Solid Stances

[MJS]

Stances are, IMHO, our foundation for pretty much everything we do. Without good stances, pretty much anything we do, won't be as effective compared to if our stance was solid.

In another thread, DavidCC posted this, and I think its a good point and worthy of more in-depth discussion. Here is his post, but the part I want to focus on is this:

"But if you have real stability, you change the expected point of contact (earlier), and you initiate contact in such a way as to misalign the shooter, you'll disperse and absorb his momentum, he feels like he's shooting on a tree, and that can't feel good. "

So, what exactly does everyone do to ensure that they have solid stances?

Mike

 

[Danjo]

We use a fighting stance unless we're doing forms. Much more like the MMA stances you see in the UFC etc. Something solid enough not to get taken down by a grappler, but high enough to still kick etc. Stances are transitional at any rate.

 

[DavidCC]

teach'em, test'em, dril'em, rinse, repeat

visually insepct for good foot alignment, width and depth

then physically test the stance by putting a "load on" - that is, pushing them off their stance! My 8 yr old can support my weight (220) leaning against her horse stance (when she is doing it right).

 

[Danjo]

teach'em, test'em, dril'em, rinse, repeat

visually insepct for good foot alignment, width and depth

then physically test the stance by putting a "load on" - that is, pushing them off their stance! My 8 yr old can support my weight (220) leaning against her horse stance (when she is doing it right).

Actually, I prefer to test them in sparring when people are free to mix stand-up and grappling rather than have someone come along to give you a shove. The reason is that going from a stand-up position to a sprawl or at least a wider base can happen very quickly and the ability to go from one to the other quickly is what I feel is important.

 

[punisher73]

As a general concept, stances need to provide structural integrity for what you are trying to accomplish. All stances are transitory and are only used to accomplish your goal and then to move on.

Some general things for a good stance is:

1) Proper skeletal alignment. Let your body do it's work
2) Proper weight distibution. Each stance is going to have a maximum effect for what it was designed for based on certain weight distributions. For example, you would not want to load up your cat stance all on the front leg, this would be an improper weight distribution and would take away the tactical use of what the stance is for.
3) Understanding what/when/how your stance is to be used. All stances have a strong point (what it was designed to do) and they all have a weakness.
4) Control your own center. All of them should maximize the use of your center to your advantage. By taking the center you can control your opponent.
5) Stance should be a balance of stability and mobility. You want to be able to move and adapt to changing conditions. A very stable stance is a good thing if you are in tight and need more balance. If you need to move quickly to evade or close the distance you are going to want more mobility. Each stance should take into consideration which it is designed for. You should also understand moving into and out of each stance fluidly so you aren't sitting there like your feet are caught in mud, or knocked over at the slightest push.

Since each stance is different, you could have a checklist of what a good "X stance" is, but some of those might not translate to what a good "Y stance" would be.

 

[DavidCC]

Actually, I prefer to test them in sparring when people are free to mix stand-up and grappling rather than have someone come along to give you a shove. The reason is that going from a stand-up position to a sprawl or at least a wider base can happen very quickly and the ability to go from one to the other quickly is what I feel is important.

Me too, eventually; if they can't get to it, they can't get to it quickly. I was thinking more of teaching it to beginners.

 

[DavidCC]

As a general concept, stances need to provide structural integrity for what you are trying to accomplish. All stances are transitory and are only used to accomplish your goal and then to move on.

Some general things for a good stance is:

1) Proper skeletal alignment. Let your body do it's work
2) Proper weight distibution. Each stance is going to have a maximum effect for what it was designed for based on certain weight distributions. For example, you would not want to load up your cat stance all on the front leg, this would be an improper weight distribution and would take away the tactical use of what the stance is for.
3) Understanding what/when/how your stance is to be used. All stances have a strong point (what it was designed to do) and they all have a weakness.
4) Control your own center. All of them should maximize the use of your center to your advantage. By taking the center you can control your opponent.
5) Stance should be a balance of stability and mobility. You want to be able to move and adapt to changing conditions. A very stable stance is a good thing if you are in tight and need more balance. If you need to move quickly to evade or close the distance you are going to want more mobility. Each stance should take into consideration which it is designed for. You should also understand moving into and out of each stance fluidly so you aren't sitting there like your feet are caught in mud, or knocked over at the slightest push.

Since each stance is different, you could have a checklist of what a good "X stance" is, but some of those might not translate to what a good "Y stance" would be.

that all sounds good to me. #5 do you mean something like "move between stability and mobility as needed"?

 

[Touch Of Death]

Given you always have a strongest and weakest base of support, and the enviornment is always changing around you, you are only neutral to a situation for an instant.
Sean

 

[Josh Oakley]

The stances I end up training the most are the Horse stance and the flamingo stance. Not necessarily toward fighting, though both have improved my kicks greatly. The primary reason I train these stances is because they strengthen my knee. i don't have a meniscus in my right knee, so keeping the muscles around my knee strong allow me to still be able to move around without a cane.

 

[punisher73]

that all sounds good to me. #5 do you mean something like "move between stability and mobility as needed"?

Yes. But, I do think that all stances should have a little bit of one in the other as well.

 

[MJS]

Just to continue on with the discussion, here are a few questions:

1) What do you do, to make the stance to stable?

2) When you're testing it, do you include movement, such as Danjo suggested, or are you testing just from a static position?

3) If it is possible to make your stance immune to a take down, where did the MMA fighters go wrong?

 

[DavidCC]

Just to continue on with the discussion, here are a few questions:

1) What do you do, to make the stance to stable?

2) When you're testing it, do you include movement, such as Danjo suggested, or are you testing just from a static position?

3) If it is possible to make your stance immune to a take down, where did the MMA fighters go wrong?

1) heels out, etc everything matters.
2) I start with testing the horse stance 3-9 in static horse stance. Then we do it moving backwards in "45 degree horse stances facing 12" (or you might call it a neutral bow depending on yoru dictionary). Applying continuous pressure to the front shoulder, the student aligns the feet 12-6, steps back, re-aligns to 45.
3) I don't know if there is immunity or if they are 'wrong' but mobility is much easier to learn and train.

 

[KenpoDave]

1) What do you do, to make the stance to stable?

Test it. There are hundreds of ways, and the preferred method will change with the preferred outcome of the moment. Deconstruct, reconstruct...

2) When you're testing it, do you include movement, such as Danjo suggested, or are you testing just from a static position?

Yes. Both. I test more often with movement, but I study my stances while static or moving slowly.

3) If it is possible to make your stance immune to a take down, where did the MMA fighters go wrong?

Maybe to a particular takedown, but not to takedowns in general. Anyone "immune" to takedowns is likely using more than the stance, although the stance would be centrally important. We used to play a game like this about 15 years ago, a kenpo version of what was once called "Smear the (rhymes with Smear)." I wouldn't say we were immune to being taken down, but those who were not regulars in the game eventually gave up trying.

 

[JamesB]

Just to continue on with the discussion, here are a few questions:

1) What do you do, to make the stance to stable?

We utilize a PAM and other corrective footwork to stablize our stances. We pay particular attention to the direction the head is looking, and the alignment of the outside of each foot (i.e. must be parallel when in horse/neutral bow).

2) When you're testing it, do you include movement, such as Danjo suggested, or are you testing just from a static position?

Yes but in two different ways. When practising self-defence techniques such as bear-hugs, pushes etc, we teach and practice how to stablize our stance once the attack is on. So how to gain a stable position.

But when testing foot manouvres / stance transitions (i.e. moving from a stable position) we apply pressure (in the direction the stance is designed to be strong in) during the transition. This helps the practitioner develop a feeling for how it feels to have a strong stance.

3) If it is possible to make your stance immune to a take down, where did the MMA fighters go wrong?

I'd say it isn't possible to make your stance immune to takedown, as stances are specific things - they are designed to be strongest in one direction only at a time, so there is no single 'super stance' that can thwart all takedowns attempts. But specific takedowns, committed and aimed at a particular area of your body can be stopped. And if the grappler backs off, comes at you at a different angle, you assume the appropriate stance/posture at the moment it matters most. Timing is important.

You wouldn't just stand there statically with a 10-foot gap between you, but I don't think that's what's being suggested. But just in case readers are assuming that is the case, it isn't.

 

[Danjo]

We utilize a PAM and other corrective footwork to stablize our stances.

Hmmm...I never thought of using non-stick cooking spray to keep people from being able to take you down, but whatever works I guess.

 

[DavidCC]

Hmmm...I never thought of using non-stick cooking spray to keep people from being able to take you down, but whatever works I guess.

spray it all over your legs and hips, works great, and smells better.

 

[Danjo]

spray it all over your legs and hips, works great, and smells better.

Better than what? Crisco?

 

[marlon]

Hmmm...I never thought of using non-stick cooking spray to keep people from being able to take you down, but whatever works I guess.

that was funny!!

 

[marlon]

Just to continue on with the discussion, here are a few questions:

1) What do you do, to make the stance to stable?

2) When you're testing it, do you include movement, such as Danjo suggested, or are you testing just from a static position?

3) If it is possible to make your stance immune to a take down, where did the MMA fighters go wrong?

1. train yourself to root. knees bent and not locked, wieght downward which means body alignment

2. all stances are transitory, the important part of stability is in skeletal alignment when moving and striking. Every stance has a weak point. Its strengnth is always relational vis a vis your opponent and what you are seeking to accomplish at the time. Leg strength and skeletal alignment trains stances
3. there is no such immunity found in a stance...response to the attack is the key

just my thoughts.

marlon

 

[JamesB]

Hmmm...I never thought of using non-stick cooking spray to keep people from being able to take you down, but whatever works I guess.

It's a new style of martial-art, but not many people have heard of it yet. It's called 'Ketchup Karate'. Simply smother yourself in the stuff, and your attacker will be unable (or unwilling) to get any kind of hold on you!!