Quickstep wrote:

"Also look at the very beginning and watch Timothy Howson do a conventional Intro and a Feather Step just as it is in the book"

Howson's feather is conventioal, but it is not even remotely consistent with the flawed theories of timing that you've posted in the past.

The video in question has 50 or 51 frames per measure, which is to say each beat is about 12.5 frames.

The timing between the steps for Howson's feather is:

Prep to step 1: 15 frames
Step 1 to step 2: 14 frames
Step 2 to step 4: 20 frames

So if we assume that like everyone else Howson is putting step 2 on beat three, then we find that:

The prep step occurs just after the "and" after beat four, on "beat 4.6" NOT ON BEAT FOUR

Step one occurs very slightly before beat two, a bit closer to it than Sinkinson's step 2.

Step three occurs right on beat three (this is what we used as our music to action reference)

Step four occurs just after the and after four, on "beat 4.6".

So, what we have is that Howson's feather's last quick is a little earlier than Sinkinson's by the numbers, but it's stil more than a half beat behind beat four!

And watching the video for appreciation of the dancing, it's immediatley notable that Howson doesn't extend his drift nearly as much on step three as Sinkinson did. I wouldn't quite call him impatient, but it doesn't have the outstanding, floating patience of Sinkinson's version.

And if we were to find someday who was actually placing that foot before the and after four... that would look very impatient, in the off-time beginner sort of way.

Another detail to be sure not to miss on this video:

See how Howson's right heel is flat on the ground on step 3 of the feather before this moving left foot breaks free from its place to even begin closing? Just as on Jonathan's video, and contradictory to your mistaken belief.

And then there's the timing of the foot rise. You have to look very, very carefully, but you can see that Howson's right heel is off the ground just before the moving left foot passes it to end step one. Another detail, performed exactly as the world's leading teachers say it should be, and in direct conflict with your imagination of how it is done.

What happened to step Two? Surly you mean that that on step Two you are right on beat Three,and where does step Four come into it?

Dave. I'm with you on that one.
Anonymouse . Counting frames will only land you into trouble. Just briefly. You would count 4.5 as 4.1/2 steps. As we know the 1/2 is part of the 4 and not the step that hasn' t arrived. if we draw a line 4 is this side, 1/2 is the other side. Without music how do you know the both the 4 and the 1/2 are not starting on this side of the line, or on the line
Getting off that. I noticed you didn' t have anything to say about Crossley and Hawkins. We will leave that one also to be spoken of some other time.
If you can't beat them then fight them on their own ground.
Looking at different dancers dancing a Feather Finish or a Feather Step
Feather Step.
Frame by frame. How many dancers can you find who at the end of the second step are on the way down. And how many dancers can you see are lowering only at the end of the third step. You can add to that any Feather Finish. You will if you look see a proportion of both. With the majority lowering as per the first example. But not all of them. What exactly do you do if you look at yourself frame by frame. And is there a right and a wrong way.... You've been framed.

Yes, sorry about the typos. It is step TWO on beat three, and step THREE no sooner than a half beat after beat four.

"Counting frames will only land you into trouble."

On the contrary, it's about the only way you can safely analyze this video once you discover the error the production company made in processing it.

"Just briefly. You would count 4.5 as 4.1/2 steps. As we know the 1/2 is part of the 4 and not the step that hasn' t arrived. if we draw a line 4 is this side, 1/2 is the other side. Without music how do you know the both the 4 and the 1/2 are not starting on this side of the line, or on the line"

I know that the one half (actually .6 for Howson, more than .7 for Sinkinson) must come out of the two beat interval between "4" and "2". Regardless of how this lines up with the music, what I have in the frame count is PROOF that the slow step is not twice the lenght of the quick - in actually fact, the SECOND QUICK TAKES MORE TIME THAN THE SLOW!

"Getting off that. I noticed you didn' t have anything to say about Crossley and Hawkins. We will leave that one also to be spoken of some other time."

It takes time to make accurate measurements, I thought I'd start with a simple case from the beginning of the video that is more than adequate to prove the FUNDAMENTAL ERROR of your timing argument.

"Looking at different dancers dancing a Feather Finish or a Feather Step
Feather Step.
Frame by frame. How many dancers can you find who at the end of the second step are on the way down."

Everyone of any quality is at their highest point at the end of the second step - this is the point where their descent in fact commences. But the specifical falling action mentioned in the book won't occur until later. The initial fall which commences from the end of step two is entirely due to leg division, and the book really doesn't comment much on leg division.

"And how many dancers can you see are lowering only at the end of the third step."

ABSOLUTELY NONE, excepting of course untrained beginners.

Now back to the video: You might find this interesting - start it up and count the music out loud with your finger positioned on the pause key. As Howson takes his prep step, close your eyes but keep counting. Press pause precisely on the downbeat of beat three of the next measure, which is his feather. Open your eyes, and ask yourself, where he is in the action. Try a few of the others in classic SQQ figures, making sure to close your eyes to avoid visual distraction in getting that pause precisly on the beat.

You should try reading Len Scriveners Just One Idea. Regarding starting to lower on the second step of the Feather. Which then brings us to Harry Smith - Hampshire who asks the question....
The footwork of the man's 3rd step of a Foxtrot Feather Step is given as TH in the technique books. Describe the exact positioning of the moving leg when the heel of the supporting leg touches the floor.
I will add one thing to that. There are some of our top dancers who do appear to delay their lowering. So acording to the books where should that moving leg be.
Don' t lets forget third step is across the body in CBMP as it is on the 6th of the Reverse Turn.
See if you can check Timothy Howson on that third step. Do you see how he comes into a neutral position. and is that left shoulder leading into the Reverse. I don't think so.
Now we have what is and what is it supposed to be.
As far as I can see the Timothy's timing used on the Feather is as we all try to do. S Q Q. I'm waiting for your words on Jonathann Crossley now, to see what he does with a Feather as well as Hawkins We don't need frame by frame to see their timing do we.
Lets not forget you very recently said that dancers do not do a Feather Step all quicks.

I've been away on a Greek island for the last week , so haven't been able to take part in this till now.
First, it's very possible and indeed fruitful to count frames to establish detailed timing by top dancers. I've done it many times with Sinkinson's waltz.It gives an insight to their musical interpetation.
I'm not a championship grade dancer. Later this summer, we will almost certainly have to move from Intermediate to Pre-champ so am very keen to learn.(international style).
I have some genuine questions (not 'hidden agenda' questions).
I do try to 'hover' on step 2 of my feather by extending it to 1.5 beats (and i can consistenly do this). However, when i do this at the start of my routine, i do my prep step on 4 (or just after - but not 4.5), step 1 on beat 1, step 2 on beat 2.5 and step 3 on beat 4. Basically, i extend step 2 by stealing time from the first slow.
I'm interested to read about starting step 1 on beat 1.5, and landing step 2 on beat 3 etc. Basically, this is a half-beat delayed version of what i do. While i'm writing this, i remember a posting by Jonathan some months ago, where he said that, in general, if a quick is followed by a slow, it steals time from that slow (hope i'm quoting that correctly Jonathan).
Should i be aiming for step 1 of the feather on beat 1.5.? How do judges view a lower (than championship grade) dancer doing this? I'm sure i could dance it this way.
Also, on the lowering at end of step 3. Isn't this essential when the next figure is a reverse turn (as it is for us) as i have to rise during this reverse turn to provide the lead for the lady.
To be honest, my main work with my dancing at present is to maintain an attractive frame and position at all times, to provide a better lead, and to look more relaxed and 'lazy' in comps. These are my priorities, but i'm interested in details of timing and interpretation. I have no problem with tricky timing details as i have both a musical and engineering background (i know - i know - dancing is art, not engineering )
PS - i'm also not a slave to the technique book.

"Jonathann Crossley now, to see what he does with a Feather as well as Hawkins We don't need frame by frame to see their timing do we.
Lets not forget you very recently said that dancers do not do a Feather Step all quicks."

Preliminarily it appears that neither is dancing a conventional feather; instead they are doing syncopated running actions derived from the feather. Also note that both begin outside partner - that by itself won't disqualify it from being a conventional feather, but the fact that the figure takes a lot less than a full measure DOES!

You won't find someone doing this action in a place where a conventional feather belongs. In another place, for example between Crossley's hover and his fallaway, something other than a conventional feather makes sense, and was used. In essence, he's runing to catch up with the music.

Obviously you have not yet discovered the video company's mistake though.

As for Howson, his third step is drifted way out - in accordance with the way SQQ is actually performed, but in GROSS CONFLICT with your claims about how it is to be done.

And whatever you think about when the man's foot should be lowering, it's plainly clear that it is actually FLAT *BEFORE* the feet close. The action would be very awkward if he delayed it, so like just about everyone else with a clue, he does not.

"First, it's very possible and indeed fruitful to count frames to establish detailed timing by top dancers. I've done it many times with Sinkinson's waltz.It gives an insight to their musical interpetation."

Indeed, it's quite a bit more accurate than any hearing-based method for determining in detail what actually happened. By itself it will give you the relative timing of the steps; nail down the position of one point to the music (such as by the count with your eyes closed and press pause method) and you can then determine where everything else falls in the music.

"I do try to 'hover' on step 2 of my feather by extending it to 1.5 beats (and i can consistenly do this). However, when i do this at the start of my routine, i do my prep step on 4 (or just after - but not 4.5), step 1 on beat 1, step 2 on beat 2.5 and step 3 on beat 4. Basically, i extend step 2 by stealing time from the first slow."

It seems like there might be some confusion either between us in the way you've expressed this, or in the actual goals. The interval between the placement of steps one and two is going to be the shortest of the three, while the interval between steps two and three is the longest. It's that long interval which steals time from the following slow, such that you have step two landing right on beat three, but then drift the movement into step three all the way until it lands sometime after the and after 4 - 4.6 for Howson, later than 4.7 for Sinkinson. Into the next measure then, you'll place the slow just a little before beat 2.

"Basically, this is a half-beat delayed version of what i do."

Yes, it seems to me that you're about a half beat ahead all the way through. There interesting thing is that if you are a consistent amount ahead all the way through, it's very likely that people won't usually notice, as the proportionate timing of your steps is still right. We're pretty used to seeing actions that are visually offset from the corresponding sounds, and our minds tend to overlook the difference unless either we look in detail, or it's something like lips moving/words sounding where we tend to use both to interpret meaning.

"While i'm writing this, i remember a posting by Jonathan some months ago, where he said that, in general, if a quick is followed by a slow, it steals time from that slow (hope i'm quoting that correctly Jonathan)."

Actually that was my comment, but Jonathan confirmed that it matches what all the notables are doing.

"How do judges view a lower (than championship grade) dancer doing this?"

This is not artisitc license, it is actually the proper way to dance a foxtrot. However, if there's anything odd that you have to do to achieve it, such as getting "stuck" up and stationary on step two waiting for the music to let you lower, someone might try to recommend you go back to a choppier beginner action with more explicitly seperated rise, fall, drive, arrival, etc. You don't want to wait for the music (which is a situation in which many intermediates find themselves tuck), you want to time things all the way through such that you and the music arrive on the downswing together.

"as i have both a musical and engineering background (i know - i know - dancing is art, not engineering)"

Engineering is merely a set of practical tools that makes more interesting art possible!

I only asked the question about how judges view this for non-champ grade dancers because the text book calls the feather step S-Q-Q and i'm not doing that. I'm doing Medium (1.5)- medium -q.
It's much nicer than the strict S-Q-Q and i think expresses the feeling of good foxtrot music much better. As i said, i'm not a slave to the technique book, but are some judges expecting the lower grades to follow it exactly? I don't think i get 'stuck' anywhere.
I have more severe problems, but there's no harm working on something i can cope with.
Talking of Sinkinson's slow waltz - i reckon he lands step 2 a quarter beat early(1-2-3 natural turn). Which probably gives him more time to do nice shaping and gathering etc on 3 and 3&. I'm only guessing. I never asked him. didn't have the nerve! I've tried dancing it this way, and when i get it right, it does have a nice feel to it.

"I only asked the question about how judges view this for non-champ grade dancers because the text book calls the feather step S-Q-Q and i'm not doing that."

Actually, I think you are dancing consistently with the book when you do that.

SQQ should not be taken over-literally.

It lays out the outline of the figure, and has meaning in terms of feel, but really can only be interpreted in terms of the traditions and dynamics of ballroom dancing. Anyone who tries to tell you that a slow in foxtrot actually gets twice as much time as a quick is dead wrong and grossly ignorant. To do so would be at odds with the entire character of foxtrot.

This is what we mean when we say SQQ: when we mean something else, such as the abnormal quasi-syncopated running feathers lasting less than a full measure which Quickstep has found in two places in the Blackpool video, we would not call those SQQ. They are essentially differnet figures, with different timing, for a different application - for one thing, they aren't coming from a normal feather precede (and note in both cases that the first step is also outside partner - that doesn't have to change the timing, but it's another clue that these are not the usual situation)

"Talking of Sinkinson's slow waltz - i reckon he lands step 2 a quarter beat early(1-2-3 natural turn)."

Possible, but it would be worth checking the other steps too to see if they are also ahead, or if the interval between steps is uneven.

If it's uniformly ahead and the step intervals are even, the very real possibility exists that you are looking at a video with a synchronization problem between the sound and picture; it's actually quite common as the two data streams often get seperated in processing. Unless there's something obvious in that same segment like someone talking on camera the offset might not be caught.

But if the interval between steps (in frames) is uneven, then I would expect you've found some interpretive musicality. In general, while beginners want to march through things, more advanced dancers will really consider each component of potential rigidity: do I want to be fixed and sqaure there, or might something else be more musical? That's after all how we ended up with sway and shape in the first place - someone figured out that being purely vertical "at attention" was really not the best way to do things.