# stepping



## marlon (Jun 7, 2008)

I do not know if this is worthy of it's own thread.  However, my question is does kempo teach to step full or empty.  i know that when i was taught to half moon part of the purpose was to keep the non moving leg unwieghted and place the weight there after the foot has been placed, and the alignment problems with half mooning have a good thread of its own, but this is a separate idea, i think.  what i mean is that normal walking is essentially falling onto the leg that moved gravity does the work and the weight is transfered at the same time that the foot is placed.   One can also place the foot first then transfer the weight.  which do you use and why would you see one way better than the other?

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jun 7, 2008)

marlon said:


> I do not know if this is worthy of it's own thread. However, my question is does kempo teach to step full or empty. i know that when i was taught to half moon part of the purpose was to keep the non moving leg unwieghted and place the weight there after the foot has been placed, and the alignment problems with half mooning have a good thread of its own, but this is a separate idea, i think. what i mean is that normal walking is essentially falling onto the leg that moved gravity does the work and the weight is transfered at the same time that the foot is placed. One can also place the foot first then transfer the weight. which do you use and why would you see one way better than the other?
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon


Fall into your motion. Its easier that way, takes less energy... etc.
Sean


----------



## kenpofighter (Jun 7, 2008)

Depends on what you are trying to accomplish. I do both.


----------



## marlon (Jun 13, 2008)

i do not know that 'falling' is the best thing.  I realize that you need to move your weight into the strike.  however, if one falls into the step there is more downward movement than forward movement...or options for movement to be more precise.  To step first with the foot unweighted then shift the weight as you strike seems more controlled and has the benefit of better response to a dynamic situation.

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## DavidCC (Jun 13, 2008)

I prefer to push my mass with my legs.

without moving your weight you can't really step very far in front of you, unless one leg is significantly longer.


----------



## Doc (Jun 18, 2008)

marlon said:


> I do not know if this is worthy of it's own thread.  However, my question is does kempo teach to step full or empty.  i know that when i was taught to half moon part of the purpose was to keep the non moving leg unwieghted and place the weight there after the foot has been placed, and the alignment problems with half mooning have a good thread of its own, but this is a separate idea, i think.  what i mean is that normal walking is essentially falling onto the leg that moved gravity does the work and the weight is transfered at the same time that the foot is placed.   One can also place the foot first then transfer the weight.  which do you use and why would you see one way better than the other?
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon



The foot is not "placed" until the transfer of its mass.


----------



## pete (Jun 18, 2008)

DavidCC said:


> I prefer to push my mass with my legs.
> 
> without moving your weight you can't really step very far in front of you, unless one leg is significantly longer.


actually, the more you sink into the hip creas of one leg will determine the length of step in your other foot.


----------



## FeralKenpo (Jun 18, 2008)

In a fight do you think that you will think about how you will move?(double think)
How I react is how I will move because it will be my most natural body mechanics.
(I don't mean to seem rude)
I understand you are just trying to get a better understanding, that's just how I look at it.


----------



## marlon (Jun 18, 2008)

Doc said:


> The foot is not "placed" until the transfer of its mass.


 
Hello Doc, could you explain your use of the quotation marks above,please?

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## marlon (Jun 18, 2008)

FeralKenpo said:


> In a fight do you think that you will think about how you will move?(double think)
> How I react is how I will move because it will be my most natural body mechanics.
> (I don't mean to seem rude)
> I understand you are just trying to get a better understanding, that's just how I look at it.


 

i think you will do what you have trained your self to do the most...whether that thing is correct or not.

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Doc (Jun 19, 2008)

marlon said:


> Hello Doc, could you explain your use of the quotation marks above,please?
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon



It was the use of your own word. Basically, until you put the foot down, you haven't taken a "step."


----------



## MarkC (Jun 27, 2008)

So at the end of the day, half-moon stepping yes, or no?


----------



## karate-dragon (Jun 27, 2008)

half moon stepping yes in basics and forms because you learn balance, weight transference, etc. But you wouldn't use it in fighting. We were taught that it was to learn balance. As your moving unweighted foot came towards your planted foot you regained your balance briefly and then continued.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jun 27, 2008)

FeralKenpo said:


> In a fight do you think that you will think about how you will move?(double think)
> How I react is how I will move because it will be my most natural body mechanics.
> (I don't mean to seem rude)
> I understand you are just trying to get a better understanding, that's just how I look at it.


Thats why we train and what you do in training is what you will do on the street. Thats the way it works. You will, of course, get sloppy in the heat of battle, but you will use the foundation you have provided yourself. I don't like this attitude about martial arts but I don't find it rude.
sean


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jun 27, 2008)

Doc said:


> It was the use of your own word. Basically, until you put the foot down, you haven't taken a "step."


Actually its until you have astablished a new base. Your foot can be down but not supporting your weight. (dodging ***** slaps)
Sean


----------



## Doc (Jun 27, 2008)

MarkC said:


> So at the end of the day, half-moon stepping yes, or no?



*NO!*


----------



## Doc (Jun 27, 2008)

karate-dragon said:


> half moon stepping yes in basics and forms because you learn balance, weight transference, etc. But you wouldn't use it in fighting. We were taught that it was to learn balance. As your moving unweighted foot came towards your planted foot you regained your balance briefly and then continued.



The idea that you would do this only for basics doesn't make sense. That's like saying, I'll train my blocks incorrectly, but I'll do them right when I need to use them for real.

"What you do is what you do. If what you do is NOT what you do, than what are you doing?" - Ed Parker.


----------



## DavidCC (Jun 27, 2008)

from a neutral bow, when doing a step-through, isn't the moving foot moving towards the stationary foot similar to the c-step motion?  why doesn't this give the same false proprioceptive cue?  is it because one actually IS side stepping??


I only c-step because my teacher still requires it, so when performing forms I will do it :/  my poor daughter sometimes bangs her ankles together but I am trying hard to break her of that


----------



## Doc (Jun 27, 2008)

> from a neutral bow, when doing a step-through, isn't the moving foot moving towards the stationary foot similar to the c-step motion? why doesn't this give the same false proprioceptive cue? is it because one actually IS side stepping?


When utilizing footwork moving in a neutral bow correctly, each foot occupies a specific plane of travel, and maintains that plane relative to the pelvic girdle. The pelvic girdle and it's relative position to the feet in the footwork grid, are one of the determining factors as to whether the body perceives the movement as forward, or lateral.


----------



## kidswarrior (Jun 27, 2008)

Doc said:


> The idea that you would do this only for basics doesn't make sense. That's like saying, I'll train my blocks incorrectly, but I'll do them right when I need to use them for real.
> 
> _* "What you do is what you do. If what you do is NOT what you do, than what are you doing?" - Ed Parker.*_


:rofl:


----------



## MarkC (Jun 28, 2008)

So then what would be the correct way to move in a forward stance or bow stance when doing forms or kata? Moving into and out of deep stances without c-stepping or half-moon stepping , or whateevr you wish to call it is pretty awkward.


----------



## RevIV (Jun 28, 2008)

MarkC said:


> So then what would be the correct way to move in a forward stance or bow stance when doing forms or kata? Moving into and out of deep stances without c-stepping or half-moon stepping , or whateevr you wish to call it is pretty awkward.


 
I completly agree with you.  But the more you work it the easier it becomes.  We do a form that has a lot of back and forward stances in it, transitioning between the steps is very difficult at first but teaches a lot of body control.
    When did the half-mooning make its way into Kenpo?  Also, if half mooning is so bad why has it lasted throughout the generations?


----------



## Doc (Jun 29, 2008)

MarkC said:


> So then what would be the correct way to move in a forward stance or bow stance when doing forms or kata? Moving into and out of deep stances without c-stepping or half-moon stepping , or whateevr you wish to call it is pretty awkward.



That in and of itself, should tell you a lot.


----------



## Doc (Jun 29, 2008)

RevIV said:


> When did the half-mooning make its way into Kenpo?  Also, if half mooning is so bad why has it lasted throughout the generations?



This type of erroneous basics were introduced to kenpo through its many converts from other traditional styles who taught their old basics. You'll find many in kenpo that cling stubbornly to a Traditional Japanese cultural influence, that doesn't belong.

Bulletin: Kenpo in the Ed Parker lineage is non-traditional and is culturally American based. Traditional arts do traditional things, whether they make sense or are functional. I believe its called, uh let me see now ........ uh, oh yeah, tradition!.


----------



## LawDog (Jun 29, 2008)

Many boxers,kickboxers,Thai kickboxers and MMA stylist's still use the wide half moon type of stance. They seem to be very effictive in using it. I am not a fan of the "half mooning" type of foot work but I just look at it as a transitional move from one wide stance to another. The application of this foot work will determine if it is proper or not.
:ultracool


----------



## MarkC (Jun 29, 2008)

Doc said:


> That in and of itself, should tell you a lot.



Hmmm. Should I infer :

A) Don't use deep forward stances. etc.
or
B) I need more practice in moving from and to such stances without half-moon stepping?


----------



## Doc (Jun 30, 2008)

MarkC said:


> Hmmm. Should I infer :
> 
> A) Don't use deep forward stances. etc.
> or
> B) I need more practice in moving from and to such stances without half-moon stepping?



All stances have their purpose, and in most styles the deep forward stance is usually about traditional training and punching, in general. Offensively, they have no place in street encounters. Nobody is going to attack you with one. Defensively, they have no place in street encounters. You aren't going to defend yourself with one. Are you?

If you want to train leg strength, I always say drop the pretense and just go train your legs, and stop pretending you're going to use this "training" in a fight.

With the hodgepodge of modern arts and the blending of traditional and non-traditional, most "teachers" don't know which is which, and just keep doing what they were taught - right or wrong. It's called "traditional." Translation: "Do it this way because that's the way we do it."


----------



## MarkC (Jun 30, 2008)

I doubt I'd use a deep forward stance in a fight, true. I can probably say the same for a few more stances and techniques. I'm certainly never gonna use a jump spinning crescent kick on anybody! I doubt I'd ever stand in a horse stance to fight either, at least not facing straight on.
So what do we do? Ditch all the forms and drills that contain such things?
(I'm not being sarcastic).

Isn't this guy doing some half-moon stepping?




 
I have , of course, seen the same form and others without that stepping, so is it most likely a habit picked up somewhere else?


----------



## DavidCC (Jun 30, 2008)

Doc said:


> When utilizing footwork moving in a neutral bow correctly, each foot occupies a specific plane of travel, and maintains that plane relative to the pelvic girdle. The pelvic girdle and it's relative position to the feet in the footwork grid, are one of the determining factors as to whether the body perceives the movement as forward, or lateral.


 

If I read that reeeeeeal  sloooowwwwly, it makes sense   thanks!  That also gives me more detailed answer on why c-step 'confuses' the body.


----------



## marlon (Jul 1, 2008)

When stepping do you shift all the wieght to the non moving leg and at what point and in what manner do you shift it back?  Do you drop the leg into place with all the weight there or do you gradually (not meaning slowly) shift the wieght to the other leg...?Could c-stepping be an exagerated drill of weight shifting that became a step in and of itself when that was never the original intention?

marlon


----------



## marlon (Jul 1, 2008)

Doc said:


> When utilizing footwork moving in a neutral bow correctly, each foot occupies a specific plane of travel, and maintains that plane relative to the pelvic girdle. The pelvic girdle and it's relative position to the feet in the footwork grid, are one of the determining factors as to whether the body perceives the movement as forward, or lateral.


 

Fro the record the c-step is dropped from my curricullum.  Logic must win out over tradition.

marlon


----------



## DavidCC (Jul 1, 2008)

marlon said:


> Fro the record the c-step is dropped from my curricullum. Logic must win out over tradition.
> 
> marlon


 
Awesome.
:bow:


----------



## kidswarrior (Jul 1, 2008)

marlon said:


> Fro the record the c-step is dropped from my curricullum.  Logic must win out over tradition.
> 
> marlon


Good for you! I took this step a few years ago, and know it takes some courage to buck s.th. so ingrained. :asian:


----------



## marlon (Jul 1, 2008)

kidswarrior and david cc,
what do you teach as timing and wieght distribution for stepping?
respectfully,
marlon


----------



## kidswarrior (Jul 1, 2008)

marlon said:


> kidswarrior and david cc,
> what do you teach as timing and wieght distribution for stepping?
> respectfully,
> marlon


Wow, that's a heavy question, but I'll go with a general answer. I use the principle from Kung Fu San Soo (which blends well with my Kempo, and so which I've actively sought to synthesize for some time now), _the foot lands at the same time_ as the strike/block/throwing/unbalancing act. While this is very general, it mostly holds true for my practice and ensures that the whole body is behind the contact. This may sound slow and clunky, but I assure you it's not. And it virtually guarantees that you'll gain and keep the initiative (since there's a greater chance you're hurting him with every move).

Hope that makes sense.


----------



## DavidCC (Jul 2, 2008)

ideally you want the momentum of your body movement to add to the force of the strike, right?  AFAIK if the foot lands too early, that won't happen.


----------

