Since nearly all car, horse, airplane, dog, and other races are run with turns to the LEFT, and I feel more comfortable banking my bike to the left than to the right, does anyone know why a RIGHT turn in the Waltz is called a "NATURAL TURN"?

By the way, Horse race tracks vary from country to country.. the US is opposite to the UK for e.g.

As to Nat. ... the VW originally only turned to the Right.. when other dances evolved, socially, they adopted the term to identify that right, was the natural way to "rotate".. this is a theory...and, there is another good reason. It also has been proposed that it was due to the Sword carrying by officers when they danced .

Terence, isn't the position of the sabre on the man also the reason that Line of Dance is in a counterclockwise flow? I also sometimes wondered about the name of the natural turn for right-hand turns. I figured maybe it was referring to the fact that other facets of life view right-handed of anything to be more natural? Not sure why, since there are plenty of southpaws out there.
But it likely doesn't have anything to do with that, as I am right-handed, but the left-hand turns in dancing seem far more natural to me than the right-hand turns! But the natural turn in the waltz is a very nice move.

Ive always believed that they mis-named the turns.. the Left ( Rev ) turn goes with the direction of flow.. would that not seem to indicate more " natural " ?..

once precedent is set its difficult to reverse, or should I say natural ( a good pun , but not intended )..

By the way.. I,m one of those s.paws

As Shakespear wrote . What's In a Name.
But surely it was called a Natural Turn because thats the way the clock goes. A Reverse Turn the opposite.
Just for arguments sake . I doubt if a left handed swordsman would have carried his weapon on his left side.

I've read discussions on other message boards about Natural Turn, and though it's been a long time, I remember the sword theory having been debunked (or at least, hotly challenged). One of the arguments against had something to do with the idea that men of the era would never have worn their swords, or even their sword "holster" (sorry, don't know the proper terminology) while dancing with a lady. Sounded convincing to me.

At any rate, that's an answer to an entirely different question, which is, "How did it come to be that dancing first began with couples turning to the right? Why not to the left?". The original question was of terminology: "Why is the right turn called Natural, a left turn Reverse, and not the other way around?". This has a much simpler answer.

For whatever reason, sword or no sword, dancing Waltz for many years was traditionally done in only one direction: To the right. It wasn't until later that someone decided to try it the other way. Since this was a variation of the norm, it was only natural (no pun intended) to refer to it as the "reverse". I read somewhere that it became customary at some point for a gentleman to ask of a new partner, "Do you reverse?".

So from a historical standpoint, it makes perfect sense: If people were turning only to the right for many years, then added a left-turning variation later on, it seems perfectly logical that the late-comer would be dubbed "Reverse".

I hear this question quite often, and I understand why. In America we are usually taught the "Box Step" -- a basic version of a Reverse Turn -- as our very first dancing pattern. Unfortunately in chain schools, some dancers pass through the levels without ever really learning to dance a proper Natural turn! If it is taught at all, it is often done only as a novelty, then forgotten shortly thereafter.

In its modern form, the Natural turn is somewhat more difficult for beginners, and so without proper guidance they fall back into familiar territory, the Left Box. To someone like this, it is understandable that they perceive a left turn as the more "natural" version. Even with proper guidance, just having been taught the Left Box first, coupled with the fact that it's somewhat easier to a newcomer, is enough to leave someone with the impression of the Left Box as the "natural".

To undo this impression, it helps to give a short demonstration of the historically-accurate version of 18th-century Waltz (aka "Vintage Waltz"). In tempo, it's Viennese, but the movement is almost more like a 3/4 Polka: A sort of a loose "side-close-close" action, where most of the turn is on the close-close. Try this yourself and you'll find that turning to the right is actually slightly easier than turning to the left. If my description isn't working for you, just try Polka turning to the right, then to the left... You'll discover the same thing.

Regards,
Jonathan

Thanks to all that responded. Makes me feel better knowing that others have had the same question.

Jonathan, that was a great explanation about the natural turn and the vintage waltz. I do have one question about that. You say it was a loose side-close-close style, but I am having a hard time visualizing a "side" step as the first in the waltz, other than, say, the side whisk or something similar. Your hint that a polka style turning right is similar is somewhat helpful, but I was wondering if the "side" you mention in this vintage waltz isn't really at least somewhat "forward" as well? More curious than anything else, really, though it does sound like an excellent thing to show someone as an example of how the dance has changed over so many years.

You're not too far off. The "loose" side-close-close action I mentioned can range from side-close-close to side-close-side, to side-cross behind-side. The latter is a turning version of the Side Whisk.

One thing that may be contributing to your confusion is if you're imagining the figure as beginning with the man facing the line of dance. To move down line of dance with a side step, you would need to begin facing wall, or at least somewhere in that vicinity.

The side-close-side and side-cross-side are typically done on the outside of turn, while the side-close-close is more common on the inside. When on the outside, if you do step side on 3, it's usually smallish, being placed directly under the body.

This is not strict technique, but an observation of what I feel I do (and observe other people doing) simply to get the job done.

The side step on 1 is the longest step. It is the step with the least rotation, but that is not to say that there is none at all. I usually teach it as a straight side step, because the student will tend to add the right amount on his own without requiring a complicated technical explanation. But if I were to analyze the result in greater detail, then I would say that because of the rotation, this side step could possibly be described as beginning side and slightly forward, and perhaps ending side and slightly back.

True. It's also a great dance to teach to those wedding couples who insist on dancing Viennese as their first dance, after only two lessons.

Regards,
Jonathan