The Anchor in MJ: WCS meets MJ

[JiveLad]

Dateline: Feb 25, Sydney:

Towards the end of the beginners class at Willoughby, Sydney, Jive Lad’s ears pricked up as he heard the teacher start taking about the anchor step. He went on to explain that “we used to teach semi-circle, step back....and now we are changing that......and introducing the ‘anchor”. The anchor was described and demonstrated as feet coming more together and a slight ‘lean’ back to create some tension (after the step back) with weight on the back foot – and of course doing the anchor at appropriate points from there - ie at 'end' of moves.

Now the reason I stood up and took attention was that my understanding is that the ‘anchor’ is a fundamental of WCS – and it was being brought in to MJ – and into the Beginners Class.

This theme continued into the Intermediate Class. Lots of talk about Anchor, Tension and Slot. In one sense, I saw this as a key moment: the ‘we’ referred to above, I took to mean Ceroc Australia – not just the whim of one particular teacher (in this case Mark – great guy btw). And it seemed to me a deliberate and important ‘strategic’ change in direction: a melding of MJ and WCS: bringing the best bits of technique from WCS directly into MJ.

The Intermediate class itself comprised 2 moves – the second of which could I sense have been legitimately part of a WCS class (which is probably why Jive Lad flunked it several times and had to have remedial help from the demonstrator who skipped down from the stage to help out).

Interested to consider if/how this could be done in the UK........I wonder if it could work? The more I think about it, the more I see it as the future - and the next stage evolution of MJ/Ceroc.

Any views?

[Caro]

That sounds interesting !

So would Jivelad (sorry - I had to - :flower: ) know how the anchor in MJ is done, in terms of timing ? Do you just change the connection at the end of your step back to give an elasticity feel while keeping the same timing, or do you add 2 beats during which you do your anchor at the end of the moves ?

Also I'm curious, would you necessarily know when the end of a move is ? I mean for the basic stuff it is quite obvious, but for the more elaborate moves ? Or is it when you reach the end of the slot (you said it was slotted, is that exclusively ?) and redirection is given like in wcs ?

[JiveLad]

That sounds interesting !

So would Jivelad (sorry - I had to - :flower: ) know how the anchor in MJ is done, in terms of timing ? Do you just change the connection at the end of your step back to give an elasticity feel while keeping the same timing, or do you add 2 beats during which you do your anchor at the end of the moves ?

A good point - as what was going thru' my head on the way back was that surely this takes an extra beat (or 2). Now, after the step back, the feet stepped more in line (but not together) and I distincly heard the teacher talking about 'pause' to anchor - and get that tension. So it was more than just changing the connection: it was footwork. For a more detailed technical explanation, I would have to defer to a teacher (and please note that the above is just my interpretation - therefore could be inaccurate).


Also I'm curious, would you necessarily know when the end of a move is ? I mean for the basic stuff it is quite obvious, but for the more elaborate moves ? Or is it when you reach the end of the slot (you said it was slotted, is that exclusively ?) and redirection is given like in wcs ?

Not sure about this - regarding the 'end of move' anchor - that is maybe open to debate in terms of when to do it. The only thing I would add is that the teacher also started to expand the tension/elasticity technique from a follower perspective - eg. when the lead is behind with hand on shoulder of follower, then follower should lean into this slightly to create some tension.....

[NZ Monkey]

This would have been about a week after J&T’s workshops in Sydney. I wasn’t there myself this time ( :tears: ) but they apparently taught a WCS meets MJ workshop at some point in the weekend. I would not at all be surprised if this class was based almost entirely on that.

Personally I’ve got no problem with taking technique pointers from other dance styles (especially my beloved WCS) but that is a pretty drastic sounding change to move the two closer. While the change in that would bring to the dynamic of the dance would suit me to a “t”, If MJ started getting too much like WCS I think I’d find I’d just rather dance WCS anyway and forget about MJ altogether.

OK, if I’m honest – I’d rather just dance WCS anyway given a choice between the two, but that’s just my personal preference. I’m sure there a lot of people out there who don’t have my refined sense of taste though :stir:

[NZ Monkey]

Not sure about this - regarding the 'end of move' anchor - that is maybe open to debate in terms of when to do it. The only thing I would add is that the teacher also started to expand the tension/elasticity technique from a follower perspective - eg. when the lead is behind with hand on shoulder of follower, then follower should lean into this slightly to create some tension.....To be fair this example is a technique point common to many dances. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with anchors as such.

[TA Guy]

Well MJ has always had a one beat anchor, and it's use is to build tension for the next move amongst others... very similar to WCS, and of course every swing dance out there.

Whether you semi-circle or not doesn't really affect that. In fact, one of the selling points of the semi circle is the step back to anchor and build of tension.

But I'm am all in favour of the MJ anchor and associated technique being taught. If you are a MJ dancer, it's one of those things that often has to be self-learn't. And it's crucial to controlled smooth dancing.



Not on topic, but it is a pet hate of mine when teachers attend a workshop and then blindly apply some technique they have "learn't" from the workshop a week later. Experience show one workshop often isn't enough to really appreciate the detail usually. Not that is what happened in this case, I am three thousand miles away, difficult to tell :)

[robd]

Yes, I think TA Guy is on point. Dancing with good MJ dancers you will feel a brief settling action which loads the momentum for the next travel forwards. Not sure if calling it an anchor and linking it to WCS helps or hinders the discussion though. The stuff about matching the pressure is also basic connection stuff applicable to many forms of dance. It's good that it's being taught but it doesn't necessarily mean MJ and WCS have decided to jump into bed together (DTS, you might get that snog from Caro yet :wink:)

[Lazy Dave]

Some of us have been doing this for a while....
A quiet revolution IS happening, after I put the kettle on.

[robd]

Some of us have been doing this for a while....
A quiet revolution IS happening

Dave, I could think of many words to describe your teaching but quiet definitely is NOT one of them :rolleyes:

[ducasi]

Like others have said, anchoring in MJ is nothing new. The step back is a one beat anchor, and plenty of folks will extend it longer, maybe even with a triple-step involved. :eek:

I applaud them for teaching this style to beginners though. :clap:

Isn't Modern Jive a great dance to have this sort of flexibility? :D

[Maxine]

introducing the ‘anchor”. The anchor was described and demonstrated as feet coming more together and a slight ‘lean’ back to create some tension (after the step back) with weight on the back foot – and of course doing the anchor at appropriate points from there - ie at 'end' of moves.


Any views?

It has got to be a positive move to ditch the semicircle step back (because it makes the dance so bouncy IMHO) but were you able to put the anchor into practice during freestyle or did it cause you any problems?

[Lazy Dave]

Dave, I could think of many words to describe your teaching but quiet definitely is NOT one of them :rolleyes:

Are you still going on about my gentle tones slipping under the Marquee at the last Southport and WAKING YOU UP!!!! :whistle:
Get over it! :lol:

[Trouble]

I think its great that MJ are introducing anchor steps.

Makes for smoother dancing, less bouncing and maybe the happy joining of WCS/MJ for ever more.

NOT.

[Gadget]

Aaaaaaaaaarg!

[Geordieed]

Both MJ and WCS have roots in Swing/Lindy. MJ uses a rock step and the older forms of WCS used/uses a rock step. Putting an anchor and a rock step is a lot going on. Too much maybe (Putting in an anchor step should not to be confused with a tripple step that is a whole other issue especially with WCS and is having a profound affect on its future).

The rock step has now been taken out of the modern form of WCS. As a default MJ does not work to the action/reaction affect on a frame in an open dance position from the use of the semi circle action. Whether or not social dancers see the semi circle as something that they use in their dance Ceroc still teach it as a default and feature it in their beginner DVD. There are a lot of better dancers in MJ who are adding their knowledge of other dances within the social dance scene.

In defence of teachers in MJ attending workshops and bringing back new techniques to the dance I think it is a good thing. How else is MJ to progress. Having proactive teachers should be encouraged.

[Alan Doyle]

Both MJ and WCS have roots in Swing/Lindy. MJ uses a rock step and the older forms of WCS used/uses a rock step.

:yeah:

MJ was derived from ECS/Lindy Hop (which uses a rock step).
West Coast Swing was also derived from Lindy Hop but the rock step was replaced with a 'walk walk' (two steps forward for the lady).

MJ has more in common with ECS/Lindy Hop than WCS.

[kps]

In Carl and Sarah’s Coasting class (basically described as MJ meets WCS without the footwork) at Swish they were pretty much teaching this. It was a very interesting class that I think worked very well, at the end of each move the idea was you were leaning away from each other using that tension to start the next move. I do hope this could possibly be the way ceroc is heading along with saying good bye to the semicircle as I think it looks and feels much better when dancing.

[Alan Doyle]

In Carl and Sarah’s Coasting class (basically described as MJ meets WCS without the footwork) at Swish they were pretty much teaching this. It was a very interesting class that I think worked very well, at the end of each move the idea was you were leaning away from each other using that tension to start the next move. I do hope this could possibly be the way ceroc is heading along with saying good bye to the semicircle as I think it looks and feels much better when dancing.

Was the lady walking forward or stepping back?

[kps]

Was the lady walking forward or stepping back?

At the end of each move we stepped away from each other building the tension. The lady then took at step forward at the start of the move as the man moved out of the slot to allow her to pass to allow her to travel to the other end of the slot.

[Alan Doyle]

At the end of each move we stepped away from each other building the tension. The lady then took at step forward at the start of the move as the man moved out of the slot to allow her to pass to allow her to travel to the other end of the slot.

Sounds to me like they were teaching WCS :wink:

[kps]

Sounds to me like they were teaching WCS :wink:


It was a lot like WCS but using MJ moves and no triple steps.
It was a very good class.:waycool:

[Maxine]

It was a lot like WCS but using MJ moves and no triple steps.
It was a very good class.:waycool:

No triple steps, sounds like a dream to me:awe:

[Alan Doyle]

It was a lot like WCS but using MJ moves and no triple steps.
It was a very good class.:waycool:

A lot of MJ moves were taken from WCS and it's possible to dance WCS using no triples. You were still dancing WCS in my opinion.

[kps]

A lot of MJ moves were taken from WCS and it's possible to dance WCS using no triples. You were still dancing WCS in my opinion.

We probably were, I only recently started doing WCS and there were a lot of similarities with it but I felt it was more a slotted MJ dance with a slight technique change. But as I said I have only been dancing WCS for a few months so when I have a bit more experience I might well agree with you.

[Alan Doyle]

We probably were, I only recently started doing WCS and there were a lot of similarities with it but I felt it was more a slotted MJ dance with a slight technique change. But as I said I have only been dancing WCS for a few months so when I have a bit more experience I might well agree with you.

One of the characteristics of WCS is the ladies stretch and that she walks forward twice on 1, 2

One of the characteristics of MJ is that there is a step back at the start of every move.

[robd]

A lot of MJ moves were taken from WCS and it's possible to dance WCS using no triples. You were still dancing WCS in my opinion.

:what:

I love how you offer an opinion on what style they were dancing without seeing it.

I'd say they were dancing exactly what the class was billed as: 'MJ with a WCS influence'

Yes, you can dance WCS without any triples (I watched Kyle Redd's feet as he was dancing socially at Skegness and he didn't do a single triple in the 2 mins or so that I watched) but in the same way that 'walk, walk' is the accepted opening to many/most WCS patterns so is the inclusion of a pair of triples in either a 6 or 8 beat pattern.

Go to a WCS class ANYWHERE and I'll bet you won't find one that teaches beginners not to do triples.

I still think this talk of it being MJ or WCS in this thread is a red herring when the stuff being talked about (stretch, gradual connection, etc) is simply a characteristic of accomplished dancing in either style.

[Gadget]

I have a real problem with the anchor step. Mainly because it's an anchor. It stops the follower from following and roots them for that beat.

Every problem I have ever encountered from leading WCS people has been with the anchor(*) - it's not a led step and followers go into automatic.

(* That and tripples ;))

[DS87]

I have a real problem with the anchor step. Mainly because it's an anchor. It stops the follower from following and roots them for that beat.

Every problem I have ever encountered from leading WCS people has been with the anchor(*) - it's not a led step and followers go into automatic.

(* That and tripples ;))

But the Anchor is led (whether the follower tripples or not) as it is a result of the leader slowing the follower down before the redirection. Without this lead the follow should continue to travel in the direction that they were going. The main reason that the anchor step is trippled is due to this change of speed (as are most of the tripples in the dance). However a tripple is not essential as long as the follow is slowed to the point that they are ready for redirection.

[TA Guy]

I still think this talk of it being MJ or WCS in this thread is a red herring when the stuff being talked about (stretch, gradual connection, etc) is simply a characteristic of accomplished dancing in either style.

Exactly.

I am baffled by people in this thread saying it's not a fundamental part of MJ.

You step back to extension in MJ. You 'settle' with stretch, you enter the next move. Fundamentally exactly the same as WCS (Yes, WCS often adds a triple and takes two beats usually, but the 'settle' & 'anchor' purpose is the same). This MJ 'anchor' (for want of a better name) has nothing to do with a WCS influence.

Likewise, if the move requires it, say an octopus, you give the follower some room (get out of the slot). Again this is nothing to do with WCS, 'coasting' or 'smooth' MJ.

-

Both these are just good MJ dancing and have absolutely nothing to do with a (modern) WCS influence because all this was being done years before WCS had any signficant impact over here.

[Lazy Dave]

I just don't like the idea of my bum sticking out....
Have you seen some of the contortions people get into with these big step backs? Not attractive!
Everything has it's place and there's a place for everything.... But keep your bum under control.

[Alan Doyle]

You step back to extension in MJ. You 'settle' with stretch, you enter the next move. Fundamentally exactly the same as WCS (Yes, WCS often adds a triple and takes two beats usually, but the 'settle' & 'anchor' purpose is the same). This MJ 'anchor' (for want of a better name) has nothing to do with a WCS influence.


It's not fundamentally the same as WCS. To reiterate, the lady steps back on count 1 in MJ and the lady steps forward on count 1 in WCS.

[DavidB]

There is a huge amount that can be learned from other dance styles. Not every technique developed for other dances will work as well in MJ. The key is to understand why they are done in other dances, and apply that same reasoning to what we do in MJ. Just don't expect to arrive at the same conclusion.


There is a lot that goes on when we step back in modern jive, and then step forward.

Weight change
Momentum change
Energy change
Direction change
Connection change
Lead/follow
These things obviously happen in other dances, but generally they are spread out over more beats, with different things happening at different times. In MJ the default is for everything to be blended together.

There is a big difference between WCS and MJ in what happens immediately after this step. In WCS you would almost always move in parallel and stay in leverage. In MJ you move towards each other, and go into compression or a closed hold.

Perhaps more importantly there is a difference in what you are doing before. Again in WCS you are likely to be moving in parallel (although at different speeds). In MJ you are both moving away from each other. The separation and stretch are natural - you don't have to do anything to create it. If you try to stop early, and then create the tension as a separate event, you run a major risk of overextending the connection. (Unfortunately I speak from experience here.)

It also happens far more often. In a yoyo for example there are 2 of these back/forward movements in the middle of the move, plus the ones at the start and end. All deserve the same respect. In WCS the Anchor is only done between moves.

Any you can do WCS without an anchor. In the past a coaster step was often done instead. This isn't done now because it basically forces the lady to come forward for the next step, and the lead has to be quite strong to stop it. And a few years ago there was a fashion to remove the anchor completely, and just fudge the footwork on the step before or after. This works perfectly well - a lot of people still do it occasionally to fit moves to the music. But when it is done all the time, it changes the look and feel of the dance. Why does MJ have to change its look & feel?

Finally you have to consider the music. We do most of the changes described above on the downbeat. This is quite a long drawn-out beat, which is why we can do everything and it still feels ok. WCS will do some things before the upbeat, some on, and some after, because the upbeat is shorter and sharper.

Fundamentally what most people do in MJ is pretty natural. It is why it is successful. Breaking down a natural movement into it individual parts is a worthwhile exercise for advanced dancers, or fixing individual faults, or when the environment changes (eg slower music, or very fast floor). I'd question its relevance for beginners.

[David Franklin]

Y'know, I read the title of this thread, and immediately thought of GetAGrip.

Then I realised you'd written anchor! :blush:

[Lory]

keep your bum under control.:really:

Mine has will of its own :blush:

[TA Guy]

It's not fundamentally the same as WCS. To reiterate, the lady steps back on count 1 in MJ and the lady steps forward on count 1 in WCS.

Your talking about the mechanics, there are lots of differences in the mechanics; the (usual) triple in the WCS anchor, the number of beats etc. That is a given :) No one is arguing they are the same mechnically (at least, I hope not :))

[ducasi]

... As a default MJ does not work to the action/reaction affect on a frame in an open dance position from the use of the semi circle action. Whether or not social dancers see the semi circle as something that they use in their dance Ceroc still teach it as a default and feature it in their beginner DVD. ...


... I do hope this could possibly be the way ceroc is heading along with saying good bye to the semicircle as I think it looks and feels much better when dancing.

I'm trying to understand here what the semi-circle (used as a teaching aid to start a sequence of dance moves) has to do with what happens in the actual dance... :confused:

I reckon you could teach WCS with something like a semi-circle in place of the starter step. It wouldn't affect how the actual dance is danced, would it?

"Semi-circle and triple-step back!"

[Rhythm King]

Sounds to me like they were teaching WCS :wink:

I disagree - sounds more like they were teaching an MJ variation on "Deans Collins Style" Lindy hop, which is slotted and has the rock step/step back.

[Alan Doyle]

I've just re-read kps's description and I agree with you Rhythm King. I first misread it that the lady stepped forward but reading it again


At the end of each move we stepped away from each other building the tension. The lady then took at step forward at the start of the move as the man moved out of the slot to allow her to pass to allow her to travel to the other end of the slot.

She steps away and then steps forward, so it does sound more like a rock step :doh: :blush: :o

[NZ Monkey]

I reckon you could teach WCS with something like a semi-circle in place of the starter step. It wouldn't affect how the actual dance is danced, would it?

"Semi-circle and triple-step back!"It would actually. At least it'd make the start a bit more awkward socially if it wasn't there.

The starter step is essentially an anchor itself. It's purpose is to let the dancers get a bit of a feel for each other and start off the dance nice and connected, and that's easier in a closed position than anywhere else. Obviously it isn't exactly necessary, especially if both dancers are familiar with each other already - but it's a convention with some merit if you'd regularly dance with people you don't know.

[straycat]

West Coast Swing was also derived from Lindy Hop but the rock step was replaced with a 'walk walk'

[nitpick mode]While Lindy makes a lot of use of rock-steps, and it's one of the normal ways of teaching newcomers, it would be a mistake to say that that's the "standard" Lindy method - seasoned Lindyhoppers often use walk-walk or twist-twist, or any number of variations. The leads will tend to rock-step more than the follows, but when it comes down to it, the "standard" thing is simply to do any footwork which fits the dance, and allows for a degree of anchoring. Amongst the higher echelons, the rocksteps can seem to vanish altogether - here's a fun example (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqWqnZNRqdg).

[ads]

It's not fundamentally the same as WCS. To reiterate, the lady steps back on count 1 in MJ and the lady steps forward on count 1 in WCS.
This is incorrect, the lady's step first on the 8(the "&") in MJ bringing her right foot together with her left(the opposite feet for guys) on the 1 which baffles allot of non MJ dancers and in WC she steps on the 1