What does your Neutral Bow look like?

[JamesB]

OK here's a quick poll to see how much variation there is out there in the way people form a Neutral-Bow.

Please look at the image below before voting! Note that the red lines represent the familar 12-6 and 9-3 lines. The oblong shape represents the alignment of the body.

So looking at the picture now, there seems to be three basic variations on the Neutral-Bow:

A. Horse Stance facing roughly 9.30 / 10.00 O'Clock
B. Feet angled to 45 degrees (i.e to 10.30)
C. Feet and body angled to 45 degrees

So please use the polling options above to vote for the way you train/teach the Neutral-Bow.

 

[Ray]

OK here's a quick poll to see how much variation there is out there in the way people form a Neutral-Bow.

Maybe it would be a good idea to use the diagrams in Infinite Insights? Just because there's a lot of variation doesn't mean it should be decided by popular vote?

 

[Blindside]

Who is deciding anything? This is a "what do YOU use" not what Jim Mitchell uses.

Lamont

 

[JamesB]

Maybe it would be a good idea to use the diagrams in Infinite Insights? Just because there's a lot of variation doesn't mean it should be decided by popular vote?

It was because of the variation that I felt it would be interesting to see how people actually practice their kenpo, rather than how they read it should be in a book. Also from reading about the history of Kenpo, it seems Infinite Insights represents a particular era in Kenpo so it would be good to see a broader spectrum this way.

Also, any strong opinions either way regarding 'horse-stance' vs 'feet at 45' ? There are benefits to both methods depending on how you define 'better' - i.e. which is more prevalent, which stance is stronger, which is more manouvarable, which is easier to teach to a beginner etc.

 

[Ross]

It was because of the variation that I felt it would be interesting to see how people actually practice their kenpo, rather than how they read it should be in a book. Also from reading about the history of Kenpo, it seems Infinite Insights represents a particular era in Kenpo so it would be good to see a broader spectrum this way.

Also, any strong opinions either way regarding 'horse-stance' vs 'feet at 45' ? There are benefits to both methods depending on how you define 'better' - i.e. which is more prevalent, which stance is stronger, which is more manouvarable, which is easier to teach to a beginner etc.

Hi James,

You know mine - A.

Good idea about starting this thread, as it was getting a bit specific on the Basic one.

BTW did Locking Horns the other night - makes much more sense now and, man alive is it awesome! Not an easy one though!

 

[Doc]

Who is deciding anything? This is a "what do YOU use" not what Jim Mitchell uses.

Lamont

Oh that was a good one. The stances in general as displayed in Infinite Insights are flawed and were not to Mr. Parker's liking. Drawings yes, pictures no.

 

[Doc]

It was because of the variation that I felt it would be interesting to see how people actually practice their kenpo, rather than how they read it should be in a book. Also from reading about the history of Kenpo, it seems Infinite Insights represents a particular era in Kenpo so it would be good to see a broader spectrum this way.

Also, any strong opinions either way regarding 'horse-stance' vs 'feet at 45' ? There are benefits to both methods depending on how you define 'better' - i.e. which is more prevalent, which stance is stronger, which is more manouvarable, which is easier to teach to a beginner etc.

I define it by anatomical perameters, not personal preferences as admittedly, motion based Kenpo allows. Therefore "A" is absolutely correct, and anything else is 'anatomically flawed' and contrary to proper body mechanics.

 

[Shortay]

I'm with Ross and Dad on this one.

xx

 

[Ross]

I'm with Ross and Dad on this one.

xx

Lol!

Hello Hun! xx

 

[Kenpobuff]

Oh that was a good one. The stances in general as displayed in Infinite Insights are flawed and were not to Mr. Parker's liking. Drawings yes, pictures no.

Why would Mr. Parker use a visual reference and put it in his book that would describe his system if he didn't like it?


Or was this one of those "intentional mistakes" I've heard rumor about to see who learned from a book and who learned from an instructor?

 

[Kenpodoc]

I define it by anatomical perameters, not personal preferences as admittedly, motion based Kenpo allows. Therefore "A" is absolutely correct, and anything else is 'anatomically flawed' and contrary to proper body mechanics.

C is the definition in Infinite insights. Doc, I take it that your neutral bow is a slightly off angled horse stance. Are the insides of your feet parallel to each other or the outsides parallel (slightly toed in)?

 

[JamesB]

I define it by anatomical perameters, not personal preferences as admittedly, motion based Kenpo allows. Therefore "A" is absolutely correct, and anything else is 'anatomically flawed' and contrary to proper body mechanics.

yes this is my understanding and is how Mr Mills has taught me to look at my posture and alignment. There seems to be two perspectives in Kenpo when it comes to stances (and posture etc) - basing everything on external reference points such as "point your feet over there", and a self-relative "internal" perspective where everything is relative to one's own body physics. I much prefer the latter perspective and find it much easier to understand what I should be doing. That being the case, *why* does the former (external) method exist?

Why would Mr. Parker use a visual reference and put it in his book that would describe his system if he didn't like it?

Or was this one of those "intentional mistakes" I've heard rumor about to see who learned from a book and who learned from an instructor?

I was hoping somebody would ask this question as I am now wondering the same thing. When I posted this poll I first checked my Infinite Insights as I wasn't certain whether or not there was an explicit statement in those books as to how the feet should be aligned - but there in black+white it says "feet should be 45".

So the Golden Question is - what motivated Mr Parker to deliberately describe the neutral-bow this way? Also am I right in thinking that the Infinite Insights corresponds to the 'Motion' kenpo era?

Mr Parker would certainly of had discussions with his students and peers about this topic - presumably the "feet at 45" was deemed easier to teach+describe from a book and gave a rough idea as to how the stances should be - leaving it up to the instructor to give the finer details.

There can only be one 'correct' Neutral Bow, but the poll so far indicates that there is a 50-50 split between 'Horse vs 45'. It amazes me that even within the same art of Kenpo there is no agreement as to how to achieve this fundamental posture - even with authorities on the subject giving clear statements as to which is the desirable method.

Are the insides of your feet parallel to each other or the outsides parallel (slightly toed in)?

I was hoping to convey this idea in the diagram but didn't quite succeed. The arrows on diagram 'A' are drawn from the outside of the feet and should be parallel, resulting in a 'toe-in', 'heel-out' stance.

 

[Touch Of Death]

I vote for none of the above because your last option included confusion. I know why I put my feet the way I do.
Sean

 

[JamesB]

I vote for none of the above because your last option included confusion. I know why I put my feet the way I do.
Sean

well I struggled to think of any other variations on this stance and wanted to keep the diagram+poll simple. So, I would be interested in hearing what your thoughts were on this topic?

 

[Touch Of Death]

well I struggled to think of any other variations on this stance and wanted to keep the diagram+poll simple. So, I would be interested in hearing what your thoughts were on this topic?

We play with the angle on the back foot. So we can launch in the direction of our opponent. It a bit quicker yet less stable. Its a trade off.
Sean

 

[JamesB]

We play with the angle on the back foot. So we can launch in the direction of our opponent. It a bit quicker yet less stable. Its a trade off.
Sean

thanks, I understand this - you're right I should have included a poll option for 'none of the above' ah well, too late now, unless a Moderator can change this for me?

 

[HKphooey]

I define it by anatomical perameters, not personal preferences as admittedly, motion based Kenpo allows. Therefore "A" is absolutely correct, and anything else is 'anatomically flawed' and contrary to proper body mechanics.

Not sure if this is saying the same thing...
Personal preference, in most case, is antacomically correct (hence the word personal). I base my stance on the size of my body. That in itself is personal preference. I was always taught the proper foot placement, was established by rear heel sliding up to front toes (small gap) and Droping my right knee to the ground just behind my front heel for proper spacing. When all is said and done, I should be able to execute front and rear twists, rear leg front kicks, cat stances etc. without my own legs getting int the way. So "A" looks the closest.

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Crap. Decades in this stuff, and I still gots to fix my feet.

 

[Doc]

I'm with Ross and Dad on this one.

xx

My duaghter agrees with me therefore I consider the matter closed.

XXXX

 

[Doc]

Not sure if this is saying the same thing...
Personal preference, in most case, is antacomically correct (hence the word personal). I base my stance on the size of my body. That in itself is personal preference. I was always taught the proper foot placement, was established by rear heel sliding up to front toes (small gap) and Droping my right knee to the ground just behind my front heel for proper spacing. When all is said and done, I should be able to execute front and rear twists, rear leg front kicks, cat stances etc. without my own legs getting int the way. So "A" looks the closest.

No that would be incorrect. You must be taught proper mechanics and posture which can conflict with personal preferences. Additionally sir, the base phyical specifications of a neutral bow have nothing to do with the size of your body. Only 'depth' may be 'adjusted' without affecting these base specs, and this is true of all stances in bi-pedal anatomical postures.