What I'd posted on KT:
For my part, I treat it as an exaggerated step, much like I do with a front kick. What determines a front kick or roundhouse depends on the time I launch it in the rotational process. To exemplify the notion of "a kick is an exaggerated step", just throw an occasional front kick while walking normally, not allowing the kick to disrupt your pace one iota. For a round house, change course to a 45 and launch the kick to 12:00, once again not disrupting your pace.
Transferring this to the process of rotating (specifically, the NB - Twist - NB sequence), my front kick launches when my hips are parallel, my round house launches when the rear hip reaches the forward 45 degree angle. Both are still just extensions of the step, so the acceleration of the mass through the stance transition is what's really doing the hitting. Like a punch, the leg launches an aligned weapon off of an already accelerating body.
(
KenpoTalk post)
As an addendum, my front kick launches when my hips are on the 9:00 / 3:00 line and make contact when they reach the 7:30 / 1:30 line. The round house launches hair later, when the hips reach the 7:30 / 1:30 line. I'm chewing on Doc's advice about the rolling of the pelvic girdle.
When I teach kicking to beginning students, they first learn a front kick from a square horse just to understand weapon formation, leg alignment, and timing. I then have them simply walk (slowly, at first) and pay attention to the rhythm of the feet - thump..thump...thump...thump. These form quarter notes, and the kick must be inserted in full between two beats as an eigth note, without disrupting the rhythm. Later, we apply this lesson to the stance transitions, again requiring the kick to be inserted between discrete actions within the stance transition. Only when there is no disruption in their stance transition do I know their kick is truly an exaggeration of a step. (and, being a closet musician, I pay close attention to the rhythm
)
This type of kicking isn't pretty, but it is hella effective. I recall my teacher explaining Ed Parker once demonstrating kicking behind a half-wall of some sort that was in his school. You could only see his upper body behind the wall. You couldn't tell if he was kicking or not, he just moved along smoothly as if walking. The most significant aspect of this method of kicking, I believe, is that it doesn't create a hiccup in the forward acceleration of the body, you literally walk (or run) through the guy with your stance work, the kick being an exaggeration of the step.
As with anything, the power and effectivness is platformed on stance transitions and the mechanical structure to support the strike during those transitions.
Cheers
Steven Brown
