Get Outta There!!

[Brummbaer]

My experience in group lessons is that the focus is on steps, not what my AT teacher calls dance fundamentals (axis, frame, posture, and balance.) Frame isn't corrected.

I can empathize somewhat with that view. We'd danced previous to AT for many years and had a concept of axis, frame, posture, position, height, balance, lead/follow, etc, but AT re-engineered that. At one extreme (IMHO not good) we had an over-emphasis on technique: walking, disociating, pivoting, etc. It didn't mean a lot then. We wanted to learn 'steps' to be able to dance. Not to wait 2-3 years to develop the technique. At another extreme (a brief, unsuccessful, foray into ballroom) we'd learned sequences of steps.

So, we learned some basics (from a ballroom instructor who did actually understand social AT and the differences). Then we did workshops, group lessons, privates, courses, etc, and learned more complicated steps and how to lead/follow them - and some 'technique' to make those better. We're not past learning how those moves can be combined in different ways, or even new moves, but the emphasis now is on doing them 'elegantly', for want of a better descriptor, getting an appropriate lead, and musicality in applying them.

In fact we were recently commenting that one of our teachers, in group lessons, tends to emphasize steps, but will add information on position, posture, timing, etc only if asked. Another teacher tends to overemphasize the technique for some simple sequence, but to the detriment of keeping interest in the group.

Fortunately we have other teachers, or more 'coaches', to whom we'd go for detailed technical assistance, correction and general presentation in an intensive way.

I'm inclined to think that you don't know what you lack in technique until you have sufficient vocabulary and/or need. And I'd guess that the old apprenticeship method of learning managed that in its era; but that's just inappropriate at our age and in our society.

As an aside, someone who started learning AT around the same time used to describe sacadas as 'the leg stick thing' (and still does); I'm thinking high or low sacada (and who might we hit); follower side step or fwd; which leg do I stand on for this; do I pivot; my foot position relative to follower, leg extension and part of leg (a deep sacada?), our embrace, etc, etc

 

[opendoor]

...When a couple dances ballroom, their sternums are off centered...

I think the term "centered" is wrong here, because the upper bodies remain related to each other in the BR frame, you don't break the centering.

..To execute a sacada, I have to step into the space between my partner's legs...

A sacada is an illusion. You don't step between your partner's legs, but exactly where her foot was an eighth note earlier. Timing creates the illusion that her leg is being kicked off. In order to be able to perform back-sacadas, you need a lot of torsion and dissociation. While keeping your upper body as parallel as possible to your partner, you have to turn your hips more than 90° and step back. That's orthopedically demanding. You execute this movement on your own axis, not in a frame (shared axis).

 

[ArbeeNYC]

I hadn’t realised so many leaders find a V-embrace uncomfortable. There nust be something wrong in how its being taught. Are people just copying from YouTube?

FWIW this is the squared-up, close embrace I mean:


This video shows the V-embrace, which they call “close embrace”, really well:

The first video is one I'm familiar with and has many good pointers, although I'm a firm believer in wrapping the right arm and giving the woman a comfortable and secure harbor. His right hand lines up with her center line, which affords more flexibility and is more in line with his own background as a dancer.

 

[tangomaniac]

I think the term "centered" is wrong here, because the upper bodies remain related to each other in the BR frame, you don't break the centering.

A sacada is an illusion. You don't step between your partner's legs, but exactly where her foot was an eighth note earlier. Timing creates the illusion that her leg is being kicked off. In order to be able to perform back-sacadas, you need a lot of torsion and dissociation. While keeping your upper body as parallel as possible to your partner, you have to turn your hips more than 90° and step back. That's orthopedically demanding. You execute this movement on your own axis, not in a frame (shared axis).

According to this video, a sacada isn't an illusion. The video clearly shows the man stepping between the woman's legs.

I was taught to do back sacadas on the woman's sidestep, which is a 180 degrees pivot. I can tell I've done it correctly when I feel I pulled my back out. Executing on her back step seems easier.

 

[Steve Pastor]

In that video he is clearly placing his foot beside his partner's foot or simply between her feet under her center. His foot is not taking the place of his partner's foot. He is "taking her place" in the sense that his "center" ends up where her "Center" was.
This goes to the "grounded" discussion because you know where her foot is when all of her weight is on one foot (in the ground there if you will) and her center is above it "on the beat" and her feet should be "collected." As her "center" begins moving onto her next foot the space beside the weighted foot opens up.

I have an old quote from an unidentified source that states, "My personal opinion about whether this is an illusion is that the better dancer you are, the more doubt there is in the observers mind as to what actually happened. ...

Timing is key to creating the illusion. And, you have to coordinate your lead with the movement of your feet/legs, and make it look like your feet/legs are doing the work. Using your feet/legs to accomplish the same thing requires only that you use your feet/legs. I'll go on to say that the more force you use, the more room there is to improve your timing."

 

[opendoor]

According to this video, a sacada isn't an illusion. The video clearly shows the man stepping between the woman's legs..

- You don't have to explicitly mention it for an illusion to become an illusion.
- "stepping between" is misleading in this context. He says and shows it correctly: "taking her place". When the follower's foot lifts off, his can take that spot. That creates the illusion. The fact that the legs are touching is due to the teaching situation.
- Just because a video gets liked on YT doesn't mean it has to be automatically good. It doesn't make mistakes, but it's basically not recommended for didactic reasons.

 

[Tangogal]

The first video is one I'm familiar with and has many good pointers, although I'm a firm believer in wrapping the right arm and giving the woman a comfortable and secure harbor. His right hand lines up with her center line, which affords more flexibility and is more in line with his own background as a dancer.

He also has one of the best possible partners in the World! Mariana is very well grounded and an active participant in the embrace. With a more flighty or passive partner I can understand wanting a firmer hold.
I wasn’t intending to argue the position of the leader’s arm with those videos just to show that there’s nothing inherently uncomfortable about any embrace. If it hurts there’s something wrong!

 

[Tangogal]

Can I get a clarification on terminology?

sacada: foot replaces partner’s. Weighted leg movement
Gancho: followers leg hooks on contact. Free leg movement
Something else?: like a gancho but followers leg is pushed away. Leader’s leg weighted? Followers free leg. Maybe some kind of misalignment?

 

[Brummbaer]

Can I get a clarification on terminology?

sacada: foot replaces partner’s. Weighted leg movement
Gancho: followers leg hooks on contact. Free leg movement
Something else?: like a gancho but followers leg is pushed away. Leader’s leg weighted? Followers free leg. Maybe some kind of misalignment?

Sacada — The most common term for a displacement of a leg or foot by the partner’s leg or foot. Occurs when a dancer places their foot or leg against a leg of their partner and transfers weight to their leg so that it moves into the space of and displaces the partner’s leg
From Tango Argentino de Tejas Other glossaries are available, some with videos.

I wouldn't disagree with the earlier comment that it can be an illusion, but there can also be a displacement - a movement of the follower's leg (high or low, or somewhere inbetween, depending on the depth and contact, i.e. touching** the leg). Sometimes I just take the space (and sometimes the follower can give a little flick in the displacement); sometimes I actually move (displace) the leg. Maybe that's got another name, or it's in some other 'style', or it's strictly classified as 'non-tango' in some interpretation of the true way. It's a matter of degree of displacement - and, of course, you can argue about what's led and from where.

See also gancho and enganche (wrap). My (leader's) foot (leg) is positioned differently, and differently within the space available, for a sacada, gancho (hook) or wrap.

I tend to go for sacadas on the forward or side step of an ocho. Not yet found a safe way on a back step of an ocho. Can also use a 'sacada' in cross system from just walking as a route into back ochos, say. There are also back sacadas. I'd say the term sacada can cover several moves.


** not necessarily 'to do with teaching situation'.

 

[Rabbit]

Whether there's contact in a sacada or not depends on the timing, if the "target" moves first there usually won't be contact and if both partners move simultaneously there will be. I usually do the contact version.

 

[Brummbaer]

Whether there's contact in a sacada or not depends on the timing, if the "target" moves first there usually won't be contact and if both partners move simultaneously there will be. I usually do the contact version.

That's a little bit chicken-egg description. Sometimes the timing and positioning is such that the contact, and degree of contact, is intentional; sometimes contact is not intended, so timing and positioning are adjusted to ensure there's no contact. It's about the leader's intention (adjusted for circumstances, music and follower). And not forgetting that there are follower's sacadas.

 

[Brummbaer]

Not yet found a safe way on a back step of an ocho.

Just re-watched that video and realised that I do that, and other similar 'displacements' on the backward step of the ocho, but that's a sort of termination (to me). Just never described that as a 'sacada' (although thinking about it, it is). It's been described as a 'forced cross' or even a 'mini boleo' or even 'mini voleo'. Sometimes we just lack the words to name the parts...

Let's just dance

 

[JournalInTime]

I usually do the contact version.

Same.

My coach tells me that a non-contact sacada is scary for the person receiving the sacada. It leaves too much doubt as to the true location of the foot/leg of the individual delivering the sacada. Light contact – meaning very light – allows a swifter, cleaner, more confident dance. It also gives the receiver the option to embellish with a quick unled gancho around the moving leg.

As it was explained to me by not just her but a good half-dozen other teachers, the famous illusion is not that of contact, which is ideally present, but that of kicking the foot away, which hurts and is to be avoided. It's similar to the illusion of the barrida, where contact is real but light, but there's no drag . . . it merely looks like a drag because movement continues after establishing contact. Or the illusion of the parada, where contact is real but light, but not the cause of the stop . . . it looks like foot contact produced a stop only because the foot is placed an instant after the stop is led with the upper body.

In all of these cases, the contact lets the receiver react interestingly, wrapping the incoming leg in a sacada, proposing a counter-barrida in a barrida, executing the famous pasada or proposing a counter-parada in a parada, etc.

I think most illusions of foot and leg play are called "illusions" not because the contact is fake, but because the source of action – the displacement, pivot, stop, whatever – isn't foot or leg contact, but an upper-body movement. But some teachers don't clarify this because they don't mind terribly that beginners avoid even the contact, as it prevents football kicks by the giver and dangerously mistimed embellishments by the receiver.

 

[JournalInTime]

I wouldn't disagree with the earlier comment that it can be an illusion, but there can also be a displacement - a movement of the follower's leg (high or low, or somewhere inbetween, depending on the depth and contact, i.e. touching** the leg).

Agreed.

However, that's still a sort of illusion, as the movement comes from the upper body. Real contact occurs – and the giver's leg definitely transfers momentum to the receiver's to make it fly! – but the momentum is that of the giver's entire body, not that of a swinging or kicking leg alone. The receiver's leg is less pushed into the air that it is given a surface along which to slide up and out.

The giver should be able to pivot their entire body suddenly and convert this kind of sacada into a gancho ("ganchada") or enganche ("enganchelada"). If they cannot, the contact was too brusque to be safe in social dance. It's still done that way in escenario, of course . . . along with vertical splits, partner throws, and lots of other crazy stuff.

 

[Tangogal]

My rule of thumb is: thigh contact probably gancho, ankle or calf contact - the “not a gancho” move. Giant steps and the leader follows my feet: definitely sacadas of the no contact variety.