With regard to the International Style, which has more rise and fall - foxtrot or waltz.

I am slightly confused on this. On the one hand, it is often said that the energy of swing goes more into rise in waltz but more into hoeizontal movement in foxtrot. On the other hand, technically there are more "up" steps in f/x as opposed to "continue to rise" in waltz.

Perhaps I should ask some more specific questions - so here goes

(a) is the max height on step 3 of a reverse turn in f/x (up) higher or lower than the max height on step 3 of a reverse turn in waltz (continue to rise)

(b) is the max height on step 3 of a reverse turn in f/x higher or lower than step 4 of an outside change in waltz (both up - but are the two up's equivalent)

"f/x" is flim shorthand for "effects." The conventional abbreviation for the Fox Trot is "FT" or just "F".

Rise in the Waltz is higher than that in the Fox Trot. "Up" in Fox Trot simply means that the heel is off of the floor on that step.

On the other hand, rise in the Waltz is significant and increases throughout most figures until the dancer lowers.

Sometimes, I have problems with my Achilles' tendons. There are times when I can barely execute steps properly in the Waltz but have no trouble with the Fox Trot.

In the Waltz, the dancer stepping backward will virtually never have foot rise but in the Fox Trot the man may raise his heel on a backward step (e.g. the man's step 5 of the Reverse Wave).

jj

So just to make sure I've got you right

The "up" in FT is lower than than the "up" in W and even lower than the max height on a basic rise and fall W figure.

Right.

Keep in mind that most 'up's in FT are quicks. There really isn't time to rise as much as in a Waltz.

But to distinguish FT from Waltz by the relative amount of foot rise is misleading. Rise and fall are much more important in Waltz. Smooth flow is more important in the Fox Trot; the heel is raised from the floor on quicks to maintain that smoothness.

jj

Another question (or two)

Are the overall rise and the foot rise in proportion to one another

and

Does the answer you gave earlier withy regard overall rise apply also to foot rise

"Are the overall rise and the foot rise in proportion to one another(?)"

Not necessarily. You can have body rise without foot rise (as in backward steps). However, if you have foot rise then you will have overall rise as well. The only exception to this generalization might be a weave in the Fox Trot.

"Does the answer you gave earlier withy (sic) regard overall rise apply also to foot rise(?)"

All of my responses prior to this particular one have been about foot rise.

jj

Waltz and foxtrot have different character of movement (and so to a degree do the closing vs. passing steps within waltz).

What the character does is predict how much rise and fall would balance other aspects of the dance, such as the size of the horizontal movement.

So in the end it's proportional - a champion's foxtrot will have more rise and fall than a beginner's waltz, because even though foxtrot's rise and fall is less in proportion to the horizontal movement, the horizontal movement is drastically larger for a champion than for a beginner.

I wish you guys would look before you comment. Compare if you Google Luca and Lorain Demo Foxtrot and Luca and Lorain Demo Waltz and compare. Take a look how high Lorain's heel is off the floor before it lowers. Write what you see and not what you think you see or have been told. I doubt if Luca would be able to get any higher in his Foxtrot if he tried. Look then come back and write. I think in both cases Waltz and Foxtrot you will find the feet rise to an angle of 45 degrees in both dances.

I have viewed those videos. Nowhere does either partner come close to 45 degrees in a foot rise, especially in the Fox Trot.

I've also watched Howson and Bolton, Gozzoli and Betti, and the Hiltons.

When one is stepping backward, of course, the foot will appear to have a high degree of pitch when the toe contacts the floor but that is not foot rise.

jj

Polished.

I agree it is a good idea to look at video evidence. The camera never lies !

I do not have access to many videos. But one I do have is Hearn's advanced ballroom figures DVD. I was wondering if you had that, and if so, could you perhaps pick out some examples from that to illustrate your point.