"Anonymous. Just for your benifit once again. But instead this time tell us exactly how you interpret this. Page 10
In the actual Walk the weight is first on the stationary foot At the full extent of the stride it is divided for a moment in between the heel of the front foot and the ball of the back foot."

Two comments:

1) This is an EXERCISE not a dance figure - you will not find that exact action occuring anywhere in any dance, though you will find many things related to it.

2) It doesn't say anything about straight legs.

"You said Paragraph eight. It is nearly impossible to get two straight legs.( straight doesn' t mean rigid )
What exactly do you do. Is your knee bent at the extent of the stride. Is that what you are being taught."

Stop chopping things out of context!!
I said that with CHAMPIONSHIP LOWERING it is nearly impossible to get two straight legs. This is because when you construct a triagle with that kind of angle at the top of it, your feet would have to be IMPRACTICALLY FAR APART. This is simply geometry. As a result, in championship dancing it is quite rare to be able to get both legs fully straight. On the other hand, IF YOU DON'T LOWER VERY MUCH, THEN IT IS EASY TO GET STRAIGHT LEGS.

"As we are aware the ball of the moving foot from a closed position skims the floor. Then it becomes a heel skimmimg the floor with the toe slightly raised."

Yes, that's usually what happens.

"Then at the extent of the stride the weight is divided for a moment in between the heel of the front foot and the ball of the back foot."

No, that almost never actually happens in well coordinated dancing. In good dancing, your weight would depart the old foot before it arrives on the new - momentarily, you are not being supported. Only if you keep things short and choppy are you likely to be able to achieve a dual-support phase.

"In your reply I would expect you to say that at the extent of the stride the front foot is flat on the floor and the knee is bent."

Of course not - that would be really unwise!

"But to even suggest that a persons feet can leave the floor in Standard is too stupid for words. That is how we walk not how we dance. Again look at the picture."

Nobody suggested that the feet should leave the floor. But what you are missing is that 99% of the issue is what the body and the standing leg do. And that is THE SAME FOR WALKING AND DANCE-WALKING. The 1% difference of how high the moving foot is off the floor is FUNCTIONALLY IRREVELEVANT if the movement itself is well aimed. Only if you aim poorly, or fling the weight of a raised moving foot around, would the fact that it has lost contact with the floor actually change anything.

Anon the "",
I always read what you write, but I do not understand how the weight is not centralized at the extent of the walk. What about the side step? How much weight is carried into these steps? On any walk does the foot arrive into its position with the body weight over the foot? If so, does this mean the body stops moving until the other foot closes under the body?

In response to "mad russian". I agree with your comments. Alex Moore's book, good as it is, is a little bit dated. Very good dancers don't dance as it is written in the book. If you really struggle, you can make the book's text and diagrams nearly fit in some cases. But these attempts in this only underline the point that dancing has moved on a little. The diagram for the closed change doesn't show the way it is done. I followed this for a long time while i was a beginner, and had to learn the correct technique later. I'm sure i'm not the only one, and that's not the only example
I am a traditionalist at heart, but my top priority is good dancing

Anonymous and quickstep - will you two guys please stop arguing about this weight change thing. nobody is learning anything from it

jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjololkk

what bicth

"do not understand how the weight is not centralized at the extent of the walk. What about the side step? How much weight is carried into these steps? On any walk does the foot arrive into its position with the body weight over the foot?"

Generally, yes, - by the time the foot is placed, the body weight will already be ready to get on it.

"If so, does this mean the body stops moving until the other foot closes under the body?"

No, the body keeps moving - usually it projects beyond the standing foot a bit before the moving foot has closed.

Obviously the action in tango is rather different.

Puzzled. It is interesting about the side step. This is what we are taught. When you step to the side you will be on both toes passing the weight from one foot to the other. At some point for a moment your wight will be split. One place in particular where it is often done wrong is between the first and second step of a Reverse Turn in the Foxtrot. Also between four and five on the Reverse Turn. The mistake is being lazy, (or having never been told ), and coming off a flat foot. It is also taught that on the step to the side think of the leg as being a rod. On a Backward Walk I think all of us will agree with the technique book that the feet stay in contact with the floor man or lady.
So all we have under the microscope is one step forward. With the moving leg under the body say the right foot, The ball of the foot touches the floor untill it becomes a heel. The push is from the standing leg. The heel skims the floor and at the extent of the stride we will be on the front heel and on the ball of the rear foot. The heel of the left foot having left the floor. If anybody follows that they will not be wrong. None of this will happen if the weight of the body is allowed to go in front of the moving leg. Where this idea ever came from goodness knows. I would not want anybody to believe me on this last bit concerning the body weight. Go and look for yourself. There is enough right here on this site to look at and to prove.

"None of this will happen if the weight of the body is allowed to go in front of the moving leg. Where this idea ever came from goodness knows."

It is a PLAIN AND OBVIOUS FACT that in ordinary walking, as in the action of the swing dances, EACH STEP BEGINS WITH THE BODY GOING AHEAD OF THE LEGS. Then the moving leg starts moving under the advancing body. Eventually it may overtake the body by some amount.

BUT THE BODY GOES FIRST.

In the Technique book it very clearly says in three places in as many pages that from a stationary position the weight must be brought forward over the balls of the feet. Absolutely nothing is mentioned about getting the body ahead of the feet. Once we start walking thats it. The foot, it is calculated travels twice the speed of the body. As s soon as from a stationary position the weight moves over the ball of the foot the foot is off travelling twice the speed of the body. If you walk the way you discribe down the aisle in your local super market you would soon be followed by the Security.
Close your eyes, or anybody close your eyes. Imagine walking with your body going ahead of your feet.
If you are doing a Rumba Walk very definitely the foot freezes on beat two which is step one and the body continues to go to the point of imbalance and then is caught by the next step, by a foot that is travelling twice the speed of the body. If it didn't we would finish flat on our face.
But we are not doing Latin here. This is Standard.
When you say. EVENTUALLY the foot MAY overtake the body by some amount. That is to stupid for words.
Who flogged this information to you. It must have been a Dr.Good and his Travelling Medicine Show. Who then ran off laughing all the way to the bank.
When comencing a walk from a closed position the weight must always be brought forward over the Balls of the feet. That's right, we do it every day. But where did you get the idea that this happens at the end of the step onto the next step and from there on. Give me a discription from any technique book or DVD. Excluding DR. Good's. Also keep those feet in contact with the floor.