No, we stay 'down', and the absence of tbe element of rise that comes from straightening the knees isn't the same thing as 'keeping them bent'. The knees should be slightly flexed, no more.

No, of course it isn't. There is no hover in a Spin Turn.

You bend your knees if you want to. I'll keep mine flexed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssdbLOWqj3w

In the video to which you've linked, I notice that the lead uses no pivoting action at all, executing step 4 almost as though he were dancing the 4-5-6 of a Natural.

Curious, I looked at my International Waltz video. For this figure, Victor dances the demonstration in pretty much the same fashion. When he breaks down the steps, however, he does an actual pivot.

Do we do as he does or as he says?

jj

"In the video to which you've linked, I notice that the lead uses no pivoting action at all, executing step 4 almost as though he were dancing the 4-5-6 of a Natural.

Curious, I looked at my International Waltz video. For this figure, Victor dances the demonstration in pretty much the same fashion. When he breaks down the steps, however, he does an actual pivot."

You will see this time and time again, with dancers whose practical habits are far better tuned than the "getting the written details but missing the point" way in which they've memorized the formal technique.

Of course there are also opposite situations - sloppiness in practice that gets cleaned up in abstract demonstration.

But this is an example of an action that is more optimal than that which results from trying to read the book too simply. A true pivot is a good precede to another pivot, or to a heel turn as in the running right turn - but it's not the most optimal interpretation to precede step 5 of a spin turn.

I disagree. The "most optimal interpretation" is the one that a couple can execute most effectively. Shortening or eliminating the pivot does not produce a better looking figure.

If you pull up the Hiltons or Gozzoli and Betti (or whoever he's dancing with) executing this figure (you have to look for it), you'll see that both Marcus and Mirko use a brief but unmistakable pivot on step 4.

jj

"I disagree. The "most optimal interpretation" is the one that a couple can execute most effectively. Shortening or eliminating the pivot does not produce a better looking figure."

On the contrary, the fact that it does produce a better action is precisely why people do this. The "flavor" of energy and poise needed to make substantial rotation of the weighted foot is not a good match to the following action of step 5. The modified action which you see people actually dancing in which they drive off the foot without completing a pivot is a much better match. Effectively, this is just the man's appropriate complement to the fact that the lady is departing step 4 from her toe, rather than her heel as she does in the cases when the rotation is to be completed.

"If you pull up the Hiltons or Gozzoli and Betti (or whoever he's dancing with) executing this figure (you have to look for it), you'll see that both Marcus and Mirko use a brief but unmistakable pivot on step 4."

There is a hint of a pivot, but not a true pivot. You yourself call it "brief" which hardly supports your argument above against "shortening" it.

A good spin turn has as much in common with 456 of a natural as it does with a natural pivot turn - which is to say, it has hints of both, but is neither.

If this is true then you are not executing the pivot correctly. You're probably allowing yourself to become backweighted instead of simply letting the heel "kiss the floor" as some say.

Yes, the actions in the videos are definite pivots. I called them "brief" because they are not a complete half rotation.

This statement is simply not true because of the nature of step 5 in each figure. In the Natural Turn, Step 5 is "to side" but in the NST it's "FWD in CBMP," between the woman's feet.

If the man steps forward with the RF without pivoting to some extent - to re-orient the direction of the standing foot - then he creates a very ugly step as Victor himself explains in the breakdown. Why didn't Victor take more care to demonstrate it properly? I don't know - possibly time constraints.

jj

"If this is true then you are not executing the pivot correctly."

I do pivots very well, thank you. And their energy management is nothing like spin turns. It's a completely different relationship between body and feet. Practicing inserting a variable number of true pivots between a natural turn and 456 of the spin turn will make this clear - in particular, remembering to get out of "pivot mode" when taking step 4 (not step 5) will be key to the natural evolution of a nice spin turn action.

"Yes, the actions in the videos are definite pivots."

Nope. They lack the torque to rotate the weighted standing foot against the floor in the same manner utilized by a pivot. Instead the body is allowed to develop relative to the standing foot in a way not seen in pivots.

"This statement is simply not true because of the nature of step 5 in each figure. In the Natural Turn, Step 5 is "to side" but in the NST it's "FWD in CBMP," between the woman's feet."

Well, first, it's not forward in CBMP though that typo has appeared in some texts. The right foot is never placed into CBMP in any interpretation of a spin turn, rather its existing position is redefined into CBMP by the turn in of the left foot during step 4. But the placement of step 5 is most definitely not in CBMP.

More importantly, the difference in the position of step 5 between the two figures is quite minimal. The difference in the description of its position occurs because the description is given relative to the alignment of the standing foot, which is somewhat different (though practically speaking, it should not be as different as you might assume)

"If the man steps forward with the RF without pivoting to some extent - to re-orient the direction of the standing foot - then he creates a very ugly step as Victor himself explains in the breakdown. Why didn't Victor take more care to demonstrate it properly? I don't know - possibly time constraints."

His body knows more than he credits it with. If the man allows his leg to rotate without his body, that causes a problem, yes. But when actually dancing some turn in is made as the left foot is placed, then the man's body turns as he moves over his standing left foot, which keeps his right leg properly associated with his body. This is a far superior match to the action of step 5 than making the majority of the turn by spinning the weighted left foot on the floor as is done in a true pivot.

Step 5 in the Natural Turn is a toe (as side steps often are) and in the NST is a heel lead to a toe (as forward steps often are). The difference is not minimal. In fact, it is critical.


It is different because the relationship of the standing foot to the direction of movement is different in each step - assuming that you execute each step correctly.


I never claimed that a man would do such a thing.


There is a huge difference between the rotation of the body to effect CBM and the turning of the body to execute a pivot.

Also, the association of the standing foot is as important - if not moreso - than that of the moving foot.


No, it isn't It's just easier for you to execute and it's more difficult for the woman.

jj