Stance training in ancient Shaolin styles

[ShotoNoob]

And that post makes no sense and it most certainly does not address the question you quoted

|
The typical karate student in the US doesn't want to be told they have to stand around for six months. Most are eager to spar and eagerly anticipate doing so. That's what I've witnessed.

 

[Xue Sheng]

It was not a question I asked nor was it an answer...not jumping, just trying understand

|
The typical karate student in the US doesn't want to be told they have to stand around for six months. Most are eager to spar and eagerly anticipate doing so. That's what I've witnessed.

Then don't. For the record Karate is not Chinese and this post is in the Chinese MA section and it is talking about Chinese martial arts. Feel free to comment but understand the audience

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The typical karate student in the US doesn't want to be told they have to stand around for six months. Most are eager to spar and eagerly anticipate doing so. That's what I've witnessed.

I like the "develop" something first and "enhance" it later approach. To me, the horse stance training belong to the "enhancement". I prefer the following MA development order.

1. development - through partner training,
2. test - through sparring/wrestling,
3. polish - through solo drills.
4. enhance - through weight/equipment and static standing.

What's more important, the "fighting experience development" or the "foundation development"? Of course both are important. But there are some "time" issue here. You can still "enhance" your horse stance when you are 60 years old. But you can't enhance your sparring in your old age. So when you are still young, you should spend most of your training time to develop your "fighting skill". You can always enhance your foundation for the rest of your life.

IMO, it's better to drill your "hip throw - dynamic horse stance" 10,000 times than to stand in your "static horse stance" for 6 months. You will get the same result for your "static horse stance" training, but you will get much more.

 

[Flying Crane]

I like the "develop" something first and "enhance" it later approach. To me, the horse stance training belong to the "enhancement". I prefer the following MA development order.

1. development - through partner training,
2. test - through sparring/wrestling,
3. polish - through solo drills.
4. enhance - through weight/equipment and static standing.

What's more important, the "fighting experience development" or the "foundation development"? Of course both are important. But there are some "time" issue here. You can still "enhance" your horse stance when you are 60 years old. But you can't enhance your sparring in your old age. So when you are still young, you should spend most of your training time to develop your "fighting skill". You can always enhance your foundation for the rest of your life.

IMO, it's better to drill your "hip throw - dynamic horse stance" 10,000 times than to stand in your "static horse stance" for 6 months. You will get the same result for your "static horse stance" training, but you will get much more.

The problem with that approach is that people don't want to go back and develop things like stances, once they've tasted something more " exciting" like sparring. They think that's the highest level of training and they think stance isn't important. But if you allow a student to do it in that order, they never understand how proper stance training can elevate their abilities exponentially. I for one wish my early teachers hadn't ignored stance training in my instruction. I'd be much better now than I am.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The problem with that approach is that people don't want to go back and develop things like stances, once they've tasted something more " exciting" like sparring. They think that's the highest level of training and they think stance isn't important. But if you allow a student to do it in that order, they never understand how proper stance training can elevate their abilities exponentially. I for one wish my early teachers hadn't ignored stance training in my instruction. I'd be much better now than I am.

That's quite possible too.

If you can use your hip throw to throw your opponent every time on the mat, your "horse stance" should be much better than those who can sit in their horse stance for 30 minutes. You can use your "partner training" to develop your foundation too. The static horse stance training is not the only method.

Will it be better if you can let your students to develop their foundation through the "fun" part of their application training than through the boring part of their static horse stance training?

Of course the school work of the "partner training" and the home work of the "horse stance training" can be done at the same time.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

dup, deleted.

 

[Danny T]

|
The MMA / boxing audience doesn't understand the foundation being developed here. They decry the 'fixed' stances used by Karate-based fighters in MMA.

I don't really care what the audience thinks it know or understands about training. The audience only pays the ticket price and watches.

|
everybody leans towards boxing or 'natural' stances when sparring.

And that is also how they actually fight.

|
Randomly pacing around.

A good fighter Is Not "Randomly pacing around". Good fighters are moving with a purpose, they not moving for the sake of moving.

 

[ShotoNoob]

The problem with that approach is that people don't want to go back and developing things like stances, once they've tasted something more " exciting" like sparring....

Precisely....

 

[ShotoNoob]

It was not a question I asked nor was it an answer...not jumping, just trying understand
Then don't. For the record Karate is not Chinese and this post is in the Chinese MA section and it is talking about Chinese martial arts. Feel free to comment but understand the audience

|
Why do you think I'm looking to you for instruction on what or what not to do? I was talking about what I had [observed]. It's an observation....
|
See my post above, please....

 

[ShotoNoob]

They think that's the highest level of training and they think stance isn't important. But if you allow a student to do it in that order, they never understand how proper stance training can elevate their abilities exponentially.

|
Or it's a self-discipline or patience issue. Expediency over base-building.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The problem with that approach is that people don't want to go back and develop things like stances, once they've tasted something more " exciting" like sparring.

When people find out that their "hip throw" won't work on short opponents, they will go back and work on their low horse stance. After you have understood why you need to train your horse stance, you will have strong motivation to do so. When you just working on your horse stance because your teacher told you so, your motivation won't be as strong.

 

[ShotoNoob]

When people find out that their "hip throw" won't work on short opponents, they will go back and work on their low horse stance. After you have understood why you need to train your horse stance, you will have strong motivation to do so. When you just working on your horse stance because your teacher told you so, your motivation won't be as strong.

|
I think that's certainly true for some students. Others will follow the traditional training. Others will try to short cut it. Good observation for teaching because a certain group prefers the application, the explanation.

 

[ShotoNoob]

I don't really care what the audience thinks it know or understands about training. The audience only pays the ticket price and watches.

|
Thanks for proofing reading my post. I was was generalizing,,,,

 

[Danny T]

|
Thanks for proofing reading my post. I was was generalizing,,,,

???
I must be missing something.

 

[Flying Crane]

That's quite possible too.

If you can use your hip throw to throw your opponent every time on the mat, your "horse stance" should be much better than those who can sit in their horse stance for 30 minutes. You can use your "partner training" to develop your foundation too. The static horse stance training is not the only method.

Will it be better if you can let your students to develop their foundation through the "fun" part of their application training than through the boring part of their static horse stance training?

Of course the school work of the "partner training" and the home work of the "horse stance training" can be done at the same time.

I disagree that the "fun" aspect of training will be as effective in that development.

 

[Flying Crane]

When people find out that their "hip throw" won't work on short opponents, they will go back and work on their low horse stance. After you have understood why you need to train your horse stance, you will have strong motivation to do so. When you just working on your horse stance because your teacher told you so, your motivation won't be as strong.

I am doubtful of this, for most students. But I do agree that a good teacher will help the student understand what the stance training is accomplishing, and how that works, and doesn't simply tell the student, do it because I say so.

 

[Flying Crane]

Sorry, I had a couple duplicate posts. Systems glitch.

 

[mograph]

How do you folks define "stance training?' Could you describe the practice as you have experienced it?

(Just trying to get a common definition.)

 

[Xue Sheng]

pick a posture and stand in it properly

 

[clfsean]

It's not static for me & mine. It's dynamic. You have to move to use a stance. If you go only completely static, you are incredibly rooted. However the downer is that's all you know. Likewise if you never root, you may be quick as hell, but a strong wind will topple you. You have to learn a moving root. You can't do it standing like a statue or moving like leaf in the breeze. It's a mix of both. At first more static than not, but then it needs to equal out.

Your milage may vary...