"If you had lessons with Len, you would know that he DID disagree with the " book" ."

He may have thought he was disagreeing with it, but much of his apparent disagreement is the result of his decision to examine factors that Moore's book IGNORES. When two people are talking about two different things, they may appear to disagree, but in reality they are just talking about different things.

"No one is denying the legs come into play.. thats not the issue ."

On the contrary it is PRECISELY the issue. Moore's book ignores the way in which closing and then redividing the legs in step 2-3 of a feather step will create a change in altitude of the body. Because his book ignores this, it's description of rise and fall appears to contradict the obvious trend of body altitude in a well danced feather. This is because the book is not discussing body altitude when it refers to rise and fall, instead it is referring to foot (and to a lesser degree, knee) action.

Scrivener on the other hand considers all sources of change in body altitude, and ends up with a description that matches the overall effect you see.

The two authors appear to disagree with each other, but mostly what they have done is include (Scrivener) and exclude (Moore) different factors from their analysis.

I think we may have gone from the Waltz to the Foxtrot. Whichever one it is I suggest that you go to a slow teaching count as is on the Letter Service tapes or disks and see exactly what they are demonstrating. On the third step of the Feather where are they at the time they lower the heel to the floor. Is it before the moving foot comes underneath the body. Or is it as the moving foot comes underneath the body.

"On the third step of the Feather where are they at the time they lower the heel to the floor. Is it before the moving foot comes underneath the body. Or is it as the moving foot comes underneath the body."

This depends on the size and dynamic of the movement that the dancers wish to execute.

With the limited altitude change and smaller movement of traditional dancing, much of the descent is complete by the time the foot is flat, so this will occur late in the overall descent, as the feet are passing.

But with todays larger and more dynamic dancing, the majority of the overall altitude change will occur in the legs AFTER the feet are flat on the floor. Since the lowering out of the foot rise marks only the beginning of the overall descent, it will have to be complete earlier, usually before the feet pass.

The technical rules underpinning both methods are the same; but applying the same rules to two different situations (two different desired outcomes) generates two different sequences of action.

Anonymous . We are not refering to different situations . We are dicussing the third step of the Feather Step in the Internation Foxtrot which usually is followed by a Reverse Movement. The question is where should the moving foot be at the time that the heel of the standing foot lowers to the floor. does it correspond to the lowering by the lady who is going backward, or do they lower at different times. We all know that the lady lowers the heel to the floor only as the moving foot passes the standing foot. So what does the man do.

"We all know that the lady lowers the heel to the floor only as the moving foot passes the standing foot."

This is a common misconception based on sloppy reading of the technique and insufficient attention to the role of technique in producing the desired overall dancing.

1) in a plain WALKING ACTION as documented in the introduction of Moore's book, danced with NO RISE OR FALL, then this would be true. But that's not the case in this figure. Instead, a descent is occurring, and that will necessarily make the details of action different than in the case with no rise or fall.

2) If the lady had foot rise, this would be the traditional timing for when the foot rise would be lost. But she does not have foot rise, so it's not literally mandated that her foot go flat at this point and not before.

Now, speaking more generally, I'd refer you to my post of yesterday on when the feet go flat / foot rise is lost in small traditional vs. large modern movements:

This depends on the size and dynamic of the movement that the dancers wish to execute.

With the limited altitude change and smaller movement of traditional dancing, much of the descent is complete by the time the foot is flat, so this will occur late in the overall descent, as the feet are passing.

But with todays larger and more dynamic dancing, the majority of the overall altitude change will occur in the legs AFTER the feet are flat on the floor. Since the lowering out of the foot rise marks only the beginning of the overall descent, it will have to be complete earlier, usually before the feet pass.

The technical rules underpinning both methods are the same; but applying the same rules to two different situations (two different desired outcomes) generates two different sequences of action.

"Anonymous . We are not refering to different situations . "

The different situations are the range of possible desired characters of the dancing - traditional, small and high in the legs, or modern, large and descending very low into the knees during the lowering. Applying consistent underlying rules of technique to both cases dictates that the sequence of actions will have to be different to create each desired outcome.

Anonymous. Exactly which technique book are you reading from. I am not aware of any book which says that the person going backward does not lower the heel to the floor of the standing foot untill the moving foot arrives under the body.
Backward Walk.
Alex Moore Page 13 paragraph 3.
Continue to move backwards, draw the RF back to the LF and at the same time lower slowly the left heel to the floor making sure it does not touch the floor untill the RF is level with it. The RF is drawn back with the heel on the floor the ball being lowered as it reaches the LF. Continue the walk with the RF. If you are the same Anonymous. I remember about two years ago quoting this to you. I can't believe that anybody would still be making the same mistakes.
One former British Champion goes as far as to say that if the lowering is too early that person will have to tilt the hip to allow the foot to pass. Only slightly but enough to destroy the ballance. Plus they will be falling backwards. I have this on a teaching video. Now pleaser quote from your reference book on the same step.

"Anonymous. Exactly which technique book are you reading from. I am not aware of any book which says that the person going backward does not lower the heel to the floor of the standing foot untill the moving foot arrives under the body.
Backward Walk."

Perhaps you would care to cite a technique book which DOES mandate this SPECIFICALLY for a FEATHER STEP?

"Alex Moore Page 13 paragraph 3."

That is describing a walk without rise or fall, NOT A FEATHER STEP.

"If you are the same Anonymous. I remember about two years ago quoting this to you."

And you are still ignoring the fact that what you are quoting is written about a DIFFERENT SITUATION that the one being discussed. You have no justification whatsoever for assuming that the sequence of actions in a feather step is precisely the same as it would be in a walk danced without rise or fall.

The simple reality has always been that the proper timing for the lowering of the heel depends on the SPECIFIC CHARACTER OF MOVEMENT DESIRED. There is no general rule applicable to all situations. Only by examining the entire situation of the dancing desired can you deteremine what timing of the heel lowering would be just right to support that specific goal, because there are many different right answers suiting the many different ways in which great dancers have danced many different figures. The only consistent thing we can say about all of them is that they've chosen what is best for the specific situation at hand, rather than unthinkingly assume that the details of some other situation will apply.

Anonymous . Answer the question and don't be ridiculous. Page 13 is describing a walk Backwards. Being that the Foxtrot has more steps backwards for both the man and the lady. If he had thought that there would be those of hard understanding he would have probably put in in extra chapter or two on understanding. Then the technique book would finish with more pages than Gone With The Wind.
You obviously do not visit Learn the Dances on this site, are you not capable of letting it register on what you see.
Just simply copy word for word what is written under Backward Walks in any technique book if it differs to Alex Moore. Or if you like put it in your own words how you believe a Backward Walk should be done from the time it begins to the finish. Any dance. Stepping to the side is a different story but related, which I am almost certain you do not know the correct technique. You might like to give your version on that also .

"Anonymous . Answer the question and don't be ridiculous. Page 13 is describing a walk Backwards."

Yes, which is to say it is NOT DESCRIBING A FEATHER STEP. Unlike a feather step, it is describing an action with NO RISE AND NO FALL.

Why is this difference still impossible for you to comprehend after so many years?

Anonymouse. There is no difference in a Backward Walk in a Foxtrot or a Backward Walk in the Waltz . The timing is different otherwise both finish under the body. In the Waltz the knee flexes and the next step, step two with the LF, goes to the side if this is the first three of a Natural Turn..
You still haven't given how you think a Backward Walk should be , technique wise. Or anything that can be copied from any technique book. Falure to do this proves that there isn't any.
If you can find your way to Google Marcus Hilton Basic Foxtrot. And can press Pause then move that thermometer type thing you will see right at the beginning especialy on step three by the lady exactly what technique she is doing. If you can get that far, I will point out something else that is worth looking at on the same clip.