PDA

View Full Version : The WCS double prep



NZ Monkey
26th-July-2009, 10:46 PM
Having said that 'prep' is short for 'preparation (for rotation) so if a prep does not lead into that rotation but instead leads to another 'prep' you'd have to question why you're 'prep'ping the '1' in the first place.I know in the rest of your post you explain why it doesn’t matter to you, but I think this is a decent question on its own so I’ll try to answer it anyway.

I much prefer the double prep because it adds energy to the (almost) inevitable spinny thingy that comes after it. For lack of a better term, that extra “bounce” from the second prep can make the pattern snappier and makes it easier to wrap the follow up virtually on the spot if desired, as well as giving the followers more to work with on the spin. In slightly more scientific terms, because their change in angular momentum after the second prep is greater (they’ve gained some from the first prep remember), they’ve now got more angular momentum to work with than they would with only 1 prep.

I don’t know why opinion is changing, but I’m guessing you’re right about people overdoing the preps too much and this being a response to it. I’ve seen a lot of clips where it seems to me that the guys are leading double preps, but in a single beat rather than over two. Personally, I find the effect rather distracting as it tends to make the hands look like they bounce quickly before the turn. I also suspect that a lot of people are arm leading it somewhat, which I’d rather avoid.

It’s one of the things I’m looking forward to clearing up when I’m in the USA though as so far I’ve only seen it rather than had the reasoning explained to me. If anyone has any insight they’re willing to share though it’d be appreciated!

In fact, I should probably make this a separate thread altogether so……..

Lee Bartholomew
27th-July-2009, 11:17 AM
If you were preparing to unlock a door, you wouldn't get your keys out twice would you :wink:

Lory
27th-July-2009, 11:38 AM
I much prefer the double prep because it adds energy to the (almost) inevitable spinny thingy that comes after it.
Personally I hate being double prepped.. 'I' don't need it and less is more IMO.


I’m guessing you’re right about people overdoing the preps too much and this being a response to it.This is definitely a good reason to stop teaching it. Some guys just can't help overdoing it.

If your a sensitive follow, you'll react to the first prep and almost spin off in the second one.

Or, you'll end up doing mini ocho's.



I’ve seen a lot of clips where it seems to me that the guys are leading double preps, but in a single beat rather than over two. Are they leading the steps double speed too? If not, I can't for the life of me see how this would work, as the follow would be on the wrong foot at one point :confused:

Anyway, no double preps for me please! :flower:

NZ Monkey
27th-July-2009, 12:16 PM
Are they leading the steps double speed too? If not, I can't for the life of me see how this would work, as the follow would be on the wrong foot at one point :confused:
No, it looks more like a high speed shake when I've seen it. Much like the prepping starts just before or on the second footfall.

As I said though, I've only ever seen it, on youtube clips no less, so it's possible I'm missing something. That said - I can't see how it's supposed to work either.


If you were preparing to unlock a door, you wouldn't get your keys out twice would you A better analogy might have been "if you post a zen-like proverb, you should only need to check once that it's relevant", but I suppose that's setting a pretty high standard :wink:

As I mentioned in my original post, there's actually a reason why I think the double prep has value.

Lee Bartholomew
27th-July-2009, 12:47 PM
As I said though, I've only ever seen it, on youtube clips no less, so it's possible I'm missing something. That said - I can't see how it's supposed to work either.


Can you post up an example clip?



As I mentioned in my original post, there's actually a reason why I think the double prep has value.

The only merit i can personally think of, is that it is an easier way to teach jivers WCS. In the long term though this is a bad habit to teach and not one that should be encouraged.

I have heard alot said about double preps from US pro dancers and some of the top teachers here in the UK. None of them have encouraged it.

Then again maybe I am missing something or perhaps what you are seeing in the clip is not actually a double prep. Without seeing what you mean it is hard to call. :nice:

TA Guy
27th-July-2009, 04:39 PM
OK, putting aside double speed shaking, over-large preps and other things that are blatant errors.....

It's about acceleration isn't it ? I know when I use a double prep it's always when the acceleration that follows the double prep is relatively fast. Whether that's the same as the 'bounce/snap' NZ Monkey talks about I dunno, maybe it is.

Of course, you can get that with a single prep as well, so maybe it's a flaw in my leading, but as well as the extra acceleration, I look upon it as just another way of passing information between partners. Here comes a speeded up bit! :)

It also so happens I like the look of the odd double prep as well, so I'm quids in :)

FoxyFunkster
27th-July-2009, 05:03 PM
Double preps are over complicating things and are not necessary in my opinion, and i don`t think they make for great viewing......i also think that a double prep for acceleration is cranking up the gas, lets get on the rollercoaster, iyou don`t need it.....In short i generally think about leading direction/length on count 1 so no prep on 1! then my choice on count 2.....either more direction or a prep for rotation.....also Preps need to be subtle and smooth....i do think that part of the problem comes from varying degrees of frame on the follows part.....if i`m dancing with someone who has fantastic frame which makes them more sensitive to subtle movements then i`ll tone it down however if i`m dancing with someone with moderate or little frame then subtle is probably not the best thing, but each to their own.....my love of WCS comes from the challenge presented when dancing with different people and trying to best tailor my dance to suit the partnership......

Lory
27th-July-2009, 05:15 PM
It's about acceleration isn't it ?


Hmm, as you would still prep even if you wanted your partner to turn very slowly, this can't be the only reason.

Prepping helps to set the body's alignment up correctly, with the front foot facing the direction you want your partner to spin in and helps to provide some torque.

Here's an experiment for you... stand up and spin on the spot. I bet you prep yourself only in one direction (the opposite one obviously:rolleyes:m ) before your spin, even if you want to spin very fast or do multiple spins... am I correct? :innocent:

TA Guy
27th-July-2009, 06:06 PM
Well. Presumably all those US Pros that have been doing double preps for the entire life of WCS did it for a reason ? :) Even if the latest fad/change is to phase them out.

I don't know the mechanics of why it works, although I can just about get my head around NZ Monkeys idea that the bounce improves snap, but I do find it easier to accelerate my partner with a double prep rather than a single prep.

On top of that, you are communicating a shedload of information to the follower on the one beat with a double prep.
As general rules, the less ambiguity the better surely ? And, the earlier the follower has this information the better as well ?

NZ Monkey
27th-July-2009, 08:04 PM
Can you post up an example clip?I'll see what I can do, but they've been relative unknowns and it'll be a little over a day before I get a chance to trawl through random clips.




The only merit i can personally think of, is that it is an easier way to teach jivers WCS. In the long term though this is a bad habit to teach and not one that should be encouraged.I doubt that jivers have anything to do with it. It is/was taught that way in the USA after all.



I have heard alot said about double preps from US pro dancers and some of the top teachers here in the UK. None of them have encouraged it.Perhaps, but Cat and Paul certainly used to teach it (that's where I learned after all) and J&T have as well - as recently as the beginning of the year.

I expect there's more to it that Double Prep = Bad.


Well. Presumably all those US Pros that have been doing double preps for the entire life of WCS did it for a reason ? Even if the latest fad/change is to phase them out.That's my line of thought as well. I'd just like to know why.

Certainly a double prep can be very small. Watching clips of, for example, Paul Warden closely, I often think he's double prepping with only a very tiny movement on the first one. Similarly, the way J&T have taught it in the past is with a horizontal motion of only about an inch - which is very difficult to spot at a distance.

NZ Monkey
28th-July-2009, 03:18 AM
I'll see what I can do, but they've been relative unknowns and it'll be a little over a day before I get a chance to trawl through random clips.
Well, my boss was away from work today so I've had a bit more chance than I thought I would and........ I can't find any of the examples I was thinking of.

It's possible that they were on Facebook, or on actual DVD's of recent event's in the USA, and I'll check those out as well when I get a chance.

Failing that just ignore my ramblings please, and if I stumble across them again I'll come back to this thread and post them :blush:

NZ Monkey
28th-July-2009, 03:47 AM
Personally I hate being double prepped.. 'I' don't need it and less is more IMO.

...Snip.....

If your a sensitive follow, you'll react to the first prep and almost spin off in the second one.

.....Snip.....

Anyway, no double preps for me please! :flower:Just because I'm curious now, would you consider the prepping being done in the following clip to be double or single? Do they look like something you'd happy for someone leading to use?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOxK4Ga18jY

robd
28th-July-2009, 09:20 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOxK4Ga18jY

Nice clip - I always find the Pros dancing in a studio environment like this to be more impressive than most of the comp videos I see. I notice it talked of Miles and Tessa's last day tesaching studio classes - I wonder if that means they are leaving the scene?

Alan Doyle
28th-July-2009, 09:41 AM
I notice it talked of Miles and Tessa's last day tesaching studio classes - I wonder if that means they are leaving the scene?

Back in April '09 they sent a message on facebook:

NO MORE LOCAL CLASSES - WE'RE GOING GLOBAL!
Yep, after 7 years of teaching local weekly classes in Vancouver, we are proud and sad to announce the end. We have always been torn between trying to manage our local and international dance businesses. But we are finding that our international career has grown to be more and more rewarding and more lucrative than our local market, so it is time to focus exclusively on it and give it 100% of our attention. This is cause to celebrate!
What this means for the future:
-BROADWAY CLASSES CONTINUE UNTIL END OF JUNE. We will still be living in Vancouver, teaching privates and Swing-in-School, and doing occasional local appearances. For those who have supported our classes at Broadway Ballroom over the past 2 years, thank you!! We hope to all the the Vancouver dancers in privates or out dancing...several of our students are organizing small groups to share private lesson packages.
-We intend to travel and stay in various dance communities for longer stints, so we have a bigger impact and less back-and-forth travel. For those living outside Vancouver - drop us a line - we have more time on our hands now to come and see YOU!
-This also means that we will have more time to dedicate to other projects that have been pushed to the back burner, like new instructional videos, new articles, our WCS syllabus, and choreography.

Lory
28th-July-2009, 10:05 AM
Just because I'm curious now, would you consider the prepping being done in the following clip to be double or single? Do they look like something you'd happy for someone leading to use?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOxK4Ga18jY

Well, after great scrutiny, (fab clip BTW :cheers: ) I'm sorry to say, I'm none the wiser. To me it 'looks' like he's leading straight on 1 and a prep on 2, i.e. single prep but its so fast, I really can't tell

But....

if it helps, I've danced with Miles and will tell you from 'my experience' he single prepped me. What he does with other dancers I wouldn't know :)

Caro
28th-July-2009, 10:10 AM
From a follower perspective, giving me a double prep:
- increases momentum for the spin as NZM described the physics of it (so it is useful if you want me to spin more than 360 deg, say in a free spin for example)
- lets me know in advance that a spin is coming - which is rather important: the earlier I know what you are up to, the easier it is for me to follow. If I get a straight direction on 1 and hear something in the music I want to respond to, then a prep on 2, I'll most likely have to abort whatever it was that I might have been doing in a straight up and down the slot pattern. Even if I'm not planning on doing anything but regular footwork, again why wait the last minute to tell me a spin is coming.

Now the thing is very few leads actually do the double prep nicely. The first prep needs to be very subtle (say an inch off the slot), otherwise I will rotate my frame too much and it will not help the spin but hamper it (as I will have to recover quickly in the other direction for the 2nd prep before the spin).

I suspect a lot of followers who don't like double preps have been exposed to those gigantic arm leads from left to right... :tears:



I much prefer the double prep because it adds energy to the (almost) inevitable spinny thingy that comes after it. For lack of a better term, that extra “bounce” from the second prep can make the pattern snappier and makes it easier to wrap the follow up virtually on the spot if desired, as well as giving the followers more to work with on the spin.

I don’t know why opinion is changing, but I’m guessing you’re right about people overdoing the preps too much and this being a response to it.
:yeah:



Are they leading the steps double speed too? If not, I can't for the life of me see how this would work, as the follow would be on the wrong foot at one point :confused:

yes when a guy is leading a double time prep, they expect double time steps - personally I find that difficult to do, you need to be very switched on and have a lot of connection (tension) to respond to it well.
Lee (easton) is a big fan of them though.



I have heard alot said about double preps from US pro dancers and some of the top teachers here in the UK. None of them have encouraged it.


Are you sure ? Jordan dances with and teaches double preps as far as I can remember...
I think when the pros come over here they see those gigantic arm leads that swivel the follower 45 deg off the slot in each direction before the spin (a bad habit for a lot of MJ leaders) and hence have to adapt their message for us to understand that there is no need for such swinging around.

Btw in the Myles and Tessa's clip as far as I can see Myles uses (tiny) double preps whenever he wants Tessa to rotate more than 360 deg, which makes sense... to me anyway ;)

mikeyr
28th-July-2009, 12:03 PM
- lets me know in advance that a spin is coming - which is rather important: the earlier I know what you are up to, the easier it is for me to follow. If I get a straight direction on 1 and hear something in the music I want to respond to, then a prep on 2, I'll most likely have to abort whatever it was that I might have been doing in a straight up and down the slot pattern. Even if I'm not planning on doing anything but regular footwork, again why wait the last minute to tell me a spin is coming.

HMmmm! I know this is a bit kinda off topic, but I gotta answer this from a leaders point of view and pose some questions.

Please don't mess with my 3&4, if I set you up, by all means go for it. If I dont then don't. "Lead & Follow is a conversation" that phrase used on here all the time. In a conversation one speaks others listen then reply. To butt into a conversation is considered rude.

Moreover, aren't redirections, tucks, spins etc(hence the prep bit) down the left side all done on the 3&4 for a reason? I am intrigued to know what you all think.

*Should followers really be thinking of highjacking this pivotal (Pun Intended) part of any WCS pattern when they dont know what leader has planned.?

*Is there no styling, footwork included a follower can do on these beats to emphasise any musical highlight that is not disruptive to the lead?

I have put these questions and those regarding preps into a PM to fellow Swingdaddy Mario Robau Jr. Afterall if there is anybody qualified to give a definitive answer to these questions its him.

Caro
28th-July-2009, 12:34 PM
Please don't mess with my 3&4, if I set you up, by all means go for it. If I dont then don't. "Lead & Follow is a conversation" that phrase used on here all the time. In a conversation one speaks others listen then reply. To butt into a conversation is considered rude.

*Should followers really be thinking of highjacking this pivotal (Pun Intended) part of any WCS pattern when they dont know what leader has planned.?


Hold on - I am not talking about highjacking anything here - just shaping the pattern differently from the follower's perspective, whether with footwork or body movement. I'm still following whatever is led here.

I'll take an example, on a free spin (guy's right to lady's left) down the slot (girl spins anti-clockwise): ideally I'd like to be on my right foot on 3, because that's the easiest way to make that free spin.
Now if I'm not prepped on 1 and start a syncopation that would make me land on left on 3, I'll have to adjust or abort as soon as I feel the prep on 2. If I feel a light prep on 1, I know straight away that a spin is coming and I'm likely to go with regular footwork from the beginning of the pattern.

I'll give you that an experienced follower will syncopate and then re-syncopate to adjust as need be for the spin, but again why delay letting her know what you are up to ? Surely a characteristic of good communication is to let your intentions known early ?

NZ Monkey
28th-July-2009, 01:06 PM
Well, after great scrutiny, (fab clip BTW :cheers: ) I'm sorry to say, I'm none the wiser. To me it 'looks' like he's leading straight on 1 and a prep on 2, i.e. single prep but its so fast, I really can't tell

But....

if it helps, I've danced with Miles and will tell you from 'my experience' he single prepped me. What he does with other dancers I wouldn't know :)It is a fab clip isn't it? :respect:

The reason I chose it though is because *I* see a very definite double prep going on there, and it happens consistently throughout the whole track when Myles is leading certain movements. As Caro says though, the first one is subtle. In fact, I think.....
Now the thing is very few leads actually do the double prep nicely. The first prep needs to be very subtle (say an inch off the slot), otherwise I will rotate my frame too much and it will not help the spin but hamper it (as I will have to recover quickly in the other direction for the 2nd prep before the spin).

I suspect a lot of followers who don't like double preps have been exposed to those gigantic arm leads from left to right... .....Hit's the nail on the head and deserves a giant :yeah:



- increases momentum for the spin as NZM described the physics of it (so it is useful if you want me to spin more than 360 deg, say in a free spin for example) I also think it's good for providing the sort of elastic connection feeling you get in, say, a tsunami on the 3&4. Even if the leader isn't planning on spinning you more than 360 degrees, if you have enough momentum to go further then he has more energy to build up a decent connection with.

Of course, that all assumes he can lead well enough to use it without yanking you around in the first place. :whistle:


Moreover, aren't redirections, tucks, spins etc(hence the prep bit) down the left side all done on the 3&4 for a reason? I am intrigued to know what you all think.That seems like too restrictive a question to me.

As I see it, pretty much all patterns are made up of the following three things.
The walking stage (usually the 1&2, but maybe more depending on what's happening).
The anchour (everything for the two beats after the post).
The bit in the middle.It's the bit in the middle where redirection and whatnot happen, but depending on the length of the pattern that might not happen on the 3&4, or they might happen several times.

Personally, I think they happen when you're prepped for them properly. Since they take time to set up usually and don't happen on an anchour, there aren't too many beats left in a basic six count.


*Should followers really be thinking of highjacking this pivotal (Pun Intended) part of any WCS pattern when they dont know what leader has planned.? You could equally ask whether leaders should be domineering and refuse their partner any playtime. Like it or not, WCS is known for giving followers more freedom than most other dances to play and modify the patterns. That's one of it's attractions in my opinion.


*Is there no styling, footwork included a follower can do on these beats to emphasise any musical highlight that is not disruptive to the lead? I think Caro's line of reasoning was more along the lines of "If I know I'm going to be doing a spin two beats in advance I can get ready to style it up without disrupting anything else. If I only get one beat of prep time, it's probably too much of a surprise to come up with something, and I end up not doing anything cool instead."

I could be putting words in her mouth there, but that's what I took from it.

Edit: Cross posted with Caro.

Caro
28th-July-2009, 01:27 PM
I think Caro's line of reasoning was more along the lines of "If I know I'm going to be doing a spin two beats in advance I can get ready to style it up without disrupting anything else. If I only get one beat of prep time, it's probably too much of a surprise to come up with something, and I end up not doing anything cool instead."


:yeah:
that's another excellent reason - are you in my head or what ?!

Lory
28th-July-2009, 01:29 PM
The reason I chose it though is because *I* see a very definite double prep going on there, and it happens consistently throughout the whole track when Myles is leading certain movements. As Caro says though, the first one is subtle.


OK, I'll compromise :innocent:... If the double prep is subtle enough that 'I don't notice it'.. it's fine! :wink:

Seriously though, what 'Begginer Bob' sees and interprets a double prep, is a far cry from what you and Caro are talking about. A lot of guys just don't get the word 'subtle'. Some guys even bounce or shake your hand to emphasise it :sick:

mikeyr
28th-July-2009, 01:58 PM
Hold on - I am not talking about highjacking anything here - just shaping the pattern differently from the follower's perspective, whether with footwork or body movement. I'm still following whatever is led here.

I'll take an example, on a free spin (guy's right to lady's left) down the slot (girl spins anti-clockwise): ideally I'd like to be on my right foot on 3, because that's the easiest way to make that free spin.
Now if I'm not prepped on 1 and start a syncopation that would make me land on left on 3, I'll have to adjust or abort as soon as I feel the prep on 2. If I feel a light prep on 1, I know straight away that a spin is coming and I'm likely to go with regular footwork from the beginning of the pattern.

I'll give you that an experienced follower will syncopate and then re-syncopate to adjust as need be for the spin, but again why delay letting her know what you are up to ? Surely a characteristic of good communication is to let your intentions known early ?

No! Body movement wont have that impact. Youre talking about footwork (on your left on 3) Youre doing something that is not led and disrupts the lead! If you syncopate your first two beats with either a triple rhythm(fancy footwork) or even a Quad Rhythm (Very Fancy Footwork) You'll be on your right foot on 3, if you do your standard double rhythm you'll be on the correct foot too, sooo........ I assume your doing the ole &34 thing (A leader can do that cos he knows whats coming next, you dont). Ouch! Good Luck with that :whistle:

Oops. Forgot, Preps come 1 beat before the turn!

robd
28th-July-2009, 02:08 PM
Oops. Forgot, Preps come 1 beat before the turn!

What if the leader is 'prep'ing the prep? :na:

straycat
28th-July-2009, 02:29 PM
Please don't mess with my 3&4, if I set you up, by all means go for it. If I dont then don't. "Lead & Follow is a conversation" that phrase used on here all the time. In a conversation one speaks others listen then reply. To butt into a conversation is considered rude.

I have to say - this sounds more like 'Lead & Follow is dictation'. Conversations have a lot more subtleties than this - the message here appears to be "don't speak until I give you leave to speak", which amounts to something else entirely.

Caro
28th-July-2009, 06:47 PM
No! Body movement wont have that impact. Youre talking about footwork (on your left on 3) Youre doing something that is not led and disrupts the lead! If you syncopate your first two beats with either a triple rhythm(fancy footwork) or even a Quad Rhythm (Very Fancy Footwork) You'll be on your right foot on 3, if you do your standard double rhythm you'll be on the correct foot too, sooo........ I assume your doing the ole &34 thing (A leader can do that cos he knows whats coming next, you dont). Ouch! Good Luck with that :whistle:


Jeeez!!!! Since when do you lead my footwork ??? It can be led at times in certain patterns, for example you can lead me to match your syncopation (say on one of those double handed things when we both turn back to back - ok I'm sure you know exactly what I mean there - come on someone give me the name of those!), but in the grand scheme of things, my footwork is my responsibility ! My job is to go where you direct me giving you the right connection at the right time, and sort my feet out myself !

I claim freedom for my feet !!!

And to give you an example of body movement that I could use to shape the spin, I could decide to arch my back to emphasis something on 3 and do 'and (L) 3 (R), delayed and (pivot L) 4 (R)', or do a spiral turn and go lower during the turn, tilting the head at the same time - again I can do all this from the prep on 2, but it's even nicer if I have a beat warning on 1 to know that that spin is coming - then I can think a little ahead how I want to shape that turn !

If you lead me forward on a big accent in 1 (say at the beginning of a major phrase, i.e. beat 1 of 32 or 1 of 48), I might make that one 'look bigger' by stepping a little further than normal and adding a slight upper body movement and step 1 (hold) and 3, which I would not do if prepped for a spin on 1 as it would put me in a rush to complete the turn.

TA Guy
28th-July-2009, 07:30 PM
Fan ? :)

NZ Monkey
28th-July-2009, 10:14 PM
OK, I'll compromise :innocent:... If the double prep is subtle enough that 'I don't notice it'.. it's fine! :wink:

Seriously though, what 'Begginer Bob' sees and interprets a double prep, is a far cry from what you and Caro are talking about. A lot of guys just don't get the word 'subtle'. Some guys even bounce or shake your hand to emphasise it :sick:I am much happier now. I was wondering for a minute there if the whole WCS world had passed me by or something crazy like that :D

robd
28th-July-2009, 10:23 PM
Just one thought I did have is that pretty much whenever I have seen one of the pro's teaching a prep on '1' it also conveyed direction/length. One does not necessarily exclude the other.

Gadget
29th-July-2009, 01:11 PM
No! Body movement wont have that impact. Youre talking about footwork (on your left on 3) Youre doing something that is not led and disrupts the lead! If you syncopate your first two beats with either a triple rhythm(fancy footwork) or even a Quad Rhythm (Very Fancy Footwork) You'll be on your right foot on 3, if you do your standard double rhythm you'll be on the correct foot too, sooo........ I assume your doing the ole &34 thing (A leader can do that cos he knows whats coming next, you dont). Ouch! Good Luck with that :whistle:
Erm... if you're a good lead (good enough to lead a double prep well) then you should notice the change in your partner's weight distribution and amend the lead accordingly (ie not lead whatever it was that you would have double preped for)

{:blush: ...although I have to admit that Caro's footwork always baffles me; cool :waycool: and moves her where she should be with style :worthy:, but I can never manage to syncopate my own with hers :blush:}

mikeyr
29th-July-2009, 02:49 PM
to give you an example of body movement that I could use to shape the spin, I could decide to arch my back to emphasis something on 3 and do 'and (L) 3 (R), delayed and (pivot L) 4 (R)', or do a spiral turn and go lower during the turn, tilting the head at the same time - again I can do all this from the prep on 2, but it's even nicer if I have a beat warning on 1 to know that that spin is coming - then I can think a little ahead how I want to shape that turn !

Exactly my point You'll muck up what I was trying to lead because the weight on the ("&") your body position is comprised. Why not just leave synopating the 3&4 alone, you have the other 2/3 of the pattern you can play with.... Is that not enough?

Fair enough if you dancing a strictly with regular partner youre pretty sure what he'll lead next. But on the social dance its highjacking!


If you lead me forward on a big accent in 1 (say at the beginning of a major phrase, i.e. beat 1 of 32 or 1 of 48), I might make that one 'look bigger' by stepping a little further than normal and adding a slight upper body movement and step 1 (hold) and 3, which I would not do if prepped for a spin on 1 as it would put me in a rush to complete the turn.

If you wanna acent the big 1, try a hold ball change, if can do em, theyre really nice and works all the time without you having to compromise the lead.

mikeyr
29th-July-2009, 02:51 PM
Erm... if you're a good lead (good enough to lead a double prep well) then you should notice the change in your partner's weight distribution and amend the lead accordingly (ie not lead whatever it was that you would have double preped for)

{:blush: ...although I have to admit that Caro's footwork always baffles me; cool :waycool: and moves her where she should be with style :worthy:, but I can never manage to syncopate my own with hers :blush:}

You dont have a clue what we're talking about...!

NZ Monkey
29th-July-2009, 07:59 PM
Exactly my point You'll muck up what I was trying to lead because the weight on the ("&") your body position is comprised. Why not just leave synopating the 3&4 alone, you have the other 2/3 of the pattern you can play with.... Is that not enough?It's only compromised if she messes up, or if you mess her up. If you really do lead something tricky that she wasn't expecting then it's her job to sort her footwork out, and it's something followers get quite a bit of practice doing when dancing with trircky leaders. If she moves in a way that makes it impossible to lead what you'd intended - get over it, that's part of the dancing game (and being realistic....it's not exactly a major issue with a good follower anyway. At least in my experience).

To be honest, I wouldn't call what Caro is describing out of the ordinary as far as female styling goes in a spin. I've danced with plenty of girls who routinely do things similar to this without it affecting me at all, and as a more-than-capable follower I'm pretty sure Caro know's what she's talking about here.


If you wanna acent the big 1, try a hold ball change, if can do em, theyre really nice and works all the time without you having to compromise the lead.If she want's to accent a big 1, I'm sure she's capable of choosing how to herself. There is more than one way to skin the proverbial cat after all, and she does have free will.

David Franklin
29th-July-2009, 08:18 PM
There is more than one way to skin the proverbial cat after all, and she does have free will.Not if MikeyR is leading (apparently).

Gadget
29th-July-2009, 08:54 PM
You dont have a clue what we're talking about...!
? I have a little bit more than a clue. :rolleyes:

I just see leading as taking it's cue from the follower as to what to lead and more importantly when to lead it: if the follower is on the wrong foot to lead something, don't lead it. Where's the problem? It's not a dictatorship: it's a partnership.

straycat
29th-July-2009, 09:03 PM
Exactly my point You'll muck up what I was trying to lead because the weight on the ("&") your body position is comprised. Why not just leave synopating the 3&4 alone, you have the other 2/3 of the pattern you can play with.... Is that not enough?

Well and good... but if you take Caro's advice, and lead as she asks, you can ensure that she does what you want, while allowing her to play with the music when it won't muck things up. So you both get to have your cake and eat it, which sounds good to me.

Can you explain what the problem is with doing as she suggests?

mikeyr
30th-July-2009, 09:28 AM
Well and good... but if you take Caro's advice, and lead as she asks, you can ensure that she does what you want, while allowing her to play with the music when it won't muck things up. So you both get to have your cake and eat it, which sounds good to me.

Can you explain what the problem is with doing as she suggests?

Firstly, Preps into spins are a function of the followers frame, the better the followers frame the less prep Required! A good follower doesnt need a double prep.

Secondly, In WCS beats 3&4 are those where redirections are lead, a dangerous ground to play around in I am sure most intelligent people will agree. Plus Followers have plenty of options on 1,2 and/or 5&6 and/or 7&8 which equates to either 66% or 75% respectively Is that not enough to play with?

Thirdly. Good followers are good followers because they follow:what:

Maybe Caro should spend more time leading, she'll may well better understand.

(Before you ask, yes I do follow, I need to, I need to know what I am talking about when I teach.):what:

mikeyr
30th-July-2009, 09:31 AM
? I have a little bit more than a clue. :rolleyes:

I just see leading as taking it's cue from the follower as to what to lead and more importantly when to lead it: if the follower is on the wrong foot to lead something, don't lead it. Where's the problem? It's not a dictatorship: it's a partnership.

Like I said, you dont have a clue what I am talking about! :what::really:

mikeyr
30th-July-2009, 09:44 AM
To be honest, I wouldn't call what Caro is describing out of the ordinary as far as female styling goes in a spin. I've danced with plenty of girls who routinely do things similar to this without it affecting me at all, and as a more-than-capable follower I'm pretty sure Caro know's what she's talking about here.

What makes you think that I am less of an authority than Caro?

What she's talking about having a double prep so that she knows not to syncopate &34! Which would put her on her left foot on 3, because she is doing this, she more than likely commit to that on beat 2. Its highjacking not following if the leader wants to lead any outside it will cause an abort.

I can only surmise it doesnt bother you because you lead double preps (hence this thread) ..... I Rest my case:what:

David Franklin
30th-July-2009, 10:16 AM
You dont have a clue what we're talking about...!Glad to see the tradition of constructive, informative posts from WCS teachers is continuing on here.


Firstly, Preps into spins are a function of the followers frame, the better the followers frame the less prep Required! A good follower doesnt need a double prep.

Secondly, In WCS beats 3&4 are those where redirections are lead, a dangerous ground to play around in I am sure most intelligent people will agree. Plus Followers have plenty of options on 1,2 and/or 5&6 and/or 7&8 which equates to either 66% or 75% respectively Is that not enough to play with?

Thirdly. Good followers are good followers because they follow:what:Yeah yeah. Whatever. But could you, like, answer Straycat's question?

robd
30th-July-2009, 10:33 AM
What makes you think that I am less of an authority than Caro?


Fewer intermediate points? :devil: :whistle:

NZ Monkey
30th-July-2009, 11:37 AM
What makes you think that I am less of an authority than Caro? Well, where should I begin.........?

Actually - I'm not going to bother. You obviously consider yourself to be more of an authority than her, and are unlikely to listen to me (or anyone else) tell you otherwise. As you appear to want to make this about credibility though - I'm curious as to what it is that makes you more credible than Caro?


What she's talking about having a double prep so that she knows not to syncopate &34! Which would put her on her left foot on 3, because she is doing this, she more than likely commit to that on beat 2. Its highjacking not following if the leader wants to lead any outside it will cause an abort.
Followers have plenty of options on 1,2 and/or 5&6 and/or 7&8 which equates to either 66% or 75% respectively Is that not enough to play with?To take that line of reasoning a step further though, if she chooses to take your advice and syncopate 1&2 first - as she is apparently allowed to play with those beats - before stepping on the next beat then she'll still end up on her left foot, messing with the holy 3, and you find yourself with the same issue as you had before.


Maybe Caro should spend more time leading, she'll may well better understand.Well, I spend a lot of time leading and I think you're wrong too. Maybe if you spent more time following you'd understand better instead.


I can only surmise it doesn't bother you because you lead double preps (hence this thread) ..... I Rest my case:what:Double preps or not, my argument remains the same and just as valid. It's the followers job to sort out her own footwork. It isn't the leaders job to micromanage her.

May your case rest in peace.:rolleyes:

straycat
30th-July-2009, 11:41 AM
Firstly, Preps into spins are a function of the followers frame, the better the followers frame the less prep Required! A good follower doesnt need a double prep.

Secondly, In WCS beats 3&4 are those where redirections are lead, a dangerous ground to play around in I am sure most intelligent people will agree. Plus Followers have plenty of options on 1,2 and/or 5&6 and/or 7&8 which equates to either 66% or 75% respectively Is that not enough to play with?

Thirdly. Good followers are good followers because they follow:what:

You've explained why you don't think it should be necessary. Can you explain why it's a bad thing to do?

Chef
30th-July-2009, 01:07 PM
I am a beginner WCS leader and all this lot of discussion has gottem me all confused again. I am used to being told to do things slightly differently (or very differently) by each set of teachers, both US and UK pros, that I encounter.

Am I supposed to do my leading with preps in the right place and if the follower has chosen to syncopate herself onto the wrong foot for the turn I have prepped she has to jolly well sort herself out.

or

If she has put herself onto a different foot to the one I am expecting from the rythm pattern for WCS I am supposed to sense this(if so what should I be looking for), abort the move I have led the prep for, think up something else that I can lead from the position that I suddenly find myself in which still fits within the music.

or

some other course of action that I can't imagine at the moment.

At the moment I am wondering why I should even bother to try and learn to lead if followers have a culture of utterly ignoring it. Is it a give and take thing or is it just who can shout loudest in the pair of dancers?

What are your thoughts (input from both experienced followers and leaders gratefully recieved)?

NZ Monkey
30th-July-2009, 01:31 PM
What are your thoughts (input from both experienced followers and leaders gratefully recieved)?My thoughts are:

You're right. On both counts. :D

It is (IMO of course) the followers job to sort out her own footwork, but if you sense something has gone horribly wrong for whatever reason and you're able to, then by all means abort or change it. In an ideal world you wouldn't have to, but let's face it - none of us are perfect and even the very best of us got there by making a lot of mistakes along the way.


At the moment I am wondering why I should even bother to try and learn to lead if followers have a culture of utterly ignoring it. Is it a give and take thing or is it just who can shout loudest in the pair of dancers?Regardless of what MikeyR seems to be saying (loudly), I think you'll find what the rest of us are talking about is a matter of styling rather than hijacking.

For example, you may lead a spin but the follower has a lot of options that will change it's look. She'll still spin. She'll still end up where you want her if you lead it well. She has choices in getting there though. The rest of the debate seems to me to be about the degree of that freedom of choice as far as I can tell.

Nobody is suggesting that followers not follow, but I'll confess that it's easy to see it that way if you're used to something a little more one-sided (which is most dances compared to WCS).

robd
30th-July-2009, 01:56 PM
We seem to have gotten away from the original topic but still fertile ground I suppose.

This clip at 1.52 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=446_lXFQycY&fmt=18) is interesting as it shows even the very best leaders sometimes are caught out by a follower variation/hijack (call it what you will)

Caro
30th-July-2009, 02:24 PM
You know as much fun and good popcorn it is to argue one's point in this thread, at the end of day none of the two approaches (single prep vs double prep) is WRONG : they are just preferences, and mostly achieve the same results in most cases.

I've stated my preference and explained why (if you can tell me early what you're up to we're both likely to have a better dance), now I do also enjoy dancing with the advocates of the 'one prep only', when it's done well it (almost ;) ) doesn't matter.



Am I supposed to do my leading with preps in the right place and if the follower has chosen to syncopate herself onto the wrong foot for the turn I have prepped she has to jolly well sort herself out.


yes I would say an experienced follower would do that - she might in some cases even have acknowledged the lead, and decided to wrong-foot herself to see how she could end up sorting herself out in a cool way while trying not to disrupt you (some of us like a challenge - ok it doesn't mean it always goes right and stylishly, but it sure is good fun trying :devil: - not with beginners, obviously :rolleyes: ).
Unless as NZM says it goes badly, badly wrong, in which case it would be cool if you could try to help her save herself before she breaks her arm or fall on her arse :flower:



If she has put herself onto a different foot to the one I am expecting from the rythm pattern for WCS I am supposed to sense this(if so what should I be looking for), abort the move I have led the prep for, think up something else that I can lead from the position that I suddenly find myself in which still fits within the music.


sense it - not necessarily unless it is obvious (she may well do this in a way that is purposely meant for you not to sense it, very often, so that you carry on with whatever you were leading)



At the moment I am wondering why I should even bother to try and learn to lead if followers have a culture of utterly ignoring it. Is it a give and take thing or is it just who can shout loudest in the pair of dancers?


ok my take on this: I never want my leader to feel he is highjacked.
Highjacking carries a notion of violence, like a slap in the face, and I never want to do that.
Now as a follower you have to sense that leaders welcome your 'participation' in different ways. Some are quite controlling (for lack of a better word) and leave you very little freedom. In those (extreme) case, it's 100% following, with a little playing on the anchor.

Some others welcome you changing the timing of a pattern (say you lead a UAT starting at beat 24 of a 32 beat phrase - I would almost systematically style the UAT to make it 8 beat to help you phrase the music), or give you more freedom in the way you want to shape or end a move.

Some leaders set you up so that you are able to hit something cool (look at Jordan dancing with Tat or Melina), or expect/welcome you to do things at various times to hit the music, sometimes ending up in a weird situation and then it is an interesting challenge to both to try and find out how to get out of this in a cool way (look at Tat and Kyle's strictly dance at the last US open).

It's sometimes difficult to know where you stand with a new partner, but to me the attraction of this dance is to find out just how much you can play with your partner and contribute to the dance with both leaving the floor happy.

Just how boring would it be if every single sugar-push, UAT, whip and left side pass were always exactly the same ? :what:

But as much as I like playing, I never want my leader to think at the end of the dance: I never want to dance with this highjacking b1tch again :eek:


EDIT: I'm on holidays just now so it might well be my last post on the subject for a while... the sun is calling me...!

EDIT 2: next week at sea sun and swing, I'll make sure to collect the attending pro's take on single vs double prep, and will report ! (unless I forget it all.......)

Lory
30th-July-2009, 03:23 PM
You know as much fun and good popcorn it is to argue one's point in this thread, at the end of day none of the two approaches (single prep vs double prep) is WRONG : they are just preferences,

Hallelujah! :yeah:

I think we all agree though... it is wrong (from a leaders perspective) to do a HUGE right - left motion :)

straycat
30th-July-2009, 04:00 PM
This clip at 1.52 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=446_lXFQycY&fmt=18) is interesting as it shows even the very best leaders sometimes are caught out by a follower variation/hijack (call it what you will)

Fun clip... but I confess I can't see him being caught out at that point - would you explain for the hard-of-understanding? ;)

Or do you mean 2.52ish?

Chef
30th-July-2009, 04:11 PM
Thank you NZ Monkey and Caro for your replies.

It SEEMS TO ME that the messages that I am getting are

There are many things that the follower can do during a pattern to style things up, hit musical accents, or make things interesting for themselves. An experienced follower would mostly be able to do this without interupting the lead. Less experienced followers may not achieve this while they are learning what works and what doesn't and the leader should understand that is part of the learning process and try to work with your partner to get things back on track as gently as possible if it all goes a bit wonky.

To single prep or double prep. Different U.S. pros have different views and reasons to back up thier views, some of which are mechanical and some which are based on asthetics. The one thing that seems to unify them all is that it should not be overly big whichever one that is done. This may be because all you are doing is to teach followers ONLY to respond to big leads and this would rob the dance of its rich area of subtlety.

If a follower is going to take over a section of the dance for her play time then there are better times than others within, or between patterns, to attempt to get the leader to give this play time. If the followers have been given or has taken play time they must finish as a sensible point in the music so that the leader can still dance within the music (ie handing control back 1 beat before the end of the phrase makes his life difficult).

I can also think I understand what MikeR is saying. Styling, syncopation or whatever else, is fairly safe during the 1,2 or the anchor of a pattern. Play with the middle bit with caution because that is where the leader can and may do the redirection which the follower can not anticipate. Expert followers may want to, and be able to operate safely in this zone or get themselves out of trouble but how do you become an expert at this without trying lots of stuff, most of which whill fail. I THINK MikeR is saying that since there is such a high proportion of a pattern that is safe to play in why bother playing in the danger zone. This just shows that he has compassion for leaders and little understanding of how women like playing in dangerous places in the knowledge that it will be looked at as the leaders fault if it all goes Pete Tong (tongue firmly in cheek for that last sentance).

Again. Thanks for your veiws. An interesting discussion to read.

robd
30th-July-2009, 04:33 PM
Fun clip... but I confess I can't see him being caught out at that point - would you explain for the hard-of-understanding? ;)

Or do you mean 2.52ish?

No, I def. meant 1.52 Around 1.52 he is looking to do a back to back barrel turn at normal speed as far as I can see (he leads these quite often) but Melina has done a heel slide just as he's setting it up. It only stuck in my mind because you see Jordan 'caught' in this way so rarely.

Just after 2.52 he is left 'begging' for the follower a little bit (as Jordan himself described it at Rockbottoms)

Zuhal
30th-July-2009, 05:15 PM
But as much as I like playing, I never want my leader to think at the end of the dance: I never want to dance with this highjacking b1tch again :eek:


In most environments I am a competent WCS lead. I cannot begin to think and describe what I am doing on which foot but I know how the dance works and I can entertain most partners.

However very good followers spend so much time mucking about that I can easily loose the thread of where I am and what I am doing.

When I lead any dance I try to dance within the competence of my follower and maybe stretch them for a few seconds within the dance. My best WCS dances are with superior followers who just do the occasional syncopation or hijack and help me land a break. They just stretch my experience.

Guess which ones get asked to dance.

Zuhal
30th-July-2009, 05:26 PM
I think we all agree though... it is wrong (from a leaders perspective) to do a HUGE right - left motion :)

Lets suppose we are in a class environment and the prepped move is being taught especially to achieve an overturn.

I've been round and danced with everyone in the room and only two of the followers give enough frame to lead it subtely.

The teacher hasn't spotted it but invites questions.

I want to say
"Can you please tell the followers to give some frame so that we can lead it small"

I have to say
"Can you say a bit more about the size of the prep you need"

Long patronising explanation addressed to me.
Teacher tries it on me
"Thats fine. what are you worried about":banghead:

Lee Bartholomew
30th-July-2009, 10:23 PM
Im interested in knowing who/ how many people actually teach a double prep.

I remember a few years back when there was a J&T weekender at The Royal Oak. I done a class the prior weekender with Cat and Paul. They taught a double prep.

When I had a private with Tatiana at their weekender, she said not to double prep. This was some time ago so my memory is a little faded of what was actually said but it doesn't seem that they would teach that if thats what she said.

Also Cat and Paul done a WCS workshop a month or so back in Worthing and someone asked the question on double prepping and the response was, not to do it. So it seems Cat and Paul have also gone down this route of single preps.

From other experiance, Kyle and Sarah at Eclipse, Christopher and Katrina and Samantha Buckwalter are all US pros that teach without double preps.

I personally can not see the gains of a double prep, however I do tend to do it as a habbit :blush:

Reet Petite
31st-July-2009, 12:56 AM
To quote Mario Robau from his Intensive "No prep is better than a double prep."

As a less experienced follow I do find that a double prep can send me off balance but if it's executed as more of a prance ie; I remain in the same lane, it's less of a car crash :rolleyes:

TA Guy
31st-July-2009, 02:19 AM
I am also interested in what is actually bad about double preps ?

Anyone actually know ?

(P.S. I'm not interested in "They are bad because some people execute them badly". That could apply to every bleedin' thing :))

Lee Bartholomew
31st-July-2009, 05:29 AM
I am also interested in what is actually bad about double preps ?



AKAIK only a small number of people have actually been killed or injured by double preps compared to just a few broken bones with single preps :na:.

If you lead a double prep it causes the follows weight to become very unstable (and not as in it makes them feel like pigging out on cake).

A prep gives the follow momentum one way. The leader has to take the momentum he has given in a prep, absorb it (to stop the follow from turning compleatly), and then redirect momentum the other way for the turn.

Now if we double prep whe have to give momentum one way, absorb it, send the moemntum the other way, absorb it then send the momentum back in the origional direction the momentum was going in anyway for the turn !!!

From the leaders point of view, this is quite a lot of work and from the follows, it can be confusing and disorentating.

WCS is about conserving energy and making the big things small, not about over complicating things and giving (esp leaders) harder work.

straycat
31st-July-2009, 08:50 AM
If you lead a double prep it causes the follows weight to become very unstable (and not as in it makes them feel like pigging out on cake).

A prep gives the follow momentum one way. The leader has to take the momentum he has given in a prep, absorb it (to stop the follow from turning compleatly), and then redirect momentum the other way for the turn.

Sounds like a good analysis of the overdone version, but this description doesn't really bear any resemblance to the clip NZM posted (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOxK4Ga18jY), where it seems to amount to little more** than a quick shift in tension before the main prep.

**'little more' meaning it looks subtle. Not easy.

I wonder if the term 'double prep' is actually something of a misnomer?

NZ Monkey
31st-July-2009, 09:13 AM
To quote Mario Robau from his Intensive "No prep is better than a double prep."
I don't suppose he explained why then? The reason I ask is because I suspect we might be loosing something in the conveyance without context.

Also, clips like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dD9xUICvlGM&feature=related and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evNveayZ810&NR=1 tend to reinforce my opinion on double preps rather than dispelling them. They're particularly noticeable when both hands are being used here, but otherwise I see a very similar change in tension as in the first clip I posted, albeit possibly a bit smaller and definitely from further away.


I wonder if the term 'double prep' is actually something of a misnomer? Possibly, except that it is a prep used before another one. At least that's what it feels like to me.

robd
31st-July-2009, 10:05 AM
So it seems Cat and Paul have also gone down this route of single preps.


I don't recall Paul ever teaching a double prep as standard in any of his classes that I have done.



(P.S. I'm not interested in "They are bad because some people execute them badly". That could apply to every bleedin' thing :))

I think it may be more likely that people execute them by default (maybe even more so coming from an MJ background?) unless specifically taught otherwise hence the emphasis on not prepping '1'



Possibly, except that it is a prep used before another one. At least that's what it feels like to me.

Maybe my description of "prepping the prep" was not too far off the mark?

Another aspect to consider is whether this prepping may be as useful to the leader in setting their body shape for the pattern as it is for the follower?

mikeyr
31st-July-2009, 01:49 PM
Also, clips like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dD9xUICvlGM&feature=related and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evNveayZ810&NR=1 tend to reinforce my opinion on double preps rather than dispelling them. They're particularly noticeable when both hands are being used here, but otherwise I see a very similar change in tension as in the first clip I posted, albeit possibly a bit smaller and definitely from further away.

Without wanting to sound smug. I know both of the individuals you cite very well. I have spent 4 1/2 months out of the last 6 months teaching, dancing and choreographing with Samantha. Both Mario & Sam (and others) have helped me put my class teaching cirriculum together........So when I say that you now really are talking out of your bum!:eek: I feel maybe that I do so with at least a smidgeon of authority.....

I can only conclude that, you "should have gone to Spec savers"! Or you dont know what youre looking at!

In the examples you give, I see very subtle single preps and I see lots of double resistance which is characteristic of many Texas WCS who came from either Push or Whip (Teaxas Variants)

I also see the double handed Prance lead (over 4 beats) enabling Them to hit the break. I have included this clip where you can better see the double resistance and Prance lead http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7QoB4a-qiE&feature=related

If anything these examples show what LEAD & FOLLOW is all about! No FCUKing about on the 3&4 there hey Gadjet(is that the Inspector):what:

TA Guy
31st-July-2009, 02:09 PM
I think it may be more likely that people execute them by default (maybe even more so coming from an MJ background?) unless specifically taught otherwise hence the emphasis on not prepping '1'


My understanding is that in this country it is typically jivers who have problems with double preps. It confuses them. Not really something I've noticed, but it's been mentioned by others on this forum before.

My understanding again is that this new trend for single preps was the idea of someone who decided that leading direction, momentum and a prep on count one for too hard for beginners.
That makes sense to me.


AKAIK only a small number of people have actually been killed or injured by double preps compared to just a few broken bones with single preps :na:.


:)



If you lead a double prep it causes the follows weight to become very unstable (and not as in it makes them feel like pigging out on cake).

A prep gives the follow momentum one way. The leader has to take the momentum he has given in a prep, absorb it (to stop the follow from turning compleatly), and then redirect momentum the other way for the turn.

Now if we double prep whe have to give momentum one way, absorb it, send the moemntum the other way, absorb it then send the momentum back in the origional direction the momentum was going in anyway for the turn !!!

From the leaders point of view, this is quite a lot of work and from the follows, it can be confusing and disorentating.


Again, a great description of double prepping done badly, but as I said, you can argue that anything done badly is 'bad'.

Followers have to deal with 'movements' similar to preps all the time, even a simple shoulder walk is often led with a similar movement of the arm to invoke a 'hippy' walk. Or, if anyone attended the Southport where the Roystons taught that elongated Stalker Whip with a similar arm movement to decorate the walk ?
Neither of those examples are preps, in fact that actual movement in both examples is larger for the simple reason that you are trying to get a 'hippy' walk going. Not something you are trying to do in a prep.
If a follower has problem with a decently executed double prep, then seriously, IMO they have larger problems in the dance than they realize.



Off the top of my head I can think of four reasons why double preps are good.

1) On a lighter level, it can be used to accent the beat/stylize.
2) Because of the double amount of movement allowed on the second prep whilst still only travelling the same distance from 'straight' as a single prep, there is greater energy build-up/greater snap.
3) More information is communicated to the follower.
4) Probably more inportantly, that information is transmitted earlier.


So far, there has been a deafening silence on why double preps are 'bad' (other than the "if you do them badly, they are bad" argument).
Genuinely, I would like to know. I am not so set in my ways that I don't want to improve if somebody gives me an actual reason :)

mikeyr
31st-July-2009, 02:11 PM
Some others welcome you changing the timing of a pattern (say you lead a UAT starting at beat 24 of a 32 beat phrase - I would almost systematically style the UAT to make it 8 beat to help you phrase the music), or give you more freedom in the way you want to shape or end a move.


Wow I am impressed that you use Rocket Science to solve such a simple problem. :doh:

You could of course just let the lead finish the 6 count Uat and hit the 1 of the next major phrase with a tuck or similar, which is preferable to a hitch dont you think?

You shouldnt assume that just cos we blokes dont know Rocket Science we dont know where we are in the music :eek:


Is this why this forum is dying?

mikeyr
31st-July-2009, 02:18 PM
Lets check the semantics. Lets see if I am talking garbage This clip, 32-33 seconds in, a very definite two handed double prep?


Yes YOU are talking Garbarge about the prep! REALLY:banghead:

The rest of it is pretty rubbish too!

TA Guy
31st-July-2009, 02:21 PM
Yes YOU are talking Garbarge! REALLY:banghead:

Fair enough.

But all I can see is you insulting people and generally being bombastic without actually backing up your opinions with any arguments whatsoever. At least I made an attempt!
So educate me, what is so bad about double preps ?

NZ Monkey
31st-July-2009, 02:22 PM
Without wanting to sound smug. I know both of the individuals you cite very well. I have spent 4 1/2 months out of the last 6 months teaching, dancing and choreographing with Samantha. Both Mario & Sam (and others) have helped me put my class teaching cirriculum together........I know (although you clearly do want to sound smug). That's why I chose them to show my point.


So when I say that you now really are talking out of your bum!:eek: I feel maybe that I do so with at least a smidgeon of authority..... I'm not going to be drawn into a pathetic mud-slinging match, so I'm sorry to disappoint you there Mike.

I was pointing out that I see the same type of movement as I have talking about throughout the thread on those clips, of Mario, after Reet Petite informed me that Mario teaches that they are never a good idea.

In my second clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evNveayZ810&NR=1) after a single run-through I see a distinct double prepping action at 21, 51, 2:11, 2:39 and 2:52. Now, perhaps he doesn't call them double preps, or perhaps you're happy to justify the movements in some other way. In any event, the movement is there on video for everyone to see and make up their own mind.

mikeyr
31st-July-2009, 02:37 PM
I know (although you clearly do want to sound smug). That's why I chose them to show my point.

I'm not going to be drawn into a pathetic mud-slinging match, so I'm sorry to disappoint you there Mike.

I was pointing out that I see the same type of movement as I have talking about throughout the thread on those clips, of Mario, after Reet Petite informed me that Mario teaches that they are never a good idea.

In my second clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evNveayZ810&NR=1) after a single run-through I see a distinct double prepping action at 21, 51, 2:11, 2:39 and 2:52. Now, perhaps he doesn't call them double preps, or perhaps you're happy to justify the movements in some other way. In any event, the movement is there on video for everyone to see and make up their own mind.

I still say you dont have a clue what youre looking at.

Why don't you ask the man himself, he is a forumite, PM him, I am sure he'll help you out. Be sure to let us know what he says though!

NZ Monkey
31st-July-2009, 02:46 PM
Why don't you tell us Mike? You did, after all, enter this debate with the statement that this is what you'd done.

In any event, I'd rather wait until I finally meet him myself in a couple of months. I find a picture is worth a thousand words.

In the meantime, there are about half a dozen questions different people have been asking you in this thread so far, and so far you've spent a lot of energy not answering them.

mikeyr
31st-July-2009, 03:04 PM
Why don't you tell us Mike? You did, after all, enter this debate with the statement that this is what you'd done.

In any event, I'd rather wait until I finally meet him myself in a couple of months. I find a picture is worth a thousand words.

In the meantime, there are about half a dozen questions different people have been asking you in this thread so far, and so far you've spent a lot of energy not answering them.

I'll let him know youre coming :stirring::popcorn:

What were they again :grin:

straycat
31st-July-2009, 03:12 PM
In no particular order,

The Facts™ (so far as I can tell) Are These


Caro & NZM think that 'double preps' are Good™.
Mike thinks they are Bad™, but won't say why.
Mike claims that what Caro & NZM view as 'double preps' are not 'double preps', but are actually 'double resistances'. (™)
Mike says that 'double resistances' are Good™.
Everyone thinks that overdone 'double anythings' are Very Bad™


So the only point of disagreement appears to be what the term 'double prep™' actually refers to? Or have I missed something?

mikeyr
31st-July-2009, 03:13 PM
Fewer intermediate points? :devil: :whistle:


Thats very true, shes actually is 2 points shy of what Catriona Wiles got when she was in intermediate. So after her next comp that means....

How many you got Rob, I mean you're not shy of giving an opinion.

mikeyr
31st-July-2009, 04:29 PM
In no particular order,

The Facts™ (so far as I can tell) Are These


Caro & NZM think that 'double preps' are Good™.
Mike thinks they are Bad™, but won't say why.
Mike claims that what Caro & NZM view as 'double preps' are not 'double preps', but are actually 'double resistances'. (™)
Mike says that 'double resistances' are Good™.
Everyone thinks that overdone 'double anythings' are Very Bad™


So the only point of disagreement appears to be what the term 'double prep™' actually refers to? Or have I missed something?


Working on the RobD principle(see below) that the more intermediate points you have the more qualified you are, Caro has 15 points from 4 comps whereas I only have 8 from 2 comps however I have a better comp Average. So by extrapolating I would have 16. which makes me the most knowledgable until someone with even more intermediate points :na::na:

But hold on... What if you guys form a coalition a bit like Pokomon! :eek: How many points do you have NZM, Stray? Oh ok not much danger there then,:sleep: until Caro comes back form her hols of course.

So being the most Knowledgable on here at the moment (using the RobD principle) I am right and you all are wrong, there you go, Explained rather nicely I think:D

I like this game, you guys are such fun!

straycat
31st-July-2009, 04:40 PM
Mike. Why did you just quote my entire post, if you weren't actually going to refer to it in any way?

mikeyr
31st-July-2009, 04:51 PM
Mike. Why did you just quote my entire post, if you weren't actually going to refer to it in any way?

You dont really want to listen to what I have to say. You REALLY want to know answer?. Go Ask Mario, he's up now.

straycat
31st-July-2009, 05:02 PM
You dont really want to listen to what I have to say.

Why do you believe this to be the case? If it were so, I would not be asking you questions.

robd
31st-July-2009, 05:29 PM
How many you got Rob, I mean you're not shy of giving an opinion.

Lol. As you well know, I have no points whatsoever in any competition ever in the whole world ever. I haven't ever entered a points awarding competition though which may or may not have a bearing on that :nice:

I can't believe you bit at that little dig Mike (unless the truth hurts) and of course I don't believe that competition points give you any more or less authority for posting on this forum.

I do have to say however that you aren't coming off too well on this particular thread. It's clear you have beef with Caro, NZM et al and I think you all have valid viewpoints but you are evading a lot of reasonable questions and with the Mario stuff you are starting to sound a lot like Andy McGregor did in the past when he'd constantly refer people to his links with Nigel Anderson to validate his opinions.

Gadget
31st-July-2009, 11:48 PM
OK, I'll attempt to show my ignorance again:

(And if it appears i don't know what people are talking about, then please enlighten me - communication rather than a shouting match or belittling)

1) Double preps are (should be) subtle and normally only the better followers can take advantage of them.

2) The better followers don't need double preps because they can adapt on the fly and generally single preps are enough for them.

Don't they cancel each other out?


There was a list of positives that a double prep can give; primarily an advanced warning to the follower of an intended lead. If something helps me communicate better and lead my partner better, I don't really care where it comes from. However here are a couple of dissadvantages I can think on:

- Confusion. I suppose it depends on the amount of connection within the lead and which method of leading you prescribe to: If your lead is based on having a constant 'background' tension (as WCS dancers seem to favor), then there is more scope to vary that tension to distinguish between a pre-prep and a prep. Even then, you would have to have a very good consistency in your lead to be able to vary it like this.
If your lead is based on starting the follower on a path and changing it when necessary, then a double prep is going to be hard to incorporate - you would have to lead and counter the lead at the same time.
If your lead is based on a constant presence, re-directing the follower's momentum, then the subtle pre-prep could be mistaken for a prep or even a direct lead.
Personally, my lead is more towards the last one; a 'pre-prep' for me is making the follower aware I am with them, then preparing, then leading.

- Lack of spontaneity If you are preparing and thinking that far ahead, are you really reacting to the music, or have you decided the moves/patterns and are now trying to make them fit the music? I think it matters less in WCS than MJ because you have the 6/8 beat structure to work within.

- Disruption If the follower is styling or ending a phrase, then your pre-prep may be as undesirable and off-putting as a hi-jack would be to your lead. Hesitation and over-preparation could have the opposite effect from the intended one and cause them to come out early on the "wrong" foot.

- Domineering Yes; the lead should lead and the follow follow, but half the skill of the very good followers is the ability to add styling in between the movements led, while still following them and not disrupting them. By pre-prepping the follower, you are cutting out a space that they would "normally" have to play in.
If they are 'playing' and you ignore it; over-riding with your (pre-pre) lead and establish dominance again, then you are quashing their role within the partnership.


So if we presume that, (when led well), (at the right time), a double prep is a good thing, can anyone suggest when this good time would be? And if it is only changes in direction or free-spins that would benefit from a double prep?


{BTW I'm a bit out of touch with Caro, but when she left Aberdeen she was one of the best followers I have ever danced with and a very good lead - I can only presume that her dance holidays, workshops, privates and competition experience has improved her dancing even further. I don't know anyone more dedicated, including teachers; personally I give her comments more weight than the rest of the posters on this thread.}

Lee Bartholomew
1st-August-2009, 04:37 PM
Does the Double prep come from a more country or Ballroom style WCS?

From all the Ballroom and Country WCS clips on youtube I have seen, it seems to be that way.

This is a good example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0OZ75MBdQA&feature=rec-HM-r2

mikeyr
1st-August-2009, 09:48 PM
I can't believe you bit at that little dig Mike (unless the truth hurts) and of course I don't believe that competition points give you any more or less authority for posting on this forum.

Not so much biting Rob but kind of agreeing with you mate! Now that I am a full time dance teacher I have neither the time nor finances nor really the inclination to further my points tally in the US.

Further Iam not really bothered by how I am viewed on here for that I would need to respect their actual dancing ability, Sadly not many that I have met on here have done that. Although they do talk a good game!

My students keep coming back in sufficient numbers that I am opening my 5th class next month, so I must be doing something right, d'ya think?

The questions actually have been answered, not necessarily by me but answered none the less.

Double preps cause over rotation, none of the followers that I have danced with or taken lessons from in the US like them for that reason.

The whole &34 thing.... Well you tell me, how many times have you had your lead comprimised by followers like that!

Anyways, I'll let them continue to talk the talk. Me I am off to walk walk triple triple!:tears:

straycat
2nd-August-2009, 12:18 PM
Double preps cause over rotation, none of the followers that I have danced with or taken lessons from in the US like them for that reason.
Thank you for answering my question.


My students keep coming back in sufficient numbers that I am opening my 5th class next month, so I must be doing something right, d'ya think?
Where do you teach?

FoxyFunkster
2nd-August-2009, 01:11 PM
Not so much biting Rob but kind of agreeing with you mate! Now that I am a full time dance teacher I have neither the time nor finances nor really the inclination to further my points tally in the US.

Further Iam not really bothered by how I am viewed on here for that I would need to respect their actual dancing ability, Sadly not many that I have met on here have done that. Although they do talk a good game!

My students keep coming back in sufficient numbers that I am opening my 5th class next month, so I must be doing something right, d'ya think?

The questions actually have been answered, not necessarily by me but answered none the less.

Double preps cause over rotation, none of the followers that I have danced with or taken lessons from in the US like them for that reason.

The whole &34 thing.... Well you tell me, how many times have you had your lead comprimised by followers like that!

Anyways, I'll let them continue to talk the talk. Me I am off to walk walk triple triple!:tears:


Another thing to add is that Preps as far as i`ve been taught are a body led action - The action for a prep comes from rotation in the leads body causing the follows reaction to be rotational. Double prep as Mikeyr says promotes over and unneccesary rotation in both partners. These things can commonly get over complicated and analysed far too much in my opinion, So in trying to keep things simple my aim is that by the time count 1 is done i want to have given the follow as much information about where she is going (direction) and then by count 2 how she is going to get there. If the follow has that clear information from me then it frees her up to explore how to get there as long as it is not disruptive........Lets not forget this amazing dance we love is a social dance! Lets not saturate WCS with technique at the cost of having fun.