Why is any particular lead technique important?

[timbp]

There are different techniques for leading a dance. Not being restrictive about defining "lead", they might include leading with the body, leading with the arms, hand signals, or a caller telling everyone what to do next.

I can understand how a body lead may well be inherently smoother and gentler than an arm lead. But if somebody can lead smoothly and gently with the arms, why criticise them for not leading with the body?

Earlier I posted this conversation dialogue, which is as accurate as I can make it after 24 hours.

Partner: "Can you try to stop using your hand to lead?"
Me: "Was I doing that? Sorry. I've had a couple of years learning to lead with the hand on my partner's back."
Partner: "You learned well. It's a really small, subtle movement, and it's giving me a really clear lead. But you're not supposed to be doing it in tango, and it's distracting me from following your chest."

So the lead was small, subtle, and clear. The follower knew exactly where I wanted her. She was being guided, not yanked or pushed. So why does it matter if the lead is from the hand rather than the chest?




(I'd like the discussion to focus on lead technique, not tango versus WCS verus MJ. If you think the real answer to the question above is "it's not tango", then you need to explain how and why figures done with one technique are tango and the same figures done with a different technique are not [and similarly for any other dance if you want to say "dance X is led that way"].)

(I'm hoping for some serious discussion that is more interesting than forum plants. I've never found plants very exciting -- all they do is start green, gradually go brown, and drop leaves all over the carpet until I throw them out.)

[Lee Bartholomew]

In answer to your question why is it important. It's not.

Most people who go dancing do not have a really good lead technique. They just go through the process of performing the moves without thinking about it.

So if we change the question to what makes a good lead technique then the answers will be a bit different.

Personally I feel that a good lead technique is to have a clear direction which you are taking the lady to. I always try to bring the lady forward and have me move in to position, even with moves like the first move. This also helps slottedness

I have also recently found that if I get un unconfidant follow or someone who is bouncy, counting the beats with a twist of the wrist smoothes them out abit. No idea how or why that works but it does.

[johnnyman]

Lead is about clarity, not control.

Often, if you have a strong body lead, as you do in WCS, you can actually go in directions with your dancing that you never dreamed of before, but also it is about creating the right amount of tension and relaxation.

Additionally, thinking one move or signal ahead is a good help and executing a move slightly earlier so you can mould the move to wherever you are going, especially on pretzels and leading into dips. There are about three or four factors in my thinking before executing one of the more stylish dips.

Having soft hands on the back or holding the ladies hands is also good. I still think the 'no thumbs' rule in Ceroc applies in all manner of things, but also the closed position in WCS is a great asset, particularly using the hand on the shoulder blade.

[ducasi]

Arm/hand leads take longer to send and be received than body leads, and so result in a less-well connected dance.

[angelblue]

There are different techniques for leading a dance. Not being restrictive about defining "lead", they might include leading with the body, leading with the arms, hand signals, or a caller telling everyone what to do next.

I can understand how a body lead may well be inherently smoother and gentler than an arm lead. But if somebody can lead smoothly and gently with the arms, why criticise them for not leading with the body?

Earlier I posted this conversation dialogue, which is as accurate as I can make it after 24 hours.


So the lead was small, subtle, and clear. The follower knew exactly where I wanted her. She was being guided, not yanked or pushed. So why does it matter if the lead is from the hand rather than the chest?




(I'd like the discussion to focus on lead technique, not tango versus WCS verus MJ. If you think the real answer to the question above is "it's not tango", then you need to explain how and why figures done with one technique are tango and the same figures done with a different technique are not [and similarly for any other dance if you want to say "dance X is led that way"].)

(I'm hoping for some serious discussion that is more interesting than forum plants. I've never found plants very exciting -- all they do is start green, gradually go brown, and drop leaves all over the carpet until I throw them out.)

Have you thought that it is actually your follower that was the problem? Maybe she prefers that type of lead over another for tango. It sounds to me that you led quite efficientley. In all dances it is about clarity and overall in my opinion feeling safe in the arms of my lead is paramount

[Caro]

I can understand how a body lead may well be inherently smoother and gentler than an arm lead. But if somebody can lead smoothly and gently with the arms, why criticise them for not leading with the body?

(...)

So the lead was small, subtle, and clear. The follower knew exactly where I wanted her. She was being guided, not yanked or pushed. So why does it matter if the lead is from the hand rather than the chest?

In your particular example, it just feels nicer for the follow. She only has to concentrate on her center following yours, which is hard enough, without having to worry about a lead that could from your hand as well.

Also, from an external point of view, there's a good chance that the dance will look more connected if you can lead her from your center rather than from your hand (when you lead from your hand this also means that your body is not necessarily oriented in the direction you want her to go to, which doesn't look at nice as when it is).

Nice to have some dance related discussion

[David Bailey]

Assuming you are discussing MJ leading, rather than any other dance:

I can understand how a body lead may well be inherently smoother and gentler than an arm lead. But if somebody can lead smoothly and gently with the arms, why criticise them for not leading with the body?

Because they'd (presumably) be even smoother and gentler with a body lead? Or because it simply "looks better"?

Most professional dance teachers talk about leading from the "centre" (wherever that is), so presumably they have good reasons for that.

On the "different dances" thing - different dances have different holds, and different conventions about leading. But AFAIK most / all of them at least allow a body-lead component. Even something like salsa, which is arm-focussed, can be led with the body as well.

[Franck]

I can understand how a body lead may well be inherently smoother and gentler than an arm lead. But if somebody can lead smoothly and gently with the arms, why criticise them for not leading with the body?

Ultimately and at the top level, there won't be a real difference. One of the Focus workshops I teach is on body vs arm leads and explains the difference.
At Intermediate level of competency, dancers are encouraged to use body leads to become smoother as hands and arms are potentially very fast (faster than a follower's body can follow), so by using body leads you are keeping your leads within safe parameters.

When you start applying musicality to your dancing, not just leading breaks but actually moving yourself musically independently of your partner, you will need to dissociate your body movement from the lead. In this case you would use arm / hand lead but they would still feel like a body lead. This allows you to add footwork, syncopations and dissociation to your dancing without impacting on your partner's experience.

Ideally, your arm / hand lead would still feel like a 'body lead' i.e. be gentle, smooth, connected and suitable to the range of movements of your partner, so it is best to learn body lead so you can replicate it in your arm/hand leads.

[robd]

Ultimately and at the top level, there won't be a real difference. One of the Focus workshops I teach is on body vs arm leads and explains the difference.

Without wishing you to give away the secrets of your Focus workshop for free Franck, can you explain how, say, a first move would differ when arm-led as opposed to body-led? I think I know the difference but it's an area of leading where I am struggling a little in making the transition from Jive to WCS. What do we mean by arm-led? That the leader is leading the follower by her arms? Or that the leader is leading the follower with his arms? Or both? Or neither?

[Franck]

Without wishing you to give away the secrets of your Focus workshop for free Franck, can you explain how, say, a first move would differ when arm-led as opposed to body-led? I think I know the difference but it's an area of leading where I am struggling a little in making the transition from Jive to WCS. What do we mean by arm-led? That the leader is leading the follower by her arms? Or that the leader is leading the follower with his arms? Or both? Or neither?

No secrets there, I'm happy to share

Arm led referred to the leader using his arm to generate the lead (note that even with a 'body lead' the lead will be communicated via the arms if that's where the points of connection are). The follower will receive the lead via the connection or point of contact, so for the above it makes little difference whether it's her back, her arms her hand or indeed her foot.

What I was referring to is where the lead is generated. If the momentum comes from your centre (moving your chest forward for example) then you have used a body lead. If the lead is generated from an arm movement (pushing your partner back in the first beat of most Ceroc move) then you are using hand leads.

The First Move as taught at Ceroc classes would involve mostly hand leads as the leader is mirroring his partners movement (rather than paralleling her movements). A variation where the man steps back on his right foot on count 3 (as the followers pivots out) could be body led rather than hand led; even clearer if the leader steps forward towards his partner on his left foot following her in her step back and paralleling her pivot. The lead can very clearly be initiated from the body, rather than the hand/arm.

In WCS, the initial steps are mostly body led and generated from the leader moving down the slot (and taking his partner with him) or moving out of the slot generating forward momentum and rotation. I believe many advanced WCS dancers dissociate their body and lead from the hand to be able to achieve cool effect whilst their hand still appears to be leading a basic pattern (if the follower had her eyes shut for example).

[spindr]

Partner: "Can you try to stop using your hand to lead?"
Me: "Was I doing that? Sorry. I've had a couple of years learning to lead with the hand on my partner's back."
Partner: "You learned well. It's a really small, subtle movement, and it's giving me a really clear lead. But you're not supposed to be doing it in tango, and it's distracting me from following your chest."

Leading on the back will literally (and metaphorically) put pressure on your partner to move.

"Opening the chest" will not -- your partner has the choice to loiter (decorate) for as long as they like -- and then accept your invitation to move back to a heart-to-heart position.

A subtle difference but a key one.
SpinDr

[David Bailey]

Arm led referred to the leader using his arm to generate the lead (note that even with a 'body lead' the lead will be communicated via the arms if that's where the points of connection are).

Good point, I hadn't really thought about it that way before.

Very few "body leads" are actually led solely by the body - even in AT close hold there's arm contact.

[Caro]

Good point, I hadn't really thought about it that way before.

Very few "body leads" are actually led solely by the body - even in AT close hold there's arm contact.

Another way to think about it, is that unless there is center to center connection (AT close hold), it's your frame which will transmit your body lead, whether it is just a shoulder and an arm (MJ, WCS except close hold), or more, like in a ballroom hold or WCS close hold or a blues hold.

Sometimes guys try to 'body lead', i.e. they move their center, but their frame stays in place: the follow can't follow. Great if the lead wants to do isolations / syncopations of course, but very often they don't and still expect to the lady to follow (I'm thinking this is quite common with beginners at AT / blues, in an open hold).

[Amir]

So why does it matter if the lead is from the hand rather than the chest?
[/SIZE]

It feels better, looks smoother and creates more options.

[Thetruth]

There are different techniques for leading a dance. Not being restrictive about defining "lead", they might include leading with the body, leading with the arms, hand signals, or a caller telling everyone what to do next.

I can understand how a body lead may well be inherently smoother and gentler than an arm lead. But if somebody can lead smoothly and gently with the arms, why criticise them for not leading with the body?

Earlier I posted this conversation dialogue, which is as accurate as I can make it after 24 hours.


So the lead was small, subtle, and clear. The follower knew exactly where I wanted her. She was being guided, not yanked or pushed. So why does it matter if the lead is from the hand rather than the chest?




(I'd like the discussion to focus on lead technique, not tango versus WCS verus MJ. If you think the real answer to the question above is "it's not tango", then you need to explain how and why figures done with one technique are tango and the same figures done with a different technique are not [and similarly for any other dance if you want to say "dance X is led that way"].)

(I'm hoping for some serious discussion that is more interesting than forum plants. I've never found plants very exciting -- all they do is start green, gradually go brown, and drop leaves all over the carpet until I throw them out.)

I have been learning Tango for 12 months now. Not in a class environment but private lessons. The lead from the chest is vital to the style, and this is emphasised in classes and private lessons.
Now why, it is to do with the balance of your follow and critical to the lead. The follow does numerous moves and her or his weight (males leads also learn to follow in Tango) is centred. If the lead is from the hands then it is not centred as in a chest lead. Therefore, balance adjustments are constantly required because of the lead from the hands. Tango is not lead like in Cha Cha or Samba. Nor MJ or Ceroc (which are the same).
So it is best to do what the teacher advises, being that they are the teacher they do (or should) know more than the students about Tango. Dont confuse the style because you may feel the hand lead is better? Learn the style as it is taught then you will best represent that style when dancing it. Tango has been around for a long time, far longer than MJ. What you learnt in MJ is MJ not Tango.
Hope this helps, well done on trying to learn such a difficult dance style. One thing about Tango is building the mood in the dance, this can make a spectator intoxicated so its not about smiling as in MJ, regarding the character of the dance.

[Thetruth]

Ultimately and at the top level, there won't be a real difference. One of the Focus workshops I teach is on body vs arm leads and explains the difference.
At Intermediate level of competency, dancers are encouraged to use body leads to become smoother as hands and arms are potentially very fast (faster than a follower's body can follow), so by using body leads you are keeping your leads within safe parameters.

When you start applying musicality to your dancing, not just leading breaks but actually moving yourself musically independently of your partner, you will need to dissociate your body movement from the lead. In this case you would use arm / hand lead but they would still feel like a body lead. This allows you to add footwork, syncopations and dissociation to your dancing without impacting on your partner's experience.

Ideally, your arm / hand lead would still feel like a 'body lead' i.e. be gentle, smooth, connected and suitable to the range of movements of your partner, so it is best to learn body lead so you can replicate it in your arm/hand leads.

Just to clarify..............are you inferring this applies to Tango? Can I ask where or how you learnt the information above in Tango.

[Franck]

Just to clarify..............are you inferring this applies to Tango? Can I ask where or how you learnt the information above in Tango.

Well, I was answering in a MJ context, I should have made that clearer. However, what I said applies to Tango too, though as the close embrace creates connection from the chest, it would be impossible to initiate the lead from your arms. As I mentioned the lead will be communicated via the connection points, so if you are holding hands, you have a choice to initiate the lead from the body, or from the arms and done properly, the follower can't tell the difference. In a close hold connection (Tango, blues, etc.) the lead will be communicated body to body, so it would be ridiculous to attempt to initiate the lead from your arms (though I believe many beginner tango dancers who have done other dances such as MJ/Salsa/etc. find it difficult to adjust).

[David Bailey]

The lead from the chest is vital to the style, and this is emphasised in classes and private lessons.

I believe the lead is technically from the centre rather than from the chest. Now all I need to do is to find out where my centre is...

So it is best to do what the teacher advises, being that they are the teacher they do (or should) know more than the students about Tango.

Yes... but unfortunately lots of AT teachers say different things. For example, the 542 ways of leading the cross. Hence the need to sample lots of different teachers until you find someone who (in London) isn't Federico.

Anyway, whilst I'm all in favour of discussing AT in every thread, maybe this discussion is best continued in the "Learning Tango" thread?

[straycat]

Lead is about clarity, not control.

Often, if you have a strong body lead, as you do in WCS, you can actually go in directions with your dancing that you never dreamed of before, but also it is about creating the right amount of tension and relaxation.

No secrets there, I'm happy to share

I'm a bit reluctant to dive into this particular arena, as I find the concepts quite hard to articulate sometimes.... but here goes anyway.

Few things to add. It's quite possible to use body-leads to lead your partner in opposition to your own own direction of movement. There's a lovely lesson I had recently, in which I was shown, when holding the hand of a partner who's arm is completely relaxed and disconnected, and is not necessarily expecting any kind of move, how to instantly connect and lead a rock-step (while stepping back myself) in one movement. It's actually quite easy - if you body lead it. Arm leading it - I wouldn't have a hope.

Personally I don't go for the disassociation techniques as described here. Ideally, I prefer everything to be generate from the core, and I believe that one gets a far nicer lead that way. Certainly I would find it impossible to properly mimic a body lead with just the arm, and I'm not sure I'd want to - a fully connected body lead means that I can feel full feedback from my partner, can feel exactly what she's doing, and respond instantly with my whole body - if I've disassociated my arm, I'm not going to get that. Unless I've misunderstood what you're saying (quite possible). Do you actually mean that you disassociate the styling, maintaining core and frame so the lead is not affected? To me, that makes more sense.

In a similar vein - even if we're doing solo improvisations (while retaining a hand-hold), I don't want the arm disassociated - if I keep that connection, my partner can feel what I'm doing, work off that, and also 'request' support if she wants to do a move.

In summary, the more I learn in the way of body-leads / connection, the more I come to think that there's barely anything that can't be led with a body lead, and very little that wouldn't be improved by employing them.

[Franck]

Few things to add. It's quite possible to use body-leads to lead your partner in opposition to your own own direction of movement. There's a lovely lesson I had recently, in which I was shown, when holding the hand of a partner who's arm is completely relaxed and disconnected, and is not necessarily expecting any kind of move, how to instantly connect and lead a rock-step (while stepping back myself) in one movement. It's actually quite easy - if you body lead it. Arm leading it - I wouldn't have a hope.

I'm interested in how you achieved this. My guess is that you're using a visual connection, but it would be great if you could describe the above technique in more details.

Do you actually mean that you disassociate the styling, maintaining core and frame so the lead is not affected? To me, that makes more sense.

Yes, that's more what I meant, at no time would I lose the connection (core & frame).

In summary, the more I learn in the way of body-leads / connection, the more I come to think that there's barely anything that can't be led with a body lead, and very little that wouldn't be improved by employing them.

I agree with that, but I like to keep more options in my quiver and sometimes using a different type of lead initiation is more suitable to the dance.