My gong fu teacher is really big on rooting and i can see its benefits and where it can be useful, however i’ve found for myself that i prefer fast movement that may not be as rooted. anyone else ever have to ponder this? what did you do?
These are not mutualy exclusive, you aren’t stationary when you are rooted and striking, and it you need to be fairly set with your feet to generate power.
I make sure to develop my root yet at the same time i make sure and train my light fast footwork. Having a good root is very important, yet at the same time being able to dance your opponent into the ground is just as usefull. I say do what your teacher says, and do what you feel is best for you in the long term. You will not forever be with your instructor.
It is something along the lines of practicing deep rooted stances when training, yet in a fight one naturally moves faster. Moving faster leads to having shorter horses, while still maining the proper balance and root for power generation. In otherwords one overexaggerates in training to be able to quickly feel and improvise naturally in real combat situations. Those shorter horses lead to lighter feet.
thank you all for the imput. i definately agree that powerful stiking can better occur when rooted.
Originally posted by bodhitree
thank you all for the imput. i definately agree that powerful stiking can better occur when rooted.
sticking with that, look at a boxer. they have powerful strikes and are mobile…
I only do the rooted thing when I want to resist takedowns…and even then…I don’t always do it. Sometimes I sprawl or do something else that requires more mobility.
But within standup striking and kicking - mobility is the name of the game.
I think I had a thread like this in the wing forum basically talking about if the wing chun footwork was mobile enough for the totality of fighting.
Basically…people kept saying that wing chun has footwork for everything. To be honest, I feel the footwork is very good, and can be used as a basis with which to expand upon for the varying degrees that one might need at any given time. Basically, using the wing chun footwork to come up with a longer range-more mobile, version of it, and of course using the rooted stance when in the clinch or very close range.
What I’ve always told my students and classmates was that stances (in the sense of the classical stances that you would see in any given “classical” ma) are only there to facilitate a movement, nothing more. You don’t actually “stand” in a stance, but you are there momentarily to move energy; press, pull, assist with weight transfers when striking/kicking, or countering the like.
Other then that one should be in a natural fighting stance, the typical 45 degree stance with the weight 50/50 for easy change of direction. Now for us wing chun folks, sometimes we can have the lower body in this position while having the upper body squared to facilitate our in fighting techniques, but when in the outside range, I keep to my 45 degree position. As far as heels vs balls of the feet, I see it as using whatever is appropriate at the time…if I need more of a “biu” or shooting energy in my footwork, I will tend to press with my calf as well - weight on the k1 point, and if I need to be a bit more rooted I will place weight on the entire foot with heels down (usually ONLY when applying in fighting techniques). Whatever is called for at the time.
How do you know what to use when? Experience.
Originally posted by SevenStar
sticking with that, look at a boxer. they have powerful strikes and are mobile…
I’d concider them rooted as well though, being rooted and being mobile can happen…
look at someone who does taiji and actually fights.
yeah, that’s what I was getting at. I guess my reply was actually more geared toward PQ, not bhodi, as PQ said that he thinks it’s important to be able to both root and dance.
yeah, that’s what I was getting at.
cool, I thought so, but I like to come out and say it…
Can’t beat a free swinging heavy bag for training mobility while rooted. Wish I had access to one more often. Makes srtikes and kicks faster, too. My favorite drill is to get it swinging erratically then try to dodge around in while holding a loose horse stance. S’a bitch to keep it from fitting you, setting up combos and still keep rooted enough it don’t knock you over if you miss or hit off center.
I do that normally too…just make sure you keep the hands up…and go with the flow while unloading on the bag…it’s not so bad once you get used to it…just go with it.
rooted =/= immobile
deep stance =/= rooted
Much more subtle than that.
Semi-OT: Fun with heavy bags
My brother and I made heavy bags by lining burlap sacks with old phone books and papers and then filling the center with stones and discarded shoes. One of our favorite body conditioning drills is to get the bag swinging nice and fast and then stand in a nice sturdy rooted horse stance and take the bag straight in the chest. Right now the bags (which hang off of a tree in the back yard) have frozen hard as rocks so we are waiting for a good long thaw before we try that again. :eek:
You’re no fun! :mad:
Omoar- A deep stance is rooted, yes. But you will at some point need to move around. If you stand up to do this, you tellegraph. Added benifit of learning to move without raising out of a deep stance is that you do not loose all of your root. And it is reflexive to sink back into a fully rooted position when you are hit with a blind side move, such as one might expect when doing free-swinging heave bag drills.
dame
I’d think that is the worst time to do it.
agreed. Unless you actually like strain injuries. Dunno, maybe if you are 100% certain you can prevent the takedown by muscling through it or such. The only rooted position I know of that is advisable in this situation is the sprawl. Could be that is what he ment.
I disagree.
But you will at some point need to move around.
I don’t that’s relevant to my point.
If you stand up to do this, you tellegraph.
I agree. But again, I don’t think it’s relevant to what I am trying to say.
Added benifit of learning to move without raising out of a deep stance is that you do not loose all of your root.
As I said before, I don’t believe the depth of your stance realyl has much to do with root.
And it is reflexive to sink back into a fully rooted position when you are hit with a blind side move…
I’m perfectly happy to be sent sailing if I am blindsided. I’m pretty agile. If it looks like I’m gonna land one then nothing makes me happier in this world than an opponent who is well rooted. 
But there is more than one way to handle a situation, Omar. If you only master one fighting technique, you van adapt it to fit, but only after someone owns you like nothing eles. If you take the time to learn a few other techniques, even if you don’t like them, you give yourself more options. Goes back to that whole “more tools in your tool kit” thing.
You said you disagree that a deep stance is rooted. Am I right to thing you mean that you don’t have to be in a deep stance to be rooted? Or are you stating that you don’t thing a deep stance is rooted?