Do these provide the same conditioning? If not, what differences exist between them?
Reasonable men can agree to disagree, so probably you and I can too.
No, they are different
Horse stance builds structure and endurance. Squats build raw strength and mass.
Ofcourse, one also lends to the other, but these are the primary benefits.
Also the differences between stance training and squats is.
Stance training improves balance, strengthens bones, ligaments, and tendons you become more rooted while increasing inner strength.
While doing squats increases leg strength via increased muscle mass. it does not give the benefits of proper stancework.
I do utilize sqats when I work out along with Stance work but I make sure to stay away from doing heavy weights or trying to max out. I’ll do lighter weights and make sure that I stretch real good between sets, and also stretch during my warmdown
Then how do you gain explosiveness in stance training? Squats help you in that to some degree, at least better than static stance training. Both can give endurance as well. Just squat 1000 times, that’s endurance. Also, squatting will help your balance, especially if you’re trying ot balance a heavy weight on your traps, in front of you, or overweight, etc., Both should strengthen ligaments and tendons as well as muscle. Weight training helps in bone density, so I guess squatting with weights help in that as well. I don’t know if squats help in internal development or root though.
not very comparable
I wouldn’t even compare stance training to squats.While i think both have their place,no amount of stance training will give you the raw strength gained from squatting heavy.If someone can explain to me why i am wrong i’ll gladly listen though.I get a bit tired of the MA community acting as though lifting is something you should avoid and that sitting in deep horse stance,holding rings on your forearms,and doing forms until the cows come home are means to the same ends.IT is akin to saying running a marathon will allow you to double your squat.To me it seems that horse stance works muscular endurance and little power,though more endurance would be great for anyone to add.The balance thing i agree with,but the rest can be gained(and t a greater degree) through the use of squats and it will take a lot less of your time than sitting for 30 minutes.Again,i think the key is to have a degree of both.Who cares if you can hold only your bodyweight for 30 minutes? Is that going to help you when you need to stand up with a 250 pound guy on your back to shake him off? On the other side,who cares if you can lift 500 pounds once? That won’t help much either if the other guy can last a minute and wait until you run out of gas.
strike a balance,
-Devildog
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=“-1”>quote:</font><HR>I wouldn’t even compare stance training to squats [/quote]
I agree you can’t because they are two totally different means giving you different end results.
Besides the question asked what were the differences, not which is better.
Chang Style Novice
check out this thread it should give you a little more insight on the topic being that it was discussed before.
[This message was edited by RENEGADE_MONK on 08-16-01 at 12:14 PM.]
okies..
Weight training helps the elasticity of the muscles and increases the gain of flexibility since it tears the muscles fibers in almost exactly the same way as stretching. It increases strength in the whole range of motion unlike one static shifting stance. It also allows more leverage behind each blow (more muscle fibers).
Stances increase the endurance and density of muscles by prolonged fixed positions. Nothing withstands a legkick like a well conditioned leg. Plus, conditioned legs “give” less when they impact a non moving object (body). I used to lift all the time w/o doing stances and after I picked it up again I noticed a dramatic increase in my kicks impact. The legs just dont bounce off their target anymore, but penetrate like a lance. Is all about the follow through and if you dont do stancework, your kicks will not sting as much as they could.
“If you and I agree all the time, then one of us is unnecessary.”
I get a bit tired of the MA community acting as though lifting is something you should avoid and that sitting in deep horse stance,holding rings on your forearms,and doing forms until the cows come home are means to the same ends.
Let them think that, then we’ll be able to beat them up 
It’s like, in a gym I don’t care how many people there are who only train arms and chest. That leaves less good looking, balanced people to be competition for me
No I’m just kidding, I don’t mind helping people if they ask.
Iron
Stances increase the endurance and density of muscles by prolonged fixed positions. Nothing withstands a legkick like a well conditioned leg
I’m debating whether to bring up something here… I’ll do it later when I have more time. I think this might start a Green Dragon Studios vs. Pavel argument. Actually, I’d love to see them argue, because I think I would learn a ton. Too bad neither of them are here 
bbl,
Iron
Go for it IronFist.
Personally I look at stances and weights as 2 halves of a circle. On one hand you’ve got explosive power, on the other you’ve got sustained muscle contraction. On one hand balance during weighted motion, on the other hand balance through involving all the muscles in the group (the static stance not allowing a single muscle to dominate for a long time). On one hand you’ve got possible benefit of size (if a lot of other factors line up) and on the other you can develop chi. Why not get both?
On a side note, I think that saying stance training builds endurance is a little misleading. Stance training doesn’t mean you can fight for hours on end. Endurance when it comes to anaerobic muscular contraction, yes- similar to isometrics, but not really the same as what people commonly refer to as endurance.
I think they complement each other well. I plan to be doing both once I’m back into training and did both up until recently.
Just some thoughts from an ignoramus.
In my personal experience, stance training helps your body memorize the shape so that you can execute in combat. Weights make you stronger.
I’m currently doing the majority of my stance work the day after my deadlift workout. I want to see what happens when I do stance training after the muscles are shredded. I’ll let you guys know if anything comes of it.
C’mon, it’s worth a shot. 
Most actions of men can be explained by observing a pack of dogs. Not wild dogs, just neighborhood dogs who all scurry under the fence on the same night and set off together to reclaim a glimmer of the glory their species possessed before domestication.
What Water Dragon said.
Don’t delude yourself into thinking stance work is the answer for strong legs.
If you’re approaching stancework as a strength exercise (which should NOT be it’s primary purpose in martial arts; see Water Dragon’s comment), make sure the depth of your stance is the same as you would require for usage (throw out that ridiculous “train low, use high” idea), and be sure to supplement it with squats or other full-range exercises.
Some of Pavel’s exercise plans use this idea.
“Nothing withstands a legkick like a well conditioned leg.”
If you’re trying to deal with a kick by tensing up your leg and trying to “take it,” you’re allready starting off on the “wrong leg.” Bwahaahaha, that was good. But seriously.
As for the explosiveness thing, neither stance work nor squats will do much for explosiveness. Over-reliance upon isometric exercises (eg. if you do lots of proper range stance work for leg strength but do not supplement it with some full-range weight bearing exercises) will dramatically decrease your explosiveness (and vascularization and cellular respiration and bone density and flexibility and innervation and…). If you want explosiveness, first train yourself up to a decent level of fitness over a year or two using traditional weight-bearing exercises, then look into plyometrics.
Braden
Mind listing some plyometrics exercises?
I disagree that weights can’t develop explosive power- it all depends on how you lift them- ie. exercises, rep tempo. weight used, etc.
Weights, being a dynamic exercise instead of static, are definitely years ahead of stance training in terms of explosive power.
Just because you don’t think they are the most efficient means of training explosive power doesn’t mean that weights don’t work. There are many atheletes who have found proper strength/power training to vastly improve their explosive power.
If you can look at the olympic powerlifting competition, see that Turkish guy throw up a clean & press or clean & jerk, 2 or 3 times his weight, in the blink of an eye, and tell me that THAT is not explosive power; then maybe our definitions of explosive power are different.
I looked into plyometrics about 7 or 8 years back.
The exercises looked real cool, but I had joint problems doing the explosive pushups. The book I read also recommended doing frog jumps or something similar. Training my friend recently for his San Da competition, we gave the frog jumps a shot. He nearly blew out his knees trying them and was out of training for 3 days letting them heal.
I also remember the various running drills, some of which required fancy shoes.
I know a lot of people get plyos to work though. I would just like to see some failsafe exercises that everyone agrees on, that have worked for a lot of people..
Just some thoughts from an ignoramus.
Weights don’t build explosiveness? Tell that to all the PL’ers who have 3 and 4 ft vertical jumps.
I wouldn’t listen to Braden for two reasons-
- He’s a dirty cannuck
- He does bagua
Nuff Said
:eek: :rolleyes: 
Found me a pretty good article on Plyometrics, if anyone wants to check it out:
http://www.testosterone.net/html/body_53four.html
I think I misunderstood the exercises before.
I think I get them a little better now.
They did a study on explosive power in football players:
http://www.testosterone.net/html/body_121blood.html
The results didn’t seem to indicate one method was all that much better than the other for developing explosive power; however in other articles they mention that plyometrics are important for athletes looking for functional power.
I guess doing old fashioned “try to touch the rim” jumps I used to do when I was a lil B-Baller would be good for more explosive kicks. And doing some hopping pushups would be good for punches. Just gotta make sure that I don’t spend too much time in the down swing or go too far- this was my problem before.
I plan to use plyometrics to supplement weights and stances; but I could never see this as my sole method for power.
Learn sumpin new everyday
Just some thoughts from an ignoramus.
My weight training partner and I started doing polymetrics 3 yaers ago at the end of our work outs. One particular exersise saved me from tearing up my knee one night. We do 4 sets of single leg bench stands. Place one foot on a bench one on floor. Smoothly stand on the bench pause then lower yourself back to the floor dont just drop. The reason this saved my knee is my team and I were doing a footpatrol one night and i stepped in a stump hole. instead of just falling in I did the bench drill. With forty plus pounds of gear on I wasnt injured. Polymetrics all the way!`
Ironfist - “Weights don’t build explosiveness?”
Lost_Disciple - “I disagree that weights can’t develop explosive power.”
Illusionfist - “I wouldn’t listen to Braden for two reasons.”
Don’t take my word for it. Pick up a book on muscle and neuromuscular physiology and start reading a range of scientific articles on the topic.
“Weights, being a dynamic exercise instead of static, are definitely years ahead of stance training in terms of explosive power.”
Absolutely. I stated in my post that stance training alone will decrease explosive power.
“Just because you don’t think they are the most efficient means of training explosive power doesn’t mean that weights don’t work. There are many atheletes who have found proper strength/power training to vastly improve their explosive power.”
You’ve answered the problem yourself here. Traditional weights are an ideal strength/power training tool, which is one component of explosive power. Clearly, if two people have the same hypothetical ‘explosive power quotient’, but one of them generates more power period, that person’s performance will be better. Proper weight training simply does not directly train the nerves or muscle fibers used for true explosiveness, however.
“The exercises looked real cool, but I had joint problems doing the explosive pushups.”
Yes, good plyometrics are very demanding on the body. You really need a high level of fitness allready (through traditional weight training) to have conditioned your body enough to safely do plyometrics.
“The results didn’t seem to indicate one method was all that much better than the other for developing explosive power; however in other articles they mention that plyometrics are important for athletes looking for functional power.”
Keep reading. It’s somewhat controversial, and you’ll find studies going both ways. Most of the controversy is over the negative health effects (when done by people not properly conditioned), however, and this has caused something of a backlash against the exercises (which the more paranoid of us would suggest is related to the immergeance of studies finding no benefit). It sounds subjective to say “the scientists I like agree on their usefulness,” so instead I’ll suggest examining the physiology of muscles and finding which side is coherent with that.
“Mind listing some plyometrics exercises?”
The basic idea of plyometrics is a load followed by single explosive release. Such as stepping off a box and exploding off the ground when you hit it. Land, relax, repeat. More recently, people have been experimenting with more continuous footwork/bounding drills. The traditional upper body plyometric involves medicine ball training. If you’re really interested, you should pick up some books on the topic. I don’t want to describe specific exercises that can get people hurt if done improperly/if done by people in poor or even average shape.
A good starting place is books by Donald A. Chu. If you poke around though, you’ll find lots of interest in the subject, and lots of peoples individualized exercise programs.
Well, like I mentioned in my follow-up post I was basically doing them wrong; spending a bit too much time on the down cycle, and probably pausing for a bit at the bottom- not to mention using frog jumps that involved really deep knee bends. Ian’s a professional athelete and far from out of shape. I’m almost dead sure it was incorrect form- a mistake on my part.
Once I get some money I’ll pick up some books. My job offer has kinda fallen through at the moment and I’m not doing so well. My list of books to buy right now is pretty huge.
I’ve been doing medicine ball for abs, but again, since I was probably pausing at the bottom (while doing my ab crunch/situp) then I was probably losing a lot of the elastic momentum.
I think we’re pretty much saying the same thing; my personal preference for mixing both may be different; but I was just trying to rebuff your comment where you said “stances and squats won’t do you much good”. That statement implise that you feel squats are ineffective. I’m just trying to state, that eventhough they may not focus exclusively on explosive power, there is some benefit to be had from squats.
If you wouldn’t mind, I’d at least like to see an example of a workout you’d do. I wouldn’t be foolish enough to adopt the routine as my own, but I’m trying to see how the training principles all relate. Like how much the full range of motion matters; among other things. A lot of it seems like what we’re not supposed to do in weight lifting- and that’s riding momentum. The idea of taking out most of the eccentric part of the rep might’ve saved my friend’s knees; even still doing pretty deep knee bends at the bottom of every jump.
While I plan to incorporate them into my training, I still do not agree with removing deep stances & especially weight bearing exercises- well for myself anyway.
Thanks, you’ve been a lot of help.
Just some thoughts from an ignoramus.