koreantiger81 Posted October 31, 2002 Posted October 31, 2002 1. Heel to heel-your front and back leg are aligned in a straight line. The advantages of a heel to heel sparring stance includes: good protection of your stomach area exposing minimal surface target area, quick front leg and front punch attack. Since your body is aligned in a perfect line, it allows for quick attacks. "The quickest way to get from A to B is a straight line. The disadvantage is you totally telegraph your back leg kicks. 2. Heels two to three inches apart-This allows for quick back leg attacks, but exposes a greater surface area... I always thought a heel to heel sparring stance was the only way to go, until my W.T.F master point out otherwise. I"m unsure now of the best sparring stance...What do you think? Kinesiologist/TrainerBlack-Belt
Thai_Kick Posted October 31, 2002 Posted October 31, 2002 An Orthodox or Southpaw stance! Limits Are Not Accepted. They Are Elbowed, Kicked And Punched.
niel0092 Posted October 31, 2002 Posted October 31, 2002 I prefer method 2 you describe and switch alot between south paw and orthodox. "Jita Kyoei" Mutual Benefit and Welfare
Heckler83 Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 I used a modified attack stance. What I do is that I position my feet with my front foot 2 to 3 feet in front of my back and the back foot one to one and a half feet to the right on a 45 degree angle forward and to the right. My hands are close enough to my head that I can do protective moves like cover counters or parrys, but still far enough away to protect my chest and midsection. This may or may not work for you. It's just something I like. It is up to those men who are strong,to protect those who are weak,from the tyranny of evil menBlue belt, Hap Ki DoDropped Shotokan and TKDPicked up Muay Thai and Jujitsu
Sid Vicious Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 i love the shoot fighting stance. but whats effective for me might not be effective for you.
SBN Doug Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 I used a modified attack stance. What I do is that I position my feet with my front foot 2 to 3 feet in front of my back and the back foot one to one and a half feet to the right on a 45 degree angle forward and to the right. My hands are close enough to my head that I can do protective moves like cover counters or parrys, but still far enough away to protect my chest and midsection. This may or may not work for you. It's just something I like. That's just about my exact stance as well. Kuk Sool Won - 4th danEvil triumphs when good men do nothing.
Bretty101 Posted November 2, 2002 Posted November 2, 2002 If i'm points sparring i like the Bill Wallace (very) 'Side-on' stance. If i'm full contact and using my hands to go for a knockout i'm very square. I currently trying to continually flick between the 2. Bretty
Ironberg Posted November 9, 2002 Posted November 9, 2002 In fighting, you should be constantly moving, not thinking about feet positions. My style has a fighting stance which is so darn customizeable that it can be basically anything as long as only both of your feet are on the floor, your hands are in a tight guard, and it doesn't resemble any other stance. More and more in sparring I am learning the benefits of shifting foot positions in a broken rythmn. That way you can surprise your opponent with whatever comes next, so to speak. If the bounciness causes your opponent to shift attention to what the heck your feet are doing --> feed him fist. I must admit, however, that my feet are usually close together, unless I stop to do something like throwing him over my leg, or sweeping. "An enlightened man would offer a weary traveler a bed for the night, and invite him to share a civilized conversation over a bowl of... Cocoa Puffs."
Recommended Posts