Do you dislike the First Move? Should it be an intermediate move?

[happygoldfish]

I've never really liked the First Move. It doesn't seem to fit in with the the other moves.

I'm an intermediate, but I hardly ever do the First Move in freestyle unless it was in the beginners lesson earlier.

O.K., now that I am swimming in these dangerous waters: I don't much like the First Move, (which I was taught Ceroc style; btw the only move in my tiny repertoire which I dislike more is the neckbreak). It just feels wrong. And as for which foot to step back on, as a follow, it was usually the right, although the demo stepped back on her left. Now, how I am supposed to know......never mind the Columbian, how ridiculous is "psssst! First Move! step back on your left" .
So for a while I was doing my confused little soft shoe routine, (getting out of sync), to try and copy the demo. For a very short while. Then I just "made do" with whatever foot had gone back. But I still frequently get the feeling of being wrong-footed. The "correct way" depends on the instructor; I have been told left back, right back, and doesn't matter.
Now that I know there are variations of the basic First Move, my partner and I can try and search out one that feels right to us.

I was prompted by reading the above into wondering whether beginners generally dislike the First Move. So:

Do you like the First Move?
What problems do you have with it?
Do you find that people you dance with don't do it the way it is taught?
Do followers find that different leaders lead the First Move differently?
Would you prefer not to meet it until the intermediate lessons?
etcetera.

Helloooo beginners!

[DavidY]

Helloooo beginners!

Oops - probably not one of them any more..

When I'm taxiing, I will sometimes try and lead Beginners' moves which weren't in the lesson.

There are many Beginners' moves which people just follow. However if someone hasn't seen the First Move before, chances are that they won't follow it properly (could be due to my poor leading, of course). The Shoulder Drop is another tricky one.

So I reckon the First Move isn't the most "natural" move.

[nebula]

I liked it being a follower, and being a leader in the beginners class, quite like it, too. It's an easy move to lead and to follow - have no problem with it from either position, and like variations of it, ie 1st move pushspin, and 1st move into catapult, etc...

[JCB]

Thank you for starting this thread, HappyGoldfish: the one that has migrated to "intermediate" got too complex for me!

First Move, from my (beginner follower) point of view doesn't actually teach me much. I am too busy dodging errant feet, arms, and elbows. The majority of ankle kicks and toe stomps have been during this move. I have been elbowed in the stomach when a bloke who had just led me forward and slightly to his left, realised I was supposed to be on his right, and mid-step, tried to push me there, and caught me sharply with his right forearm. I do not like First Move!
But I can see now that it is an important stepping stone in MJ.

Ducasi said it was not a complex move, but that hasn't been my experience. So, how has it been taught? The wording is important: for example, the Ceroc instructor said to lead the lady forward and to your right as you step forward, so you end up side by side like this. The Leroc instructor said to lead the lady forward while you step diagonally forward and to your left, (and yes, they ended up "side by side like this" :-).

Or perhaps wording isn't so important, because it was quickly forgotten, when the lead realized he didn't remember where his right hand was supposed to be. And then when that right hand is under control, it all goes pear-shaped again, as the lead, who has been repeating the mantra :"left hand to shoulder," so he could remember how to start the whole thing off, comes close to smacking his partner in the face on the "turn out".
As I remember it, Leroc and Ceroc parted company at this point. The Ceroc instructor asked for a lead that turned the follower in place, on her left foot, with the aim being that the pair end up side by side, facing opposite directions, as they had been before the "turn out". But there was no mention of footwork for the leads. As a follower, I am not sure, but I think it is because the men need to step that left foot forward again to get into a proper side-by-side position, and some don't, that I often end up "kitty-corner" to the lead, rather than directly beside him. And if the lead manages to get that side-by-side position right, the follower has an unusual turn to perform, travelling during the turn (at close quarters), from beside the man, back in front of him, (plenty of opportunity for ankle-clips here). Sometimes, (especially if the leader's hand has left the hip of the follower), instead of leading this travelling turn, he may turn towards the lady, to accommodate her top turn, and the pair end up at right angles to the rest of the class.

I am afraid I don’t remember the wording used in the LeRoc classes, but in that version I end up in front of the lead, in a sort of quasi ballroom hold, so I think the lead must move his right foot back and to the right. The top turn is then in place.

Now I am confused. People have been promoting “First Move” as a way to get into more advanced closed-position moves. But as Happy goldfish has pointed out, the Ceroc version doesn’t have a closed-position. So let me get this straight: Ceroc teaches a version (which seems, in my experience anyway, one of the more difficult moves to get the hang of), which somehow changes significantly once leaders are deemed intermediate? Forget that awkward second side-by-side bit, so you can add some closed-position moves? I think I am missing something here.

One worrying point: because this move can go wrong in so many complex and subtle (or not so subtle ) ways, and the nature of the lessons doesn’t allow enough time and personal attention to iron things out, beginner leads seem to settle into the closest facsimile they can manage, and it becomes ingrained (who said “practice makes permanent, not necessarily perfect”…or something like that? ) Aack!

Back to teaching it: Part of the problem is that with the Ceroc (and most LeRoc?) “no course, join when you like” format (which I really, really like, she hastens to add: due to our circumstances, we couldn’t afford to learn to dance without it), an instructor can't control at what point in their learning curve the beginner leaders are introduced to "First Move," My bruises and I feel very strongly that it should be at least a few weeks along, when they have some small familiarity with the basics. But since you can't control that, I can only see two options:

1)Spend a whole beginners' lesson going through the First Move. Oh yeah, I can see the first-timers hurrying back the next week after that!
2)Save the First Move for intermediate. But then you can get leaders being taught variations before the basic version!
Help! What is the answer?

...or you could ignore this post altogether?: I have noticed the lack of beginners flocking here to tell of First Move mishaps, so I guess I am an exception. Or perhaps here in Bucks there is a concentration of MJ Numptiness?

[whitetiger1518]

I know I'm not a beginner..
However:

JCB How much room did you have when you got all these bruises? I have experience mainly in Ceilidh and Country Dancing (apart from MJ I mean) and I have often seen some lovely dances that got squashed, briused or just spoilt by too little room to turn. I can remember feeling like I was at the Dodgems for some dances - and for others when I couldn't avoid it, I got stood on or kicked.

In MJ, I love the First move... Even if it is the basic move with no variation, it allows a little play particularly as your balance is helped by the Leader having a strong posture.

At the moment I am attempting to sort out how to position my free arm and leg when doing the pivot at the moment and I occasionally try a deep dip if I am given enough support too.
Swirly skirts can really make such an ordinary move look lovely too!

Sorry if I went off topic

Whitetiger

[JCB]

I know I'm not a beginner..

Good! then you can help!

JCB How much room did you have when you got all these bruises?

It varied. But the worst two (the elbow, and a toe-stomping) happened with plenty of room to manouevre. The toe-stomper pulled me round in front of him after the turn-out, and stepped forward, with his eyes on the stage. Squish. Ouch.

In MJ, I love the First move...<snip>... Swirly skirts can really make such an ordinary move look lovely too!

Don't get me wrong: I would like the move (especially LeRoc style) if I only ever danced it with really good leads. But it is one of my beginners-class nightmares!...and that has put me off it.

[ducasi]

Now I am confused. People have been promoting “First Move” as a way to get into more advanced closed-position moves. But as Happy goldfish has pointed out, the Ceroc version doesn’t have a closed-position. So let me get this straight: Ceroc teaches a version (which seems, in my experience anyway, one of the more difficult moves to get the hang of), which somehow changes significantly once leaders are deemed intermediate? Forget that awkward second side-by-side bit, so you can add some closed-position moves? I think I am missing something here.

From the "turn out" position in the First Move (which is what I mean when I, and presumably others, say "First Move position") the leader and follower have their respective right and left arms in a ballroom-ish position – man's hand on lady's back, lady's hand on man's shoulder.

From there the conventional First Move turns the lady back so they are side by side again. However, if instead of turning the lady back a full 180º, the man instead turns her only 90º and turns himself 90º, then we have a closed position.

From here lots of possibilities open up, including penguins, pivots, columbians, "basic dips" (which aren't actual dips), etc...

So, yes, the First Move changes when adding things to it, but not significantly.


There is another way to get into a slightly more open closed position from the first move, one which is ideal for doing Manhattans and such, and that is for the man to follow the lady as he turns her out so he is facing her, in the closed position, man's left foot forward, lady's right foot back.

Hope this isn't too complex, but is understandable and helps.

[drathzel]

Personally i love the first move, you can build on it or keep it as it is. Its nice to lead and lovely to follow. Also i find its a great "comfort zone" move for beginners.

For the lady the first move footwork is useful as it gets you moving in and out, pivoting, tranfering the weight and also keeping returning to the orginal spot.

For men it helps with lead and gets the guy moving back and forward

[JCB]

<snip>...if instead of turning the lady back a full 180º, the man instead turns her only 90º and turns himself 90º, then we have a closed position....<snip>...There is another way to get into a slightly more open closed position from the first move, one which is ideal for doing Manhattans and such, and that is for the man to follow the lady as he turns her out so he is facing her, in the closed position, man's left foot forward, lady's right foot back.

At least I think I get the idea. It certainly makes the move seem more useful to me, anyway. But that begs the question: why isn't one of these, (or a similar version) taught in the beginner class, (call it "First Move- Variant" or "First Move- Basic" if you want to avoid annoying purists), and save the vintage version for the intermediate class?

[ducasi]

But that begs the question: why isn't one of these, (or a similar version) taught in the beginner class, (call it "First Move- Variant" or "First Move- Basic" if you want to avoid annoying purists), and save the vintage version for the intermediate class?

These versions get you into the closed position – and then what?

Ceroc don't currently teach any closed position moves to beginners – perhaps because they can be quite scary. I'm no beginner any more, and I can find closed position quite scary!

As I've said elsewhere, I think Ceroc should teach a different First Move – the one taught by Amir where there is no "turn in". But that's a different discussion...

[JCB]

No beginner steps: forgot that. We were taught mambo steps, and a five-step Columbian in our small LeRoc class.

As I've said elsewhere, I think Ceroc should teach a different First Move – the one taught by Amir where there is no "turn in".

Got to get to one of his workshops, (once they start up in September...really hoping we will be ready by then; eternal optimist, me )
Ooops.
The person below me is back on topic.

[happygoldfish]

Ooh! That's me! Erm, where was I? Ah! …

Thank you for starting this thread, HappyGoldfish: the one that has migrated to "intermediate" got too complex for me!

Hello again, JCB! I thought you'd got lost in the intermediate jungle!

Ducasi said it was not a complex move, but that hasn't been my experience.

Exactly! There's so many ways it can go wrong. And does! By comparison, the octopus is easy even for a follower who hasn't done it in the lesson.

So let me get this straight: Ceroc teaches a version (which seems, in my experience anyway, one of the more difficult moves to get the hang of), which somehow changes significantly once leaders are deemed intermediate? Forget that awkward second side-by-side bit, so you can add some closed-position moves? I think I am missing something here.

Brilliant!

{snip some good bits} … beginner leads seem to settle into the closest facsimile they can manage … {snip some more}

Yes. There's so many different ways to do it wrong (of course, I never do it wrong). And almost no going back.
Each beginner lead is in his own little universe, with a different broken symmetry.

The toe-stomper pulled me round in front of him after the turn-out, and stepped forward, with his eyes on the stage. Squish. Ouch.

Ceroc recently introduced the beginners' Cerocspin instead of the Lady Spin, because beginner followers complained that the Lady Spin caused injuries.

…a ballroom-ish position …

Now I've seen everything! ballroom-ish!
That's like saying that a dog is cat-ish.
It's definitely not a ballroom position (argentine tango, maybe).

From there the conventional First Move turns the lady back so they are side by side again. However, if instead of turning the lady back a full 180º, the man instead turns her only 90º and turns himself 90º, then we have a closed position.

From here lots of possibilities open up, including penguins, pivots, columbians, "basic dips" (which aren't actual dips), etc...

So, yes, the First Move changes when adding things to it, but not significantly.

There is another way to get into a slightly more open closed position from the first move, one which is ideal for doing Manhattans and such, and that is for the man to follow the lady as he turns her out so he is facing her, in the closed position, man's left foot forward, lady's right foot back.

Ah! Now I get it. You regard the essence of the First Move as being Count 2 (your ballroom-ish position). But I think most people would regard it as Counts 3 and 4 (the turn-out and turn-back).

It's Counts 3 and 4 which cause the difficulties (and the injuries) for beginners.
So why not ditch them?

As I've said elsewhere, I think Ceroc should teach a different First Move – the one taught by Amir where there is no "turn in". But that's a different discussion...

So you do want to ditch Counts 3 and 4?
Or is it just Count4?

To return to topic …
Have other beginners been injured in the First Move? Or any other move?
Tell us the gory details!

Helloooo beginners!

[David Bailey]

Now I've seen everything! ballroom-ish!
That's like saying that a dog is cat-ish.
It's definitely not a ballroom position (argentine tango, maybe).

Errr... no?

Ah! Now I get it. You regard the essence of the First Move as being Count 2 (your ballroom-ish position). But I think most people would regard it as Counts 3 and 4 (the turn-out and turn-back).

It's Counts 3 and 4 which cause the difficulties (and the injuries) for beginners.
So why not ditch them?

They're ugly, provide nothing, and break up the connection.

[ducasi]

Ah! Now I get it. You regard the essence of the First Move as being Count 2 (your ballroom-ish position). But I think most people would regard it as Counts 3 and 4 (the turn-out and turn-back).

No, if count 2 is the "step in (side to side)" position, that's not the essence of the First Move – it's count 3, the "turn out" position. At this point we have the "ballroom-ish" hold in that the man's right hand is on the ladies back, her left hand is on his shoulder, and the man's left hand is holding her right hand.

It's ballroom"-ish" in that it's a sloppy version of the normal ballroom hold, and in ballroom terms it's an open position, though in Ceroc terms it's not as open as the typical single-handed "step back" position, which is why I've termed it "semi-closed" – literally "half-way to closed".

It's Counts 3 and 4 which cause the difficulties (and the injuries) for beginners.
So why not ditch them?

So you do want to ditch Counts 3 and 4?
Or is it just Count4?

The First Move as taught by Amir ditches count 4 – instead of a turn back in, the lady steps straight back out turning under the man's arm as usual. There are subtle other differences, such as it's made more slotted, so the man gets out of the way of the lady, and she travels in a straight line in and out.

A common refinement to the first move also changes count 2, the "step in (side to side)" position. (Aside: Do Ceroc teach that the man takes his hand to his shoulder at this point? I think they do. If anyone can give a good reason for doing so, please let me know!)

In this version of the First Move, the step in and turn out become fused together so that the lady is already turning on the count and the whole thing becomes smoother.

It's hard to describe in words, and for that reason I think it may be harder to teach though than a First Move with a definite position on count 2.

That's why I'd support teaching Amir's First Move in place of the Ceroc First Move, but not the First Move as I do it.

Hope this clarifies things.

[ducasi]

Got to get to one of his workshops, (once they start up in September...really hoping we will be ready by then; eternal optimist, me )

I recommend Amir's Jango DVD – both entertaining and educational. Google for it.

[whitetiger1518]

Don't get me wrong: I would like the move (especially LeRoc style) if I only ever danced it with really good leads. But it is one of my beginners-class nightmares!...and that has put me off it.

Easy way to solve your problem then Come up here and dance with some of the Central Belt guys. I can say from experience that to dance with them (particularly the Glasgow Guys ) creates an addiction for every dance move - including the First Move, all its various extensions and versions.

Come up and have a holiday with us and enjoy the lovely leads

Whitetiger

[tsh]

As a lead, I expect everyone to be able to follow a first move, and the only followers I really struggle with are those who refuse to step towards me and turn the move into an open sway sort of thing.

It's not really clear what the objection is that is being discussed on this thread. Is it that beginner men can't lead the move? In freestyle or in a class?

Beginner followers appear to make the move difficult by making each beat of the move very sharp and trying to rush the turn out and back, which I guess might be a result of there normally being no assistance from the lead between beats 2 and 4.

Sean

[David Bailey]

Hmmm... it almost seems like we've got a consensus, in that the "step out and back" bits are both awkward and difficult?

[ducasi]

Hmmm... it almost seems like we've got a consensus, in that the "step out and back" bits are both awkward and difficult?

The turn out and back bits, yeah, could be better. The First Move position itself is fundamental.

[Franck]

Hmmm... it almost seems like we've got a consensus, in that the "step out and back" bits are both awkward and difficult?

Awkward and difficult maybe, though i would imagine that depended on each dancers. Some will find it the most natural thing (indeed many followers throw themselves into the 'step out and back' even on their first night whether led or not...).

My take on the this thread, and the First Move, is that I like the move and that over the last 15 years, I have never had anyone complain about it. Many dancers like it and as mentioned several times, it is a great springboard for many variations.

Before considering any radical changes to the moves, you have to consider the alternatives. Stepping in side by side on beat 2 is very straightforward but what else would you do once there? A side pivot and replace seems as good an option as any of the alternative I've heard.
Using 'Amir's' version, where you remove the pivot back in place and lead the lady through is not easy either as it involves correct placement for the men and slotted directional leading for the guys, both simple for experienced dancers but very difficult for beginners.

The pivot out and in on beats 3 and 4 is also a useful repetition of the ladies' footwork for the Yoyo, so provides re-inforcement of good pivoting technique.

The First Move has more variations than any other moves, which I believe is a testament to its usefulness and I don't think that it should be removed from the Beginners Curriculum because it's not as easy as some other moves.