"Anonymous. If you take a close look at the man's steps on 5 6 of a Reverse Turn, which is the part under discusion. You will see a momentory pause as the feet come together for the man. This allows the lady to comfortably move past the man into the Three Step or whatever."

Ideally a slowing not a pause. But that's besided the point as even if it were a pause, it would still be DRASTICALLY different from the type of end-of-rise action that occurs in foot closure waltz.

In waltz you use up everything in the rise, in foxtrot you keep something for movement.

"Incidently you should have already risen before the feet come together."

Only in the simplified binary sense of rise to which the book confines itself. The reality is that on any skilled dancers the gain of altitude continues up until the feet pass, at which point loss of altitude commences. That's the altitude, which is not the same thing as the book rise.

Anonymous. For the person going forward in both the Foxtrot and the Quickstep a step to the side after the first step is taken. You should be on your two toes and not coming off a flat foot which would present sway at the end of one and as we all know sway is on two and three. Any competent judge will pick this mistake in an instant.
If you do your frame by frame thing and stop as the feet are to together do you really see any difference between a Waltz a Quickstep or a Foxtrot at that point.
Maybe we have more thoughour teachers here. When teaching a Bronze medal class many teachers teaching a Reverse Turn Foxtrot, will have the class freeze as they go from 5 to 6 and then explain that the foot will not stop but will pass into the Feather Finish. Teaching it this way will ensure that at that point as the lady passes they are on ballance with their foot under their hip line and the foot tracking..
This is all Bronze Medal stuff and should be taught to beginners or Social Classes or whatever.
Once again Rise at the end of step one. Up on two and three. Lower at the end of three. How many of you are taught this, and the differences there are over the same steps in the Waltz.

"If you do your frame by frame thing and stop as the feet are to together do you really see any difference between a Waltz a Quickstep or a Foxtrot at that point."

Definitely. No one who understands these dances would confuse the passing instant of a passing action with a closing action for a second, as they are fundamental different.

"teaching a Reverse Turn Foxtrot, will have the class freeze as they go from 5 to 6 and then explain that the foot will not stop but will pass into the Feather Finish."

The foot will not stop because the body will not stop. Wheras in waltz the foot will stop because the body travel has momentarily stopped due to converting all the momentum into rise. The waltz action is complete and the foot closure marks the end of the swing - in the foxtrot, you only convert part of your momentum and the closing is quite clearly a passing thing, in no way an endpoint.

That's the fundamental difference you must learn to create in your dancing.

"Once again Rise at the end of step one. Up on two and three. Lower at the end of three. How many of you are taught this, and the differences there are over the same steps in the Waltz."

The major difference at the time when the feet close is not in the textbook foot rise, it is in the completeness of the conversion of momentum to altitude.

The textbook issue is somewhat minor in comparison and somewhat misleading in that the body altitude will experience a continuation upwards as the feet close which is NOT covered in the book (the book does not cover altitude change due to the legs closing and reopening, which has become quite important at today's step sizes)

The contribution of what the book does mention towards the completeness of rise is that the waltz-style commence and continue curves up more sharply, leading towards the complete conversion of momentum. In contrast, the book foxtrot rise is simply from heel lead to moderate toes, along more even path throughout the first step. Thus foxtrot rise (book plus the legs closing altitude gain) merely converts some of our movement and slows us somewhat.

Anonymous. Put it this way then. You have a ordinary camera and at the instant that the feet come together you snap them. Could you tell whether you were watching a Waltz or a Quickstep or a Foxtrot.
A lot of writting there but are you saying anything.
What does the technique book mean when it carefully chooses words like. Rise at the end of one. Do that.Rise at the end of one, up on two and three. Does that say there is further rise on two and three. Of course it doesn't.
That is a fundamental Basic that you should have learnt in a Bronze Class.
I know its hard to be told that you have been wrongly instructed or that you just didn't listen. But that's what we have to do. Be ready to change. There is so much bad teaching and dancing out there.
My body altitude will not experience a
continuation upwards as the feet close which you do obviously believe. That is not what the technique book says.
Does it. If it does in the Foxtrot tell me where.

"Anonymous. Put it this way then. You have a ordinary camera and at the instant that the feet come together you snap them. Could you tell whether you were watching a Waltz or a Quickstep or a Foxtrot."

Yes, because if there is any grace and consistency to their dancing, the rise as the feet pass in foxtrot will be noticeably short of what would be required to absorb all momentum and keep them closed as in waltz. In waltz the energy here is purely 'up' - in foxtrot it is still mostly 'across'.

"What does the technique book mean when it carefully chooses words like. Rise at the end of one. Do that.Rise at the end of one, up on two and three. Does that say there is further rise on two and three. Of course it doesn't."

As has been explained to you and then silently ignored by you numerous times, the technique book only concerns itself with rise taken from the feet, ankles, knees, etc.

It does not concern itself with the change in body altitude the occurs as the legs close and reopen.

As has been pointed out to you time and time again, with todays large amounts of travel this creates a noticeable continuation upwards until the peak of step two, and a downwards trend thereafter.

The book is correct, but it does not tell the full story of what happens, prefering instead to concentrate on the intentional techniques rather than everything that incidentally happens as a result. You don't have to do anything to create this additional altitude gain as the legs close (you are correct that there is no continuation of the rise in the feet), you just have to stay picked up and let geometry due its thing.



The problem is that you believe that what we both learned in brozne class is the full story - and have not yet realized that in fact it's only part of it.

"My body altitude will not experience a
continuation upwards as the feet close which you do obviously believe."

If it dosn't then there is something seriously wrong with your feather step, as everyone else experiences this incidental result when they execute the technique described in the book. It's simple geometry - decrease the width of the triangle formed by the legs and you increase the height.

Try watching some videos and determining where the highest altitude in a feather actually occurs. You will I guess be very surprised when you discover that it's as the feet pass at the end of step two.