Wide stances and ending your forms on the same spot

[Gerry Seymour]

Ok.

Damn it, I did it again. Ok starting right now...

Keep it up, postitute.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I'm not talking about the beginner level training. I'm talking about the advance level training. No matter how many research papers that you have read, you still have to write your own Phd thesis to obtain your Phd degree.

But first you have to read a bunch of research papers. And even after you write your own thesis, you should still be reading research papers. That's the part that he's talking about here, which is just as important as writing your own thesis (imagine writing one with having no idea what the foundational research was, or the appropriate language)

 

[dvcochran]

One common thing I hear is that your forms should end on the same spot you started, assuming you had consistent stances throughout the forms. However, with both the Palgwe-style and Taegeuk forms I've learned, you usually end up either a few steps forward or backward of your starting point.

The reason for this seems to be that your proper stances are not in a straight line, and that anchor points shift as you perform the form. For example, if you take the Kibon Il Jang or Palgwe Il Jang, which both follow the same basic I pattern (assuming your font has the right type of I). Theoretically if you do 2 steps left and 2 steps right, that should balance out, and if you do 4 steps forward and 4 steps back, then that should balance as well.

However, the nature of the stances is that they are wide. The first move is a step to the left, but you have a wide stance, so your left foot is placed behind your starting position. Where the right leg goes in the second step is largely irrelevant, because the left foot is your anchor point for the turn into the third move. You have now effectively shifted the line back a half step.

This gets corrected at Moves #9-12, where you do a mirror of Steps #1-4 and essentially shift the line back. If the form ended at Step #16, you'd be on the same spot as before. But when you add in Steps #17-20, you again shift the line back a half step. Your ending position in this case is always the width of your stance behind your starting position.

I've just recently started on the Taegeuks. I learned them before as an elective to our curriculum, and am going through them again. With Taegeuk Il Jang, I see a similar thing as in the Kibon and Palgwe forms. In theory, you have 2 full steps forward and 2 full steps back, and should end up on the same spot as before. But when I start practicing on the edge of the mat, I find I have to do a stutter step for the last step to stay on the mat, because the Taegeuk form ends up behind my starting point as well!

The reason for this, as best I can tell, is the way in which you turn. Once again, because your stances are not in a straight line, but rather shoulder width apart, and because of how you shift in each set in the form.

1. Steps 1-4 have you move back a half step compared with your starting position, just like the Kibon/Palgwe form
2. Step 5 has you move a whole stop forward. However, your transition into Step 6 has you anchor on your front leg and slide your back leg into the stance, which means that you don't move a whole step forward. Steps 6-9 will be anchored on your starting line.
3. The anchor point for the turn forward into Step 10 is actually behind your starting line. It may be even with or slightly in front, depending on the difference between your walking stance width and front stance length. You would think since you're halfway through the form you would be well forward, but you're in virtually the same spot.
4. The turn from Step 10-11 is the same as from Step 5-6. However, this time you are moving forwards for Steps 11-14. The other two horizontal lines shift backwards with their turns, this makes up for one of them.
5. The turn from Step 14-15 is a step across your rearward foot towards the rear of the room. This means your anchor point is at the rear, and you make a full step towards the rear. There are no turns like in Step 6 or Step 11 that negate some of the length of your step. So Steps 15 & 16 are truly a full step back.

The end result is that just like the Palgwe and Kibon forms, Taegeuk Il Jang ends up behind where it started. I've watched videos of people perform Taegeuk Il Jang with very narrow walking stance and very long front stance, which offsets the difference a little bit, but even then they end up behind where they started.

Has anyone else noticed this? I often hear "you should end your form in the same spot as you started", but I feel if people do that, it usually means that their stances are too narrow, or they're moving forward with longer steps than they go back with. For most forms "you should end a step behind where you started" seems more accurate to me.

It is really not that big a deal if you finish a half-step forward or back. What is important is that all the lines are straight and perpendicular to each other. This is how you know your stances, step to step, and your turns are correct. If a person really, really wants to end on the starting point it can be done with subtle adjustments to some steps (in I/H pattern forms). It goes out the window in some of the Yudanja and MDK Poomsae.
We teach TKD front stances as shoulder-width wide and 1-1/2 to 2 shoulder-widths deep. It is slightly different for everyone, someone with short legs may not be quite that deep but should be close; someone with long legs should be closer to 2 shoulder-widths deep. Why? Conditioning. No mystics or magic. You do 3 Kibon, 8 Palgwe, & 8 Taeguek poomsae in deep stances and at power and you will be gassed. If you do the 8 Taegueks 3 times in a row using the Kukki-style front stance and you will not get nearly the conditioning. Another argument for deep stances; watch a bunch of elite level Olympic style matches. Over 1/2 the time they are in a wide stance, (usually a back stance).
Okinawan styles use a wide, shorter stance to generate power. A valid argument for a partial reason for the narrower but deeper traditional Korean stance is to diverge from their Japanese counterparts. Both, wide or deep stances are allow for full use of the body and generate more power. Something modern Kukki-style seems to be forgetting.

 

[skribs]

This has nothing to do with style. Anybody can train a "mirror form" if they want to.

For example, if your form has:

1. left leg forward left downward block.
2. step in right leg right punch.
3. skip in left leg right side kick.

You can also train

1. right leg forward right downward block.
2. step in left leg left punch.
3. skip in right leg left side kick.

You can take any form from any MA system and train the "mirror form".

It has everything to do with style. Because the Taekwondo forms were designed this way. The TKD training style is "you mirror it exactly as it was taught to you." During forms testing, the instructors will look at how close you followed the source material. During forms competitions, the judges will see how correct your form is, based on their learning of the form.

I'm not saying you can't use the forms in other ways in your own practice. But if you go to test Taegeuk #3 and your stances are wrong, or you change the form from what it originally was, you will fail your test.

 

[Clyde Cash]

Everyone reading this thread has to let go of their "forms." They are obsolete compared to sparring. Why do you waste your training time on workouts scientifically proven to be pointless?

 

[Danny T]

Everyone reading this thread has to let go of their "forms." They are obsolete compared to sparring. Why do you waste your training time on workouts scientifically proven to be pointless?

Though I'm not one, there are many who compete in form presentation competition. For them such training time isn't wasted nor pointless.

 

[Clyde Cash]

Though I'm not one, there are many who compete in form presentation competition. For them such training time isn't wasted nor pointless.

They can do their little dances for medals, I was talking about forms in relation to fights.

 

[JowGaWolf]

They can do their little dances for medals, I was talking about forms in relation to fights.

I do forms and there's nothing wrong with my sparring. I haven't had a chance to use it in a real fight but judging by the outcome of some of my sparring, I think I'll be ok in a real fight. Actually I know I'll be more than ok in real fight doing the same techniques. I did in sparring. I wouldn't have to hold back like I do in sparring.

 

[Earl Weiss]

if the reasons are not reasonably obvious, then theres a fair chance the reasons are not logical and just a made up rule for the only purpose of having a rule ?

"Reasonably Obvious " is in. in the eye of the beholder. The Chang Hon system had the advantage of the founder very often stating his reasons. (Some may disagree with reasons but that is a different topic) I am not sure many could find those reasons "Obvious" if not stated. For other systems the founders are long gone and there is little if any documentation as to why they did what they did and modern conveniences like ease of printing were not available to them.

 

[jobo]

"Reasonably Obvious " is in. in the eye of the beholder. The Chang Hon system had the advantage of the founder very often stating his reasons. (Some may disagree with reasons but that is a different topic) I am not sure many could find those reasons "Obvious" if not stated. For other systems the founders are long gone and there is little if any documentation as to why they did what they did and modern conveniences like ease of printing were not available to them.

yes so ? if the reason isn't obvious and I mean obvious to some one who studies ma, then theres a fair assumption that theres no good reason at all. beyond maintaining tradition.

 

[Earl Weiss]

They can do their little dances for medals, I was talking about forms in relation to fights.

By "Fight" do you refer to only to Sparring, or Combat, or Self Defense, or all of those? If those are your only goals why waste a lot of time learning a martial art.

 

[Earl Weiss]

yes so ? if the reason isn't obvious and I mean obvious to some one who studies ma, then theres a fair assumption that theres no good reason at all. beyond maintaining tradition.

I studied a system for 18 years before spent time with the founder. Only then did I understand some of the reasons he specified doing things a certain way. Either I was to dense, or it wasn't obvious.

 

[Earl Weiss]

Everyone reading this thread has to let go of their "forms." They are obsolete compared to sparring. Why do you waste your training time on workouts scientifically proven to be pointless?

Because some of us care to learn an art, as well as a sport.

 

[jobo]

I studied a system for 18 years before spent time with the founder. Only then did I understand some of the reasons he specified doing things a certain way. Either I was to dense, or it wasn't obvious.

maybe a bit of both ?.

 

[Gnarlie]

Hey Skribs.

Using the modern Korean approach and stances, all of the Taegeuk forms except 1. JANG land on the spot mathematically. 1. Jang lands slightly back, but this can be corrected for competition purposes with a bit of adjustment throughout the form. To bear in mind is that the general rule for Taegeuk is turn on the ball of the foot. There are very few exceptions to this rule where one turns on the heel or middle of the foot.

With wider and deeper stances, landing on the spot without cheating goes out the window.



Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[skribs]

To bear in mind is that the general rule for Taegeuk is turn on the ball of the foot. There are very few exceptions to this rule where one turns on the heel or middle of the foot.

This does make a difference.

 

[Flying Crane]

I'm anti-tradition. Why should I do my form the same way as the ancient form creator did? The best that I can do is just another good copy machine, no more and no less.

Do you want be just another copy machine for the rest of your life?

Why do you think that including the forms from the system you have learned as part of your training makes you a “copy machine”?

I’m ambivalent towards tradition. I’m interested in learning a method that works. Systems that have been around for a long time continue to exist because they work. They have a history of success. I train in such a system. I’m not interested in tradition for tradition’s sake. But if I decide to train in the method, the I LEARN THE METHOD because through history people have found it useful. But to understand it and make it useful for yourself, you need to train the system, the methodology.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Why do you think that including the forms from the system you have learned as part of your training makes you a “copy machine”?

I’m ambivalent towards tradition. I’m interested in learning a method that works. Systems that have been around for a long time continue to exist because they work. They have a history of success. I train in such a system. I’m not interested in tradition for tradition’s sake. But if I decide to train in the method, the I LEARN THE METHOD because through history people have found it useful. But to understand it and make it useful for yourself, you need to train the system, the methodology.

This is the same thing boxers do before they become great boxers. They learn how things are done and how to do it. Then once they hit a certain level of expertise, they begin to develop their own style and add to system of boxing. But they have to get those foundation in first. The thing that we must understand about Kung Fu wang is that even though he doesn't like forms and he thinks that they are a waste of time. The one truth is that he studied Forms and everything that he knows now is built from his exposure to forms. He may not think that forms have had a positive influence on his ability to use technique but it's clear that it has. What he has learned was not independent of forms.

I doubt that he would know what he knows now without exposure to forms.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I doubt that he would know what he knows now without exposure to forms.

We all need to contribute something to the MA that we love. Just to be a copy machine is not good enough.

I have developed several new training methods that my teacher didn't teach me before such as:

- Shin bite -> scoop -> sticky lift -> 45 degree sticky lift -> foot sweep
- Heel up to heel down spring -> heel down to heel up spring -> whole leg spring
- Use hook punch to set up ...
- Use uppercut to set up ...
- Rhino guard
- Double spears
- Chinese zombie guard
- Octopus strategy
- Running punch
- ...

I'm not satisfied to stay in just a good copy machine level.

 

[Orion Nebula]

It's kind of funny that you brought this up. One of my classmates is moving, so last week was his last week with us. So we did a bunch of stuff he wanted to work on. This included the kata Gojushiho Sho. The kata ends kind of abruptly in the middle of a repeated sequence. A student asked why the sequence wasn't completed before ending the kata, and our instructor jokingly said that they needed it to end in the same place it began.

Personally I like the idea of ending where you start. It helps to let me know that my stances and steps are consistent. Perhaps this is less important as you advance.

But first you have to read a bunch of research papers. And even after you write your own thesis, you should still be reading research papers. That's the part that he's talking about here, which is just as important as writing your own thesis (imagine writing one with having no idea what the foundational research was, or the appropriate language)

This guy understands academic research

It has everything to do with style. Because the Taekwondo forms were designed this way. The TKD training style is "you mirror it exactly as it was taught to you." During forms testing, the instructors will look at how close you followed the source material. During forms competitions, the judges will see how correct your form is, based on their learning of the form.

I'm not saying you can't use the forms in other ways in your own practice. But if you go to test Taegeuk #3 and your stances are wrong, or you change the form from what it originally was, you will fail your test.

Just a thought here about the competition comment. Forms seem to have some variation between schools, even within the same style. For example, I had trouble recalling part of Heian Nidan (the second Shotokan kata) after being taught it in class, so I looked it up on YouTube. There is a particular move in it that is done differently by different people. We also discussed the one fingered strikes in the beginning of Unsu. A lot of people strike downwards towards their knees, which makes no sense because what the heck are you striking at on your opponent? Apparently someone testing for their 3rd or 4th dan did it that way and got chewed out by the test people (I'm sure there's a proper term for them) and was told the correct way to strike was forwards. Yet in just about all competition videos I've seen, they strike down. So I feel like competition must be a little bit biased when it comes to judges using their own knowledge of the form, because they could potentially dock you for a variation they aren't familiar with. I also wonder if there is any bias in competition where many styles are present. If the form isn't done in your style, how do you know they didn't forget a move or substitute a technique?