Leadable and unleadable moves (split from New Year, New Dance)

[Andy McGregor]

Any consensus on the best way to lead it ?

My own opinion is that the Columbian is led using frame and body leads. This requires a bit of hand action with the guys left hand changing the attitude of the lady's frame so she's stepping backwards in the 'behind' bit of the move and then using the left hand again to change the attitude of the frame so she's stepping forward in the 'forward' bit of the move.

My short calls for this move after 'starts like a first move but this is where it changes' are 'forward - behind - forward - forward - forward - behind - forward - forward - forward - behind''.

My preference for the right hand is on the top of the lady's hip (iliac crest) or waist rather than the shoulder blade - this isn't because it's a better lead position, it's because the man's hand on the lady's shoulder blade means the the lady's left breast could press against the guys wrist as she turns to step backwards on the 'behind' bit - some ladies might like this with the right man, but most women object - in my experience

[Ghost]

Any consensus on the best way to lead it ?

1. Lead it on followers who know it
2. If leading it followers who don't know it, don't let them think! Because the odds of them working out what to do are pretty slim. (Eventually if you mirror the correct footwork and persist they'll get it but I don't really like this approach and you need a lot of room)

I once had a conversation while dancing about how the woman I was dancing with just couldn't follow Columbians and how they were unleadable. I agreed. After about 10-20 seconds of discussing this I pointed out I'd just led her in a Columbian forwards, backwards, and going round in a circle cw and acw.

But as soon as I see the cogs going round in a follower's head I'm doomed and she'll invariably do some other variation of walk

Personally I prefer a shoulder blade tango embrace, but then I learnt the technique for the move in tango....

[David Bailey]

I also noticed that the lead (the part where you lead the follower into the first step behind) was done on the followers hip (rather than shoulder blade). I seem to get different feedback depending on where I attend, as to whether partners find it awkard led at the hip as opposed to the shoulder blade.

I did have one lesson with Simon and Nicole, where they did this with the right arm lead on the shoulder blade (tucked through the armpit iyswim). Any thoughts on whether this is best led shoulder or hip, as I seem to change.

Not relevant. If you're thinking about using your hand to lead the move, it's already going wrong. At most, you should only be giving a slight nudge with your hand.

II also noticed on the moves site mentioned earlier, that they say this move is an unleadable move .

They're wrong

(yes, I know, I'm the one who gave the Jiveoholics link... )

Any consensus on the best way to lead it ?

Well, that's interesting.... Because the variation I do (and I suspect Ghost does also) has different footwork - instead of both partners stepping forwards (and sideways) simultaneously, I step forwards as the woman steps back, and vice versa. This, to me, is nicer, more elegant and easier to lead; I use dissociation and body leads to do it. We'd call it a linear giro in Tango, partially coz we like using foreign names for things. Foreign names are cool.

However, the Official Columbian may need more frame to lead.

(In tango, the Official Version is more of an Americana movement - see here for an example.)

Either way, you need some technique to lead and follow the movement.

[Moo]

Not relevant. If you're thinking about using your hand to lead the move, it's already going wrong. At most, you should only be giving a slight nudge with your hand.

Just to clarify, I didn't mean lead solely with the hand, thats just a connection point of the frame with a hint of steer (in some cases). It was more focusing on where the connection point was.

In my mind, I was trying to figure out, if the frame is somehow more stable, if the main connection points are higher or lower (than the dissociation point if that makes sense). I think I'd need to have a partner with me to have a bash at explaining it properly.


The variation you mention, I think thats the way I learnt with Simon and Nicole. I've been trying that, and find its preferable for me, but I think sometimes I find myself lagging just a moment behind the follower on the first backstep which I'm trying to fix. This doesn't happen for me if I do it the traditional way, as I feel more synchronized rather than having a waiting moment (whilst she steps back. If we're talking about a different variation that may not make sense! Ah, maybe ignore that, are you talking about doing a different step just for the first follower step back before the actual start of the columbian, or every time, so its some type of converse Columbian whatever that means ?)

[David Bailey]

Just to clarify, I didn't mean lead solely with the hand, thats just a connection point of the frame with a hint of steer (in some cases). It was more focusing on where the connection point was.

In my mind, I was trying to figure out, if the frame is somehow more stable, if the main connection points are higher or lower (than the dissociation point if that makes sense). I think I'd need to have a partner with me to have a bash at explaining it properly.

In that case, fair enough - I'd also go for the shoulder blade as the hold.

The variation you mention, I think thats the way I learnt with Simon and Nicole. I've been trying that, and find its preferable for me, but I think sometimes I find myself lagging just a moment behind the follower on the first backstep which I'm trying to fix. This doesn't happen for me if I do it the traditional way, as I feel more synchronized rather than having a waiting moment (whilst she steps back. If we're talking about a different variation that may not make sense! Ah, maybe ignore that, are you talking about doing a different step just for the first follower step back before the actual start of the columbian, or every time, so its some type of converse Columbian whatever that means ?)

Err... dunno. I can't find a video of a linear giro, which is annoying...

Basically, the variation I like has:
Leader: Side -> forward -> side -> back -> side etc.
Follower: Side -> back - > side -> forward -> side etc.

Whereas the tradition Columbian is:
Leader: Side -> forward -> side -> back -> side etc.
Follower: Side -> forward -> side -> back -> side etc.

[Ghost]

I also noticed on the moves site mentioned earlier, that they say this move is an unleadable move .

They're wrong

In fairness it's worth noting that the people saying it's leadable are teachers with double digits years of doing Ceroc and some have with quite a bit of jango and tango experience too.

It reminds me of something Franck said a long time ago.

I'm so glad there's no footwork in Ceroc

A common misquote! the correct version of the above is: "There is no set footwork in Ceroc"

So yes a linear giro / columbian is leadable. However I'd argue that's it's not repeatably leadable by an average good intermediate leader unless the follower specifically knows it.

Categorically I can't lead a columbian 100% of the time on a Ceroc follower who doesn't know it. Make of that what you will.

Well, that's interesting.... Because the variation I do (and I suspect Ghost does also) has different footwork - instead of both partners stepping forwards (and sideways) simultaneously, I step forwards as the woman steps back, and vice versa. This, to me, is nicer, more elegant and easier to lead;

Definitely agree with David's points. I often just walk alongside though. I don't do it, but if you want to do the show by example version, then you need to mirror her.

Either way, you need some technique to lead and follow the movement.

The problem I've found is that the technique I use is from tango. it works perfectly on tango followers, but not so well on Cerocers because they don't know the same things.

A food for thought quote from Andreas Wichter

"You're not leading me - you're making me understand what it is you want me to do; it's not the same thing."

[David Bailey]

Definitely agree with David's points. I often just walk alongside though. I don't do it, but if you want to do the show by example version, then you need to mirror her.

If you want to be really flash, you do it whilst walking backwards

[Ghost]

If you want to be really flash, you do it whilst walking backwards

Hee.

And if you've been thinking far too much about musicality lately, you could do syncopated sidesteps

[geoff332]

1. Lead it on followers who know it

I really disagree with that. It's not about whether they know the columbian or not: it's about whether they give you a frame to work with. I find people who think they know it worse, because they try and do the move instead of following the lead. But you seem to know this...

My own opinion is that the Columbian is led using frame and body leads.

Not relevant. If you're thinking about using your hand to lead the move, it's already going wrong. At most, you should only be giving a slight nudge with your hand.

Exactly. It's easy to lead this way...

Because the variation I do (and I suspect Ghost does also) has different footwork

The variation you mention, I think thats the way I learnt with Simon and Nicole.

I've done both variations, and heard them called by a bunch of different names, in both open and closed holds. The technique and movement are the same, only the hold (and the point of connection) change.

[Ghost]

1. Lead it on followers who know it

I really disagree with that. It's not about whether they know the columbian or not: it's about whether they give you a frame to work with. I find people who think they know it worse, because they try and do the move instead of following the lead. But you seem to know this...

Good point.

Basically it depends on your point of view and I wasn't entirely sure what Moo was going for. A lot of Ceroc leaders would be perfectly happy that they had led the move if they basically got the woman started and then accompanied her as she did the rest. There's also an argument for doing this for a bit when learning to lead it so you can get used to doing your part without having to deal with leading everything.

While I agree that the follower's frame is important, there's not much a leader can do if they don't have one, other than to recognise this and not attempt to lead the move. (Or settle for saying "Columbian", I guess)

For leaders who want to lead the move to a deeper definition of "lead", then simply define the following knowing the move as including knowing about frame, connection etc and how they apply to it.

Edit - though this runs into the problem that frame , connection etc aren't standardly taught.

Better answer. If you really want to lead columbians or for that matter ochos, take up tango; it's much easier to lead them there.

[Ghost]

Thinking about it there might be a way....


I like followers who play, sabotage and hijack . As such my lead is very invitational. So for example I do a movement which clearly indicates I want the follower to step forward. It's then up to her to recognise this and then either accept and step forward, or do to something else.

As such for me the columbian only really works if the follower understands what the lead for each element means so that she can freely accept or not.

David on the other hand is the opposite.

So it's possible that a more authoritarian leading style is the best approach to leading a columbian on a follower with basic following skills who doesn't know it.

[ant]

I like followers who play, sabotage and hijack . As such my lead is very invitational. So for example I do a movement which clearly indicates I want the follower to step forward. It's then up to her to recognise this and then either accept and step forward, or do to something else.

As such for me the columbian only really works if the follower understands what the lead for each element means so that she can freely accept or not.

I find when as a leader you are walking and not mirroring this lead works best in the above situation and you are relying on the follower to pick up what you want by small disociation movement. I think that the move can go wrong with this lead if it is over led.

David on the other hand is the opposite.
So it's possible that a more authoritarian leading style is the best approach to leading a columbian on a follower with basic following skills who doesn't know it

When you just go for it then the mirroring works best as I feel you need an equal amount of dissociation in the body of the leader and follower to lead the move in this way.

[Lory]

1. Lead it on followers who know it

I know this was said 'tongue in cheek' but you'd be amazed at how many people ask "did you do the lesson?" before attempting a move, as if I wouldn't be able to follow it, if I hadn't learnt it

I just reply, you lead it and I'll have a go anyway

[Amir]

Originally Posted by Franck
A common misquote! the correct version of the above is: "There is no set footwork in Ceroc"

Or even better 'There is no agreement about footwork in Ceroc'

or even better 'There is no agreement'

[Andy McGregor]

Or even better 'There is no agreement about footwork in Ceroc'

or even better 'There is no agreement'

As Ceroc is not a dance but a trademarked company name there can be no footwork in Ceroc.

It's a bit like saying there's no beef in McDonalds - but there is in their burgers - unless it's chicken or fish

The difference is that Ceroc doesn't seem to agree what it puts in it's burgers. If you were to listen to Franck you'd get the impression that you could ask for a cheeseburger and on one day it could be fish, but on another day it could be beef - but Franck would say it doesn't matter as it's all protein and very tasty

[geoff332]

or even better 'There is no agreement'

I disagree.

[straycat]

'There is no agreement'

I disagree.

I think you're both wrong.

[David Franklin]

I know this was said 'tongue in cheek' but you'd be amazed at how many people ask "did you do the lesson?" before attempting a move, as if I wouldn't be able to follow it, if I hadn't learnt it

I just reply, you lead it and I'll have a go anyway

I'm reminded of a Yuval and Natalie story (can't find it online, so this is embellished^h^h^h^h rephrased in my own words).

Y/N were teaching somewhere, and half way through the lesson a follow comes in, explaining "It'll be all right, I just follow the lead".

Upon overhearing this, Yuval says "so let me just remind you of the last move", and throws Natalie about 15 feet in the air for a death-dive down the back.

The follow made her excuses and left.

[Andy McGregor]

The follow made her excuses and left.

It makes a funny story but is probably bad for business.

[Lory]

The follow made her excuses and left.

I'd have done the same!