"Anymouse. You say no turn into 1 - only between steps. But doesn't that allow for turn over the last half of 1 ie on the mans left foot whilst RF is swinging towards the passing position."

There is no turn of the feet at that time. Since turn is measured in the feet, this means that there is no turn at that time. The feet will not turn until after the end of step one - really, there is not much turn until step 2 has been placed, at which time both feet then turn together.

"Ive just realised that the CBM thing is something I've done without realising it, including the difference between fwd and bckwd. Do you have an explanation for the difference ?"

In passing figures at least, toeing in has to do with letting the knee work more into the direction of the swing. Going forwards the knee is already pointed in the direction of the swing, and you want to run the whole length of the foot, so there is no turn of the foot. Or at least none beyond perhaps aligning the outside edge of the heel and the inside edge of the toe with the direction of movement.

"The heel turn for the lady - what of the definition (from Guy Howard that a heel turn is commenced on the ball of foot) ."

Commenced from, okay. But most of it occurs while the weight is moving back the heel.

Anymouse.

With regards the idea of no turn on 1. How do you square that with Guy Howard which states "start to turn on 1" then "turn 1/4 between 1 and 2" this being defined as turn in the feet. Although there is a finite time required for the weight to move through the foot and to attain heel release surely there is some scope for turn on the left foot on the last part of step 1 ie after rise but before the feet pass.

The other thing is I am slightly confused by the definition of "between". Does "between" include the time after placement of step 1 up to the point of passing the feet. Or is it restricted to the phase between passing of the feet just before weight is taken onto step 2 ?

The other question I have is why are the amounts of turn different for the lady ?

I like the explanation of the toe turned in thing. I've never thought that one through before.

Surely this is a case of divided turn for Man: 1/4 between 1 & 2 and 1/8 on 3, while all 3/8s of the Lady's turn comes on the heel turn of 2, she being on the inside of the turn?

the second half of the turn turns that around, and Lady has a divided turn, while the man turns 3/8 on 5, with his ending alignment "pointing", the body finishing its turn on 6.

thanks. i was wondering if it really was that same principle - apart from in this case, the technique suggests that the completion of turn applies to both feet and body.

Surely, where you place a foot "pointing", it isn't going to move again, and the body having previously "turned less" has to catch up.

This doesn't apply to the first half of the NT, but the movement of a heel turn is significantly different. Lady will make the whole turn, to step out forward - any continuing turn would be ugly.

my point was that the heel turn in the ft reverse turn is different from the corresponding steps on say 2 and 3 of a rev turn in waltz in the sense that there is no body turns less on 2 or body completes turn on three.

i am not sure why continuing the rotation as step 3 is taken would be considered ugly particularly.

Interested. If you had access to youtube and Googled Marcus Hilton Basic Foxtrot and at the end of beat three ,on bar two, as the lady has closed her feet at the end of the heel Turn She is still facing the same way. That is backing diag to centre with the LOD. He is a mirror image except he is on his two toes To recap. He is feet together on both toes . She her feet together and is down. At this point there is no turn. He is facing diag to centre she is backing diag to centre.
Move the imagine on a fraction. You will see they both turn 3/8ths of a turn over his left and her right foot.For her the turn is a Heel Turn and not a Heels Turn
Without youtube you guys are flying blind.
Do you want to know how to use your head on a Spot Turn. Shirley Ballas will show you. Do you want to know every spin there is in all of dancing , Turning and Spinning Techniques. Or Hip to Knee Action. How about Latin Arm Styling. And probably the most important at this moment Core Rhythm.
Where Guy Howard gets his amounts of turn from will undoubtably have to be re - written. It just is not being done that way any more.
Terence Is unusually quiet at this time as well as Lluv2Dance.
To be fair to Guy Howard. If I turn 3/8ths of a turn. Or any turn at all I will pass every point on the compass. That doesn't mean stop and then continue. I suppose he never thought that anybody would think otherewise if he did he would have worded it a different way, To recap . The turn is continuous and not in stops and starts. But you will face or back every point of the compass within that 3/8ths of a turn. Does that make sense or not.
Back to the Heel Turn. Does she turn on beat one. No. or beat two. No. Does she turn at the very end of beat three 3/8ths of a turn. You tell me??. Those are beats remember and not steps.
Interested. When you bring the Waltz into this discussion . You on the inside of a turn must be familiar with NFR ( No foot rise) and how to apply it. It is a science on its own..

"at the end of beat three ,on bar two, as the lady has closed her feet at the end of the heel Turn She is still facing the same way. That is backing diag to centre with the LOD. He is a mirror image except he is on his two toes To recap."

Not even remotely true. By the end of BEAT three, more than half of the turn has been accomplished and the alignments will be somewhere between diag wall against LOD and LOD.

Perhaps you got confused by beats vs. steps - step 2 ends a little bit before beat three does, so by the end of beat 3 we should have achieved the final alignment of step 2, and maybe even some of the additional turn reserved for step 3.

Interested:

"With regards the idea of no turn on 1. How do you square that with Guy Howard which states "start to turn on 1" then "turn 1/4 between 1 and 2" this being defined as turn in the feet."

While the actual turn is measured in the feet, "start to turn" or its Alex Moore equivelent "commence to turn" is actually a redundant mention of the body action called CBM. It is not an actual turn of the feet, but a prelude to the turn of them. If you look at the given alignments, I believe you will see that no actual turn of the feet is documented in the placement of step 1, but only in the eventual departure from it.

Clive:

"Surely, where you place a foot "pointing", it isn't going to move again, and the body having previously "turned less" has to catch up."

I would not necessarily agree with this. The foot will not necessarily point in the ultimate alignment, but may simply tend towards the ultimate alignment with the difference made up later.

There's some tendency to demo pointing alignments by placing the moving foot extended in the new alignment while the body remains stationary over the standing foot, but they are not actually danced that way. Instead, the moving foot fully achieves its extension and pointing alignment only as the body is in flight away from the standing foot towards the moving one - its really a continuous process, not the hold-point-move one that is often used to introduce the concept.

Interested:

"my point was that the heel turn in the ft reverse turn is different from the corresponding steps on say 2 and 3 of a rev turn in waltz in the sense that there is no body turns less on 2 or body completes turn on three."

I would not actually say that it is different in execution. The documented completion of the body turn for waltz tends to be reserved in execution until the CBM (if any) of the next figure. And the same is done in foxtrot - just as in waltz, we achieve the end alignment in the feet, but hold an underturned alignment of the body which is not lost until the next CBM action.

It would seem that both you and Clive are writting about the second step of a Natural Turn in th Waltz. NFR.
The lady keeps her weight over the LF and is still facing diag to centre as she points her right toe on step two, down the LOD ( not across ). Then as the man passes who does have foot rise. She follows him up into the rise. Not rising before but following
When the roles are reversed the man now does not have foot rise on one.
If this is not understood your V Waltz is a wrestling match also.
The Dynamics of a Turn. Stand with your partner at arms length out to the side. You in the centre turn . Your partner on the ouside is having to travell much faster than you who are hardly moving. If you don't keep thinking you will get in front of your partner making it impossible for them to keep pace.
But in dancing the man will use his strength to keep you in place. This then shows up in the dancing and you can no longer be a Ghost in a Dress.