( thats OK )

American style is very deep rooted in its technique, to achieve the results they desire .
I think the classic e.g. might be T/A and all other styles .

They, have in essence, become a caricature 0f the original ( as have most other dances ) .

I dance, and teach all 3 Tango styles, and in so doing , always try to keep them in context with their own style.

All were developed for different reasons, by people much smarter than I !!.
It would be like asking the Americans to change THEIR swing , to what we have turned Jive into, another parody .

The responses I generally get to my comments are " Well, thats progress ".... no doubt.. but is it ALWAYS the right path to take ??

Terence. The turnout of the feet in Latin.If I do one Rumba Walk stopping with my RF behind my left both feet pointing to the front. If I turn my rear foot which is the RF to a Latin Cross position, that is toe to heel. If I brought the feet together. without changing the shape of the foot , bring it heel to heel with the LF. Even though I have not move my LF it has the appearance of having been turned out. On a clock face it will be pointing to 11 whilst the right is pointing to 1. Yet I didn't move it at all. Personally I work both feet, but for those who have difficulty never fear, the back foot is here.

Again, you keep pressing the point of what YOU have been taught , and what you prefer..( was dancing and teaching that style in the 40s / 50s )

As i stated, when teaching " street " style " latin , majority are little concerned with footwork .

Until you have worked, taught and danced in that " world ", it is impossible to understand .

Latinos do NOT dance Intern. style dances . They are more concerned with their " roots ".... Bachata... Mambo... Salsa... Merengue.. and Guajira . Ya know-- the "real " thing !