stances

[Manny]

Last night talking with wife about tkd/karatedo (shotokan) I told her that shotokan is similar to TKD in some ways,however the stances were diferent. She did not got it so I went to the floor to be graphic. I performed an ap-kubi and an ap-sogui and told her that those stances allowed me to use mi legs to kick, then I perfomed a zenkutsu-dachi, a very deep one like the one my shotokan friends do and believe me it was very dificult to perform a kick.

I told wife that karate is focused on hand strikes so the lower the postion/stance the better to deliver powerful/linear blows and that in TKD as we emphatize on kicks we need a more upward stance to flow with the kick.

Any coments?

Manny

 

[lifespantkd]

I think each stance type can be placed somewhere on a spectrum from maximum stability to maximum mobility. At any point in a self-defense situation, any place in the spectrum may be needed. Certainly some martial arts emphasize particular areas of the spectrum more than others.

Cynthia

 

[mastercole]

OK, I will comment.

On stances:

Taekwondo contains every stance found in Shotokan. Though all of Taekwondo's techniques and stances are not found in Poomsae, we still have them.
Shotokan (JKA and Shotokai) tend to favor different stances than Taekwondo, but we have the same stances.

On hand techniques vs kicks:

- Poomsae, 17 types, 8 Taegeuk and 9 Dan poomsae: out of 537 total technical motions, only 15.6% (84) of those motions are kicks
- momakki (hoshinsul) 17 types: approximately 10% of skills involve kicks
- sparring 17 types: first 16 types involve approximately 35% kicks.
17th type (Shihap Kyorugi/Olympic sparring) involves more steps than kicks, more body evasion motions than kicks and more hand motions than kicks,
however, kicks are over 90% of attack technique.
- kyukpa 17 types: approximately 40% kicks, 60% other body parts

15.6% + 10% + 35% + 90% + 60% = 210.6 / 5 = 42.12% kicking

So we have approximately 42.12% kicking and 57.88% other body parts skills.

We can safely state that Taekwondo is approximately 60% hand skills, and 40% kicking skills

 

[mastercole]

Having a low position or stance does not make for more powerful linear blows or hand strikes. Landing a strike of any kind, can only achieve it's maximum power potential on impact from a higher unstable stance. The more low and stable a stance is, the less potential for a maximum degree of acceleration.

That said, hard blows can be struck from either stance. Heck a knockout blow can be struck from a laying down position, but we can not achieve maximum potential power from a laying down position, we have to be standing, and standing high and unstable at impact.

 

[Indie12]

Last night talking with wife about tkd/karatedo (shotokan) I told her that shotokan is similar to TKD in some ways,however the stances were diferent. She did not got it so I went to the floor to be graphic. I performed an ap-kubi and an ap-sogui and told her that those stances allowed me to use mi legs to kick, then I perfomed a zenkutsu-dachi, a very deep one like the one my shotokan friends do and believe me it was very dificult to perform a kick.

I told wife that karate is focused on hand strikes so the lower the postion/stance the better to deliver powerful/linear blows and that in TKD as we emphatize on kicks we need a more upward stance to flow with the kick.

Any coments?

Manny

First off all, let me add that their are many similarities between Okinawan Karate systems and Tae Kwon Do (specifically Shorin-Ryu, and Shotokan).

 

[Indie12]

OK, I will comment.

On stances:

Taekwondo contains every stance found in Shotokan. Though all of Taekwondo's techniques and stances are not found in Poomsae, we still have them.
Shotokan (JKA and Shotokai) tend to favor different stances than Taekwondo, but we have the same stances.

On hand techniques vs kicks:

- Poomsae, 17 types, 8 Taegeuk and 9 Dan poomsae: out of 537 total technical motions, only 15.6% (84) of those motions are kicks
- momakki (hoshinsul) 17 types: approximately 10% of skills involve kicks
- sparring 17 types: first 16 types involve approximately 35% kicks.
17th type (Shihap Kyorugi/Olympic sparring) involves more steps than kicks, more body evasion motions than kicks and more hand motions than kicks,
however, kicks are over 90% of attack technique.
- kyukpa 17 types: approximately 40% kicks, 60% other body parts

15.6% + 10% + 35% + 90% + 60% = 210.6 / 5 = 42.12% kicking

So we have approximately 42.12% kicking and 57.88% other body parts skills.

We can safely state that Taekwondo is approximately 60% hand skills, and 40% kicking skills

Just out of curiosity Mastercole, where did you get your statistics? Where did you get these "facts"?

Secondly, Tae Kwon Do is more 80% Kicking, 20% Handstrikes, depending on which organization your with!
For example: ITF would be more towards hand strikes w/ kicks, while WTF is more kick oriented and few hand strikes.

 

[Indie12]

Having a low position or stance does not make for more powerful linear blows or hand strikes. Landing a strike of any kind, can only achieve it's maximum power potential on impact from a higher unstable stance. The more low and stable a stance is, the less potential for a maximum degree of acceleration.

That said, hard blows can be struck from either stance. Heck a knockout blow can be struck from a laying down position, but we can not achieve maximum potential power from a laying down position, we have to be standing, and standing high and unstable at impact.

Agree/Disagree.

 

[Earl Weiss]

Originally Posted by mastercole
Having a low position or stance does not make for more powerful linear blows or hand strikes. Landing a strike of any kind, can only achieve it's maximum power potential on impact from a higher unstable stance. The more low and stable a stance is, the less potential for a maximum degree of acceleration.

That said, hard blows can be struck from either stance. Heck a knockout blow can be struck from a laying down position, but we can not achieve maximum potential power from a laying down position, we have to be standing, and standing high and unstable at impact.
Agree/Disagree.

I have tremendous respect for Mastercole. But I have to say he lost me on part of this. I would agree that to accelerate from a low stance takes longer, and this would seem t result in a slower technique. However, the starting position / stance is only part of the equation. Witout getting into a "Sine wave debate" while the stance may start low, when stepping or moving the body will rise up to a higher stance and drop down as the hand technique is executed. One could view this as the hand technique realy starting at the high point in the transition, since from this point any number of techniques might be executed. So, the issue of the low, slower stance is largely negated. It is all somewhat moot for sparring since traditional stances aren't really used. However, for power tests the tehnique often finishes in the lower more traditional stance although having the transition being high as noted above.

So, anecdotaly (I have no scientific evidence) the power test observations show that the morepowerful hand technique does not need to finish or start in a high unstable stance to generate maximum power.

 

[mastercole]

I got them from my 42 years of martial arts experience You would have to have an good understanding of Kukkiwon Taekwondo to understand these approximate numbers, if you research the Kukkiwon, and any other Taekwondo groups curriculum, you can learn about it. Let me know what you find out.

Also, the WTF does not have a curriculum. The WTF is basically a tournament committee. Maybe you meant to type Kukkiwon?

 

[mastercole]

Thank you for the kind words, the feeling is mutual, Sir.

Just to clarify: I am stating that the maximum potential power/energy of a punch **on impact** can only be achieved while the body is in a higher, more unstable stance. It maybe slightly rising, or slightly falling (sinewave), or in place, or moving forward, and even backward, but on **impact**, it must be unstable ---- with the ground ---- to achieve it's maximum potential energy.

Of course to achieve that maximum potential, we need to launch from a stable object, like the ground.

Consider this, the more MASS you add at impact, all other factors remaining the same, the more energy you apply to the target. If that MASS is rooted to the ground during impact, it is only partially being applied against the target. If that MASS was launched from the ground, at the point of being nearly airborne and being in correct alignment on impact, a greater percentage of MASS would be applied against the target, with less rooted to the ground.

The greater the degree of ACCELERATION you have at impact, all other factors remaining the same, the more energy you apply to the target. The more rooted or stable you are to the ground, the less potential you have for acceleration. The more unstable you become, the greater your potential for acceleration.

 

[mastercole]

First off all, let me add that their are many similarities between Okinawan Karate systems and Tae Kwon Do (specifically Shorin-Ryu, and Shotokan).

Shotokan is a Japanese style.

 

[lifespantkd]

Consider this, the more MASS you add at impact, all other factors remaining the same, the more energy you apply to the target. If that MASS is rooted to the ground during impact, it is only partially being applied against the target. If that MASS was launched from the ground, at the point of being nearly airborne and being in correct alignment on impact, a greater percentage of MASS would be applied against the target, with less rooted to the ground.

The greater the degree of ACCELERATION you have at impact, all other factors remaining the same, the more energy you apply to the target. The more rooted or stable you are to the ground, the less potential you have for acceleration. The more unstable you become, the greater your potential for acceleration.

Yes. This analysis is completely supported by the laws of physics. Newton's second law of physics is F = m*a. That is, force equals the product of mass and acceleration. The more of our mass that we can throw into a punch or a kick, the more forceful that punch or kick will be. The faster we can accelerate that mass at contact, the more forceful that punch or kick will be. Remember, acceleration comes from both change in speed and direction. So, to increase acceleration, we need to move our mass faster and faster as we approach contact. And, when the technique involves some kind of pivot at completion (think, for example, about the pivot of the fist at completion of a basic punch), that change in direction also increases acceleration at contact.

Cynthia

 

[puunui]

Consider this, the more MASS you add at impact, all other factors remaining the same, the more energy you apply to the target. If that MASS is rooted to the ground during impact, it is only partially being applied against the target. If that MASS was launched from the ground, at the point of being nearly airborne and being in correct alignment on impact, a greater percentage of MASS would be applied against the target, with less rooted to the ground.

GM LEE Won Kuk, the founder of the Chung Do Kwan, was a big believer in short narrow stances. His main teacher, FUNAKOSHI Yoshitaka Sensei ("Waka Sensei" as GM Lee referred to him) was known for his incredible power. He would routinely break makiwara during practice. GM Lee said that Waka Sensei would start in a high short narrow stance (with his arms down by his sides, sort of like how some like to tease WTF style competitors), and then lunge deeply with all of his body weight into a blow. In some photos, it looks like Waka Sensei is in a long deep stance. But that was the result of the transfer of his entire body weight behind the blow. He did not start off in a long deep stance; he started in a short stance, put all his body weight behind it, and temporarily ended up in a long stance, before dragging his back leg up, to return to his short narrow stance. This is similar to what elite competitors at WTF competition do, they often kick long, and because their weight is behind it, they may momentarily look like they are in a deep long stance, but then they immediately drag their back leg up to regain their stance. Some try to explain the deep long stances as some sort of leg strengthening exercise. That may be true, but that isn't the purpose of the *momentary* long stance, which is that it is a natural consequence of throwing your entire body weight and hips behind the blow. The dragging up of your back leg is a natural consequence of returning to your original stance, which is short and narrow.

 

[mastercole]

GM LEE Won Kuk, the founder of the Chung Do Kwan, was a big believer in short narrow stances. His main teacher, FUNAKOSHI Yoshitaka Sensei ("Waka Sensei" as GM Lee referred to him) was known for his incredible power. He would routinely break makiwara during practice. GM Lee said that Waka Sensei would start in a high short narrow stance (with his arms down by his sides, sort of like how some like to tease WTF style competitors), and then lunge deeply with all of his body weight into a blow. In some photos, it looks like Waka Sensei is in a long deep stance. But that was the result of the transfer of his entire body weight behind the blow. He did not start off in a long deep stance; he started in a short stance, put all his body weight behind it, and temporarily ended up in a long stance, before dragging his back leg up, to return to his short narrow stance. This is similar to what elite competitors at WTF competition do, they often kick long, and because their weight is behind it, they may momentarily look like they are in a deep long stance, but then they immediately drag their back leg up to regain their stance. Some try to explain the deep long stances as some sort of leg strengthening exercise. That may be true, but that isn't the purpose of the *momentary* long stance, which is that it is a natural consequence of throwing your entire body weight and hips behind the blow. The dragging up of your back leg is a natural consequence of returning to your original stance, which is short and narrow.

Exactly. When I read this suddenly a ML pitcher came to mind. Standing at the plate, lifting his leg in a high, unstable stance, launching his mass forward throwing his arm as quick as possible, landing in a deep stance and even ending up standing on his lead leg during recovery. That is how these guys can get the ball to reach over 100 mph.

We also see this in the Taegeuk Poomsae, changing from high to low and back to high stances.

 

[Manny]

I think stances are something very personal, foe example the TKD where I come uses stances not so wide or low, but no to short or shallow, so my stances are medium or in beetwen, this allows me to kick right and to punch right, if I need more penetration or torque in a single baro momtong chirugi then I only upon impact use moe hip rotation and my stance gos a little more low (hit aimed to the solar plexus).

However doing some shotokan stile techs I feel the wider zenkutsu-dashi not allows me to kick properly because my shotokan friend ask me to use very low and wide stances.

There are sometimes I use a bom sogui stance for sparring but I would rather prefer the ap sogi stance, because it permits me to move around with ease.

Manny

 

[Flying Crane]

Exactly. When I read this suddenly a ML pitcher came to mind. Standing at the plate, lifting his leg in a high, unstable stance, launching his mass forward throwing his arm as quick as possible, landing in a deep stance and even ending up standing on his lead leg during recovery. That is how these guys can get the ball to reach over 100 mph.

err...not a TKD guy, but I don't think this is a good way of looking at it. A ML Pitcher may maximize how fast he throws a ball, but he sacrifices stability and is completely off balance and open at the end of the throw. If you tried to fight this way, if that punch missed you would be immediately slaughtered. Maximizing power at the complete expense of stability, mobility, safety/recovery, is not a good tradeoff.

In my opinion, the best answer lies in how you use your stances to deliver your techniques. I don't know the TKD stances, but when you throw a punch, if you properly use the legs to drive your stance changes while powering your punch, that can give you an extremely powerful punch, while keeping you in a position from which you can recover and still defend yourself. You do not end up open and a sitting duck.

 

[Flying Crane]

Yes. This analysis is completely supported by the laws of physics. Newton's second law of physics is F = m*a. That is, force equals the product of mass and acceleration. The more of our mass that we can throw into a punch or a kick, the more forceful that punch or kick will be. The faster we can accelerate that mass at contact, the more forceful that punch or kick will be. Remember, acceleration comes from both change in speed and direction. So, to increase acceleration, we need to move our mass faster and faster as we approach contact. And, when the technique involves some kind of pivot at completion (think, for example, about the pivot of the fist at completion of a basic punch), that change in direction also increases acceleration at contact.

Cynthia

This also is not an accurate way of looking at it. Newtonian physics is a wonderful tool for describing the movement of celstial bodies (i.e. planets, stars, galaxies) thru the vacuum of space, devoid of friction and disconnected from an ongoing pushing/power source, etc. But it is inadequate for describing the motion of a complex biological organizm such as the human body.

When you throw a fist, it is not separated from your body, like a planet moving thru orbit. It also is subject to the gravitational pull of the earth, and the friction of the atmosphere. It is also affected by the fact that it is connected to the arm and body, which stands on the earth, and the punch is being propelled by a constant muscular action that does not cease until the punch is complete. These measures cannot be accounted for in Newtonian physics, and makes their use inappropriate in contemplating a martial action such as a punch.

A punch does not need to accelerate, in order to be effective. Rather, it is being driven by an action of the body. This action needs to continue thru the completion of the punch. If it wavers before completion, the punch can lose power and effect. But if that action is constant and steady, it can be effective. It does not need to actually accelerate thru to the end. The action of the body, driving the punch thru the target, creates the damaging effect of the punch.

Specifically HOW you drive that punch with your body matters much more in how effective and how powerful that punch will be. If you drive your punch with the strength of the arm and shoulder, your punch will be limited to how strong your arm and shoulder is. If you learn to use the power of the full body, driven from the feet up thru the torso and down the arm, with proper stance transitions, then the force of your punch can increase dramatically, rising to the greater strength of the whole body working efficiently together.

 

[lifespantkd]

Specifically HOW you drive that punch with your body matters much more in how effective and how powerful that punch will be. If you drive your punch with the strength of the arm and shoulder, your punch will be limited to how strong your arm and shoulder is. If you learn to use the power of the full body, driven from the feet up thru the torso and down the arm, with proper stance transitions, then the force of your punch can increase dramatically, rising to the greater strength of the whole body working efficiently together.

Personally, I think we're saying the same thing! How you drive the punch with your body determines how much mass is propelled with how much acceleration which determines how much force the punch produces. An actual analysis of the force vectors involved would require some sophisticated programming since we're not moving just a point of mass through space with no friction and no gravity, but Newton's second law is still at work.

Cynthia

 

[StudentCarl]

This also is not an accurate way of looking at it. Newtonian physics is a wonderful tool for describing the movement of celstial bodies (i.e. planets, stars, galaxies) thru the vacuum of space, devoid of friction and disconnected from an ongoing pushing/power source, etc. But it is inadequate for describing the motion of a complex biological organizm such as the human body.

When you throw a fist, it is not separated from your body, like a planet moving thru orbit. It also is subject to the gravitational pull of the earth, and the friction of the atmosphere. It is also affected by the fact that it is connected to the arm and body, which stands on the earth, and the punch is being propelled by a constant muscular action that does not cease until the punch is complete. These measures cannot be accounted for in Newtonian physics, and makes their use inappropriate in contemplating a martial action such as a punch.

A punch does not need to accelerate, in order to be effective. Rather, it is being driven by an action of the body. This action needs to continue thru the completion of the punch. If it wavers before completion, the punch can lose power and effect. But if that action is constant and steady, it can be effective. It does not need to actually accelerate thru to the end. The action of the body, driving the punch thru the target, creates the damaging effect of the punch.

Specifically HOW you drive that punch with your body matters much more in how effective and how powerful that punch will be. If you drive your punch with the strength of the arm and shoulder, your punch will be limited to how strong your arm and shoulder is. If you learn to use the power of the full body, driven from the feet up thru the torso and down the arm, with proper stance transitions, then the force of your punch can increase dramatically, rising to the greater strength of the whole body working efficiently together.

I don't think your technical points diminish the value of Cynthia's idea at all. Gravity and friction? Otherwise you concede what she's saying: your body mechanics determine whether the mass you deliver is big or small (arm or whole body), and whether you have that mass moving with speed at the moment of impact. I'll agree that other, additional physics is involved, but Cynthia's explanation of Master Cole's original point is valid: the way that stance contributes to using the body to deliver mass on-target with maximum speed.
Carl

 

[lifespantkd]

I'll agree that other, additional physics is involvedl

I agree that additional physics is involved, too. A complete analysis would be quite complex!

Cynthia