Quote Originally Posted by Gadget View Post
But I am often told that the 'slot' can rotate in WCS: By rotating the follower you are rotating the slot.
You can rotate your follower and not move the slot, although the only times I've seen this personally is in routines, or in freestyle with the same couple that performed said routine. I'd say this case is very much the exception rather than the rule.

You can rotate the slot if you choose to, although there is really no reason to do so socially unless there is a floorcraft issue. Again, this is an exception. I've done this myself a total of perhaps five or six times in a little over a year.


Quote Originally Posted by Gadget
And that the "slot" is a shared slot where both dancers move sideways equally to 'share' the slot on parallel moves.
There are a few schools of thought on the issue. The "LA" way is to share a shoulder width slot. In passes and conventional whips this is done by rotating your upper body as you pass each other, rather than the man actually stepping off this.

Dancers who learned WCS from a Country and Western background (including the likes of Robert Roysten and John Lindo) tend to break away and step out of the slot more.

I'm not sure I can put my finger on it, but *something* looks different again from the dancers I've seen from the East Coast, but at the moment that's a small enough sample that I can't be sure it's more than individual variation.

Quote Originally Posted by Gadget
In MJ if I lead you towards me, I expect you to move towards me. If I lead you away I expect you to move away. If I am in the way of where I lead you, I expect to be trampled. If I lead you to the same place I am moving to, I expect a collision. Does the "slot" of WCS change any of that?
It tends to discipline the movement. This isn't an issue with very good followers, but for a large proportion "forward" in practice means "foward, and somewhere within a 20 degree arc to the side - probably the left one".


Quote Originally Posted by Gadget
instead of the follower "flashlighting" their partner, they "flashlight" the slot and it's up to the lead to stand in that spotlight… is this correct?
No. The whole idea is to keep you chests parallel to maintain a connection (physically, visually and dare I say it...emotionally). That's impossible doing what you're describing. Both the Leaders and the Followers rotate their upper body through the dance to maintain this connection most of the time.

Quote Originally Posted by Gadget
…But anyway, I fail to see the relevance this 'rule' of WCS has to the lead: It shouldn't matter if you could move back, front, side-ways, up or down – the lead should be able to lead you where they intend you to be.
I think it does matter, and in a slightly unexpected way.

On one hand it's almost a crutch. If you partner knows that forward only means forward your lead doesn't have to be as precise as it would otherwise to lead them forward.

On the other hand, having the guide there effectively gives you both partners more common ground to work on. From a Leaders point of view I have not only an extra tool in my tool box, but one which leaves the rest of my body free for other tasks.

Theoretically there's nothing stopping a MJ couple achieving the same effect without having similar guidelines to work within. Practically speaking it's extremely difficult however, and I don't know that any couple in MJ circles has even come near achieving a similar effect without restricting their personal dance style in some similar way.

Quote Originally Posted by Gadget
I was under the impression that the 'slot' doesn't end until tension is re-established?
The slot ends after the post has been set, which isn't at the very end of the pattern. Tension or "leverage" (I hate that term for it, but when in Rome....) is created by connecting through that post on the anchour step. Under double resistance, the end of the slot is hit hard at the post rather than connection being built over the next few beats.

To be fair, some (very good) people teach followers to travel the anchor so I can where your coming from here. The more mainstream philosophy is that the dancers centres settle away from each other on the anchour step, but the shift is smaller than the first group I mentioned.


Quote Originally Posted by Gadget
...again I don't think that this has any relevance to the lead for this move.
(Although I'm not convinced that I would like to dance with a 'weightless' follower that would continue moving until I stopped them or they bumped into the side of the space-ship.)
It's kind of disturbing, but thankfully the very few dancers I know who feel like this are fantastic.

Quote Originally Posted by Gadget
But it's not a turn (360º); it's a pivot (90º). And for that there is no need to raise the hand in the lead - it is even more difficult to turn under the hand when it's at hip height!
As Martin Harper has said, in a sugar tuck the follower turn 360 degrees over four beats.