To follow up on my last post.

I had a look at the Hearn video with Gozzoli and Betti, and compared some ups in FT vs W. I think it is very hard (for me at least) to make an accurate comparison. But I do agree the difference between W and FT is not compelling. I did however think that his FT ups looked higher on a compact figure like a telemark step 2 or curved three step 2 than on a more progressive figure like feather finish step 2.

You refer to an angle of 45 degrees. What angles would be expected according to technique. I have image analysis software here somewhere so I could probably measure these things from video. The Hearn video is certainly clear enough to do that meaningfully.

Interested.On rise and fall. This was given to me to prove that what we do is following a natural law of movement. You get a Shopper docket or a piece of paper about 6 inches long and 2 inches wide .1 inch at the bottom fold it with the crease going to the right. 2 inches above that fold it to the left. And 2 inches above that fold it to the right.Turn it side on with the first crease to the right and pump it up and down. The bottom fold represents your feet above that the shin and above the thigh. The rest is your body. You will need to lightly touch what would be the toes to keep it in place . Do you see the constant angle between the three segments on the raising and the lowering. This is a natural turn of events.. Don't forget where you saw it.The person who passed this on just happens to be one of the top forty world wide. They should know shouldn't they. What angle are the feet if the thigh and shin are 45 degrees. If your feet are only ten degrees then is the thigh and the shin the same angle as Luca's are..I haven't got Gozzoli's . I am using stuff from youtube mainly because with the right location anybody can go and look . It is possible to slow the movement down to almost zero if you know how. Also it is possible to get the clip onto your computer in your picture section. Or to get it onto one of those USB's that's one of those little carry around thing that you can collect data on and plug in anywhere.

I agree with your estimate - just by eyeballing the Gozzoli video, the angle (between the long axis of the foot and the floor) can be clearly seen to be of the order of 45 degrees both in waltz and FT. Any difference between FT and comparable figures in waltz is hard to discern, and although I wouldn't rule it out, the difference is obviously no more than 10 degrees.

I would be interested to hear others' views re what angles are stipulated or implied by the standardised technique, if indeed there are are any hard and fast requirements (for W and then for FT).

"I would be interested to hear others' views re what angles are stipulated or implied by the standardised technique, if indeed there are are any hard and fast requirements (for W and then for FT)."

There are of course NO ABSOLUTES, as the proper amounts and angles are all RELATIVE to the size of motion desired, in the context of the character of the dance in question.

Anonymous. I think that now th WDC are coming into Amateur scene we might see more control of what constitutes correct technique. At the present we have people adjudicating who don't know what they are looking at. If the top line looks good, never mind about the feet. Figure Skating was that way for a while. Now if the wrong part of the skate touches down, for instance an outside edge. It is an automatic deduction. Never mind if they land it, it is still a deduction. And thats how it should be. Who thinks otherwise.
Talking about skating. They now cannot skate in a championship to a vocal unless the vocal is acompanying the orchestra. Which is a pity I thought Brian Boitano skating to Michael Crawford's Phantom of the Opera was the ultimate. Not any more.

Competitors are judged on their footwork at the lower levals and are expected to have correct footwork and technique by the time they are dancing at the championship leval. At this leval we want to see style and artistic flair along with flight,grace,etc.

reply to anymouse re no absolutes


ok so what are the relative angles for ft vs w

OK, interested, here are the details.

The foot rise in a Waltz must be precisely 37.5% at its height for your supporting foot.

You'll need to freeze your motion on the third step of the Waltz while your coach measures the angle with a protractor. If the angle is any higher or lower then you are a hopeless dancer and should take up step aerobics instead.

For the more blockheaded users of this forum, that advice is sarcasm.

Do yourself a favor and pay attention to anymouse. Polished has nothing but contempt for beginners and believes that you should be dancing at Marcus Hilton's level in your first lesson.

Your posts make it appear that you're only taking up dancing as a geometry assignment.

If you're honestly interested in learning to dance then go to the Learning the Dances pages on this website and watch Jonathan and Melissa perform both the basic Waltz and Fox Trot figures.

jj

I salute you JJ. Finally some sanity/sarcasm to snap the rise/fall junkies out of their obsession.
After reading all ten gazillion posts on the rise and fall in the waltz my heart sank when I saw we were going to continue the same nonsense in regards to the FT.

well if youre not interested in it - do not read it - its not compulsory.