Home Reviews

I got a one-star review by Voracious Reader on Amazon for my book How To Dance With a Partner. I love this review. I wish the reader had contacted me directly because it is fun to discuss with someone who is interested in the material. In the Introduction, under section heading How To Use this Book, I write: "If you find that needed rules are missing, unnecessary rules are included, or there are logical inconsistencies, the author welcomes your feedback on these, as well as other concerns."

The reviewer makes errors that keep him from learning.

First, as often happens, he looks for confirmation of what he already knows. When presented with information beyond his experience, the reviewer concludes the author is wrong.

Second, he underestimates the author. See my references below. [1] I am reminded of what Jose Capablanca, the chess genius, said, paraphrasing: If I let you make an attacking move, you should consider my strength. It probably is not a good move.

Third, he takes things out of context. He disregards the foundation which the book builds accusing the author of contradictions.

Fourth, he quibbles over semantics.

Fifth, lacking humor, he imagines the worst interpretation of the author's words.

If you want to learn, you start with the premise that the author knows something you do not know. When your interpretation does not make sense, you ask yourself, or better still ask the author, what you are missing. When you understand what the author is saying, you can disagree with the author, but you do not not want to misunderstand the author.

Here is the review with my comments preceded by AW:.

---

Review by Voracious Reader with Author Comments

1.0 out of 5 stars Avoid this book!
Reviewed in the United States on July 22, 2026
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase

This book is full of misinformation.

AW: When he does not understand something, he should ask questions, not jump to the conclusion the information is wrong.

It's not that the author and I have different opinions on dance, we are actually quite similar about our attitude towards being gentle with followers.

AW: As he said, we agree. Since we agree, if he was open to learning, I could help him a lot.

It's just that the misinformation in this book ranges from beginner misconceptions, objective falsehoods, to things that are described as "universal" that only for for some dances (i.e., slow ones), to self-contradictions and physical impossibilities.

As an example physical impossibilities, he says the man can never ever move the woman, even a little.

page 55: "there is no use of force in dancing, not even a little not even a smidgen of tension in the fingertips, none."... "everyone moves their own body parts under their own volition"

Then he talks about underarm turns. You have to raise your hand to lead a turn, but you are expressly forbidden from moving your partner, This leader requires the man to raise his hand, which, according to physics, moves her hand, because it's on top of his. The book is full of mistakes like this: general good ideas, exaggerated until they don't work.

AW: This is a semantic complaint. What do we mean by the word "move". I anticipated this complaint. In Part Overview under heading Technicalities I write "This is a practical rule book for social dancers. The descriptions are technical enough for dancers to perform as needed. We have omitted technicalities that are not necessary for social dance instruction."

AW: The man raises his hand. The woman raises her hand in response. This is very different from the man raising the woman's hand. Everyone can tell the difference between these two behaviors. In the first case, we say the man does not move the woman's hand which is good. In the second case, we say the man does move the woman's hand which is bad. The reviewer is arguing that the man is moving the woman's hand in the first case too.

AW: As to physics, every step you take moves the earth in the opposite direction. In the same way, the reviewer is complaining that when the man starts to move his hand, in the micro-second before the woman responds, according to physics, the man must have moved the woman's hand some micro-distance. When we calculate how far someone walks on the earth, for the level of human perception, we do not need to subtract the distance the earth moved in response. Similarly, the dancers do not perceive this micro-distance as the man moving the woman's hand. When you give instruction, social dancers know the difference between the man moving only his hand and the man moving the woman's hand.

And later, when talking about leading a back step, in close embrace, he acknowledges that the leader moves forward, and this moves the follower (It has to, because physics), but here it's OK.

AW: I cannot find leading a back step. However, the principle is the same as raising the hand. The woman perceives the man inviting her to step back. She moves back on her own. In chapter 31. Closed Position, heading Leading in Closed Position, I write, "The man moves the body connection to indicate to the woman where to move. This invites the woman to move without throwing her off-balance, allowing her to do her own dancing. ... He needs to make sure he is inviting her to move not coercing her into moving. When moving, the man must allow flexibility in his frame to give the woman the freedom to move on her own."

AW: Dancing as one with your partner is the perception that you are independently, moving together without resistance. If you perceive tension with your partner, you are not dancing as one. According to physics, with sensitive enough instruments, moving as one is impossible. The instruments will always show more than zero pressure or tension. At the level of human perception, you can achieve the feeling of moving as one without tension and pressure if you follow the Laws of Balance, Connection, and Direction.

It's like he takes good points "invitation, not coercion" p56, and extends them to ridiculous, non-working lengths. Part way through I started to suspect AI, due to the lack of understanding of dance, physics, etc.

AW: The author takes the points to their logical conclusion. They work. In the front matter, under heading How This Book Helps You, and subheading The Solution to a 1,000-Year-Old Problem, I write, "This book solves the biggest problem in social dancing, a problem that affects millions of people. The problem is how to communicate unambiguously. Dance teachers have an enormous wealth of knowledge. However, when explaining how to communicate, they are surprisingly vague. This vagueness is not the fault of dance teachers. Men and women have been social dancing at least as far back as the eleventh century. Until now, there was no clearly defined method for communicating." That the reviewer does not know how to communicate unambiguously is understandable because all previous dance instruction was vague. This is the only unambiguous instruction for social dancing. Therefore, the instruction in this book contradicts how the reviewer learned to dance.

Then there is 57. Now, this is being a bit pedantic, but people that claim to have universal systems always ignore all sort of things, so "there are two steps a woman can make: step and rotate" "these are the only things she can do". Really? How about a dip? A developé? A hop?

AW: The system is universal for social dancing as defined in this book. Any system that is logically consistent and complete must have constraints. As I write in Part Overview chapter 3. Social Dancing, "This book is only concerned with social partner dancing.. ... "Definition of Social Dancing: dancing that puts the social nature of dancing first.". I go on with the "Definition of Social Dance Choreography: any choreography you can unambiguously communicate safely without having practiced with your partner." Under A for Attitude, I define ten values for social dancing: "Safety, Courtesy, Comfort, Teamwork, Naturalness, Freedom, Clearly Defined, Easy, Fast, and Universal". To meet these requirements, in chapter 20. Law of Balance, under heading Everyone Maintains Their Own Balance, I write, "For safety's sake, everyone maintains their own balance." This is true for the the other nine values as well. I do not know what a develope is. A dip and hop are fine provided both people maintain their own balance and therefore do not lose contact with the floor and do not slide. A dip going down and up and a hop raising up and down are both vertical movements and are led by the Law of Connection. Step and rotate are the only two horizontal movements a person can do under these constraints. As I write in chapter 20. Law of Balance under heading Practice Off-Balance Movements Ahead of Time, "Any choreography that intentionally violates the law of balance is not social dance choreography. Off-balance movements can be fun. You can do them, and other non-social dance choreography, during social dances, but you should practice them with your partner ahead of time."

The "Law of Balance" is a fine rule, for some dances. Other dances specifically share weight. It's part of the design, the physics and the fun of the dance. Try to do pivots in polka without sharing weight. It doesn't work. I don't think the swingout in Lindy works without sharing weight, but I'm not regular Lindy dancer.

AW: The reviewer is talking about moves, not dances. If a move requires sharing weight, the move is not a social dance move. You can do the move in social dancing if you have permission from your partner. You can pivot in Polka without counterbalancing. Continuous pivots in any dance are difficult without counterbalancing. You need extreme balance. In my opinion, continuous pivots are not social dance choreography even without counterbalancing. They require too much skill. The swingout in swing is safer, easier, and faster without counterbalancing. In many dances, like Polka and Contra, some people like to counterbalance. If you and your partner agree, counterbalance to your heart's content. Do not share weight with someone who has not given you permission to do so.

And I can't find it now, but he talks about starting the follower, and then not leading again until she is done. This is common beginner misconception. Beginners commonly only know one set of movements that start with a given lead, and go back to basic steps after a pattern, But there are many patterns in Salsa, for example, that start with the same lead, but only diverge later in the step Just as a simple example, an underarm turn lead might lead into

* Another turn

* Back to basic step

* Spin into a hammer lock

* Open into cross-over breaks

* Free spin

AW: The reviewer does not understand the principles in this book. You constantly go from one lead to another. You do not lead figures. You lead the four basic patterns of go straight, turn, go straight and turn, and walk in a circle. Figures are made up of one or more of the four basic patterns. The basic forward and back figure in Salsa is led by first asking the woman to step back and then asking her to step forward. When done in place, an underarm turn, hammer lock, and free spin are all led the same by moving the connection around the woman to invite her to turn. The difference is adjusting the connection accordingly, ie. you let go in a free spin, in a hammerlock you have one hand up and one hand down. Cross-over breaks are led by asking the woman to turn then asking her to step. In chapter 35 Woman's Choreography, I write, Building Blocks for Figures, "The four basic patterns are the building blocks for the woman's figures. The woman's figures are made up of these basic patterns following one upon another." The Unit of Communication, "Definition of the Unit of Communication: the man invites the woman to move. The woman completes her movement. The man waits for her to finish." "As you dance, there is a parade of requests that the man makes of the woman. The man invites the woman then waits for her to finish. The woman completes her movement on her own. This sequence of invitation by the man and completion by the woman is the unit of communication."

And probably a dozen more. You can't just lead at the start. You have to lead the whole way. The old saying "Not making a decision IS making a decision" applies to leading. You ARE always leading, whether you realize it or not. Make sure you know what you are leading. No, you don't crank her through the turn, as the author exaggerates, but you are always letting her know what is coming up.

AW: The reviewer's comment here reveals the problem in social dance instruction. The reviewer's instruction is meaningless. What does he mean by lead? Specifically, what does the man do and how does the woman respond? He does not know. In the book, leading has a specific meaning. To lead step, the man moves the connection straight in the direction he wants the woman to go. To lead rotate, the man moves the connection around the woman. You do not lead the whole way through. Depending on what the man leads, the leads can come quickly, within a fraction of a second, or be up to seconds apart. Taking Salsa as an example, in leading the basic step, as soon as you ask the woman to step back, you immediately ask her to step forward. If you lead a simple pass with the lady turning left, you do not lead her every step. You initiate her steping forward and give her a signal to turn left, then you wait for her to take the rest of her steps on her own.

And there are many steps that are a continuing sequence. A simple walk can have one, OR MORE steps. How does she know?

AW: Hey, he asked a question! I answered this question in chapter 33. Law of Direction, heading The Woman Stops When She Can Go No Further, "Rule of Woman Stopping: the woman stops when her motion is blocked or she reaches the end of her connection." More details follow.

The leader is either leading that you continue or you do something else. There is no "finish" for her to get to.

AW: No, this is wrong. The leader does not lead the woman to continue. He only initiates her movement. She continues on her own. The finish is when she reaches the end of the connection or if the man blocks her. The man attempting to lead ever step of the woman does not work. The reviewer already gave some examples, a free spin in Salsa and a swingout in Lindy. In a free spin, the man lets go of the woman, so he is not leading her all the way through her turn. In a swingout, the man leads the woman forward while he steps out of the way and moves in front of her. He cannot lead her forward the entire time while he is going the other way. In both of these figures, and in every figure, the man and woman are following my rules even if they do not know it. Following the Law of Direction, the woman is to keep going. In the free spin, once she starts turning, she continues to turn on her own. She stops when the man reconnects. In the swingout, once she is invited forward, she continues forward on her own, while the man is going the other way around her to face her.

Also, of course, you have to lead the exit, before it happens. It's much easier, and less confusing to lead continuously.

Further, one of the realities of dancing is other dancers. It's incredibly common on a busy dancing floor to have to adjust your patterns on the fly. If you aren't already leading, you'll have to re-establish the lead. And it will take longer.

And some closing problems:

"If someone tries to talk to you while the music is on, put your fingers to your lips to shush them". Wow. Rudeness will not get you many repeat dances. Many people like to converse on the social dance floor, others do not. Either is fine. I guess the author missed chapter ten, p 82 "Be respectful. Don't tell anyone else what to do."

AW: Shushing is funny. What can you do when people lack a sense of humor. There is no rule against being charming. If two people both like to converse with each, as I write, do whatever you want when you both agree and are not bothering others. This is a guideline, not a rule. In my experience, usually, those talking are either instructing the other person or talking out of nervousness, both are not good. As to this being rude, the reviewer is taking this out of context. Chapter 10. Courtesy, starts with the headings Be Respectful and Be Considerate. By the time we get to the heading No Talking, we have already established that you should treat other people with respect. When you shush someone, you must shush respecfully. I guess that depends on what finger you shush with.

And the worst of the bunch:

"I stop the class. I make an example of them." If an instructor does this to you in a dance class, leave. If the instructor does this to someone else in your dance class, leave. Talk to whoever hired them on the way out, explain why you are leaving.

Bullies, even well-intentioned ones, have no place in teaching. The teacher sets the tone for the class. You can't say "be polite to your partners", and then be rude to your students. Students, particularly beginning students, can be very sensitive. Don't publicly embarrass them.

AW: The reviewer continues to take things out of context and recast in the worst way. We have already established that social dancing is about having fun. Having a good attitude and getting along with others is what is important. We built a foundation on the principles of safety, courtesy, and comfort. The quote the reviewer is complaining about is from an anecdote in chapter 18. Follower Attitude, heading Whose Is the Fault When Followers Do Not Follow?. The anecodote is "When a follower tries to help a leader, even if he asked her, I stop the class. I make an example of them. I tell the men, do not ask the women what to do. I tell the women, your job is to follow, not help the man.". This is a story for illustration purposes. You only do something like this when you know the person is going to laugh because they already know they should not be doing what they are doing. It is like catching someone with their hand in the cookie jar. Of course you do not humilate people. What is the reviewer thinking?

Bottom line: the book has many anecdotes about how he couldn't dance with people, because they were not dancing his way. If you read this book, this will happen to you. You won't be able to dance with most people, because his system will only work with people dancing his system.

AW: This requires a three part answer. First, in the book I describe what is happening during leading and following. People are following my laws whether they know it or not. The pushing and pulling is noise in the communication. My method works even with people who do not know it. You can dance with everyone better when you follow my method because you know what you are doing. People will also prefer dancing with you because you are not pushing and pulling on them.

AW: Second, I do not think there are any anecdotes where I could not dance with people. I have never met anyone that dances with more people than I do. In the Appendix, chapter Do Not Tell Others What To Do, under heading Everyone Can Dance, I write, "I will dance with anyone. I social dance for fun. I do not care how good someone is. I have just as much fun with a beginner as with someone who knows what they are doing." There are anecdotes where there are problems, such as people hurting me and followers not knowing what to do. That is the point of anecdotes. To describe experiences that people relate to so they understand the problems and solutions.

AW: Third, it is true you may not want to dance with people that do not follow my method. My intent was to make it easier for everyone to dance with everybody. I was disturbed to find that an unintended consequence was that when some people learned how nice it is to dance following my method, they do not want to dance with people that push and pull them. I have told them that is not in the spirit of my method, but they do not care what I think.

---

[1] I started studying communication in social dancing around 1995. The question was how does the woman know what to do? I wanted to understand balance. I have been dancing for 40+ years. I have taught over 7,000 dance classes. I have taught dance workshops in Seoul, Manilla, Canada, Boston, Chicago, Detroit, Las Vegas, Miami, Texas, Virginia, Wisconsin, and elsewhere. I have taught Argentine Tango, Ballroom, Contra, Latin, Lindy, Line, Israeli, Salsa, Square, Waltz, West Coast Swing, and more. I ran the Gainesville Dance Association for 2 years filling the studio with over a dozen different groups on a weekly basis, multiple groups each day, and with world class professionals coming in for workshops. I publish a weekly newsletter of dancing in the area for over 20 years. I have a website with a calendar of area dance events for which I wrote the software. I have a background in training skills. I have played, captained, coached, referreed, and run basketball and volleyball leagues for 20 years, often being the best player in the league. I have scored 48 points in a basketball game, and I played in the first professional Jose Cuervo Beach Volleyball Tournament held in Florida. I have a bachelor of science in mathematics from the University of Florida, enough credits for a second degree in chemistry, and I studied physics, biology, and computer science. I am a software developer. I was the highest performer at IBM Global Network amongst ten departments of 100 people. I played large high school varsity basketball. I was our county's high school chess champion. I finished every science class in my high school by eleventh grade. I scored so high on the SAT, the highest in my city, that MIT asked me to apply.

Home Reviews