# Stepping



## guy b (Feb 5, 2016)

How does your front foot contact the floor when stepping? Toe or heel first?


----------



## MAfreak (Feb 5, 2016)

ball of the foot.


edit: sorry, now i saw its the wing chun forum.
thought on common martial arts stepping like in boxing, karate, tkd.


----------



## guy b (Feb 5, 2016)

Please don't get into intricacies of ball, k1, mid foot and so on. Front of foot or back of foot?


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 5, 2016)

Heel


----------



## geezer (Feb 5, 2016)

In a typical advancing step: The _whole foot_ (flat of the foot). On a longer step or passing step, the heel touches first then the whole foot. It's what happens naturally in our lineage's back-weighted stances.


----------



## Cephalopod (Feb 5, 2016)

As much as possible, our feet slide forward rather than stepping.
This is done to increase awareness of changes in terrain or obstacles that your feet might encounter ( so that you wont step heavily onto the edge of a curb that you didn't notice, for example).
If a large step is necessary, then the heel comes down first, like Geezer said.


----------



## Danny T (Feb 5, 2016)

Depends on how broad a step. Sliding the whole foot, Stepping with the whole foot, or heel - toe.


----------



## Eric_H (Feb 5, 2016)

Toe, it allows you to judge the terrain, plant better in slippery or soft surface and not get swept.


----------



## geezer (Feb 5, 2016)

Eric_H said:


> Toe, it allows you to judge the terrain, plant better in covered. Now, how much you want to bet we're about to find out from the OP that wslippery or soft surface and not get swept.



OK, some say toe, some say heel, some say whole (flat) foot, some say glide/slide, some say it depends. Seems like all the bases have been covered. So who want's to bet that we're about to find out that we're _all_ wrong?


----------



## Eric_H (Feb 5, 2016)

^ That quote is inaccurate


----------



## guy b (Feb 5, 2016)

Cephalopod said:


> As much as possible, our feet slide forward rather than stepping.
> This is done to increase awareness of changes in terrain or obstacles that your feet might encounter ( so that you wont step heavily onto the edge of a curb that you didn't notice, for example).
> If a large step is necessary, then the heel comes down first, like Geezer said.



Interesting, have never seen anyone not lift the front foot at all. What do you do on uneven terrain?


----------



## guy b (Feb 5, 2016)

How about back stepping? How do you do it? How does foot contact?


----------



## guy b (Feb 5, 2016)

geezer said:


> OK, some say toe, some say heel, some say whole (flat) foot, some say glide/slide, some say it depends. Seems like all the bases have been covered. So who want's to bet that we're about to find out that we're _all_ wrong?



Impossible for everyone to be wrong so far given that all options have been covered. Think of it as a kind of survey to get to know each others wing chun.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 5, 2016)

geezer said:


> OK, some say toe, some say heel, some say whole (flat) foot, some say glide/slide, some say it depends. Seems like all the bases have been covered. So who want's to bet that we're about to find out that we're _all_ wrong?


It depends on the time of the day and the distance between you and your opponent.

- If it's dark, you want to feel the ground for each and every step that you take. You want to make sure that you don't step on any sharp object. The "flat foot" will be safer.

- If you are in the kicking range, to step in with "heel" will give your opponent a chance to "sweep" or "scoop" you. Old saying says, "In MA, you should step in as if you are walking on a frozen lake surface. That is the "toe" first.

- If it's in the day time and you are outside of your opponent's kicking range, you can step in any way that you may perfer.


----------



## Cephalopod (Feb 5, 2016)

guy b said:


> Interesting, have never seen anyone not lift the front foot at all. What do you do on uneven terrain?


In some cases, such as wearing sneakers on carpet, or when I train in the grass and roots of my unkempt backyard, the shifting foot does lift a little. The point is, it doesn't lift more than it needs to. On hardwoods or concrete, the foot just slides.

When I train, as part of my overall awareness I try to feel the floor with my feet. That way, forward or back, my feet just do what they need to do to shuffle.

Again, we're talking about small shifts, side to side, diagonals, forward and back. If I have to lunge out the way of a defensive tackle going for the sack, all bets are off


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 5, 2016)

but...but...when I levitate...there is no need to stepping or contact with front or back of foot, etc... silly humans!!!  Clearly, you all have it wrong... stepping is SOOOOO inefficient and NOT proper wc/wt/vt thinking. Silly mortals!


----------



## RobertK (Feb 6, 2016)

Interesting topic!
When stepping we commonly use the heal to first contact the floor. But I have learnt both ways, so somethimes I would use the toes, it depens on how long the step is.
Backing up I spring of the front leg, sort of pushing yourself backwards.


----------



## guy b (Feb 6, 2016)

What about stepping patterns? How do you approach and retreat?


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 6, 2016)

guy b said:


> What about stepping patterns?



A lot of WC footwork pattern is based on mui fa pattern as far as I know(?)



guy b said:


> How do you approach and retreat?



Normally blast straight in and then figure it out from there  If the way forward is obstructed then angular footwork may be needed depending on the timing and distance.
If caught off guard or timing was off then a diagonal step back may be warranted.


----------



## Danny T (Feb 6, 2016)

Seems there is another guy b.
First guy b. has a period at the end of his name. 2nd one does not.
Going to make things confusing.


----------



## KPM (Feb 6, 2016)

Danny T said:


> Seems there is another guy b.
> First guy b. has a period at the end of his name. 2nd one does not.
> Going to make things confusing.



It says "member since yesterday."  Are we sure this is not the same Guy B. with a different account to dodge the moderators?  Because his posting style sure seems similar!


----------



## guy b (Feb 6, 2016)

I am the same person and will be using this account


----------



## Marnetmar (Feb 6, 2016)

Step with the whole foot, shift on the ball of foot to get off the line, shift on the heel to move the opponent.



Cephalopod said:


> As much as possible, our feet slide forward rather than stepping.
> This is done to increase awareness of changes in terrain or obstacles that your feet might encounter ( so that you wont step heavily onto the edge of a curb that you didn't notice, for example).
> If a large step is necessary, then the heel comes down first, like Geezer said.



This sounds EXTREMELY impractical.


----------



## geezer (Feb 6, 2016)

_@Marnetmar and Cephalopod:_ *Not *so impractical in my experience. Like what _Cephalopod_ described, on relatively level, smooth surfaces like pavement, I also train with the lead foot gliding, just brushing the ground, with the toes lifted a little like skiis. On rougher surfaces, I lift my foot as much as necessary. This works very well with the back weighted "WT" stance and steps, and your lead foot feels out your path much like a man-sau or "asking-hand" feels the way for the hands.

Back in the mid eighties I conducted class on a concrete slab behind the house I shared with other grad students. There was always a lot of junk strewn about, stuff like dog chew-toys, balls, muddy shoes, a garden hose left snaking across the slab and so on. Students entered the area via the side gate and were expected to clean-off and sweep the workout area. If they forgot, I would kill the lights and we would all practice our steps in the dark using this "gliding foot" technique until all the junk had been pushed aside. Alternating huen-bo (circle-step) was especially efficatious!


----------



## JPinAZ (Feb 6, 2016)

guy b said:


> I am the same person and will be using this account



Why? Hiding from the mods or something? lol


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 6, 2016)

JPinAZ said:


> Why? Hiding from the mods or something? lol


How would creating a new account with a nearly identical name, then telling people it's the same person, let him hide from moderators?


----------



## guy b (Feb 7, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> How would creating a new account with a nearly identical name, then telling people it's the same person, let him hide from moderators?



Quite. I'm not hiding from the moderators. My other account doesn't work well enough to post messages so I have changed to another account.


----------



## guy b (Feb 7, 2016)

JPinAZ said:


> Why? Hiding from the mods or something? lol



Doesn't make logical sense


----------



## Phobius (Feb 7, 2016)

guy b said:


> Doesn't make logical sense



Got to give him (guy) that. Would actually make no sense creating a new account with near same name in order to hide.


----------



## geezer (Feb 7, 2016)

JPinAZ said:


> Why? Hiding from the mods or something? lol



Let's all ease up a bit! ...Remember:

_"Paranoia will destroy ya"_


----------



## Cephalopod (Feb 8, 2016)

Marnetmar said:


> This sounds EXTREMELY impractical.



Same can be said for a great number of skills until the persistent application of kung fu grinds them permanently into our being!

I'm not saying that I am perpetually hyper-aware of nature of the ground beneath my feet...but hey... a man's gotta dream.

And in the mean time, hopefully I'll avoid slipping on those squeaky chew-toys


----------



## guy b (Feb 8, 2016)

Ok practical experiment time. Change stepping to the opposite of what you do now. What do you find?


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 8, 2016)

guy b said:


> Ok practical experiment time. Change stepping to the opposite of what you do now. What do you find?



Ummm...I'd look like Lord of the Dance guy?


----------



## geezer (Feb 8, 2016)

wckf92 said:


> Ummm...I'd look like Lord of the Dance guy?



Yeah, I pulled up one of your stepping videos. I liked the battle punch steps at about 1:20 and also the fingertip Bart Cham Dao chopping movements at about 1:35, but some of your kicking toward the end was a little high by the standards of my WC.


----------



## guy b (Feb 9, 2016)

wckf92 said:


> Ummm...I'd look like Lord of the Dance guy?



Joking aside, it shifts your balance and changes the way you connect to the ground, which in turn directly controls the way you step and the way you turn. When might it be an advantage to have front of foot connection? When back of foot connection to ground?


----------



## Parky (Feb 12, 2016)

Eric_H said:


> Toe, it allows you to judge the terrain, plant better in slippery or soft surface and not get swept.



Eric,
Wouldn't getting swept have more to do with where you've placed your weight? I can step with toe or heel keeping my weight on the back leg, though I can see where stepping toe first might encourage you to keep your weight on the rear until it's safe to advance.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2016)

guy b said:


> Joking aside, it shifts your balance and changes the way you connect to the ground, which in turn directly controls the way you step and the way you turn. When might it be an advantage to have front of foot connection? When back of foot connection to ground?



This. I've heard many instructors (of various arts) tell students their various "always right" instructions. I've then watched nearly every one of them do it a different way when that actually worked better. There's no one right answer to which way to step, in any art, in my opinion. There are principles, and those should drive the choice of step shape, distance, speed, weight distribution, and so forth. Some of those principles differ by art or style, but most are common to all, since they are common to the human anatomy and to physics.


----------



## guy b (Feb 14, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> This. I've heard many instructors (of various arts) tell students their various "always right" instructions. I've then watched nearly every one of them do it a different way when that actually worked better. There's no one right answer to which way to step, in any art, in my opinion. There are principles, and those should drive the choice of step shape, distance, speed, weight distribution, and so forth. Some of those principles differ by art or style, but most are common to all, since they are common to the human anatomy and to physics.



For teaching purposes I think there are better ways to step at particular times.


----------



## Eric_H (Feb 15, 2016)

Parky said:


> Eric,
> Wouldn't getting swept have more to do with where you've placed your weight? I can step with toe or heel keeping my weight on the back leg, though I can see where stepping toe first might encourage you to keep your weight on the rear until it's safe to advance.



Its in how you plant the weight, but you're not far off. That said, you can't plant the heel without committing weight in way that leaves you open to a sweep, at least not that I've ever seen.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 15, 2016)

Eric_H said:


> Its in how you plant the weight, but you're not far off. That said, you can't plant the heel without committing weight in way that leaves you open to a sweep, at least not that I've ever seen.


Sure I can. If I keep my weight on my right leg, flex my left foot, and move it forward (keeping weight on my right foot), sweeping the left will be minimally effective. It may be more effective than sweeping me if I do the same movement with the foot extended, but only because of the natural slope and flexibility of the bottom of the foot, which will diffuse a too-low sweep in the second scenario.

The primary difference, as I see it, is how far I can step without transferring weight to the left foot.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 15, 2016)

Parky said:


> Eric,
> Wouldn't getting swept have more to do with where you've placed your weight? I can step with toe or heel keeping my weight on the back leg, though I can see where stepping toe first might encourage you to keep your weight on the rear until it's safe to advance.


You can only sweep when your opponent's heel is down. You can't sweep him when his toes is down but his heel is still up. Heel down is "committed". Toes down is "not committed".


----------



## guy b. (Feb 15, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You can only sweep when your opponent's heel is down. You can't sweep him when his toes is down but his heel is still up. Heel down is "committed". Toes down is "not committed".



Correct, toes down allows balance recovery because foot is active


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 15, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You can only sweep when your opponent's heel is down. You can't sweep him when his toes is down but his heel is still up. Heel down is "committed". Toes down is "not committed".


I can't agree entirely with this. It's about weight. If he has about 25% of his weight there (and moving to that foot), then it doesn't matter whether it's heel or toe down - the effect will be the same. Again, for most people, you can likely read their weight distribution by heel vs. toe, but that's not an absolute.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 15, 2016)

guy b. said:


> Correct, toes down allows balance recovery because foot is active


Not an absolute. If we followed that reasoning, someone standing evenly-balanced, on their toes, would be un-sweepable. Weight distribution (and trend) will be more definitive than which part of the foot is touching. I (and anyone else with average balance) can place the entire foot on the ground without committing weight.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 15, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I can't agree entirely with this. It's about weight. If he has about 25% of his weight there (and moving to that foot), then it doesn't matter whether it's heel or toe down - the effect will be the same. Again, for most people, you can likely read their weight distribution by heel vs. toe, but that's not an absolute.


Of course it's easier to sweep your opponent's leg when that leg has more weight on. There will be no argument there.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 15, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Of course it's easier to sweep your opponent's leg when that leg has more weight on. There will be no argument there.


My point was that the part of the foot placed has little impact on sweep-ability, except as a cue to normal usage. For most martial artists (in my experience), the ball of the foot will fall first, so when the heel falls, that is a cue that more weight has been committed - probably past the point of recovery. However, the heel isn't the determiner (just the indicator).


----------



## mograph (Feb 16, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> My point was that the part of the foot placed has little impact on sweep-ability, except as a cue to normal usage.


Yep. One way to test this would be to keep the weight back, and try sweepability with heel down, then with toe (ball) down. Then commit weight forward, and try sweepability with heel down, then with toe (ball) down.


----------



## guy b. (Feb 16, 2016)

and 





gpseymour said:


> My point was that the part of the foot placed has little impact on sweep-ability, except as a cue to normal usage. For most martial artists (in my experience), the ball of the foot will fall first, so when the heel falls, that is a cue that more weight has been committed - probably past the point of recovery. However, the heel isn't the determiner (just the indicator).



Sorry but from a grappling point of view you would be incorrect. Being on the toes means calf musculature is engaged and the balance is more reactive. Being heel down calf musculature is relaxed and less easy to adapt.



> If we followed that reasoning, someone standing evenly-balanced, on their toes, would be un-sweepable.



Not unsweepable, just less likely to be swept. This is a major reason why toes first is a good way to step in some situations.

On hot coals you would go toe first because speed of change and maintenance of balance might be a factor. Same applies to certain situations in fighting.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 16, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> someone standing evenly-balanced, on their toes, would be un-sweepable.


If you are real good at "foot sweep", you can even sweep at your opponent's upper leg to take him down.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 16, 2016)

guy b. said:


> and
> 
> Sorry but from a grappling point of view you would be incorrect. Being on the toes means calf musculature is engaged and the balance is more reactive. Being heel down calf musculature is relaxed and less easy to adapt.
> 
> ...



I still don't agree. Yes, if you draw the foot back, you tense one side of your leg and relax the other. The opposite happens when the ball is down and the heel up. The latter is more flexible, but still doesn't change the ability to redistribute weight, nor the ability of an opponent to sweep you. In both cases (ball down/heel up, or heel down/ball up), you can put 5% of weight on that foot, which relatively unsweepable (not impossible, but impractical) regardless of which part of the foot is down.

Now, if we assume more weight on the foot, yes, having the flex of the foot available (being on the ball of the foot) provides more options. But that wasn't the point under discussion. I was saying that having almost no weight on a foot makes sweepability roughly equal regardless of which part of the foot is down.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 16, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you are real good at "foot sweep", you can even sweep at your opponent's upper leg to take him down.


Agreed.


----------



## guy b. (Feb 16, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> In both cases (ball down/heel up, or heel down/ball up), you can put 5% of weight on that foot, which relatively unsweepable (not impossible, but impractical) regardless of which part of the foot is down.



You sweep a foot with weight committed to it, not weight off it. If you are messing around with weight on feet you will just be moved around, pulled onto a foot, and swept or tripped by a decent grappler. If you are standing on one leg with no weight on the other foot then you present a huge osoto gari opportunity, with horrible fall and back of head to floor ko very likely.

This is a non argument. Heel vs toe is talking about a committed weight foot. Toe is better vs sweeps and trips because musculature engaged and easier to react, not fool proof though of course.


----------



## geezer (Feb 16, 2016)

guy b. said:


> You sweep a foot with weight committed to it, not weight off it. If you are messing around with weight on feet you will just be moved around, pulled onto a foot, and swept or tripped by a decent grappler. If you are standing on one leg with no weight on the other foot then you present a huge *osoto gari *opportunity, with horrible fall and back of head to floor ko very likely.
> 
> This is a non argument. Heel vs toe is talking about a committed weight foot. Toe is better vs sweeps and trips because musculature engaged and easier to react, not fool proof though of course.



osoto gari:






We use huen-bo (circle-step) much the same way.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 16, 2016)

guy b. said:


> You sweep a foot with weight committed to it, not weight off it. If you are messing around with weight on feet you will just be moved around, pulled onto a foot, and swept or tripped by a decent grappler. If you are standing on one leg with no weight on the other foot then you present a huge osoto gari opportunity, with horrible fall and back of head to floor ko very likely.
> 
> This is a non argument. Heel vs toe is talking about a committed weight foot. Toe is better vs sweeps and trips because musculature engaged and easier to react, not fool proof though of course.



Actually, the original question was about which comes down first. Someone posted that putting the heel down first meant you were more easily swept - that's the point I'm discussing. The first part of the foot coming down may or may not have committed weight behind it, and that's what determines the opportunity to sweep, not which part of the foot makes first contact.


----------



## guy b. (Feb 17, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Actually, the original question was about which comes down first. Someone posted that putting the heel down first meant you were more easily swept - that's the point I'm discussing. The first part of the foot coming down may or may not have committed weight behind it, and that's what determines the opportunity to sweep, not which part of the foot makes first contact.



But that's what's incorrect. Heel down first is more sweepable than toe down first because the calf musculature is not engaged with heel, weight commitment being the same.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 17, 2016)

guy b. said:


> But that's what's incorrect. Heel down first is more sweepable than toe down first because the calf musculature is not engaged with heel, weight commitment being the same.


I'll just disagree and leave it at that. I don't think you and I are communicating on this one, so we aren't furthering the discussion.


----------



## guy b. (Feb 17, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I'll just disagree and leave it at that. I don't think you and I are communicating on this one, so we aren't furthering the discussion.



Ok if you like, sorry I couldn't describe better


----------



## mograph (Feb 17, 2016)

When the heel is down, aren't the shin muscles (e.g. _tibia anterior_) engaged in order to keep the toes up?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 17, 2016)

guy b. said:


> Ok if you like, sorry I couldn't describe better


No worries. I just felt like we were derailing the thread with miscommunication. This is probably one of those discussions that would be much easier with some mats to discuss on.


----------

