Log In



   Stay logged in?

Forgot Password?

User Status




Recover Password

Username or Email:

Change Image
Enter the code in the photo at left:

Before We Continue...

Are you absolutely sure you want
to delete this message?

Premium Membership

Upgrade to
Premium Membership!

Renew Your
Premium Membership!


Premium Membership includes the following benefits:

Don't let your Premium Membership expire, or you'll miss out on:

  • Exclusive access to over 1,400 video demonstrations of patterns in the full bronze, silver and gold levels.
  • Access to all previous variations of the week, including full video instruction of man's and lady's parts.
  • Over twice as many videos as basic membership.
  • A completely ad-free experience!


Sponsored Ad

+ View Older Messages

Posted by Anonymous
11/7/2008  5:18:00 PM
"One may have a subjective opinion as to whether the technique should be rewritten, but not as to what it actually says."

You must be new here.

We regularly get into arguments here about what the actual text in the reference books says.

Further, we even more frequently get into arguments about what the literally quoted passages mean.

For example, there's are those here who who still do not understand that the stated amounts of turn are measured between alignments, and that those alignments are of the feet. Neither the body alignment nor the direction of travel will necessarily match the stated foot alignment, or necessarily change when an amount of turn indicates a change of foot alignment.
Posted by Polished
11/7/2008  10:01:00 PM
London Ballroom. Everything you have written is correct except for the exit from the Reverse to the Natural. There after your Forward Change you should be facing diag to centre and not cutting across the LOD on a digonal to the wall alignment. If you did it that way, I take it that you are at the bottom of the long side of the room, you would be heading straight into the corner instead of continuing around the room.
Please don't anybody ask about the Fleckerl's.
Posted by LondonBallroom
11/13/2013  3:52:00 AM
"London Ballroom. Everything you have written is correct. . ."

I am happy to help!

". . .except for the exit from the Reverse to the Natural."

Well, I don't think I passed comment on that particular topic. . . !

Dude . . .
Posted by jofjonesboro
11/10/2008  8:03:00 AM
posting links to websites that are still being developed is not cool.

Well, genius,
Posted by jofjonesboro
11/10/2008  4:38:00 PM
the next time that you have a technical question you might try telling us up front what kind of operating system you're using.

When I start posting links to non-working websites that I know to be non-working then you can quote scripture.

Yes, that's just what I need. A website full of information about dancing on the other side of the ocean.


Depends on your definition of ’working.’
Posted by jofjonesboro
11/10/2008  7:00:00 PM
So, if I'm not a US citizen then my "Embassy compatriots" hated your service?

Then why qualify your earlier claim
Posted by jofjonesboro
11/11/2008  2:36:00 PM
with the condition of my nationality?

It would not be unreasonable to infer from your original utterance that the staff at embassies other than that of the US didn't "love" your services.

Re: Dude . . .
Posted by Anonymous
10/3/2011  3:45:00 PM
On the V. Waltz. Get those alignements correct and you will be part way there.
It’s not a lock; it’s a cross.
Posted by jofjonesboro
10/21/2008  12:01:00 PM
I always thought that the reason for the cross in the Viennese Reverse turn was fairly obvious but I guess that I was mistaken.

The cross makes it much easier to keep the VW moving in a straight line. Merely bringing the feet together would make the 4-5-6 of the turn more difficult.

Why on the Reverse and not on the Natural, you ask? The man's first step on the Natural turn is between his partner's feet. Trying to cross on a Natural turn would be disastrous.

On a Reverse turn, the man's first step will be outside his partner's right foot.


Posted by jacobuserasmus
10/23/2008  8:22:00 AM
As far as I'm concerned they are not the same steps. This is maybe where you need to start when thinking about it.

There is quite a few other differences related to shaping and the feel of the step.

It's the difference between a Natural Turn and spin turn in the Waltz. It is not the same variation and therefore it is danced differently.

I think at the end of the day you're teacher is correct it is just the way it is done as the first person to standardize the step decided to do it that way.

The fact is it is possible to use a different step to do a reverse turn on viennese music but then we would not call it a Viennese waltz.

+ View More Messages

Copyright  ©  1997-2018 BallroomDancers.com