Contra Body Movement Position

[pygmalion]

Here's something I really struggle with in my smooth dancing -- dancing in CBMP. Probably a throwback to the whole year I spent learning from a few bad teachers who had no clue about the concept. :x :cry:

Anyway, back to the present. Any ideas on how to develop the habit of using CBMP? Rules of thumb on when and how to use it? Tips and pointers?

http://www.dancesport.uk.com/tid-bits/issue020.htm
http://swingworld.com/articles/single_tracking.htm

[msc]

After review of Alex Moore's book, I realize my terminology was completely wrong, let me try again. I was under the impression that CBM was the creation of a body torque in preparation of a turn, but in fact it's the unwinding of that torque to power through the turn. In the swing dances, the examples are, as described in the first article, the swinging action of the hip and body through a natural or reverse turn. For example, on the front half of the natural turn for the man, or the back half for the lady, the right side should be slightly forward as the right foot advances. After the right heels begins to establish, the left hip and side swing up and around the right foot. That movement of the left hip/side around the right foot is Contra Body Motion.

CBMP occurs when a foot crosses the body line (although it's not very far across the line, just slightly.) This should happen because of some sort of twist through the body though, not just because a step calls for CBMP.

[DanceMentor]

I believe it then follows that there are for ways to step into CBMP:
Fwd on LF
Fwd on RF
Back on LF
Back on RF

I believe Contra Body Movement is the "follow thru" of the body as the upper body is "swung" over the foot.

[Taita]

Hi Jenn,

To me, CBMP (Contra Body Movement Position), to me is nothing more complicated than walking. There are very precise, technical definitions, which have been graciously provided by others. I'll just try to explain it in my words. If you have 2 arms and 2 legs, take a look at how you walk. With every forward or backward step you take, your legs and arms swing. They will swing in opposition (right arm will swing forward and left arm will swing backwards when stepping with your left leg and vice versa). Anyone not swinging their arms in opposition to each other will definitely be amusing to watch :lol: !

When I was learning this, initially, I would simply swing my arms back and forth. Then I would swing my sides along with my arms. Then I simply relaxed while I was dancing and enjoyed the moment. When I did this, I realized I didn't have to do all that stuff, CBMP would happen naturally on it's own. Try not to think of yourself as 'dancing' as you are 'floating' and you may find these things happening naturally.

[msc]

believe it then follows that there are for ways to step into CBMP:
Fwd on LF
Fwd on RF
Back on LF
Back on RF

Technically I agree with this, but there's more than meets the eye. For example, the second step of a Tango promenade walk is "forward and across in CBMP," and that's not generally what one might think of when one thinks of forward. Actually, the body actions that create this step are incredibly involved, and of course they are nowhere descibed in the ISTD manual.

Also, the crossing steps in the hover cross are taken forward and across in CBMP for the man, I'm not sure about the lady, but again, a very strange step to be labeled "forward." Unless you understand the body actions that generate the step, but then it's merely an incredibly difficult step in CBMP.

Anyone not swinging their arms in opposition to each other will definitely be amusing to watch

When you swing through a move, isn't this exactly how the body will move? For example, on the forward half of a natural, the left hip and leg will swing out in front and the left rib (and hence arm) will follow, yes?

[Taita]

When you swing through a move, isn't this exactly how the body will move? For example, on the forward half of a natural, the left hip and leg will swing out in front and the left rib (and hence arm) will follow, yes?

Hi msc,

I was originally refering to the forward and backward steps one takes while walking (i.e. not dancing). However, in regards to the natural turn (waltz), do not get trapped into the idea that there is simply 'one' way to do anything in dance. There are as many ways of doing just about anything as there are dancers. The way that seems to work best for me in order to execute a good natural turn, one must preceed the turn by first using your body's momentum to 'reach' upwards with the left half of your body with the initial right forward step thus creating a natural CBM position. Then 'swinging' your leg into position to further the reach on the left side.

[msc]

do not get trapped into the idea that there is simply 'one' way to do anything in dance.

Fair enough.

But actually I think we're fairly similar in reality, as I've said before it's easier to show these moves than describe them. I think of the left side reach as pitching my hips while keeping both sides long and projected forward, with the leg naturally swinging out to a toe position due to the aforementioned swing, but still, pretty much the same sequence of actions you described.

[elisedance]

Amazing - for something that is so important for ballroom standard/smooth this is the only thread I could find dedicated to the issue and it only has 6 posts (maybe I missed something - TC where are you :)).

CBM and CBMP are everywhere and they've come up in lessons gallore. However, I'm still a bit confused. The description above (from Alex Moore's book) describes CBM as in essence the unleashing of a body torque but we never use the term that way, we always use it for establishing the torque. If its the latter what do we call the torque generation which I'm currently trying to build. And whats the best way to do so relative to the step - I think I have been creating it too late.

I would love to hear some of the gurus here comment on the descriptions above (this is an old thread so there may be more current thinking on the issue) and specifically on the creation of torque and its timing.

[Chris Stratton]

Amazing - for something that is so important for ballroom standard/smooth this is the only thread I could find dedicated to the issue and it only has 6 posts (maybe I missed something - TC where are you :)).

Actually there have been numerous treatments of the subject here, most far more accurate than the posts in this thread (which where the details are concerned are somewhere between misleading and erroneous)

However, I'm still a bit confused.

The Len Scrivener style descriptions are perhaps the most practical. Roughly:

CBM: turning the opposite side of the body towards the moving foot

CBMP: placing the moving foot towards the opposite side of the body.

The description above (from Alex Moore's book) describes CBM as in essence the unleashing of a body torque but we never use the term that way, we always use it for establishing the torque. If its the latter what do we call the torque generation which I'm currently trying to build.

Both are potentially CBM, unless the body rotation occurs during a step when the wrong foot is moving for rotation in that direction to qualify as CBM. Yet another possibility is a "body turns less" situation, where the body rotation lags the foot rotation, with the result that you end a step in a wound-up position.

Take for example an initial natural turn in waltz. Potential anticlockwise rotation during the prep step is CBM. Clockwise rotation early in the first step is CBM. Body turns less (in practice, we leave out most of the official "body completes turn") during the second-third step results in a under-turned wound up position that will allow more CBM in the fourth step than would be possible if the body turned square to the feet as they closed during step three.

[Larinda McRaven]

Actually there have been numerous treatments of the subject here, most far more accurate than the posts in this thread (which where the details are concerned are somewhere between misleading and erroneous)

In defense of the posts... if you look at the dates, they were back when we at DF first got started. And the depth of the newer posters knowledge base was far more sophmore than it is today.

The posts actually fairly well represent the understanding of most average dancers interpretation of CBM and CBMP.

[Chris Stratton]

The posts actually fairly well represent the understanding of most average dancers interpretation of CBM and CBMP.

Yes, and that's more or less the problem. Most people have picked up assorted trivia about CBM & CBMP that is a mix of incidental and inaccurate; most are not learning the concepts or especially the difference between them in a useful way.

Thats why I like the objective clarity of the Len Scrivener description.

[Terpsichorean Clod]

CBM vs. CBMP? (http://danceforums.com/showthread.php?t=7761)
Discussion on CBM (http://danceforums.com/showthread.php?t=21711)

[etp777]

Not gonna click through as believe one of those involves me giving same type of inaccurate information Chris mentions, and then being corrected. :) Have sinced worrk with coach on the subject.

[Terpsichorean Clod]

You don't have any posts in either thread. :)

[elisedance]

CBM vs. CBMP? (http://danceforums.com/showthread.php?t=7761)
Discussion on CBM (http://danceforums.com/showthread.php?t=21711)

You are the thread find king for sure TC :) - how come I didn't come up with those when searching for CBM??

thanks :kissme: I will peruse...

[etp777]

isn't CBM too short a search phrase?

[Terpsichorean Clod]

You are the thread find king for sure TC :) - how come I didn't come up with those when searching for CBM??

thanks :kissme: I will peruse...
You're welcome, ee. :) 3-character words are too short for the search function.

[elisedance]

Actually there have been numerous treatments of the subject here, most far more accurate than the posts in this thread (which where the details are concerned are somewhere between misleading and erroneous)



The Len Scrivener style descriptions are perhaps the most practical. Roughly:

CBM: turning the opposite side of the body towards the moving foot

CBMP: placing the moving foot towards the opposite side of the body.



Both are potentially CBM, unless the body rotation occurs during a step when the wrong foot is moving for rotation in that direction to qualify as CBM. Yet another possibility is a "body turns less" situation, where the body rotation lags the foot rotation, with the result that you end a step in a wound-up position.

Take for example an initial natural turn in waltz. Potential anticlockwise rotation during the prep step is CBM. Clockwise rotation early in the first step is CBM. Body turns less (in practice, we leave out most of the official "body completes turn") during the second-third step results in a under-turned wound up position that will allow more CBM in the fourth step than would be possible if the body turned square to the feet as they closed during step three.


Thanks Chris - I think I have it this far whats challenging now is when you are in a position that requires CBM and then your partner asks you for more going into another stepp. For example, from an outside spin into natural pivots - maybe its a following issue. You sort of have to know to do it, I don't feel a lead that tells me to crank the CBM up more at that point. Or maybe thats falls into the 'something one has to just do' catagory.

[elisedance]

You're welcome, ee. :) 3-character words are too short for the search function.

er, that would probably explain it
:doh:

[tangotime]

Thats why I like the objective clarity of the Len Scrivener description.



Pretty much like all of his musings .

His ideas in the " day ", were sometimes ( and still are to some degree ) very controversal . His lectures were always packed to the rafters ( including Pros being there ).

He frequently rocked the boat ,and that was probably in large part ,why he was never invited to judge the "British" .

For those of you who are un aquainted with him ( and Nellie ), if you ever have the opportunity to read his book " Just One Idea ", do so .

[Chris Stratton]

His ideas in the " day ", were sometimes ( and still are to some degree ) very controversal .

This is often said, but the limited evidence available today makes it seem that it's not his ideas that are controversial but his explanations.

And the reason those explanations are controversial is because they take a fresh look at what was actually being danced, free from the baggage of much of the misunderstood incumbent technical language. Unfortunately, that language had/has too often been allowed to divert attention from the dancing it was intended to describe - people were trying to literally execute misunderstandings of the descriptions.

A good example is the camp of people who attempt to reflect a theoretical difference between CBM & CBMP by oddly constraining their CBM to avoid ending in a position that they, based on misunderstanding of the incumbent language, think would be miss-applied CBMP. They believe that any twist of the body into an opposite side lead relative to the feet is necessarily CBMP, when in fact that is not the case. CBMP of a foot usually occurs as a result of diagonal movement across the feet, and never occurs as a result of body rotation during the step when that foot is placed. And in fact, properly done CBM will in most cases result in an opposite side lead that does loosely resemble CBMP, but by definition is not CBMP.

In contrast, Scrivener starts out by acknowledging the similarity, then simply stating that CBM is when you rotate and CBMP is when your step direction is towards the other side of the body.

[tangotime]

This is often said, but the limited evidence available today makes it seem that it's not his ideas that are controversial but his explanations.

.

I can assure you from first hand experience ,that it was not only his explanations and some of his ideas that were controversial.

And there are written accounts of some of his confrontations ,with some of the oligarchy of the " day " over such issues .

I took from Len and many of his contempories , and learned early on not to bring any of those ideas to the " table " . You possibly are not aware of the constant " battles" that went on between many of the high profile pros of that era, on varying theories and techniques.

What with Howard, Moore, Thieaubault, Tolmeyer, Binnick, Jacques et al ,and then add Len to the mix , it is little wonder that there would be dis agreement .

Len just seemed to be in his own " camp ". And as you just stated " this is often said ".. I say, where theres smoke theres fire !.

[_malakawa_]

most of them you already said. But to be clear

CBMP - as is obvious by the words itself, it is a POSITION rather than a movement.
CBMP describes steps when a foot moves across the standing foot, while the torso moves in the same direction as the moving foot without rotation. CBMP is routinely used in steps taken in promenade position or outside partner step. CBMP helps to maintain dance position of the couple: CBMP allows the dancers to make these steps without shifting or rotating with respect to each other.

CBM is the movement of the opposite side of the body towards the moving foot. CBM occurs in the following four scenarios:

The left leg moves forward as the right side of the body moves forward (the torso rotates to the left)
The left leg moves backward as the right side of the body moves backward (the torso rotates to the right)
The right leg moves forward as the left side of the body moves forward (the torso rotates to the right)
The right leg moves backward as the left side of the body moves backward (the torso rotates to the left)

[Josh]

Hey, I thought I recognized that description of CBM--that's the description I added to wikipedia over two years ago! A bit simplified but I suppose it does the trick...

[_malakawa_]

Hey, I thought I recognized that description of CBM--that's the description I added to wikipedia over two years ago! A bit simplified but I suppose it does the trick...


yep, correct.

my students are also confused with this. ant it took me some time to explain them. but i found this on wiki today.

I actually learned technique by W. Laird books.

[waltzguy]

So, am I right or wrong about the following?

Using waltz, whisk - chasse from PP, for example.

As you go into the whisk ending, step 3, that is CBM. That is, for the man, left shoulder forward while left foot is back.

As you exit the whisk and proceed into the chasse from PP, that is CBMP. That is, for the man, right foot steps out and across into the left portion of the body, since the body remains torqued to allow this to happen naturally.

Yes?

[Angel HI]

....they take a fresh look at what was actually being danced, free from the baggage of much of the misunderstood incumbent technical language. Unfortunately, that language had/has too often been allowed to divert attention from the dancing it was intended to describe - people were trying to literally execute misunderstandings of the descriptions.....

CS? :shock:

Bravo, CS. http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/happy/happy0034.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net/freesmiley.php?smiley=happy/happy0034.gif)

[Angel HI]

So, am I right or wrong about the following?

As you go into the whisk ending, step 3, that is CBM. That is, for the man, left shoulder forward while left foot is back.

As you exit the whisk and proceed into the chasse from PP, that is CBMP. That is, for the man, right foot steps out and across into the left portion of the body, since the body remains torqued to allow this to happen naturally. Yes?

Should be interesting to read the replies. Many would say that it depends upon whether the whisk is in a corner or not, as one would be CBM, and the other could be CBMP where the lead, hence the action, must have already occured well before step 3.

[dancepro]

Here's something I really struggle with in my smooth dancing -- dancing in CBMP. Probably a throwback to the whole year I spent learning from a few bad teachers who had no clue about the concept. :x :cry:

Anyway, back to the present. Any ideas on how to develop the habit of using CBMP? Rules of thumb on when and how to use it? Tips and pointers?



http://www.dancesport.uk.com/tid-bits/issue020.htm
http://swingworld.com/articles/single_tracking.htm

I will send you a pm with my take on the subject.

Dancepro

[samina]

(fyi: pygmalion is not longer very active on the boards...her request was from years ago.)

i would love to hear your take, if you care to post it on the thread, dancepro! :)

[dancepro]

(fyi: pygmalion is not longer very active on the boards...her request was from years ago.)

i would love to hear your take, if you care to post it on the thread, dancepro! :)

I will pm you the information. I am still in trouble.

Dancepro

[samina]

thanks! :)

[elisedance]

I will pm you the information. I am still in trouble.

Dancepro

Can sam share it? with me for example (if she doesn't mind that is...)

[Chris Stratton]

Waltzguy's post raises an interesting oddity: While it's beyond question that a whisked position qualifies as CBMP, this isn't actually mentioned in the books.

[dancepro]

Can sam share it? with me for example (if she doesn't mind that is...)

Sure

Dancepro

[dancepro]

Can sam share it? with me for example (if she doesn't mind that is...)

I will forward you the mail myself.

Dancepro

[samina]

on its way...

[waltzguy]

I will forward you the mail myself.

Dancepro, would you be so kind as to share it with me too, if you don't mind. Thanks.

[dancepro]

Dancepro, would you be so kind as to share it with me too, if you don't mind. Thanks.

It is on it way, Waltzguy.

Dancepro

[Angel HI]

Waltzguy's post raises an interesting oddity: While it's beyond question that a whisked position qualifies as CBMP, this isn't actually mentioned in the books.

Exactly my point. http://www.dance-forums.com/showpost.php?p=621695&postcount=28

[etp777]

Hey, I thought I recognized that description of CBM--that's the description I added to wikipedia over two years ago! A bit simplified but I suppose it does the trick...

Heh, always interesting when stuff like that shows up Josh. :) Actually, annoyed at an internet phenomenon lik ethat right now. I've been looking for a wine recipe I used years ago, and thought I found it, as I found websit ethat indexed old usenet posts, and had one with recipe attributed to me. But on reading it, wasn't really me, looks like they grabbed my name from one post on usenet thread, and gabbed text of anoother. Sadly, don't have recipe I was really looking for (and it's been years, so don' thave it now).

[Josh]

So, am I right or wrong about the following?

Using waltz, whisk - chasse from PP, for example.

As you go into the whisk ending, step 3, that is CBM. That is, for the man, left shoulder forward while left foot is back.

Not quite wg--step 3 is neither CBM nor CBMP.

It's not CBM because even though the torso does have a rightward rotation to it to keep the body line correct and the left foot is going back, there's nothing really special happening. Something similar happens on step 3 of an open reverse turn (like in tango), and in step 3 of a fallaway reverse and slip pivot. The torso rotates to the right to keep a good body line and make the CBMP step more comfortable, but CBM is really only used by definition to

(1) initiate rotation (as in step 4 of both of those figures), (note: when there is only sympathetic rotation because of natural swing, as in step 1 of the whisk and step 1 of closed changes, it's called "slight CBM")
(2) create a side lead to allow for OP position (as in step 1 of a feather, step 4 of natural turn and back lock in quickstep), or
(3) maintain a good body line when stepping across in CBMP (as in step 1 of the chasse from PP, see below). This is also "slight CBM."

It's not CBMP because while the L foot is placed on/across the line of the R foot, it's a "crossing" action, and does not really have the characteristics or true flavor of a CBMP step, namely, that it must be a "step." Other examples of this in waltz would be the turning lock, turning lock to the right, and the left whisk, all which feature the man crossing but not "stepping."

As you exit the whisk and proceed into the chasse from PP, that is CBMP. That is, for the man, right foot steps out and across into the left portion of the body, since the body remains torqued to allow this to happen naturally.

Yes?

Yes! :-) But the CBMP isn't really about the "left portion of the body"--the question is whether the right foot is placed on/across the line of the left foot, and it does, so it's CBMP. Also, although the man does not rotate here, he applies what's called "slight CBM" on step 1 of the chasse from promenade, since he's stepping forward and across in CBMP. If he fails to do this, he will lose a good body line with the lady and will risk pulling her to his left and either turning her too soon or just flat out losing the position.

[waltzguy]

Good stuff, Josh. Still trying to digest it.

[Josh]

Good stuff, Josh. Still trying to digest it.

Cool--but don't try too hard. All that technical stuff is important on some levels, but the most important thing is the dancing... as long as it keeps improving, it really doesn't matter if you know what step CBM happens on! :-)

[Angel HI]

Good post, Josh http://www.dance-forums.com/showpost.php?p=622132&postcount=42 . You explained well what I meant when I said that there would be questions. The whisk is an often misunderstood step.

[tangotime]

Cool--but don't try too hard. All that technical stuff is important on some levels, but the most important thing is the dancing... as long as it keeps improving, it really doesn't matter if you know what step CBM happens on!


:-)

I know Scrivener would be diametrically opposed to that philosophy .

To paraphrase, he believed that one could NEVER achieve establishing basic fundamentals by excluding and not knowing where, why and when to apply CBM .
He also used to say it should be primarily a " natural " action that can be implemented as may be necessary.

Oddly enough, he felt "its" one of greatest assets , was the ability to bring the 2 bodies into " balance " when commencing to move back LIL after stepping O/side partner .

[bjp22tango]

2008 DF Silent Auction -
ITEMS can be added Oct 01, 2008 - Nov 30, 2008
BIDS can be made Nov 01, 2008 - Dec 15, 2008



I'm looking for a link for this and don't see any?! Am I just blind?

Thanks.

[Joe]

No, you're not blind.

[tangotime]

I know Scrivener would be diametrically opposed to that philosophy .

To paraphrase, he believed that one could NEVER achieve establishing basic fundamentals by excluding and not knowing where, why and when to apply CBM .
He also used to say it should be primarily a " natural " action that can be implemented as may be necessary.

Oddly enough, he felt "its" one of greatest assets , was the ability to bring the 2 bodies into " balance " when commencing to move back LIL after stepping O/side partner .



One important thing to add.. the "degree " of CBM should vary dependant on its need . He like to use the word. " Complimentary " .

[Larinda McRaven]

AUCTION (http://www.dance-forums.com/auction/)

[elisedance]

... all in CBM/CBMP

[Josh]

To paraphrase, he believed that one could NEVER achieve establishing basic fundamentals by excluding and not knowing where, why and when to apply CBM .

Well then I'd have to say that if you're paraphrasing him correctly, he ignores the basic concept that everyone is different, and that what may be necessary for one person may not be necessary for another. While I do agree it can be important, if the purpose of knowing about CBM supports good dancing of the couple, then that's a good thing--but if it's not particularly helpful for that couple, why bother?

Oddly enough, he felt "its" one of greatest assets , was the ability to bring the 2 bodies into " balance " when commencing to move back LIL after stepping O/side partner .

Could you elaborate on this a little, tt?

[tangotime]

Well then I'd have to say that if you're paraphrasing him correctly, he ignores the basic concept that everyone is different, and that what may be necessary for one person may not be necessary for another. While I do agree it can be important, if the purpose of knowing about CBM supports good dancing of the couple, then that's a good thing-

-but if it's not particularly helpful for that couple, why bother?



Could you elaborate on this a little, tt?



Actually , nearly verbatim , his point , as I stated ( which I and others were made abundantly clear ) was that if one chose to ignore the concept, then ones dancing would never achieve the level that most top prof. strived for and most all succeded .

He also said that CBM, in his view, that the " gliding or " skimming " action that should be present in the " walk " is only enhanced by the use of CBM .

Your last sentence confuses me ?.. why would it not be helpful ? surely the whole point of the exercise is to facilitate ?.
I would add and concede, that it was probably not administered to the " absolute " beginner couple . ( Nellie taught them, not that she would have ignored it ).

Your comment about " different " is one frequently commented on.
He believed that many competitors spent far too much time on seeking the perfect partner . His philosophy was simplythis ,make " adjustments" wherever possible, in obvious differences like height, stride pattern.. things that would or should not hinder a partnership .

To my thinking, which he "shaped ", is that all actions should be of a natural and voluntary nature , that are occasionally enhanced thru additional body shaping .


Reading all the posts, there is a wealth of info, and ideas, and one should take from them, the things that you believe will enhance your prowess as a dancer .

N.B..... to the novice, may I suggest you seek the advice from a prof. who can place these comments in perspective .


Will share this experience that happened to me many yrs ago with a VERY prominent examiner . The topic in a lecture was 1.2.3 of a natural moving into the Spin turn.. 4th step . as we know know, it is diplayed as for man " toe turned in. At this time the techn. had not been formalised to that alignment . I made the mistake of injecting ( as a Question )what Len had been advocating for many moons, and I was quickly rebuked !!