Is ball of the foot roundhouse outdated with modern shoes?

This is version A with no chamber and no hooking.



Because we've only kicked shields, my ITF school never drilled the hooking version (and the pattern(s) using it aren't trained because we had a mixed group and that pattern was high Dan .

So is chamber optional for the hook version or is it a demand if you compete in forms?
IMO the reverse hook kick is generaly trained with a target paddle rather that a heavy bag or stationary object so it can travel through the target. This is not to say it can't be done as shown. The text references the "Dual purpose" of the kick. One to kick and the other to hook the opponent who moves in. (Not a fan of the latter and it would seem that requires less of a chamber.) )
 
If the text was meant to be instructional it might be considered an omission. However, since not intended as such it is not an error. Not every step of the kicks are shown or explained.

What is it intended as then?
 
IMO the reverse hook kick is generaly trained with a target paddle rather that a heavy bag or stationary object so it can travel through the target.
That's why I threw the regular heel kick. I. asked about the specifics since I have never done a hooking one because you can't hook a flat kicking shield surface

I can hook that heavy bag, but it won't be pleasent
 
Last edited:
IMO the reverse hook kick is generaly trained with a target paddle rather that a heavy bag or stationary object so it can travel through the target. This is not to say it can't be done as shown. The text references the "Dual purpose" of the kick. One to kick and the other to hook the opponent who moves in. (Not a fan of the latter and it would seem that requires less of a chamber.) )

Not a fan? Yon-Gae Tull prescripes a hooking reverse turning kick... As does Choi Yong..

 

Not a fan? Yon-Gae Tull prescripes a hooking reverse turning kick... As does Choi Yong..

You seem to misunderstand " (Not a fan of the latter and it would seem that requires less of a chamber.) . The latter being the second one mentioned " "the other to hook the opponent who moves in. " Which of course has nothing to do with the patterns that have the move.
 
You seem to misunderstand " (Not a fan of the latter and it would seem that requires less of a chamber.) . The latter being the second one mentioned " "the other to hook the opponent who moves in. " Which of course has nothing to do with the patterns that have the move.

I think the point you are trying to make is that chambering is slower and that you don't have time for that if someone moves in, but I think it’s the opposite. Not chambering makes the leg heavier to swing, even though it's a less involved movement.
 
Then you will have to clarify what you mean with less requirement of a chamber
If you want the foot to be moving as quickly as possible at moment of impact to increase destructive force, chamber will facilitate this. If you want the leg to pull someone in the speed will be less of a factor so the chamber is not as important.
 
If you want the foot to be moving as quickly as possible at moment of impact to increase destructive force, chamber will facilitate this. If you want the leg to pull someone in the speed will be less of a factor so the chamber is not as important.

This goes back to the discussion we had before. When one chambers, he is halting the acceleration of the foot. So what you have to do is make up for that by engaging your quads when the chamber is released, to make something useful out of the tucking motion.

This results in chamber versions requiring more relative speed and full body integration than a mere leg swing, because a non chambered leg swing has no stop to its momentum from take-off all the way to impact.
 
Last edited:
If I roundhouse kick and let the standing foot decide for itself, here's how much it rotates by instinct. What would you guys say this base foot pivot degree is? 50?
_20211008_134714.JPG
 
If I roundhouse kick and let the standing foot decide for itself, here's how much it rotates by instinct. What would you guys say this base foot pivot degree is? 50?
relative to what? Relative to the direction of the kick/direction you are looking then it looks like 1 quarter full rotation which is 90degrees, relative to the wall it's pointing at then it's 0 degrees, relative to the room behind you then about 270. Consider that 45 degrees is 1/8 of a full 360 degree circular rotation which isn't much at all.
 
relative to what? Relative to the direction of the kick/direction you are looking then it looks like 1 quarter full rotation which is 90degrees, relative to the wall it's pointing at then it's 0 degrees, relative to the room behind you then about 270. Consider that 45 degrees is 1/8 of a full 360 degree circular rotation which isn't much at all.
That is right sir and I stand corrected.
I hurriedly used the wrong value.
If he knows the ‘4 quadrants it is easy to dissect.
 
When one chambers, he is halting the acceleration of the foot.
Only if you're not doing it correctly. It's a matter of redirecting the chamber movement into the kick without halting or losing momentum. Transitioning from the chambering line to the kicking line (or arc depending on the kick) requires a subtle circular element to maintain momentum. This idea also applies to hand techniques traveling in multiple directions.
 
Back
Top