Lead and Follow — From Myth to 'Yes! This is Easy' Reality

The Traditional View

For decades, partner dance has taught Lead/Follow as a kind of mysterious "Leader" does something and "Follower" does their best to respond to it.

“One person gives the signal, and the other follows it.”

Because the Leader is leading and the Follower is following everything will work unless the Follower isn't following because the Leader isn't leading in which case the Follower will get blamed for not following correctly. Why does the Follower have that name? Because the Leader is the leader and therefore they must have a Follower.

**Yes, it's convoluted, circular in reasoning and frankly total BS.

It's all wrapped in:

• Gender roles
• Vague metaphors like "technique". “intention,” “tone,” or “connection”
• A strange mix of physical cues and social storytelling

It worked — mostly — because dancers developed intuition and touch over years of frustration and practice.

The 25% Problem

More accurately you only have a 25% chance of it working. Takes this fun example where for every step in any direction:

| Success! | gets it right | gets it right | It's ok, we've all been there.

But... wouldn't it be nice if there was something that's provable, easy to understand and works? (With no fluff and bs)

The Problem

This model assumes:

• That a clear signal is always sent,
• That the Follower can interpret and execute it correctly,
• That deviations are due to “bad following” or “weak leading”,
• Everyone gets frustrated and are told to 'just practice'.

Read about the Sheer Improbability of Synchronization

How Lead and Follow Really Works

Thanks to math and physics we now know:

Lead/Follow is not a transmission-reception model.
It is a recursive, probabilistic, energy-aware negotiation of energy exchange and motion.

TL;DR: We've done the overthinking so you don't have to.

This is the reality of 'Lead and Follow'

Leader instigates an action and then synchronizes with whatever the Follower does.

It's really easy. It eliminates push and pull. It's proven by math and physics.

It fixes the Sheer Improbability of Synchronization problem too!

Simple Proof: This applies to just about any Dance Position (DP) but we'll assume that Leader and Follower are in Closed Position.

The simple truth is that the Follower can't (and must NOT) predict what the Leader is going to do. It's a lot of work and aside from anything else Follower is supposed to be enjoying themselves.

The Leader simply doesn't know where the Follower will go because Follower doesn't know themselves. How could they possibly know until they are doing it?

But the Follower does tell the Leader where they are when they are doing it. In our single step example the Leader continues to move until they can feel Follower is no longer moving back (because they stop moving!) and at that point Leader puts weight on their moving foot. It doesn't matter why the Follower has done what they have done, it only matters that the Leader synchronizes with it. Alternatively they could look at the Follower and tell them they did it wrong (good luck with that).

Leader never, ever, ever puts weight on their foot before the Follower has put weight on theirs.

That of course is extended to:

Leader always synchronizes with what the Follower has just done as in their current position and current shape.

What other option does Leader have?

• Complain that their partner isn't following (good luck)
• Tell their partner they did something wrong (good luck with that)
• Pick Follower up and plop them down in the "correct position"

Timing Details:

• Leaders Timing Model
• Followers Timing Model

Something this radical, this simple and this easy should have proof!

• [(Im)Probability of Synchronization]/inside-the-steps/probability/probability/improbability-of-synchronization/default.md) The chances of you synchronizing with your partner explained.

• Schrödinger’s Follower:
  The Follower exists in a 'superposition' of possible responses until their motion is observed.

Followers Movement Is In Control:
The Leader doesn’t lead — they use the new reality of where the Follower is for their next action.

• Least Action Principle:
  The Follower’s response follows Maupertuis’ principle — they take their most energetically efficient (i.e. preferred) path, which might even be the one Leader was hoping for.

• Matching Energy:
  Matching Leaders and Followers energy is nearly impossible. Instead, Leader adapts to where the Follower actually is rather than where Leader thought they should go.

To quote the Wisdom of the Great Philosopher Jagger who teaches that "You can't always get what you want, But if you try sometime you'll find, You get what you need "