The Logic of Standard

[Kitty]

Yesterday I found out that in international foxtrot there are steps where leader's steps are toe, toe, while followers are supposed to have toe-flat, toe-flat.
I always thought that in standard behind every bit of technique there is a practical reason. So what is the logic behind this assymmetry?

[Warren J. Dew]

Ladies dance in heels, men do not. Sometimes on a low rise, as often happens in foxtrot, ladies will put the heel down where the man would not.

On some figures, there's also an asymmetry between the forward moving half and the backward moving half on just when the rise occurs, due to body swing.

[Kitty]

In the steps where men are on toes usually there is a rise. How do ladies rise if they are not on toes?

[Larinda McRaven]

Body and leg rise can occur seperately from foot rise.

If you are looking at an ISTD book you will see a rise and fall column that says something like "rise end of 1 NFR (NoFootRise)". This indicates that even though her body and legs rise/stretch upward with her partner, her footwork would not relect this, therefore TH.

This is actually very logical and the rule holds true consistantly through the book.

[DancePoet]

I have just started reading the ISTD syllabus book. It is amazing what technique tips can be picked up from it that aren't being taught in class. Very cool stuff for those into the details. It also makes one realize how much more I have to learn regarding the basics. I am contemplating purchasing one for the Amercian Smooth Bronze patterns to use a s a supplement to my classes and lessons.

[DancePoet]

An example, in my foot work for the bronze level foxtrot grapevine, I was turning my right foot slightly on the second step in preparation for the turn of my body. My body then would begin to turn as I finished and began the third step. Looking in the syllabus, the right foot is still suppose to be directly forward. I suspect a judge would have picked this up and marked me down accordingly.

So...even if I have an instructor not quite as skilled at finding these minor errors as someone with tons of technique experience, then I can find these smaller errors through reading and review of my own dance technique.

Kind of cool! Makes the purchase price of the book seem worth it!

[Kitty]

What is the name of the book? And where can I buy it? (Many people on DF have mentioned it! Time for me to buy it!)

[DancePoet]

Hi Kitty,

I'll email my instructor to see if I can get the name of the book. I have some ideas on where to purchase it, will check these out asap, and get back to you. Unless one of our other DFites has a quicker idea.

[JohnK]

Knock yourself out...

http://www.usistd.org/dance_books/manuals/

[Kitty]

Knock yourself out...

http://www.usistd.org/dance_books/manuals/

Which one? it says the books are for those who are going to take exams, I'm not taking any exams.

So which book has everyone been talking about?

[Kitty]

If you are looking at an ISTD book you will see a rise and fall column that says something like "rise end of 1 NFR (NoFootRise)". This indicates that even though her body and legs rise/stretch upward with her partner, her footwork would not relect this, therefore TH.



Which book are you looking at? Or are all ISTD syllabus books the same?
Sorry for this question, but what is "TH" :oops: ?

[DancePoet]

I've emailed my instructor, but it might be a bit before I get a reply.

[Chris Stratton]

"The Ballroom Technique"

The current edition is a slim grey volume with the ISTD logo on the cover.

Many of the major ballroom-oriented dance suppliers should have it. I happened to get get mine during a team-organized bulk order of CD's from Casa Musica in Germany, but it's probably not necessary to wait for international shipping.

Officially it is a guide to exam preparation and a reference manual for teachers. But students who are starting to gain an understanding of how things work can learn a lot from it too. Many things are confusing, so it's not necessarily something to be read in isolation, but starting to get familiar with it also gives you an introduction to the language used to preciely discuss technique in lessons and seminars. Many of my teachers have been willing to play a role in interpreting the book, and help me out of confusion when I can't seem to match what it says to the way I thought we were supposed to do things. If lesson work is partially in reference to the book, then the book can help ******* your memory of the lesson later on.

In terms of the thread question, one thing to keep in mind is that the difference in footwork is fairly minor - we are mostly talking about the middle step of the 'back 3 step' portion of the reverse wave, and the middle step of the back feather. Men doing this step not only don't have a raised heel to roll onto, but also are allowed to have a more forward poise when going backwards than the ladies are. Trying it both ways, I find it very hard to release the heel while maintaining the kind of poise I think I'd want from my follower. Of course when I tried this theory out on a teacher, she promptly demonstrated an ability to do it with 'wrong' footwork without creating any difference that I could feel while dancing with her...

Finally, a game I've often played with myself in the context of online forums is "guess what the book says". Sometimes I'll see a topic being discussed, write a post based on my imagination about what the book says, but then go actually check the book before hitting 'send'. Inconsistencies discovered this way can be quite informative - occasinally they indicate an error in my undesrtanding of technique, but more often they indicate a problem with my conception of what a figure is about, in that I've described reasonably proper technique for something that isn't quite the figure on the syllabus.

[Kitty]

So everyone agreed that the answer to my original question is that girls wear heels...

[DancePoet]

Girls wear heels??? Oh...so that's how they get up to my height. Why didn't I notice this sooner. ;)

(It must be getting late, cause I'm getting tired and beginning to get silly.)