Kenpojujitsu3 said:
The Tracy split occured during the "category completion era". None of the forms were ever just self-defense techniques put into a kata.
I am sure it was not "just" techs in a kata. I am sure more thought was put into it than just listing them out. Things like transitions and such, but I am quite sure the forms were developed using techniques that already existed, and not the other way around. I have seen people claim that the techniques were created from the forms, but I just don't believe that is true, and I'll explain why.
All the movements found in the forms #3 thru #5 (and some in #2 as well) which is as high as I have learned, are found in Tracys as distinct SD techs. Tracys claim that they have kept the techs and forms the same as Mr. Parker taught them in the early days. Tracys also state that in the early days there were no forms, only techs. I don't know the Tracys and I am not pushing anyones agenda, but all I can do at this point is accept their word for it.
A few years ago I watched a friend test for brown belt in John Sepulveda's school here in California. I was able to watch the candidates do all the forms up beyond #5. All the forms were very very similar to the Tracy version. There were some very minor differences, but they were certainly close enough to be considered the same form. So this tells me that this part of the curriculum has not undergone a substantial change since Tracys left.
The movements in the forms are very very specific, very stylized, and are done on both sides. The movements clearly had a very specific meaning and function. You cannot create a form with this kind of detail, without knowing what it is for and having a purpose for the movement. I find it impossible to believe that the forms were created first, and then SD techs were somehow extrapolated from the very specific movements in the forms. The very specific movements in the forms already existed as SD techs.
I have seen people argue the other way around for this. So far I have not seen any arguments that are convincing that it might have been done otherwise. What I have seen others state is, in my opinion, simply their opinion. But no believeable arguments to support such a claim.
Getting back to the original question in the thread: it is my belief that the first performance of the tech starts with feet together because this is the assumed position you will be in if you are surprise-attacked. If you don't know the attack is coming, you will be in an unguarded posture, probably feet together and hands unengaged in a defensive position. After the performance of the tech on the second side, I suspect you don't return feet together because it is a more fluid transition into the next tech of the form.
When you get a chance to ask your instructor I would be interested in hearing what he has to say.