i think the whole foot forces you to get the time in, because with the heels only you can kinda "fake" marking time. i mark time heels only, but for beginners i believe they should mark time whole footed.

i definately think whole foot is better, it helps you be able to see who is out of step, because with whole foot, your bnody sways a TINY bit and if u are swaying the wrong way, you know your out of time. it just helps ne feel the tempo in my whole body as well.

We lift with whole foot only enough to get our foot off the ground but not to much to make our drums wobble.

They both have their pros and cons. My line lifts the whole foot. It's better for feeling the beat. But, as someone with an unstable knee, lifting only the heel puts a lot less stress on my knee.

i was first taught to lift only the heel, and i think that is the best way.

I was taught the whole foot...marking time is just marching in place and you cant march with just your heels...that's what I think, but I don't think one is superior over the other

I personally like whole foot more. Due to the lack of feel of time wehn its just the heel. When you are just doing your heels, you can get off beat and kind of fake it. You feel the pulse better using the whole foot. Though sometimes it can cause your hips to hurt, but you just have to fight the pain.

our line lifts our whole foot but sometimes we only do heel if were not with our instructor. but ive noticed its harder for me at least, to keep time when only lifting my heel

we do heel, and i like it better than whole foot. often with whole foot people end up moving about and not staying in one spot. I also think heel looks better.

I think heel is better when you're starting out in the morning for like, competition or warming up for band camp. It saves energy.

When you're warming up for halftime or you're in the lot at competition, then I think it should be whole foot, to really get a focus on the tempo.

Personally, I think both are essential to know. :P