Log In

Username:

Password:

   Stay logged in?

Forgot Password?

User Status

 

Attention

 

Recover Password

Username or Email:

Loading...
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!

$99
PER YEAR
$79
PER YEAR
$79
PER YEAR

Premium Membership includes the following benefits:

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

  • Exclusive access to over 1,620 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
Re: Andrew Sinkinson
Posted by Guest
11/14/2006  1:18:00 PM
It's always interesting read posts from Anonymous and Don. It's like Albott and Costello. Don, the bending of the knees and not moving forward step that you're trying to describe (you kind of lost me when you started to introduce CBM and CBMP into this issue though), is what they teach us in the very first level of bronze when we know ditully about the waltz. You seem to forget that the hip is also a joint that you can NOT bend if you were to keep your body verticle. What you describe does not create continuity of movement, that's some thing that needs to be present in the waltz and also foxtrot.
Re: Andrew Sinkinson
Posted by Don
11/14/2006  1:57:00 PM
Anonymous Your famous last words.Take some private lessons with champions. I'd better put you right here. I have had more lessons than you are ever likely to have in the Standard style of ballroom dancing with dancers of a much higher quality . Starting with the gure himself Alex Moore. If you look at the records of Wally Fryer. Len Scrivener. Harry Smith Hampshire and even the great Henry Jaques. I have been to lectures by Donnie Burns, Steven Hillier,John Woods, Richard Gleeve And more recently Anthony Hurley. Andrew Sinkinson. My present teachers have many titles under their belt and have lessons regularly with some of the most respected coaches in the trade. So please don't be so childish, and do stick to the facts. Possibly the most ridicules thing you have said so far, and there has been quite a few, is that the Standard Syle of dancing requires more torso twist than Latin. I take that back. The most stupidist thing you have ever said is that nobody has ever done the first three of a Natural Turn the Waltz correctly ever. Would you like to take that back, or would you care to repeat it.I dont believe you even stop to think what you are saying. You are iculuding not only everybody reading this, but every past or present champion there as ever been, which includes the person who first introduced the step in December 1922..
Re: Andrew Sinkinson
Posted by Anonymous
11/14/2006  2:00:00 PM
Don,

You need to stop ranting.

Stop attending workshops.

And instead take private lessons personally, to work on the most basic ideas.

Then you will realize the truth of what I have been saying.

As any workshop will prove, what someone says will generate more misunderstanding than knowledge. You need to get out there and experience it with them, ask the questions, experience it on your terms.
Re: Andrew Sinkinson
Posted by Don
11/14/2006  3:55:00 PM
Anonymous. If I were you I would quite before you make yourself a bigger fool than you already are.
You said .Any workshop will prove that what someone says will generate more misunderstanding than knowledge.
Do you ever think before you make these stupid statements.
Does that includes the Ballroom Dancing Congress at Blacpool which I would say has possibly the most knowledgable audience you will find anywhere. Eight hours of lectures I could include all those names on my list of lectures I have attended. But I will stick to one only. My teachers were placed 19th in the Waltz at Blackpool, and simularly in the other three dances.
Re: Andrew Sinkinson
Posted by Anonymous
11/14/2006  9:10:00 PM
"You said .Any workshop will prove that what someone says will generate more misunderstanding than knowledge.
Do you ever think before you make these stupid statements.
Does that includes the Ballroom Dancing Congress at Blacpool which I would say has possibly the most knowledgable audience you will find anywhere."

Absolutely. Many of the audience benefit from it of course. But many such as yourself lack the requisite foundation knoweldge to follow what is really being discussed, and as a result come away with severly confused and impractical ideas.

Rather than confusing yourself with either hours of lectures, you would do much better to take one hour in private with one of the presenters and really work on the truth behind a few basic ideas. When you are the subject of the lesson, your confusion will be noted and you will be shown a way out of it - but when you are merely an unprepared audience member, you are free to get a seriously wrong idea about what has been recommended.
Re: Andrew Sinkinson
Posted by Don
11/15/2006  6:19:00 PM
Anonymous . As usuall spoken with the attitude that you know all and anybody else knows nothing. Do you read what you are writting .
Many benifit . First you wrote that any workshop will generate misunderstanding. Which has now changed to many. What exactly is many. Is it more or is it less. You have never been to a workshop, have you. You would know that we are not an audience but participants.
I very much doubt if you would be able to understand what the lectures are about. Anybody who believes that on a back Lockstep Quickstep that the hip goes back and the shoulder doesn't. I mean how could you possibly know with the kind of instruction you have been recieving, what the devil are they talking about.
Just looking at your other none intelligent comments. I said There is sway on step three of a Natural Spin Turn. What exactly did you mean by "I hope not"
.
Do we file that one away with your Back Lock. You have completely ignored when I asked you. Do you still believe that nobody has ever done the first three of a Natural correct ever.
Shall we file that away with your Spin Turn and Back Lock.
Another thing you don't seem to be able to grasp. When you say you are forbiden from passing a person who is in front of you. I'm sure you will have difficulty grasping this. When I appear to be sideways. My partner is still in front of me. Second third step on the Feather. I am moving sideways but my partner is still in front of me. That is not too hard to understand is it. I see you now believe that the man does not shape to his left, and that the lady does move her foot into position before the man moves on a Backward Walk. And do you still believe that the heel of the supporting foot lowers before the moving foot comes along side on a backward step.
I see you have changed your mind on whether or not there is a midway point between two steps. I can remember months ago trying to prove to you that there has to be a midway. I can remember giving an example that if somebody jumped off a twelfth floor of a building that would have to pass the sixth floor. And still you went on.
And this is a classic. My aim is to establish sufficient doubt in the minds of other dancers who seriously want to improve. Do you know what an ego maniac is. I think you do and have probably been told enough times. Theres lots more if you want it, pages and pages. What was that other one. We go to the point of imbalance and did you say we fall out having to catch our weight.
To get off the above. Todays dancers are contiuously getting out of each others way. They dance their own steps in their own space. I never enter the space they are standing on and they mine. Don't forget to answer the questions will you.
Re: Andrew Sinkinson
Posted by Anonymous
11/16/2006  7:38:00 AM
"First you wrote that any workshop will generate misunderstanding."

I maintian that any workshop will cause more harm than good for someone who does not have the background knoweldge to understand it - it is quite easy, as your case proves - to come away with exactly the wrong idea.

This happens when you take something that is important, but only one element, and instead get the idea that it is the whole story. When you do this, you focus on one small detail, but fail to include the more important things that make it dancing, and especially fail to get the proportions right.

So you go around babbling about 46 degrees or tip of toe or somesuch - which are all terrible bad advice outside of the specific contexts where they would be good advice.

"Anybody who believes that on a back Lockstep Quickstep that the hip goes back and the shoulder doesn't."

Please don't misquote. The hip goes back MORE than the shoulder.

"I said There is sway on step three of a Natural Spin Turn. What exactly did you mean by "I hope not"

The spin turn action is SSS

"Do you still believe that nobody has ever done the first three of a Natural correct ever."

Of course not, the state of the art is still evolving. If someone had done it correclty, there would be nothing left to discover.

"When you say you are forbiden from passing a person who is in front of you. I'm sure you will have difficulty grasping this. When I appear to be sideways. My partner is still in front of me. Second third step on the Feather. I am moving sideways but my partner is still in front of me. That is not too hard to understand is it."

Indeed, you have not passed them.
If you have, you have lost body position. The only time you are allowed to pass someone (move from a trailing position to a leading one) is if you are turning, which is what I said to start with.

"I see you now believe that the man does not shape to his left"

Take some lessons and you might discover this key element.

"and that the lady does move her foot into position before the man moves on a Backward Walk"

Her foot moves a little bit, but it does not move "into position" yet - it cannot do so, because "in position" will not be defined until the movement of the man's body shows what the position will be.

"And do you still believe that the heel of the supporting foot lowers before the moving foot comes along side on a backward step."

Not on a backward WALK, but yes, this is a key component of many backwards STEPS as you would know if you were taking PRIVATE LESSONS with blackpool champs and not merely confusing yourself trying to follow their lectures.

"I see you have changed your mind on whether or not there is a midway point between two steps."

No, but I did try to help with your confusion - everything has a midpoint, the dispute has always been what happens there. You can for example go from weight on one foot to weight on the other without ever having weight on both, because the midpoint in that case would be "weight on neither". It's still a midpoint, but it's the proper one, rather than what you prefer.

"And this is a classic. My aim is to establish sufficient doubt in the minds of other dancers who seriously want to improve."

you won't learn until you start asking hard questions.

"We go to the point of imbalance and did you say we fall out having to catch our weight."

Practically quoted from a blackpool champ...

"Don't forget to answer the questions will you."

Been doing so for months. When are you going to get around to looking at picture number two and admitting that it shows a body which CANNOT POSSIBLY BE BALANCED OVER THE STANDING FOOT.
Re: Andrew Sinkinson
Posted by Don
11/16/2006  3:30:00 PM
Anonymous. Do you have tunnel vision.
For the present lets deal with your last paragraph. look at picture two.
For those wishing to get a print of the Forward or Backward Walks go to Learning Centre and click on Technical Tips. Then Forward Walks.
Anonymous . Look at picture two. Then look at picture one. Picture two is a continuation of one. On picture one the weight is over the RF.foot on the ball . The supporting heel is in contact with the floor. We are now ready to commence a Walk. On two the Walk has commenced.
Well what do you know. We are as in picture two. I would say without fear of contradiction that you never reach position three in the picture do you. Because you have never been taught. Some of the things you have said , and there are plenty. would lead me to believe that whoever taught you had very limited advice to pass on to you.
Just one more thing to add. You said plain enough twice that the shoulder does not go back with the hip on a Backward Lock.
On a Back Lock with the CBMP on the first step. Hold that line on the second and third step. On the third step the right shoulder is over the right hip which is over the RF. This is where the person going backwards has made space for the person going forward. So that the person going forward can maintain a straight line and still has the lady on his right hip. You do know we are diagnal to the wall don't you.
Last at this time.
And you still persist in saying that nobody has ever done the first three of a Natural in the Waltz, which was introduced by Victor Silvester December 1922, Correctly.
You really are a fool. Your reasoning for the above is it is still evolving. So what about the Spin Turn or the Feather and Reverse. Nobody has ever done them correct either because they are still evolving.So why would you give a person advice on something that nobody has ever done correctly.
You'll have a job to live that one down.
Re: Andrew Sinkinson
Posted by Anonymous
11/16/2006  8:02:00 PM
"Picture two is a continuation of one. On picture one the weight is over the RF.foot on the ball . The supporting heel is in contact with the floor. We are now ready to commence a Walk. On two the Walk has commenced."

The sequence of walks as shown has some serious errors - even their author now admits he wants to recreate them. However, picture two does show a proper position of the standing foot, standing knee and body - specifically it shows that the body is off balance. And that is the only reason I call your attention to that sequence - the rest of it should not be emulated, because the rest of it is wrong.

"You said plain enough twice that the shoulder does not go back with the hip on a Backward Lock."

Both go back with the body because the body is sustaining movement. However, the hip moves back relative to the body to create the CBMP postion - which means that the hip moves back relative to the shoulder too. The key here is that CBMP is taking the hip back without the shoulder, but of course everything is also moving. You seem to have the same problem understanding this superposition of movement in the feather step two - where the leg moves a small amount relative to the body, but the body is moving a large amont across the floor.

"And you still persist in saying that nobody has ever done the first three of a Natural in the Waltz, which was introduced by Victor Silvester December 1922, Correctly. You really are a fool."

If you think there is nothing left to improve - then you are the fool. Clearly, we are still learning as a community what a natural turn is supposed to be. We can't do it correclty, because no one yet knows for sure what would be correct. It's an ongoing process of discovery - execpt to someone who wants to claim they've already heard all the answers.

"So why would you give a person advice on something that nobody has ever done correctly."

Because there's dancing it slighlty incorrectly and then there seriously flawed. There's still a lot of room for you to improve before you catch up with the present state of the art - which of course will continue to improve while you are trying to catch up with it.
Re: Andrew Sinkinson
Posted by Don
11/16/2006  9:17:00 PM
Anonymous. So you are saying nobody dances correctly. So I will never catch up ever because it is forever changing. So therefore none of us will ever dance correctly. All the books and tapes are not correct. Didn't the mathematician Stephen Hawking say in his book with time everything goes from order to disorder. Maybe the 1920 dancers were better than they are today, and the further we go the worse we get. So there is no hope for us, so lets stick to what we've got. One thing though if you twist your spine and have been doing it like that for a while. You most likely already have degeneration of the spine. Later you might say I wish I had paid more notice and checked it out with my physio people. Thats why I think it is almost a crime to try to convince people to torque their spine.

+ View More Messages

Copyright  ©  1997-2024 BallroomDancers.com