Latin Lover and his wife Susan.
They are one of the few couples who hold my attention.
So watchable.
Looking at dance couples, in the MJ scene only.
Are there any couples who you think are the perfect match, as in the guy and girl are 100% of the same standard/ability/contribution to the dance.
I am thinking of the visual aspect.
Often, one is slightly better, or slightly more "with it" than the other.
I can only think of Clayton and Janine... as in your eyes go equally to Clayton and to Janine, and I would not say one is a bit better than the other.
Latin Lover and his wife Susan.
They are one of the few couples who hold my attention.
So watchable.
are we talking present or past?
Mr and Mrs Under Par
Mike and Linda Ellard
Rocky and Val
Mark and Rachelle
Dunno about Mike and Linda and I'd probably agree and Dave and Val but I totally disagree about Mark and Rachel and Mr/Mrs Underpar. They dance well as couples but have conflicting dance styles and I've seen them dance far better with other partners (it has been a while since ive seen them though). More so Mark and Rachel as Marks hip-hoppy style never did suit Rachels more balletic style as well.
Me and............. Some hot girls , Not gonna name them way 2 many!
Altho i have always liked nigel and nina as a couple
Nigel and Nina probably deserve special mention as they are synonymous with Jive over the last decade.
best
johnnyman
Both lovely people, but I would not have said the perfect match dance wise, visually, due to styles.
Both of them fun to watch individually, Mark with his boundless energy and Rachel with such a lovely, smooth, graceful follow
NB: Last time I saw Mark and Rachel dance was 2004.. so things may have changed.
They might be synonymous with Jive over the last decade, but are they perfectly matched?
Nigel had been doing Lindy and MJ for a while before Nina joined the MJ scene, Nina coming from a Ballet background, learnt very quickly as Nigel took her under his wing.
Nigel has showmanship and presence, Nina has grace and poise - does this make a perfect match?
I have thought of one more couple, Donna and Paul Brotherson.
Donna used to teach in England (I forget her previous surname - she came over with John Sweeny to do a triples thing)- somewhere north of London, came to Aussie and found her man.
Watching them dance together, they are both strong dancers and thier styles are similar.
I also very much like thier teaching style - a lot of fun and even though I have been dancing a long time, I always get something out of thier class.
I just LOVE dancing with Donna
They are very popular as teachers on the weekender circuit.
Miss-quoted a bit... John Sweeney, Frances Browning & Karen Hillier did the triples (double trouble) thing 2002... Donna was a groupie.
I think John underestimated the Aussies and expected to win... He was billed as a top triples (double trouble) guy, got given a workshop to do, did the champs and found out that we were a little more advanced than that
I remember Donna, as I used to go to her keep-fit classes way back, and it was her who got me interested to go to her classes, she was a excellent dancer and teacher.
I always thought Roger & Cathy were a well matched couple. Similar styles and ability, plus they are both tall and slim...... they look right together.
Hi, John Sweeney here. Only just noticed this. Not entirely accurate!
Frances, Karen and I decided to compete in Oz. We were asked if we could teach a number of workshops while we were out there. One of the things they asked for was Aerials. But my main Aerials partner was Donna. Over a drink in the garden of a pub in Oxford, after teaching a Drops workshop for Coralie (Jive+), I mentioned to Donna (who was my demonstrator) that it was a shame she couldn't come with us and do the Aerials workshops with me.
Donna decided to seize the opportunity and within 48 hours we had arranged flights for her as well.
In Oz Donna and I competed in the Open and got through to the final. She also taught some hip-hop and demonstrated Aerials in Sydney and Brisbane with me.
Groupie? I don't think so!
Yes, we arrived as a party of one man and three ladies, so we started messing around with Quads (Triple Trouble) and had a great time
Donna fell in love with Australia the day we landed, and fell in love with Paul when she met him at the pre-champs dance the next night. Married a year later!
"got given a workshop to do"? Well actually it was all planned in advance and we taught multiple workshops in Sydney and Brisbane.
"found out that we were a little more advanced" Hmmm... not my recollection! We were told by one of the judges that some of the judges ranked us top and some ranked us bottom. Which to my mind implies that the judging criteria weren't defined well enough.
Triples is always a challenge. There are some triples who do lots of sequences which are basically choreographed three-person cabaret. There are other triples who try to show lead and follow throughout.
We tended to aim at over 90% lead and follow, with only a couple of sequences where we acted semi-independently.
Some of the judges obviously enjoyed the cabaret-act style, and the double aerials of some of the triples.
No, we didn't expect to win, because we were already aware of all the challenges in the judging. Of course, we hoped to win...
We expected to have fun and we did. All the Australians were very friendly and gave us a great welcome.
Hope that clarifies things a little!
Happy dancing,
John
Indeed it does, I stand corrected.
It is an interesting point as to how much lead and follow you can do in triples, and where it becomes corrie.
Is leading and following a pre-determined move corrie?
Having re-watched the 2002 champs and thought about it, I think I do only 20 genuine lead and follow triples moves (my definition being at the base level, of what I could reasonably expect to do with 2 good follows, who have never done triples with me before).
After that comes moves, you have practiced with those follows, so is this lead and follow or corrie?
I think it becomes a grey area, as you have mentioned you did 90% lead and follow, and yet, I would say, if you took 2 follows you had never danced triples with, I would venture to suggest some of that 90% would not be sucessfully leadable.
So where does lead and follow become corrie?
It was a breath of fresh air to have you guys here.
A response at last! Too busy dancing to write!
Lead & Follow… Well that's a big topic.
When I dance with someone who has never done Ceroc before I always start with simple moves (exercises to the beat, really) so that by the end of the first track she is following my fingertips, moving her feet, keeping her own balance and keeping tension to the minimum. Then on the second track I can lead her into fifty moves. Of course the moves I choose are ones that can be followed intuitively by someone with that very limited experience.
Would I try and lead her into Double Trouble? No, because I would only have one hand instead of two to lead her with, and because she wouldn't yet have learnt some of the basic reflexes we instil into Ceroc ladies.
When I am in a new venue where I don't know any ladies, I very rarely ask two ladies with whom I haven't danced before to do Double Trouble with me. First I dance one-on-one with as many ladies as I can. I am not looking for the ones who look good, I am looking for the ones who feel good.
Sadly, in my experience, in Ceroc (and all Modern Jive) teaching, it is very rare to find a weekly class where the ladies are actually taught anything about how to follow. 99% of what is taught from the stage is about teaching the men how to do moves, and occasionally how to lead them. Ideally we should have the men in one room being taught how to lead moves, and the ladies in another room being taught the technique of following. But that, of course, is not practical! That is why we made the Modern Jive Toolkit DVD (findable via Google) - to cover all the technique that is not covered in classes, for the ladies as well as the men.
So, when I am at a new venue, I am looking for ladies that follow beautifully – lightly and reactively. I also make sure that they can do drops and lambadas well.
Now, when I lead those ladies it is very different from leading the good beginner. I can do a much wider range of material. And, if there is some particular Double Trouble move that I want to lead, I will dance it with each lady singly and make sure they know the move. So it is still lead and follow, but the ladies know a lot more.
If I do Double Trouble with those ladies, maybe with a bit of verbal prompting for some complex moves, yes, I can lead about 90% of my DT repertoire. I checked against one of the early championships we won, and came up with that figure at the time, in response to similar queries – we tended to keep things at that sort of level, so I guess that figures applies to the material that we used at the Australian championships as well, but I haven't checked.
Of course the ladies won't do it as stylishly as they might if they had practised together with me, and things won't always go as I planned!
So, there is a whole range of lead and follow:
- completely intuitive
- learnt reflexes for basic moves and sequences
- standard moves like drops which the ladies must have learnt
- complex moves which the ladies must have learnt, and which could be considered to be choreographed, but are lead by the man
- prompted moves, often quite complex, where a couple of words from the man can be enough for the ladies to achieve the move
- choreographed moves where at least one lady is acting independently, even though she may still be in contact with the man
- three person cabaret where the three people are acting independently
It is not a straightforward area, but I would say the border between choreographed and non-choreographed is somewhere near the bottom of the list – probably just the last two bullets.
So, even if you have practiced a move with two ladies, as long as the man decides when it will happen, what speed it will happen at, sets it up and then leads the ladies into and through the move, then I would say that it is not necessarily choreographed.
Hope that makes sense!
John
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks