PDA

View Full Version : The Blame Game



straycat
3rd-July-2006, 02:01 PM
During Wendy's 'Why can't I dance to fast tracks? (/forum/showthread.php?t=8917)' thread, Chef said the following (in response to my knee-jerk 'blame the leader' post):


Can we please get away from this idea that it is ALWAYS the leads fault.

The lead thas got thier job to do. The follower has their job to do. The only thing that you can do to to make the partnership work is to ensure that you are doing your own job well. A great lead cannot make a beginner follower dance like a champion and vice versa.

Which really got me to thinking about the whole 'fault' issue. On the whole, my stance is unaltered - but I'm curious to find out other people's thoughts on the issue. Quick note - I'm not getting at Chef, and I agree with much of what he says - I just want to present another viewpoint on the whole thing, and maybe find out what everyone thinks...

I think I first heard that phrase during a Nigel & Nina class one fine Beach Boogie, and I could see exactly what they were getting at. Leading well is hard - and I think that a lot of leaders would be quite shocked at the difference between the lead they think they're giving, and the lead they're actually giving - the point was (I believe) to stop us getting ratty when the follower goes whizzing off the left, not to the right, and to actually consider the fact that the lead we just gave might be much of the reason they did that.


It's extraordinary how much difference can be made by a small change in hand-position, for example, or by the ghost of that instinctive semi-circle that many of us were originally conditioned to do at the start of moves... for one example, when I first learned to join two pretzels back-to-back (oh - eight years gone) - I found that a lot of followers would, at a key moment, turn the wrong way for no apparant reason, putting them into a very uncomfortable-looking position, making it seem as if they were trying to break their own arms. I still don't know what part of my lead made them do that, but I do know that a slight turn of the wrist at just the right moment prevents this. Why? Don't know. Took a lot of experimenting to figure it out though, and I could have just said 'Well - they just don't know the move'. And only done it with people that knew it. I'm glad I persevered though.

The more Lindy I do, the more my awareness of these issues seems to grow. Allow my left hand to bounce? I'm giving all kinds of strange and confusing signals to my partner. Semi-circle? God forbid! Allow my leading arm to relax while still holding my partner's hand because I don't need to use it for a while? At the wrong time, that can leave my partner feeling abandoned and not knowing what to do - and also make it very difficult to regain the connection for when I do need it...

And I haven't even mentioned the awareness of where my partner's weight might be, or making sure her weight is in the right place to do the move I'm currently leading. Loads of factors. Loads of things to be aware of. And the more I learn, the more I find there is to learn.

And we have to do all this with different followers, each of whom is different. Each of whom has a unique following style (some subtly different, some vastly so) - we have to adapt to all of them. And they to all of us.

'Fault'. 'Blame'. Bad words, really. Very negative. Let's ditch them for a while.

What I'm getting at though, is that there is more a leader can do to sort out a dance which isn't going well, than a follower. Far far more.

Example: many moons ago, I entered the LeJive open thingumie (intermediate) at Hammersmith. During our first (and only) dance, I just couldn't seem to ... connect with my partner. I felt I was dancing well, never heard the track before, but it was great, but ... something was wrong, and my partner was not following well. To my shame, it took me 3/4 of the track to realise that she couldn't figure out the beat. After that, I switched to some basic moves and accentuated it briefly, she got it, and we were back on track. If I'd been on the ball, I couldn't have done this much sooner. If the situation had been reversed ... she could have backlead it, sure, but that might have made things worse. Much harder proposition.

Now - a novice lead is going to find it harder to cope with difficult followers, but if you throw your hands up and say "she's too hard to lead", you're learning nothing. If you simply keep in mind that there are things that you can do to deal with most things problems - open yourself to that idea, as it were - you find that you start learning them.

A good enough lead can bring out the best in virtually any follower - for any problem there might be with her technique, or the way she responds to your lead, a leader can generally find a way around it, or to avoid the circumstances that bring it out - there's always a way, and eventually, you'll find it. You have to consider that the lead you just gave may well have been subtly misleading, even if only to your current partner. Try it a different way.

I'm almost certainly preaching to the converted with this post, but there's
unfortunately far too many leaders out there who haven't learned this lesson.

I would say more, but I'd - better get back to work,

Stray

LMC
3rd-July-2006, 02:20 PM
Yeah, all that, BUT -

I know very well that it's my fault as a follower sometimes (and frequently know immediately that it's my fault) - because there is a failure in my connection (momentary lapse of attention or just a brain -> body connection failure). Missing offered hands is my personal favourite :blush:

Plus, if you get a backleading/anticipating follower, it sometimes doesn't matter what you do - they have assumed that you are finishing a move a certain way and that's what they will do - which leader has never been backled into a return? Even as a beginner lead, I sometimes know in my heart that I am not at fault, it's that the determined follower has decided that I can't lead 'cos I'm a girl so she's just going to carry on regardless :rolleyes:

Dancing with beginner men, I frequently get feedback along the lines that I am making them lead - mostly complimentary, sometimes a bit "put out" when I am being cruel to guys who have been dancing a few weeks by following exactly what is led :devil: . When you know you are following someone who has only been dancing a few weeks, it is quite easy to 'translate' their lead and encourage an unconfident beginner by following what you know to be their intention (e.g. a first timer is almost certainly leading the catapault from the beginner's lesson, not a sway) and then if it's something desperately ambiguous/wrong, having a chat about how they can lead it more clearly/demonstrating the difference. I know, I know - I shouldn't do this, bad follower, slap wrists, etc - but I feel that verbally correcting every move a very beginner lead makes is not really very encouraging!

I'm with Chef - it's only *always* the lead's fault if the follower is following perfectly.

bigdjiver
3rd-July-2006, 02:27 PM
I always first try to consider that if anything that I am involved with goes wrong I might be at fault. If I identify what I did wrong the possibility exists that I can learn. I also try to keep in my mind that nobody can change the past, so try to avoid recriminations.

David Franklin
3rd-July-2006, 03:13 PM
Which really got me to thinking about the whole 'fault' issue. On the whole, my stance is unaltered - but I'm curious to find out other people's thoughts on the issue. Quick note - I'm not getting at Chef, and I agree with much of what he says - I just want to present another viewpoint on the whole thing, and maybe find out what everyone thinks...My thoughts, for what it's worth:

"It's always the lead's fault" is useful as a zeroth level approximation. The natural tendancy for a beginner lead is to think "I lead her to do X and she did Y - it's all her fault!", so anything that makes him/her take a good look at their own actions is no bad thing. And the fact that the leader "sets the agenda" does mean it's up to him to choose suitable moves for the level of the follower as well.

But a dance is a partnershp, with two people working together. He will not lead perfectly, she will not follow perfectly, so they both need to adjust for each other. After a certain point, the attitude that all the responsibility lies with the leader is counterproductive; if I'm off balance or off beat, or about to back into someone, it is just as poor partnering for my follow to decide "hey, he's leading - it's his problem" as it would be the other way around.

Look at it like this; if only the leader is responsible for the things that go wrong, then he must be the only one responsible for what goes right. And I think the likes of Kate, Lily, Nicole, etc. might have something to say about that!

bigdjiver
3rd-July-2006, 03:36 PM
if I'm off balance or off beat, or about to back into someone, it is just as poor partnering for my follow to decide "hey, he's leading - it's his problem" as it would be the other way around. It is the leaders problem. The leader either initiated or accepted the dance. If the leader can't fix it he has to avoid that follower in the future.

...Look at it like this; if only the leader is responsible for the things that go wrong, then he must be the only one responsible for what goes right...It is a collaboration. If the leaders lead properly, and the followers follow properly, and it works, then it is a collective victory. If the followers do not follow the correct lead, then the leader is working with the wrong followers. The best leaders pick followers that know when and how to rebel.

mikeyr
3rd-July-2006, 03:40 PM
I'm with Chef - it's only *always* the lead's fault if the follower is following perfectly.

Iam afraid I'm with LMC & Chef - it's only *always* the lead's fault if the follower is following perfectly.

Notwithstanding the technical expertise of the follower. I have been conducting an informal study for some months now entitled "Follower pre-programmed response - does it really exist".

One of the classic examples this study uses to illustrate the problem is the "unwrap" postion where the dancers both facing the same way with (L) right to (F) left 8 out of 10 subjects(followers) will initiate a wrap movement to a basket position at the leads right side, regardless of any external stimulii (signals). However when on the left side of the lead in the same unwrap position, this will never occur.

In summary, yes it does. Followers you dont know what we are going to do (hell we dont even know half the time). Let us lead.

philsmove
3rd-July-2006, 03:49 PM
In tango

Rule one - there are no mistakes I tango

Rule two - if there is mistake it’s the mans fault

And if the woman is leading – just don’t go there

End of story

David Franklin
3rd-July-2006, 03:52 PM
It is the leaders problem. The leader either initiated or accepted the dance. If the leader can't fix it he has to avoid that follower in the future.The problem is not what "the leader can fix"; the problem is the attitude that the follower "can't" fix it. And I would say that if the follower really wants to progress, such an attitude is her problem. One of the common themes I've heard from leaders in top partnerships is that the ability of their partner to "cover for their mistakes" is hugely important.

As to the rest; I can understand leaders blamed for picking the wrong moves for the follower; leaders being blamed for picking the wrong follower for the moves is a new one...

MartinHarper
3rd-July-2006, 03:55 PM
Leading well is hard

Following well is hard too. Leading well is about acting perfectly. Following well is about being perfect. Which is harder?

You've mentioned things that make leading well hard, but for each of them I could mention things that make following well hard. Yes, a perfect leader should be completely aware of his partner's balance at all times, in case she is not perfectly balanced. A perfect follower should be perfectly balanced at all times, even when the lead has done something unbalancing.


A good enough lead can bring out the best in virtually any follower

And vica versa.
With the really good followers, I can lead whatever I like and they'll find a way to make it look good and fit the music. I can give them mis-leads that make no sense, and they'll invent some crazy thing that fits my mis-leads and looks hot. I can lead when they're halfway through some awesome piece of styling, and they'll still be on balance and able to follow it perfectly, smiling as they do.
It's dangerously easy to get lazy as a lead, when you have a follower like that.

LMC
3rd-July-2006, 03:56 PM
And if the woman is leading – just don’t go there
Hmmmm...

Now I am leading in freestyle occasionally, I can empathise with how irritating it is when a naughty follower wrecks one of your finest moves by resisting or just going off in the wrong direction. But they - actually we, 'cos I still get things wrong more often than I wish I did! - won't learn if no-one ever dances with them/us. I'm useless at ochoes for instance - but that's a question of recognition as much as ability.

As DF says, the lead should adapt down to the follower's level of capability if necessary. Trying more and more complicated moves to make the follower pay attention is not always the answer (I know :blush: ) - sometimes keeping it simple but using double handed moves/close hold to retain more control is better.

We might not actually be leading. However, we might not be following either when we're beginners. But again, how will we ever learn if no leaders will "go there"? :(

Twirly
3rd-July-2006, 04:11 PM
In summary, yes it does. Followers you dont know what we are going to do (hell we dont even know half the time). Let us lead.

:rofl:

I quite agree - but in mitigation, we do get used to being led in a particular way in a particular move because much of the time it happens like that... and then we get caught out when someone does something different (and thank goodness they do). Sometimes I don't even realise that I'm anticipating, but when I do realise, trying to remember "don't anticipate" makes matters even worse as anticipating is all I'm thinking about! :blush: It’s really hard to get the balance between not anticipating what is going to happen next but being able to “read” the lead you are given, particularly if it’s into a move you’ve never done before or a variation – there is still a good proportion of each dance like that for me, depending on whom I'm dancing with. Never mind all the rest of the stuff going on – the beat, musicality, styling, etc.

Btw – what are ochoes? Apols for ignorance. :confused:

David Franklin
3rd-July-2006, 04:13 PM
As DF says, the lead should adapt down to the follower's level of capability if necessary. Trying more and more complicated moves to make the follower pay attention is not always the answer (I know :blush: ) - sometimes keeping it simple but using double handed moves/close hold to retain more control is better.The "problem" with adapting down is that in some ways it is avoiding the issue. If all a couple does is stick to the moves they can already do, then how are they going to progress? In a social scenario this may not matter too much, but for people who are working at a goal, whether that be as modest as putting the evening's intermediate moves into freestyle, or as ambitious as putting together cabaret, it's not very satisfactory.

I'm pretty sure that when Chef wrote the quote at the start of this thread, he was thinking of the kind of circumstance where a couple (might be social dancers who hardly know each other, might have competed together for years) want to get a particular move to work or concept to work. Occasionally, the truth is something like:


That move is never going to work until you learn to do 'X' properly.

More frequently, the situation is something like:


OK, I know it should be possible for me to get this to work without you having to do X. But I'm just not getting there. So could you try doing X to make it easier for me.

If you don't allow either of those conversations to happen, it's going to take a lot longer to get anywhere, and the most likely outcome is the lead will simply stop trying to get the move to work. In a social context this is understandable, but it does have it's downside. As you say:


how will we ever learn if no leaders will "go there"? :(

Franck
3rd-July-2006, 04:29 PM
I am still firmly in the 'Leaders are responsible' but a few distinctions need to be made:

1- I really believe that most anticipations, wrong directions and mistakes by followers could have been anticipated and led better, so in 90% of cases, whilst it might not appear to be the Lead's fault, I would look at my leading first and what I could do to improve my success rate, including simplifying my repertoire of moves to a level where I can lead clearly and correctly most followers.

2- Leads are not responsible for the complete dance, they are only responsible for leading! This is why a good follower can transform a simple (but well led) dance into a spectacular event by adding style, interpretation and musicality (within the lead and timing of the music). Which is why some of the best followers really make us look better, within the confines of our own limitations. The only time an excellent follower will flounder is if a lead is physically preventing them from dancing properly (yanking, pushing off balance, dancing off beat, etc...)

3- Followers take some of the responsibility as soon as they hi-jack the connection or somehow prevent the flow of the dance. If a follower hi-jacks the connection to add a style flourish, then she's in control of the connection and for a while, is effectively leading. Some men react better to that scenario, and others can't handle it very well. In that case the followers become leaders and can take the blame for not hi-jacking / leading properly and failing to communicate their intentions to the man, if it doesn't go to plan.
Other times, there are no intended hi-jack, but some followers will place their arm (for example) in such a way that the men will be unable to extricate themselves from a move (some positions can be anticipated but not always). In that case, this is just a bad habit that some followers picked up (usually trying to copy a style they saw somewhere) and can easily be corrected.

In summary, I would tell the Leads to think long and hard before blaming the followers. It might help to experience following with a few other men (a selection of levels) so they realise how ambiguous most leads / signals are when the shoe is on the other foot.

Like Straycat, who started this thread, I do not disagree with Chef, that followers have a responsibility in making the dance worse (or better), I find however that by improving connection, leading (or preparing the lead) earlier than usual and changing subtle things in my stance, balance, hand position, etc... I hardly ever feel the need to blame any of my partners!

bigdjiver
3rd-July-2006, 04:37 PM
If a partners do not know the each others capabilities then they are both taking a risk. If you take a risk and it does not work out, it is your responsibility.

One of my deficiencies as a leader is that I too often try to extend my partner. It is a dance class, where we come to learn, but perhaps more often I should relax and just enjoy. I am not suggesting that either partner should dumb down to the lowest level, but that they should dumb down to their level of "proximal development", that region where they can dance and advance.

philsmove
3rd-July-2006, 04:40 PM
Hmmmm...
We might not actually be leading. However, we might not be following either when we're beginners. But again, how will we ever learn if no leaders will "go there"? :(

if a women is leading me, any mistakes are definatly mine :blush:

LMC
3rd-July-2006, 04:51 PM
The "problem" with adapting down is that in some ways it is avoiding the issue.
Yep - and sometimes avoids pain too :eek:


If all a couple does is stick to the moves they can already do, then how are they going to progress?
I was thinking of a random partner selected for freestyle (i.e. social scenario). I frequently dance with "advanced" followers who have been dancing longer than I have so they won't let me lead :mad: - in which case, I'll save trying to "fix" newly learned intermediate moves into my repertoire until I can practise with someone more patient/less likely to decide that I'm leading the 'basic' catapault rather than a variation of same and spin themselves out whether I'm holding onto their hand (without thumbs of course :innocent:) or not :rolleyes: Once I've practised the move a few times and I'm smoother/more confident with it, then I hope I am more likely to be able to divert/prevent backleading with a clearer lead. I agree that it's better to work together to progress - but it's not always possible if you're dancing with someone who only goes once a week for the fun of it and couldn't really care less...

As a follower, one or two "weird"/unexpected moves in a dance is nice :D - but a leader who throws a whole series of incredibly complicated and unrecognisable moves at me is just annoying, it makes the dance hard work rather than fun.

David Bailey
3rd-July-2006, 04:53 PM
"It's always the lead's fault" is useful as a zeroth level approximation.
:yeah:
We've had this before, in fact one of my very first threads ("Top ten smokescreens (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5050)") started off with this very phrase. Ahhh, those were the days...

Anyway, it's easy enough to disprove - there are "anticipation trap" moves which the follower can mess up by trying to anticipate - such as crossed ochos or the straightjacket. If the follower messes it up by over-anticipation, it's clearly their fault.

So, I'm still of the same opinion - it's a simplification, which helps at the start, but may hinder further on. A bit like saying "atoms are fundamental particles" in physics.

robd
3rd-July-2006, 05:01 PM
Following well is hard too.


:yeah:



With the really good followers, I can lead whatever I like and they'll find a way to make it look good and fit the music. I can give them mis-leads that make no sense, and they'll invent some crazy thing that fits my mis-leads and looks hot. I can lead when they're halfway through some awesome piece of styling, and they'll still be on balance and able to follow it perfectly, smiling as they do.
It's dangerously easy to get lazy as a lead, when you have a follower like that.

Another :yeah:

Very easy to get an over-inflated sense of your own abilities if you dance regularly with top class followers.

Franck
3rd-July-2006, 05:02 PM
Anyway, it's easy enough to disprove - there are "anticipation trap" moves which the follower can mess up by trying to anticipate - such as crossed ochos or the straightjacket. If the follower messes it up by over-anticipation, it's clearly their fault.That wouldn't disprove anything. All it does show is that if you keep offering the same lead / signal to some partners, those that know what you're doing and did the same tango / JANGO class will be able to follow it, and other partners will not (and will indeed anticipate something else they recognize).
It could also show that in the prep for a crossed ochos, you haven't made sure your partner was receptive to the upcoming lead, had her balance and weight-distribution under control and were sufficiently connected to make sure she would follow the move correctly.
Trying to trip up your partner with anticipation traps is a smug approach, and I believe much more limiting that looking at how you could take responsibility and lead earlier / better. I'm pretty sure that most very good Tango leads would be able to take a reasonably competent MJ followers and lead them into any Ocho combination without blaming their anticipation.

I agree that the Leader taking all the responsibility could at some level slow the develpment of great follower, but we are nowhere near that stage yet, and MJ leads have a long way to go before they need to worry about being so good that followers don't need to learn anything.

Chef
3rd-July-2006, 05:07 PM
I find however that by improving connection, leading (or preparing the lead) earlier than usual and changing subtle things in my stance, balance, hand position, etc... I hardly ever feel the need to blame any of my partners!

I do not disagree one jot with this. I just think that it fits into what I said above when I said "leaders have their job to do".

The leader can do everything within his power to improve his connection but his abilities to lead end where he makes contact with the follower. You can send the message correctly but if there is no one home to receive it then what happens is unlikely to be what you intended or expected. Your leading job then becomes one of crisis manangement and then the fluidity, inventiveness and musicality of the dance you can offer inevitably suffers.

You have to dance within the abilties of the partner you find yourself with. For both leader and follower, the more you can each bring to the party the bigger the party you can have.

When I made the first post I was thinking more about BASIC errors. Things like the womans spare arm being dead at her side and unavailable for connection. When going to an open first move position the womans hand doesn't end up on your shoulder where she has been trained to put it. Instead it ends up jammed down the middle of my back and tangled up when the rest of the move is completed. Not being able to do a simple return on the spot.

The dance that I give always has to be scaled to the abilities of the follower that I am with. I can't exceed hers and she can't exceed mine. If a great follower throws a lot os styling, lead hijacks, musicality, or sabotage at a beginner follower then they are just confused and lost. What my partner and I expect of each other is different from what we expect of beginners.

I think I will stick to the quote of mine in the first post. It says what I want to say and everything that I want to say is contained within it.

Franck
3rd-July-2006, 05:11 PM
Very easy to get an over-inflated sense of your own abilities if you dance regularly with top class followers.:nice:
Dancing with top class leaders will also give you a distorted sense of your own abilities, and will mostly teach you to follow better and be more aware of when to wait expectantly for example. It won't however teach you how to adapt to poor leads, how to keep your balance without help from the man, how to quickly change your weight distribution without the lead controlling it if you are on the wrong foot for the move your partner is leading and much more that great followers need to know...

This thread reminded me of the r.a.d F.A.Q. on Cat's Corner (http://www.catscorner.com/leadfaq/faq_beginners.html) about dancing with Beginners:

While there is no question that dancing with a better partner will make you *look* good, and that with such a partner you can concentrate more on styling details and so on because the lead and follow doesn't need so much attention, it is not the best way to practice lead/follow skills. If learning leaders only dance with accomplished followers and vice-versa, they won't develop great leading/following skills, because they won't *need* to. Now let's suppose that YOU are a great leader or follower. What happens if you dance only with other great dancers? Your lead and follow skills will gradually *deteriorate* -- because you're not working them very hard. After some months without exposure to beginners, you may be surprised to find that you can't dance with them very well, even though they seem to do okay with other beginners.
You learn how to dance better by dancing with more experienced partners. But you learn how to lead/follow better by dancing with less experienced partners. Your skills are put much more to the test dancing with a beginner than with an experienced dancer. It is easy to lead/follow a great dancer. All your weaknesses as a leader/follower show up with beginners. Dance with them and ask yourself why each incorrectly led/followed figure didn't work and when you figure it out, work on incorporating the fixes into all your dancing!

David Bailey
3rd-July-2006, 05:14 PM
That wouldn't disprove anything. All it does show is that if you keep offering the same lead / signal to some partners, those that know what you're doing and did the same tango / JANGO class will be able to follow it, and other partners will not (and will indeed anticipate something else they recognize).
:eek: Use not the J-word with me, sirrah... :na:

The point is that, in both those examples, I'm not leading anything - the follower should just stay still / wiggle on the spot. There are no signals. But the follower may decide it's evil not to do a turn every 2 seconds, or whatever, so effectively "takes control" as described up above - and then it all goes to pot from there.


Trying to trip up your partner with anticipation traps is a smug approach, and I believe much more limiting that looking at how you could take responsibility and lead earlier / better.
I didn't say I did that - I just said that's an example of a scenario when a follower can mess things up, beyond a leader's ability to recover. Admittedly, I can usually now compensate for most things a follower tries with a straightjacket (famous last words), but that's only because I've been doing that move a lot for quite a few years now.


I'm pretty sure that most very good Tango leads would be able to take a reasonably competent MJ followers and lead them into any Ocho combination without blaming their anticipation.
Possibly, I'll let you know in 10 years' time. But :clap: for the Tango Thread Diversion :)

Franck
3rd-July-2006, 05:16 PM
I do not disagree one jot with this. I just think that it fits into what I said above when I said "leaders have thier job to do".
This is why I said I didn't disagree with you. I'm just concerned that many men who haven't reached that level of leading (i.e. doing their job) blame their partners first, when they still have a long way to go, which is why I would still maintain that it is the leader's responsibility.
I am of course talking about how a dance feels rather than any competitive dancing as that would fall under the 'Competitions are evil' rule.

DavidB
3rd-July-2006, 05:17 PM
It is so often the leaders fault that thinking about your lead should be the first response to a problem. And the second response. And possibly the third. And then decide whether the move is worth arguing about. If you get this far and still want to 'discuss' it, don't say I didn't warn you...


I was looking through some of my old notes at the weekend when preparing for a Lead & Follow workshop. I found a line that I had forgotten:
As leaders get better, they are less worried about a missed lead.
As followers get better, they get more worried about a missed follow.


David

PS If Leads were always wrong they would be called 'Man Cities'.

Franck
3rd-July-2006, 05:22 PM
The point is that, in both those examples, I'm not leading anything - the follower should just stay still / wiggle on the spot. There are no signals. But the follower may decide it's evil not to do a turn every 2 seconds, or whatever, so effectively "takes control" as described up above - and then it all goes to pot from there.I can't find the quote off the top of my head, but the penny dropped for me when DavidB taught me the following: a beginner can't lead anything but a great lead can actually lead nothing
This sums up your example above, if your partner is not staying still, when you would like her to, then you should get better at leading nothing.
Many dances will have rules for followers that will simplify the job of the Lead: Tango will ask followers to do nothing until led in a particular direction, West Coast Swing will introduce the concept of a track and ask followers to keep travelling along the track once led forward and until stopped, etc... Neither of these rules are absolutes but they make the leader's (and follower's) job easier in the earlier stages (first few years) of learning.

But :clap: for the Tango Thread Diversion :)Only using Tango as an example as I know it's the only reference you will pay attention to :whistle:

David Franklin
3rd-July-2006, 06:34 PM
This thread reminded me of the r.a.d F.A.Q. on Cat's Corner (http://www.catscorner.com/leadfaq/faq_beginners.html) about dancing with Beginners:As ESG would undoubtably say, you can find quotes to back up most points of view in the RAD FAQ:

Leader must compensate. Follower must compensate. If a follower moves far away from the leader, it is good dancing for the leader to follow the follower out instead of tugging her back into position. Also, the follower must compensate for poor indications from the leader.

Franck
3rd-July-2006, 07:14 PM
As ESG would undoubtably say, you can find quotes to back up most points of view in the RAD FAQ:Absolutely, but the quote you found confirms that whilst the follower must compensate, the lead was poor in the first place, and ultimately the man's fault :wink:

Also, the follower must compensate for poor indications from the leader.

David Bailey
3rd-July-2006, 07:38 PM
This sums up your example above, if your partner is not staying still, when you would like her to, then you should get better at leading nothing.
Hmmm... so if I lead a three-step forward (back for the follow) move, left hand hold only, then just stop, "leading a nothing", how is it my fault if the follower suddenly decides she absolutely has to move forwards, against all my lead? Short of forcing her, there's only so much a lead can do, isn't there?

Don't get me wrong - in that circumstance, I accept that it's my responsibility to keep the dance flowing, and I will, and I also accept that it's my responsibility for leading something which that person cannot yet follow. Leaders have to roll with the punches, with great power comes great responsibility, and all that jazz...

But, how do I know she can't / won't follow something until I try it?

And I'm sure we've all occasionally danced with people who look like superb dancers - but who just refuse to follow a lead, especially if the lead is not into an Official Ceroc Move(TM). I had one like that at Chiswick - 3 minutes of hell... :rolleyes: (I had to try and remember how to dance Ceroc, that was painful... :na: )

Don't get me wrong - I completely accept that it's a very good idea to assume that it's always the leader's responsibility, one way or another, to ensure that the dance works. But if a move goes wrong, I think saying "It's always the leader's fault" is inaccurate, and can encourage lazy following.

However, I think the point made previously is excellent - in the circumstances where the follower over-anticipates, the follower is taking the lead, and if it goes wrong, it's then her responsibility, almost by definition :)

El Salsero Gringo
3rd-July-2006, 07:40 PM
As ESG would undoubtably say, you can find quotes to back up most points of view in the RAD FAQ:My work here is done. :flower:

El Salsero Gringo
3rd-July-2006, 07:46 PM
One of the classic examples this study uses to illustrate the problem is the "unwrap" postion where the dancers both facing the same way with (L) right to (F) left 8 out of 10 subjects(followers) will initiate a wrap movement to a basket position at the leads right side, regardless of any external stimulii (signals). However when on the left side of the lead in the same unwrap position, this will never occur. Has anyone else noticed that leads for a lady spin are now much more often interpreted as a sway, now that the lady spin is no longer a beginner's move?

jivecat
3rd-July-2006, 07:47 PM
:rofl:

I quite agree - but in mitigation, we do get used to being led in a particular way in a particular move because much of the time it happens like that... and then we get caught out when someone does something different (and thank goodness they do). Sometimes I don't even realise that I'm anticipating, but when I do realise, trying to remember "don't anticipate" makes matters even worse as anticipating is all I'm thinking about! :blush: It’s really hard to get the balance between not anticipating what is going to happen next but being able to “read” the lead you are given, particularly if it’s into a move you’ve never done before or a variation – there is still a good proportion of each dance like that for me, depending on whom I'm dancing with. Never mind all the rest of the stuff going on – the beat, musicality, styling, etc.
This is a good time to not anticipate - you can't if you don't know many of the more common moves.


Btw – what are ochoes? Apols for ignorance. :confused:

http://www.argentine-tango.com/movies/forward-ocho-follower.wmv
Hope this link works, and helps. It looka a bit weird as she's dancing them without a partner.


As a follower, one or two "weird"/unexpected moves in a dance is nice - but a leader who throws a whole series of incredibly complicated and unrecognisable moves at me is just annoying, it makes the dance hard work rather than fun.
As long as the moves are led accurately I really enjoy this - it stops any tendency to go onto auto-pilot and really makes me concentrate on connection.


I was looking through some of my old notes at the weekend when preparing for a Lead & Follow workshop. I found a line that I had forgotten:
As leaders get better, they are less worried about a missed lead.
As followers get better, they get more worried about a missed follow.
Instead of constantly apologising, if anything happens in the dance now which feels a bit marginal I ask "Did I follow that correctly?" or "Is that what you intended to happen?" As they improve, leaders will say, in a blase kind of way, that the outcome doesn't matter, but it does to me! I need the feedback to know if I've responded to their intention, and if I didn't I'd like to work out why.

Franck
3rd-July-2006, 07:58 PM
Hmmm... so if I lead a three-step forward (back for the follow) move, left hand hold only, then just stop, "leading a nothing", how is it my fault if the follower suddenly decides she absolutely has to move forwards, against all my lead? Short of forcing her, there's only so much a lead can do, isn't there?I don't want to jump to conclusions about your interpretation of 'leading a nothing' but "leading nothing is more than just stopping, or offering no lead. Sometimes, and indeed with some followers, leading nothing will involve a very clear double lead (i.e. leading her in 2 opposite directions at once that cancel each other out into a 'nothing).
Your partner might still decide to ignore the lead, in which case, she would be hi-jacking the connection and your responsibility is transferred to her.

The above is based on providing a consistent leading experience too, if a girl is led one way at the start of a dance and at some point, the lead decides to become more subtle, the follower might struggle to adapt and may miss more subtle leads.
Most of the job of a good follower is influenced by how much she trusts the lead. If the leader leads 'nothing' and does something interesting with it, she'll pay attention, if on the other hand, the lead disappears briefly at the beginning of a dance and the leader does nothing with it, she will assume it was a hiatus in the dance and will likely ignore further pauses to help smooth out the experience.

MartinHarper
3rd-July-2006, 08:30 PM
I'm pretty sure that most very good Tango leads would be able to take a reasonably competent MJ followers and lead them into any Ocho combination without blaming their anticipation.

Many times on this thread, I'm struck by the way the issues are so mirrored, and this just one example. I'm pretty sure a reasonably competent MJ lead would be able to lead a very good Tango follower into any Ocho combination they can think of. Admittedly that won't be as many, but it'll look better.


I'm just concerned that many men who haven't reached that level of leading (i.e. doing their job) blame their partners first, when they still have a long way to go...

Absolutely. Equally, there are many women who "just follow", and blame leads, and miss opportunities to improve their following and their dancing.

Dancer, blame thyself. Works for everyone.
Or, consider the relative difficulty of improving one's own dancing versus improving the dancing of the other six billion people in the world.

Twirly
4th-July-2006, 10:08 PM
This is a good time to not anticipate - you can't if you don't know many of the more common moves.

http://www.argentine-tango.com/movies/forward-ocho-follower.wmv
Hope this link works, and helps. It looka a bit weird as she's dancing them without a partner.


Thanks for that jivecat - I get the general idea now.

I do know the more common moves, and unfortunately they are the ones I expect. But the more I practise, the easier it becomes to follow what's not expected. And I can't be as bad as I think I am, as the same guys keep asking me to dance :D

Now I will go and repeat "must relax whilst dancing, must relax whilst dancing"... :nice:

bigdjiver
4th-July-2006, 11:06 PM
...Dancer, blame thyself. Works for everyone...A much better expression of what I was trying to say.

TheTramp
5th-July-2006, 12:29 AM
Has anyone else noticed that leads for a lady spin are now much more often interpreted as a sway, now that the lady spin is no longer a beginner's move?
Yes. When I'm following over here, I quite often find myself going into a sway, when the lead meant to be doing a lady spin.