[Tango-L] "You'll both be in a lean.."

[Trini y Sean (PATangoS)]

Hi all,

Astrid gives an excellent description of what I referred to
as the woman having a "core".  The stronger the core, the
better able the man can initiate a greater lean and get a
longer stride (along with the use of contrabody movement). 
Most women should be able to handle a slight lean caused by
the man repositioning his standing leg back a couple of
inches, which could give 'Mash the additional couple of
inches he wants without making her panic.  It's possible
that more contrabody (without the lean) might also gain
that couple of inches. 

To get more extreme strides requires that the man also
needs to trust the woman to accept his weight, as well,
which she transfers to the floor through her bone structure
which is aligned by her core.  A lot of women, however,
will misinterpret this weight as an indication to step
backward.  Why? Because she thinks she has to hold her own
weight and be on her own balance as opposed to maintaining
the balance of the couple.  He ends up falling into his
next step and chasing after her.  (One nice thing about
volcadas is that they make women work a lot harder on their
core.)

A useful way of thinking about length is to think about
making the body long as opposed to the step along the floor
long.  So as a woman reaches back and down with her leg,
her torso needs to reach up and forward to balance and
extend her body.  It feels great when I dance with a guy
(like Robert Hauk) who can make me stretch all the way out
but who doesn't take up a lot of floor space.

Trini de Pittsburgh

--- astrid <astrid at ruby.plala.or.jp> wrote:

> > Is not the "energy" rather forward force then downward
> weight? At the
> point of the axis the force, energy, weight is equal.
> From what I have read
> it that you are supporting each other, but not to the
> extent that if you
> were to walk away the other would fall dramatically. Also
> this then becomes
> an issue of trust, the follower trusts the leader to
> support them but not to
> drop them. What I understand of allowing a leader to
> "hold" the followers
> weight is that the leader provides a means for the
> follower to be lighter on
> their feet. This allows them to pivot and be provided a
> lighter more free
> structure to move within. One which without being lifted
> and supported they
> would not have.
> >
> > 'Mash
> > London, UK
> 
> A fairly good description. Now, this is getting really
> complicated, but I
> think that the energy is more like a presence, a
> readiness in the follower
> that can be directed in any direction and is not limited
> to "forward".
> To be light on one's feet is achieved by directing some
> of one's own weight
> upward, meaning lifting the body off the tight connection
> in the pelvic
> joints, pulling the torso away from the pelvis. Leaning
> slightly forward in
> that position shares some of the weight with the leader
> but not all of it,
> and the way the leader should respond is by sharing some
> of his weight with
> the follower, and then, Jake Spatz, you would not have
> anything to worry
> about. This is the dynamics of a pyramid. Putting weight
> on a leader who
> won't move a little forward but instead insists on
> stasnding on his heels,
> or worse, does not have a strong axis, is really scary !
> But being "lifted" by the leader, no, I usually don't
> like that at all, that
> can really take away your balance except for a few moves
> where this lift is
> really required. I lift myself.
> >






       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Need a vacation? Get great deals
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
http://travel.yahoo.com/