Stance confusion

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Kung Fu Forum
41

[QUOTE=kwaichang;769207]This section describes the application of the IBX-H101 exercise … www.mdsystems.com/evidenc.htm thuis study shows a decrease in BP with Isometrics
AthleticQuickness.com this is on quickness and speed with athletes
www-rohan.sdsu.edu/dept/coachsci/csa/vol21/morrisse.htm this one is interesting
www.cttaichi.com/articles/kneestrength.htm This one is close. KC

There is so much out there but these support my argument for the most part.
KC[/QUOTE]
you’re kidding, right? none of these studies deal with muscle strength relating to isometircs

the first study shows a change in blood pressure - what does that have to do with strength in a muscle?

the second is essentialy what I posted above in regards to specificity of training in terms of type and at a given angle of ROM; there is the statement regarding the lack of strong evidence for dynamic versus static training in terms of muscle hypertrophy being similar, but what it ignores is the motor learning data that shows that practicing what you actually want to do is better than practicing something else and looking for transfer (give me e few days, I can dig up the references…)

the third shows that people doing something involving weightbearing (in the case taiji) get stronger in their quads than people who do noting (control group); nothing about isometrics per se; and this is geriatric population, so they probably were deconditioned to begin with, so of course they will have strength gains

42

[QUOTE=RD’S Alias - 1A;769228]that was a nice dissertation there…now explain why 6 weeks of almost exclusive hard stance work yielded a wide range of results, WHICH INCLUDE a reduction in joint pain left over from damage caused by previous bad gout attacks, if your point that “if put under repetative direct stress, tey actually get weaker” is true? ?

How come I have more agility? why do I have more ease of movement in ALL ranges of motion if the stance work is such a narrow, and specific practice?

If I was engaged in some other practice maybe you could say it was that, but all I did additionally was pushups, pull ups etc…

The next 6 weeks will be all footwork and mechanics drills. The only stance work will be holding the ball for 10-20 minutes prior to my workout. I was expecting the results of the LAST 6 weeks to come then.[/QUOTE]

the reduction in jooint pain can be explaned by a sort of generalized adaptative response to any sort of input; this is why most people with low back pain of a non-structural nature get better doing almost any kind of gentle non-specific exercise;

in other words, give the system something to do that is not inherently damaging and it will use it to move towards homeostatis; that includes resolution of of previously unresolved chronic inflammation;gout is build up of uric acid crystals in the joints leading to inflammation - so no surprise it got better

and I didn’t say that stance training exposed the joints to direct repetative stress, BTW - I was explaining that unlike muscles, that when stressed over time get stronger, joint structures do the opposite - stance trianing does not occur at the end of range, so that’s not a concern

as for an increase in agility, that may or may not be a subjective feeling - you would need to have been tested in some sort of objective framework to determine if in fact you are more agile; at the same time, doing stances, you have been working quads and glutes a lot (even isometically); this has likely caused a reciprocal inhibition in the hamstrings and adductors, muscles that are typically hypertonic and therefore “tight”; emphasizing the quads / glutes you have decreased the resting tone in the antagonist muscles, and thererfore have greater extensability and ease of motion in general throughout the lower quarter

43

I guess my question was not worth answering. I will ask again. Why work from a stance that requires constant training to be able to use? As we get older and our personal obligations change we might not be able to spend the time to keep ourselves physically fluid. The body suffers age. Why not a stance that is more natural to work from? One that does not require you to work hard continually just to be able to use it? For instance, a gun is one heck of a weapon until it is out of bullets, and then it is still a gun but not quite as effective.
Your stance is a constant. Every move you make you try to do from a stance. As you move or flow from one technique or move to the next you try to maintain yourself in some form or version of that same stance. This is what gives you power and structure. Your stance is pretty much everything. The best way I have found to practice my stance work is to do it in conjunction with training my footwork. You need to be able to shift and move about quickly and with fluid motion, and in doing so you also need to be able to maintain some form or version of that stance. A stance should be such that you can hold it for as long as you want to. Not just a few minutes.

44

[QUOTE=Lee Chiang Po;769234]I guess my question was not worth answering. I will ask again. Why work from a stance that requires constant training to be able to use? As we get older and our personal obligations change we might not be able to spend the time to keep ourselves physically fluid. The body suffers age. Why not a stance that is more natural to work from? One that does not require you to work hard continually just to be able to use it? For instance, a gun is one heck of a weapon until it is out of bullets, and then it is still a gun but not quite as effective.
Your stance is a constant. Every move you make you try to do from a stance. As you move or flow from one technique or move to the next you try to maintain yourself in some form or version of that same stance. This is what gives you power and structure. Your stance is pretty much everything. The best way I have found to practice my stance work is to do it in conjunction with training my footwork. You need to be able to shift and move about quickly and with fluid motion, and in doing so you also need to be able to maintain some form or version of that stance. A stance should be such that you can hold it for as long as you want to. Not just a few minutes.[/QUOTE]

I know what you’re referring to. If you want to discuss that here, call it holding stake or holding post, not stance training. We’ve been discussing a whole nuther anuimal in this thread.

45

PT I said i just posted them to passify the BP one was talked about from the other thread so I included it. As far as geriatric is concerned I pondered that to see who would jump on it and most did. Iwould research the effect of long duration low intensity stress on non -contractile tissues. BTW transitional is predominantly neurological in nature as far as the brain being plastic and all you know old dog new trick sort of. BTW about the angle during Isometrics that theory has been rebuked with later studies , dont ask me to post any look them up for your self. It seems you are just repeating what you were taught in PT school . KC PS anyone can poke holes in a study even the dbl blind ones.

46

No,

The problem is when people act like something fabled to be 1,600 years old, that in itself is another discussion, is better than current sports science and modern sport training practices.

47

[QUOTE=RD’S Alias - 1A;769047]

Now, I have been doing this, and just body weight conditioning for about 6 weeks and little else. Today I did my forms for the first time in a long time, and found I was exceptionally loose, agile and moved with a much greater smoothness precision and balance. I’m talking a HUGE improvement over the last time I did my forms 6 + weeks ago.[/quote]

So let me get this straight…holding stances made your stances in your forms better. Shocking!!!:wink:

I don’t think that anyone questions whether practicing stances makes your stances better or easier to hold.

I think what is questioned is the utility of stance training at all…and for that matter forms.

I tend to think that weight bearing exercises that move your leg through the full range of motion would be preferable to holding a static position.

And this gets to larger issue. Holding low stances is extremely inefficient. You cannot fight that way and not tire quickly no matter how much you practice it.

It would preferable to train your legs in a more general way and then work on being as efficient and economical in your fighting movements as possible.

In other words, practice specifically to be efficient, practice generally as though you are inefficient.

FP

48

So let me get this straight…holding stances made your stances in your forms better. Shocking!!!

Reply]
Actually, that is the funny part…They got a little more stable, and a little deeper, but that is about it. I don’t seem to have made any progress so far as the length of time I can hold them, and they certainly don’t seem to have gotten easier in the last 6 weeks. I still hit a wall around the same holding times as when I started 6 weeks ago. You’d think by now, the 5 minute horse stance would have improved to at least 6 minutes…but it hasn’t.

I still start shaking uncontrollably somewhere around 4 minutes (Kills me when i used to be able to go almost 20), and I actually start falling over no matter how hard I fight not to, at or near the 5 minute mark.

In 6 weeks, I improved my hold time by only 8 seconds on the first stance…6-7 seconds on the last one. When I was young, in my 20’s this very same routine tripled my holding time in the same period. I went from 3 minutes to NINE…(God age sux!!)

All the progress is in areas NOT related to stances…like the ability to move smoothly in between the stances..which is something I didn’t practice at all.

I held the stance till I fell over, and then stood up walked around or sat, or layed down for a minute or two and then did the next stance on the list, and the next, and then the next and so on etc… untill I could no longer stand at all, and it took 20 minutes of sitting there recovering before I was capable of getting up and walking back to the car. I repeated this process 3 times a week, for 6 weeks and did nothing else but pushups, pull ups and on rare inconsistent occasion a bit of bench pressing. I didn’t even go near the transitions from one stance to another…yet that seems to be where some of the best improvement occurred.

I don’t think that anyone questions whether practicing stances makes your stances better or easier to hold.

Reply]
That is just it, other than I got more able to sink a bit lower, they really didn’t get easier to hold.

I think what is questioned is the utility of stance training at all…and for that matter forms.

Reply]
Well, I seem to have gotten a surprising amount of extra agility, in just 6 weeks, so that alone shows fantastic utility. I bet it would have been even better if I had done foot work drills as a cool down too.

I tend to think that weight bearing exercises that move your leg through the full range of motion would be preferable to holding a static position.

Reply]
I would too, BUT with this recent experience, I’d have to say that the Stance work is as good, or maybe even superior in many ways.

And this gets to larger issue. Holding low stances is extremely inefficient. You cannot fight that way and not tire quickly no matter how much you practice it.

Reply]
If it is so inefficient, then explain all these unexpected results I am having?


It would preferable to train your legs in a more general way and then work on being as efficient and economical in your fighting movements as possible.

Reply]
Well, I think I am going to have to say the common perception must be wrong here. Stances must not be highly specific training, in actuality they must give a wide range of development..much more than previously thought anyway. How else can we explain what happened to me? I wasn’t looking to do anymore then shore up my structure and rooting here. I never expected all this other stuff too.

In other words, practice specifically to be efficient, practice generally as though you are inefficient.

Reply]
I think with all the side benefits I have seen, maybe stance work gives more over all development in a lot of previously unseen ways. Specific training might be to work footwork drills that are specific to your style.

49

[QUOTE=Merryprankster;769202]I’m going to go with the structural argument here.

When you do a bunch of stance work, you don’t get any stronger. However - and especially if you’ve laid off for awhile - your structure improves.

When your structure is good, it takes less muscular effort to do it. Kinda like when you haven’t squatted or benched in a while, and you spend a great deal of time just getting the muscle memory to “lock” your frame and movement groove in place.

That seems pretty straightforward and obvious to me.

I’d say there’s certainly a diminishing return on investment here though.[/QUOTE]

Nice post. Especially the aspect of diminishing returns. So true.

I would like to add my thoughts.

Though we may recieve less and less as we do stance training, or we plateu(sp). This is where I like to see much cross training. For me stance training is part of my leg program, BUT it is only a part. Running, Cycling, Weights/squats/etc. Kicks, as well as many various fun exersizes (tiger crawling, horse hopping on stairs, and other traditional methods)

For instance, one aspect of my stance training is: Standard heel kick from rear leg in deep bow stance, with a syncronized palm/fist strike.

I like to do this kick from a solid very low stance, work it till i cant do it anymore, then raise my stance accordingly.

When you get the ability to throw a very fast and powerful kick from a drop bottom bow stance, doing it from a relaxed upright posture is so much easier. So i use the low stance often to improve my high stances.

though we may not recieve any more benefits from low standing because we have plateued(sp) this doesnt mean to stop, or you will lose all that conditioning you have recieved.

Maintinence is the key. As well as solid cross training. dont get to stuck on doing things the same way all the time.

50

I would like to add for the record.

I dont like doing low standing…i hate it.

BUT, the only reason i still do it is because i have WITNESSED first hand benefits from the training.

IE: ME

actually seeing, touching, smelling, tasting, experiencing something is worth way more to me than all the words one could type on the INTERNET or “supportive scientifical documents” could ever be.

it may not be a lot of change the training will give, but there is an aspect that it helps in, this is why it has benefit to me.

but everyday for hours??? H3LL NO

51

though we may not recieve any more benefits from low standing because we have plateued(sp) this doesnt mean to stop, or you will lose all that conditioning you have recieved.

Reply]
LOL!! Ur tell’n ME!! I used to be able to hold a deep Horse for 20 minutes! 15 of which seemed effortless almost!!

Now I am dying at 3-5…:frowning:

52

[QUOTE=RD’S Alias - 1A;769365]though we may not recieve any more benefits from low standing because we have plateued(sp) this doesnt mean to stop, or you will lose all that conditioning you have recieved.

Reply]
LOL!! Ur tell’n ME!! I used to be able to hold a deep Horse for 20 minutes! 15 of which seemed effortless almost!!

Now I am dying at 3-5…:([/QUOTE]

I feel your pain bro :o

53

The bottom line is most of the guys posting here dont want ST to work it is too hard for them and they are inherently lazy. So let them do there stuff or try to wave away the stance training as un scientific, thats OK those of us that do it will reap the benefits and thay wont. KC

54

[QUOTE=kwaichang;769432]The bottom line is most of the guys posting here dont want ST to work it is too hard for them and they are inherently lazy. So let them do there stuff or try to wave away the stance training as un scientific, thats OK those of us that do it will reap the benefits and thay wont. KC[/QUOTE]

lol :rolleyes:

55

The bottom line is most of the guys posting here dont want ST to work it is too hard for them and they are inherently lazy. So let them do there stuff or try to wave away the stance training as un scientific, thats OK those of us that do it will reap the benefits and thay wont. KC

  1. Just because something is hard doesn’t mean it’s any use to your specific goal. Playing chess like a grandmaster is hard, but it won’t make you a better cook.

  2. Lots of the guys here who are questioning the value of stance work have busted their ass to reach where they are at. Classifying them as lazy is not a very good argument.

56

Again, if stances are being approached as a method for training mechanics, why are there so many questions about the depth of a stance or whether you can fight from it? If you are opening your rear inguinal fold and closing the front one to enter a bow stance, the shape of the stance is dictated by those movements – there’s no question about it, other than how your degree of tension or flexibility might come into play. And if you don’t have the prorioceptive awareness to understand this, you’ve got a teacher showing it to you. And what does it matter whether you can “fight out of” the stance that results? Fights don’t happen “out of” a stance in the first place, they happen through the production and management of force – for example, by the methods you’re learning in your martial arts training.

I don’t think the chinese martial art community can fault “mma nutriders” on this topic when there is so much confusion and misinformation in the community itself.

57

Disagreement? Confusion?

None!

Sifu said!

End of Thread.

58

[QUOTE=Lee Chiang Po;769234]I guess my question was not worth answering. …Why work from a stance that requires constant training to be able to use? …[/QUOTE]It was a good question, but not directly relevant to RD’s question. However, since this is KFM and ‘not directly relevant’ is not completely unusual… :rolleyes:

I think a lot of traditionalists would say that when you’re younger you practice the stances deeper and when you’ve really ingrained the stance into your structure, you can then get the benefits without hitting the really low stance: train low, fight high.

My Japanese internals teacher taught me (and trains himself) in really low hardcore stances but he has done this to such a degree that when he stands normally in a natural stance and I push/kick/punch him his way of absorbing it is uncanny like he was in a full horse. He trains his stance to change his structure and his way of standing/moving (I should add his stance training is always moving).

[QUOTE=RD’S Alias - 1A;769336] Reply]
Well, I seem to have gotten a surprising amount of extra agility, in just 6 weeks, so that alone shows fantastic utility. I bet it would have been even better if I had done foot work drills as a cool down too.

If it is so inefficient, then explain all these unexpected results I am having?[/quote]

OK: [QUOTE=Mr Punch;769199] like I said, if all you’re doing for weeks is concentrating on static, rooted feeling, then when you start moving again of course you’re going to feel like it’s lighter![/quote]

Then, like I said:

KC

[QUOTE=kwaichang;769432]The bottom line is most of the guys posting here dont want ST to work it is too hard for them and they are inherently lazy. So let them do there stuff or try to wave away the stance training as un scientific, thats OK those of us that do it will reap the benefits and thay wont. KC[/QUOTE]Ill second streetfighter with a big fat :smiley: and Ill raise him a :rolleyes:

Is there really any need to come out with that BS? And furthermore, can you really be that stupid?! You post a couple of bits of half-related evidence, say, I thought that would be enough because of all the real evidence out there, then change it to, Oh well, I only posted it cos I knew you lot would criticize it and anyone can criticize anything and now you think you know what everyone else is doing in their training, and accuse people who do train differently of being lazy? Im afraid, youre starting to sound like an ass.

FTR and FWIW, Ive trained lots of deep, rooting stance work, and found no improvement in anything other than deep stance work. Ive also trained lots of slow-moving deep stepping, and found a lot of improvement in a lot of things, including then using those same motions at speed in sparring. Ive reached plateaux, and sometimes worked through them by other good old-fashioned traditional work: like bagwork, full contact sparring, lifting weights, and then when those have plateaued back to stancework and thus it goes: improvement, training and development cycles. Theres some anecdotal evidence for you.

Now, Ive done this with legitimate (and rogue!) teachers in legitimate traditional arts for 17 years so surely that makes my anecdotal evidence as valuable as RDs, whos trained from video with no partners for the past god knows how long? But, wait, sorry eh, it doesnt agree with you, therefore its worthless and Im lazy? You may even be worse than an ass.

59

, whos trained from video with no partners for the past god knows how long? But, wait, sorry eh, it doesnt agree with you, therefore its worthless and Im lazy? You may even be worse than an ass

Reply]
I have learned from and trained under real people plenty…infact all my core material was taught to me one on one from actual live teachers…that includeds all my core curriculem, over all training methodology, basics, fundemental structure and mechanics, drills techniques, applications etc…

Mostly what I got from video and books are just form choreography to play with during times I had no teachers or training partners and a few neat conditioning exercises or new insite into stuff I already knew. All my real working knowledge and core practice comes from actual real teachers though…but you’d know that if you paid attention, now wouldn’t you.

So please excuse me if I haven’t spent 18 years learning from one obscour, famous Chinese master who’s only ingrish is being able to say “awwww, berrry gooood!” because I studied in the ubber styles under him in a well known secret society/ Temple/chinese resturaunt controlled by theTongs… like you obviously did…:rolleyes:

60

Modern scientific data tells us…

That we need both static and dynamic forms of training to gain our total fitness goals. ( yin yang principle) All training should be done from the inside ( stabilization system) to the outside( movement system).

If the core’s movement system is strong and the stabilization system is weak , the kinetic chain( nervous system, muscle-tendon system and skeletal system) senses imbalances and forces are not being transfered and /or utilized properly. This will result in compensation, synergistic dominance and inefficient movement.

In personal training we use the drawing in manuever which is the samething we do in martial arts training and Qi Gong by tucking the hips up and under.

This helps us find equalibrium, our center of gravity , aligns our skeletal structure, gives us proper posture, connect the du and ren meridians, etc.

If you can not see the value of static stance trainig in your martial arts then you do not know enough about anatomy , physiology,or real martial arts training.