Talk:Taekwondo stances

Walking Stance Diagram is Wrong

The Walking Stance diagram is incorrect. The diagram shows a low stance, 1.5 shoulder widths from heel (front foot) to toe (back foot). Walking stance is one foot length shorter than shown, measured from toe to toe.

Back Stance vs L-Stance

Is there any difference between these two stances? I think they are both the same... - Nmnogueira 19:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been to clubs where either one of these terms refers to the same stance, although I can't reference this fact. Furthermore, the photgraph appears to depict a horseback-riding stance, not a back/T-stance. Also, the description of the back stance says weight distribution is 60/40 while in "L-Stance", it is 70/30. I've been taught it was 60/40 though I've never tested exactly how much weight I do shift to the back. I also don't like the statement in "L-stance" that "there is virtually no weight on that front leg" since I would hardly consider 30%-40% of one's body weight to be "virtually no weight". This statement seems more fitting for the cat stance than the back stance. --Darren Lee 04:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard of it and from the photo it looks like an incorrect gojung sogi (fixed stance), although you never perform sang makgi (twin block - the one in the photo is sang sonkal makgi) in a gojung sogi.

ColinJennings 11:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In need of repair

I think this page is in great need of a complete overhaul. I am an ITF practitioner for 9 years and know that some of the information contained in this article is either factually incorrect or factually dubious.

I would like to redo the page with an image, the name of the stance and a brief description in a table, however the problem I have is that the ideal images are copyright as is ideal information. Does anyone have any ideas on what can be done. I have the condensed encyclopedia, the legacy CD and the 15 volume encyclopedia, so getting the information is not a problem for me. Getting it on wikipedia without breaking copyright law is.

ColinJennings 00:28, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Walking Stance

I think the description of the walking stance doesn't match with the picture and the stance "ap kubi", a low position. I wouldn't say that ap kubi is used when mobility is important. In that case, "ap seogi" should be used, and this is the one I would call "walking stance", becase of the high position, similar to walking. I'm not sure what is the usual English expression to designate ap kubi, but I wouldn't call it a walking stance... - Nmnogueira 10:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. In fact I came on this page to point out that there's no mention of what I would call a "forward" or "long" stance, which would translate from "ap keubi seogi". This is the stance with most of the weight on the front leg, as in the fifth move of Taguek 1. "ap seogi" would translate to "walking stance" which seems to be the one pictured in the article. --Sabri Al-Safi (talk) 17:26, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think some of the confusion here comes from differences between styles. I've trained a little in both ITF and WTF, and there are technical differences between the stances they share, as well as a few completely different ones. This article's a bit of a mess, as there's no distinction between the two styles - the images seem to be for ITF taekwon-do, while some of the descriptions more match WTF taekwondo. For example, in WTF, apkoobi seogi or "long stance" matches more what is "walking stance" in ITF, except by current WTF rules both feet are in a line, while in ITF they're shoulder-width apart. There's no "short stance" in ITF, what we would call "walking stance" in WTF, which is with your legs straight, with front foot around one foot-length in front. I imagine that's why it's not mentioned anywhere on the article, as well as cat stance/tiger stance, which also doesn't exist in ITF. I'm not sure what would be more worthwhile - to just list all stances in existence, ITF and WTF, or to separate the article into two parts with WTF definitions of the stances and ITF definitions separate, but there needs to be some distinction as they are rather different, and this article will just cause confusion for anyone training in either style, or a completely different one. -- Froggity (talk) 01:29, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Newbie

Hi, I'm a student of Taekwondo myself, and i'd thought I'd give editing this article a try. I'm completely clueless when it comes to formatting the article, so any and all help is appreciated. I hope to find some other sources in a library, google wasn't all that fruitful, but there are sources there, so that's an improvement. Thank you ALessThanFittingEpithet (talk) 02:58, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Taekwondo stances. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120905121506/http://www.taekwondo-itf.ch/STANCES.pdf to http://www.taekwondo-itf.ch/STANCES.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:55, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]