Thoughts on stances

[Hudson]

It seems to me that there are many "impractical" stances being taught today. Stances that would be incredibly hard to fight from. For example, one stance a friend showed me had one leg almost kneeling and the other behind him with the calf parallel to the ground, and he had almost no movement and was hard pressed to keep the stance. My thoughts is that these are taught to strengthen the body rather then to be used in sparring or fighting. Stances that place all the weight on one leg, that keep the hands in ways that are hard to block with, what is the point to them? I think they're best left for competition.

 

Any thoughts?

[Drunken Monkey]

...stances are transitional, not fixed.

 

think of them as how to place your feet whilst moving rather than singular, stationary positions.

 

the one you described is basically a step forward.

 

lets just say you are in a normal stance (let's just say bow and arrow, left foot forward).

 

you've made an extension/technique with your left hand and wish to keep the pressure on.

 

therefore you can take a step with your right foot whilst keeping upper body exactly the same.

 

this would put your feet as you described.

 

it allows you to then advance position whilst maintaining a covering position+forward pressure, as well as putting you in position to kick.

 

if your friend can't move, then he is doing it wrong.

 

if he is doing them wrong and yet feels like he can 'show you how it's done', i think you should think twice about taking advice from him...

[Hudson]

Heh, I suppose I hadn't thought of it that way. Thanks for the post.

[delta1]

...stances are transitional, not fixed.

 

think of them as how to place your feet whilst moving rather than singular, stationary positions.

 

Beat me to it! Stances can also be used to move in place, changing structural allignment and/or adding power to a technique.

 

The stance described is also similar to a lunge stance or a close kneel. The lunge brings the trailing hand into major play, giving allignment, torque and engaging the mass very quickly. The kneel drops your height while allowing you to maintain posture, and adds a lot of gravitational advantage to your technique.

 

Stances may be used as weapons as well. This stance could be used as a knee drop on a downed, or partially downed opponent. Or it would work as an outside leg buckle or break.

 

All are purely transitional. You wouldn't pose there any more than youd leave a strike hanging in mid air.

[Drunken Monkey]

....what can i say?

 

my time zone gives me a posting advantage....

 

um, just a little picking again.

 

when doing this type of movement, you don't have to drop your weight (although you can).

 

i refer back to my example where the weight/balance is exactly the same and the step carries that position forwards.

 

well, too many variations that depend on too many variables that depend on what you wanna do.

 

i mean, if you wanna take the guy down you will want to drop your weight...

[delta1]

when doing this type of movement, you don't have to drop your weight ...well, too many variations that depend on too many variables that depend on what you wanna do.

 

Very true. Even when changing stance in place, as opposed to moving forward in your example, you can do a lot of different things. For example, done as a reverse lunge or kneel your primary purpose might be to get out of the way of his attack or his reaction to your attack. It might also clear a path for your attack, say a hammerfist to the groin and/or a heel scoop. Or it may primarily be done to drop your height so that a hammerfist or forearm strike can rise up into the groin. This is also an excellent stance to use to regain your base should your opponent get you bent over. Possibilities are endless, and how you use the stance depends on what you want to do. Main point is, like you said, the stance is transitional. Don't get stuck in a pose, unless BB Mag is there with a photographer (there's an exception to every rule, right?).

[delta1]

Hudson, what kind of martial art do you practice, and what is your level? If you are new, I wouldn't worry too much on the details DM and me are talking about. You'll get them later on. For now, just take them as information on why it is important to learn your basics well.

[Luckykboxer]

the stances being taught in most martial arts i have seen are not impractical at all. They may have specific reasons to use them, but are not impractical.

 

the one you are describing sounds to me like a close kneel stance( at least that is what it is called in my style)

 

Its very possible that your friend has the wrong foot position or is misusing the stance.

 

Also your friend may be of a bodytype that when facing most people wouldnt use that stance.

 

I know that I am a large person, and rarely will i use the same stances and techniques that much smaller people will use. Simply because I wont ever have a height difference in respect to theirs unless maybe i was fighting Shaquille O'Neil

 

Think of the stances as different types of Bricks that you can build a house with. Your house may very well be different then mine so you are likely to use different bricks.

 

I know that I have learned dozens and dozens of different attacks, including hands, fingers, arms, knees, legs, etc.etc.

 

But I would normally not use but a few of those in most situations, the others are fairly specific to being in situations where the "mainstay" so to speak is unable to be used either do to limitations in body position, or hazards around you.

 

My advice would be to learn the stance, learn what it is used for. PRactice it, think of different ways it can be used other then what you have been told, and file it away for use when you need it.... They key being to practice it so you dont forget it

[Hudson]

Thanks, I am rather new to martial arts. I have taken 2 years of TKD, a year of kickboxing, and am now starting a style of Kung Fu.

[Drunken Monkey]

so um, what style?

 

would help us explain things to you if we know what style.