How Critical Are Feet Placement??

[sensei8]

Is Kiba dachi [Horse Stance] the same as Kokutsu dachi [back Stance]??

No! Of course they're not. If they were the same, they'd not have different names, for example.

Laziness!?

Taught improperly!?

Thoughtlessness!?

Time and time again I would see Yudansha, of varying levels, forget the critical importance of feet placement in the proper execution of Kokutsu dachi. More to the point, the front/leading foot!!

The following diagrams, are noted with the leading left foot...

|

__

THIS, above, diagram, of the feet, is the exact prescribed methodology as to how ones feet must be placed at, for Kokutsu dachi, per Shindokan!!

/

__

/

/

THESE, above, diagrams, of the feet, are NOT the exact prescribed methodologies as to how the front/leading foot and/or the rear/trailing foot should be placed, per Shindokan!!

Nonetheless, the latter diagrams, are what I see the most, unfortunately.

An instructor can differ from the two stances, as far as the intent of the practitioner by the weight distribution, 30% in the front...70% in the rear, as necessary for an effective Kokutsu dachi.

Up and down drills are what I do in order to observe proper foot placement, no matter the technique/stances/etc.. Boy oh boy can you see it, even in the most seasoned practitioners...drives me literally crazy.

With ones feet out of its prescribed alignment, the practitioner suffers some of the following ailments:

*Imbalance

*Poor Body Shifting

*Affected transitions

*Poor Posture

To name just a few apples, albeit, those very few are enough to upset the apple cart!!

Some might ask, and many have asked..."What's the big deal...that's close enough...can't be exact all of the time!!"

To that I say...do it correct or don't do it at all!! Besides, if you can't do it right, all of the time, then you're not doing it at all...if ever!!

Drill out the mistakes; that's how mistakes are both avoided and corrected!!

[LLLEARNER]

Kokutsu Dachi is the same in Shotokan.

[JR 137]

I've been taught and always done both feet pointing straight ahead. At least I'm pretty sure that's what I was taught.

The biggest mistake I see, and of course I'm guilty of it myself is in kiba dachi. Both feet are supposed to point straight (straight in front of the knees), yet pretty much everyone has them turned out somewhat. Turned out is shiko dachi, aka sumo stance*.

*Why is sumo stance called shiko dachi rather than sumo dachi? As far as I know, sumo is a Japanese word, commonly used by Japanese people. It's not like we call it sumo while they call it shiko.

[mushybees]

*Why is sumo stance called shiko dachi rather than sumo dachi? As far as I know, sumo is a Japanese word, commonly used by Japanese people. It's not like we call it sumo while they call it shiko.

I suppose because the stance didn't originate in sumo. I don't think sumo wrestlers would be happy if we renamed it karate stance

[Wastelander]

We don't have kokutsu-dachi in Shorinkan, although it is part of KishimotoDi--the back foot is pointed to the 45, rather than straight to the side as you describe, however. That being said, I am hardly an authority on that stance, in particular.

From a general perspective, I would say that foot placement/alignment is very important...to a point. People like to say that humans are all built the same way, so the body works the same way, but that's not the case. People have bones of different lengths, joints aligned at different angles, varying degrees of flexibility, etc. With that in mind, I tend to reject the rigid "this foot must be pointed at this exact angle, as measured along this line" approach. If the feet are aligned in such a way that they accomplish what the stance is intended to do, and not compromising structure, then it is a successful stance. This will almost always mean that the feet are generally pointed where they should be, of course, but there are going to be degrees of variance, and that's okay if the stance isn't compromised, at least from my perspective.

As far as shiko-dachi's name, "shiko" is the name of the stomping (done from that stance) that sumo rikishi do at the corners of the dohyo before a match.

[JR 137]

As far as shiko-dachi's name, "shiko" is the name of the stomping (done from that stance) that sumo rikishi do at the corners of the dohyo before a match.

I love it. Thanks, Noah. Made my day.

And I completely agree with the rest of your post as well.

[DWx]

Funny how things differ...

Kokutsu dachi is equivalent to Niunja sogi in Chang Hon (ITF) TKD. We must turn our feet about 15 degrees to gain some torque in the legs and grip the floor.

Kiba dachi = Annun sogi and for this feet must be parallel

[sensei8]

We don't have kokutsu-dachi in Shorinkan, although it is part of KishimotoDi--the back foot is pointed to the 45, rather than straight to the side as you describe, however. That being said, I am hardly an authority on that stance, in particular.

From a general perspective, I would say that foot placement/alignment is very important...to a point. People like to say that humans are all built the same way, so the body works the same way, but that's not the case. People have bones of different lengths, joints aligned at different angles, varying degrees of flexibility, etc. With that in mind, I tend to reject the rigid "this foot must be pointed at this exact angle, as measured along this line" approach. If the feet are aligned in such a way that they accomplish what the stance is intended to do, and not compromising structure, then it is a successful stance. This will almost always mean that the feet are generally pointed where they should be, of course, but there are going to be degrees of variance, and that's okay if the stance isn't compromised, at least from my perspective.

As far as shiko-dachi's name, "shiko" is the name of the stomping (done from that stance) that sumo rikishi do at the corners of the dohyo before a match.

How is the stance NOT compromised if the feet aren't where they're suppose to be per that styles methodology/ideology??

Any degree of compromise affects balance, for example, therefore, effectiveness is affected as well.

For that, I am that rigid, because either the stance is correct or it isn't. And if it wasn't important, than why was Soke and/or Dai-Soke that adamant about correct feet placement??

I tell my own students...seeing that you've been instructed/taught correctly, and consistently, in which you've chosen to not execute said technique and the like in the manner of which it's been prescribed, then I must conduce that you're either being lazy and/or your being thoughtlessness in its proper application.

But, that's just me!!

[Wastelander]

How is the stance NOT compromised if the feet aren't where they're suppose to be per that styles methodology/ideology??

Any degree of compromise affects balance, for example, therefore, effectiveness is affected as well.

For that, I am that rigid, because either the stance is correct or it isn't. And if it wasn't important, than why was Soke and/or Dai-Soke that adamant about correct feet placement??

I tell my own students...seeing that you've been instructed/taught correctly, and consistently, in which you've chosen to not execute said technique and the like in the manner of which it's been prescribed, then I must conduce that you're either being lazy and/or your being thoughtlessness in its proper application.

But, that's just me!!

It can be compromised based on the ideal of "perfect" for the style, and still be functional, based on the build of the karateka. Personally, I am MUCH more concerned with function than style purity/perfection. Indeed, I am not the only one, as even Nakazato Minoru Sensei accepts such variances in the style, as it should fit the practitioner. He once said, when someone asked him about a small variance between how two of the senior Okinawans did a technique: "Little things not so important. Big picture important." Just a difference in approach.

[sensei8]

It can be compromised based on the ideal of "perfect" for the style, and still be functional, based on the build of the karateka. Personally, I am MUCH more concerned with function than style purity/perfection. Indeed, I am not the only one, as even Nakazato Minoru Sensei accepts such variances in the style, as it should fit the practitioner. He once said, when someone asked him about a small variance between how two of the senior Okinawans did a technique: "Little things not so important. Big picture important." Just a difference in approach.

I'm not concerned with style purity/perfection either, and I'm more concerned with function/effectiveness, as well. I was taught one way, and that one way eliminates any degree of impropriety within said technique(s).

I've discovered how one way avoids that technique being tainted, and I agree with Nakazato Minoru Sensei..."Little things not so important. Big picture important."...akin to the one can't see the forest because of all of the trees. Yet, I can't shake as to why Soke and Dai-Soke were that adamant about the little things.

Yes, just a difference in approach.