Yes, this is what I mean. My low is "foot stays on the floor" and my high still has knees almost together. What I saw was higher.
Low vs. High boleo - leader's choice or follower's choice?
- Thread starter LoveTango
- Start date
Yes, this is what I mean. My low is "foot stays on the floor" and my high still has knees almost together. What I saw was higher.
I know of a woman who dances this way. I wouldn't think of asking her to dance, because that type of movement has no place in the way I dance.
I will admit, she does not lack for partners.
opendoor
Forum Master
:bkick:
I only wanted to show how much rubbish is going round, and how uncritical people are, in particular concerning argentines
mshedgehog
New Member
I would say that the high one *can* be a totally natural movement and a surprise and not the follower's choice: and therefore I think that (if you are going to do it at all) it *should* be. The reason I believe it *can* be, is that I once kicked my own bottom with a successfully-led high boleo, and I actually cannot kick my own bottom on purpose and unaided, even if I try. The reason I believe that because it *can* be natural, it therefore *should* be (if you are going to do it at all) is that otherwise you have to switch all sorts of thinking on and off and that is very distracting and destroys the overall logic and integrity of the dance and prevents you doing other things. I don't think faking makes sense in tango, for reasons of technique and aesthetics. But you may not agree that this follows. I also generally think that nearly all the ones I see on the floor (aside from being a bad idea in other ways) are fake, because it's really not at all easy to lead high ones successfully and it is also not common for the follower to be in exactly the right place physically - in any sense.
I think we could say that the boleo happens when there is a sudden change of direction in the pivot, and the centrifugal force caused by this change is greater than the gravity. This force makes the follower's foot lift. The same phenomenon happens during the boleo of a cow-boy with the "bolas" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolas).
If the momentum impressed by the leader is not enough to cause a boleo, or if the follower is blocking her knee, the boleo will simply not happen: this is what someone calls the "low boleo".
If the foot is raising due to the follower's energy, it is a fake boleo.
If the follower pivots extending her leg and keeping her foot at the floor, it is a planeo.
If the momentum impressed by the leader is not enough to cause a boleo, or if the follower is blocking her knee, the boleo will simply not happen: this is what someone calls the "low boleo".
If the foot is raising due to the follower's energy, it is a fake boleo.
If the follower pivots extending her leg and keeping her foot at the floor, it is a planeo.
Dave Bailey
Active Member
Or a step
sixela
Well-Known Member
But the follower has some control over how much of the energy transfers to the foot, by controlling the dissociation at the hip and how fast the built up torsion "unwinds" again.
opendoor
Forum Master
Dont agree, the to and fro movement is lead by the man with the counter movement. The moment the woman gets into it only is the flicking at the angular point. It provides the speed.
sixela
Well-Known Member
Of course. But he leads the to and fro of the top of the follower. How the bottom half reacts depends on how the follower dissociates above the waist. At least I don't actually physically grab the follower below the waist
.
Unskilled leaders frequently give far more force than necessary when leading boleos, and resisting can cause pain and counterproductive tension in the follower's muscles. I can't tell you how many times I've been led in boleos (including high inline back boleos) that should have been kept low due to space, but it required considerable effort form me to keep my foot down resulting in painful joints and muscles.
No. Not always, as I pointed out above... If she were always the mistress of her movements, then it wouldn't be possible for bad leaders to hurt followers by overly forceful movements.