At the risk of sounding ignorant, I want to ask a question about pivots, in waltz, for instance. On the shows recently broadcast on PBS, Tony
Meredith comments, "what beautiful pivots" and what I see looks more like continuous spins in second position [and with a lot of rise]and not what I would call a pivot as such. Does anyone have a comment? Thanks

Hi Annie
A pivot is a strong turning figure, so pivots would look like continuous spins. What is "second position"?. I'm not aware of this term.

Second position is is a step taken to the side, so feet are apart.{let's say shoulder width}. It appears that both partners held their feet in second postion throughout the turning action.
I think of a pivot as holding a foot in CBM.

Annie. You must find the difference and understand the difference between a Pivot in the Rumba and a Pivot in the Standard style. The type of continuouse Pivots used in the Rumba would never be used in Standard.
In the Standard Style a turn is made on the ball of one foot, the other foot is kept in front or behind in CBMP. Any arguments look up page 33 in the technique book. Your description is as in Rumba not Standard. Good Luck

Get a clue quickstep - she didn't say anything about rumba pivots.

Her confusion is simply cuased by the need to maintain a same side lead in all but the final pivot. This will have the shoulders rotated towards the seperation of the feet - the feet will appear apart sideways relative to the body, but the feet are inline with each other relative to themselves.

The lady said Pivots in Second Position and staying in Second Position That is Rumba Pivots. If you don't understand you should keep quiet. Second Position Ballet is the clue. Got to go.

"The lady said Pivots in Second Position and staying in Second Position That is Rumba Pivots. If you don't understand you should keep quiet. Second Position Ballet is the clue. Got to go."

No - it isn't what she saw. It's what she thought she saw - in reference to the body, the feet do appear to be in second position. But in reference to themselves the feet are seperated front/back.

Perhaps before jumping to ourtragoues conlcusions that only prove you own lack of reading comprehension, you should go back and review the first post in the thread. And you will see that she was clearly watching WALTZ and not rumba.

Yes. But she is applying Rumba technique to a Waltz. On your own, . feet apart, as she said about shoulder width. Turn half a turn followed by another half. Now with a partner and her foot in between yours, the other parallel on the outside about shoulder width apart. Turn. There is no CBMP or CBM there. This is a Pivot in the Rumba. Which you would not use in a Waltz. For those who know Latin it is like a Three Step Turn which is done solo. Some like to call it a Spin but it isn't

"But she is applying Rumba technique to a Waltz. On your own, . feet apart, as she said about shoulder width."

Quickstep, she was watching better dancers than you can ever dream of being.

For the record, the feet *are* shoulder width apart in waltz pivots - but they are still seperated front-back relative to themselves. Even though they are apart sideways relative to the body, they are still inline relative to themselves.

Technically you can call this CBMP... though I'd say it's stretching the definition far enough I can't agree it was wise to document it that way.

Lets go to a model.Put a ruler on the table. With the finger keeping one side still turn the other side one half a turn and repeat.The two sides of the ruler are your feet. You would never do a Pivots in the Waltz like that. With that there is no CBMP at all. With a Pivot as in Modern one foot is held in front of the other making it a forward movement. In a turn with the feet in second position it is a sideway movement . No CBM. No twisting of the body. Just turn. This is worse than teaching school.