The Importance Of Stance Training

[Simon L]

Ok. Firstly Eric H, I've been in the martial arts for nearly 20 years now. I've done hung gar, and wing chun, so I know what I'm talking about. As to your assertion "Basic Kung Fu *is* stance work. It *is* the most important part of your kung fu. You can't survive energy challenge if the other guy is able to bounce you all about willy-nilly". Stance work is only a small part of learning kung-fu. I trained with Ian Protheroe up in Brisbane, and he never harped on about training a stance from a fixed position. When you're in a real fight, training your stance from a fixed position isn't going to do a lot of good. It's training actual punches and kicks, doing drills, and training your footwork and muscle memory that counts. A guy throwing punches and kicks at you, and your instructor telling you how to move, where to block properly, where to position your arms and legs, and doing this hundreds of times is how you become a good fighter. Derek Fung's school was not teaching that at all. All the stance work in the world isn't going to count for anything when the fight goes to the ground either. Don't believe me? Have a look at MMA, where many of the fights go to the ground. The way Derek Fung was teaching kung-fu, you'd get seriously hurt in a real situation. Also, what's wrong with an Academy Pledge? Martial arts isn't just about fighting--it's about creating self-confident, healthy individuals who use their skills for good, rather than going around beating people up.
As to Flying Crane's assertion that I "wouldn't recognize a good kung fu teacher if said teacher bit him in the nuts." Well wtf do you know? Did you bother reading my post, numbnuts? I know enough about wing chun to tell you that you don't start students on double hand chi sau. You do chi sau once the basics of sil lim tau have been mastered, and your sifu thinks you're good enough to progress. Look at William Cheung's grading structure--they don't do single hand chi sau until level 4 (out of ten levels), and double hand chi sau until level 5. Same with Ian Protheroe. Look at Jim Fung's grading structure--double chi sau is done at grade 3 (out of 4 grades). William Cheung and Jim Fung's schools are both accredited with the VTAA, and widely known in the wing chun world. Derek Fung's isn't. I spoke to Martin Lung (one of Chu Shong Tin's students), and he said that Derek was not even on the scene in Hong Kong in the old days.
Wing chun schools, like all schools, can be divided into those that are great, and those that are mediocre (or worse). What I saw was a not particularly great teacher, who was doing it for the money. Go to a random school, and see how many guys are training, see if they are actually throwing punches and kicks, and see if they're going through the kinetics of fighting.

 

[Flying Crane]

Ok. Firstly Eric H, I've been in the martial arts for nearly 20 years now. I've done hung gar, and wing chun, so I know what I'm talking about. As to your assertion "Basic Kung Fu *is* stance work. It *is* the most important part of your kung fu. You can't survive energy challenge if the other guy is able to bounce you all about willy-nilly". Stance work is only a small part of learning kung-fu. I trained with Ian Protheroe up in Brisbane, and he never harped on about training a stance from a fixed position. When you're in a real fight, training your stance from a fixed position isn't going to do a lot of good. It's training actual punches and kicks, doing drills, and training your footwork and muscle memory that counts. A guy throwing punches and kicks at you, and your instructor telling you how to move, where to block properly, where to position your arms and legs, and doing this hundreds of times is how you become a good fighter. Derek Fung's school was not teaching that at all. All the stance work in the world isn't going to count for anything when the fight goes to the ground either. Don't believe me? Have a look at MMA, where many of the fights go to the ground. The way Derek Fung was teaching kung-fu, you'd get seriously hurt in a real situation. Also, what's wrong with an Academy Pledge? Martial arts isn't just about fighting--it's about creating self-confident, healthy individuals who use their skills for good, rather than going around beating people up.
As to Flying Crane's assertion that I "wouldn't recognize a good kung fu teacher if said teacher bit him in the nuts." Well wtf do you know? Did you bother reading my post, numbnuts? I know enough about wing chun to tell you that you don't start students on double hand chi sau. You do chi sau once the basics of sil lim tau have been mastered, and your sifu thinks you're good enough to progress. Look at William Cheung's grading structure--they don't do single hand chi sau until level 4 (out of ten levels), and double hand chi sau until level 5. Same with Ian Protheroe. Look at Jim Fung's grading structure--double chi sau is done at grade 3 (out of 4 grades). William Cheung and Jim Fung's schools are both accredited with the VTAA, and widely known in the wing chun world. Derek Fung's isn't. I spoke to Martin Lung (one of Chu Shong Tin's students), and he said that Derek was not even on the scene in Hong Kong in the old days.
Wing chun schools, like all schools, can be divided into those that are great, and those that are mediocre (or worse). What I saw was a not particularly great teacher, who was doing it for the money. Go to a random school, and see how many guys are training, see if they are actually throwing punches and kicks, and see if they're going through the kinetics of fighting.

I don't know anything about Derek Fung so I'm not his defender nor detractor. I'm going by the statements that you have made, and everything you've said tells me you do not understand kung fu. Stance actually IS everything. Without stance, you've got very little, and your comments make it clear that you don't even understand what stance is. You've really got 20 years of martial arts? Honestly, with what you've said it sounds to me like you've got 1 year, 20 times.

But hey, you are the one who decided to come on the scene, resurrect a thread that has been dormant for 7 years, and dog on someone's teacher. Sure, it's always OK to resurrect old threads if there's something to add to the discussion. But resurrecting the thread with the only reason being to criticise someone, and that's the VERY FIRST post you've made on the entire forum, it's trolling at its worst. So I call it like I see it. You are a simpleton, plain and simple. Go back to your hole in the mud and hide your head from the sun.

 

[Simon L]

"I don't know anything about Derek Fung so I'm not his defender nor detractor. I'm going by the statements that you have made, and everything you've said tells me you do not understand kung fu. Stance actually IS everything. Without stance, you've got very little, and your comments make it clear that you don't even understand what stance is. You've really got 20 years of martial arts? Honestly, with what you've said it sounds to me like you've got 1 year, 20 times.

But hey, you are the one who decided to come on the scene, resurrect a thread that has been dormant for 7 years, and dog on someone's teacher. Sure, it's always OK to resurrect old threads if there's something to add to the discussion. But resurrecting the thread with the only reason being to criticise someone, and that's the VERY FIRST post you've made on the entire forum, it's trolling at its worst. So I call it like I see it. You are a simpleton, plain and simple. Go back to your hole in the mud and hide your head from the sun."

Ok, let's get a few things straight. Now read this carefully idiot. The words kung-fu mean 'work' and 'effort' in Chinese. Good kung-fu is kung-fu which works in AN ACTUAL FIGHT. Kung-fu is not ALL about the stance. It is much more than the stance. One of the reasons why a lot of kung-fu guys get their butts whipped when they step into the ring against MMA guys, and jiujitsu guys is that they haven't done enough of the actual applications of fighting--e.g. done enough drills with actual punches and kicks, and gotten out of actual grabs and locks, nor have they done enough conditioning. No amount of 'correcting the stance,' 'training the apex' or 'holding the invisible ball' will help you with reading your opponent, timing, distancing nor the kinetics of actual fighting. The same reason that doing a 'tou lou' a thousand times will not make you a fighter at all.
Standing in a fixed stance against a static punch, is not going to make you a fighter. You need to have a LOT of punches and kicks thrown at you to know how an opponent actually moves, and how you train your muscle memory to deal with it. Watch a couple of good fighters actually spar. They don't actually keep a stance--they're doing their best to avoid being hit, and they move around a fair bit, and they can read their opponents moves too. Good martial arts schools practise these attributes. A lot of wing chun schools are basically no good--they start chi sau far too early, and they crap on about a stance (as I've indicated above). Flying Crane, have a think about what I said. If you want to learn a stance, then hold it. If you want to learn to fight, then have people throw punches and kicks at you--makes sense doesn't it?

 

[Punchy]

Stance is your foundation. Without one, your punches are weak, your footwork is shaky, your kicks have no support, your structure, no matter how good, will be ineffective, because you will be unable to pivot correctly to dissipate your opponent's attack.
Other than that, stance is pretty much worthless.

Just as you say too many WC schools start chi sau too early, I would also say, too many schools skip over the importance of SNT in an effort to get to the good stuff.
I strongly agree that to be a good WC man you need to spend time in dealing with realistic attacks, but don't skip the obviuos need to lay the groundwork.

The people who developed WC didn't live in a bubble. They fought. They knew about fighting. And then they developed a methodoloy to impart that to others. Why do we think we are any smarter than they were?

 

[Simon L]

Yak Sao, I agree with a lot of what you said. Stance should not be dismissed out of hand--my point was that it is NOT nearly as important as Flying crane would argue. Especially when you consider that the inverted toe stance of much wing chun is pretty pointless anyway--your motion is restricted with an inverted foot position. You can have the best stance in the world, but unless you've felt a heap of punches and kicks thrown, gotten out of a lot of locks and grabs, and know how to move in a fight, all the stance work is of no use. Same as chi sau--too many wing chun schools emphasise it far too early. It's an important exercise, but it won't teach you to defend against long-range low kicks. In fact Sil Lim Tao is the most important part of Wing Chun, and not enough schools emphasise this. Yip Man had a lot of students--not all completed the system, and of those that did, not all were great practitioners, and unfortunately, a lot of teachers are charlatans who may have trained briefly with Yip Man, and then go on and say that they have the REAL Wing Chun.

 

[oaktree]

Stance training is the most important part for anyone in Chinese
martial arts. Just about every style emphasizes the importanc of it.
In some schools like xingyiquan you wont even br taught how to
Do a form till you can stand in a stance for at least 20 minutes.

The reason why it is the most important is because it
Builds the strength needed to generate power.
It builds proper alignment it gives structure.

Kungfu means time and effort because it takes
Time to gain skill meaning you must first be able
To stand then walk it takes effort to reshape your
Mind and body and learn to use your foundation
to build off it.

If your foundation is weak you over look basics you will
Never have good kungfu.

Simon calling people names shows no respect
To other martial artist it shows lack of control and
Temperance. If you can not control your speech
Then it means you can not control your body
And that means your foundation may not be well
Grounded based on your presentation on the forum.

Good luck in your training

 

[Flying Crane]

Ok, let's get a few things straight. Now read this carefully idiot. The words kung-fu mean 'work' and 'effort' in Chinese. Good kung-fu is kung-fu which works in AN ACTUAL FIGHT. Kung-fu is not ALL about the stance. It is much more than the stance. One of the reasons why a lot of kung-fu guys get their butts whipped when they step into the ring against MMA guys, and jiujitsu guys is that they haven't done enough of the actual applications of fighting--e.g. done enough drills with actual punches and kicks, and gotten out of actual grabs and locks, nor have they done enough conditioning. No amount of 'correcting the stance,' 'training the apex' or 'holding the invisible ball' will help you with reading your opponent, timing, distancing nor the kinetics of actual fighting. The same reason that doing a 'tou lou' a thousand times will not make you a fighter at all.
Standing in a fixed stance against a static punch, is not going to make you a fighter. You need to have a LOT of punches and kicks thrown at you to know how an opponent actually moves, and how you train your muscle memory to deal with it. Watch a couple of good fighters actually spar. They don't actually keep a stance--they're doing their best to avoid being hit, and they move around a fair bit, and they can read their opponents moves too. Good martial arts schools practise these attributes. A lot of wing chun schools are basically no good--they start chi sau far too early, and they crap on about a stance (as I've indicated above). Flying Crane, have a think about what I said. If you want to learn a stance, then hold it. If you want to learn to fight, then have people throw punches and kicks at you--makes sense doesn't it?

There's the thing: stance is NOT simply squatting down and nailing your feet to the floor, never to move again. Stance is both building the strength in the legs, AND understanding how to use that strength actively to drive your technique from the ground up. That is where real power comes from, far more than from the strength of the arms and shoulders. That is what stances are all about, and it's a training process to develop both the strength, AND the ability to use that strength. This is fundamental to Chinese martial arts, and any good teacher will take his time with this and not rush thru it, because this builds a foundation for far better skills in the long run, even if it doesn't satisfy a desire for quick fighting ability right this instant.

If you feel MMA is somehow THE yardstick against which all martial arts should be measured, then go do MMA. Why do traditional Chinese martial arts, if that is your belief? Go follow your interests, and don't do things that don't satisfy your interests, or don't fulfill your vision of what martial training ought to be. But don't hold any illusions that you've got all the answers. As I've mentioned, the things you've posted indicate to me that you have a very superficial understanding of Chinese martial arts.

 

[Tez3]

There's the thing: stance is NOT simply squatting down and nailing your feet to the floor, never to move again. Stance is both building the strength in the legs, AND understanding how to use that strength actively to drive your technique from the ground up. That is where real power comes from, far more than from the strength of the arms and shoulders. That is what stances are all about, and it's a training process to develop both the strength, AND the ability to use that strength. This is fundamental to Chinese martial arts, and any good teacher will take his time with this and not rush thru it, because this builds a foundation for far better skills in the long run, even if it doesn't satisfy a desire for quick fighting ability right this instant.

If you feel MMA is somehow THE yardstick against which all martial arts should be measured, then go do MMA. Why do traditional Chinese martial arts, if that is your belief? Go follow your interests, and don't do things that don't satisfy your interests, or don't fulfill your vision of what martial training ought to be. But don't hold any illusions that you've got all the answers. As I've mentioned, the things you've posted indicate to me that you have a very superficial understanding of Chinese martial arts.

Funnily enough we spend good bit of time on stances in MMA, without proper stances you will be unbalanced, taken down, don't punch with power or fall over when kicking. In fact in the karate I do we also spend a fair bit of time learning stances, Wado Ryu has a lot some of which I believe those who do CMA would know, the Judo we do needs good stances, if you don't stand the correct way you either can't throw properly or you hurt your back. Kick boxing needs good stances or else you can't kick properly and end up unbalanced. I can't imagine any martial artist in any style, to be honest, not understanding why stances are so vital.

 

[Flying Crane]

Funnily enough we spend good bit of time on stances in MMA, without proper stances you will be unbalanced, taken down, don't punch with power or fall over when kicking. In fact in the karate I do we also spend a fair bit of time learning stances, Wado Ryu has a lot some of which I believe those who do CMA would know, the Judo we do needs good stances, if you don't stand the correct way you either can't throw properly or you hurt your back. Kick boxing needs good stances or else you can't kick properly and end up unbalanced. I can't imagine any martial artist in any style, to be honest, not understanding why stances are so vital.

I am not at all surprised by what you are saying. And just to be clear, neither was I making a contrast between MMA and traditional Chinese martial arts in terms of one being better than the other. Just saying that, if he thinks his local MMA gym trains in a better way, then that is where he should be training.

All I can say about Traditional Chinese martial arts is that it takes a certain mindset to train it properly. It definitely is not for everyone.

 

[Tez3]

I am not at all surprised by what you are saying. And just to be clear, neither was I making a contrast between MMA and traditional Chinese martial arts in terms of one being better than the other. Just saying that, if he thinks his local MMA gym trains in a better way, then that is where he should be training.

All I can say about Traditional Chinese martial arts is that it takes a certain mindset to train it properly. It definitely is not for everyone.

I realise that , I can just imagine what he'll say if he did go across to MMA and has his stances corrected and worked on instead of 'real kicks and punches' lol. You can't run until you've learnt to walk. People are often disappointed when they come in an MMA club/gym, they expect just what Simon seems to expect and it just isn't like that. Just like any other martial arts place it's basics, basics, basics first then you do the more advanced techniques. While it was open, sadly the instructor left, I did some JKD for a while, I felt as home there even though the style and techniques were very different because the fundamentals of training were the same as I'm used to in karate and MMA. I've no doubt that if I went to a WC class while I'd be totally at sea techniquewise I'd understand how you train and vice versa I'm sure.

 

[Flying Crane]

I realise that , I can just imagine what he'll say if he did go across to MMA and has his stances corrected and worked on instead of 'real kicks and punches' lol. You can't run until you've learnt to walk. People are often disappointed when they come in an MMA club/gym, they expect just what Simon seems to expect and it just isn't like that. Just like any other martial arts place it's basics, basics, basics first then you do the more advanced techniques. While it was open, sadly the instructor left, I did some JKD for a while, I felt as home there even though the style and techniques were very different because the fundamentals of training were the same as I'm used to in karate and MMA. I've no doubt that if I went to a WC class while I'd be totally at sea techniquewise I'd understand how you train and vice versa I'm sure.

yeah, and the need to keep reinforcing those basics never goes away. That should always be a significant part of the training, no matter how advanced one gets.

 

[MJS]

Some posts on stance training were split into a new thread. There was some good discussion on the subject so this thread can be dedicated to that topic.

 

[bully]

I have always been taught that stance is extremely important in Wing chun, in China even more so. We were doing more stance training than I ever did in my Western classes and it payed dividends in my footwork and general movements.

Just wish I had 5-6 hours again per day to train and no distractions:uhyeah:

 

[Xue Sheng]

"I don't know anything about Derek Fung so I'm not his defender nor detractor. I'm going by the statements that you have made, and everything you've said tells me you do not understand kung fu. Stance actually IS everything. Without stance, you've got very little, and your comments make it clear that you don't even understand what stance is. You've really got 20 years of martial arts? Honestly, with what you've said it sounds to me like you've got 1 year, 20 times.

But hey, you are the one who decided to come on the scene, resurrect a thread that has been dormant for 7 years, and dog on someone's teacher. Sure, it's always OK to resurrect old threads if there's something to add to the discussion. But resurrecting the thread with the only reason being to criticise someone, and that's the VERY FIRST post you've made on the entire forum, it's trolling at its worst. So I call it like I see it. You are a simpleton, plain and simple. Go back to your hole in the mud and hide your head from the sun."

Ok, let's get a few things straight. Now read this carefully idiot. The words kung-fu mean 'work' and 'effort' in Chinese. Good kung-fu is kung-fu which works in AN ACTUAL FIGHT. Kung-fu is not ALL about the stance. It is much more than the stance. One of the reasons why a lot of kung-fu guys get their butts whipped when they step into the ring against MMA guys, and jiujitsu guys is that they haven't done enough of the actual applications of fighting--e.g. done enough drills with actual punches and kicks, and gotten out of actual grabs and locks, nor have they done enough conditioning. No amount of 'correcting the stance,' 'training the apex' or 'holding the invisible ball' will help you with reading your opponent, timing, distancing nor the kinetics of actual fighting. The same reason that doing a 'tou lou' a thousand times will not make you a fighter at all.
Standing in a fixed stance against a static punch, is not going to make you a fighter. You need to have a LOT of punches and kicks thrown at you to know how an opponent actually moves, and how you train your muscle memory to deal with it. Watch a couple of good fighters actually spar. They don't actually keep a stance--they're doing their best to avoid being hit, and they move around a fair bit, and they can read their opponents moves too. Good martial arts schools practise these attributes. A lot of wing chun schools are basically no good--they start chi sau far too early, and they crap on about a stance (as I've indicated above). Flying Crane, have a think about what I said. If you want to learn a stance, then hold it. If you want to learn to fight, then have people throw punches and kicks at you--makes sense doesn't it?

Most of that says you are entirely clueless about Traditional Chinese Martial Arts or for that matter martial arts as a whole

First the term Kung Fu as it applies to Chinese martial arts, although you are correct that it means hard work it does not mean Chinese martial arts, the term Wushu does and to be good at Wushu requires Kung Fu.

Next you are completely misunderstanding what is meant when they say Chinese Marital arts is all about stance. The fact that you stated "Standing in a fixed stance against a static punch, is not going to make you a fighter" says you are fairly clueless about MA as a whole

Let me clear this up for you a bit, since you likely do not have the background that you are claiming to have.

Try building a house without a foundation. Try growing a tree without a root... that is what stances mean to Traditional Chinese martial arts.

So endth the lesson

 

[mograph]

Y'know ... could this be settled by saying that fixed stance training is a necessary, but not sufficient component of martial arts training?

 

[Eric_H]

Ok. Firstly Eric H, I've been in the martial arts for nearly 20 years now. I've done hung gar, and wing chun, so I know what I'm talking about.

I sincerely doubt that.

As to your assertion "Basic Kung Fu *is* stance work. It *is* the most important part of your kung fu. You can't survive energy challenge if the other guy is able to bounce you all about willy-nilly". Stance work is only a small part of learning kung-fu. I trained with Ian Protheroe up in Brisbane, and he never harped on about training a stance from a fixed position.

You keep bringing up this Ian Proteroe person, obviously you identified with his teachings. Different people teach in different ways. Just because he taught you something does not make it true.

When you're in a real fight, training your stance from a fixed position isn't going to do a lot of good. It's training actual punches and kicks, doing drills, and training your footwork and muscle memory that counts. A guy throwing punches and kicks at you, and your instructor telling you how to move, where to block properly, where to position your arms and legs, and doing this hundreds of times is how you become a good fighter.

Since you already *clearly* know so much about fighting, why even bother seeking out a new Sifu at all?

Derek Fung's school was not teaching that at all. All the stance work in the world isn't going to count for anything when the fight goes to the ground either. Don't believe me? Have a look at MMA, where many of the fights go to the ground. The way Derek Fung was teaching kung-fu, you'd get seriously hurt in a real situation.

So you have sparred with his senior students to see how good they are then?

Also, what's wrong with an Academy Pledge? Martial arts isn't just about fighting--it's about creating self-confident, healthy individuals who use their skills for good, rather than going around beating people up.

And wouldn’t that same pledge then stop you from coming on to a forum and acting in the disgraceful manner in which you have already? I mean this Ian Proteroe probably had some such nonsense at his school – no?

Listen dude, a very traditional Chinese teacher didn’t come up and kiss your behind like you wanted him to and now you’re all bent out about it. You need a westernized teacher, I hope you find one. At the same time, dogging on an older Chinese gentleman for teaching in the very classical Chinese manner when you’re learning Chinese Kung Fu is kind of ridiculous. GM Ip didn’t hand out much of anything unless you had been with him a long while, I’m sure Sifu Fung is the same.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Y'know ... could this be settled by saying that fixed stance training is a necessary, but not sufficient component of martial arts training?

I would say not exactly

I would think it would be more along the lines of necessary, but not sufficient if your goal is to understand and apply the complete art and be a martial artist.

 

[Punchy]

Y'know ... could this be settled by saying that fixed stance training is a necessary, but not sufficient component of martial arts training?

Sure....if you want to take all the fun out of it

 

[Simon L]

There's the thing: stance is NOT simply squatting down and nailing your feet to the floor, never to move again. Stance is both building the strength in the legs, AND understanding how to use that strength actively to drive your technique from the ground up. That is where real power comes from, far more than from the strength of the arms and shoulders. That is what stances are all about, and it's a training process to develop both the strength, AND the ability to use that strength. This is fundamental to Chinese martial arts, and any good teacher will take his time with this and not rush thru it, because this builds a foundation for far better skills in the long run, even if it doesn't satisfy a desire for quick fighting ability right this instant.

If you feel MMA is somehow THE yardstick against which all martial arts should be measured, then go do MMA. Why do traditional Chinese martial arts, if that is your belief? Go follow your interests, and don't do things that don't satisfy your interests, or don't fulfill your vision of what martial training ought to be. But don't hold any illusions that you've got all the answers. As I've mentioned, the things you've posted indicate to me that you have a very superficial understanding of Chinese martial arts.

Ok Flying Crane, let's get a few things straight here. I never said that stance was simply squatting down. What I did say was that there is far too much emphasis on it--it's one of the criticisms that Bruce Lee had with traditional Chinese martial arts. No amount of training the stance will help you learn about timing, distancing, reading one's opponent or even more importantly muscle memory. You learn to fight by having punches and kicks thrown at you, grabs and locks applied, and repeating this hundreds, if not thousands of times. Understanding how to use strength is of no use, if you don't know how to move, where to block, how to read your opponent etc. I know what I'm talking about. You can hold a stance for hours each day, but your muscle memory and contact sensitivity WILL NOT BE TRAINED. These are some of the reasons that A LOT of kung-fu guys don't do all that well in real fights. In a real fight, it's those attributes which I previously mentioned which count, because your stance becomes disrupted or even worse the fight can be taken to the ground. Now have a look at this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvKRyTSr5Mo&feature=related

If you watch it, you'll realise that the fight goes to the ground. Where is the kung-fu guy's stance once he's on the ground? Once Royce Gracie got close to him, the other guy got flogged. You need to realise Flying Crane, that the empirical evidence of most kung-fu fighters is not that great when they go against guys in the ring. There are exceptions--where I trained with Ian Protheroe, we did a LOT of punches and kicks, drills, actual grabs and holds, how to move, where to position yourself etc. Also, a lot of the stance training, particularly in wing chun, is WRONG. The inverted toe stance gives one insufficient mobility. Many people in martial arts are not particularly bright--they don't stop and think whether something works or not, and just blindly listen.

 

[Flying Crane]

Ok Flying Crane, let's get a few things straight here. I never said that stance was simply squatting down. What I did say was that there is far too much emphasis on it--it's one of the criticisms that Bruce Lee had with traditional Chinese martial arts. No amount of training the stance will help you learn about timing, distancing, reading one's opponent or even more importantly muscle memory. You learn to fight by having punches and kicks thrown at you, grabs and locks applied, and repeating this hundreds, if not thousands of times. Understanding how to use strength is of no use, if you don't know how to move, where to block, how to read your opponent etc. I know what I'm talking about. You can hold a stance for hours each day, but your muscle memory and contact sensitivity WILL NOT BE TRAINED. These are some of the reasons that A LOT of kung-fu guys don't do all that well in real fights. In a real fight, it's those attributes which I previously mentioned which count, because your stance becomes disrupted or even worse the fight can be taken to the ground. Now have a look at this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvKRyTSr5Mo&feature=related

If you watch it, you'll realise that the fight goes to the ground. Where is the kung-fu guy's stance once he's on the ground? Once Royce Gracie got close to him, the other guy got flogged. You need to realise Flying Crane, that the empirical evidence of most kung-fu fighters is not that great when they go against guys in the ring. There are exceptions--where I trained with Ian Protheroe, we did a LOT of punches and kicks, drills, actual grabs and holds, how to move, where to position yourself etc. Also, a lot of the stance training, particularly in wing chun, is WRONG. The inverted toe stance gives one insufficient mobility. Many people in martial arts are not particularly bright--they don't stop and think whether something works or not, and just blindly listen.

Oh, now I see what you are talking about. Thanks for setting me straight. You know best. :rofl: