Quickstep Bronze syllabus question

[Josh]

Would you follow a progressive chasse ending DC with a chasse reverse turn in bronze syllabus? It is not allowed in ISTD, but I have had a couple of people including some who judge events advocate using the combo after an underturned spin turn.

 

[Chris Stratton]

Interesting, had not seen that but it makes some sense as the sort of "running" foot change of stringing them together can overpower the chasse reverse if one isnt careful - in effect the silver combo with the quick open reverse is easier since you can continue to move a lot.

Personally I prefer to teach the heel pivot if one wants an easy entry to inside lane or reverse figures, especially for floorcraft purposes since it requires less preplanning of directions.

 

[DL]

Would you follow a progressive chasse ending DC with a chasse reverse turn in bronze syllabus? It is not allowed in ISTD, but I have had a couple of people including some who judge events advocate using the combo after an underturned spin turn.

If I understand you properly and my recollection is correct, this was in the first QS routine I learned.

 

[SpinTurn]

We have done precisely that combination in bronze quickstep. Got the idea from this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVrBtujXMm4

 

[Josh]

Right--but it is not syllabus legal, which is my concern. There are some great syllabus combos that can be put together that are still syllabus legal but not "in the syllabus," such as a checked spin turn with a reverse pivot ending, or a brush tap to promenade in tango, and so on. But this combo, progressive chasse to chasse reverse, just can't be made legal as far as I can see. Any further ideas on this?

 

[Chris Stratton]

Spin turn to reverse pivot is explicitly legal. A checked spin turn is not a legally defined figure but rather an interpretation of this combination.

My gut feeling is most invigilators would allow a brush tap to promenade as its consistent with the spirit of the methods officially listed, but who knows.

 

[Mengu]

Right--but it is not syllabus legal, which is my concern. There are some great syllabus combos that can be put together that are still syllabus legal but not "in the syllabus," such as a checked spin turn with a reverse pivot ending, or a brush tap to promenade in tango, and so on. But this combo, progressive chasse to chasse reverse, just can't be made legal as far as I can see. Any further ideas on this?

Can you somehow argue that the first step of your chasse reverse is taken on the RF prior to the actual step? I know, pretty thin.

 

[Josh]

Spin turn to reverse pivot is explicitly legal. A checked spin turn is not a legally defined figure but rather an interpretation of this combination.

Correct, and I have yet to hear of an invigilation on this interpretation.

My gut feeling is most invigilators would allow a brush tap to promenade as its consistent with the spirit of the methods officially listed, but who knows.

Under "Methods of preceding any promenade figure":
2. Walk on RF, place LF to the side without weight, turning lady to PP, count &

With the brush tap, it's not a "walk on RF" specifically but I think the method of turning to PP on any "&" would fall under this category.

 

[Josh]

Can you somehow argue that the first step of your chasse reverse is taken on the RF prior to the actual step? I know, pretty thin.

Since the chasse reverse is 3 steps, LRL, I would answer a definite no. Unlike figures whose last step becomes the first step of the next and so on, there is no such thing going on in this case.

 

[vcolfari]

I did this combination all the time in Bronze events and was never questioned. My view was that I was merely connecting two Bronze patterns by taking an extra step on the right foot. I know that's not ISTD legal, but that was how I justified it in my mind.

 

[Mengu]

Since the chasse reverse is 3 steps, LRL, I would answer a definite no. Unlike figures whose last step becomes the first step of the next and so on, there is no such thing going on in this case.

Cross Chasse has the same problem, but I see people dancing it after a walk on the RF. Probably also illegal, but when needed, it's better than running into a wall, another couple, or a judge.

 

[Chris Stratton]

Since the chasse reverse is 3 steps, LRL, I would answer a definite no. Unlike figures whose last step becomes the first step of the next and so on, there is no such thing going on in this case.

The quick open reverse is explicitly legal there in the way Mengu proposes, but the chasse reverse is not listed.

 

[Josh]

The quick open reverse is explicitly legal there in the way Mengu proposes, but the chasse reverse is not listed.

What Mengu proposed was that the "first step" of the chasse reverse was on the RF, that being the last step of the progressive chasse. The quick open reverse, just like the chasse reverse, begins with the man's LF. It does end with a fourth step on the RF, unlike the chasse reverse, but that's got nothing to do with its precede.

 

[Chris Stratton]

The right foot step does not formally belong to either type of reverse, and in both cases its provided by the. previous figure; but doing this for a QOR is explicitly legal, while doing it for the chasse reverse is in question.

That suggests to me that its not the wrong-footedness but something else (momentum?) which causes the chasse reverse to be left off the list.

 

[Josh]

You're missing the point, but it doesn't really matter--I believe that it is the momentum which causes it to not be a valid follow as well. I think it's this simple, and that's why I have not used it this way. While the running finish has lots of momentum and goes to a natural turn, it is after all a natural turn and is thus fundamentally different. The swing is still there but the passing of each other is present and not so in the reverse. That's my thought on it.