Is ball of the foot roundhouse outdated with modern shoes?

[Earl Weiss100]

InfiniteLoop said:
"This is a variation of the reverse turning kick". That's what it says.

Again - what does that have to do with your ITF being a disjointed mess comment?

 

[InfiniteLoop]

Sir, no - the reason is because h is using terms generically, is because he is addressing a general audience and using the kick generically for sparring as opposed to following any technical parameters.

If you don't know what a disjointed mess is ............. I will let others finish the sentence.

He is not using generic language, he says "ITF calls it reverse turning kick," , when he in fact throws reverse hooks.

 

[Earl Weiss100]

He is not using generic language, he says "ITF calls it reverse turning kick," , when he in fact throws reverse hooks.

Irrespective of what he says - If he said it. (Please provide Time stamp for what he purportedly said and what you claim he did. ) The text is clear and you are in error. vis a vis being 2 types of reverse turning kick.

And I ask again what does any of this have to do with your statement of the ITF being a disjointed mess?

 

[Earl Weiss100]

He is not using generic language, he says "ITF calls it reverse turning kick," , when he in fact throws reverse hooks.

Sir, it's unfortunate that you find confusion where none exists. Patterns and classical fundamental exercises have certain technical parameters whether it is punching while pulling your hand to the hip or any number of other things. Sadly you seem to find the fact that techniques are adapted for sparring, self defense, breaking or any number of things a source of confusion. Perhaps you will find an instructor who can enlighten you since I most definitely have not been able to .

 

[InfiniteLoop]

Sir, it's unfortunate that you find confusion where none exists. Patterns and classical fundamental exercises have certain technical parameters whether it is punching while pulling your hand to the hip or any number of other things. Sadly you seem to find the fact that techniques are adapted for sparring, self defense, breaking or any number of things a source of confusion. Perhaps you will find an instructor who can enlighten you since I most definitely have not been able to .

That has nothing to do with this. If my instructor in ITF says it's reverse turning kick time, you damn well know he means straight legged.

 

[Earl Weiss100]

That has nothing to do with this. If my instructor in ITF says it's reverse turning kick time, you damn well know he means straight legged.

Of course, seems your instructor is not confused at all.

 

[InfiniteLoop]

Of course, seems your instructor is not confused at all.

No but General Choi was naming it reverse turning kick....

 

[Earl Weiss100]

No but General Choi was naming it reverse turning kick....

I have no idea what your point is.

 

[InfiniteLoop]

I have no idea what your point is.

The only way reverse turning kick would be an actual reverse turning kick would be if taekwondo roundhouse kicks were unchambered. Choi confused, as was often the case

 

[Earl Weiss100]

The only way reverse turning kick would be an actual reverse turning kick would be if taekwondo roundhouse kicks were unchambered. Choi confused, as was often the case

You are getting your knickers in a twist over "Semantics" / technique names. Heck you then have plenty to get upset about . The "U Shape" Block and grab looks more like a "C" - just ask the Village People. The "Turning" / "Reverse Turning" follows the Knifehand / reverse Knifehand, Footsword / reverse Footsword Naming convention. Is the "Walking stance really how you walk? Is a "Mountain block" in other systems in case you get attacked by a mountain? The confusion is yours alone.

 

[dvcochran]

The only way reverse turning kick would be an actual reverse turning kick would be if taekwondo roundhouse kicks were unchambered. Choi confused, as was often the case

So now you are smarter than General Choi. All I can say is "here's your sign".

General Choi was fastidious with details and identification. Maybe to a fault in some instances but it has worked well for decades.

A classless line you have crossed here. To question is one thing (we all should do that); but you have arbitrarily claimed knowledge superiority. Dude.