High Kicks

Training
41

[quote]otoko wrote:
capoeiraguy wrote:
HunterKiller wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
@hunterkiller you’re joking, right?
Keep in mind kicking against a bag doesn’t necessarily represent your actual technique.
Crocop for example decapitates his victims differently then with the hick he utilzes in the vid.

Also someone else mentioned that I was insane or trolling or something. I was comparing them to roundhouse kicks, which is a different kick that involves turning of the hips and keeping the foot planted (unless I have learned wrong).

In the event that I am wrong go ahead and call me stupid and I wont bring up kicking on this forum again.

Man…if you don’t rotate your base foot doing round kicks, you’re going to destroy your knee one day…

There are guys from karate backgrounds and some european kickboxing gyms who plant their foot when throwing low kicks and middle kicks. The degree to which they rotate is usually less than what a muay thai guy would deem correct.

I think you are right in general about the knee issue. Though there are some exceptions out there.
[/quote]

Those are exactly the guys I usually see doing that…besides newbies that dont know any better. I’ve seen some kick without rotating at all…makes me wince haha

42

[quote]otoko wrote:
JonnyTMT wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Let’s not kid around here anymore, practically every roundhouse kick relies on rotation, and that is done on the ball of the foot. You may not see it always, cause it’s often just a slight balancing issue.
There are some exceptions like the one otoko mentioned, but these are more spontanous improvisations.
I.e. a guy practicing his “brazilian kick” against pads will have most (80%+) of his weight balanced on the ball of his standing foot.

Also: You can front kick with your supporting foot flat on the ground, but that’s not recommended, especially with high front kicks.

Sorry dude, but for front kicks (teeps), your supporting foot should be flat on the ground and ideally pointing in a 90 degree angle to the side. This gives you a solid base so you can push forward with the hips.

For a teep that is right.

I am not sure exactly what Schawarzfahrer is referring to but it might not be a teep. Like a front kick from the back leg to someones face.

Though this discussion is giving me flashbacks of a thread I read a while back on another forum. Somebody posted that Mirko’s body kick was weak because he didn’t throw it Thai style. I do think that the muay thai style probably generates the most power in general. Though there are guys who are effective and hard kickers who don’t throw them that way. I can throw both ways. Probably the thai way is more intuitive for the majority of people. And as mentioned less wear on the knees.

[/quote]

I agree the thai style has a hell of a lot of power. I’ve never been able to train in it formally unfortunately. All of my kicking training has come from training and competing in olympic taekwondo. We usually get a bad rap because it looks like our kicks dont have any power…but trust me they do and they hurt haha The kicking technique has changed a lot in the past 10 years, for the better I think…

43

I was thinking about this while I was training the other night.

For sparring, I will almost always be on the ball of my foot when I kick. I am going for speed over power.

But doing board breaking, my supporting foot will be on the floor (but I bet if you did one of those pressure sensor tests, most of my weight would still be on the ball of my foot).
The boards don’t move, or fight back like a person-though according to the laws of physics they do-so you don’t need to be able quickly change the direction of your kick if the person moves.
So, for power, perhaps you need to have your foot planted on the floor, so you can kick through the resistance of the board. But sparring you need to be able to move more, so you sacrifice a little power to get more agility?

44

[quote]cfwhite wrote:
I was thinking about this while I was training the other night.

For sparring, I will almost always be on the ball of my foot when I kick. I am going for speed over power.

But doing board breaking, my supporting foot will be on the floor (but I bet if you did one of those pressure sensor tests, most of my weight would still be on the ball of my foot).
The boards don’t move, or fight back like a person-though according to the laws of physics they do-so you don’t need to be able quickly change the direction of your kick if the person moves.
So, for power, perhaps you need to have your foot planted on the floor, so you can kick through the resistance of the board. But sparring you need to be able to move more, so you sacrifice a little power to get more agility?[/quote]

That is a true observation…and that is where taekwondo kicking technique has been shifted to. We use a much tighter chamber with all kicks (which also helps to not telegraph as much) and we shift our hip into the kick at the last second…which in the end gives us more speed and leeway to change kicks, throw multiple kicks or to not kick at all if our opponent moves out of range. My instructor/coach would always yell “running motion!!” at training…thats what our kicks look most like now.

It is a slight trade off power wise on some kicks (ie round kicks) but I think on spinning kicks it actually helps retain power…

I personally think bigger guys like me can generate around the same amount of power as a thai style kick. Im not really losing power since my mass is great…or I’m at least regenerating lost power by increasing the speed.

45

When you kick, whatever the kick, the power is generated from the floor up, not from the air down.

Your foot being planted or on the toes will depend on the kick as others have already pointed out.

Depending on the movement, the foot is obviously at a better position to transmit the most force and be as efficient as possible for the rest of the body from a biomechanical and physiological point of view.

For the purpose of the initial post ie roundhouse kicking, up on toes wins hands down from all aspects.

46

I find that spinning kicks get their power from the momentum generated, because your leg travels a greater distance, and has more time to generate speed.

Humble, how would you describe the power generated in a flying/jumping kick? Or an axe kick, since it travels downwards?

47

[quote]cfwhite wrote:
I find that spinning kicks get their power from the momentum generated, because your leg travels a greater distance, and has more time to generate speed.

Humble, how would you describe the power generated in a flying/jumping kick? Or an axe kick, since it travels downwards?[/quote]

Hey cfwhite,

This is true, momentum does help with the spinning kicks but the power is still generated from the floor up. If your feet aren’t positioned correctly when you turn, your hips wont be in a position to be so momentumous (if there is such a word).

Likewise for the jumping roundhouse, jumping front kick etc. Initial take off point and where your foot is, is important so that your body doesn’t have to work in mid air in changing position, which is power lost.

Axe kick would also be dependent on foot position which translates over to the rest of the body position. Power is still generated from the floor up. It can’t be any other way. What allows you to raise your leg and then contract all the muscles in the downward phase of the axe kick is a stable and proper base. Try do an axe kick jumping… doesn’t work.

As for flying side kicks etc, you’re never going to do the same damage you can do to someone whilst planted on the ground. Sure you may launch them but this is just your weight travelling at speed with what power you can generate mid air which is again dependent on the speed you can generate and maintain in air from your take off.
It’s like comparing open chain kinetic exercises to closed chain kinetic exercises. A knee extension will never generate more power than a squat through the quadriceps.

48

Me knocking out a roid muncher.

49

this guy has terrible form, he has a big sweeping motion with his leg and he also kicks flat footed.

50

[quote]rlittle0016 wrote:
this guy has terrible form, he has a big sweeping motion with his leg and he also kicks flat footed.[/quote]

I agree, totally nonfunctional KTFO

51

[quote]otoko wrote:
JonnyTMT wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Let’s not kid around here anymore, practically every roundhouse kick relies on rotation, and that is done on the ball of the foot. You may not see it always, cause it’s often just a slight balancing issue.
There are some exceptions like the one otoko mentioned, but these are more spontanous improvisations.
I.e. a guy practicing his “brazilian kick” against pads will have most (80%+) of his weight balanced on the ball of his standing foot.

Also: You can front kick with your supporting foot flat on the ground, but that’s not recommended, especially with high front kicks.

Sorry dude, but for front kicks (teeps), your supporting foot should be flat on the ground and ideally pointing in a 90 degree angle to the side. This gives you a solid base so you can push forward with the hips.

For a teep that is right.

I am not sure exactly what Schawarzfahrer is referring to but it might not be a teep. Like a front kick from the back leg to someones face.

Though this discussion is giving me flashbacks of a thread I read a while back on another forum. Somebody posted that Mirko’s body kick was weak because he didn’t throw it Thai style. I do think that the muay thai style probably generates the most power in general. Though there are guys who are effective and hard kickers who don’t throw them that way. I can throw both ways. Probably the thai way is more intuitive for the majority of people. And as mentioned less wear on the knees.
[/quote]
I agree with JohnnyTMT, front kick/push kick both require the fighter’s supporting foot to be planted on the ground. This is especially best for a push kick because it has more power as you push your hips into your leg as you drive it forward. I actually find it easier to get my kick higher with my foot firmly on the ground.

High roundhouses with a flat foot can generate power, though you don’t see someone throwing flat footed kicks too often in a match. Speed decreases because your hips and leg move at different speeds, kind of like in boxing when dudes throw from their arms/shoulders and not use twisting power of their hips and torso to generate power with speed. Flat footed kicks seem to kick up and against the target instead of around and ‘through’ (with the hips turning over) while on the balls of your feet.

52

[quote]rlittle0016 wrote:
this guy has terrible form, he has a big sweeping motion with his leg and he also kicks flat footed.[/quote]

who Alain?

53

[quote]AquilaV wrote:
otoko wrote:
JonnyTMT wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Let’s not kid around here anymore, practically every roundhouse kick relies on rotation, and that is done on the ball of the foot. You may not see it always, cause it’s often just a slight balancing issue.
There are some exceptions like the one otoko mentioned, but these are more spontanous improvisations.
I.e. a guy practicing his “brazilian kick” against pads will have most (80%+) of his weight balanced on the ball of his standing foot.

Also: You can front kick with your supporting foot flat on the ground, but that’s not recommended, especially with high front kicks.

Sorry dude, but for front kicks (teeps), your supporting foot should be flat on the ground and ideally pointing in a 90 degree angle to the side. This gives you a solid base so you can push forward with the hips.

For a teep that is right.

I am not sure exactly what Schawarzfahrer is referring to but it might not be a teep. Like a front kick from the back leg to someones face.

Though this discussion is giving me flashbacks of a thread I read a while back on another forum. Somebody posted that Mirko’s body kick was weak because he didn’t throw it Thai style. I do think that the muay thai style probably generates the most power in general. Though there are guys who are effective and hard kickers who don’t throw them that way. I can throw both ways. Probably the thai way is more intuitive for the majority of people. And as mentioned less wear on the knees.

I agree with JohnnyTMT, front kick/push kick both require the fighter’s supporting foot to be planted on the ground. This is especially best for a push kick because it has more power as you push your hips into your leg as you drive it forward. I actually find it easier to get my kick higher with my foot firmly on the ground.

High roundhouses with a flat foot can generate power, though you don’t see someone throwing flat footed kicks too often in a match. Speed decreases because your hips and leg move at different speeds, kind of like in boxing when dudes throw from their arms/shoulders and not use twisting power of their hips and torso to generate power with speed. Flat footed kicks seem to kick up and against the target instead of around and ‘through’ (with the hips turning over) while on the balls of your feet.
[/quote]

I don’t disagree with Johnny. I agree a teep is thrown that way.

I don’t personally know of anybody throwing high roundhouses flat-footed. For roundhouse kicks to the body though it is not uncommon to see guys flat footed or close to it.

Thai style is like you said through and turning over.

For a guy like Mirko or an Andy Hug. They plant, their hips open but the hips close extremely quickly. They generate speed that way. I do think that because of the initial phase(planting) it is not as quick as the thai style. Though a guy like Mirko accelerates his kick extremely quickly. I think it has to be thought about part of a system though. The stylistic differences between muay thai and say a european kickboxer or Dutch kickboxer. Some guys plant their body kicks or do not turn their hips over. But they also might throw more in combination and not kick an opponents guard(Buakaw) to control the flow of a fight and their opponents position.

I think both are fine. If you have worked it well into your style of fight then no problem. I know guys who think the same and know others who are adamant about only one way being right.