American Smooth Thread

[Arun Garg]

This thread is a great example of why I *try to* stay away from imprecise and inconsistent language. ‘Normal’ and ‘recovery’ have no real or consistent meaning and just lead to confusion. And by my own fault, even the ‘flash’ and ‘trash’ are subjectively defined.

I agree with Lucia, I see no “flash” in your kids, as neither the material nor level lends itself to that type of presentation.

As far as what the ‘ideal’ is for a throwaway or any classic picture line: WILDLY subjective, and what Warren describes here….certainly not how I understand things, but alas the nature of subjectivity.

And in terms of ‘recovery’ and it mattering more, which was the original point I was responding to, I took it as Warren describing transitionary quality from figure to figure or action to action. Which as a universal is always happening, so it read as a statement with no real meaning. Once the body starts dancing, I have always been taught that it doesn’t stop; it is constantly transitioning and moving and preparing from and to action to action, foot to foot. In that context, leaving picture lines is no more important than entering and moving through them, even as a competitive presentation on a busy floor.

 

[Arun Garg]

I, for example, fell on my bottom during a country competition. This drew lots of eyes; I'm sure it drew the eyes of some judges. Maybe they saw my spectacular recovery!

At NYDF this year, in my A Scholarship final, I fell hard on my butt right in front of the livestream camera as my heel caught a very large rhinestone. I returned to my phone blown up with messages of people that were watching from afar. Recovery!

I don’t think judges made any binding decisions based on the fall, or the way I recovered. It’s just the expected. Sometimes falls happen, and you just get right back up. I cannot see it being a factor in marks unless you’re falling constantly in front of the judges because you don’t understand your own weight and momentum.

 

[lucia_l]

[...] Once the body starts dancing, I have always been taught that it doesn’t stop; it is constantly transitioning and moving and preparing from and to action to action, foot to foot. In that context, leaving picture lines is no more important than entering and moving through them, even as a competitive presentation on a busy floor.

That's my pro's view. There should be no "posing"; that is, stopping for any duration and restarting is not allowed. If the camera man wants to "catch" the line, he better have to work darn hard! Moving continuously through things is the goal.

The feedback is that I have not achieved this yet. On the other hand.... he says he is continuously working on being continuous too. (I do not see any choppiness or posing in his dancing. But there you go.)

 

[Arun Garg]

he says he is continuously working on being continuous too. (I do not see any choppiness or posing in his dancing. But there you go.)

The ever unreachable end goal!!!

 

[Warren J. Dew]

but she's not adding motions I associate with "flash". There's no playing to the audience-- frills, winks, toying. It's nice dancing-- probably better than mine. But "flash"? I'm not seeing it.

Winking at the audience is "flash"? Not by my definition. Hogging the spotlight, maybe. "Flash", not so much.

To me, "flash", in the context of a ballroom competition, has the purpose of drawing the attention of the judges, not of the audience. That means it needs to be an action big enough for the judges to see in their peripheral vision, from half way across the floor. A wink is neither.

Spotlight hogging would make more sense in the context of a showcase, rather than a competition.

Well... sure. But then some people think a certain number of eyecatching moves (i.e. flash) are required to win-- and so self preservation.

To be clear, I was talking about self preservation in the sense of avoiding bruises, concussions, broken bones, and the like.

 

[lucia_l]

Winking at the audience is "flash"? Not by my definition. Hogging the spotlight, maybe. "Flash", not so much

Drawing attention, hogging the spotlight. Po=taa-to, po-tah-to.

.

To me, "flash", in the context of a ballroom competition, has the purpose of drawing the attention of the judges, not of the audience. That means it needs to be an action big enough for the judges to see in their peripheral vision, from half way across the floor. A wink is neither.

Oh? I think drawing their attention when they are near is sufficient. And the judges may very well notice positive audience reaction, so I don't think this is either/or. Judges are human.

To be clear, I was talking about self preservation in the sense of avoiding bruises, concussions, broken bones, and the like.

I don't see how moving fast and leaping while moving forward prevents bruises, concussions or broken bones more than other move would prevent them.

 

[Warren J. Dew]

Oh? I think drawing their attention when they are near is sufficient. And the judges may very well notice positive audience reaction, so I don't think this is either/or. Judges are human.

I’m thinking the high ronde’ is sufficient to draw attention when they are near, not just when they are more distant, no trashy winking required. Valid point about noticing the audience reaction, though that’s easier in Latin where you can stay in front of the same people for more than a bar or two. To get a wave of applause following you around the floor in a traveling dance, your flash better be the opposite of trash, and visible from across the floor even to an audience.

I don't see how moving fast and leaping while moving forward prevents bruises, concussions or broken bones more than other move would prevent them.

If everyone else is doing scatter chasses, and you’re doing basics, someone whose scatters are still trashy enough to lack good directional and speed control will run into you and knock you 40 feet across the floor. Ask me how I know.

 

[j_alexandra]

Can we get back to talking about Smooth, please? Happy to have a thread on recovery, but we've gotten way off the track. Maybe someone can make a thread and move these posts?

In the meantime, a beautiful Smooth showdance. Low ronde prominent at 1:14ish, for those keeping track:

 

[Warren J. Dew]

Can we get back to talking about Smooth, please? Happy to have a thread on recovery, but we've gotten way off the track. Maybe someone can make a thread and move these posts?

In the meantime, a beautiful Smooth showdance. Low ronde prominent at 1:14ish, for those keeping track:

Good recovery and transition out of that low ronde'.

Honestly, recoveries and transitions are core to the quality of Smooth. Moving those posts out of this thread kind of defeats the whole purpose of this thread. It's as if the moderators are implying that Smooth is just about flash and trash.

 

[ChaCha1]

Can we get back to talking about Smooth, please? Happy to have a thread on recovery, but we've gotten way off the track. Maybe someone can make a thread and move these posts?

In the meantime, a beautiful Smooth showdance. Low ronde prominent at 1:14ish, for those keeping track:

Love this routine and that low ronde is just beautiful! I used to have the same combination in my waltz routine, it is harder than it looks (of course with Nick & Viktorij dancing it all looks easy) I don't think think there is a need for those super high ronde's in smooth. These low ones blend into routines and are amazing!

 

[j_alexandra]

Good recovery and transition out of that low ronde'.

Honestly, recoveries and transitions are core to the quality of Smooth. Moving those posts out of this thread kind of defeats the whole purpose of this thread. It's as if the moderators are implying that Smooth is just about flash and trash.

not so much; the recovery posts contain much discussion of quickstep etc which is, shall we say, not Smooth. What's wrong with a thread on recovery? It's an interesting subject and worthy of its own thread.

 

[ChaCha1]

Around the same era:
I love all the finalist and Peter and Alexandra were my favorite at that time. Mikhail and Galina have low ronde's facing each other around 2:45

 

[Warren J. Dew]

not so much; the recovery posts contain much discussion of quickstep etc which is, shall we say, not Smooth. What's wrong with a thread on recovery? It's an interesting subject and worthy of its own thread.

Agreed that the discussion of quickstep is irrelevant to Smooth, and I was thinking about breaking that half of my last post off into the Standard geekery thread. But somehow, the quickstep posts remained in this thread, along with the Country Western discussion. Granted, the quickstep posts also contained some stuff about Smooth and contained nothing about recovery.

If someone wanted to start a separate thread about recovery as applied across styles, that would be fine. Breaking off discussion of recovery in smooth from the Smooth thread basically prevents Smooth technique from being discussed in the Smooth thread. That seems counter to the purpose of the thread, which was originally created as a reaction to the Standard Geekery thread as a place to hold similar technique discussions about Smooth.

If you just want to discuss historical videos of Smooth, the easiest way to do that would be to unlock the History of Smooth thread (if I'm remembering my threads properly).

 

[j_alexandra]

Agreed that the discussion of quickstep is irrelevant to Smooth, and I was thinking about breaking that half of my last post off into the Standard geekery thread. But somehow, the quickstep posts remained in this thread, along with the Country Western discussion. Granted, the quickstep posts also contained some stuff about Smooth and contained nothing about recovery.

I haven't had time to do anything about it

If someone wanted to start a separate thread about recovery as applied across styles, that would be fine. Breaking off discussion of recovery in smooth from the Smooth thread basically prevents Smooth technique from being discussed in the Smooth thread. That seems counter to the purpose of the thread, which was originally created as a reaction to the Standard Geekery thread as a place to hold similar technique discussions about Smooth.

Totally in for a thread on Recovery across styles.

You seem to be perceiving an implication that Smooth is flash and trash. No such implication exists, or maybe only in your mind? I never implied it, nor stated it. Moving posts about recovery in quickstep to a thread about recovery is just organization.

If you just want to discuss historical videos of Smooth, the easiest way to do that would be to unlock the History of Smooth thread (if I'm remembering my threads properly).

I don't see discussion of historical Smooth videos, just two videos that point out rondes -- which we *were* discussing. Also not sure unlocking the smooth-changed thread would be useful. (link included for those who were not on DF three years ago and might want to read the [locked] thread)

 

[joy]

Smooth finalists also do high rondes, Galina does them too.