"Not till the front toe touches the floor."

WRONG AGAIN

The height of the front ankle doesn't depend more than a small amount if the toe is up or not.

In contrast, with the back heel up, it's ankle is much higher than the front one.

This PLAINLY REQUIRES that with straight legs the BODY MUST BE CLOSER TO THE FRONT FOOT.

If yours isn't, then you in denial about the FACT that you are BENDING YOUR BACK KNEE there.


"But that is really beside the point of this thread: was this thread is about is proving that if you do seek to split your weight between two articulated feet, and intend to keep your knees stright, then your body wil HAVE TO BE CLOSER TO THE FRONT FOOT THAN TO THE BACK.

That is simply, irrefutable geometry.

For so many times I have told you that the body will reach a point which is exactly half way between the front foot and the back foot. This is going forward or backward or to the side. take your pick.
Going Forward. Just put a bit of common sense here. As the weight arrives midway the front foot will stop moving. This will allow the body to catch up to the foot that is in front. From what you have written I believe you have never got a straight leg, possibly the rear leg straightens but that front leg. What a mess.
Draw a triangle with the long side at the base. draw a line down exactly half way. with the triangle divided into two we have a front and a back. As we enter the front this is the half where the knee will start to bend. Behind you this is where the leg will be straight showing that beautiful leg line right to the tip of toe before it starts to bend.
Try to remember that the front foot will become flat immediatly.
The ladies steps are not a mirror of the man's steps. Can you pick the main difference. I would be quite happy if you were to quote from an Official Handbook.

"Draw a triangle with the long side at the base. draw a line down exactly half way. with the triangle divided into two we have a front and a back. As we enter the front this is the half where the knee will start to bend. Behind you this is where the leg will be straight"

If both legs are straight and both feet articulated, then the rear leg is noticeably longer (measured to the floor) and the body will have to be CLOSER TO THE FRONT FOOT THAN TO THE REAR.

It's ELEMENTARY GEOMETRY.

Yes, there will be a point where the body is halfway between the feet, but this CANNOT OCCUR when both feet are articulated and both knees are straight.

It's simply not possible to create an isoceles triangle when your foot articulation puts your ankles at such different heights.

"Try to remember that the front foot will become flat immediatly."

Doesn't really matter, the rear ankle will STILL BE HIGHER, meaning the triangle will still not be isosceles. If your body is equidistant between your feet, then either your back knee is bent, or your back heel is still very low to the floor.

Elementary and irrefutable geometry...

So are you saying because the front foot is flat and the back heel is off the floor and there is a difference in the height of the ankles we dont have a central position. Regardless of that there had to be a mid point. You surely aren't trying to tell us that we can only pass a mid point if the ankles are the same height. All of this it seems is to justify your inability to get on the heel of the front foot and the toe of the back foot with your weight equally distributed between the two with the knees straight. Once There was a Spot . That For One Brief Shining Moment Was Midpoint.

I've been trying to follow this discussion to make sense of it.
I have a genuine question, not wishing to take 'sides'
This point:
"""""to get on the heel of the front foot and the toe of the back foot with your weight equally distributed between the two with the knees straight."""""
When should i be doing this? I was sort of avoiding having my 2 knees straight.(except maybe when they're together)

"So are you saying because the front foot is flat and the back heel is off the floor and there is a difference in the height of the ankles we dont have a central position."

Not with your feet in these positions and both legs straight you can't. It's geometrically impossible.

"Regardless of that there had to be a mid point. You surely aren't trying to tell us that we can only pass a mid point if the ankles are the same height. "

For the body to be halfway between the feet, either the ankles must be the same height or the knees must be bent by different amounts to accomodate the difference in ankle height.

"All of this it seems is to justify your inability to get on the heel of the front foot and the toe of the back foot with your weight equally distributed between the two with the knees straight. "

Inability? No, it's a piece of cake. I just don't feel that it is usually appropriate, and so I make the strategic choice not to. But I easily can if/when I want to.

I must believe then that you do not have a knee that can be considered straight at the extent of your stride.. If it isn' t straight then it must be bent You know as well as I do that that is not according to the correct technique. If this was a major competition the judges would be on it in a flash. Do it once maybe. Do it consistently and you are gone. Maybe where you are everybody bends their knee, that just makes you all a law unto yourself. Move out of your evironment and your gone.

"I must believe then that you do not have a knee that can be considered straight at the extent of your stride.."

Because you are obviously going to keep right on IGNORING the NUMEROUS CLEAR STATEMENTS OF THE FACT THAT IT IS INDEED STRAIGHT WHEN THAT IS APPROPRIATE.

Face it - you don't actually read what you are replying to, you simply subsitute your own wild assumptions.

"If it isn' t straight then it must be bent You know as well as I do that that is not according to the correct technique."

On, the contrary, unlike you, I know that depending on the nature of the figure and the size of the movement, it may well be IMPROPER to have a fully straight leg.

"If this was a major competition the judges would be on it in a flash."

You generally won't see fully straight legs in major competition! The dancers at that level lower too much to make it practical to get the front leg fully straight. But at social dance height, it's very easy to have a straight leg.

"Do it once maybe. Do it consistently and you are gone."

Yes, gone all the way to the final, and then home with the world title. Try really looking at some of these champions, and you will often see legs that never fully straighten, because the y are dancing in a way that would make fully straight legs INAPPROPRIATE.

They are not dancing what is described in the book - they are not doing a walking EXERCISE, they are doing a fully dynamic, fully flighted dance step with TONS OF LOWERING. To get their legs fully straight when their center is that low would be an impractical SPLIT.

=====================

Anyway... the real point of the thread was to point out to those who want to pass through a split weight point the simple fact that such a mid-stride position CANNOT actually have all the characeristics described for it.

One of them has to be wrong: either the back heel isn't up, or the back knee isn't straight, or the body isn't equidistant between the feet - the combination of all three is not possible. That is irrefutable geometry.

That this flawed teaching has survived as long as it has simply points out how people will repeate things they've heard without first investigating to see if they are literally posssible, or if something has gotten distorted or mis-stated in the course of handing down the idea.