Quickstep presumably watched current world (and British) champs Gozzoli and Betti. Here are my timings from a video of their that was on youtube (the one with the interview after they demo all five dances)

NTSC video, 30 frames per second

Weight on prep step: 0
Weight on first step: 21
Weight on first quick: 37
Weight on second quick: 61
Weight on next slow: 81

Duration of a measure (weight on slow to weight on slow) 60 frames. That would be 30 mpm, but I suspect they danced the prep step later than normal and it's really a more ordinary tempo.

Continue with measurement from weight change to weight change:

Duration of the slow: 21 frames or 20 frames (1st measure or second measure) = 1/3 measure.

Duration of first quick: 16 frames. Hey, it's actually quick!

Duration of second quick: 24 frames.
say what? The "quick" actually takes more time than the slow!

So what does this mean? It means that it's impossible to land the weight on both quicks squarely on the beat. If you put the first quick squarely on beat three, then the second quick will be 24/15 or more than a beat and a half later!

That's right - the top pros land the second quick not on beat four, but actually after the AND AFTER BEAT FOUR.

Seems we are back to square one. Frame by frame I see the foot arriving before the weight. Thats why I said as the knee straightens. That's where my count stops.
From the beginning after the count on the preperation step of 3. 4.The RF is to the rear. To count untill the knee straightens on the second quick ( third step). is still 44 frames. The weight as not arrived at this point which if you have been watching leaves them with the LF behind
You will see that the foot is in front of the body, not the body in front of the foot which should correct one of your misunderstandings. Anybody here can do the same and see which is so.
I've been looking at Gozzoli. If he is behind the beat on 4 I doubt if it could be clocked with a stop watch. Also you might notice his timing on the Feather is three quicks with one quick on the introduction step making four quicks in all QQQQ.I see on the Reverse Weave all steps on the beat.
You are now seeing how the foot is being placed before the body. You must have seen how Gozzoli come around square to the LOD on the Reverse and the toe turned in on the 4th step of the Reverse. I can't see any left shoulder leading into the Reverse. Can you.I've counted Gozzoli as 42 frames. What I did notice is the terrific amount of bending of the knee well into the 45 degree angle.The rear knee is about 9 inches from the floor very reminiscient of John Wood. Do you see the amount of turn over the left foot on the first of the Reverse Turn.Its worth a lesson working frame by frame isn't it.

"From the beginning after the count on the preperation step of 3. 4.The RF is to the rear. To count untill the knee straightens on the second quick ( third step). is still 44 frames. The weight as not arrived at this point which if you have been watching leaves them with the LF behind"

You can't expect to find the position of the third step in the measure by counting from the prep step, because you don't know when that is in the measure.

Instead, evaluate the interval between the second and third steps - and I GUARNANTEE that you will find it is well more than a beat.

"I've been looking at Gozzoli. If he is behind the beat on 4 I doubt if it could be clocked with a stop watch. "

Me too, but unlike you, I carefully measured the duration of his third step in three measures - and got the same answer of 23-24 freams ever time. The simple fact is that this is more than a beat and a half, which makes it IMPOSSIBLE FOR BOTH QUICKS TO FALL ON BEATS.

"Also you might notice his timing on the Feather is three quicks with one quick on the introduction step making four quicks in all QQQQ."

WRONG. Measure the step intervals as I did, and you will that they are not equal.

"I see on the Reverse Weave all steps on the beat."

WRONG AGAIN. Actual measurement of the timing turns out to be the same as for his feather - with the second quick placed more than 1.5 beats after the first quick.

TIME TO FACE FACTS - YOU ARE DEAD WRONG, AS ALL OF THE TOP PROS PLACE THE THIRD STEP WELL AFTER BEAT FOUR.

Contrary to quicksteps's wildly inaccurate claims, here are the actual timings from the landing of each step on Mirko's video:

All are S - Q - Q nominal

Feather: 21 - 16 -24
Reverse: 20 - 18 - 23
F.Finish: 20 - 17 - 24

Note not only the consistency of the timing through all of these basic figures, but how in each case the time between the strike of the second step and the strike of the third step is 23 frames, wheras a beat on this video is 15 frames, and 1.5 beats would be 22.5 freams.

That clearly indicates the Mirko Gozzoli consistently lands his third quick a BEAT AND HALF or more behind his second - and shows the lie in quickstep's infantile claim that he puts both steps on the beat.

"That clearly indicates the Mirko Gozzoli consistently lands his third quick a BEAT AND HALF or more behind his second"


Sorry, third STEP a beat and a half behind the SECOND

Or second QUICK a beat and a half behind the first.

You've lost me in a couple of places there. Next time I go dancing I will take my calculator with me. I still cannot see how a dancer of any standard can't get his two quicks on the beat. There must be something radically wrong there. How far behind will that make the first step of the Reverse. Now we are chasing the beat aren't we. We are out of time with the music. Are you aware that there is a count of and at the end of that quick. As we all agree , I hope, an and count comes from the beat your on and not the beat that is coming up.
I'll bet the guy who was being taught that all the steps were an equall length is tearing his hair.
So that I get this straight. Are you saying that the first step has two beats. The next step has one beat. ( that leaves one beat left over ) are you saying that the next step takes a beat and a half. You only have one beat. So you are taking a half a beat from the next beat which is the first of the Reverse Turn.Now the Reverse only has one and one half. You are out of time . That's if you were ever in time.
So that I can understand just put it simply like. First step two beats. second one beat and the third ??

"You've lost me in a couple of places there. Next time I go dancing I will take my calculator with me. I still cannot see how a dancer of any standard can't get his two quicks on the beat."

Counbt the number of video frames between when the man's weight arrives on his left toe for the first quick, and when it arrives on his right toe for the second quick. On Mirko's video it is 23 or 24 in each of the first three measures. One beat on that video is 15 frames, therefore we can clearly see that the time between the quicks is a BEAT AND A HALF.

Two things seperated by a beat and a half CANNOT POSSIBLY BOTH BE ON THE BEAT!

"How far behind will that make the first step of the Reverse."

Perhaps you were not aware of this, but foxtrot slows land much closer to their second beat than to their first. The properly danced final quick does indeed steal time out of the next slow - but that is the way it is SUPPOSED TO BE.
And it's clearly what all of the top dancers are doing.

"We are out of time with the music."

Declare all of the worlds best dancers to be off time. Go right ahead. There are things I can readily point out that nobody gets right, so it is your right to make that claim also.

"I'll bet the guy who was being taught that all the steps were an equall length is tearing his hair."

It turns out to be much closer to the truth than what you believe. The first quick is shorter, but the second quick is often the longe

"So that I get this straight. Are you saying that the first step has two beats. The next step has one beat. ( that leaves one beat left over ) are you saying that the next step takes a beat and a half. You only have one beat."

No, the first step only gets about a beat and half. Actually even less than that. The second quick is the longest duration of the three steps.

Before you go screaming that this is wrong, keep in mind that what we have measured is not the duratin of the official "steps" but rather the time between the weight changes. The official steps (what are supposed to be SQQ) must be measued instead between the times when the feet pass.

But for the purposes of refuting you mistaken claim that both quicks land on the beat, we look at the time between the weight landings, rather than between the official step boundaries.

"You are out of time."

That the part that you just don't understand. You started the thread by pointing out how someone had said to accent the third beat, and I immediately responded that the accent was the fact that the third beat is the only one that has a step land on it. And now we have video timings to PROVE it.

I can see the source of your confusion though. You still dance the second quick of a feather as a beginner might, by placing the foot under your nearly stationary body. That small distance and near lack of any body flight during the quick means that it will have to be a short step - in both distance and in time. If you look at someone like Mirko, his third step is huge, because his body keeps moving and because he DELAYS THE PLACEMENT AND LANDING OF THE MOVING FOOT until his body has traveled a large distance. His step is big, and takes at least a beat and a half to execute. Yours is small and takes only a beat. But nobody is going to claim that you are on time and he is off, because he is on time in the WAY THAT MATTERS FOR FOXTROT.

There are two many factors involved in something like a Feather Step to turn it into a mathematical formula. First we have the shoulders dancing a diffrent timing to the feet. Then we have some who bring their body weight over their third step later than others who arrive earlier. But all at 30 bars a minute take two seconds to complete one bar of music.
Then you take Mirko and most of the others who make the first step of a Feather a quick. Danuite's partner on his solo did the normal slow.
Tell this to an inexperienced dancer and make the first step a quick could result in there timing being one beat the first step. One beat for the second. One beat for the third. we've got one a beat left over. You and I know how we handle this timing my making our introduction a quick. So to start counting Mirko and company and to use as an example is not good.
Also after proving to yourself frame by frame. You must apply the same to every step they do. And even you will agree it is not going to tally up. What will add up is that each bar of music at 30 bars a minute will take two seconds. 60 seconds divided by 30 = 2 seconds each bar of music.

"Then you take Mirko and most of the others who make the first step of a Feather a quick."

If you mean that they dance an entire feather in three beats, you are wrong.

They do redistribute the timing from what a niece student might expect, but the three steps of the feather still consume and entire measure. Its the overal amount of time as SQQ, it's just distributed differently - the durations are much closer to being equal, and even the briefest step is slightly more than a beat.

"Tell this to an inexperienced dancer and make the first step a quick could result in there timing being one beat the first step. One beat for the second. One beat for the third. we've got one a beat left over. You and I know how we handle this timing my making our introduction a quick. So to start counting Mirko and company and to use as an example is not good."

They are good example, because the DO NOT DO WHAT YOU HAVE PROPOSED. Instead, they use an entire measure for each three steps.

"Also after proving to yourself frame by frame. You must apply the same to every step they do. And even you will agree it is not going to tally up. What will add up is that each bar of music at 30 bars a minute will take two seconds. 60 seconds divided by 30 = 2 seconds each bar of music."

Look at my numbers again quickstep - they add up rather exactly! 60 frames for each three steps:

Feather: 21 - 16 -24 (= 61 = 2 seconds)
Reverse: 20 - 18 - 23 (=61)
F.Finish: 20 - 17 - 24 (=61)

In terms of beats, we have the interval between the landing of the prep step and the landing of the slow as 1.33 beats. And then the interval to the landing of the first "Quick" as average 1.13 beats, and then the interval to the landing of the second "quick" as a whopping 1.58 beats!

It's that last one that ruins your argument - you claim the two quicks land on succesive beats, but they are actually 1.58 beats apart. Simply not possible for both to be on beat!

If we put the first quick on the third beat, what we find is that the slow lands just before beat two, and the last quick lands a hair after the and after beat four.

We should get one thing straight. By measure I believe you mean one bar of music.
If you use the first of the Feather as a quick. You must start that bar of music as a quick on the introductory step on beat one with the LF. So your Feather will now have four steps instead of three. That's not to hard to understand is it. This change in technique happens time and time again on many different steps.
Thats why frame by frame analysing is not a good idea because you haven't a clue what timing they are using. Does that make sense or not.