I was wondering what people feel about horse stance training. What has it given you?
I found this article. I feel it does a good job of summarizing the benefits. http://www.hungkuen.net/training-stancetraining.htm
Im a noob at Mabu training, but i can after only some months feel i have a much stronger stance.
I like it!
stances
as part of my taijiquan, i do some yiquan martial stance work, some standing meditation, and also i will take postures from the form and do stance training with them. by no means do i have the time or the inclination to hold these postures for hours upon hours (maybe 1-2 minutes per posture at most, each leg); however, even this little bit of stance work helps tremendously with overall body alignment while doing forms, with feeling grounded, and with leg strength and muscle endurance. i will, from time to time, do some sei ping ma work, but it’s not my favorite. i think that anyone can find a way within their chosen discipline to do some kind of still posture training or stance training. a liitle bit can go a long way toward improving your gongfu.
Sei ping ma training was fine. My first gung-fu teacher made me hold it for 30 min every day. Definitely got some good strength training out of it. But when I learned how to sink into my Sei Ping Ma while executing a hand technique, and how to CORRECTLY transition to other stances to maximize power generation from my CLF teachers is when my skill hit a new level.
plenty of muscular endurance. Not much in the way of strength, tho.
If you say so Sevenstar. I would say structural strength = strength as well. Plus for those of us with naturally strong legs, that time under tension causes quite a bit of muscle growth and recruitment. If you want strong structure in your movements, shouldnt you be doing like the MMA creed, and training as close to use as possible? Squats are great for wrestling cause its a similar movement, they really dont on their own have much to do with San Ti, Sei Ping Ma, etc usage in a fight.
Stance Training.
There is a ton of stuff available in stancework. You can simply hold a stance, switche, throw strikes, use weights, etc. Personally, I have found that gym equipment weightlifting (I can’t think of any other term) is unnecessary if you do a lot of stance training.
I stance train almost everyday aside from in class. In class we hold for about 15 minutes but the legs are worked throughout. At home I usually hold for a bit less. I’m probably goingto get some curled weights to attach to my legs.
[QUOTE=Golden Arms;713540]If you say so Sevenstar. I would say structural strength = strength as well. Plus for those of us with naturally strong legs, that time under tension causes quite a bit of muscle growth and recruitment. If you want strong structure in your movements, shouldnt you be doing like the MMA creed, and training as close to use as possible? Squats are great for wrestling cause its a similar movement, they really dont on their own have much to do with San Ti, Sei Ping Ma, etc usage in a fight.[/QUOTE]
you don’t hold a static horse in a fight - whatever small structural strength gain you have wouldn’t be of serious benefit in an altercation or competition. If it was, judoka would do stance training - and we don’t. you gain the same integrity from repetition of throws, I’m sure.
In any event though, ANY prolonged exercise stops becoming a strength builder and enters the realm of endurance. pushups, high reps with weights, etc. they are for endurance building, not strength. stance training is no different. Once you are holding a horse stance for more than a couple of minutes, you are losing the strength building benefit. even isometric training is done in short bursts, not prolonged time periods.
muscle growth comes from placing a load on the muscles that they aren’t used to. Muscles are lazy - they won’t adapt and grow stronger unless you make them. I squat 450. The longest I’ve ever held horse is like 10 mins. Guys I know who hold it for 30 have much weaker legs than I do. Why? it’s not a strength builder. They have greater leg endurance than I do.
I’m not sure why you mentioned squats, but yes, they are sports specific. They aren’t major strength builders either, though.
[QUOTE=The Xia;715679]There is a ton of stuff available in stancework. You can simply hold a stance, switche, throw strikes, use weights, etc. Personally, I have found that gym equipment weightlifting (I can’t think of any other term) is unnecessary if you do a lot of stance training.[/QUOTE]
depends on what your goal is. Ideally, I’d mix both types - weight and bodyweight. For pure strength, you can’t beat weights. bodyweight training is great for endurance and explosive strength. I would prefer moving stance training or squats to static stance training though, as with static training, you aren’t building strength or endurance throughout a full range of motion, only in the position it’s being held and a few degrees beyond.
I discovered this when I first started lifting weights. I did a full weight lifting program. I found that everything had its benefits and was challenging except for some of the leg weight exercises. I was doing heavy weights for the legs with little effort. I attributed this to static and moving stance training, kicks, and walking/jogging/running. I decided to continue with these things and not include leg weight machines.
In all honesty, I doubt it was that. it’s genetic. I can do ANYTHING with my lower body - I yoke carry 650, headed for 500 in squat… anything strengthwise involving the lower body is easy for me. However, my bench press, for example, sucks in comparison. walking and jogging definitely aren’t strength builders. Ever notice the pencil legs on a distance runner? sprinters are the ones with strong legs.
genetics.
That thought has crossed my head. However, I can tell you that my legs were not at all well-defined before I started Kung Fu.
genetics.
That thought has crossed my mind. Naturally, I am inclined for bulk muscle. However, I will tell you that before I started Kung Fu my legs had little definition.
that has nothing to do with it. definition is only two things combined:
- lowered body fat %
- residual tension in a relaxed muscle
Can you explain that more?
sure. A “toned” muscle is really nothing more than a muscle that is always flexed to some extent - a perpetual state of tension. This comes from constant training of the muscle.
Thanks. So if muscle definition is an indication of constant training, then shouldn’t definition be an indication of strength since constant training develops strength?
no. training produces lots of effects, depending on the goal - strength, endurance, explosiveness, speed… Also, don’t forget the other part I mentioned - low body fat. there are crackheads downtown where I bounce that are cut. They don’t lift weights, but they are so skinny that you can see the muscle striations. Also, you have bigger guys who are very strong with no definition, for the opposite reason - higher bodyfat %.
[QUOTE=SevenStar;716438]there are crackheads downtown where I bounce that are cut. They don’t lift weights, but they are so skinny that you can see the muscle striations.[/QUOTE]
I can tell the difference between those who are toned vs. starving. It’s like comparing Bruce Lee to an anorexic.
[QUOTE=SevenStar;716438]Also, you have bigger guys who are very strong with no definition, for the opposite reason - higher bodyfat %.[/QUOTE]
I agree with this.