That is where we differ. I see MJ as a branch of Jive, the American bit of Latin American dance. All the Latin American dances are clearly described and have only one basic. That's what makes them easy to learn. Saying "do what you like" leaves a lot of scope to get it wrong.Franck wrote:II'm saying that claiming 'One true way' for footwork is wrong.
However, just because there's a set basic doesn't mean there can't be variations. It's the same in all partner dances, you need to walk before you can run. And the MJ basic is IMHO, walking. (note, no smiley)
I'm not claiming anything of the sort. I change the way I teach on a regular basis and I'm always improving and striving to get better. The most recent change was January this year. I'm being the best I can be, but I'm never arrogant enough to think my teaching is the best or won't get better.Franck wrote:As I've explained twice already (in this thread, and countless times on this forum).
The only reason we are in disagreement, is because you claim that your teaching of footwork is the best, a fact that has been demonstrated false.
Why we disagree is beyond me. I've based what I teach on observation. I observe what's going on at MJ dances and teach people to join in with the dance I see. I'm not trying to change the dance. I'm trying to find the best communication methods to teach beginners to do the dance I see in real life. Franck may be many steps ahead of me as an innovator at the cutting edge or even the bleeding edge of MJ. But I'm simply teaching what I see.
And I do teach footwork variations. But I don't teach them as the basic. I'm very clear on this.