Bridging the gap from Beginner to Intermediate.

[Phil_dB]

Great advice, and there's a nice opportunity here to throw in perhaps your first ronde with the left leg as you come round to block and carry through the lead into the follower's turn. All in one smooth action as you iron out the beginner jerkiness.

Ah - thanks for the tip, I like the sound of that & will give it a go.

[SteveW]

I hope you don't mind me sharing what a (brilliant!) LeRoc instructor told us at a workshop recently: Blocking could be compared with catching a cricket ball. When you catch, you dont stop the ball DEAD in it's path, - you slow the ball down by retreating your arms to absorb the impact. Obviously a Follow won't be generating the same amount of force, but the principle's the same in terms of slowing her down (block) and then speeding her up (pushing/leading her the other way); smooth instead of jerky.

Will give it a go, and post results. The main "problem" is the step round bit which, when I am doing it, feels ok to me but apparently has the grace of a farmer in a muddy field. I think part of it stems from me over extending on the 2nd part.

Also, what is a ronde?

[Agente Secreto]

Will give it a go, and post results. The main "problem" is the step round bit which, when I am doing it, feels ok to me but apparently has the grace of a farmer in a muddy field. I think part of it stems from me over extending on the 2nd part.

Also, what is a ronde?

Steve

A ronde is where you take your foot out and round in a circular motion at ground level as you turn. However, if you're already having challenges with the turn and block motion in the YoYo you don't need any other complications so forget it.

For me the trick on the YoYo was to make sure that as I take the right hand from my left shoulder and down to the right to turn the lady out I take only a small step forward on my right foot. This has the double effect of creating a bit of elbow room and getting my right foot in the position where I can use it as the pivot. The on the turn and block you can turn on the right foot and literally the upper part of the arm hardly needs to move, you just turn the forearm and bring this up so it's vertical - giving a very natural block all along the follow's forearm.

Don't worry though, at the beginning we all looked clumsy and missed blocks and that will pass as the elements of the moves themselves become more automatic.

Agent 000
Licensed to Dance

[~Jo~]

Hey guys ,

I've managed to read a good amount of these posts, but confess not all.....it's a very long thread lol.

I was wondering about the differences between men and women in MJ. Is it easier for a woman to become intermediate? I class myself as a beginner because I don't know all the names of moves, I can't speak the MJ lingo convincingly and I have only been dancing for about 4 months (unless thats a long time then whoops! lol). But when I dance freestyle I do many intermediate and advanced moves because the lead knows them. So, can a womans dance status be determined by how well she follows? Because sometimes I don't know the move I'm following I just do it...lol. If I were a man I would hardly know any moves to initiate in a freestyle, but being a lady I can just follow and I'll sort of be the same level as the man I'm dancing with (unless they are really good or stylish as I havent managed to be stylish with my dancing yet lol).

In regards to the step back semi-cirlce, our classes teach them. It was my understanding that the step back is a shift of weight to be able to go into the move rather than an exagerated actual step back. The semi-cirlce I have to admit as a beginner is helpful as I know when the man is going to start the dance (don't shoot me !!!!).

Jo x

[Lost Leader]

Hi Jo,

The simple answer to your question is yes, it is different for followers if you are talking about the transition from beginner to intermediate classes. The difference is that the average lead needs to stay in the beginner class longer (about 10 weeks) before attempting the intermediate class. The average follow can safely start doing the intermediate class after about 6 weeks.

Leaders have to know how to lead moves, followers need to know how to folllow. As a follow you don't actually need to know the moves in as much detail as the lead. A good follow can follow a lot of moves they have never actually been taught but a lead would actually have to know the move to be able to lead it. Followers need a different set of skills (such as how to spin smoothly) and it can actually be unhelpful to know the moves in too much detail. Knowing the names of moves is not important.

I am oversimplifying things greatly here of course. No two people are alike and when you are ready for intermediate classes depends on a huge range of other factors such as confidence, previous dance experience and so on.

Hope this helps.

[David Bailey]

I was wondering about the differences between men and women in MJ. Is it easier for a woman to become intermediate?

I'd say "yes", but then qualify that by saying that it's (much) more complex than that.

But, to add a little bit of complexity, I think it's easier for followers to get from beginner to intermediate, but it's much much more difficult for followers to get from intermediate to advanced - in MJ.

[NZ Monkey]

But, to add a little bit of complexity, I think it's easier for followers to get from beginner to intermediate, but it's much much more difficult for followers to get from intermediate to advanced - in MJ.

As it happens I was at a tea dance with a number of excellent followers yesterday, and it was quickly obvious that there were no men on the dance floor that were close to their level*.

Thinking about it more, even at the big party nights the high caliber followers outnumber the leaders in the same category by a factor of three or so.

I wonder just how these girls got as good as they are. In at least half the cases they're "pure" cerocers, just like the guys are. If it really were harder for followers to become "advanced" I wouldn't have expected this trend.

I'd also love to know why the guys seem to be lagging so much behind. I don't believe it's a lack of talent, so presumably the talent isn't being developed as effectively as the girls.

*I'm deliberately excluding myself from that comparison to avoid asking any awkward questions that I might not want the answer too....

[~Jo~]

Well,
in my class It was obvious after a few weeks that I was going to learn faster than the men. Now, most of the men who had started before me are still getting to grips with basic beginner moves and style and I'm having to help them.

The other women get the moves the same as me but they haven't learnt how to spin as I have, and they don't make much effort with helping it look graceful (but i assign that to the fact im quite a perfectionist and want to dance to a high standard whereas they are doing it for enjoyment and don't care lol). I agree that women just having to follow makes it so much easier to be involved in a more impressive looking freestyle if the mans a good lead.

But I think in my class at least the women have genuinely learnt faster - i look around and i see the other women having to tell their partners what to do, and we all chat about how we know the instructions for the moves now just as well as the actual instructors cos we've gone over them so often!

It's sounds quite harsh on the guys to say that but...in my class its true! (i am slowly thinking that im involved in a very 'special' class though lol)
i suppose it would be sexist to say women learn faster than men?

[NZ Monkey]

i look around and i see the other women having to tell their partners what to do,

Watch that. Feedback is a Good Thing, but if you don't know how to lead you can't really appreciate just what it takes. In my experience women tend to give men advice that patches the symptom, rather than fixes the problem. It takes a very knowledgeable person to have very good grasp on both roles. In my experience figuring out how something is going wrong is usually a team effort.

i suppose it would be sexist to say women learn faster than men?

At the beginner stage I think it's fair to say that the guys have a much steeper learning curve. Try learning to lead yourself and see how quickly you pick things up then

[~Jo~]

I do! I do! ...I found it fine being the man as i like being in control, although some of the moves bringing the lady across the chest arent really suitable for women being men lol (for two reasons)

[bigdjiver]

... I'd also love to know why the guys seem to be lagging so much behind. I don't believe it's a lack of talent, so presumably the talent isn't being developed as effectively as the girls...

Perhaps on the way to being a good "frame" we get stuck at the phase of being wooden?

[David Bailey]

I wonder just how these girls got as good as they are. In at least half the cases they're "pure" cerocers, just like the guys are. If it really were harder for followers to become "advanced" I wouldn't have expected this trend.

I'd also love to know why the guys seem to be lagging so much behind. I don't believe it's a lack of talent, so presumably the talent isn't being developed as effectively as the girls.

My theory - and it's just a theory - is that it's all about "learning curve" steepness, which varies for different roles at different times and with different dances.

So, if look at MJ and we represent "dance perfection" as a score of 100 on a graph, and consider the average dancer going to weekly classes, then leaders will probably progress slowly (say, 2 points per year on average), but will generally progress constantly year on year. Whereas followers might get 4 points per year on average for 2-3 years, but then might well "stall", gaining only small amounts thereafter without serious work, mainly because there's only so much you can learn through freestyle, and there's not much tuition aimed at followers. In addition, you come against the law of diminishing returns - the difference between "Level 1" and "Level 2" is significant, but the difference between "Level 10" and "Level 11" is less so. So there's less incentive to improve beyond a certain point.

I think there's the same amount of difficulty involved in each role, but that leading - initially - has a steeper learning curve (and I also think this is why lessons are usually targeted at leaders, to give them extra assistance).

Anyway, that's my theory.

*I'm deliberately excluding myself from that comparison to avoid asking any awkward questions that I might not want the answer too....

Hell, yes, I live in perpetual fear that people will tell me what they really think of my dancing

[David Bailey]

But I think in my class at least the women have genuinely learnt faster - i look around and i see the other women having to tell their partners what to do,

Hmmmm. Bad habit. Really. Unless you're a really good dancer, or unless you're asked for advice, I'd be very cautious about that sort of thing.

I almost never give unsolicited advice when I do classes.

It's sounds quite harsh on the guys to say that but...in my class its true! (i am slowly thinking that im involved in a very 'special' class though lol)

Yeah, it does sound a bit... unusual.

i suppose it would be sexist to say women learn faster than men?

Initially, at least, following is much much easier than leading.

And if you're finding MJ easy, I suggest you learn tango...

I do! I do! ...I found it fine being the man as i like being in control,

You may have your own learning curve to go through then as a follower...

[Andy McGregor]

And if you're finding MJ easy, I suggest you learn tango...

My own opinion is that MJ is one of the simplest partner dances. Which means it's really easy. If you find it easy it's because it is. And that is the beauty of the dance. It's intended as an easy social dance. Making it complicated at a week-night class is anti-social. Our job as teachers is to simplify the dance, not make it more complicated and more difficult to learn.

Of course there are people who make MJ sound complicated or even find it complicated - there's even teachers who make it sound complicated. I'm afraid that these examples tell you more about the person than the dance

On the subject of taking up a complicated dance, why put yourself through it if all you want is a nice, easy social dance? Especially Argentine Tango. Some would say that it's quite anti-social - I've heard that people routinely refuse the offer of a dance

[robd]

The terms 'Beginner', 'Intermediate', 'Advanced' don't tend to count for much on the social dance floor - they are only needed so far as I can see to define dancers rights to entry for classes and competitions.

[NZ Monkey]

The terms 'Beginner', 'Intermediate', 'Advanced' don't tend to count for much on the social dance floor - they are only needed so far as I can see to define dancers rights to entry for classes and competitions.

Sure, but on the other hand there are clear differences in ability no matter how you choose to phrase it. If you're going to talk about stuff like this then you need some way to categorize people, even if the divisions are pretty fuzzy sometimes.

[Andy McGregor]

Sure, but on the other hand there are clear differences in ability no matter how you choose to phrase it. If you're going to talk about stuff like this then you need some way to categorize people, even if the divisions are pretty fuzzy sometimes.

However, those differences are irrelevant when you're social dancing. The objective is to have a nice dance rather than judge on your partner's level of dance ability. Of course you do need to take their level into account when you dance, but it's a partnership, not a competition or a display.

I think there is a mind-set amongst some MJ dancers that you need to be a great dancer or on your journey to greatness to have fun. Almost the opposite is true in my experience. If you're constantly striving to be a better and better dancer and always looking to dance with great dancers the fun seems to get left behind and you start moving towards a world of long-distance travel, sleep deprivation, sore feet and bruising

My advice is to simply enjoy your dancing and enjoy who you're dancing with, no matter what level of dancer they are

[David Bailey]

The terms 'Beginner', 'Intermediate', 'Advanced' don't tend to count for much on the social dance floor

Well, yeah, but that's not what they're for.

- they are only needed so far as I can see to define dancers rights to entry for classes and competitions.

No, they should be there to help structure the learning process.

[Gadget]

in my class It was obvious after a few weeks that I was going to learn faster than the men. Now, most of the men who had started before me are still getting to grips with basic beginner moves and style and I'm having to help them.

As others have said; be wary of this - you may (think you) know how and where you should be on each count within a move, but this does not mean that you actually know what it takes to lead you to these positions. By moving yourself or telling the lead that you need to be here, then there you are doing it for them; not letting them learn.

But I think in my class at least the women have genuinely learnt faster - i look around and i see the other women having to tell their partners what to do, and we all chat about how we know the instructions for the moves now just as well as the actual instructors cos we've gone over them so often!

Hmmm.... you may know the spiel, you may know how each partner should be on each count, but I have danced with many, many, many followers. There is only one in a thousand who genuinely pick things up and learn how to follow rather than learn the moves. ... Then they try and learn how to dance 'properly' and loose a lot of that! (but it does come back)

I was wondering about the differences between men and women in MJ. Is it easier for a woman to become intermediate?

Yes. (IMHO)

A couple of reasons why:
- Girls dance around their bedrooms singing into hairbrushes. Very few boys do.
- Girls put handbags on the floor to dance around in night clubs. Boys tend to trip over anything on the floor.
- Girls get together in 'gangs' and dance with each other. Boys kick things, get together in 'gangs' and get drunk.
- Girls can generally dance in time with the music. Boys normally have to get drunk to get on the dance floor... and by that time, whatever they are moving to, it's not music.
- Girls get up and dance because they like the music. Boys get up and dance because they like the girls.
- Girls looking good and using their bodies to entice boys comes second nature. Boys tend to pose and preen for themselves.

So; once leads actually manage to find the confidence to get on the dance floor, once they learn to step in time with the music, once they get over being in close proximity to a follow and not getting amorous (*), then they have to remember each position in a sequence that combines to make a move, another move to do after this one and they have to deal with followers doing lots of things that they didn't expect them to... including actually going where they are led.

The follower on the other hand, they only have to try and 'switch off'. To become aware of the lead and ignore the actual moves. To just go where the lead is guiding them. Once they get that, they are free to listen to the music and concentrate on improving their own dancing. { - I can't do it. I'm too much of a control freak }

(*Re: not getting amorous? ... well, that's the theory.)


A good follower with a new lead will make the lead feel that they can lead anything and the follower will glide to their beck and call, making the dance stylish and mind-reading at the same time. (At least this is how I felt as a new lead with good followers)
A good lead with a new follower will make the follow feel that they can dance and move on the dance floor, responding to the lead's movements and dancing together as one. (And this is how I try and make followers feel.)

How do you define how good a lead is? How good a follower is? Can you compare the two? Does a good follower have the same 'skill level' as a good lead? If so, then perhaps it takes longer for a lead to get to this level than a follower? I would say that it takes a lead longer to shake the 'beginner' status.

I am of the opinion that MJ is the easiest dance to learn, but the hardest dance to master.

[Phil_dB]

By moving yourself or telling the lead that you need to be here, then there you are doing it for them; not letting them learn.

Yes, - this is a big one for me. I must admit, it does annoy me when a follow moves when i haven't led something in class. Conversely, - I'm impressed if I lead something wrong and the follow follows what i led (!) -- I think to myself "i'm dancing with a good follow" (sometimes this happens when i'm being taught a variation of a beginner move and muscle memory & lack of concentration puts me into auto-pilot and I do the standard beginner version )

When i'm learning a new routine in class, at the beginning when they're breaking down each movement, I like to keep still and watch exactly what the instructors are doing first so i can then copy (hopefully) exactly what they've just done. It seems though that most people move AS the instructors move (if you see what I mean) (including people who haven't seen the routine before). I think to myself "you haven't seen what they've done yet, so you're almost guessing, - you may have missed something subtle but important" - if the follow just moves herself into the position instead of waiting for me to lead it, - it really does hinder me when i'm trying to pick up something new.

I need to lead to learn