PDA

View Full Version : "I don't go back on that foot..."



David Bailey
25th-February-2007, 03:18 PM
Dancing with a lady last night, I encountered some resistance to her stepping back on her right foot - which I was trying to get her to do, to lead into Manhattans, West Manhattans, cross-body leads, tango walks and so on (most of my current move-set in other words).

But she just kept going back on her left foot, without fail.

I initially assumed that my lead was at fault and tried to make it clearer - no luck.

I then resorted to verbal indication (I know, I know, but I was desperate), only to be told point-blank: "No, I don't go back on that foot". :confused: :what:

Is it me, or is that a weird thing to say?
Is it a valid choice for her to make?

I left it at that, and did other moves - was that the right thing to do? What should I have done?

Minnie M
25th-February-2007, 03:23 PM
Oh dear David IMO that is so bad :sad:

If the lady didn't understand - or couldn't do it -or for what ever the reason is - DON'T do it - move on :really: it is only a dance and it should be fun, why make it hard work, and embarassing for your partner.

Unless it is in a class (an actual lesson) IMHO in freestyle you should not tell a lady what to do (unless she asks)

David Bailey
25th-February-2007, 03:28 PM
If the lady didn't understand - or couldn't do it -or for what ever the reason is - DON'T do it - move on :really: it is only a dance and it should be fun, why make it hard work, and embarassing for your partner.
Fair enough - but I just wondered why anyone would decide not to step back on her right foot... :confused:


Unless it is in a class (an actual lesson) IMHO in freestyle you should not tell a lady what to do (unless she asks)
Yeah, it's the last refuge of the incompetent :blush:

The problem is that the stuff I'm doing now, especially to certain types of music, all depends on being able to use that "mirrored backstep" as a starting point. So it's not like refusing a pretzel, it's more like refusing to do slotted dancing. Which is a new one on me...

drathzel
25th-February-2007, 03:36 PM
i dont have a prefered foot i'm always changing between the two and sometimes i dont step back i take my foot forward (this is to compensate for people taking big steps and to save my little arms and shoulders).

I dont know how people can only do it on one foot, my cousin is the same and she gets herself into such a tizzy over the basket and cerocspin cuz her feet wont go in the right direction cuz she has already stepped on it.

It could be the person learnt in a class where the teacher always stepped back on her left foot and ceroc is a very visual dance, i mean look how many people in the beginners class always swap their feet round on the step back when the teach has stepped back on the other foot.:hug:

Franck
25th-February-2007, 03:38 PM
I think this is the problem with teachers who make a big deal of always stepping on a specific foot. Most people will dance, learn to follow and use whatever connection is given to them to eventually learn to follow properly and use each foot as appropriate, but some dancers, will take their teachers' words literally, refuse to follow and only step back on 'that' foot, as any other foot would be wrong.
In the process they will add complex weight-changes to make sure they step back on 'that' foot despite being clearly (ok not always, but sometimes) led to step back on the 'other' foot.

Having said that, I agree with MinnieM, not much you could have done, except smile and dance without leading any step backs on 'that' foot! Lecturing one's partner on the dance floor is always bad form.

I know I should have stayed away from this thread, but it pushed my 'which foot do followers step back on?' button.

Tiggerbabe
25th-February-2007, 03:41 PM
Fair enough - but I just wondered why anyone would decide not to step back on her right foot... :confused:
Maybe it's just that she'd not encountered these moves before and normally steps back on her left. Perhaps the demo, at the classes she goes to, always starts by stepping back left and she (the lady you danced with) has assumed that you must do this.

As it was at a freestyle, I think you did the right thing by moving on.

MartinHarper
25th-February-2007, 04:14 PM
Dancing with a lady last night, I encountered some resistance to her stepping back on her right foot - which I was trying to get her to do, to lead into Manhattans, West Manhattans, cross-body leads, tango walks and so on (most of my current move-set in other words).

Seems to me like it should be possible to lead a follower into Manhattans and cross-body stuff regardless of what foot they go back on in open. (I've no idea what tango walks are).
Did she refuse to step back right in closed? I can see that being harder.


Is it a valid choice for her to make?

I can think of valid reasons to make that choice. You'd have to ask the lady what her reasons are to know if they're valid.


In the process they will add complex weight-changes to make sure they step back on 'that' foot despite being clearly (ok not always, but sometimes) led to step back on the 'other' foot.

Hmm. When I follow I end up doing all kinds of hoppity-skippity things to step back on my right in closed position (first move, basket, sway, etc). Not really sure what to do about that.

David Bailey
25th-February-2007, 04:53 PM
Seems to me like it should be possible to lead a follower into Manhattans and cross-body stuff regardless of what foot they go back on in open. (I've no idea what tango walks are).
Did she refuse to step back right in closed? I can see that being harder.Yep, refused in open, closed - every which way she could, basically.

At one point I wondered if she was a LeRoc spy... :whistle:

Tiggerbabe
25th-February-2007, 04:56 PM
Ok, maybe some "helpful" person told her once she had two left feet, and she believed them :innocent:

Franck
25th-February-2007, 05:05 PM
Hmm. When I follow I end up doing all kinds of hoppity-skippity things to step back on my right in closed position (first move, basket, sway, etc). Not really sure what to do about that.There's nothing wrong with doing 'hoppity-skippity' things if you're trying to achieve a particular look, match your partner or because it feels right. I was only referring to doing it (even when it doesn't feel natural) because you've been told you must step back on 'that foot'!

As far as avoiding, if you don't like it, I would recommend stepping with feet level (and close) so that it's easy to shift your weight distribution and follow your partner's lead (if available).

Freya
25th-February-2007, 05:07 PM
Hmmm, Thinking bout when I dance I change feet almost as quickly as the weather changes in scotland :rolleyes:

I have no preference as to which foot to step back on, I don't think so anyway! It's not a conscious effort anyway! If a guy leads me in manhattans or walks then I expect him to lead me back on the foot he wants by trying to gauge when my weight is on the other foot enabling the other to be free to move. I assume though being a great advocate of AT that DavidJames does this! :wink: My very very basic knowledge of AT inclines me to think that this is one of the basic principles.

I don't know why this lady said she doesn't step back on her right foot. Maybe she misunderstood her teacher saying to step back on the Left all the time, maybe she has a physical problem that she physically can't step back on the Right (ok grasping at straws there!). Was she a good dancer otherwise?

I find that one thing I hate is when the teacher says in the intermediate class that there is going to be footwork, be it Cha Cha Cha,or even penjuin walk kinda thing! Not because I hate the Footwork aspect! I love it! I can usually never do it because it takes alot of practice for me to learn these things. But because of the guys in the class! I have on occasion had a guy walk off the dance floor in the middle of the class (with me...Do I Smell?) growling that there was footwork involved and ceroc isn't supposed to have it!!!!! :angry:

But I think I've kinda derailed the topic a bit? I got a bit carried away :blush:

purplehyacinth
25th-February-2007, 11:35 PM
Hmmm, Thinking bout when I dance I change feet almost as quickly as the weather changes in scotland :rolleyes:

I have no preference as to which foot to step back on, I don't think so anyway! It's not a conscious effort anyway! If a guy leads me in manhattans or walks then I expect him to lead me back on the foot he wants by trying to gauge when my weight is on the other foot enabling the other to be free to move.

I'd be hard put to tell you what foot I step back on! When it comes to moves where footwork is an issue, then 9 times out of 10, I will generally get the lead from the man which puts me on the correct foot (the pressure in the small of ones back/on the hip from the leader's hand generally tells me), and if I'm wrong footing at that point, then there is generally a "fudge" on my part (I think I tend either simply to weight shift, or to do some sort of a gliding transfer rather than skip - but I've been doing these fudges so long in other types of dancing that I now tend to do them without actually knowing what it is I do to achieve them - perhaps some kind leaders who have had the dubious pleasure of dancing with me could let me know (by PM if they don't want to embarrass me in open forum) if I have any horrendous habits I should be correcting).

Anyway, sorry this waffle is rather off-topic.

To get back to the subject, given that ceroc seems to be taught with feet being mentioned only at certain points (ie where there is choreography, or where one foot has to be at a particular point in a particular move), I would generally agree with Freya that I would expect that the man's lead should give the lady a pretty good clue as to where her feet are meant to be (or which foot her weight should be over) if it matters at that point in the dance.

Just to be controversial - if the man has been giving an adequately clear lead and the lady has not followed it, then I would say that that is not always the man's fault. (unless of course the lady in question is a beginner follower who may not be experienced in interpreting the particular lead/signal - in which case is it really anyone's fault??)

Yogi_Bear
25th-February-2007, 11:56 PM
Just make sure she has her weight on her left foot before you step forwards leading her to step back. Then if she doesn't step back on her right she will fall over....but I don't suppose it would have been that easy or you wouldn't have had such a problem....

MartinHarper
26th-February-2007, 01:12 AM
Just make sure she has her weight on her left foot before you step forwards leading her to step back. Then if she doesn't step back on her right she will fall over....

If the follower's feet are together, she can easily add a quick weight transfer in order to step back on her left.

frodo
26th-February-2007, 01:26 AM
Yep, refused in open, closed - every which way she could, basically.

At one point I wondered if she was a LeRoc spy... :whistle:

I have come across a similar lady at a Leroc venue, who whatever I tried I couldn't get her to step back on her right foot - it was just remarkable how she always managed not to - but only ever one. Didn't try a verbal lead though.

Contrary to the impression I've got from reading this forum, I haven't got the impression at Leroc classes I've been to that there was much emphasis on footwork.

Though I've never AFAIR heard 'step back on any foot you feel like' at a Leroc class.

Andy McGregor
26th-February-2007, 02:17 AM
Oooh! Footwork dicussions. Yippee :clap:

I can't resist them. There is only one footwork for MJ In an eight beat phrase it goes RLRLRLRL for the ladies. Of course you can vary it a bit when you get good. But the basic MJ is pretty much as I've said.

Which brings me to a further point. Has there been a discussion about the Ceroc DVD "Turn Your Home into a Ceroc Venue"? After watching for a few chapters I lost the will to ever attend a Ceroc venue...

Franck
26th-February-2007, 02:23 AM
If the follower's feet are together, she can easily add a quick weight transfer in order to step back on her left.True, but assuming you have established some level of connection, she will not feel the need to transfer weight and will follow your body lead.
If she ignores the connection and transfers weight, the lead should feel it and adjust his move or footwork accordingly; if she is good enough to isolate her footwork from the connection, then she probably had a more interesting idea than I was about to lead anyway.
If no connection was present, I would avoid any patterns or moves that require my partner to be on a specific foot since I wouldn't be able to feel her weight-distribution.

Franck
26th-February-2007, 02:26 AM
Dancing with a lady last night, I encountered some resistance to her stepping back on her right foot
/snip/
"No, I don't go back on that foot". :confused: :what:

There is only one footwork for MJ In an eight beat phrase it goes RLRLRLRL for the ladies. Of course you can vary it a bit when you get good. But the basic MJ is pretty much as I've said.

I think this is the problem with teachers who make a big deal of always stepping on a specific foot. Most people will dance, learn to follow and use whatever connection is given to them to eventually learn to follow properly and use each foot as appropriate, but some dancers, will take their teachers' words literally, refuse to follow and only step back on 'that' foot, as any other foot would be wrong. I had no idea the lady was one of your students Andy, but it all makes sense now!

NZ Monkey
26th-February-2007, 03:40 AM
I can't resist them. There is only one footwork for MJ In an eight beat phrase it goes RLRLRLRL for the ladies. Hmmmm, I wonder what the ladies here will say tonight when I tell them they're not dancing MJ then? Perhaps they'll ask for their money back? There could be a revolution!

This is sounding like a more fun idea all the time..... :devil:

Lou
26th-February-2007, 08:30 AM
Hmmmm, I wonder what the ladies here will say tonight when I tell them they're not dancing MJ then?
:rofl: Andy's just got a very black & whites view of the world. :D


Is it me, or is that a weird thing to say?
Is it a valid choice for her to make?
I don't think it's weird & I think it's valid (but I would say that, wouldn't I?)

I did pretty much the same thing to Nigel Anderson once. :eek: If you don't believe me, ask Andy - he was there. :D

Actually, it wasn't as bad as your scenario, DJ - Nigel was trying to show me why I should step back on my right. I was deliberately stepping back left to show him my point of view, too. But I have to say it's very hard to step back on one foot, when a leader like Nigel is clearly indicating the other foot!

From this I learned that there is no One True Footwork (which is why I think Andy is wrong to say that only RLRLRLRL is valid).

And yes, it's hard to lead Manhattans, etc. sometimes when the Lady's doing standard Left foot back. It requires a stronger lead, and space for her to realise what you're trying to make her do. Feel free to practice on me sometime, as I can do stubborn left foot back very well.... :wink:

I've posted many times about the theories behind Left Foot Back for followers. Contrary to what Frodo's posted here:

Contrary to the impression I've got from reading this forum, I haven't got the impression at Leroc classes I've been to that there was much emphasis on footwork. it is emphasised in Bristolian LeRoc classes. It's definitely taught that way by Sherif, John Eastman & Jackie, the folks at Elmgrove, and Dave & Cat at Trinity. Perhaps he's attended another LeRoc class? It certainly ISN'T taught that way in Brighton LeRoc classes, for instance.


I know I should have stayed away from this thread, but it pushed my 'which foot do followers step back on?' button.
Really?! :D Yay! Footwork! :awe:


Perhaps the demo, at the classes she goes to, always starts by stepping back left and she (the lady you danced with) has assumed that you must do this. Or even the teacher says it. In the classes I mentioned above as examples, there are usually 2 teachers - the male teacher goes through the man's steps - and the female teacher teaches the lady's steps.

Lou
26th-February-2007, 08:53 AM
There is only one footwork for MJ In an eight beat phrase it goes RLRLRLRL for the ladies.


I had no idea the lady was one of your students Andy, but it all makes sense now!

:D I just got what you were saying, Franck. I think Andy actually means LRLRLRLR (with a silent first L, or course!)

David Bailey
26th-February-2007, 09:03 AM
And yes, it's hard to lead Manhattans, etc. sometimes when the Lady's doing standard Left foot back. It requires a stronger lead, and space for her to realise what you're trying to make her do. Feel free to practice on me sometime, as I can do stubborn left foot back very well.... :wink:
Actually, I have now figured out a workaround.

From the "step out" bit of the first move (in which I hope we can all agree, the lady is stepping back on her right foot), I simply turn that into a West Manhattan - I step forward to my gith as she steps out. I can use a clear body lead from that point to move into manhattans, walks etc. :)

OK, it's unlikely I'll need that very often in the future, but at least there is a solution.

The lady in question had a few other faults in terms of following - typical of someone who thinks they're better than they are, to be frank. Unfortunately, I'm not used to leading Ceroc MovesTM, so the dance wasn't really a success. :sad:

MartinHarper
26th-February-2007, 10:50 AM
Yep, refused {to step back right} in open, closed - every which way she could, basically.


From the "step out" bit of the first move (in which I hope we can all agree, the lady is stepping back on her right foot)....

You seem to be contradicting yourself. Could you clarify?

David Bailey
26th-February-2007, 10:59 AM
You seem to be contradicting yourself. Could you clarify?
Sorry - I'm not talking about the "first step back", after the semi-circle - she can do that on any foot - but the bit where she comes in to the side, then steps out again - so halfway through the move.

If she steps out at that point, then it has to be back on her right, pivoting on her left foot - there's no other way to do it.

In which case, I've got her. Mwa-ha-ha, etc.

Andy McGregor
26th-February-2007, 11:01 AM
:D I just got what you were saying, Franck. I think Andy actually means LRLRLRLR (with a silent first L, or course!)Lou is absolutely right, apart from missing out the L at the end.

There is, of course, a silent L at the start, how silly of me to forget. Roger Chin told me about it. He says that you need to put the lady's weight on her left foot by leaning her to her left BEFORE YOU STEP HER BACK RIGHT on beat one with her, now unweighted, right foot.

Of course, I can see Franck's point of view if you want a dance that's able to be done by most people. A less structured dance that's just walking and waving is very easy to do and will be much more popular than a dance with a bit of structure to it as the learning curve is much less steep :whistle:

the semi-circle:eek: :tears:

David Bailey
26th-February-2007, 11:04 AM
There is, of course, a silent L at the start, how silly of me to forget. Roger Chin told me about it. He says that you need to put the lady's weight on her left foot by leaning her to her left BEFORE YOU STEP HER BACK RIGHT on beat one with her, now unweighted, right foot.
Leading a weight transfer? Hmmm, I've heard that somewhere before... I'm sure it'll come to me sometime, let me think about it a while. :D


Of course, I can see Franck's point of view if you want a dance that's able to be done by most people. A less structured dance that's just walking and waving is very easy to do and will be much more popular than a dance with a bit of structure to it as the learning curve is much less steep :whistle:
Actually, AT is just walking, apparently. No waving at all :innocent:

It's not about structure, it's about technique.


:eek: :tears:
That was used for reference purposes only. :)

Franck
26th-February-2007, 11:10 AM
Of course, I can see Franck's point of view if you want a dance that's able to be done by most people. A less structured dance that's just walking and waving is very easy to do and will be much more popular than a dance with a bit of structure to it as the learning curve is much less steep :whistle:Sorry, you lost me there, the thread was about a lady who refused to step on a specific foot. Do you have another theory as to why she would do such a thing?

Modern Jive is a very open dance, and many patterns are added to it every year. Some patterns will be easier with specific footwork, others will be hindered by a strict footwork pattern.

If you want to limit how you (and your students) dance by forcing a strict footwork pattern (and a pretty pedestrian one at that) on them, fine, but don't go claiming superiority, West Coast Swing already do the strict footwork, and even then have to break the patterns regularly to fit the music and to add excitement to their dancing.

Andy McGregor
26th-February-2007, 11:50 AM
Oooh! Footwork dicussions. Yippee :clap:

I can't resist them. There is only one footwork for MJ In an eight beat phrase it goes RLRLRLRL for the ladies. Of course you can vary it a bit when you get good. But the basic MJ is pretty much as I've said.


If you want to limit how you (and your students) dance by forcing a strict footwork pattern (and a pretty pedestrian one at that) on them, fine, but don't go claiming superiority,What I'm saying is that I believe the basic footwork in MJ is as I've said. And I've also said that you can vary that footwork when you are an experienced dancer. I still think that telling people you can be weighted on any foot leads to bad technique and problems in the future.

David Bailey
26th-February-2007, 11:52 AM
I still think that telling people you can be weighted on any foot leads to bad technique and problems in the future.
OK, can you explain, 'coz you lost me on that comment... :confused:

Are you saying "telling people there's no footwork" is bad? Or what?

Franck
26th-February-2007, 11:54 AM
And I've also said that you can vary that footwork when you are an experienced dancer. I still think that telling people you can be weighted on any foot leads to bad technique and problems in the future.So when a (new) follower taught by you dances with an experienced dancer, what should she do? Follow your footwork (as taught) or follow her partner?

Miguel
26th-February-2007, 01:04 PM
Dancing with a lady last night, I encountered some resistance to her stepping back on her right foot... blah blah blah...What should I have done?
Why not treat yourself to this workshop on March 11th http://www.utopiadance.co.uk/workshop.php or attend beginners classes at your local Ceroc venue. It may solve your problem.
Hope this helps.

David Bailey
26th-February-2007, 01:17 PM
attend beginners classes at your local Ceroc venue. It may solve your problem.
Alas, I think my problems are far too numerous and deep-rooted to be solved, even by Ceroc beginner classes. :tears:

LMC
26th-February-2007, 02:42 PM
From the "step out" bit of the first move (in which I hope we can all agree, the lady is stepping back on her right foot), I simply turn that into a West Manhattan - I step forward to my gith as she steps out. I can use a clear body lead from that point to move into manhattans, walks etc. :)
IIRC from my very beginner leading, that's how a Manhattan (or mambo walk or whatever you want to call it) is taught by Ceroc™ ® ©* - except I've never heard it as stepping forward to the gith (? :confused: ) - I think it's taught as 'as you turn the follower out, turn 180deg, stepping forward on your left as s/he steps back right ..."

Alternatively, you could always lead everything in reverse (from follower's LH rather than RH) ... :devil:

Ghost
26th-February-2007, 02:48 PM
except I've never heard it as stepping forward to the gith (? :confused: )
I assume "gith" is a typo for "right"

I think the whole step back on one foot thing is at least in part, a point of reference for the lady, a bit like inhaling before speaking.

Miguel
26th-February-2007, 02:49 PM
Alas, I think my problems are far too numerous and deep-rooted to be solved, even by Ceroc beginner classes. :tears:

You or someone edited my last post. Was it necessary? If so, an explanation would be nice. OK?

Andy McGregor
26th-February-2007, 03:56 PM
So when a (new) follower taught by you dances with an experienced dancer, what should she do? Follow your footwork (as taught) or follow her partner?I don't teach the ladies to step back with either foot. I teach that the lady steps back with the foot they guy leads: for the beginners moves I teach, this is always the right foot. And I teach the beginner guys to lead the right foot back on beat one. And then I teach the ladies that most beginners moves work if they step or have a weight change on every beat.

So, yes, I teach the ladies to follow what the guys lead. And, I teach the guys to lead RLRLRLRL Preceded by a silent L on the "er" of the "and (er) back" :whistle: But I never mention the silent L because it doesn't need to be mentioned as far as I can see :confused:

But, back to the plot. What do you do if the lady continually steps back with the opposite foot to the one that you've led? My answer is that you let them do it and be thankful that they don't ask for another dance :clap:

Franck
26th-February-2007, 04:04 PM
I don't teach the ladies to step back with either foot. I teach that the lady steps back with the foot they guy leads: for the beginners moves I teach, this is always the right foot. Ah! :sick: That really clarifies it! :what: You don't teach them to step back on either foot as long as it's the right foot.

MartinHarper
26th-February-2007, 04:10 PM
If she steps out at that point, then it has to be back on her right, pivoting on her left foot - there's no other way to do it.

In which case, I've got her. Mwa-ha-ha, etc.

Yep. That's why I thought it should be possible to lead a follower into Manhattans and cross-body stuff regardless of what foot they go back on in open.
Saying that, it is possible to step back left in that situation too.

MartinHarper
26th-February-2007, 04:18 PM
Why not ... attend beginners classes at your local Ceroc venue. It may solve your problem.

I've never seen a regular Ceroc beginner class discuss how to lead women to step back on a particular foot. Have you?


You or someone edited my last post. Was it necessary? If so, an explanation would be nice. OK?

I was under the impresion that edited posts have an "edited by" message appear. The exception is self-edited posts edited shortly after posting.

David Bailey
26th-February-2007, 04:19 PM
Yep. That's why I thought it should be possible to lead a follower into Manhattans and cross-body stuff regardless of what foot they go back on in open.
Indeed - and if I'd known the Approved Ceroc Way of getting into a West manhattan, I'd have been better off.


Saying that, it is possible to step back left in that situation too.
:eek:
I think I'll follow Andy's "be grateful" advice...

StokeBloke
26th-February-2007, 04:53 PM
I initially assumed that my lead was at fault and tried to make it clearer - no luck.

I then resorted to verbal indication (I know, I know, but I was desperate), only to be told point-blank: "No, I don't go back on that foot". :confused: :what:
Why not just adapt your lead to take this into consideration, then either don't ask her again, or next time start with an adpted lead from the start. I wouldn't have thought that would be that difficult for a lead of your experience David :wink:

Lory
26th-February-2007, 05:08 PM
You or someone edited my last post. Was it necessary? If so, an explanation would be nice. OK?

I have done some investigations on your behalf and can confirm, as I first thought, nobody has edited anything in your post Miguel ;)

David Bailey
26th-February-2007, 05:09 PM
Why not just adapt your lead to take this into consideration, then either don't ask her again, or next time start with an adpted lead from the start.
I didn't adapt my lead, mainly because that comment just threw me - I thought I'd heard everything, but that was a new one to me.


I wouldn't have thought that would be that difficult for a lead of your experience David :wink:
To be fair, I was dancing like a one-legged donkey most of the night.

Lory
26th-February-2007, 05:11 PM
I definitely make no conscious decisions about which foot I step back on.. but luckily whatever one it is (:confused: ), it seems to work with 99% of the leads.:clap:

Dreadful Scathe
26th-February-2007, 05:40 PM
So when a (new) follower taught by you dances with an experienced dancer, what should she do? Follow your footwork (as taught) or follow her partner?


Maybe I'm missing something then, but I thought Andys RLRLRLRL footwork example was a tongue in cheek remark about NOT teaching footwork! I mean, what else are you going to do...hop ?

If I'm confused - Ill get my coat :)

Rachel
26th-February-2007, 05:49 PM
I'm with David, actually. I've no doubt he could have adapted his lead and done other moves instead. But it just seems such an odd thing for her to have said.

As if it's a conscious and willful decision that she just will not consider stepping back on the other foot. Ok, fair enough, if that's the way she wants to dance. But it's not like saying, I don't do aerials or pretzels ... It's going to restrict her dancing so much, I would have thought.

Rachel

Franck
26th-February-2007, 05:59 PM
Maybe I'm missing something then, but I thought Andys RLRLRLRL footwork example was a tongue in cheek remark about NOT teaching footwork! I mean, what else are you going to do...hop ?

If I'm confused - Ill get my coat :)I'm sure we're all confused... Maybe Andy will clarify, but from previous postings on the 'which foot topic' he indicated that followers should always step back (on the first beat) on their right foot, which is why I assumed he was serious on the above example.

MartinHarper
26th-February-2007, 06:00 PM
Maybe I'm missing something then, but I thought Andys RLRLRLRL footwork example was a tongue in cheek remark about NOT teaching footwork! I mean, what else are you going to do...hop ?

From prior Andy posts, he means RLRLRLRL such that the Rs are on odd beats and the Ls are on even beats. Aka marching footwork.

On a side-note, skipping footwork is too much fun.

Lou
26th-February-2007, 06:09 PM
To be fair, I was dancing like a one-legged donkey most of the night.
Well, that's one way to simplify the footwork. :rolleyes:

Andy McGregor
26th-February-2007, 07:46 PM
I'm sure we're all confused... Maybe Andy will clarify, but from previous postings on the 'which foot topic' he indicated that followers should always step back (on the first beat) on their right foot, which is why I assumed he was serious on the above example.I'm completely serious that the majority of MJ moves work with the lady stepping back right on beat one.

There might be other ways of doing the moves. They're just not my way for beginners. Neither are they Nigel Anderson's and quite a few of the top teachers outside Ceroc.

Here is a question for Franck. In the first move, how does the beginner lady get her weight onto her left foot to step back right on beat 5 if she felt more comfortable stepping back on her left foot on beat 1?

Franck
26th-February-2007, 08:17 PM
I'm completely serious that the majority of MJ moves work with the lady stepping back right on beat one. Of course they work, they also work with the lady stepping back left on beat one... That's always been my point. Some followers will naturally step back right, others left, some will be led to step back on their right foot, others will be led (often unwittingly) by the man to step back on their left and would then wonder why the teacher insisted they stepped back on the other foot (when the left was led and felt very natural).

There might be other ways of doing the moves. They're just not my way for beginners. Neither are they Nigel Anderson's and quite a few of the top teachers outside Ceroc. It might be a good idea to discuss that again with Nigel, or better still to have him post on here rather than quote him (possibly out of context). If that was his opinion a couple of years back when you did your training with him, it might have changed by now, I know many of my opinions have evolved and changed over the last few years.

Here is a question for Franck. In the first move, how does the beginner lady get her weight onto her left foot to step back right on beat 5 if she felt more comfortable stepping back on her left foot on beat 1?The weight transfer will just happen naturally if she stepped in side by side with the man with her feet close, as Martin Harper described in his 'skippity hop' post. The main point of not forcing a footwork pattern on learners, is that different people do different things naturally and what seems the best, and most logical to you, might not be best for 20% of your dancers.

Andy McGregor
27th-February-2007, 12:29 AM
It might be a good idea to discuss that again with Nigel, or better still to have him post on here rather than quote him (possibly out of context). If that was his opinion a couple of years back when you did your training with him, it might have changed by now, I know many of my opinions have evolved and changed over the last few years.That was Nigel's opinion less than 2 weeks ago. He may have changed his mind in the last 10 days, but I doubt it...

I love the comment by the Smurf. He obviously thought I was joking with my comment about RLRLRLRL. That's because it's, so obviously, the MJ footwork for beginner ladies. IMHO, the skippety, hoppety stuff is for the ladies that have the basics. But what am I doing telling the competition where they're getting it wrong :confused:

My advice to Ceroc is to keep telling the ladies to step on whichever foot they like on whichever beat they choose :devil:

frodo
27th-February-2007, 01:22 AM
... Contrary to what Frodo's posted here:
it is emphasised in Bristolian LeRoc classes. It's definitely taught that way by Sherif, John Eastman & Jackie, the folks at Elmgrove, and Dave & Cat at Trinity. Perhaps he's attended another LeRoc class? It certainly ISN'T taught that way in Brighton LeRoc classes, for instance. ...
The lack of emphasis on footwork was, as stated, only my impression; it was however primarily made at Bristol classes listed above.

Lou
27th-February-2007, 07:47 AM
The lack of emphasis on footwork was, as stated, only my impression; it was however primarily made at Bristol classes listed above.

Maybe you should try listening to the teachers while you're there? :flower:

Franck
27th-February-2007, 12:51 PM
That was Nigel's opinion less than 2 weeks ago. Well I hope he made a better job of explaining and justifying it than you have on this thread!:what:

But what am I doing telling the competition where they're getting it wrong :confused::rofl:

spindr
27th-February-2007, 02:09 PM
Well I hope he made a better job of explaining and justifying it than you have on this thread!:what:
:rofl:
:yeah:

Especially since Andy's marching footwork leads to the though that:
If you believe that it is easier (for beginners) to dance anticlockwise on the left and clockwise on the right, then stepping every beat is a no-no as whichever foot you start stepping on you will stay on for that even/odd beat -- one of which will be wrong for a particular spin direction (without syncopating -- which goes against stepping on every beat). Plus, most MJ spins are over two beats (for the spinning bit) -- so I guess stepping every beat would mean "running round" rather than pirouetting? Maybe we'll be able to tell rocst*rs followers by them trying to run 'round every turn -- gonna' need some big steps or fast footwork for double (time) turns then :)

SpinDr

Ghost
27th-February-2007, 04:29 PM
Does anyone else find it mildly worrying that in Ceroc, you actually have to learn to be able to count to 2 (and other people will disagree with you) :sick:

The 1st step isn't but it is on the 4th and a half count which is the eighth beat and the second step (which is actually the first step) is on the 1st beat and the first count; maybe. :confused: The lady will step back on her right, unless she steps back on her left. She may decide to syncopate. If you're dancing with Taz or Freya, hopping, skipping and jumping are also distinct possibilities and cartwheeling may be involved :devil: . The guy will step back on his left unless he steps back on his right; he may also decide to syncopate or if he's DavidB he won't - at all :worthy: . All of this is null and void for a variety of exceptions.

Simple really. I'm so glad there's no footwork in Ceroc :whistle:

Franck
27th-February-2007, 04:40 PM
:respect: :yeah: An excellent summary!

I'm so glad there's no footwork in Ceroc :whistle:A common misquote! the correct version of the above is: "There is no set footwork in Ceroc"

LMC
27th-February-2007, 04:42 PM
stuff
:what:

Where's the bit where you do the hokey cokey?

Andy McGregor
27th-February-2007, 06:33 PM
:yeah:

Especially since Andy's marching footwork leads to the though that:
If you believe that it is easier (for beginners) to dance anticlockwise on the left and clockwise on the right, then stepping every beat is a no-no as whichever foot you start stepping on you will stay on for that even/odd beat -- one of which will be wrong for a particular spin direction (without syncopating -- which goes against stepping on every beat). Plus, most MJ spins are over two beats (for the spinning bit) -- so I guess stepping every beat would mean "running round" rather than pirouetting? Maybe we'll be able to tell rocst*rs followers by them trying to run 'round every turn -- gonna' need some big steps or fast footwork for double (time) turns then :)

SpinDrTurns and spins work very well with stepping on every beat. Turns take two beats but the actual turny bit takes just one. The turn is followed by a weight change. When the follower is travelling and turning it's step, step, step, step - Nina makes a big thing of this and often exaggerates her steps during the lesson.

Nigel and I have been debating this stepping on every beat recently. He seems much more clear on this subject and was teaching the beginner ladies footwork this way the last time the taught for us. But I doubt he'll be posting here as he's always said that he won't.

And there's no doubt in my mind that I will be disagreed with on here all the time I'm offering an alternative method to that proscribed by Ceroc. As I said on another thread, the forum is moving further and further away from me and is more and more pro-Ceroc in a way that's becoming anti-independent. Joining in with this debate has been an attempt at finding something I can enjoy discussing on here - and I've nearly succeeded in that objective :innocent:

But, as I said, I'm delighted that Ceroc take the approach that there's no special footwork in MJ. It hastens progress towards the day when the dance divides into two different dances - if it hasn't already :whistle:

Dreadful Scathe
27th-February-2007, 07:42 PM
T But I doubt he'll be posting here as he's always said that he won't.

The average IQ level of "low to simmering" is quite fine where it is thank you very much - we don't want any fancy dan bonnet wearing experts coming in and raising it with clever futuristic ideas. :)

As they say, I know what I like and its yet to be made illegal :)


As I said on another thread, the forum is moving further and further away from me and is more and more pro-Ceroc in a way that's becoming anti-independent.

some of us do TRY to discuss Ceroc policy and dance and stuff :) apart a few loud voices, I would say the forum is fairly neutral, as its always been.

David Bailey
27th-February-2007, 08:03 PM
But I doubt he'll be posting here as he's always said that he won't.
Any reason why? 'Coz all this "Nigel says" stuff is getting a bit repetitive - I'd prefer to hear my prejudices directly :na:


And there's no doubt in my mind that I will be disagreed with on here all the time I'm offering an alternative method to that proscribed by Ceroc.
Errr, or possibly because people just, you know, disagree with you...


As I said on another thread, the forum is moving further and further away from me and is more and more pro-Ceroc in a way that's becoming anti-independent.
Yes, I'm sorry for the vast deluge of pro-Ceroc propaganda I've been putting out, I'll try to control myself in future.

I don't believe the actual "pro / anti" sentiments have changed - however, I believe there's more partisanship. But that's what the "Forum direction" thread is supposed to be discussing...

But if you want a "dividing dances" discussion, start your own thread. This one's All About Me, remember? Me, Me, Me! :grin:

spindr
27th-February-2007, 08:43 PM
Turns and spins work very well with stepping on every beat. Turns take two beats but the actual turny bit takes just one. The turn is followed by a weight change. When the follower is travelling and turning it's step, step, step, step - Nina makes a big thing of this and often exaggerates her steps during the lesson.
Stepping turns is fine -- but what I was asking was how do you dance a (non-travelling) turn followed by a return.

I presume with your stepping footwork that the turn will start with:
a step back (RL)
a clockwise turn (RL)
into a step back (RL)
an anticlockwise return (RL)
a step back (RL).

I'm just querying whether having clockwise footwork (RL) *and* anticlockwise footwork (RL) the same is really a great idea for beginners. Mainly 'cause Leroc footwork uses a mirror'd footwork -- and using the same footwork stops you "cheating" turns (in one direction), etc.

SpinDr

purplehyacinth
27th-February-2007, 11:26 PM
~snip~.

And there's no doubt in my mind that I will be disagreed with on here all the time I'm offering an alternative method to that proscribed by Ceroc. ~snip~

I just want to be clear. Do you mean PROscribed or PREscribed?

Lou
28th-February-2007, 09:55 AM
I just want to be clear. Do you mean PROscribed or PREscribed?
:worthy:
I throught Ceroc™ proscribed all footwork? :whistle:

Andy McGregor
28th-February-2007, 10:18 AM
:worthy:
I throught Ceroc™ proscribed all footwork? :whistle:It's more of comfort thing. "Do what you like" seems to be the message. I can't imagine my ballroom dancing teacher ever saying "in the waltz the lady can move whichever foot she chooses, irrespective of the foot the guy is leading". But that seems to be what Ceroc are saying. This is not a serious problem in the open hand hold. Even then, I like to be able to predict which foot is going to be weighted so I can lead turns properly. But in the closed, ballroom hold, this guidance will lead to collisions, squashed toes, etc. Thank goodness most ladies have a mind of their own, don't listen to this advice and step RLRLRLRL :whistle:

And, yes, I did use the wrong word. I can't be perfect all the time :wink:

David Bailey
28th-February-2007, 10:24 AM
I feel an urge to split this thread, to separate out all the "Whingeing about footwork in different MJ flavours" posts - mainly because, remember, This Thread Is All About Me - but I can't really disentangle all the posts.

Or, for that matter, understand most of them.

So I won't.

But maybe there should be a separate "footwork rants" area of the Forum where some people can go play...

Gav
28th-February-2007, 10:28 AM
I can't be perfect all the time :wink:

:what: :eek: :what: :eek: Whaaaaaa? Well that's my world destroyed. If Andy McG can't be right all the time, what hope is there for the rest of us?

:tears: :tears: :tears: :tears: :tears: :D

Lou
28th-February-2007, 10:54 AM
Thank goodness most ladies have a mind of their own, don't listen to this advice and step RLRLRLRL :whistle:
And there I was thinking we were supposed to step on the foot that the Leader indicates. :rolleyes: :whistle: :devil: :flower:

David Bailey
28th-February-2007, 11:19 AM
And there I was thinking we were supposed to step on the foot that the Leader indicates. :rolleyes: :whistle: :devil: :flower:
That's crazy talk.

Next thing, you'll be suggesting that "waving the arms around" is not the only way to lead... :eek:

Yogi_Bear
28th-February-2007, 11:20 AM
That's crazy talk.

Next thing, you'll be suggesting that "waving the arms around" is not the only way to lead... :eek:
OMG, are there any other ways?:rolleyes:

Andy McGregor
28th-February-2007, 12:21 PM
And there I was thinking we were supposed to step on the foot that the Leader indicates. :rolleyes: :whistle: :devil: :flower:Of course this is taken out of context. The previous line indicated that it was Ceroc who were recommending that the lady step on whichever foot she likes irrespective of the one that is led - but I do expect the guy to lead RL... :sigh:

Just a quick recap who have just joined us. I say that beginner ladies should be led RLRLRLRL for the eight beats of a musical phrase. This has, in the past been supported by Amir (for beginners) on here and I've also quoted other respected dance teachers who say the same as me.

Ceroc say it doesn't matter what the lady does with her feet (so long as they pay their £8 :cynical emoticon: ). LeRoc, in the fabulous shape of Lou, say that it's not that simple and there's hoppity, skippety things to do in the footwork for beginners.

And, I do also say that the hoppety, skippety footwork is still part of MJ. Just not for beginners.

Franck
28th-February-2007, 12:34 PM
This is not a serious problem in the open hand hold. Even then, I like to be able to predict which foot is going to be weighted so I can lead turns properly.I'm glad we agree on that, I too, like to adjust my dancing to which foot my partner is weighted on, and having her using the footwork that works for her doesn't cause any serious problems in all the Beginners MJ moves.
I did several experiments, over the last couple of days which confirmed that stepping back on the left foot on the first beat works, as does stepping on the right. Once in the 'side by side' position with her feet together, the follower will always follow the lead and transfer her weight onto the left foot to pivot on the right, regardless of which foot she started on.

Stepping back on the right foot on the first beat will fail spectacularly in a few situations (I've listed 2 below but could think of more):
- The follower was naturally resting on her right foot whilst the teacher was speaking, so that when she is led back, she steps back on her left (or trips).

- The leader (knowingly or unwittingly) is leading a natural swaying transfer of weight as the teacher counts (happens a lot) and finishes on 8 with the followers on her right foot, effectively forcing her to step back on her left... This is quite subtle, and any beginner would just assume stepping back on the right foot doesn't work for her. In a Ceroc class, she would be reassured that it doesn't matter, she can use the other foot, but in your class, she would just assume (through no fault of her own) that she has two left feet and can't do that dancing stuff... :sad: My aim is to get more people dancing, not fewer.
You might argue that by keeping the footwork simpler, I'm not teaching them to dance, but neither will you if they have stopped attending any classes under the mistaken apprehension that they couldn't get their feet right.

Thank goodness most ladies have a mind of their own, don't listen to this advice and step RLRLRLRL :whistle: Most ladies have a mind of their own, and have stopped listening to you by now, even Lou seems to have moved to the
And there I was thinking we were supposed to step on the foot that the Leader indicates. side of the discussion!

Franck
28th-February-2007, 12:49 PM
The previous line indicated that it was Ceroc who were recommending that the lady step on whichever foot she likes irrespective of the one that is led - but I do expect the guy to lead RL... :sigh:This is a complete distortion of the discussion so far. The previous line was another of your flights of fancy, where you make up what Ceroc are saying by adding 'seems to be the message' or 'that seems to be what Ceroc are saying'. Here it is quoted for you again to refresh your memory:

It's more of comfort thing. "Do what you like" seems to be the message. I can't imagine my ballroom dancing teacher ever saying "in the waltz the lady can move whichever foot she chooses, irrespective of the foot the guy is leading". But that seems to be what Ceroc are saying.

What I have been saying from the start is that followers should follow the lead, and step on the foot lead by their partner. As partners have different expectations, or levels of ability, that means that followers could step back on either foot, and that if they follow their partner, it won't matter.

What you have been saying (note there is no 'seem to be saying' here, only actual quotes) is that the followers footwork should be RLRLRLRL.

There is only one footwork for MJ In an eight beat phrase it goes RLRLRLRL for the ladies. Of course you can vary it a bit when you get good. But the basic MJ is pretty much as I've said.

This is the crux of the debate and the reason DavidJames started that thread. Fixed footwork patterns don't work for everyone and taken literally will prevent somebody following properly.


but I do expect the guy to lead RL... :sigh:As an aside, how do you teach Beginners to lead a step back on the right foot?

David Bailey
28th-February-2007, 01:06 PM
This is the crux of the debate and the reason DavidJames started that thread.
I did? Oh yes, so I did :innocent:


Fixed footwork patterns don't work for everyone and taken literally will prevent somebody following properly.
To be fair, I don't know if the follower in question was following a fixed "back on left" pattern because:

that's what she'd been taught
that's what she thought she'd been taught
that's just what she just wanted to do for some reason
she didn't like me and wanted to frustrate my lead


Or any combination of the above - although I'm inclined to a combination of 2 and 3...

Anyway, I don't really think she was a Leroc Spy - but then, it was at Finchley, anything can happen there.

Andy McGregor
28th-February-2007, 01:09 PM
As an aside, how do you teach Beginners to lead a step back on the right foot?I teach them in exactly the same way as I see it taught at Ceroc classes. I count them in, 5&6&7&8. I step left on the odd counts and the demo steps right, I step right on the even counts and the demo steps left. The class usually copies and this puts the follower's weight on the left foot on beat 8 ready for the guy to lead by a gentle pressure into the ladies hand - guess what? All the ladies step back with their right foot on beat 1. I don't even need to tell them what to do, they all just do it. Sometimes I mention the ladies step back right, but most of the time I don't need to. I said I teach followers to step back with the right on beat one, I didn't say I always told them, I just make certain that's what they learn.

Lou
28th-February-2007, 01:09 PM
even Lou seems to have moved to the ....*snip*... side of the discussion!

What can I say? I'm an open minded person, Franck. :D

I moved from an obstinate Left is Right POV when the lovely Nigel showed me there was another option. However, as I've pointed out before, I strongly believe that both options are perfectly valid for teaching begginers*. (I don't think Andy's found "The One True Way" that he thinks he has). And, of course, the option of teaching non footwork to beginners is also valid.

I'm of the mindset that teaching footwork (whichever version) isn't evil. Some beginners need to be told which foot to step back on, as the ambiguity of "it doesn't matter" only serves to make some of them anxious.

It's all horses for courses, I suppose.


*for old-times sake.

Andy McGregor
28th-February-2007, 01:19 PM
What you have been saying (note there is no 'seem to be saying' here, only actual quotes) is that the followers footwork should be RLRLRLRL. As we're now debating what was said. What I thought I'd said was that this is the basic MJ footwork that should be taught to beginners. I haven't said that it's the only footwork in MJ. I know that, once you've got the basics there's hoppity, skippety stuff and I've agreed with that - there's even stoppy/starty stuff. But I think that would confuse the beginners and that's why I don't teach it to them.

What I think I've been saying is that basic MJ needs a structure and that I think that basic structure for followers is stepping on every beat starting with the guy leading the followers weight on to the right foot on beat 1. To me this seems more simple than giving beginners a choice. They know what to do because they've been told by the teacher.

Franck
28th-February-2007, 01:20 PM
The class usually copies and this puts the follower's weight on the left foot on beat 8 ready for the guy to lead by a gentle pressure into the ladies hand - guess what? All the ladies step back with their right foot on beat 1. That's the bit that confirms my views. The class usually copies, but if they happen to mirror your 5 & 6 & 7 & 8, they will naturally be on the other foot and when you tell the ladies to step back right, they'll wonder why they're on the wrong foot!

As I've said before, the footwork you advocate works, and is perfectly valid, but as Lou just posted above:
I strongly believe that both options are perfectly valid for teaching begginers*. (I don't think Andy's found "The One True Way" that he thinks he has)Any fixed footwork pattern is not the only way for MJ.

Franck
28th-February-2007, 01:26 PM
As we're now debating what was said. What I thought I'd said was that this is the basic MJ footwork that should be taught to beginners. Not arguing with you if you've now changed your mind about 'true MJ footwork', if you can't remember what you said, I had included the direct quote, here it is again:
There is only one footwork for MJ In an eight beat phrase it goes RLRLRLRL for the ladies. Of course you can vary it a bit when you get good. But the basic MJ is pretty much as I've said.
I still disagree with that, but glad that you are now saying something else altogether.
Teaching fixed patterns to Beginners will still cause problems and certainly doesn't make the pattern any more right than an alternative, but I have already listed examples above, which you have carefully avoided so far.

Andy McGregor
28th-February-2007, 01:27 PM
That's the bit that confirms my views. The class usually copies, but if they happen to mirror your 5 & 6 & 7 & 8, they will naturally be on the other foot and when you tell the ladies to step back right, they'll wonder why they're on the wrong foot!Being devil's advocate for a moment. How can they be on the wrong foot in Ceroc when I've just been told that either foot works :confused:

In practice I notice if couples are going the oposite way to everyone else: when I see this happening I actually tell the whole class what I want them to do rather than hoping they will copy me.

Franck
28th-February-2007, 01:28 PM
What can I say? I'm an open minded person, Franck. :DIndeed you are! :respect:

Franck
28th-February-2007, 01:33 PM
Being devil's advocate for a moment. How can they be on the wrong foot in Ceroc when I've just been told that either foot works :confused:That was my point, at a Ceroc class, they wouldn't be on the wrong foot, they would continue learning happily without having the whole class stopped and their mistake explained, confirming that they indeed have two left feet.

All this because their teacher once decided that there was only one way to dance MJ...:(

spindr
28th-February-2007, 02:18 PM
Teaching fixed patterns to Beginners will still cause problems and certainly doesn't make the pattern any more right than an alternative
Some footwork can make things easier, tho' -- and it's easier to learn it correctly the first time?


but I have already listed examples above, which you have carefully avoided so far.
:yeah: I'm still waiting for Andy to explain how followers should dance a turn and return -- which is quite a fundamental part of MJ :)

SpinDr

Andy McGregor
28th-February-2007, 02:24 PM
That was my point, at a Ceroc class, they wouldn't be on the wrong foot, they would continue learning happily without having the whole class stopped and their mistake explained, confirming that they indeed have two left feet.

All this because their teacher once decided that there was only one way to dance MJ...:(But isn't that one of the aspects of teaching, feedback? Besides, I don't identify the person who is struggling. I usually say "there are a few things that commonly go wrong in this move, here's the solution". That way they feel it's quite normal and that they're not alone. I don't labour the point too much or take long over the correction but I don't ignore it if people are struggling - if they don't get it after a quick tip in the main lesson I also try to remember who they are and have a one-to-one with them in the freestyle.

Franck
28th-February-2007, 02:24 PM
Some footwork can make things easier, tho' -- and it's easier to learn it correctly the first time?Absolutely, I agree, and I teach plenty of footwork, in classes and workshops.
I also agree that on an individual basis, you can help some beginners improve by suggesting a different footwork to try, but if you want MJ to be a 'lead & follow' dance, then you have to accept that the footwork will be determined by the lead and connection (rather than being fixed and choreographed).

Franck
28th-February-2007, 02:26 PM
But isn't that one of the aspects of teaching, feedback? Teaching is about giving your students useful skills, not forcing your prejudices on them.:sad:

Mezzosoprano
28th-February-2007, 02:28 PM
Maybe I am odd - no , don't answer that bit! - but I naturally want to step back with my right.......and if I'm led otherwise I gotta really think about what I'm doing - all this whilst Franck is trying to get me to stop looking at my feet (which only happens when I dance with Franck - 'cos I'm terrified I'll stand on him!):flower:

Just realised that I do the look at the feet thing when I dance with Sheena too....

Franck
28th-February-2007, 02:35 PM
Maybe I am odd - no , don't answer that bit! - but I naturally want to step back with my right.......and if I'm led otherwise I gotta really think about what I'm doing -You're not odd, but different women will feel more natural stepping on one foot or the other. In the absence of lead, you should use the foot that is most natural for you.
If you really have to think about what you're doing, then the lead wasn't very effective. If the lead is effective, you will step back on whatever foot was led, without really noticing.

Looking at your feet only makes you try to copy patterns and typically stops you listening to the connection and lead, so is not a good idea generally.

Mezzosoprano
28th-February-2007, 02:45 PM
You're not odd, but different women will feel more natural stepping on one foot or the other. In the absence of lead, you should use the foot that is most natural for you.
If you really have to think about what you're doing, then the lead wasn't very effective. If the lead is effective, you will step back on whatever foot was led, without really noticing.

Looking at your feet only makes you try to copy patterns and typically stops you listening to the connection and lead, so is not a good idea generally.

Ah hah! So that's why you won't let me do it!! Tiggerbabe once actually lifted my head up!! Sooooo embarassing - I hadn't even realised I was doing it!! A very bad habit of mine and any way I LOVE dancing with you Franck:nice:

Andy McGregor
28th-February-2007, 02:50 PM
Some footwork can make things easier, tho' -- and it's easier to learn it correctly the first time?


:yeah: I'm still waiting for Andy to explain how followers should dance a turn and return -- which is quite a fundamental part of MJ :)

SpinDr


Beat 1 - (clockwise turn) weight on the right foot and turn to the right

Beat 2 - place left next to right to stop the turn

Beat 3 - step back right

Beat 4 - (anti-clockwise turn) step onto the left foot and turn to the left

Beat 5 - place the right foot next to the left to stop the turn

Beat 6 - step back left

Beat 7 - step back right

I think that goes RLRLRLR

Andy McGregor
28th-February-2007, 02:53 PM
Teaching is about giving your students useful skills, not forcing your prejudices on them.:sad:If we're to believe what Franck says then the whole world of Ballroom and Latin is all about prejudices. Besides, they're not mine, I caught them from highly respected teachers. Maybe correct dancin is contagious - I hope so :wink:

Gadget
28th-February-2007, 02:59 PM
I'm of the mindset that teaching footwork (whichever version) isn't evil. Some beginners need to be told which foot to step back on, as the ambiguity of "it doesn't matter" only serves to make some of them anxious.
But they come back to see. That's the point:
"Ridgid" footwork and folks think "I can't do this" then vanish. "It dosn't matter" footwork may frustrate some and make others anxious, but they will come back again to ask "which foot?"

{note: Contrast turned up for clarity ;)}

David Bailey
28th-February-2007, 03:27 PM
If we're to believe what Franck says then the whole world of Ballroom and Latin is all about prejudices.
Isn't it? :devil:


Besides, they're not mine, I caught them from highly respected teachers. Maybe correct dancin is contagious - I hope so :wink:
I've been taught, by my count, about 15 different ways to lead a cross in AT, all by highly-respected teachers - world-renowned, in some cases.

They all have prejudices - try asking different AT teachers about toe vs. heel walks to prove that.

In a social dance setting, there is no "correct" way, and trying to foist patterns on people is just teaching them to recognise patterns. "Footwork" is not "patterns", to me at least.

Franck
28th-February-2007, 03:34 PM
If we're to believe what Franck says then the whole world of Ballroom and Latin is all about prejudices. Besides, they're not mine, I caught them from highly respected teachers. Maybe correct dancin is contagious - I hope so :wink:Once again you're trying to distort my views by adding 'if we're to believe what Franck says...' :sad:

As David James said, Ballroom, and other partner dances have their own prejudices to contend with, and I'm not interested in replicating their teaching model as they lose more students (not just to their classes but to dancing in general) than anyone would believe!

To get back to MJ, I am contending that your (deeply held) prejudice on footwork is hindering some of your students (and no doubt in some cases putting them off completely). I'm even willing to accept that my stance is prejudiced too, but I have given evidence and example (real life, not name dropping teachers) where teaching a set pattern of footwork is a hindrance to learning...

David Bailey
28th-February-2007, 03:51 PM
but I have given evidence and example (real life, not name dropping teachers)
Ooh, if I go to one of your classes, can I casually drop into the conversation "Well, when I was in Franck's class, he said..."? :grin:

Coz that'd be :waycool: :D

Franck
28th-February-2007, 03:58 PM
Ooh, if I go to one of your classes, can I casually drop into the conversation "Well, when I was in Franck's class, he said..."? :grin: I thought you were booked for my 2 Focus on Connection workshops on the 11th March (see the utopia website (http://www.utopiadance.co.uk) for more details) :wink:
I had assumed that you had booked under pseudonym, or would come as someone's waistcoat button!

David Bailey
28th-February-2007, 04:12 PM
I thought you were booked for my { snip blatant plug }
I would have, if I could, you know, bother, but I'm sure it'll be sold out by now.

I think I'll just lie, that's what everyone else does. Amir told me so himself :)


I had assumed that you had booked under pseudonym, or would come as someone's waistcoat button!
I could always wear a hat, false nose and funny glasses, do you think that'd work?

Ghost
28th-February-2007, 04:17 PM
:respect: :yeah: An excellent summary!
A common misquote! the correct version of the above is: "There is no set footwork in Ceroc"
Thanks

Ok reading through the recent posts is it fair to say then that there is footwork in Ceroc, it's just that it isn't set?

Which means that Cerocers have to work out a footwork of their own that actually works.

Which means that an option for this is to look at what others are doing (or ask) and adopt stepping back on x foot. Or step back on which foot is led. Or learn how to flow with the dance etc.

But you do need to do something.

Chef
28th-February-2007, 04:18 PM
To get back to MJ, I am contending that your (deeply held) prejudice on footwork is hindering some of your students (and no doubt in some cases putting them off completely). I'm even willing to accept that my stance is prejudiced too, but I have given evidence and example (real life, not name dropping teachers) where teaching a set pattern of footwork is a hindrance to learning...

I am really starting to get confused here. No really!

Is teaching a set pattern of footwork a hinderance to learning? To learning what? what is it that they are learning by avioding learning footwork? Is a complete absence of instruction on footwork a boon to learning something?

Is there anything else that you would like to aviod teaching people as an aid to their dancing?

Does this avoidance of footwork only apply to beginners, leaving it as a skill to pick up later?

Perhaps Franck and Andy could each take a group of new dance students and have, say 3 months, of one lesson a week in their standard dance classes and then find out which set of students is dancing the best?

Should it be assesed on dancing skill alone(who would be independant enough to judge that) or retention rate of students. Or perhaps some combination so that a large group daning badly would somehow be equal to a small group dancing well.

Andy McGregor
28th-February-2007, 04:21 PM
To get back to MJ, I am contending that your (deeply held) prejudice on footwork is hindering some of your students (and no doubt in some cases putting them off completely). I'm even willing to accept that my stance is prejudiced too, but I have given evidence and example (real life, not name dropping teachers) where teaching a set pattern of footwork is a hindrance to learning...And plenty of times I've had a lady transform her dancing by saying "step on each foot as I say it" RLRLRLRL. I get beaming smiles within the space of half a track.

And, I get people coming from other classes who say "I've been told I need to come here to learn to dance properly" - I didn't tell them :innocent:

Franck
28th-February-2007, 04:55 PM
Is teaching a set pattern of footwork a hinderance to learning? To learning what? what is it that they are learning by avioding learning footwork? Is a complete absence of instruction on footwork a boon to learning something?No, you just misunderstood.

Teaching a set pattern of footwork in MJ (and saying it's the only way) will be a hindrance to some students who won't be able to replicate it naturally, and as a result will give up, confirming their belief that dancing wasn't for them.
Ceroc teach plenty of footwork, and even in Beginners classes we mention what to do with either foot, but we also say that if they feel more comfortable stepping on the other foot, and it works for them, then that's fine. I don't try to fit round pegs through square holes.

The final upshot, is that after a few weeks / months, those followers will have learnt to follow and feel the lead via the connection and they will naturally step on the best foot for the pattern lead by their partner, rather than refuse to follow that pattern because their teacher has always said that the footwork is RLRLRL etc...

Franck
28th-February-2007, 04:59 PM
And plenty of times I've had a lady transform her dancing by saying "step on each foot as I say it" RLRLRLRL. I get beaming smiles within the space of half a track.That's my point! Individually, you can suggest a different pattern if the footwork they are doing doesn't work for them, but I assure you that there are some followers for whom the opposite advice has helped.

Tessalicious
28th-February-2007, 06:37 PM
Beat 1 - (clockwise turn) weight on the right foot and turn to the right

Beat 2 - place left next to right to stop the turn

Beat 3 - step back right

Beat 4 - (anti-clockwise turn) step onto the left foot and turn to the left

Beat 5 - place the right foot next to the left to stop the turn

Beat 6 - step back left

Beat 7 - step back right

I think that goes RLRLRLRSorry Andy, but that's blatantly wrong. You're either saying that it takes 3 MJ beats (6 musical beats) to do a turn and return, or you're saying it takes 1.5 MJ beats (3 musical beats). There's no way you can tell me that Nigel would advocate that, it's completely unmusical, unless you're pioneering MJ to waltz music.

Between your beats 3 & 4, there is a beat of equal length to the others where the lady doesn't move her feet. And I don't know what you're talking about with stepping back on beat 7 as well as 6, so I'm not even going to try to explain what you've said wrong there.

Ghost
28th-February-2007, 08:36 PM
And I don't know what you're talking about with stepping back on beat 7 as well as 6, so I'm not even going to try to explain what you've said wrong there.
If the follow wants to keep ending with a step back on the same foot without syncopating and they're lead to step back on the other foot, the easiest solution* is for them to take an additional step back on the next musical beat (half a Ceroc beat). A good example is the travelling return.

:flower:

* providing the additional step back is led.

spindr
28th-February-2007, 09:00 PM
The problem is that you've moved the rotation from the start of the MJ count #1 to the middle of the MJ count #2 -- also it's double time -- so it's no longer beginner's MJ, I think it's more like Saturday Night Fever :)

MJ count#1

Beat 1 - (clockwise turn) weight on the right foot and turn to the right

Beat 2 - place left next to right to stop the turn

MJ count#2

Beat 3 - step back right

Beat 4 - (anti-clockwise turn) step onto the left foot and turn to the left

If you *are* stepping (RL)* on every beat -- then the right foot is always on an odd beat and the left foot is always on an even beat -- and there is nothing you can do to change that (without modifying the footwork).

But to dance a turn and then a return using MJ counts, i.e. an even number of beats -- your footwork in the return can't mirror your footwork in the turn.

Your easiest option is to make one step of the turn take two beats (one MJ count) -- but then you will have started stepping (LR)* on every beat thereafter.

But that's ok because you can make one step of the return take two beats (one MJ count) -- and you will be back hapilly stepping (RL)* on every beat again. Well, as long as the leader leads a return after every turn :devil:

SpinDr

Mr Cool
28th-February-2007, 09:29 PM
Wow why do people want to make footwork so complicated:confused:
I simply concentrate on moving my feet to the music :whistle:
Once I become confident in dance (its about getting up and leading with lots of ladies to lots of different music rather than learning lots of moves) I realised it is not that important which foot I step back on.:rolleyes:
It is important for the lead to know on which foot the lady is on at any one time to be in control of the lead again this is practice :wink:

Personally I lead a lady to dance in six and eight beat moves where posible:flower: it just makes for smoother cooler dancing :wink:

I do not understand what is meant by a MJ beat:confused: is that why so many Dancers of all levels ignor the music and believe the move is king:confused:

ladies gents if you have to think about your feet you need to dance more.:clap::clap: :clap: :clap:

:waycool: :waycool: :waycool:

Ghost
28th-February-2007, 09:35 PM
I do not understand what is meant by a MJ beat:confused:
A Ceroc count is two musical beats

ie 1 And 2 And 3 And 4 And (Ceroc counts)
= 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 (Musical beats)

DavidY
28th-February-2007, 10:29 PM
I thought you were booked for my 2 Focus on Connection workshops on the 11th March (see the utopia website (http://www.utopiadance.com) for more details) :wink:
Utopia is an all-star pom and dance team comprised of girls from the St. Louis area:confused: :wink:

Mr Cool
1st-March-2007, 12:58 AM
If the follow wants to keep ending with a step back on the same foot without syncopating and they're lead to step back on the other foot, the easiest solution* is for them to take an additional step back on the next musical beat (half a Ceroc beat). A good example is the travelling return.:flower:

Does anybody really believe this :confused: :confused: :whistle:

:waycool: :waycool: :waycool:

Andy McGregor
1st-March-2007, 01:37 AM
so I'm not even going to try to explain what you've said wrong there.Go on, try :devil:

Otherwise you're just saying "you're wrong but I can't explain it" - you might as well have kept quiet.

I'm not 100% certain I got this right as I worked it out on my own in my office - but I think I'm pretty close. Maybe Tessalicious would like to propose an alternative as saying someone is wrong implies that you know the right answer. Maybe Tessalicious could share it with us.

Ghost
1st-March-2007, 02:00 AM
:flower:

Does anybody really believe this :confused: :confused: :whistle:

:waycool: :waycool: :waycool:

Hey if it's wrong I'd rather know.

Just in case I'm not being clear. If I lead an acw return it's natural for the follow to step back on her left at the end. If she wants to step back on her right she can get round it by syncopating, weight shifts etc, but it's much easier if she just steps back left and then is led to do another step back on her right. Perfectly doable with beginners.

What's the flaw in my thinking? :flower:

Nessa
1st-March-2007, 05:49 AM
Maybe I am odd - no , don't answer that bit! - but I naturally want to step back with my right.......and if I'm led otherwise I gotta really think about what I'm doing - all this whilst Franck is trying to get me to stop looking at my feet (which only happens when I dance with Franck - 'cos I'm terrified I'll stand on him!):flower:

Just realised that I do the look at the feet thing when I dance with Sheena too....
:what: I thought the reason everyone looks at Franck's feet when they dance with him is because they move so bloody much!! Ah the magic shoes, I remember them well....

Don't worry, Mezzo, *I* find Franck and Sheena terrifying too..... :wink:

I've found this whole thread quite fascinating, partly because Modern Jive in Sydney (and I believe that's all companies) has just changed from what was called 'beginner footwork' (which you'd ALL have a field day abusing *Ness ponders whether to throw Australia to the wolves for the sake of entertainment....*) to standard 'walking' footwork which is I believe as Ceroc in the UK teaches it.
At beginner level when I was learning I found it EXTREMELY comforting to know which foot went where and which arm went where... was shocked one day to notice the intermediate dancers pretty much walking... and then when I actually got MORE observant to see the advanced dancers throwing all the rules out of the window.
Bloody laptop *pause for correction of typos*

I have to say I do believe in teaching them footwork at the beginner level - and then making it clear that as they progress and get more comfortable with their body positions and moving WITH the music, their footwork will change and become more natural to reflect their increased comfort with the dance style.
I'm playing around (in the shallow end of the pool, as it were) with WCS now, and am finding it very frustrating having to follow their footwork at the beginner level, but am very aware that were I to actually apply myself, within very few months I would be able to forget thinking about the footwork (as the basic 1-2-triple-step-triple-step pattern would be a natural framework for me to play with) and actually DANCE.

Though, as I believe was said above, horses for courses. For me, give me my rules and then just watch me enjoy breaking them....

And in response to DJ's original post (yep, I even read THAT far back) - the gal you danced with might just be afraid of taking the plunge into the big cold pool of 'thinking for herself'. I was the same myself when I met some tart of a dancer from Scotland who REALLY bullied me into following a lead.. (note to self - how is 'learning to follow a lead' the same as 'learning to think for oneself'???)
Perhaps a social chat afterward your freestyle would sort out what she is thinking - rather than spending 2 weeks debating the wheres and whyfores online!
Of course, here in Sydney we are limited to mere hundreds at dance parties rather than thousands - maybe you just don't have time....

David Bailey
1st-March-2007, 08:50 AM
Utopia is an all-star pom and dance team comprised of girls from the St. Louis area:confused: :wink:
Wa-hey :clap:

And, did anyone else read that as "all-star porn and dance team"? Just me then... :blush:

David Bailey
1st-March-2007, 08:55 AM
Just in case I'm not being clear. If I lead an acw return it's natural for the follow to step back on her left at the end.
:yeah: Absolutely - that's a natural continuation of the turn. You get explicitly taught that in Cuban salsa, for example.

Having said that, the opposite applies for turns in cross-body leads; the girl turns, errr, anti-clockwise (!), then should be led to step back on her right. But usually the cross-body lead imparts enough travelling momentum to allow leaders to indicate which foot the follower should step back on. Usually...

David Bailey
1st-March-2007, 09:04 AM
MORE observant to see the advanced dancers throwing all the rules out of the window.
That's pretty much the same in all disciplines - you've got to master the rules before you can break them. The problem is, of course, that beginners see advanced dancers breaking the rules, and think this is OK for them to do too...


I have to say I do believe in teaching them footwork at the beginner level - and then making it clear that as they progress and get more comfortable with their body positions and moving WITH the music, their footwork will change and become more natural to reflect their increased comfort with the dance style.
I've got some sympathy with this one - I sometimes wonder if the "Don't worry about footwork" line actually makes it harder for the beginner, by forcing them to make decisions about what to do, when, whilst they're trying to learn 20 other things at the same time.

That's not a "right / wrong" point, it's an ease-of-teaching + ease-of-learning point.


And in response to DJ's original post (yep, I even read THAT far back) - the gal you danced with might just be afraid of taking the plunge into the big cold pool of 'thinking for herself'.
No, I think it was more that she had a closed attitude towards what is and isn't possible.

As a general point, I've no, repeat no problems dancing with anyone at any level - I've done enough of this stuff so that I can adjust my dancing style and patterns to meet the level of my partner pretty quickly, and I'm not at all bothered by not being able to do "fancy moves" - since I don't do those much anyway any more.

But when you get a partner who's not willing to follow because she's just decided to do it her way, there's not much you can do about it. I'm not a teacher so I don't want to waste valuable dance time trying to explain things to her, especially as she probably wouldn't have appreciated it - it's amazing how well you can get a feel for someone's character through 3 minutes of dancing, isn't it?

Lory
1st-March-2007, 10:16 AM
For me, there's something reassuring about this thread, its confirmed to me, that I must have some built in 'natural ability' cos I don't understand a word of it. :blush:

If I had to learn dancing from 'reading' instructions, I doubt I'd have mastered a 'first move' yet :rofl:

timbp
1st-March-2007, 11:19 AM
Ah hah! So that's why you won't let me do it!! Tiggerbabe once actually lifted my head up!!

More effective I find is "If you can look down, so can I", then I look towards her feet. Almost always I get an enoyable view, and my partner learns not to look down.

MartinHarper
1st-March-2007, 11:23 AM
I think it was more that she had a closed attitude towards what is and isn't possible.

Speculation? Ask her?

I know one follower who, instead of rock-stepping, turns 90° to her left and takes two forward steps. She does step RL as she does so, though, so I guess she passes the McGregor test.

Lou
1st-March-2007, 01:46 PM
Go on, try :devil:.

OK...

(This is in beats of music, not MJ counts. The MJ counts occur on the odd numbers).

1. Back Right.
2. Weight forward Left – start turning clockwise
3. Still turning – bring right foot level with left – weight placed on right
4. Finish turning with weight on left
5. Step back right
6. Weight forward Left – start turning anti-clockwise
7. Still turning – right foot level with left – weight placed on right
8. Finish turning, weight on left
9. Step back right

You get walking turns, not spins - but then, that's one of the downsides with RLRLRLRL ;)

ducasi
1st-March-2007, 02:19 PM
I've got some sympathy with this one - I sometimes wonder if the "Don't worry about footwork" line actually makes it harder for the beginner, by forcing them to make decisions about what to do, when, whilst they're trying to learn 20 other things at the same time.
As a beginner, I remember my teacher teaching us things like the "step across" and telling us which feet we should be using. I was never on the right foot (probably because I had started off on the "wrong" foot,) but having been also told that being on the "right" foot didn't matter so much I didn't let it worry me, and instead concentrated on the rest of the move – you know, things like the getting to the right place at the right time, and leading my partner and such things.

If I didn't know that footwork was flexible, I'd have found learning to dance much harder.

And so now, as then, I let my feet do what they want to do and concentrate on more important things like connecting with my partner and the music. It usually works. :)

whitetiger1518
1st-March-2007, 03:06 PM
I'm sure I must be on the "wrong foot" ALL the time ;) Althoough being a leftie my brain thinks the right way round :)

Periodically a kind soul tries moves with me that are the reverse of the ordinary eg my left hand instead of right for single handed moves or moves where I am drawn to the opposite side from usual eg left side of leader when in first move.

Cheers
Whitetiger

Andy McGregor
1st-March-2007, 08:00 PM
OK...

(This is in beats of music, not MJ counts. The MJ counts occur on the odd numbers).

1. Back Right.
2. Weight forward Left – start turning clockwise
3. Still turning – bring right foot level with left – weight placed on right
4. Finish turning with weight on left
5. Step back right
6. Weight forward Left – start turning anti-clockwise
7. Still turning – right foot level with left – weight placed on right
8. Finish turning, weight on left
9. Step back right

You get walking turns, not spins - but then, that's one of the downsides with RLRLRLRL ;):yeah:

Isn't that what I said? Because it's what I meant to say if it isn't the same.

I've been watching women in the turns at returns and they mostly do this RLRLRLRL footwork. I'm at a loss to fathom how else Franck thinks the footwork for a turn and return could go.

Maybe Tessalicious could tell us?

spindr
1st-March-2007, 09:50 PM
(This is in beats of music, not MJ counts. The MJ counts occur on the odd numbers).

1. Back Right.
2. Weight forward Left – start turning clockwise
3. Still turning – bring right foot level with left – weight placed on right
4. Finish turning with weight on left
5. Step back right
6. Weight forward Left – start turning anti-clockwise
7. Still turning – right foot level with left – weight placed on right
8. Finish turning, weight on left
9. Step back right

You get walking turns, not spins - but then, that's one of the downsides with RLRLRLRL ;)
Yep, that's the only way that I could get Andy's marching footwork to do a turn and a return.

I just think that it's restrictive and artificial that a mirrored movement doesn't allow mirrored footwork.

In particular, I think that an anticlockwise rotation should naturally be on the left leg -- an a clockwise rotation should naturally be on the right leg.

The reason for the particular legs being used for particular directions of rotation is "cheating the turn".

"Cheating the turn" is as follows -- turn the foot out when you place the foot you want to rotate on. For a right footed clockwise rotation, rather than have your toes pointing at 12 o'clock, turn the foot slightly clockwise so that the toes point say 1, 2, or even 3 o'clock (your instep will face roughly forwards). Then when you step up on to that foot -- you will naturally rotate clockwise maybe even more than 180 degrees, especially if you raise up onto the ball of the right foot. (*)

You *can* sort of "cheat" a left-footed clockwise turn, but in that case your instep will face backwards/towards you. This isn't a natural movement. It also means you tend to dance a hook turn -- hooking the right foot around and behind the left one. Not the sort of movement I'd expect to be easy for beginners?

Oh, and most importantly -- it doesn't fit well with standard Leroc footwork :)

SpinDr

(*) For a left footed anticlockwise rotation, rather than have your toes pointing at 12 o'clock, turn the foot slightly anticlockwise so that the toes point say 11, 10, or even 9 o'clock (your instep will face roughly forwards). Then when you step up on to that foot -- you will naturally rotate anticlockwise maybe even more than 180 degrees, especially if you raise up onto the ball of the left foot.

timbp
2nd-March-2007, 02:31 PM
I've got some sympathy with this one - I sometimes wonder if the "Don't worry about footwork" line actually makes it harder for the beginner, by forcing them to make decisions about what to do, when, whilst they're trying to learn 20 other things at the same time.

I recall as a beginner being told footwork didn't matter much for men and I should concentrate on leading my partner.
Nevertheless, I knew footwork was integral to dance, and I made sure I knew where to step at each beat of each move (while still leading my partner.)

Now I rarely have any idea what I'm doing with my feet. I move my body (my centre) and trust my feet to move to keep my balance.

But can that be taught from the beginning? I know nothing about educational theory; maybe learnng to step is an essential part of learning
to move one's weight/body.

I understand in the UK you are rarely taught specific footwork. David is commenting on the "Don't worry about footwork" line -- but that line still mentions footwork.
Maybe footwork should not be mentioned at all -- classes should just tell students where their bodies should go, with no mention (ever) of feet (not even "don't worry about your feet").

I still like to tell my partners who ask about footwork "You can do whatever you want with your feet, as long as I can do whatever I want with your body".

Ghost
2nd-March-2007, 03:10 PM
Now I rarely have any idea what I'm doing with my feet. I move my body (my centre) and trust my feet to move to keep my balance.

That's how I did it when started Ceroc, but I've danced before. I'm not sure about someone who's never danced. I suspect Franck's probably right though - different strokes for different folks. However I can also see the benefit of Andy's approach of "this works, use it". So maybe something in between - like you can do what you want, but if you're stuck try this (which I think is what Franck's actually doing)

David Bailey
2nd-March-2007, 03:51 PM
So maybe something in between - like you can do what you want, but if you're stuck try this (which I think is what Franck's actually doing)
But then, you're still asking a beginner to think, rather than to do... I dunno, I'm not convinced either way, but I can at least see a plausible case for teaching exact footwork to beginners.

Ghost
2nd-March-2007, 03:55 PM
But then, you're still asking a beginner to think, rather than to do... I dunno, I'm not convinced either way, but I can at least see a plausible case for teaching exact footwork to beginners.

I'm thinking more along the lines of "if what they're doing works, then they should just carry on. If it isn't then they could try step footwork." It should be fairly easy for a beginner to decide whether their current footwork is working - a simple test is how often they fall over :whistle: .

Whitebeard
2nd-March-2007, 08:39 PM
But then, you're still asking a beginner to think, rather than to do... I dunno, I'm not convinced either way, but I can at least see a plausible case for teaching exact footwork to beginners.

Which is exactly what happens - surely. The teacher and demo are up there on stage demonstrating the footwork. And down there on the floor the class is twisting and straining its collective neck trying to actually see and absorb what is visually happening. Teaching by example - literally.

In a few moves some footwork is taught verbally as well and for me that's not always helpful. In the First Move and the Basket there is essentially the same twisting out of the follower at count 3 but for the former we are instructed to "step back left", whilst in the latter it's "step back either foot". Ooh, we're given a choice - but I choose to apply it to the First Move and step back right, which feels much better and allows me to slide the left forward and point. I'm sure that looks better than the contra-twisting of upper and lower body which is taught.

Tessalicious
5th-March-2007, 02:35 PM
:yeah:

Isn't that what I said? Because it's what I meant to say if it isn't the same.

I've been watching women in the turns at returns and they mostly do this RLRLRLRL footwork. I'm at a loss to fathom how else Franck thinks the footwork for a turn and return could go.

Maybe Tessalicious could tell us?Yeah maybe I could, but maybe I've had better things to do.

Ok, Ok, I'll play. For a simple turn and return, as taught in Ceroc Essentials footwork exercises at the start of beginners classes.

Beat 1 (musical beat): Back left

Beat 2: Hold

Beat 3: Transfer weight onto the forward right foot and turn clockwise

Beat 4: Use left foot to stop turn

Beat 5: Back right

Beat 6: Hold

Beat 7: Transfer weight onto the forward left foot and turn anticlockwise

Beat 8: Use right foot to stop turn.

So, in your terminology, this is not "RLRLRLRL" but "L RLR LR" - two fewer steps and it results in turning on the correct foot for both turns, without needing to step the turn.

I'm really sorry to hear your ladies don't do that, I'm sure they'd find it much easier if they did.

Chef
5th-March-2007, 04:03 PM
Ok, Ok, I'll play. For a simple turn and return, as taught in Ceroc Essentials footwork exercises at the start of beginners classes.

Beat 1 (musical beat): Back left

Beat 2: Hold

Beat 3: Transfer weight onto the forward right foot and turn clockwise

Beat 4: Use left foot to stop turn

Beat 5: Back right

Beat 6: Hold

Beat 7: Transfer weight onto the forward left foot and turn anticlockwise

Beat 8: Use right foot to stop turn.

So, in your terminology, this is not "RLRLRLRL" but "L RLR LR" - two fewer steps and it results in turning on the correct foot for both turns, without needing to step the turn.


I am not trying to ask for clarification just for the sake of it but......

You actually worked this bit out by dancing through it yourself and then writing down what you really did? The reason that I ask is because the way I have learnt (from the Nigel and Nina school as my prime influence) is that you rock back on beat 1 (musical beat) and you transfer your weight onto your forward foot on beat 2.

I have never noticed any teacher (ceroc or otherwise) teaching the "hold" on beat 2 (musical beat) bit (although it might explain why so many have to hold onto your hand to stop themselves falling over backwards) and I have never noticed you doing this "hold" on beat two when I have danced with you. I will observe more closely when I have another opportunity.

Also on beat 4 you use your left foot to stop your turn and then step back on your right on beat 5. I assume you want the person to use their left foot to stop the turn AND transfer their weight onto it in order for it to be possible to step back on their right foot. Would that assumption be correct?

I guess what I am asking is do you really mean what you put above or do you mean?

Beat 1 (musical beat): Back left

Beat 2: Transfer weight onto the forward right foot

Beat 3: turn clockwise

Beat 4: Use left foot to stop turn and transfer weight onto it.

Beat 5: Back right

Beat 6: Transfer weight onto the forward left foot

Beat 7: turn anticlockwise

Beat 8: Use right foot to stop turn and transfer weight onto it.

If you stick by your breakdown above I will just have to accept that ceroc training is different to my own and adapt when I encounter a ceroc trained person.

Tessalicious
5th-March-2007, 04:11 PM
Do I mean what I said above? Sure I do, as exactly what I quoted - the Ceroc Essentials footwork exercises at the start of beginners classes.

Whether I do it myself like that will depend on the lead. When I trust a lead, to give me exactly the right amount of support in a turn I will do what you describe; when I don't, I will keep my weight back until beat 3 so that I can give myself the momentum to get round comfortably, to avoid having to resort to step turns with weak leads.

Sorry to have been unclear, but I'm still shattered from the weekend, and was mainly trying to give an example to Andy to show that it isn't necessary to be quite so pig-headed.

Chef
5th-March-2007, 05:01 PM
Sorry to have been unclear.

You were completely clear. It was just that it was different to how I had been trained. I haven't seen a Ceroc essentials class so I haven't come across the breakdown of events that you describe.

I guess what it comes down to is Ceroc and Andy have different ways of doing things. I will leave those that believe strongly in the merits of their respective systems to argue their own cases.

It does explain something that I have been noticing for sometime and couldn't quite place my finger on what was the root cause.

Franck
5th-March-2007, 06:22 PM
I guess what it comes down to is Ceroc and Andy have different ways of doing things. I will leave those that believe strongly in the merits of their respective systems to argue their own cases.I believe strongly that we shouldn't specify a strict footwork pattern for all.
This thread has aptly demonstrated it as various dancers are unable to agree on any pattern, or indeed to describe properly what they do.
I watched a variety of dancers over the last week, from Beginners, to experienced dancers, teachers etc... and the conclusion is that dancers keep changing their footwork, all the time, and for a multitude of reasons.

As I said previously, I don't disagree with Andy's RLRLRLRL pattern, as it can work, but I fundamentally (and philosophically) disagree that we should teach it as 'The Correct Way'.

Having tried to follow Andy's strict footwork pattern in Freestyle, I noticed it took a lot of concentration, more than any beginner follower should devote to footwork in MJ.

Once again, step on every beat is a great way to start people dancing and will help them move their feet to the music, but enforcing a particular foot for each beat is counter-productive and ultimately pointless.

Andy McGregor
5th-March-2007, 11:32 PM
and was mainly trying to give an example to Andy to show that it isn't necessary to be quite so pig-headed.I'm just telling people what I teach beginners, what Nina teaches, what Nigel Teaches, what Amir teaches beginners - I will not say those great teachers are wrong and I believe that Tessalicious is sticking her neck out to disagree with such great dancers.

.. I didn't think that was pig-headed until Tessalicious pointed it out. I thought it was being specific and giving beginners a basic pattern to vary once they become experienced dancers. The difference between me and Tessalicious is that I teach ten lessons a week and have a considerable following of people who want to dance the way I'm teaching :wink: IMHO Tessalicious has got the footwork wrong when she has written it down, but never gets it wrong when she actually dances: I think she's got confused between a step and a step-in-place as, I believe, she actually dances RLRLRLRL :devil:

It just happened that Chef and I were next to each other in Nigel Anderson's lesson last Friday in Ealing. Guess what? He repeated the requirement for women to do the RLRLRLRL footwork: this was an advanced lesson too. Chef and I gave each other knowing looks - and, of course, blew each other kisses :flower:

The funny thing was, one of my partners in the lesson said "I don't go back on that foot" when I pointed out that the routine wasn't working because she was going back on her left foot on beat one. Deja vu or what?

This particular lady also broke her shoulder, collapsed her arm and overturned on every turn - but she had the demeanour of somebody who thought she was a great dancer who I should be honoured to partner :confused:

robd
6th-March-2007, 02:32 AM
what Amir teaches beginners

Does Amir teach beginners in the same sense as most Ceroc teachers teach beginners? Sure, he gets a steady stream of people who are new to Jango but I'll bet that the percentage of these who have not already danced Ceroc or some other form of partner dance is less than 5%.

Andy McGregor
6th-March-2007, 08:55 AM
Does Amir teach beginners in the same sense as most Ceroc teachers teach beginners? Sure, he gets a steady stream of people who are new to Jango but I'll bet that the percentage of these who have not already danced Ceroc or some other form of partner dance is less than 5%.Maybe somebody else could look back over Amir's posts. Amir said it here. Who am I to question what he posts? You'd need to be Franck or Tessalicious to disagree with such an accomplished dancer :whistle:

And what about Nigel? He teaches beginners all of the time and he says RLRLRLRL. Who are we to disagree with him? I know I teach it too and nobody has any problem disagreeing with me - which is why I'm using third-party evidence to support my argument. It is my contention that it is wrong to say it doesn't matter which foot you start dancing with. I don't make a big deal of it in my group lessons because people have come to learn a simple dance, have fun, get fit, etc, etc. But I always drop it in somewere in the lesson and I make sure my demos use, what I consider to be, the correct footwork. In beginners workshops I make sure all the women are aware of RLRLRLRL as the basic MJ footwork and it always works well.

I think some of the people who think this footwork results in a plodding dance don't understand the difference between a weight change and a step that changes the position of the foot. And the people that expect beginners to keep on the same foot for some beats, change feet on other beats and step twice or even 3 times on some beats are teaching a very complicated dance indeed :confused:

But, back to the plot. I find the hardest bit of dancing the lady's part is being on the correct foot. I'm afraid that, as a lady, I might have to say "I don't go back on that foot - but I wish I could :tears: "

David Bailey
6th-March-2007, 09:37 AM
I'm just telling people what I teach beginners, what Nina teaches, what Nigel Teaches, what Amir teaches beginners
So, no name-dropping there then... :rolleyes:

Andy, I personally would have about 300% more respect for your argument, if you made it on its merits rather than on what you say other people do.


The difference between me and Tessalicious is that I teach ten lessons a week and have a considerable following of people who want to dance the way I'm teaching :wink:
Elder Sanchez has hundreds of groupies in the salsa scene, Federico likewise in AT - they're both useless teachers whose methods IMNSHO opinion are actually harmful to dancers. Quantity is not quality.


The funny thing was, one of my partners in the lesson said "I don't go back on that foot" when I pointed out that the routine wasn't working because she was going back on her left foot on beat one. Deja vu or what?

This particular lady also broke her shoulder, collapsed her arm and overturned on every turn - but she had the demeanour of somebody who thought she was a great dancer who I should be honoured to partner :confused:
:eek: I bet it was the same woman - sounds very much like her. We should put out warning posters about her or something :rofl:

Of course, the alternative is that there are two of them in London, which is pretty scary... :eek: :eek:

Franck
6th-March-2007, 11:21 AM
Maybe somebody else could look back over Amir's posts. Amir said it here. Who am I to question what he posts? You'd need to be Franck or Tessalicious to disagree with such an accomplished dancer :whistle: Amir and I have had several discussions where we didn't agree, and I don't see this as a something shameful, but a sign that both of us are working out the best way to teach and go forward.
Amir mostly teaches Jango, which is much more complex than Modern Jive, and might require specific footwork, but whilst advocating stepping on every beat, he also says:
To clarify: I don’t think followers should step once per beat – they should do what ever they like (within the context of the move, the music, their ability and religious beliefs.)
Once again, stepping (or weight transfer) on every beat works, and I'm glad you found your 'holy grail' but we'll have to continue to disagree on whether we should make Beginners follow strict patterns. For the last 15 years, I have been teaching MJ in Scotland, and have seen beginners become amazing, who would probably have given up if I had tried to make them step on a specific foot when they weren't ready.
The main problem is not the footwork, it is thinking about it, concentrating on your feet, instead of following. Every time we say to followers, at this point you should be on 'this foot', they stop paying attention to the lead, and steps mechanically through the footwork pattern.

Tessalicious
6th-March-2007, 11:31 AM
IMHO Tessalicious has got the footwork wrong when she has written it down, but never gets it wrong when she actually dances: I think she's got confused between a step and a step-in-place as, I believe, she actually dances RLRLRLRL :devil:Thank you so much Andy, I'm very grateful for being told that, having danced with me twice, you know exactly what footwork I always do, and for it being implied that I'm either too stupid to know how I dance, or I'm too rubbish to dance correctly.
Maybe somebody else could look back over Amir's posts. Amir said it here. Who am I to question what he posts? You'd need to be Franck or Tessalicious to disagree with such an accomplished dancer :whistle:


I'm just telling people what I teach beginners, what Nina teaches, what Nigel Teaches, what Amir teaches beginners - I will not say those great teachers are wrong and I believe that Tessalicious is sticking her neck out to disagree with such great dancers.

...snip...

The difference between me and Tessalicious is that I teach ten lessons a week and have a considerable following of people who want to dance the way I'm teaching :wink:
...at which point I'm going to step down from this argument - maybe I'm weak, but I don't like feeling patronised by someone who's too fixed on his own opinion to hear anyone else's with any respect. I know Andy has been made to feel like this in the past and I am surprised that he is happy to pass that feeling on.

Andy McGregor
6th-March-2007, 12:04 PM
Sorry to have been unclear, but I'm still shattered from the weekend, and was mainly trying to give an example to Andy to show that it isn't necessary to be quite so pig-headed.


Thank you so much Andy, I'm very grateful for being told that, having danced with me twice, you know exactly what footwork I always do, and for it being implied that I'm either too stupid to know how I dance, or I'm too rubbish to dance correctly.

...at which point I'm going to step down from this argument - maybe I'm weak, but I don't like feeling patronised by someone who's too fixed on his own opinion to hear anyone else's with any respect. I know Andy has been made to feel like this in the past and I am surprised that he is happy to pass that feeling on.On this occasion I didn't start the name calling. I don't take kindly to being told I'm pig-headed and even less kindly when somebody goes off in a stroppy sulk and tries to make me wrong for defending myself when I'm called names :mad: It is even more annoying when that person accuses me of calling her "stupid" or "rubbish". I've called her no such thing, have never implied that and am annoyed that a transparent attempt has been made to put those words into my mouth - all I did was defend my argument when Tessalicious disagreed with me, first in a vague way and then in a more specific way that I believe is incorrect - but at no time has I started name calling, that's been a one-way street :angry:

Besides, I don't call it pig headed, I call it sticking to my guns. I've been quite clear in my arguments and have been robust in my defence of them. I've given my own reasons for my beliefs and I've used third-party support as well. I agree with Franck that making a big deal about footwork is the wrong thing to do with beginners. The bit where we disagree is that the RLRLRLRL footwork is the basic MJ footwork. IMHO anything else is more complicated and I can see no reason to confuse beginners with anything but footwork which is as easy as walking - all you have to do is make sure they start on the correct foot*:whistle:

*did I mention this should be the right foot for ladies on beat one?

Simon r
6th-March-2007, 12:22 PM
Amir and I have had several discussions where we didn't agree, and I don't see this as a something shameful, but a sign that both of us are working out the best way to teach and go forward.
Amir mostly teaches Jango, which is much more complex than Modern Jive, and might require specific footwork, but whilst advocating stepping on every beat, he also says:
Once again, stepping (or weight transfer) on every beat works, and I'm glad you found your 'holy grail' but we'll have to continue to disagree on whether we should make Beginners follow strict patterns. For the last 15 years, I have been teaching MJ in Scotland, and have seen beginners become amazing, who would probably have given up if I had tried to make them step on a specific foot when they weren't ready.
The main problem is not the footwork, it is thinking about it, concentrating on your feet, instead of following. Every time we say to followers, at this point you should be on 'this foot', they stop paying attention to the lead, and steps mechanically through the footwork pattern.


just to add to this,

i also agree with Amir , Nigel and nina and have been teaching this way for nearly 8 years.
itry to influence beginers by giving specific footwork but do not make it a obligation .

however in an Intermediate advanced class both nicole and i give specific footwork for all moves we teach. Whether people listen is another thing.

Frank and I also disagree on these points but we still love each other.


I do believe that some people learn better with specific footwork and some prefer to learn through the movement and experiment with diffrent footwork patterns.

Jive is the only dance with real fluidity to the dance and i think a lot of this comes from the fact we are not so rigid with our footwork. that is the main reason i started jive after many years of being told exact patterns that must be followed.
However when teaching i do feel instruction is required which you can adopt or change

Franck
6th-March-2007, 12:24 PM
all I did was defend my argument when Tessalicious disagreed with me, first in a vague way and then in a more specific way that I believe is incorrect It seems that in your quest to correct all the women's footwork to the "one true footwork ATBNANDAGAAMG™*" you have managed to patronise several followers, including the lady you referred to in your previous post:
The funny thing was, one of my partners in the lesson said "I don't go back on that foot" when I pointed out that the routine wasn't working because she was going back on her left foot on beat one. Deja vu or what?

This particular lady also broke her shoulder, collapsed her arm and overturned on every turn - but she had the demeanour of somebody who thought she was a great dancer who I should be honoured to partner :confused:


I agree with Franck that making a big deal about footwork is the wrong thing to do with beginners. The bit where we disagree is that the RLRLRLRL footwork is the basic MJ footwork.
I'm glad we agree footwork is no big deal, from here, it's only a small step (on any foot) to agreeing that starting on the other foot will not ruin the dance...


* As Taught By Nigel Anderson, Nina Daines, Amir Giles And Andy Mc Gregor

robd
6th-March-2007, 12:55 PM
The main problem is not the footwork, it is thinking about it, concentrating on your feet, instead of following. Every time we say to followers, at this point you should be on 'this foot', they stop paying attention to the lead, and steps mechanically through the footwork pattern.

I can see parallels in what Franck is saying here with my experience in the ballroom and latin dancing lessons I have been taking, particularly the latin. Given fixed footwork to do I am finding that I can either concentrate on my feet or concentrate on the lead I need to give to my partner but seemingly not do the two together. It will come in time and with practice I am sure but I can see how beginner jivers might feel similarly if faced with set footowrk patterns.

This is not to say that I don't agree that a fixed footwork pattern for beginners may not be desirable. Good arguments both for and against this have been given in this thread. I do recall Amir teaching an Octopus (yes, really though I think he called it a loop through or somesuch) at the start of a Monday Jango class last year. He specified certain footwork for the men and though I found it tricky to get in sync with this to begin with (I was so used to doing an Octopus in the way I had always done an Octopus) I did find that once it 'clicked' with me it gave the move a nice consistency.


Robert

straycat
6th-March-2007, 04:54 PM
Ok, maybe some "helpful" person told her once she had two left feet, and she believed them :innocent:

:yeah:
On that note - does anyone have two right feet? And how does that affect their dancing? For that matter - if someone with two left feet is dancing with someone that has two right feet - is that a match made in heaven, or an accident waiting to happen? :what:

Andy McGregor
6th-March-2007, 05:12 PM
:yeah:
On that note - does anyone have two right feet? And how does that affect their dancing? For that matter - if someone with two left feet is dancing with someone that has two right feet - is that a match made in heaven, or an accident waiting to happen? :what:I try to call the right foot the foot that is not the left foot - as opposed to the right foot that is the correct foot that could be the left foot. So, when the left foot is the correct foot it's also the right foot. Therefore it's quite possible to have 2 right feet, but not 2 left feet :confused:

straycat
6th-March-2007, 05:29 PM
I try to call the right foot the foot that is not the left foot - as opposed to the right foot that is the correct foot that could be the left foot. So, when the left foot is the correct foot it's also the right foot. Therefore it's quite possible to have 2 right feet, but not 2 left feet :confused:

Mmm. This only gets more confusing. For example: at a time when the left foot is correct, but the right foot is not, that means that the left foot is the right foot, so the other foot is not the right foot - but neither is it the left foot! As we try not to stifle creativity by using negative vocabulary, we cannot have a wrong foot per se.

So the left foot is actually the right foot, but the other foot is not the right foot, or the left foot, or the wrong foot and becomes the foot of no fixed handedness, or the ambidextrous foot. At which point, I suppose one could always try shaving with it. :what:

Chef
6th-March-2007, 05:36 PM
It just happened that Chef and I were next to each other in Nigel Anderson's lesson last Friday in Ealing. Guess what? He repeated the requirement for women to do the RLRLRLRL footwork: this was an advanced lesson too. Chef and I gave each other knowing looks - and, of course, blew each other kisses :flower:

As you say yourself. This was an advanced lesson. If the attendees were not able to sort out left and right and forward and back and that there would be defined footwork then they had no business being in an advanced lesson.

Franck seems to be saying that there is no set footwork for beginners most importantly. This helps a lot of people who are unable to understand or act on a instruction like "step back on your right foot" to concentrate on stuff that they are able to assimilate. I am not sure I can understand how someone that can't deal with the "step back on your right foot" instruction can work out for themselves that they have to insert a triple step before beat 5 in order to be stepping back on the correct foot on beat 5 though.
Foot dyslexic on beat 1 but insightful before beat 5.

I did not give you a knowing look. I was trying to discreetly let you know your flies were undone.


Elder Sanchez has hundreds of groupies in the salsa scene, Federico likewise in AT - they're both useless teachers whose methods IMNSHO opinion are actually harmful to dancers. Quantity is not quality.

I can understand your point that "quantity is not quality". So neither Ceroc or Andy McGregor could point to the NUMBER of students that they teach to be any indication of the QUALITY of the dancers that their teaching produces.

So we are left with proponents of different approaches being still convinced of the merits of their own approaches but with no independant, objective measures to assess the results of each. I am sure that Andy McGs signature sums up his feelings on this subject and I have sympathy for it because everytime I have tried to learn something the easy way I have had to go back and do it the right way to get the desired results - it would have saved a lot of my time to do it right in the first place. Not that I am saying I know what is the right way in this instance.

It seems like it is time for this thread to go to sleep.

Andy McGregor
6th-March-2007, 05:37 PM
Mmm. This only gets more confusing. For example: at a time when the left foot is correct, but the right foot is not, that means that the left foot is the right foot, so the other foot is not the right foot - but neither is it the left foot! As we try not to stifle creativity by using negative vocabulary, we cannot have a wrong foot per se. In this case the other foot is the next foot: at that point the right foot becomes the right foot - but then the left foot is not longer the right foot but the next foot - unless you do LeRoc where, it seems the next foot is often not the other foot, it's the same foot that's the right foot, especially if it's the left foot:innocent:

Franck
6th-March-2007, 05:58 PM
Franck seems to be saying that there is no set footwork for beginners most importantly. This helps a lot of people who are unable to understand or act on a instruction like "step back on your right foot" to concentrate on stuff that they are able to assimilate. Yep, that's it exactly! Because many beginners won't naturally step back on the right foot for a variety of reasons (sometimes the lead will make it happen, or they were just standing on their right foot at the time). Focusing on their feet will take away from learning other aspects of the dance, and crucially will impact on the fun experienced by both the follower and the leader (as their follow start paying attention to their feet instead of dance).
I am not sure I can understand how someone that can't deal with the "step back on your right foot" instruction can work out for themselves that they have to insert a triple step before beat 5 in order to be stepping back on the correct foot on beat 5 though.
Foot dyslexic on beat 1 but insightful before beat 5.The first step is not the issue on its own, in the class it's easy to specify the first step of every move, but what happens when at the end of the first move (8 MJ counts or 16 musical beats, the follower ends up stepping back on her left foot after the ACW return (which is definitely the most common footwork: i.e. turn ACW on the left foot, put right foot down and step back on the left)? If she's to move onto the next move (say basket or another first move) she will be on the 'wrong' foot according to the teacher...

The problem really comes when beginners have to maintain a strict pattern through a variety of moves and patterns led by the man. West Coast Swing solve that problem by teaching beginners a combination of 6 beat (mostly) and 8 beat patterns to cover most initial situations, in MJ, we have total freedom of moves and as a result we have many more exceptions, take the Armjive for example, as Amir posted recently:
(Obviously like any system there are some expections, like arm-jives which are one step (or weight change) per every second beat.)

MartinHarper
6th-March-2007, 11:42 PM
I can see how beginner jivers might feel similarly if faced with set footowrk patterns.

We manage to walk down the street with RLRLRLRL footwork, so provided the beginner music is in a walking tempo range, it shouldn't be any harder than free footwork. If the students do find it harder, my first thought would be that the teacher is conveying to the students that they should find it hard.