WCS - a newbie's perspective

[NZ Monkey]

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming you're not basing the following only on a youtube clip, which doesn't even use any patterns that require preps to demonstrate.

Actually none of the answers regarding 'prep' or rotation are correct, The only way to control speed and amount of rotation in any turn is through control of the followers 'Angular momentum' It is simple physics....If you close a followers body whilst in rotation then she will speed up, if you open her body then she will turn at a slower rate

Pulsing certainly does not control this. There are occasions when a follower has a default taught response to this action, But it is not a natural response
Leading acceleration through the body could mean a number of things and has no bearing on the control of rotation
Degrees of prep or when to prep the lady again has no relevance of how fast she will turn or how many times she will turn, You are preparing her for rotation is all you are doing, how many, how fast and how much come as i said with control of her momentum, how much you close her body or not!

For what it's worth, I fully agree that inertia plays an important role*. It isn't the only factor though, as I pointed out above. The solo spinning demonstration illustrates the principle nicely, but he is using both arms fully extended and a leg to do it. The effect that change has on a real follower with only one arm being taken through a significantly lesser movement is nowhere near that dramatic. It's still an important factor, but not the be-all-and-end-all.

No explanation is given on how she obtains that angular momentum in the first place. We know the turn is driven from the connection at her shoulder blade, but no mention is made of that either here or in your earlier post. If bringing the hand in to a tight halo on the turn initiates a double turn, and that was all that is required to control the speed of the turn, then does that mean bringing it closer still will automatically produce more turns? Is there therefore an upper limit of allowed turns that you only reach if you stick her hand directly to her forehead?

If you want her to add more turns you don't just bring her hand in - you also add a little more power to the turn as she passes you around 5. That has just as much impact on your control of her angular momentum in this case. For that matter, you can vary the number of turns you can lead her through without holding onto her hand at all by altering the amount of angular momentum you give her though that lead as well.

If you wanted to travel all the way across the room with her spinning like that do you magically reduce the coefficient of friction between her and the floor and remove all the air in a bubble around her instead of pulsing?

I think what you're seeing here is a case of teaching a principle. One principle. One. Very. Useful. Principle. One principle without muddying the waters too much. That's a much better method of teaching than dumping everything at once, but sometimes it doesn't stack up if you look closely enough at what is going on.

On a side note, I have a great respect for the approach Robert Royston takes to teaching. His tools-based philosophy is extremely succinct, and almost forces them to apply it to their own dancing in general rather than just on particular patterns from the workshop which they will likely soon forget.


*His explanation at the start is a bit garbled, but he gets his point across well enough.

[David Bailey]

So, back on the chain gang

Numbers-wise, the class seems to be doing very well, we had about 25 attendees, which is excellent considering it's in mid-summer. They're now also starting to structure it so that there's an explicit (simultaneous) beginner and improver class also. It's also good that the overall standard of dancer is, I think, pretty high - most of the people there are at least intermediate Jive dancers, for example. And yes, I know, "WCS is jive for good dancers" blah blah blah...

Anyway, so we did our first 10-beat movement today, woo.

1. Leaders step back on 1, and 2, as normal to start
2. Leaders turn right, followers turn left, and both do a triple-step / chasse in parallel (left-right-left for the leaders) on the 3-and-4
3. Both pivot (anti-clockwise for the leaders, clockwise for the followers) with another triple (right & pivot-left-right for the leaders) on the 5-and-6
4. Change both do a travelling step turn (clockwise for the leaders) back to face each other on the 7-and-8
5. Finsh with a standard anchor step on the 9-and-10.

So it's a 10-beat movement with four triple steps, very exciting.

It worked fine in both the classes and the freestyles, so whilst it's a fairly long pattern, my gut feeling is that it's more-or-less a leadable one.

But my general question is, now that I've learnt lots of 6-beat moves, an 8-beat (whip and variations) and now a 10-beat move, how do the followers know which timing I'll be using? I mean, I used lots of different variations in the freestyles, and it worked fine there, but that's in the context of evertone having learnt the same movements. So do followers simply default to 6-beat timing unless led otherwise, or what?

The Tango section was, umm, interesting. They put a, hmmm, not quite sure how to describe it, but "boleo-like-back ocho" into the mix. Basically* it was simply a linear media luna (or, even more basically, a "grapevine"), but the lead into it was interesting, you did it from a forward walk, turning to the right then stepping back in parallel with the follower. It's an insane thing to to in a social dance - three steps back?!? - but I think there's an interesting move in there somewhere. The good thing about doing what is fundamentally a pattern-based class in AT is that it provides some ideas which you may not have thought of otherwise.

* Admittedly for a given value of "basic"

A very good class to come back to after a break.

[frodo]

So do followers simply default to 6-beat timing unless led otherwise, or what?

A good way to address the question may be to consider a simple case.

Arguably if the leader isn't moving relative to the follower they aren't leading 'otherwise'.


One very simple case is a left side pass where the leader does nothing to let tension build on the 5&6.

Instead the leader builds tension 2*N beats later, to end the move as an 8/10/etc. count move.

[NZ Monkey]

But my general question is, now that I've learnt lots of 6-beat moves, an 8-beat (whip and variations) and now a 10-beat move, how do the followers know which timing I'll be using? I mean, I used lots of different variations in the freestyles, and it worked fine there, but that's in the context of evertone having learnt the same movements. So do followers simply default to 6-beat timing unless led otherwise, or what?

More or less yes, although I'd phrase it a little differently.

Generally speaking triples fall into one of two categories - lead and unlead.

Triples are lead through acceleration or deceleration of the follower down the slot, or by changing her direction (which is also technically an acceleration). That includes times like the 3&4 of a whip, the triple on her anchour step after finding the post, 360+ degree traveling turns and the likes of Cha-Cha steps where she's moved out of the slot. At other times triples are there by convention but aren't really necessary from a lead/follow point of view (i.e the 3&4 of a left side pass - the only technical reason I can see for it being there is so you end up on the correct foot after doing your triple on the anchour step).

That said, sufficiently able followers are able to ignore what I've just written and still follow without it causing problems to the dance. It's a bit of sliding scale really. Stepping an anchour out rather than triple stepping is a very easy example, but the 3&4 of the whip is considerably more challenging and many people consider it not worth the risk of stuffing the leader up. In the end it's the followers job to sort out her own footwork and if she chooses to take the trickier path then she has to be prepared to think quickly if it all turns to custard.

If a pattern requires an unlead triple for no other reason than to be on the correct foot later then the pattern may still be leadable, but not necessarily on someone without the experience to "sort themselves out" if and when they need to. While I can't think of any such patterns off the top of my head I have no doubt they exist, and some are probably quite common in localized little areas where a lot of leaders use similar sorts of patterns.

[David Bailey]

So I've just had a bit of a mini-revelation. When I started this learning stuff, a couple of months ago, I was wondering about the purpose of doing a "tap-and-slide" on the "3-and-4" part of the Sugar Push, rather than the triple-step of the anchor steps (ooh, get my terminology ). It seemed pointless to me, adding complexity into the move for the sake of it. But having seen a few vids of this, it makes a bit more sense to me now.

It seems that the push-away bit of the Sugar Push takes place on the "4"; that's the forward step for the guys and obviously back step for the ladies. So it does make sense to differentiate this travelling movement from the anchor step; and a tap-and-slide movement will kind of force you into a nice big push. Does that make sense? (It does to me...)

So I'll try the tap-and-slide variation a bit more tomorrow, see if that works.

[frodo]

It seems that the push-away bit of the Sugar Push takes place on the "4"; that's the forward step for the guys and obviously back step for the ladies. So it does make sense to differentiate this travelling movement from the anchor step; and a tap-and-slide movement will kind of force you into a nice big push. Does that make sense? (It does to me....)

So what you're saying is it forces the leader to go forward on the 4, whereas with a triple direction isn't inherent - leaders might apply the same movement to each triple otherwise ?

[David Bailey]

So what you're saying is it forces the leader to go forward on the 4, whereas with a triple direction isn't inherent - leaders might apply the same movement to each triple otherwise ?

Yes, I think so, something like that. I'm not saying the tap-and-step is better, just that I can see a justification for it.

[David Bailey]

So, I thought it'd be good to wrap this one up. After a few months of classes, I've now gone about as far with WCS as I want to - I can more-or-less dance it socially, and I've got some understanding of some of the basic plusses and minuses of the dance.

I do (of course) still prefer Tango, mainly because it gives me a level of fine-tuned control over the musicality of my movements, which control isn't immediately available to me in WCS (although I appreciate that good WCS-ers can have more control, at the moment I'm stuck with 6- or 8-beat movements). I'm also a bit more relaxed about my partners doing weird stuff with their feet, although I admit the first few times it threw me.

I do like the music, and I've not seen any real snootiness around.

I've some appreciation for the floorcraft issues involved, especially when mixing WCS and MJ on the dance floor.

I'm happy to have spent the time on it, and I'm looking forward to continuing dancing it socially, but as I said, I've probably got where I want to, lesson-wise, with it.

[Gerry]

David
Have you tried any one to one classes with either of the following
Paul Warden
Cat Wiles
Lee Easton
I think a private with one of these may well open your eyes to all the oportunities you may be missing. Good luck and thank you for your honest appraisals of the WCS classes you have been to

[Phil_dB]

I have to agree with Gerry, - having danced with someone last night who has been going to that Watford class for six months....

[David Bailey]

I think a private with one of these may well open your eyes to all the oportunities you may be missing.

Why? Gerry, it's not like I'm exactly a novice at this dancing lark, you know? I think I'm competent to evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses of dance forms once I've done a few months of training and social dancing. And yes, I've danced socially outside my class set. I've even had some pointers from the Maestress Of Swing, Lory

So I'm not just some newbie with 2 years' experience of doing MJ saying "Oooh, it's too hard".

And I've no problem with people saying (for example) "Tango's not for me" - they simply express a preference.

In fact, I'm not even saying "WCS is not for me", simply that the obvious limitations with musical interpretation are not for me. It's one of the reasons I went off salsa, for that matter, which has even more restrictions. In fact, musicality in salsa is pretty much non-existent; it's almost impossible for even advanced dancers to display, the musical structure doesn't allow it.

I completely accept that WCS dancers at a certain level will be able to add in musical interpretation to their dancing - I'm simply saying that I'm not prepared to put the extra effort required for that, when I can get that interpretation right from lesson 1 with AT.

That said, I'll definitely continue dancing WCS when the opportunity arises, and I'm glad I did the classes.

[David Bailey]

I have to agree with Gerry, - having danced with someone last night who has been going to that Watford class for six months....

To be fair, one reason I've stopped going to the classes is that I felt that they weren't progressing.

But blimey, you can't judge an entire class from one dance with one dancer.

[straycat]

In fact, musicality in salsa is pretty much non-existent; it's almost impossible for even advanced dancers to display, the musical structure doesn't allow it.

I'm not a particular fan of salsa, and I'm not really a fan of salsa music (especially the 'standard' Cuban fare that seems to form the bulk of the music at dances I've been to), but I very much disagree with this - there's actually quite a lot to play with in the music. While I haven't seen it very often (most salsa dancing I've seen is of the move-move-move variety), I have seen it danced by some incredibly musical couples, who were doing nothing but play to and interpret the music, and found it breathtaking. Personally, I think the musical structures certainly do allow it, but one just doesn't seem to see it done very often.

Out of interest, what do you see as "obvious limitations with musical interpretation" in WCS? I can't say I disagree with you on that score (although, not being a westie of any description, I'm not sure I'm qualified to), but a lot of people praise WCS for the musicality inherent in the dance, so I'm a little curious as to your perspective on that one.

[David Bailey]

I'm not a particular fan of salsa, and I'm not really a fan of salsa music (especially the 'standard' Cuban fare that seems to form the bulk of the music at dances I've been to), but I very much disagree with this - there's actually quite a lot to play with in the music. While I haven't seen it very often (most salsa dancing I've seen is of the move-move-move variety), I have seen it danced by some incredibly musical couples, who were doing nothing but play to and interpret the music, and found it breathtaking. Personally, I think the musical structures certainly do allow it, but one just doesn't seem to see it done very often.

OK, technically it is possible to put in some variation of musicality, but you're still a slave to the clave rhythm underneath it all. You always step on the "1" (OK, or the "2" for the "on 2" style!), for example. You can't really avoid stepping on the one, and it's extremely difficult to avoid pausing on the, umm, pause.

You can have some freedom of movement, but ultimately you're still dancing to the "1-2-3-pause, 1-2-3-pause" rhythm. You have to; that's the dance.

Out of interest, what do you see as "obvious limitations with musical interpretation" in WCS?

The lack of flexibility; for example, each movement ending in a triple step, standard moves being taught to 6- or 8-beat phrases and so on.

You can't simply step in any direction (or pause) at any point in the music - which you can do in AT, in MJ Blues, and to an extent in MJ itself.

I can't say I disagree with you on that score (although, not being a westie of any description, I'm not sure I'm qualified to), but a lot of people praise WCS for the musicality inherent in the dance, so I'm a little curious as to your perspective on that one.

I can't help but think that some people define "musicality" as "being able to do a wide range of interesting movements to a piece of music". That's not musicality - to me, at least, musicality is "being able to express the music in a completely freeform manner". And you can't do that in WCS - or, at least, not as easily and as early as you can in AT.

In AT I can do 8 different steps - each chosen individually - to an 8-beat phrase. In WCS, I don't believe that's so easily achievable.

[TA Guy]

Forgive me, I'm bored on a Sat afternoon and thought I'd have a friendly pop at this post. In the interests of putting the record straight you understand .

The lack of flexibility; for example, each movement ending in a triple step, standard moves being taught to 6- or 8-beat phrases and so on.

WCS has a framework. What you describe above is not wrong as something to be taught, but it is wrong as a 'statement' about WCS. It's essentially the framework as taught to beginners.

The length of the patterns will always be important due to the structure of the music of course, but it doesn't take long before that framework is expanded. Patterns can be 4-beat, patterns can be extended to 10-12, and even longer. Eventually, funnily enough as with MJ, what becomes important is that you do whatever you are doing on two beat boundaries and goddamm listen to the music .
Similarly, triples can be replaced with 'rock and goes', turns, or some form of 'tap, ball, change', fan/ronde or whatever.

Built into any dance, MJ, Tango, Salsa or whatever is the inflexibility of dancing within the style of that dance, WCS is no different in that. But as a plain statement, your above comments don't work.

You can't simply step in any direction (or pause) at any point in the music - which you can do in AT, in MJ Blues, and to an extent in MJ itself.

Give you half a truth point for this one. Technically you can actually step in any direction you want, and that slot can be 'S' shaped, or lengthened, or shortened, or rotated by a factor of 90 degrees etc. But yes, there is the 'slot', keeping on the track, particularly in social dancing (which is usually fairly constrained slotting for logistical reasons as much as anything else) is part of the dance. Tho personally I quite like doing weird things with the track (see how I didn't use the word 'slot' in that last sentence in case there are any drunk rugby players around ).

Not sure about the 'pause' thing tho. I pause whenever I feel like it, which if I am on form or lucky, is when the music demands it. The WCS genre of dance does require dancing to the music, so I suppose compared to any dance that doesn't require dancing to the music, it's inflexible that way .

I can't help but think that some people define "musicality" as "being able to do a wide range of interesting movements to a piece of music". That's not musicality - to me, at least, musicality is "being able to express the music in a completely freeform manner". And you can't do that in WCS - or, at least, not as easily and as early as you can in AT.

"being able to express the music in a completely freeform manner" ? Surely that's only possible in completely freeform dance and nothing else ?
Definitely not possible in WCS. Otherwise it stops being WCS. Can't help feeling tho, if you were to truly freeform in AT, it would stop being AT as well. All dances are limited by what makes them 'that dance'.

I have no comment on whether it's easier in AT, or you can do it earlier in AT. Specially since Tango/AT teachers love to tell everyone else that their dance is the harder one .

In AT I can do 8 different steps - each chosen individually - to an 8-beat phrase. In WCS, I don't believe that's so easily achievable.

This one is completely true.
Technically you could do this in WCS, but I'm not sure it would be WCS any more. Certainly there are many substitutes for 'triples' & 'step steps' and no 'rule' banning freeform footwork, but there would probably be nothing messier than eight different steps in eight beats, and truly upon my life WCS is not a messy dance. It's almost a rule! .