In response to Don's irrational obsession to his beloved textbook, I'd like to point out what the real purpose of that book is.

It isn't to create outstanding dancing.

Instead, it is to create a common starting point for the study, teaching, and discussion of dancing.

It doesn't really matter if the technique the teachers are being examined on is right, because the purpose of teaching exams is not to propogate perfect dancing. Instead, the purpose is to test the teacher's ability to learn and present structured and precise material about dancing. The quest for the state of the art comes later - once the teacher has the groundwork to observer, analyze, and describe how things might be subtly but importantly different from what was written down.

Much as they say "Democracy is the worst system, except for all the others" we could say "this book is the most innacurate... accept for all the others".

But it's role isn't to be accurate - it is instead a common reference and starting point, that isn't too bad as a way to dance for the first few years of a student's training.

Anonymous. Now hold on there are you saying that the Alex Moore book is inaccurate but more accurate than other books that are recognised by the IDSF. This includes the latest one which most teachers would have and is put out by the society. There are many steps that are not in the book. Pendulam Points Woodpecker Pepperpot and so on. You won't find a Three Step going diagnal to the centre which is often done in competitions. They're not there for obvious reasons.
It would seem your critizism of the book is simply because it does tell you not to twist. It does tell you that there is CBM on the first step of a Reverse. It doesn't tell you that you go to the point of imbalance. It doesn't tell you to have a left side lead into a Reverse Turn Foxtrot. It does tell you that there is a mid point, which is split weight, on a forward or backward step. Do you also try a left side lead in the Waltz. That's enough for now.

Don,

All I can really say is that as long as you choose a textbook over in-person work with the world's best teachers, you will be a BOOKWORM and NOT A DANCER.

The book is a tool to get your started, and it remains a reference for the LANGUAGE OF DANCING. But it does not an cannot describe actual dancing - it can only serve as a STARTING POINT FOR STUDY.

I'm not necessarily agreeing with the things that anonymous has been writing. However, i am with him when he says that the technique books aren't a 'bible'. Nothing substitutes for good individual and professional teaching. I'm sure Don would agree with this point too. But there are things which aren't written in the book and which are nevertheless important if you want to become an excellent competition dancer, and i believe (this is my own view based on my experiences) that some things written, certainly in Alex Moore's book, are just out of date. I'm not making a dig at Alex Moore- ALL text books suffer from this ageing process.

Phil. I agree. But tell me what percentage of the dancing you do is not straight from the book. Just as it has been since the first book was written. If you want an alignment or footwork or slows and quicks where do you go. You go to the same place I do.
Wally Laird for Latin and Alex Moore for modern. Any modifications I leave to the coaches or DVD's. I will mention this after being with my present teacher for a while now. And knowing that their dancing is of world class. There current records prove it. You also know as it has been since the beginning that a Waltz is commence to rise at the end of one, continue to rise on two and three lower at the end of three. That goes through whatever you may do in the Waltz. I'ii expain where I had it completely wrong. I did an Oversway in the Waltz . Then I come out by drawing my RF to my LF and I was up and stepped off on two. Wrong as I recover by drawing my RF to my LF I should have been down on one commence to rise at the end of one. That is only one place. There are many more. Best Wishes for Xmas.

"Phil. I agree. But tell me what percentage of the dancing you do is not straight from the book."

Everything I dance is based on the book, but nothing is literally straight from it. The book is only the starting point - the common language for discussion, an initial outline of the technique, and something to refer back to and constantly change your understanding of.

But it is just a tool, a reference. It is not a complete recipe for dancing. And if you are unwilling to see beyond it, you will NEVER BE A DANCER but only a student.

"If you want an alignment or footwork or slows and quicks where do you go. You go to the same place I do."

It is where you start. Then when you understand that, you understand that there is more detail than what is written there, some of it slighlty contradicting what is written.

"Any modifications I leave to the coaches or DVD's."

That's exactly the problem - you are arguing a literal (and often mistaken) reading of the book against precisely the kinds of things people have been covering during in-person lessons with world champions and/or those who train world champions. You textbook or DVD made for generally consumption simple can't compare!

"I will mention this after being with my present teacher for a while now. And knowing that their dancing is of world class. There current records prove it."

There records proove nothing of the sort. They haven't even made the final yet! There is worlds of difference between what they will teach you and what champions and those that champions study with can teach you. Your teacher is great for everyday coverage, but if you want to be a DANCER you will need to periodically consult with a true master who can help you with the things your teacher does not understand well enough to pass on.

"a Waltz is commence to rise at the end of one, continue to rise on two and three lower at the end of three. That goes through whatever you may do in the Waltz."

I suggest you consult your beloved bible, as while that is true of the basic figures, your book has many waltz figures that do not work that way.

Anonymous. The figures that do not have a verticle lowering are differet to those that do. If every last detail was written in the book we would need a truck to carry it around, you should know that.
Exactly which finals are you talking about. Which of your teachers are invited to competitions all over the world now at this present time. Are they invited to lecture as well as teach. Have they been anywhere where their picture was life size on displays advertising their coming Demonstration. Are they the Professional Champions of their country. Do they have a world ranking. Will they be competing in the UK titles in January. And do they then go to compete in Japan stopping off to teach in Hong Kong on the way. Either put up or shut up.

Don, you said your teachers were what, about 20th place?

That is impressive as a competitive achievement, but it is NOTHING as a coaching qualification. Nobody of that level is viewed as an authority by serious competitors, instead that is the kind of person you take routine lessons with. The people you consult on the difficult questions, and for the long range improvement are of another order entirely - people who won or came close to it in their day, and have put numerous students into the final or even the top spot.

So sure, work with what your teachers are giving you. But realize that what you are getting is the opinion of someone who hasn't figure out how to make their own dancing work yet. If you want an expert, find someone who won and then spent a decade teaching and judging, and put the hard questions to them.

Anonymous. Your argument will not stand up in court. Find somebody who won. Question . Won exactly what. And then spend a decade, (a decade being ten years). teaching and judging. Maybe you should tell that to Slavik and Katrina just for starters. They haven't been around that long. Anybody who has their DVD will be able to tell you how good they are at teaching.

"Find somebody who won. Question . Won exactly what."

A world or perhaps blackpool title.

"And then spend a decade, (a decade being ten years). teaching and judging."

In summary, the basic description of most of those who train today's champions.

If you are serious about your dancing, those same people should also be YOUR coaches from time to time.

As they say, if you find someone whose dancing you like get lessons with THEIR coach.