Yoo Sin #s15-19

Discussion in 'Tae Kwon Do' started by Earl Weiss, Jan 16, 2015.

  1. Earl Weiss

    Earl Weiss Valued Member

    Non Chang Hon people can stop reading now:)

    Yoo Sin 15 -19.

    Premise. If you are in a sitting stance and pivot on the balls of the feet you can pivot to a proper walking stance. The foot that would become the lead foot would pivot 45 degrees and the rear foot would pivot at least 20 degrees to reach the no more than 25 degree angle. Pivoting more than this on the lead foot with the accompanying greater pivot of the rear foot would result in the walking stance being too narrow.

    Is the above correct or not?

    Now, taking this into account we have:

    #15 Sitting stance to BD
    #16 Walking stance to BC
    Foot diagram with single photo shows left foot may have been moved and not just pivot.
    Foot diagram below photo series may show just a pivot or it may not.
    #17 Sitting Stance to BD
    Foot diagram with single photo may show a slight repositioning of right foot - may not.
    Foot diagram with series of photos seems to show pivot but could also show left foot change.
    #18 Walking stance to AD
    Foot diagram with single photo seems to show slight relocation of right foot and pivot with the left.
    Foot diagram with series of photos also may show slight right foot re position.

    Now, this most definitely seems to be an example of angles where the #s 16 & 18 BC / AD directions are not half way between B&C / A&D . They are just slightly to C / A.

    So, the questions are:

    Is the above premise correct vis a vis Mac 45 degree pivot from sitting to walking stance for a correct Walking stance?
    For moves 15-18 is it pivot only (And if so and you agree with the premise how is the issue of a greater than 45 degree pivot resolved?
    Or
    Is a foot relocated during the transitions? If so what is / are the repositions.

    Yes I need to get a life.
     
  2. TheMadhoose

    TheMadhoose Carpe Jugulum

    when i did a seminar with GM Paul Cutler he advised that the photos are always a basic guide and the written text always overrides the photograph as perspective in the photos can be misleading.
     
  3. Earl Weiss

    Earl Weiss Valued Member

    Kudos to GM Cutler for knowing and teaching exactly what the text says vis a vis photos not being the determining factor. (Kudos also to you as a student for remebering this).

    So, the issue remains vis a vis what the text says about directions for technique / stances and whether or not it's impossible to follow the text with only a pivot and effect good stances to the stipulated directions.
     
  4. TheMadhoose

    TheMadhoose Carpe Jugulum

    From my own perspective if we take BC and AD to represent a nonspecific angle on this axis we can allow for a bigger scope in application, as variations in body frames and a non standard body shape worldwide makes the text difficult to follow as carved in stone. A session I did with GM Hectar Marano he stated that a person who is short and rotund and a person who is tall and slim cannot possibly put their stances equally within the given dimensions.
     
  5. TKDstudent

    TKDstudent Valued Member

    Just to throw something else into the mix: A Diagonal Stance is for the purpose transitioning into a proper Walking Stance
     
  6. TheMadhoose

    TheMadhoose Carpe Jugulum

    Unless you're performing Juche then it's followed by rear foot stance ;-)
     
  7. Earl Weiss

    Earl Weiss Valued Member

    FWIW Volume II says it's useful. There are many more examples of a transition from Sitting to walking stance in the patern system.
     
  8. Earl Weiss

    Earl Weiss Valued Member

    Hai=ving been to a couple of IICs with GM Marano I know your recollection is accurate, however the point of my post seems to be overlooked.

    As per instructions in this pattern you would need to be in a sitting stance and pivot more than 45 degrees to form a walking stance to the specified directions.

    Point being...IMO being in a sitting stance by any average individual and pivoting more than 45 degrees would result in a Waliking stance that is too narrow.

    Agee or disagree?
     
  9. TheMadhoose

    TheMadhoose Carpe Jugulum

    i get your point but i think the pivoting into a proper stance should outweigh trying to find specific angles. There seems to be a flexible approach to some techniques which are denied others in order to bolster ideals on "correctness".....have you thought of asking FGMR on the "this is tkd" facebook page? As GM Marano says make the book your starting point and refine your technique if its not as the founder would have said "natural"
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2015
  10. StuartA

    StuartA Guardian of real TKD :-)

    This is why I dislike the A, B, C method that Gen Choi used in his pattern diagrams, as sometimes they seem 'too exact' and other times 'not exact enough'.

    FWIW.. I was taught to simply pivot from the sitting stance, 45 degree's to a '45 degree walking stance'.... I would bet, if you measured foot angles, width etc. it isnt the same as a walking stance... but seems to work just fine for me!

    Personally, i think there's a bit too much pinicketty stuff involved in stance work, which while they should be 'decent', for what is only in reality a split second thing, can sometimes go overboard!

    Stuart
     

Share This Page