This video demonstrates the standard Chain Figure and how to do it well.
We also teach you good technique for adding twirls, and variants such as the
Open Chain and the North Country Chain.
While it is traditionally known as a Ladies' Chain, it is also known as a
Second Corner Chain, a Robins' Chain, a Right-Hand Chain, Chain by the
Right, Chain Across or just Chain.
I hope you enjoy the video and find it useful!
https://youtu.be/dS8LxpVHB3M
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & 07802
940 574
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
Bob, thanks for sharing. From your comment,
"If the 2L and 1G chase it works equally well,"
it seems that an "alternating" version of this dance is possible. This
would eliminate the need for short lines as it is then automatically fair
to both pairs of neighbors. Though you might want to reserve that for more
experienced dance crowds.
Mark Widmer
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Bob Isaacs <isaacsbob(a)hotmail.com>
> To: "Tepfer, Seth" <labst(a)emory.edu>, Chris Page <chriscpage(a)gmail.com>
> Cc: Shared Weight Contra Callers <contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
> Bcc:
> Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 20:19:06 +0000
> Subject: [Callers] Re: Chase figure with neighbor?
> Here's the one Chris mentioned - Bob
>
> *Cut to the Chase *
> Becket-L Intermediate
> A1. 8 Long lines forward and back
> 8 Circle L ¾ and pass through
>
> A2. 8 Ladies allemande L 1½
> 8 Partner allemande R
> 1½ (1)
>
> B1. 8 1L around two and 2G around one and he cuts
> through (2)
> 8 2G around two and 1L around one and she cuts through
>
> B2. 8 Actives swing
> 8 Partner swing
>
> Written on December 1, 2005, and first called on April 5, 2006 at
> Princeton, NJ. It was about time for a neighbor chase sequence. Short
> sets are necessary to make this fair to both pairs of neighbors.
> (1) – By varying the length of this allemande, partners can choose who
> will be active.
> (2) – The 1L and 2G are above their partners when the chase starts, which
> is worth emphasizing in the teaching. If the 2L and 1G chase it works
> equally well. By identifying the neighbors above as the active couple, the
> call is “active couple chase – lady ‘round two and gent ‘round one and he
> cuts through, gents ‘round two and lady ‘round one and she cuts through.”
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Chris Page via Contra Callers <
> contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 7, 2025 1:24 PM
> *To:* Tepfer, Seth <labst(a)emory.edu>
> *Cc:* Shared Weight Contra Callers <contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
> *Subject:* [Callers] Re: Chase figure with neighbor?
>
> "Cut to the Chase" by Bob Isaacs.
>
> You'll have to ask him for the specific figures.
>
> Cheers,
> -Chris Page
> Los Angeles, CA
>
In light of Ang’s thumbs up, I want to point you all to the latest
*From the Mic* podcast featuring Ang DeCarlis:
https://cdss.org/podcasts/podcast/from-the-mic-episode-31-ang-decarlis/
A truly wonderful, thought-provoking, insightful episode.
Lisa
Nelson, NH
Lisa Sieverts
603-762-0235
lisa(a)lisasieverts.com
Hello font of experience
I was pondering chase figures in contra dance. You know, the move where one person goes around the other couple while being followed by their partner.
Are there dances out there where the chase is done with a neighbor instead? Is it as much fun or is it awkward or unsettling?
I enjoy the playfulness of the chase figure (especially when it goes both ways) but I always wonder if there is an unpleasant undercurrent for some. I can imagine there are people we would NOT want to be chased by.
Am I overthinking this?
Sent from my iPhone
I've got a dance in my collection with no title and chunks of the dance
that I can't read. The author appears to be Dean Snipes, but I can't
find it in any of the usual places (ContraDB, Callers Box, arbitrary web
search, contra videos, etc.)
Improper
A1. N. Dosido; N allemande R. to put Larkes in the middle
A2. Balance wave by left (??) to Star Promenade N to butterfly whirl [1]
B1. Robin pass R to swing partner
B2. Promenade across; circle L 3, pass thru
Anyone happen to have this one or know somewhere else I can find it online?
Thanks,
Sam
[1]: I have no idea what most of A2 says either. This is why I normally
type/print my cards instead of writing them by hand, I think this is
more or less right, but something must be wrong because I don't see how
this could work from a wave to the star promenade.
--
Sam Whited
sam(a)samwhited.com
Hi All,
What do _you_ call your neighbor's partner in a 4-some when teaching a
lesson?
e.g.: "This is your partner, that is your neighbor, and that is _______."
-Amy Wimmer
Seattle
What it says on the tin—I want more four-face-fours in my collection (not
least because I’m calling a session of them at NEFFA 😅), drop your
favorites here! Accepting recommendations of any difficulty level.
Thanks all!
- Maia (Brooklyn, NY)
--
Maia McCormick (she/her)
917.279.8194
>
> From: Taco van Ieperen <tacovan(a)gmail.com>
> To: contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
> Related, I find the most annoying figures to call are 1.5 figures. There's
> just no way to say
> "New Neighbor Allemande Left Once and a Half" in four beats. Also,
> beginners struggle parsing 1.5x as trading places, especially across the
> set.
>
There are lots of other thoughts on this thread about your other questions,
but I will jump in on this specific one. Bear in mind here that you are
talking about two different things (1) what move the dancers have to start
at the top of the phrase, and (2) where they have to end up when they are
done with that move. Those two pieces of information do not have to be
presented in the same call, and in fact it may be easier for newer dancers
to sort things out if you separate the two. For example:
5 NEW
6 NEIGH-bor
7 LEFT
8 alle-MANDE
1 go ONCE and a
2 HALF to
3 TRADE
4 PLA-ces
5 ROB-ins
6 to the MIDdle
7 for a RIGHT-hand
8 CHAIN
1 do a COURTesy
2 TURN and
3 FACE
4 acROSS
etc.
Now, I am sometimes more pattery in my calling and use more words than
others might. Put in whatever words work for you, and obviously you can
reduce the number of calls as the dancers become more comfortable with the
figure. But the point is that there is no need to tell the dancers how many
times they have to allemande before they start. They need to know where to
go and what move to start doing. You have time to add the additional
information later.
David
Hi All,
I've been thinking a lot about calling for beginner dancers. I've seen big
changes in the last few years where our dances now often have more than 50%
newcomers.
As a relatively new caller. I have some observations and ideas, and I'd
love perspective from people who are more experienced.
Walkthroughs:
With experienced dancers, you can do an efficient walkthrough and teach a
figure in the context of the dance. With beginners, I've seen walkthroughs
fall apart because by the time you've explained a move and dealt with the
group that has gotten all scrambled, the dancers have completely forgotten
where they are in the walkthrough and where they started the dance. This is
leading me towards the idea of isolating new figures *before* the
walkthrough: If it's the first time doing a move, teach the move first, and
then do the walkthrough that includes this move. "This dance has a new
figure called a Robin's Chain. It works like this.... <chain stuff>. That
looks great. Now let's learn the dance...."
Also, with experienced dancers, people "get it" during the dance, so you
can do two walkthroughs and even if some people are confused ii will
straighten itself out. With new dancers it feels much more important that
everyone succeed in the walkthroughs because confusion can get worse
instead of better. But at some point you can't keep doing walkthroughs. My
gut instinct is that if I teach the figures before and can't explain the
dance in two walkthroughs then I need to get better at walkthroughs or
teach easier dances.
Thoughts?
Caller Style:
I really like making each call four counts as it provides
predictable rhythm to the calling:
1,2,3,4, WITH your | PARTner | BALance and | SWING
For some calls I can give the destination location, or the destination
person:
"Robins, Chain, Across the, Set"
"Neighbor, Dosido, to NEW, Neighbor"
vs
"Robins, Chain, To your, Partner"
"Neighbor, DoSido, Once and a, half"
To your partner seems more clear, but I can also see that having two
different people in the call could create confusion. Does one format work
better in your experience?
Related, I find the most annoying figures to call are 1.5 figures. There's
just no way to say
"New Neighbor Allemande Left Once and a Half" in four beats. Also,
beginners struggle parsing 1.5x as trading places, especially across the
set.
It seems like a lot of callers drop the Allemande and just shorten it to
"Left" or "Right". Which probably is fine after two clear walkthroughs.
So, which do you prefer? Do you have other ideas?
Robins, Allemande, Left, Across
Robins, Left, to Trade, places
Robins, Left, Once, and a Half
Robins, Left, to Your, Partner
Robins, Do si, do, across
Anyway, just thinking aloud and curious what other peoples thoughts are.
Taco
A couple of suggestions. Caveat: when I used to call regularly, I didn't
have 50% newcomers.
If the first or second dance was written with a right-and-left, I would
often substitute a promenade-across instead. In a right-and-left, the
couple seconds of separation tends to throw off first-timers when they
try to "reconnect" on the opposite side of the set for the courtesy turn.
With a promenade, they are already in position for the turn. When giving
credit at the end of the walkthrough, I'd then say "This is a variation of
[name of dance] by [author of dance].
Second, for those times where one or two isolated foursomes were having
real trouble "getting it" in the walkthrough, I would do the usual two
walkthroughs and NOT bring them back to place. The idea here is to get
those dancers dancing with people who got it right off the bat. I'm not
sure how well this would translate to sets with widespread newbie
confusion, but it may be something to consider.
Mark Widmer, retired caller :-)
Paris, TN (formerly of Princeton, NJ)
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Taco van Ieperen <tacovan(a)gmail.com>
> To: contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 11:01:21 -0600
> Subject: [Callers] Calling Clearly for Beginner Heavy Groups
> Hi All,
>
> I've been thinking a lot about calling for beginner dancers. I've seen big
> changes in the last few years where our dances now often have more than 50%
> newcomers.
>
> As a relatively new caller. I have some observations and ideas, and I'd
> love perspective from people who are more experienced.
>
> Walkthroughs:
>
> With experienced dancers, you can do an efficient walkthrough and teach a
> figure in the context of the dance. With beginners, I've seen walkthroughs
> fall apart because by the time you've explained a move and dealt with the
> group that has gotten all scrambled, the dancers have completely forgotten
> where they are in the walkthrough and where they started the dance. This is
> leading me towards the idea of isolating new figures *before* the
> walkthrough: If it's the first time doing a move, teach the move first, and
> then do the walkthrough that includes this move. "This dance has a new
> figure called a Robin's Chain. It works like this.... <chain stuff>. That
> looks great. Now let's learn the dance...."
>
> Also, with experienced dancers, people "get it" during the dance, so you
> can do two walkthroughs and even if some people are confused ii will
> straighten itself out. With new dancers it feels much more important that
> everyone succeed in the walkthroughs because confusion can get worse
> instead of better. But at some point you can't keep doing walkthroughs. My
> gut instinct is that if I teach the figures before and can't explain the
> dance in two walkthroughs then I need to get better at walkthroughs or
> teach easier dances.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Caller Style:
>
> I really like making each call four counts as it provides
> predictable rhythm to the calling:
>
> 1,2,3,4, WITH your | PARTner | BALance and | SWING
>
> For some calls I can give the destination location, or the destination
> person:
> "Robins, Chain, Across the, Set"
> "Neighbor, Dosido, to NEW, Neighbor"
> vs
> "Robins, Chain, To your, Partner"
> "Neighbor, DoSido, Once and a, half"
>
> To your partner seems more clear, but I can also see that having two
> different people in the call could create confusion. Does one format work
> better in your experience?
>
> Related, I find the most annoying figures to call are 1.5 figures. There's
> just no way to say
> "New Neighbor Allemande Left Once and a Half" in four beats. Also,
> beginners struggle parsing 1.5x as trading places, especially across the
> set.
>
> It seems like a lot of callers drop the Allemande and just shorten it to
> "Left" or "Right". Which probably is fine after two clear walkthroughs.
>
> So, which do you prefer? Do you have other ideas?
> Robins, Allemande, Left, Across
> Robins, Left, to Trade, places
> Robins, Left, Once, and a Half
> Robins, Left, to Your, Partner
> Robins, Do si, do, across
>
> Anyway, just thinking aloud and curious what other peoples thoughts are.
>
> Taco
>
>
>
