# Basic Footwork



## First Action (Jan 24, 2013)

Another article from the archives for you to have a hack at...


---


The application of proper footwork is very important when fighting. Poor footwork can lead to becoming unbalanced which well end in your defeat. Good footwork can be used to your advantage through strategic measures. It can be used to keep distance (whether it is close or far), to manoeuvre around obstacles and to create unpredictability. It is also the basis of evasiveness.


To ensure you keep balance, use small quick non distinctive steps. To ensure fluidity and prevention of telegraphing, springiness is the key. Telegraphing is when your actions are obvious enough so that your opponent can predict what you are going to do. You should be in constant movement, by always use the minimum effective distance.


All of the following types of footwork are best used from the Fighters Position.


*Side Stepping* can be used to quickly gain a better position for attack or to avoid straight rushes. The secret is to move late and quick. To Side Step to the right, move your right lead foot sharply to the right, a distance of about 18 inches, then bring your left foot an equal distance behind it. To side step left is similar. Bring your left foot sharply to the left and forward a distance of about 18 inches, and follow it with your right. The examples just given assume that your right leg is forward most ie you are leading with your right side.


The *Quick Advance* is useful to close the distance and/or for attack. Lunge forward taking small steps with your front foot moving first followed by your rear foot. Your body crouches towards the floor to maintain balance. Keep your distance and move in close only when the right opportunity arises. To perform a Quick Retreat, just do the same but backwards. Move your back foot first. Be sure to not attempt attack whilst retreating and never take more than three steps back unless you are sure you know what is behind you.


Side Steps can be combined with Advance or Retreats to create diagonal actions. This should be performed so that you can make unexpected changes in direction to gain strategic placement


If you wish to change you lead side, use the *Switch*. It is handy to cause confusion in your opponent if he has gotten accustomed to your original lead, but is more commonly used when naturally flowing on after striking. This is easily done by just stepping through eg when kicking or in combination. A quick switch can be made by way of a a little jump, but be sure the jump is made as low to the ground as possible.


Any type of advancing footwork can be used to increase power in a strike. Be sure that when your advancing for attack that your lead foot does not land before the strike.


These are the basics of footwork. There are other 'types' of footwork but if you get good at these, then it is all you will need. Once you have these fundamentals installed in your muscle memory, then it will not matter how you move. You will not need to think about keeping balanced because you just will.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 24, 2013)

First Action said:


> Another article from the archives for you to have a hack at...
> 
> 
> ---
> ...



People dont try to predict what youre doing unless youre competing.



> To ensure you keep balance, use small quick non distinctive steps. To ensure fluidity and prevention of telegraphing, springiness is the key. Telegraphing is when your actions are obvious enough so that your opponent can predict what you are going to do. You should be in constant movement, by always use the minimum effective distance.



You dont really need balance. If your methodology requires balance, you may be in for a surprise when someone unbalances you against your will, and you find yourself learning without any prior experience how to do stuff without a solid base underneath you.



> All of the following types of footwork are best used from the Fighters Position.



So your footwork is reliant on your stance to be effective? What type of fights do you get into that involve specific stances?



> *Side Stepping* can be used to quickly gain a better position for attack or to avoid straight rushes. The secret is to move late and quick. To Side Step to the right, move your right lead foot sharply to the right, a distance of about 18 inches, then bring your left foot an equal distance behind it. To side step left is similar. Bring your left foot sharply to the left and forward a distance of about 18 inches, and follow it with your right. The examples just given assume that your right leg is forward most ie you are leading with your right side.



Thats a good way to practice sidestepping, but not so much how youll actually do it. Youre more likely to go 'oh god, move!' then leap off to the side than you are to remember how to do all that with correct measurements. Plus, the other guy can just adjust. To try this yourself, in a room in your house, start running forward, then adjust your heading by about 30-90 degrees just to show yourself how fast you can do it. Now imagine how much easier it would be if the person only moved a negligible distance and you had tunnel vision on their location.



> The *Quick Advance* is useful to close the distance and/or for attack. Lunge forward taking small steps with your front foot moving first followed by your rear foot. Your body crouches towards the floor to maintain balance. Keep your distance and move in close only when the right opportunity arises. To perform a Quick Retreat, just do the same but backwards. Move your back foot first. Be sure to not attempt attack whilst retreating and never take more than three steps back unless you are sure you know what is behind you.



Technically, youre better off either pushing off your back foot before you step with your front, or doing a dropstep. If youre just going to walk forward like that, stop bothering and just charge.



> Side Steps can be combined with Advance or Retreats to create diagonal actions. This should be performed so that you can make unexpected changes in direction to gain strategic placement



Diagonal footwork is barely like horizontal and linear footwork.



> If you wish to change you lead side, use the *Switch*. It is handy to cause confusion in your opponent if he has gotten accustomed to your original lead, but is more commonly used when naturally flowing on after striking. This is easily done by just stepping through eg when kicking or in combination. A quick switch can be made by way of a a little jump, but be sure the jump is made as low to the ground as possible.



Your opponent couldnt care less about which stance youre in, unless, again, youre competing with them. This also comes back to a reliance on your stance. Is this stuff for fighting, self defense, or competition? Because if its for competition, this is all very basic early learnt stuff which youll learn better in person.



> Any type of advancing footwork can be used to increase power in a strike. Be sure that when your advancing for attack that your lead foot does not land before the strike.



Running toward someone and throwing a straight punch increases the power even more.



> These are the basics of footwork. There are other 'types' of footwork but if you get good at these, then it is all you will need. Once you have these fundamentals installed in your muscle memory, then it will not matter how you move. You will not need to think about keeping balanced because you just will.



What i would suggest is reformatting all this to be the basics of how you practice competitive footwork. In THAT capacity, everything here is fine and dandy, and might even be useful for someone.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 25, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> ...
> 
> You dont really need balance. If your methodology requires balance, you may be in for a surprise when someone unbalances you against your will, and you find yourself learning without any prior experience how to do stuff without a solid base underneath you.



While I agree one should be prepared to attack or defend from an unbalanced position when necessary, I can't imagine not wanting to be as balanced as possible at all times.  Balance allows you to move more effectively and gives you more power when you do.  At least the way I was taught.



Cyriacus said:


> So your footwork is reliant on your stance to be effective? What type of fights do you get into that involve specific stances?



Considering a preference for balance as I mentioned above, I would think footwork would at least be more effective from a balanced stance.  Of course I guess a lot of my thinking comes from my limited TKD training, and my more extensive Hapkido training.  Footwork is very important in Hapkido, as well as balance.




Cyriacus said:


> Running toward someone and throwing a straight punch increases the power even more.



That would be a dangerous move against Hapkido practicioner, and I think in most other MA.  Were you being facicious?

As to the OP, I think it is a bit superficial, requiring a lot of practice under a teacher.  As something to pique interest in a brochure, perhaps OK.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 25, 2013)

oftheherd1 said:


> While I agree one should be prepared to attack or defend from an unbalanced position when necessary, I can't imagine not wanting to be as balanced as possible at all times.  Balance allows you to move more effectively and gives you more power when you do.  At least the way I was taught.



Of course - Albeit which is more important? Being able to get into a balanced position, or be able to move around in it, or being able to move around in it with footwork? Fights move around, often in ways footwork cant cater for. But if you maintain your position and move, without the need for specific methods of footwork, would you not be better off for it? Which is why i queried if this was how he suggests doing footwork, or how he suggests training it.



> Considering a preference for balance as I mentioned above, I would think footwork would at least be more effective from a balanced stance.  Of course I guess a lot of my thinking comes from my limited TKD training, and my more extensive Hapkido training.  Footwork is very important in Hapkido, as well as balance.



How complicated is your footwork, though? Very simple methods of movement are important. Codified methods of practicing them are found in systems. You may have dozens of different movements in your footwork, but are they different ways of doing the same general thing, much like boxing footwork? If your footwork works well without your stance, since you may not be given the chance to get into it, alls good.



> That would be a dangerous move against Hapkido practicioner, and I think in most other MA.  Were you being facicious?



I was being serious, but i wasnt recommending it. Putting your mass and acceleration (without meaning to sound like im quoting that saying) into a strike makes it hit harder. Charging at someone and throwing a punch makes it more powerful. Getting the shot to actually land might not be as easy though. So, while its easy to say, use forward stepping forward and throw a punch before your foot hits the ground might be sound, but you need the shot to land. So you need to be in position before you close in and throw the punch. Getting into position like that often means you arent at close range. Not being at close range suggests mutual combat. Which leads back to what the intended purpose of this article is. Is it for competition, where getting in and out and ranging and positioning are important? Or are you engaged with someone at a range where in order to step towards them, youd need to somehow end up separated from each other first? So then, you might be using it as an attack. You use it as an attack to increase the power.  Ill let you fill in the blanks from here.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 25, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Of course - Albeit which is more important? Being able to get into a balanced position, or be able to move around in it, or being able to move around in it with footwork? Fights move around, often in ways footwork cant cater for. But if you maintain your position and move, without the need for specific methods of footwork, would you not be better off for it? Which is why i queried if this was how he suggests doing footwork, or how he suggests training it.



I understand what you were getting at.  As we often do, I guess I was just thinking based on my own experiences.  In the Hapkido I learned, footwork had to match the technique being done.  If you did not step a certain way, often the techniques would not work, or not as intended.  I found it one of the hardest concepts for most westerners to learn at the beginning of their Hapkido studies.  Interestingly, one of the first things I learned however, was that our Hapkido was taught in the traditional way, as that was what had been found to work for the majority of people.  But that the most important thing was to make it work.  So if we needed to make some little changes, we could demonstrate why and were allowed to do the technique that way.  Also, of course, Hapkido is very defensive in nature, and usually waits for an attack, then normally moves into it in defense.



Cyriacus said:


> How complicated is your footwork, though? Very simple methods of movement are important. Codified methods of practicing them are found in systems. You may have dozens of different movements in your footwork, but are they different ways of doing the same general thing, much like boxing footwork? If your footwork works well without your stance, since you may not be given the chance to get into it, alls good.



Well, perhaps to the beginner it is complicated.  That may be why it takes some getting used to.  However, it soon becomes quite natural.



Cyriacus said:


> I was being serious, but i wasnt recommending it. Putting your mass and acceleration (without meaning to sound like im quoting that saying) into a strike makes it hit harder. Charging at someone and throwing a punch makes it more powerful. Getting the shot to actually land might not be as easy though. So, while its easy to say, use forward stepping forward and throw a punch before your foot hits the ground might be sound, but you need the shot to land. So you need to be in position before you close in and throw the punch. Getting into position like that often means you arent at close range. Not being at close range suggests mutual combat. Which leads back to what the intended purpose of this article is. Is it for competition, where getting in and out and ranging and positioning are important? Or are you engaged with someone at a range where in order to step towards them, youd need to somehow end up separated from each other first? So then, you might be using it as an attack. You use it as an attack to increase the power. Ill let you fill in the blanks from here.



As I mentioned, Hapkido tends to wait for an attack and then defends.  Jumping into a person's sphere of great power in what sounds (although you no doubt mean it to be understood a different way) like a brash, almost uncontrolled move, with no blocking or diagonal movement, seems strange.  I was also curious about the reason not to plant your foot before the blow is struck.  When I studied TKD, we did more kicks is sparring than punches, but of course had punches in forms.  But we tended to want both feet on the ground for a punch.  If we stepped, espscially in forms, we tried to make the punch land at the same time as the lead foot.  We believed being grounded that way gave us much more power at the point of impact.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 25, 2013)

All the rest is fine - Ill agree with it all. Ill generally say that footwork taking time to learn but becoming natural is my point - Walking forward by moving your front leg then bringing your back leg up is basically walking in stance. Its questionable. Footwork that moves you around more serves a purpose.



oftheherd1 said:


> As I mentioned, Hapkido tends to wait for an attack and then defends.  Jumping into a person's sphere of great power in what sounds (although you no doubt mean it to be understood a different way) like a brash, almost uncontrolled move, with no blocking or diagonal movement, seems strange.  I was also curious about the reason not to plant your foot before the blow is struck.  When I studied TKD, we did more kicks is sparring than punches, but of course had punches in forms.  But we tended to want both feet on the ground for a punch.  If we stepped, espscially in forms, we tried to make the punch land at the same time as the lead foot.  We believed being grounded that way gave us much more power at the point of impact.



Those sorts of brash controlled moves can work, if you can close alot of distance and do it quickly. Drop stepping, for example, tends to do that pretty well.

However, you did slightly misunderstand. My point was that trying to lunge or charge in dont work so good unless the format of competition permits it, or, as i often adore doing, if youre already in something of a medium range. Then the charge is just for momentum, and nothing else. You do plant your feet if you can, but you dont really need to in order to generate power. You just need to to generate more power. For what its worth, the thing about striking before the foot hit the ground came from the OP, not me 

"Any type of advancing footwork can be used to increase power in a strike. Be sure that when your advancing for attack that your lead foot does not land before the strike."


----------



## chinto (Jan 25, 2013)

ok stance work and foot work done right do a lot of your "blocking" for you by getting you out of the way and in position to counter attack. so yes foot work will save you if you do it right.  just walking back and forth in a strait line in a single stance is not really footwork.


----------



## First Action (Jan 25, 2013)

Thanks for your comments Cyriacus. I dont agree with everything you have said but alot of it is very useful. Especially about it being competitive. Funny cause I wrote this at a time I was into competitive Muay Thai


----------



## First Action (Jan 25, 2013)

oftheherd1 said:


> While I agree one should be prepared to attack or defend from an unbalanced position when necessary, I can't imagine not wanting to be as balanced as possible at all times.  Balance allows you to move more effectively and gives you more power when you do.  At least the way I was taught.
> 
> Considering a preference for balance as I mentioned above, I would think footwork would at least be more effective from a balanced stance.
> 
> ... requiring a lot of practice under a teacher



This is more of the line of thought I agree with.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 26, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> You dont really need balance. ...What type of fights do you get into that involve specific stances? ... youre better off either pushing off your back foot before you step with your front,


Interest discussion. Agree that you should move your back foot before moving your leading foot.

If you don't want to go down to the ground, when your opponent tries to throw you, you will need balance to resist your opponent's force.

Without good horse stance, bow-arrow stance, and single leg balance stance, you won't be able to perform the following throws.

http://cdn2.judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/ogoshi.htm
http://cdn2.judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/seoiotoshi.htm
http://cdn2.judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/uchimata.htm


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 26, 2013)

You dont need balance for everything though. Im saying you shouldnt rely on it, since it wont always be there for you. You might need balance to avoid being thrown, but do you know how to regain your balance after someone unbalances you?

Stances have a broad array of definitions. Alot of 'stances' happen naturally when you do certain things, then become codified so that you can practice them as a part of a system.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> Interest discussion. Agree that you should move your back foot before moving your leading foot.
> 
> If you don't want to go down to the ground, when your opponent tries to throw you, you will need balance to resist your opponent's force.
> 
> ...


----------



## geezer (Jan 26, 2013)

I guess I have to differ with _Cyriacus_ on the balance thing. In my experience, _balance_ is fundamentally important. When you are unbalanced, it's hard to move, counter, or generate power when you strike. A basic offensive strategy is to unbalance your opponent in order to set him up for an attack. Similarly, when unbalanced, the ability to quickly recover is essential. The greatest athletes are like cats. You can flip them upside down and sideways, and they still have their balance, or at least can recover it in an instant. 

I, on the other hand, have partially fused ankles and a poor sense of balance. Because of my ankles, certain classical stances are impossible for me, and I have to really work on "rooting" and staying balanced. Maybe that's why I appreciate balance so much. Also why my best martial sport as a kid was wrestling, since once it went to the mat, my balance was as least as good as my opponent's.

Finally, I'd like to point out that no less of a figure than FMA legend, GM Rene Latosa includes "Balance" as one of his five fundamental martial concepts: _Power, Speed (distance and timing), Focus, Balance and Transition._ Of course, like I said at the outset, balance can mean a lot of things.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 26, 2013)

In combat, the following are important:

- timing,
- opportunity,
- angle,
- force,
- balance.

The balance is 1/5 of the requirement to achieve any effective technique.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 26, 2013)

Balance? Very important. That said, having the ability to transition through moments of unbalance or stability while maintaining an attacking or a strong defense is an important skill as well. In the movement of battle there will be moments of unbalance, just taking a step is a controlled unbalancing of the body. I work my fighters by putting them in positions of instability and having to punch, elbow, knee, or kick during the transition to regain their balance or evening as they lose it and fall.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 26, 2013)

It's easy to apply a sacrifice throw to use your body weight to drag your opponent down to the ground. It's much harder to do so and regain your balance back afterward. If you can do your leg lift (Uchi Mata) and still remain standing, you will have good balance.

http://imageshack.us/a/img832/7585/changleglifting.jpg


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 27, 2013)

Ill try and say this another way - Staying balanced is not as important as being able to get balanced. In my personal opinion. Thats only a tiny portion of what i was saying, anyway. If someone comes up from behind you and hits you with something, you will be off balance. Therefore, you need to get balanced before youre totally overwhelmed. In the process, you may need to do some things while off balance.

If you are in a perfectly balanced position on perfectly balanced ground and your attacker does not unbalance you in his attack and you remain balanced as you engage him, then i guess youve had more luck than i have in the past.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 27, 2013)

Those guys have good "balance".


----------



## Uncle (Jan 27, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Ill try and say this another way - Staying balanced is not as important as being able to get balanced. In my personal opinion. Thats only a tiny portion of what i was saying, anyway. If someone comes up from behind you and hits you with something, you will be off balance. Therefore, you need to get balanced before youre totally overwhelmed. In the process, you may need to do some things while off balance.
> 
> If you are in a perfectly balanced position on perfectly balanced ground and your attacker does not unbalance you in his attack and you remain balanced as you engage him, then i guess youve had more luck than i have in the past.



Or they succeeded because they were training to remain balanced. Basic technique comes first, recovery technique comes second.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 27, 2013)

Uncle said:


> Or they succeeded because they were training to remain balanced.


Surprise has a way of circumventing that.


----------



## geezer (Jan 27, 2013)

Danny T said:


> Balance? Very important. That said, having *the ability to transition through moments of unbalance or stability while maintaining an attacking or a strong defense is an important skill as well.* In the movement of battle there will be moments of unbalance, just taking a step is a controlled unbalancing of the body. I work my fighters by putting them in positions of instability and having to punch, elbow, knee, or kick during the transition to regain their balance or evening as they lose it and fall.



I agree with this completely. A lot of traditional martial arts place tremendous emphasis on _static balance_ by training rooted stances, fixed stepping patterns, the ability to stand still on one leg, and so on. In the unpredictable fluidity of combat, I'd say _dynamic balance_ is even more important. That's the balance of a body in motion. An example would be a bicycle. It's very unstable at rest, but quite stable in motion. Another example would be the very cool clip of the skaters posted by KFW.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 27, 2013)

geezer said:


> stand still on one leg, ... _dynamic balance_ ...


If you can hop up (or down) stairs with single leg while you are holding some weight, you will have dynamic balance on single leg. If you just stand on single leg without moving, that's not enough IMO.


----------



## First Action (Jan 28, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Agree that you should move your back foot before moving your leading foot.



This seems to be a popular school of thought. Whats the reasoning for it?

I've always moved my lead first to increase speed/decrease telegraphing when lunging for attack.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 28, 2013)

First Action said:


> This seems to be a popular school of thought. Whats the reasoning for it?
> 
> I've always moved my lead first to increase speed/decrease telegraphing when lunging for attack.


Try pushing hard off your back foot without letting that foot leave the ground. It increases speed and reduces telegraphing. Push off > Drop your weight > Step > Bring your rear leg up after setting your lead leg down.

If youre getting more speed 'walking' forward with just your front leg, well, thats fine too. Not all people 'move' the same way. It might actually be working for you


----------



## Uncle (Jan 28, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Try pushing hard off your back foot without letting that foot leave the ground. It increases speed and reduces telegraphing. Push off > Drop your weight > Step > Bring your rear leg up after setting your lead leg down.
> 
> If youre getting more speed 'walking' forward with just your front leg, well, thats fine too. Not all people 'move' the same way. It might actually be working for you


Actually for wing chun if we're not taking a step forward with our back foot but rather doing a short step forward with the front we're always pushing off the back leg so the front leg comes forward first. It works well for us.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 28, 2013)

Uncle said:


> Actually for wing chun if we're not taking a step forward with our back foot but rather doing a short step forward with the front we're always pushing off the back leg so the front leg comes forward first. It works well for us.


Im not sure if you think that isnt what i said, or if youre saying that thats how you do it in Wing Chun as well or if im misreading you?


----------



## Uncle (Jan 28, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Im not sure if you think that isnt what i said, or if youre saying that thats how you do it in Wing Chun as well or if im misreading you?



First one, now the other now that I know what you meant.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 28, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> All the rest is fine - Ill agree with it all. Ill generally say that footwork taking time to learn but becoming natural is my point - Walking forward by moving your front leg then bringing your back leg up is basically walking in stance. Its questionable. Footwork that moves you around more serves a purpose.



I don't see it as questionable in the right circumstances.  Of course as I am sure you would agree you need many tools in your bag for different circumstances.



Cyriacus said:


> Those sorts of brash controlled moves can work, if you can close alot of distance and do it quickly. Drop stepping, for example, tends to do that pretty well.
> 
> However, you did slightly misunderstand. *My point was that trying to lunge or charge in dont work so good unless the format of competition permits it*, or, as i often adore doing, if youre already in something of a medium range. Then the charge is just for momentum, and nothing else. You do plant your feet if you can, but you dont really need to in order to generate power. You just need to to generate more power. For what its worth, the thing about striking before the foot hit the ground came from the OP, not me
> 
> "Any type of advancing footwork can be used to increase power in a strike. Be sure that when your advancing for attack that your lead foot does not land before the strike."



Reference the bolded text, in the Hapkido I learned we didn't have competition.  The only time we sparred was after tests.  But we only sparred as a TaeKwonDo student would.  The Hapkido I learned didn't lend itself to free sparring.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 28, 2013)

First Action said:


> This seems to be a popular school of thought. Whats the reasoning for it?
> 
> I've always moved my lead first to increase speed/decrease telegraphing when lunging for attack.


The moment that you move your front foot forward, the moment that the distance between you and your opponent has been reduced. Your opponent can sweep/scoop your leading leg and take you down at that moment.

When your front foot is outside of your opponent's kicking range, no matter where you may move your back letg, as long as it's not infront of your front foot, the distance between you and your opponent hasn't changed yet. When you move your back leg to touch your leading leg, you can then decide whether you should move in or still move back and wait for another opportunity. By moving your back leg 1st, it buys you some breathing room.

Again, you can always "hide" your intention by moving your leading (or back) foot inch by inch without your opponent notices it. When your feet is at the right spot, you can then jump in and attack.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 29, 2013)

oftheherd1 said:


> I don't see it as questionable in the right circumstances.  Of course as I am sure you would agree you need many tools in your bag for different circumstances.



If thats how you feel - Though its purely personal preference, i just dont see why i need more than one or two ways of moving in a straight line with my front foot moving first using formal footwork.



> Reference the bolded text, in the Hapkido I learned we didn't have competition.  The only time we sparred was after tests.  But we only sparred as a TaeKwonDo student would.  The Hapkido I learned didn't lend itself to free sparring.



Thats... sorta my point. You arent doing a format of competition, let alone a format of competition that permits it. So it dont work so good.


----------



## First Action (Feb 8, 2013)

Uncle said:


> Actually for wing chun if we're not taking a step forward with our back foot but rather doing a short step forward with the front we're always pushing off the back leg so the front leg comes forward first. It works well for us.



ahh, this is what I mean. I guess just because my front foot is the one that leaves the ground first I counted it as thats the one that moves first.. but in fact the muscles in my rear leg are activating before my lead.


----------



## mook jong man (Feb 8, 2013)

First Action said:


> ahh, this is what I mean. I guess just because my front foot is the one that leaves the ground first I counted it as thats the one that moves first.. but in fact the muscles in my rear leg are activating before my lead.



I don't think of moving either leg first , in our lineage the movement is initiated from the waist.


----------

