"The the same dancer will not dance it exactly the same twice running."

While we want to leave room for intentional interpretive variation, being able to intentionally achieve a high degree of consistency is also an important dance skill, and something that often sets professionals apart from amatuers (even if they are wrong, they are consistent about it)

"If there are differences how can anyone tell unless the music is playing. If there is no time signal to let you know when the step commenced how can you possibly measure it."

You can measure the TIME BETWEEN STEPS. If that is at odds with your theory of how they are supposed to fit the beats, then obviously your theory cannot apply to the dancing being measured.

For example, if your measurement of the time between two steps is not a whole number of beats worth of time, then there is NO POSSIBLE WAY that both steps can be falling on beats (unless the music itself is uneven). Either one is on a beat and the other isn't, or neither is actually on a beat.

You don't even need to turn on the sound in order to deteremine what the time value of a beat is - it's enough to measure the time between comparable steps in successive measures, and divide by the number of beats per measure. If the dancer is any good and the tempo unvarying, you'll get the same answer for many measures in a row and thus have a high confidence in your calculation for the amount of time per beat. That's how I can know exactly how long a beat is on Sinkinson's foxtrot video - because his timing is extremely consistent for FIVE succesive measures of SQQ material all captured by the same camera.

Or to return to waltz: if I watch Jonathan's video and I see that when his foot closed it is 1 beat worth of time since step 2 was placed, and 2 beats worth of time since step 1 was placed, I know that either:

1) Step three arrived closed only on beat three, NOT BEFORE

or

2) The first two steps were not on the corresponding beats. Which would be rather suprising!

Ok The Waltz is easy, only three beats and three steps. What about the Foxtrot where we have four beats and somtimes four steps and sometimes three steps over four beats. How can you possibly know which beat they started on without music. You might like to go to the Dancing Channel (See lluv2dance ). In the samples there is the Foxtrot final from last year. Watch Jonathon Crossley in the bottom left corner after he gets checked and tell me on what beats he does a Feather Step on. Then look at Chris Hawkins in the top right after he does several swivells into a Feather Step. Again what was his timing on the Feather Step. Also look at the very beginning and watch Timothy Howson do a conventional Intro and a Feather Step just as it is in the book. All can be seen without going to frame by frame which would tell you exactly nothing, and give nothing that can be of any use regards timing.

"What about the Foxtrot where we have four beats and somtimes four steps and sometimes three steps over four beats."

It's pretty easy to tell if there are three or four steps in a measure, even without sound!

"How can you possibly know which beat they started on without music."

By working forwards or backwards from one whose timing is well known. For example, I have never heard of anyone who believes or teaches that the first quick goes anywhere but on the third beat. So until someone disputes that, we can use this as a reference point from which to match up everything else.

"You might like to go to the Dancing Channel (See lluv2dance )."

I'm trying to get on there, so far it's not sending me a validation email.

"All can be seen without going to frame by frame which would tell you exactly nothing, and give nothing that can be of any use regards timing."

The problem with using your eyes and ears to try to record timing is that these senses are NOTORIOUSLY UNRELIABLE. To take any sort of scientific measurment, you have to have a plausible way of factoring HUMAN FAILABILITY OUT OF THE MEASUREMENT PROCESS. That's what counting the frames on a video does - it eliminates the unreliable dependence on the ability to determine when a sight happend relative to a sound.

My timing measurements are far more accurate than your listening/watching ones. No further proof is needed than that my timing measurements MATCH THE TEACHING OF LEADING AUTHORITIES, while your obviously flawed observations are CONSISTENT ONLY WITH BEGINNER LEVEL MISUNDERSTANDING.

You can go around in circles making a fool of yourself for as long as you live, but you won't change the facts. For example: a foxtrot quick which is to be followed by a slow has its placement delayed at least a half beat towards that slow. That's a plain fact of how the dance is done, regardless if you choose to believe it or live the rest of your life in ignorance.

Anonymouse. Go to Timing Blackpool.

You are correct, but I have seen a few couples who do that. They quickly pop up and drop down on 3. With no rise prior to that. It looks pretty weird.

Dennis. If you see a Spin Turn done correctly it will not look like mine or yours. Those top dancers usually at the very beginning of there routine will do Spin Turn. The judges expect to see one. They seem to rise forever. Where you or I are ready to come down they are still rising. We then hold to stay with the music. Which is literaly a stop. They not so.

I am not talking about expert competitive dancers. I am talking about social dancers, who during basic Waltz steps pop up and down at the end of the measure. They don't do a gradual rise, it is a pop up at the end, like the original message was talking about.

It is possible the first step is too meek. There is a drive there as well as a drive onto step two. The knees play an important part here. They must flex at the end of the last bar of music before the first step and again as the moving foot arrived under the body at the end of step one. Coaching is a must.

"I am not talking about expert competitive dancers. I am talking about social dancers, who during basic Waltz steps pop up and down at the end of the measure. They don't do a gradual rise, it is a pop up at the end, like the original message was talking about."

Dennis,

I don't believe the original post was talking about popping up on three. The mention of rise there was merely the conclusion of what began earlier, and it's turnaroudn into fall. The question seems to have been how that was all to fit in, with a (grossly erroneous) theory that it's accomplished by finishing the foot closure on the and after two.

As for late rise; two issues. With beginners, it's mostly a matter of the lack of foot strength to execute a smooth rise.

With more advanced dancers, there's a certain (flawed) school of thought that you can get more dynamic by doing a kind of ski-jump action as you pass over step one, staying down and compressed and then exploding up. That puts the lowest point of the swing over step one. In contrast, the proper way to do it is to put the lowest point of the body's height in between steps 3 and step 1. There's of course a lot of softening of the knee as you move onto step 1, but not so much that you actually continue to loose altitude. Instead, you are already softly gaining a little altitude as you move onto the foot.

And then there's the often overlooked detail of proper foot timing: specifically, the leading teachers will point out that the standing heel needs to have broken free from the floor *BEFORE* the moving foot passes it to end step 1. This is very critical to getting the hips going into the upswing. One could easily overdue it of course, but done right it is extremely beneficial. There's one frame on the Blackpool foxtrot 2006 video where you can just see Howson's heel lift before the end of step one of his feather.

Thanks. A lot of steps I do not know in detail what I am doing, so I did the beginning of a left turn and like you said, the heel comes of the ground before the other foot gets to the foot that moved first. I tried keeping my heel down as an experiment and that messes it up something fierce.

We were taught to rise like said, gradually and starting on step 1.