George put this at the very end of an extremely long thread on David Elkins' forum. I tried responding, but it got onto the second page (the 41st post), and that gets a bit ridiculous. So I decided to re-post it here. I think it worthy of its own thread.
- Bill
*********************************
Just a quick note about the Sanchin stance. I recommend turning the heel of the front foot out no more than the width of your heel. This should be a very comfortable and mobile position, making for a very dynamic, yet flexible stance. (At least is feels that way to me!)
In my travels I notice teachers emphasizing a specific angle (30-45 degrees) which forces the student into a rigid and inflexible stance.
------------------
GEM
Sanchin specifications
Moderator: Available
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Sanchin specifications
George
Been meaning to chat with you about this (and Bruce Hirabayashi too). I was there with you in Germany when we saw the Regensburg folks with the extreme foot turn-in. You asked them what their concept was, and I believe it was Helmut who stated that the front foot should be turned in 45 degrees. That's when you showed them the foot-width method.
I didn't want to contradict you, particularly when your explanation was plenty good and it solved their problem. But actually if you look at Master Uechi's big doorstop book on Okinawan karate, he has diagrams in there that clearly show the 30 (and not 45) degree angle. I'll bet the same diagram is in The Big Blue Book of Shohei. Indeed the Regensburg people were off. Your method put them on track.
First I'm going to be a nitpicky engineer for just a few seconds. And then I'm going to bring up the possibilities of "variations on a theme."
If I take your method and apply extreme examples, this can be problematic. For example, I have long but narrow feet. An Okinawan may have short, wide feet. Your method is somewhat sensitive to the body type; the angle method is insensitive to that. Actually Alan Dollar has a very nice discussion in his book about the width of the heiko dachi (opening stance in sanchin) in his book. He talks about what is relevant for a short, wide Okinawan (shoulder width), and suggests that westerners may have to make minor adjustments.
I believe the real problem is that people don't have the angle right in the first place. The practical advantage to your method is that people can visualize a foot width, whereas they are not going to pull a protractor out to measure 30 degrees. But I'll bet if we found everyone's "sweet spot" in sanchin, it would correlate slightly higher with an angle (maybe not exactly 30 degrees) than with foot width. But...that's science and measurement, and not a quick dojo method for doing what should feel right.
Another point I wanted to make.... I'm sure you would agree with me that there can be variation of this turn-in based on what you want to accomplish. If you follow discusions between David M. and I on David Elkins' sanchin cross-training thread, you can extrapolate that you might turn the foot in less if you want to be mobile. But you may choose to turn it in more if you want to screw your feet into the ground and be immobile. You also may choose to turn the feet in more to create spring-tension that can be released in a kick or some other technique. Does that make sense? What do you think?
Thanks for the opportunity to chat about this.
- Bill
[This message has been edited by Bill Glasheen (edited February 10, 2000).]
Been meaning to chat with you about this (and Bruce Hirabayashi too). I was there with you in Germany when we saw the Regensburg folks with the extreme foot turn-in. You asked them what their concept was, and I believe it was Helmut who stated that the front foot should be turned in 45 degrees. That's when you showed them the foot-width method.
I didn't want to contradict you, particularly when your explanation was plenty good and it solved their problem. But actually if you look at Master Uechi's big doorstop book on Okinawan karate, he has diagrams in there that clearly show the 30 (and not 45) degree angle. I'll bet the same diagram is in The Big Blue Book of Shohei. Indeed the Regensburg people were off. Your method put them on track.
First I'm going to be a nitpicky engineer for just a few seconds. And then I'm going to bring up the possibilities of "variations on a theme."
If I take your method and apply extreme examples, this can be problematic. For example, I have long but narrow feet. An Okinawan may have short, wide feet. Your method is somewhat sensitive to the body type; the angle method is insensitive to that. Actually Alan Dollar has a very nice discussion in his book about the width of the heiko dachi (opening stance in sanchin) in his book. He talks about what is relevant for a short, wide Okinawan (shoulder width), and suggests that westerners may have to make minor adjustments.
I believe the real problem is that people don't have the angle right in the first place. The practical advantage to your method is that people can visualize a foot width, whereas they are not going to pull a protractor out to measure 30 degrees. But I'll bet if we found everyone's "sweet spot" in sanchin, it would correlate slightly higher with an angle (maybe not exactly 30 degrees) than with foot width. But...that's science and measurement, and not a quick dojo method for doing what should feel right.
Another point I wanted to make.... I'm sure you would agree with me that there can be variation of this turn-in based on what you want to accomplish. If you follow discusions between David M. and I on David Elkins' sanchin cross-training thread, you can extrapolate that you might turn the foot in less if you want to be mobile. But you may choose to turn it in more if you want to screw your feet into the ground and be immobile. You also may choose to turn the feet in more to create spring-tension that can be released in a kick or some other technique. Does that make sense? What do you think?
Thanks for the opportunity to chat about this.
- Bill
[This message has been edited by Bill Glasheen (edited February 10, 2000).]
-
gmattson
- Site Admin
- Posts: 6070
- Joined: Wed Sep 16, 1998 6:01 am
- Location: Lake Mary, Florida
- Contact:
Sanchin specifications
Bill:
When books are written about body positions, lots of rules are created that may be proven later to be simplistic. Check "The Way of Karate" for many examples of this!
Authors try to be helpful by focusing on mechanical atributes of a position rather than trying to relate to the reader how the position is supposed to [/]feel[/i] and how the position will help the reader accomplish an action.
By focusing on the mechanical elements of the position, teachers impart a very restricted life for this stance, block, etc..
When teaching, I now prefer to set up very general rules, prefering to allow the student to gradually settle into his/her personal postures.
Books and video tapes can only generalize. This is why, in Uechi-ryu, the instructor plays such an important role. The teacher should be sensitive to the student's makeup and will gradually adjust posture, stances and positions to compliment the individual's body makeup.
I have to smile while remembering the wonderful 60's, when I tried to make everyone's Sanchin look alike. Today many instructors understand that general positions must be adapted to the individual, not the other way around.
As the student advances, his/her posture, stance, etc will change. The teacher's role is to help the student discover his/her best overall body positions.
------------------
GEM
[This message has been edited by gmattson (edited February 13, 2000).]
When books are written about body positions, lots of rules are created that may be proven later to be simplistic. Check "The Way of Karate" for many examples of this!
Authors try to be helpful by focusing on mechanical atributes of a position rather than trying to relate to the reader how the position is supposed to [/]feel[/i] and how the position will help the reader accomplish an action.
By focusing on the mechanical elements of the position, teachers impart a very restricted life for this stance, block, etc..
When teaching, I now prefer to set up very general rules, prefering to allow the student to gradually settle into his/her personal postures.
Books and video tapes can only generalize. This is why, in Uechi-ryu, the instructor plays such an important role. The teacher should be sensitive to the student's makeup and will gradually adjust posture, stances and positions to compliment the individual's body makeup.
I have to smile while remembering the wonderful 60's, when I tried to make everyone's Sanchin look alike. Today many instructors understand that general positions must be adapted to the individual, not the other way around.
As the student advances, his/her posture, stance, etc will change. The teacher's role is to help the student discover his/her best overall body positions.
------------------
GEM
[This message has been edited by gmattson (edited February 13, 2000).]
-
gmattson
- Site Admin
- Posts: 6070
- Joined: Wed Sep 16, 1998 6:01 am
- Location: Lake Mary, Florida
- Contact:
Sanchin specifications
Added to my post and wanted to activate it in this forum. Any other comments?
------------------
GEM
------------------
GEM
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Sanchin specifications
George
Actually...yes.
First of all, I agree wholeheartedly with what you wrote.
But I would also like to investigate the possibility that there can be variability within individuals on how much you turn the heels out (turn the feet in) in sanchin. As the old TV ad says, Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't.... And I'm trying to investigate whether or not other individuals understand that one can intentionally vary this foot position, depending on what one wants to accomplish.
For instance, sometimes I have a size and/or strength and/or technique advantage on an opponent and I want to be hard. Then I might turn my heels out and dig into the ground, making myself immovable. I used to do that on occasion in my aikido class to stop someone from throwing me when I didn't want to be thrown. With my sanchin training, I was able to do this against just about everyone. Then other times I'm facing an extremely large or strong opponent and want to be very mobile. I might then choose to relax my torsion a bit so my stance is more light and mobile. Or I might want to make my stance more "alive" and have energy flow up and down my body and from technique to technique. Having a more relaxed torsion of the legs affords more elasticity and/or movement that can create some very interesting whole-body effects.
What do you (or anyone else) think?
- Bill
Actually...yes.
First of all, I agree wholeheartedly with what you wrote.
But I would also like to investigate the possibility that there can be variability within individuals on how much you turn the heels out (turn the feet in) in sanchin. As the old TV ad says, Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't.... And I'm trying to investigate whether or not other individuals understand that one can intentionally vary this foot position, depending on what one wants to accomplish.
For instance, sometimes I have a size and/or strength and/or technique advantage on an opponent and I want to be hard. Then I might turn my heels out and dig into the ground, making myself immovable. I used to do that on occasion in my aikido class to stop someone from throwing me when I didn't want to be thrown. With my sanchin training, I was able to do this against just about everyone. Then other times I'm facing an extremely large or strong opponent and want to be very mobile. I might then choose to relax my torsion a bit so my stance is more light and mobile. Or I might want to make my stance more "alive" and have energy flow up and down my body and from technique to technique. Having a more relaxed torsion of the legs affords more elasticity and/or movement that can create some very interesting whole-body effects.
What do you (or anyone else) think?
- Bill
-
gmattson
- Site Admin
- Posts: 6070
- Joined: Wed Sep 16, 1998 6:01 am
- Location: Lake Mary, Florida
- Contact:
Sanchin specifications
I agree that turning your heel outward would tend to contibute towards any overall tensing.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
In seminars, I'll often ask students to compare my "heel width" stance versus their usual stance under a couple of conditions:
1. A strong kick to the forward leg.
2. Attempting to move quickly to another position.
3. Attempting to kick using this front leg.
In all cases, students felt that the "heel width" stance worked best for them.
Students must work on their stances and use the one that is best for them. I don't recommend any formula that 'fits all'.
------------------
GEM
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
On the other hand, when I do this, the "hardness" is accompanied by a weakening of the joints in the foot, knee and hip. If you are 'hard' enough (read tought), this might not matter. But for the average person, I'd recommend striving always for the most mobile, strong stance possible while maintaining the best possible alignment of the leg."Then I might turn my heels out and dig into the ground, making myself immovable"
In seminars, I'll often ask students to compare my "heel width" stance versus their usual stance under a couple of conditions:
1. A strong kick to the forward leg.
2. Attempting to move quickly to another position.
3. Attempting to kick using this front leg.
In all cases, students felt that the "heel width" stance worked best for them.
Students must work on their stances and use the one that is best for them. I don't recommend any formula that 'fits all'.
------------------
GEM
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Sanchin specifications
George
I take it then that you personally have a fixed position (sweet spot) and don't like to vary it. Or am I wrong here?
- Bill
I take it then that you personally have a fixed position (sweet spot) and don't like to vary it. Or am I wrong here?
- Bill
Sanchin specifications
Well, as I'm still getting used to the foot positioning for sanchin, I haven't found how far I like to turn it yet. Of course everyone should turn as they 'feel' is right for them. While watching the senior students do sanchin, I noticed that it's about a 30 degree angle that they like in general.
Adam
The lowly white belt
Adam
The lowly white belt
-
gmattson
- Site Admin
- Posts: 6070
- Joined: Wed Sep 16, 1998 6:01 am
- Location: Lake Mary, Florida
- Contact:
Sanchin specifications
Bill: I guess my stance has sort of evolved into what is very comfortable and effective for me. I can't remember the last time I consciously thought about it!!
------------------
GEM
------------------
GEM
