A professional dancer, very famous, first introduced the Natural Turn in the Modern Waltz in 1920, His name was Victor Silvester. I read an article in a dance magazine, by another well known person who said . Even though the first three of a Natural has been with us for over eighty years there are still arguments on how it should be performed. What just three steps. How can that be. First lets get onto common ground. A straight leg does not mean rigid. Bend the knee can be lower or compress or both at the same time. Lets use compress mainly because it is synonymous with storing energy.
Change step. From a compressed position RF forward. LF. to the side slightly forward. Close RF to LF.
On the forward step we are on the heel of the front foot and the toe of the back foot, with the weight at this point right in the middle between the two feet both legs straight, having driven off the standing foot which will carry us through. As our weight continues forward the front knee will start to compress. The weight and the leg will come under the body and with compression will swing to the side using the stored energy of the right leg. I think every beginner will do it this way. But introduce a turn at the end of the first step and that drive onto two disapears forever.( Anonymous has disagreed in the past about split weight. Somehow he thinks we can go from one step to another without passing the center ). Now some of the arguments. One teacher might teach that we hold onto three longer then lower and go forward catching the beat up. This is very much how we were taught in the early 50's. We came down from a very high position to our forward step. Nothing was said about compression at all. Then somebody came along and said. We can get all the drive we need if we compress first. We don't need that slippery slide effect. At this momment we have only really spoken about one step. I'll stop here after mentioning a lecture I attended where this teacher , a judge, showed us what some are doing with step two and still staying within the laws of dancing as it is in the the manual. Step two with the heel slightly off the floor. We would say they are as flat as a tack. But think of the rise they get. But where has the swing gone. probably more into three. To go back to my original comment Eighty years and they still disagree.

"Even though the first three of a Natural has been with us for over eighty years there are still arguments on how it should be performed. What just three steps. How can that be."

For the simple reason that no one has yet done one right...

"Change step. From a compressed position RF forward."

Note that the compression can't be achieved while over the standing left foot and remaining in a closed, contact hold. The standing knee gets in the way if you do that. You can only achieve full compression (aka knee bend) by moving the body with the knee. Try doing it stationary and see where your thigh ends up compared to your partner's crotch. If if works, one way switch who is going forward and it won't work the other.

"LF. to the side slightly forward."

Note that this is still the same direction across the floor as step one - only we now call it sideways in relation to the body, which has rotated to a new orientation.

"On the forward step we are on the heel of the front foot and the toe of the back foot, with the weight at this point right in the middle between the two feet"

Nope, you are leaving one and then you are on the other - if you do it right you won't be able to be on both at the same time. If you can, you have outstepped your body flight.

"having driven off the standing foot which will carry us through."

Yes - it will carry your right past this false idea of split weight onto fully onto the receiving foot. Unless you divide your legs further than your moment can sustain and get yourself stuck between feet, there is no point where you are really on both feet.

"As our weight continues forward the front knee will start to compress."

Yes. Note that for some of the Italians, the lowest point of their body is actually just before it arrives over the foot on step 1. That's too late in my mind, but some like the dramatic rise that results from continuing downwards until then.

"The weight and the leg will come under the body and with compression will swing to the side using the stored energy of the right leg."

Again, if this is a 3/8 turn figure then that "to the side" is the original direction of travel as seen by a now turned body. If it's a 1/4 turn figure, the sideways push relative to a less turned body means that the path will actually diver to the side here.

"I think every beginner will do it this way. But introduce a turn at the end of the first step and that drive onto two disapears forever."

There is no turn at the end of the first step in a 3/8 turn natural, but there is a turn there in the 1/4 turn natural. Neither kills the action for a dancer who has learned to fill out and sustain the movement.

"(Anonymous has disagreed in the past about split weight. Somehow he thinks we can go from one step to another without passing the center)."

Yes... hop from one leg to another. No split weight. Now we don't "hop" when we dance, we of course move in a gracefull, smooth path. But we do leave the departing foot permanently behind before the moving foot has really caught us - if we are dancing with flight. To visit the point of split weight, you have to step further than where you body flight is taking you, in order to get yourself temporarily stuck between your feet. And in order to step that far, you have to do impolite things involving your leg and your partner's crotch, or ugly things involving your lower back.

"To go back to my original comment Eighty years and they still disagree."

Of course.. because they still misunderstand.

Anonymous. I get split weight everytime I walk. I just did , so do you. I'm trying to figure out if in your set up where yours and your ladies feet are. Its just something you wrote. Is the ladies RF in between your LF and RF. Or is the ladies RF more towards the outside of your RF. Is the ladies right arm straightish, and consiquently where is the ladies left hand. Is it on the bicept or more towards the back of the mans arm. All of the above is related.
It will tell what age you come from.
For the simple reason nobody has done one right.
Now that's a bit of a rash statement don't you think.I must tell Andrew that when he arrives next month. Phil that's the Andrew you have mentioned a few times. I believe you have his tape.

"Anonymous. I get split weight everytime I walk. I just did , so do you."

Depends on how I'm walking - sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. When I'm wandering along nose in a book I do, when I am walking to the studio I don't.

"Is the ladies RF in between your LF and RF. Or is the ladies RF more towards the outside of your RF."

It's inside on inline steps and outside on outside partner steps... I mean, is that a silly question or what?

"Is the ladies right arm straightish"

Of course not! There must be a gentle bend in her elbow, due to the sharp (nearly acute) bend in the gentlemen's left elbow.

"and consiquently where is the ladies left hand. Is it on the bicept or more towards the back of the mans arm."

On the inside of course.

Allow me to give you a hint: the size of the hold comes from the leftwards stretch in both bodies, NOT from the arms and not from the placement of the feet.

"For the simple reason nobody has done one right.

Now that's a bit of a rash statement don't you think."

Nope... it's kind of like that guy who just won the nobel prize, and his mother said - but you are so young, are you allowed to win it again? If someone had done one right, half the fun would be gone. Instead, we have a challenge that no one has yet mastered.

"I must tell Andrew that when he arrives next month."

Go right ahead. Waltz wasn't even the dance for which he was famous.

The idea that people disagree on exactly how the slow waltz natural turn should be done after 80 years because no-one in that time has ever done it right is one of the silliest comments i've ever read here.What's right? How do we know that the original description was 'right'. Text books only pass on the writer's ideas, even in technical subjects.
Could it be that there is disagreement because there is no 'right' way - that dancing is an art form which is evolving. I doubt anybody would want to dance as they did 80 years ago, any more than anyone would want to play golf, tennis, football, or anything else as they did 80 years ago.
This split weight argument: - anonymous, i can't see why you are claiming this doesn't happen. Nobody is claiming that you stop with your weight split and admire the view. Unless you DO hop, the weight at some point must momentarily be evenly distributed between the 2 feet. If the weight distribution suddenly changed between ,say, 40/60 to 60/40 (put in any numbers you like) there would be a jerkiness.
If it's the Andrew i'm thinking of, it takes some nerve to suggest he's doing this incorrectly. I think you need to spell out your credentials, or have you been employed here just to disagree with everything and promote discussion?

"The idea that people disagree on exactly how the slow waltz natural turn should be done after 80 years because no-one in that time has ever done it right is one of the silliest comments i've ever read here.What's right?"

That is what we are, collectively, still in the process of discovering.


"This split weight argument: - anonymous, i can't see why you are claiming this doesn't happen."

Because it doesn't, unless you make the mistake of holding the hips back over the standing foot.

"Unless you DO hop, the weight at some point must momentarily be evenly distributed between the 2 feet."

No - you are still making the mistake of assuming that your weight is fully supported at all times. It isn't, unless you hold your hips back over the standing foot too long.

"If the weight distribution suddenly changed between ,say, 40/60 to 60/40 (put in any numbers you like) there would be a jerkiness."

Yes, which is why it doesn't do that. It changes from 100% down to 0% on one foot and then from 0% up to 100% on the other. In between, it is not completely supported. But the body movement is smooth, because the forces acting on it change only smoothly, while the inertia is continuous. It is, in effect, an almost purely horizontal falling off one foot and towards the other.

"If it's the Andrew i'm thinking of, it takes some nerve to suggest he's doing this incorrectly."

Of course he is. For one, he didn't tend to win the waltz. But that's beside the point, grab a tape, watch slowly, and I'm sure you will find mistakes. You can with everyone if you open your eyes, open your mind, and really look. No one has yet mastered this figure.

This is how 'split-weight' is very plausible and good dancing.

When one is over the standing leg, a single 'point of pressure' exists to support the 'centre of weight'. This 'point of pressure' increases, continuing to support and also move the 'centre of weight' forward. In the case of a walk, at the moment that the 'point of pressure' reaches maximum and is about to diminish the receiving leg must settle on the floor ahead of the 'centre of weight' and establish a 2nd 'point of pressure'. For a controlled weight transfer, that is required for all dance walks and most swings, as the standing leg 'point of pressure' diminishes the receiving leg 'point of pressure' should increase by about the same degree. At some point the pressure into the floor by the 2 points of pressure will be 50/50. This is the 'split weight' concept. Of course in normal dancing one does not stop there. The diminishing of the standing leg 'point of pressure' and the increasing of the receiving leg 'point of pressure' is smooth and continuous until the 'centre of weight' is fully received. It's not literally about the 'centre of weight' being equi-distant between the two feet and therefore leads to the incorrect conclusion drawn that this will lead to 'reaching into one partners space', as is implied or suggested by some. In reality the 'centre of weight' will be much, much closer to the receiving legs 'point of pressure' because one drives the centre of weight away from the standing leg far more that one can reach with the receiving leg in partner dancing, for most figures. So there are two concepts here 'centre of weight' and 'point of pressure'. How they interact is important in understanding how one transfers ones weight and maintains dynamic balance.

Note that the way that the 'point of pressure' and the 'centre of weight' interact in the run is different from the walk (or the swing), as the run only establishes a single 'point of pressure' with one leg then the other. This is what distinguishes it from the walk, which must establish the two points of pressure to create a controlled weight transfer.

Rha

"In the case of a walk, at the moment that the 'point of pressure' reaches maximum and is about to diminish the receiving leg must settle on the floor ahead of the 'centre of weight' and establish a 2nd 'point of pressure'."

You are still operating under the severly mistaken assumption that the sum of the support from both legs equals 100% of the body weight. It doesn't always - at some points in a step it is much more, and at some points it is much, much less - even briefly zero for a fully flighted action.


"It's not literally about the 'centre of weight' being equi-distant between the two feet and therefore leads to the incorrect conclusion drawn that this will lead to 'reaching into one partners space', as is implied or suggested by some."

That would be a more severe mistake, which you are least are largely avoiding - but it is not the only mistake to watch out for.

"In reality the 'centre of weight' will be much, much closer to the receiving legs 'point of pressure' because one drives the centre of weight away from the standing leg far more that one can reach with the receiving leg in partner dancing, for most figures."

Yes - but when this is done in a fully flighted action, it results in the sum of support falling far below the body weight, because the receiving leg releases the body before the moving leg accepts it.

"Note that the way that the 'point of pressure' and the 'centre of weight' interact in the run is different from the walk (or the swing), as the run only establishes a single 'point of pressure' with one leg then the other. This is what distinguishes it from the walk, which must establish the two points of pressure to create a controlled weight transfer."

Tango may use what you call a "walk" but the ballroom swing dances ultimately use an action, that while walk-like in appearance shares this property with running.

"the walk, which must establish the two points of pressure to create a controlled weight transfer."

That would be the fundamental error in one sentance.

It is imperitive in the swing dances not to attempt to use the receiving leg to control the weight transfer. Doing so can only create the kind of body stuck between overdivided legs that causes poor body and hold alignment.

Instead, the timing of weight trasfer has to be controlled only by the aim of the initiating action. Particularly when moving forward, don't launch yourself and then try to control your arrival - any attempt to do so will spoil your body alignment. Instead, launch yourself so that you arrival, UNCONTROLLED, will come out exactly where, when, and how you wanted it to be.

Moving backwards, human anatomy provides some degree of control to pace the progress of the weight through the foot without spoiling alignment, which the backwards partner must use to accomodate the desires or reality of the forward partner's less controllable movement.

Anonymous. This is to the Anonymous who doesn't believe that there is a slit weight. As Phil mentioned Phil doesn't know who he is answering unless we can distingish between one Anonymous and another.
You the first Anonymous definitely have not seen any recent IDSF competitions. The ladies right arm is more straight than bent by a long way. One of the top couples has a very straight arm. Which brings the left hand behind the man's bicept This by the way is all six on the floor. In the set up the lady comes to the man as if she is going to pass him on his right side. So where does that put her feet in relation to the man. Contact point right side to right side. Don't believe what I say. Have a look for yourself if you can. All six are the same in six different competitions. After the set up before the preperation step, the man puts the lady onto her left foot over her heel. This puts the lady well to the mans right side as she takes her shape. As I said before look for yourself and then you tell me. Nowdays the position of the arms is dictated to by the position of the body. I think you believe that the position of the body dictates the arms. That's how it was half a century ago. For those who know about Wally Fryer even in the late 40's he taught that the lady has to be well to the man's right side. It was a bit revolutionary at that time . Most in those days danced very square. I came across a very early edition of Alex Moore's book only last week dated 1936. In that edition he used photos of he and his partner. One was a forward walk. The length of stride was incredibly small. But you've guessed it they were on the heel of the front foot and the toe of the back foot and yes the weight is in the middle. He could hardly do it any other way when inside page 10 that is how it is described. You know how in a debate you must give a reference to a book, lecture or whatever to conradict what I have brought forward. I am not the least bit concerned with the way you dance any of your steps. The way that it is danced and being taught and performed today is to me of the most importance. Just like most sports time doesn't go backwards. We will never see those very straight legs with no give in them ever again. I asked a teacher . On my Feather Step am I bending my knees too much, she said. Quickstep I doubt whether you will ever bend your knees too much.
I think there lies one of your problems. The only way you can get your body ahead of your legs is if you are unbending. That isn't flight that's fall. Which acounts for your belief, as stated, that we should get to the point of imbalance and have to take our next step..