Signals....an unavoidable discussion

[David Bailey]

I can think of half a dozen moves off the top of my head that require a visual cue to differentiate it from another move the woman already knows.
OK, I'll bite - which ones? :innocent:

(Warning: getting into "signals" debates can get... nasty... )

[NZ Monkey]

OK, I'll bite - which ones? :innocent:
(Warning: getting into "signals" debates can get... nasty... )How did I know someone was going to ask me that? :rolleyes: :rofl:

OK, then.
1) The Sway (not the move by the same name taught in the UK)
2) Butterfly Lean (as an individual move - it can be led without the cue from other moves without needing the visual cue)
3&4) Backhander and Lady Walkaround with a left-hand/right-hand hold. (There are specific signals for the woman taught for these at home that I don't think are taught here. One is a physical one, but that's identical for both moves. It's a visual cue that differentiates them)
5) Lady Figurehead (an Australian move IIRC)
6) Every Other Mans Desire (Now that I've written that I realise the physical lead is ''unique'' if very close to a basket comb so I guess this doesn't count. It was the 6th one I was thinking of in my last post. Gotta love the name though :wink: )

Now, I'm sure half of these have different leads in the UK to the way I was taught in NZ anyway so I'm not sure if that's much use to you. It turns out I could only think of five real ones though. If I had more experience I'm sure I could come up with more.

None of this changes my comment that helps a lot if both partners learned a move at the same place and at the same time, or at the very least in the same way. There is plenty of variation in the way some moves are taught in different locations. I've even been taught three different leads to a standard layback from the same studio before!

*NZ Monkey hopes he doesn't get dragged into an obviously avoidable debate on signals in the UK*

[David Bailey]

{ list }
Hell, I dunno any of those :sad:

I've forgotten all these move names, I struggle to remember what the Wurlitzer is most of the time... :blush:


None of this changes my comment that helps a lot if both partners learned a move at the same place and at the same time, or at the very least in the same way.
The trouble with this is that it promotes exclusivity. In theory, you should be able to lead any move without the follower having to learn / remember a sequence - each step and movement in a move should be led.

This allows you (as a leader) to re-interpret a move and create your own version or variants - which is fine, as long as it's led properly. Every time I do a move which I think "This has to be choreographed", the more I do it, the more I realise that, no, each step is leadable.

[Twirly]

This allows you (as a leader) to re-interpret a move and create your own version or variants - which is fine, as long as it's led properly.

Every man leads every move slightly differently anyway. Even if it's been taught in the same class on the same night. And even if the dancers in question are all very good/experienced. At the end of any intermediate class at my regular venue there are usually several different versions of the moves being done - very confusing! :confused: If I tried to remember them, I'd get even more tangled up than I do already :tears:

I just try to follow... honest I do! :blush:

[Gadget]

~list of signal moves~
from this (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showthread.php?p=262255#post262255) thread...

The main problem is that the move isn't taught as a lead; it's taught as a signal (gentle push down on shoulder) and reaction (follower ducks under). This has one or two problems:
- both partners have to know the signal and response
- both partners have to have the same understanding of what the signal is
- the signal has to be clear and different from the rest of the leading/move (if the hand normally rests on the follower's shoulder, how can a gentle push down be differentiated?)
- the signal has to be given with enough time for the follower to process it is a signal, work out what it means, then act on it
- if the follower dosn't know/understand the signal, then the lead should have a backup escape route; the only one from this move is to collect the follower's nose with the inside of the elbow
- the lead expects that if a signal is given, then it's now up to the follower to execute the remainder of the move; the lead should actually be trying to ease the move by raising the elbow as much as required rather than simply keeping it fxed in air.

...there are a few other arguments against a signal, but these are the main ones: basically the only moves that should have signals should be arials where you've practiced with a partner and they know that specific signal.

{and :yeah: to DJ}

[NZ Monkey]

Interesting responses to the question of signalling there.

I don't really see what the big deal is about them. If both partners *do* know the signal then it's all well and good.

A gentle push in your quoted section is a physical lead rather than a visual signal. The woman can either follow it or not, but it's still up to the man to make the lead as obvious as possible without getting rough or dangerous.

As to the rest of those points, a visual signal is there to give the poor woman as much time and warning as you can muster in a transition. She doesn't have to instantly recognise what she has to do - the man still has to lead her through the move as it progresses. What it does do is give her advance warning of what move the guy is going to do so that she doesn't resist when it turns out to different from what she might otherwise expect. I'm sure a woman would appreciate that kind of warning if you were going for a Nosebleed. With practice, it takes no time at all to process what signals mean much like we don't have to think what the red light on the pole in the road means when driving.

Sure, you need to have both parties know what the signals mean to use them perfectly. If the follower doesn't know what the signals mean then one of three things will usually happen.

1) You lead the move anyway, and she manages to follow your perfect lead flawlessly. Congratulations.

2) You lead the move, but the follower obviously thinks you're leading something else. Proceed with the move she thinks you were leading and keep on going. It's only dancing after all, and just because you're the ''leader'' doesn't mean you shouldn't have to follow yourself once and a while.

3) The follower notices, stops dancing completely and asks you what you mean by that signal rather than waiting until after the track or ignoring it.

In my experience, option one occasionally happens (usually only with very good dancers) and option two is by far the most common.

It isn't as if any good visual signals leave either party a mile away from something fairly basic to revert to if there is confusion (although I just had an image of myself standing on one leg with my foot behind my head looking disappointed when my dance partner just stands there staring at me like I was a freak...:whistle: ). At least none I know of, so I politely suggest that when option three happens it's more an issue with the dancer than the use of a signal.

I don't see any problem with using signals myself. They give a couple more options, and if one doesn't know them then it isn't the end of the world. I suspect that experienced dance partners give each other signal all the time to let their partner know what’s coming up, even if they are subconscious ones.

Incidentally, a good example is the difference between a Yoyo and the Secret Move. The physical leads are the same (i.e. movements and positioning), but the difference is the offering of the hand by the leaders right hip. That's the sort of thing I usually mean by a visual cue. If the follower misses it, it was a Yoyo :wink:


...hang on....I just got pulled into an easily avoidable signal discussion. Doh!:tears:

[David Franklin]

I don't really see what the big deal is about them. If both partners *do* know the signal then it's all well and good. I would say that the fundamental problem with signalling is that there's no feedback loop. If a lead is misunderstood, you can see/feel that and take corrective action - maybe add a bit more tension, or change the direction of the lead. You then see her reaction to that and can decide "OK, problem sorted" or alternatively "OK, she really doesn't want to do that, better do something else". If a signal is misunderstood, the best you can hope for is to recognize that and do something else instead.

A secondary (but related) problem is that signals are typically non-intuitive. That is, the only reason the man tapping his right shoulder is the signal for a supergirl is because someone decided it should be. As such, there is no reason someone else might use that signal for a G-lift, or a first move jump, or a half-moon. I don't have the same problem with offering a hand as a signal, because it's fairly obvious what the follower is supposed to do, and it's also fairly obvious if she hasn't done it.

What it does do is give her advance warning of what move the guy is going to do so that she doesn't resist when it turns out to different from what she might otherwise expect. I'm sure a woman would appreciate that kind of warning if you were going for a Nosebleed.Yes there are times when advance warning is nice, but I find that is pretty much exclusively for the larger aerials. The only "signal" I'd give for a Nosebleed is to increase the strength of the connection (and possibly the handhold), but then I only dance it with people who trust me. Of course, someone who didn't trust me would be pretty stupid to do a Nosebleed just because they thought I'd signalled it.


Sure, you need to have both parties know what the signals mean to use them perfectly. If the follower doesn't know what the signals mean then one of three things will usually happen.

~ examples snipped ~Of course, the fourth thing that can happen is that someone will see the signal, think it means something completely different, and throw themselves into an aerial when you weren't expecting it. (Or conversely, the follow think it's a signal for something else and find herself thrown into an aerial when she wasn't expecting it). I know people this has happened to. If you use signals, you must make sure you agree on them beforehand. In this country, where there are so many different styles and conventions, anything else is irresponsible.

[NZ Monkey]

I would say that the fundamental problem with signalling is that there's no feedback loop. If a lead is misunderstood, you can see/feel that and take corrective action - maybe add a bit more tension, or change the direction of the lead. You then see her reaction to that and can decide "OK, problem sorted" or alternatively "OK, she really doesn't want to do that, better do something else". If a signal is misunderstood, the best you can hope for is to recognize that and do something else instead.
I think we may talking at cross purposes a little here. I wouldn't dream of using a signal and then just letting the follow throw herself into something. There still needs to be a physical lead to provide that feedback as well. I don't disagree.


A secondary (but related) problem is that signals are typically non-intuitive. That is, the only reason the man tapping his right shoulder is the signal for a supergirl is because someone decided it should be. As such, there is no reason someone else might use that signal for a G-lift, or a first move jump, or a half-moon. I don't have the same problem with offering a hand as a signal, because it's fairly obvious what the follower is supposed to do, and it's also fairly obvious if she hasn't done it.

Yes there are times when advance warning is nice, but I find that is pretty much exclusively for the larger aerials. The only "signal" I'd give for a Nosebleed is to increase the strength of the connection (and possibly the handhold), but then I only dance it with people who trust me. Of course, someone who didn't trust me would be pretty stupid to do a Nosebleed just because they thought I'd signalled it. I did notice that all of your examples are are aerials there. The Nosebleed example I just used to make a point about moves that could go badly wrong. I've never seen it taught with a specific signal above the physical lead either. You do state that you only dance it with people who trust you, but would you do it to someone who trusted you....and you weren't sure if they knew the technique? I suspect most follows wouldn't let you (or me, or...) get as far as the fall if they didn't.


Of course, the fourth thing that can happen is that someone will see the signal, think it means something completely different, and throw themselves into an aerial when you weren't expecting it. (Or conversely, the follow think it's a signal for something else and find herself thrown into an aerial when she wasn't expecting it). I know people this has happened to. If you use signals, you must make sure you agree on them beforehand. In this country, where there are so many different styles and conventions, anything else is irresponsible.Absolutely agree, but again I'll reiterate that there is still the physical lead as well and if either parties feel something going wrong then they should just abort. There has to be a certain degree of personal resposibility and caution from both parties when doing anything potentially dangerous on the dance floor, so throwing yourself into moves or not waiting to be sure your partner is ready for them are the 8th and 9th deadly sins in my books. Signal or no signal.

[LMC]

Welcome to the dark side.

What's your opinion on First Move footwork NZM?

[David Bailey]

I did notice that all of your examples are are aerials there. The Nosebleed example I just used to make a point about moves that could go badly wrong.
Because they're the most obvious example of immediate and dramatic damage.

Any move can cause injury if it goes wrong - shoulder injuries, back pain, etc. Drops are of course the obvious candidate for these. Backhanders and Archie Spins are also dodgy in my book - anything where the ladies arm goes into a half-nelson has to be treated with caution.

OK, except the Straighjacket when I do it, of course... :innocent:


I suspect most follows wouldn't let you (or me, or...) get as far as the fall if they didn't.
I've seen plenty of followers literally throw themselves at the floor, unfortunately. And even if the follower gets caught, it can put a strain on the leader's back.

Maybe I'm just old and frail (OK then, I am just old and frail), but I've seen a lot of injuries caused by minor misinterpretations. I caused a major groin strain injury on one person, simply by twisting her slightly the wrong way during a freestyle - and I'm an experienced lead, and she's a highly skilled follow.

Be careful out there, in other words.

[David Franklin]

I think we may talking at cross purposes a little here. I wouldn't dream of using a signal and then just letting the follow throw herself into something. It's not that easy to stop a follow throwing herself into something. Particularly if you didn't even know she was going to interpret the signal in a particular way. Yes, throwing yourself into a drop without being sure the lead is ready for you is stupid. It is also, in my experience, far more common amongst dancers who rely on signals. There's a recurrent joke on this forum along the lines of "I was dancing with an Australian, scratched my nose, and she jumped onto my shoulder!".


I did notice that all of your examples are are aerials there. The thing is, that signal is the canonical example of why signals are bad in this country. Because I have seen that signal taught for all of those moves except the G-lift. (Conversely, I'd say the G-lift is the most logical move to associate with a tap on the shoulder - but as very few people do it, it doesn't figure).

The Nosebleed example I just used to make a point about moves that could go badly wrong. I've never seen it taught with a specific signal above the physical lead either. You do state that you only dance it with people who trust you, but would you do it to someone who trusted you....and you weren't sure if they knew the technique? I suspect most follows wouldn't let you (or me, or...) get as far as the fall if they didn't.Yes, if they don't know the technique, most follows will balk at doing the face plant. That's not a big problem. The problem is the followers who know the move, think they see a signal, and decide "I'll do a nosebleed", regardless of what the guy actually leads afterwards.

Now you are actually right in saying you often want to signal "pay attention, in a moment, I'm going to ask you to do something odd. Trust me." That is generally signalled by changing the grip and or strength of connection. Often there's a practical reason for it, but sometimes it really is just a signal. Grey area, but I'm OK with it. What I'm far less keen on are specific signals that say "I want you to do X", because the danger is the follow will do X even if you have to change your mind.

The way MJ has evolved in this country is: "if you can't lead it without signalling, don't dance it". (With the proviso you can do what you like with a regular partner). The emphasis seems to be different down under. I remember when Simon de Lisle came over back in 99 he taught a load of moves involving signals. I also remember Viktor and Lydia reworking some of them so you could actually lead them. :grin:


There has to be a certain degree of personal resposibility and caution from both parties when doing anything potentially dangerous on the dance floor, so throwing yourself into moves or not waiting to be sure your partner is ready for them are the 8th and 9th deadly sins in my books. Signal or no signal.Easy to say, but not so easy to practice. Even at the highest level (world rock'n'roll champs) accidents have occurred because of the two dancers getting confused about what the next move will be.

[Gadget]

Absolutely agree, but again I'll reiterate that there is still the physical lead as well and if either parties feel something going wrong then they should just abort.
Signaling also has one main problem that has not really been discussed: it gets the follower into the mental habit of anticipating. Look for a signal and then execute the move - movement a,b,c,d and e.

Personally I disslike dancing with followers who anticipate. And teaching moves with signalling seems to me to be the perfect way to encourage this behaviour rather than disscouraging it.

{BTW I have had a lady injure themselves because they thought I had signaled a move and threw themselves backwards. :tears: not good.}