rooted vs. mobile

[bodhitree]

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?

[norther practitioner]

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.

[PangQuan]

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.

[SanSoo Student]

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.

[bodhitree]

thank you all for the imput. i definately agree that powerful stiking can better occur when rooted.

[SevenStar]

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...

[Ultimatewingchun]

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.

[SAAMAG]

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.

[norther practitioner]

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.

[SevenStar]

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.

[norther practitioner]

yeah, that's what I was getting at.

cool, I thought so, but I like to come out and say it...:p ;) :D

[Becca]

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 ***** 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.

[SAAMAG]

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.

[omarthefish]

rooted =/= immobile

deep stance =/= rooted

Much more subtle than that.

[SimonM]

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. .

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: :D

[Becca]

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: :D


You're no fun! :mad: :p

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.

[unkokusai]

I only do the rooted thing when I want to resist takedowns....


I'd think that is the worst time to do it.

[Becca]

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.

[omarthefish]

You're no fun! :mad: :p

Omoar- A deep stance is rooted, yes.

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. :)

[Becca]

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?

[omarthefish]

You said you disagree that a deep stance is rooted.

That's not exactly what I said.



Am I right to thing you mean that you don't have to be in a deep stance to be rooted?

Yes.


Or are you stating that you don't thing a deep stance is rooted?
[/quote]
No.

It doesn not follow that:

If deep stance =/= rooted Then deepstance = not rooted.

[brothernumber9]

depth of stance has little to do with root? I assume one is not refering to a resisting or pushing state for such. For example, compare high bow and arrow to low bow and arrow, back is aligned straight with the back heel.

one who is 150 LBS pushing one who is 200lbs. From high bow and arrow stance is more difficult to push straight and resist or move the 200 pounder back. From lower stance is easier. Similar to pushing a car that's stuck or out of gas. standing higher it is difficult, in a lower stance the body has a better angle for resistance in a straight line. Another example would be a football running back resisting a tackle. They often dip into the tackle, lowering their center of gravity. by leaning forward, in order to stay on feet, one foot comes forward ****her, hence a deeper stance.

[Becca]

That's not exactly what I said.



Yes.


No.

It doesn not follow that:

If deep stance =/= rooted Then deepstance = not rooted.[/QUOTE]
Ah. I get what you are saying. But I have to disagree. I find the lower my stance, the better my root.

[omarthefish]

Ah. I get what you are saying. But I have to disagree. I find the lower my stance, the better my root.

I would answer that you are more "stable" but that this is a different idea than what is traditionally called "root" in Chinese. The idea comes mainly from IMA and it is very subtle. The depth of your stance is not related at all the way I see it. This very topic title is an interesting irony for me since as I understand it, true "root" is dynamic. To quote someone else for a moment:


From high bow and arrow stance is more difficult to push straight and resist or move the 200 pounder back. From lower stance is easier. Similar to pushing a car that's stuck or out of gas. standing higher it is difficult, in a lower stance the body has a better angle for resistance in a straight line.

This is totally not a good example of rootedness. In fact, when you get down low and lean in to your broken down car as you push with both legs at that very slight engle to the ground so you can push with more hozizontal strength....you have no root at all. If the car were to suddenly vanish, you would fall on your ass....or your face, depending on wether you were facing the car or away from it.

Root is a very subtle thing that has more to do with some very subjective things, sensitivity, impulse vectors within your body and your relationship to someone else along with your ability to redirect energy rather than some kind of static stability based on the crude physics of your stance. Stance training definately helps develop root but in more subtle ways than simple leg strength.

[omarthefish]

p.s.

This is what I am getting at:




Strong root has to do with "the ability to rejust balance" and has little to do with high stance or low stance. If you have high stance then it's easy to pick you up. If you have low stance then it's easy to push you down. If you can destroy your root and then regain your root then that's the true root.

[wdl]

The biggest reason you have to be mobile and rooted in a street fight when you strike is if you have to fight multiple opponents. That adds a whole other dynamic to the fight situation. You have to have a better sharper sense of timing, when to move, when to root and strike and how to work against your opponents for a favorable outcome. Odds are against multiple fighters your going to get your butt handed to you anyway(unless of course they are untrained).

Then you get into the many theorys for fighting multiple opponents from there.

-Will

[Becca]

p.s.

This is what I am getting at:p.s.


Quote:
Originally Posted by YouKnowWho

Strong root has to do with "the ability to rejust balance" and has little to do with high stance or low stance. If you have high stance then it's easy to pick you up. If you have low stance then it's easy to push you down. If you can destroy your root and then regain your root then that's the true root.


__________________



Like I said, I get what you are saying. I just don't agree. :) Not everyone's low stances are easy to knock over. Not everyone's high stances are easy to lift of the ground. It hsa everything to do with A) how well the root is held, B) how stiff thier footwork is, and C) wether their opponant is sensitive enough to spot a break in thier root and exploit it before the root can be re-attained.

[SevenStar]

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.[/b]

more tools in the tool kit doesn't necessarily equate to being better off. A perfect example here are boxers and thai boxers. they have very few techniques comared to most other styles. IMO, a bigger key is how well you can use the techniques you have. If your tool kit consists of more tools, but they are poor quality, are you really any better off?


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?

I disagree as well - a deep stance does not indicate root. it CAN be rooted, but it also may not be.

[SevenStar]

depth of stance has little to do with root? I assume one is not refering to a resisting or pushing state for such. For example, compare high bow and arrow to low bow and arrow, back is aligned straight with the back heel.

one who is 150 LBS pushing one who is 200lbs. From high bow and arrow stance is more difficult to push straight and resist or move the 200 pounder back. From lower stance is easier. Similar to pushing a car that's stuck or out of gas. standing higher it is difficult, in a lower stance the body has a better angle for resistance in a straight line. Another example would be a football running back resisting a tackle. They often dip into the tackle, lowering their center of gravity. by leaning forward, in order to stay on feet, one foot comes forward ****her, hence a deeper stance.


using this logic, boxers are not rooted...

[SevenStar]

Not everyone's low stances are easy to knock over. It hsa everything to do with A) how well the root is held, B) how stiff thier footwork is, and C) wether their opponant is sensitive enough to spot a break in thier root and exploit it before the root can be re-attained.[/b]



the lower your stance is, the wider your legs will be, typically. this means that you are ALOT easier to off balance - just in a different direction from your current strong point. it's hard to push you backward, but quite easy to take you at a diagonal angle. How quickly can you readjust your feet? that's when we start talking about how rooted you are...

[MonkeySlap Too]

Deeper means better root for beginners. Structurally, certain deep postures automatically align you better with gravity - so it seems 'natural' that this means there is an automatic correlation between deep stances and 'rootedness.'

Which there both is and isn't. As your training advances, you learn to maintain 'rootedness' even when upright - and it the actions of force upon you or an action you are taken that determines the 'direction' of rootedness.

Being able to sustain this feeling into reality means coordinating your structure, breath, mind, in a plethora of different ways. I make no bones about being out of shape due to my work responsibilities, yet this 'root' gives me a strength that is deceiving compared to how I look right now.

In my school, 'root' is not to be confused with compression. Boxers, FWIW don't have 'root' in the same sense - at least not on purpose. Compression does take advantage of the root path, but is not 'rootedness' - at least how my school defines it.

Then you need to consider substantia and insubstantial. Personally, I'm a big beleiver in footwork to control distance. Wether you wait and bait, or dance and confuse depends more on your oponnent than on your personal reference. But from my experience, you can maintain 'structural alignment' without having to be fully 'rooted.' - nor is it always advantageous to be so.

I'm splitting hairs here, so i hope it makes sense...

[red5angel]

In my school, 'root' is not to be confused with compression. Boxers, FWIW don't have 'root' in the same sense - at least not on purpose. Compression does take advantage of the root path, but is not 'rootedness' - at least how my school defines it.



Actually I like that explanation. Soemthing hasn't completely sat right with me and the idea that boxers "root"

[SevenStar]

Actually I like that explanation. Soemthing hasn't completely sat right with me and the idea that boxers "root"


something like what? the fact that they don't know they do it? sport guys do alot of things you see tma do - peng, borrowing, yielding, etc. but they are not named, merely part of good technique.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Yes and no.


It all comes down to varying degrees. Although I agree with your statement overall. There are many things that are just the way they are, but at the same time there can be significant differences.

[SevenStar]

Yes and no.


It all comes down to varying degrees. Although I agree with your statement overall. There are many things that are just the way they are, but at the same time there can be significant differences.


why do you say the boxer example is more of a demonstration of compression, rather than root?

[MonkeySlap Too]

Okay, here is how I use the jargon:

Root: maintaining a connection to the ground, via a state of 'relaxed tension, and specific skelatal structure alignments, enabling you to draw movement from the gua.

Compression: "squeezing, or gripping" the ground so you can work against it - expand to create force. EVERYBODY in almost every sport uses compression in some way or another.

Boxers use it all the time in almost every punch - if they were trained well. But boxers do *not* use 'root'. To me 'root' is the building block for 'peng'.

You can argue it, but I had a pro boxing gym in my old club. I love boxing. But boxing does not have this idea... it isn't relevant to what they are trying to do.

Mind you, this is jargon from my teaching... I try to create a consistent, defineable set of language based on the stuff I've been taught, so others might have different ideas.

[SevenStar]

okay - I can see why you said compression. initially, when I read that, I was thinking about the spine.


as for movements of the gua though, what is this structural alignment? throwing the cross and hook involve opening and closing the gua. would you say they root somewhat when they punch?

[MonkeySlap Too]

Yes, but you are stretching to say it is the same. The difference in emphasis is as great as between ballet and long distance running. Different ai priori assumptions, different training focus. Similar gross movements.

[MonkeySlap Too]

would you say they root somewhat when they punch?

REPLY: Using my jargon, no.

[Becca]

the lower your stance is, the wider your legs will be, typically. this means that you are ALOT easier to off balance - just in a different direction from your current strong point. it's hard to push you backward, but quite easy to take you at a diagonal angle. How quickly can you readjust your feet? that's when we start talking about how rooted you are...

Depends on which deep stance you are in... There is more than just horse. :eek: The point of learning to move between stances is imortant because there is more than one. And if the deep stance is not rooted, than the student has failed to grasp just what the heck they are s'posed to be doing. There is no other practical purpose for deep stance work other than to learn rooting. As a side note:
It hsa everything to do with A) how well the root is held, B) how stiff thier footwork is, and C) wether their opponant is sensitive enough to spot a break in thier root and exploit it before the root can be re-attained. :)

[MonkeySlap Too]

Becca said:
"Depends on which deep stance you are in"

Reply: No it doesn't. Any stance by nature of being deeper gives you better levers - the only thing that changes is the directions at which you are vulnerable.

Becca said:
"There is no other practical purpose for deep stance work other than to learn rooting."
REPLY: This is not correct either. Deep postures and footwork facilitate most Shuai techniques and combinations. They have great utility in application, just not when you are standing across from your opponent. There are more uses too...

[SevenStar]

Depends on which deep stance you are in... There is more than just horse. :eek: The point of learning to move between stances is imortant because there is more than one. And if the deep stance is not rooted, than the student has failed to grasp just what the heck they are s'posed to be doing. There is no other practical purpose for deep stance work other than to learn rooting. As a side note: :)


actually, it refers to all stances. And the horse hadn't even crossed my mind. I was specifically thinking about a bow and arrow stance when I made that post.

and, like the b@stard said, there are multiple uses for deep stances.

[MonkeySlap Too]

I think I'm going to just change my name officially...

[Becca]

Becca said:
"Depends on which deep stance you are in"

Reply: No it doesn't. Any stance by nature of being deeper gives you better levers - the only thing that changes is the directions at which you are vulnerable.


7* said "the lower your stance is, the wider your legs will be, typically". This statement does make it directly matter which of the extreme low stances you are in. Your legs are in no wasy spred wide in twisted, cat or san shou... :rolleyes:



Becca said:
"There is no other practical purpose for deep stance work other than to learn rooting."
REPLY: This is not correct either. Deep postures and footwork facilitate most Shuai techniques and combinations. They have great utility in application, just not when you are standing across from your opponent. There are more uses too...

Didn't say they didn't have lots of uses, but when talking to a grappler, you get your point across better if you put it in thier terms. :)

BTW, there are more uses for rooting than while faced off. Every thing you listed uses the deep stances to teach rooting, as rooting is a major part of most things, from walking on ice to sertain chi gong techniques. :)

[MonkeySlap Too]

Becca, SEvenstar said:
"the lower your stance is, the wider your legs will be, typically. this means that you are ALOT easier to off balance - just in a different direction from your current strong point. "
The operative words being 'typically' and 'different direction. Seven is pretty well educated, so perhaps I inferred more than wa there but I doubt it. You interpeted him talking about a horse stance - he wasn't. You also said:

"There is no other practical purpose for deep stance work other than to learn rooting."

You said this because he was a grappler? How does that make sense?

Honestly, I just jumped in to help clarify some things that were incorrect coming from my perspective. They still are.

Oh, and I was using irony when I was talking about standing across from your opponent.

[spiraler]

there are many stances involved in developing root, in my opinion, besides the basic horse, bow, twist, cat, kneeling, crane,etc. one of my favorite techniques for rooting is the mud sliding step used in ba gua, this way you are rooted and mobile at the same time.the weight is placed on the rear leg. the weight is not transfered to the lead foot until the body is over it and you are ready to pull the rear leg through. this way it is difficult to be swept, and your movements become more cat like.