Alrighty! This is a big improvement. You were doing reasonably well before, but many of your constructions now are vastly more solid, with the relationships between forms being defined with much more clarity and intent. Your organic intersections are also much better - going from a scratchy mess to clear, concise, intentional marks.

There are some issues, of course:

• On this page I demonstrate where you've extended the silhouette of the neck without actually doing so in three dimensions (by adding additional masses). This is something you've done properly elsewhere. I also show where you try to cut into a cranial sphere form as it exists as a flat shape on the page, instead of respecting how it occupies 3D space. I've got a little explanation there of additive/subtractive construction - generally you should be using additive construction wherever possible, as it helps you better develop your understanding of 3D space and the relationships between forms. Subtractive construction is sometimes necessary, but it will usually test your understanding, and can easily be done incorrectly if you ignore how the form exists in three dimensions. The correct approach is to separate the form into two distinct, solid forms, by drawing contour lines along it (as though your pen were a scalpel), then treating one of these two forms as being negative space (an empty void) and the other as being positive space.

• The main issues with this wolf is that along the chin and under the neck, you tried to add to the construction simply by extending the silhouette, and then adding contour lines. You didn't use the additional mass technique which actually involves adding individual forms that exist on their own, but wrap around the underlying construction.

As to your question, I'm honestly a little confused with how you phrase it, but I believe I know why. The ellipses I draw to which the legs connect are not actually contour lines sitting on the surface of the animal's body. They are themselves masses that represent the bulk of muscle you usually see on a creature's shoulder or hip joint. It actually sticks out if seen in profile, and integrates into the additional masses you may place along the creature's back, if it has prominent back muscles. This is actually something you are missing a little in some of your deer drawings (where we're seeing them from the front or from a three quarter view, like this one. I don't believe the front would have as prominent muscles, but the hind legs probably would. You capture this better in this one, where you've got a distinct mass coming all the way up over the whole of the pelvis.

Anyway! All in all, you're making excellent progress. I'll go ahead and mark this lesson as complete, and I'll go ahead and refund the credits you spent on this since it was an extension of the previous critique.