Ma Bu (Horse Stance) Training [Archive]

Losttrak

05-03-2005, 04:24 PM

Kung fu requires strong legs and a supple waist. Without stance training, you will be missing one of those elements. Strong stance skills means your legs have greater density and therefore, armor. Also, when you train deep stances, it creates a better kick. If you train only with weights, you dont have that "sticking" power as you would if you did stance work. I noticed that when I kicked before stancework, I would hit hard but bounce off. After doing stancework, my legs were soo used to resistance that they drove through. Somehow it helps with target penetration, but I am unsure of the physiological aspects of it.

My (horse stance) ma bu is 45 degrees off my center line with my feet on the railroad tracks (parallel). 45 degree bend is nice, as it works more of the leg than a low stance, in my opinion. The lower you get, it feels like I am using more arse muscle than leg.

The most I train is two minute intervals, regardless of how long I can max out at... Its like lifting weights. Its not about doing the max, as it is about repitition. Plus, the more you do horse stances in great repition, the better it feels when you get up. There are times, that your legs literally orgasm in pleasure when you get up. For some of you guys, it might be the only chance you have... :D

Liokault

05-03-2005, 04:28 PM

Losttrak

05-03-2005, 04:35 PM

I think your wrong, but there are so many threads here about this so I wont bother to go into why :p

You are entitled to your opinion. :p

joedoe

05-03-2005, 04:38 PM

I don't often train in a deep horse stance. When I train I use a higher horse stance a lot, and to me that is more important since it doesn't just train the stance it trains the stance while punching/blocking etc. This way you learn how to use your stance to provide the solid foundation for your technique.

sk8fool

05-03-2005, 04:54 PM

I am still a beginer in shaolin and have only been learning for a year now. For me, when trying to do ma bu, I'd have trouble getting my toes to point straight. They would point outwards from me. This technique works for me, maybe it can help for somebody else as well.
I stand with my legs abot shoulder's width apart, and toes pointing outwards/diagonal
with weight on my toes and swing my heels out so that my feet are now facing foward
now my knees are bowed in so I pivot them out so they will be over my feet while lowering myself and am able to get a pretty decent ma bu.

word of honor

05-03-2005, 05:08 PM

hey Eggman, i train in choy li fut and yes, imo upper legs parallel to ground is best. sometimes people will drop below parallel when they start to tire and that is not so good, it is a much weaker position, a collapsed position basically. or they lean their upper body forward, also not good, a tight position, and it takes much more energy to hold.

the other thing we do is make the stance as square as possible. so ideally knees should be in a straight line over the ankles, feel pointing forward. this really works the flexibility of the hips as well as protects the knees from injury (which can happen if you let your knees buckle inward)

as far as low stances and what's the application point of it, i see it in terms of working full range of motion. i may never go to parallel in a practical setting or during sparring but never say never.

imo it is worse to hold a long stance if it degenerates into junk. i hold my sei ping ma/ma bu as long as i can in the proper position until i'm shaking so much i can't hold it any more or the timer goes off.

we do alot of stance training at our kwoon. stances are the foundation of everything so the stronger and more stable the better. also we have stance training forms we practice frequently and repeatedly (oh the burn)

i find holding sei ping ma is as much about exercising the will as it is about making the legs stronger and more enduring. because once you start to shake it really becomes mind over matter. but if i prepare myself in the right frame of mind to stay relaxed in body and breadth, it's amazing how much longer it takes before the shaking begins :)

omarthefish

05-03-2005, 07:56 PM

try to throw someone who has developed a strong horse.

it has proven itself effective to me in terms that I have used my horse to gain the upperhand more than once.

"Throwing" may be made more difficult but sweeping becomes a piece of cake.

ie. Dropping your weight only helps protect you against throws involving "picking you up" (quotes for a reason) Anything involving reaping or hooking a leg will be made much easier by the realative lack of mobility.

joedoe

05-03-2005, 08:15 PM

So dropping your centre of gravity is not going to help against a sweep or reaping throw?

Liokault

05-03-2005, 08:35 PM

So dropping your centre of gravity is not going to help against a sweep or reaping throw?

It will help, but not for 45 minuets :D

joedoe

05-03-2005, 08:40 PM

It will help, but not for 45 minuets :D

LOL!!! Unless of course you are a bit backed up, in which casee holding your ma bu for 45 minutes may help :D

Or are you talking about dancing? :D

omarthefish

05-03-2005, 09:07 PM

So dropping your centre of gravity is not going to help against a sweep or reaping throw?

Not really.

I'm basically pulling you that way anyways. Not straight down but in a downwards spiral. Just hook your lead leg in an upwards spiral and a low horse makes things much easier for me.

To be honest I suck at hip throws and shoulder throws. It wasn't untill I figured out the "trick" to sweeping low horse stances that I was able to throw anyone at all. Typical successfull throw for me goes like this:

I try any number of hip or shoulder throw variations.
He ruins my throw by "rooting" or dropping his weight.
I hook the leg and dump him.

Chief Fox

05-03-2005, 09:21 PM

Nobody is just going to sit there and pose in a horse stace in application. In application, the horse stance is more of a transitional stance used for sinking power. you sink into a horse stance for power, you explode out of horse stance for power. You transition from a bow stance into a reverse bow through a horse stance for power. You just don't sit in a horse stance and say, I bet you can't throw me.

I only train the horse stance while in class. Ways that we do this is the already mentioned staff drill where you place a a staff across you thighs while you sit in a horse stance for one minute. If you can't get low enough to lay the staff across your thighs then hold the staff over your head. After a minute transition in to a bow stance for one minute. Then back to a horse for one minute. Then a bow to the other side, back to horse. Then a reverse bow, back to horse, reverse bow to the other side, back to horse. Then we do crane and cat stances with horse stances in between. All for 1 minute each.

Another thing we do is, get into a horse stance and hold your hands over your head. Your budy grabs your hands and steps up on to your thighs from behind you. Hold this for one minute.

Squats are a great way to develop leg strength if that's what you're trying to do.

joedoe

05-03-2005, 09:32 PM

Not really.

I'm basically pulling you that way anyways. Not straight down but in a downwards spiral. Just hook your lead leg in an upwards spiral and a low horse makes things much easier for me.

To be honest I suck at hip throws and shoulder throws. It wasn't untill I figured out the "trick" to sweeping low horse stances that I was able to throw anyone at all. Typical successfull throw for me goes like this:

I try any number of hip or shoulder throw variations.
He ruins my throw by "rooting" or dropping his weight.
I hook the leg and dump him.

I am trying to picture it - so you hook your leg behind theirs and pull their leg forward and up to dump them on their butt?

Liokault

05-03-2005, 09:34 PM

IronFist

05-03-2005, 09:38 PM

Might I also mention the basic physiology principle called SAID?

Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demands

In other words, you get better at what you make your body do, and worse at what you don't do.

Holding a horse stance for long periods of time will make you better at holding a horse stance for long periods of time.

(Due to various physiological principles, once you get past a certain point, probably about 30 seconds to a minute), you won't get much other benefit from it. Your kicks won't get harder, your legs won't get stronger (talking raw strength, not endurance, which you will obviously gain), etc.

Here is where all the "but my sifu says..." starts. Go ahead if you want, but please do a search first so I don't have to repeat myself because I've had this argument many times before and "my sifu says" doesn't win out over science, especially when they talk about things that don't exist, like "uh horse stance builds and stores 'springy power' which gets released when you kick." :rolleyes:

So at any rate, I'm not saying "don't do horse stance," because it can improve your kung fu (ie. your legs won't be as shaky when you do forms, for example). I just don't want people being misinformed about what they're actually getting from their training. The more you know, the more you can tailor your training toward the goals you want to achieve, and the faster you can get there, too.

joedoe

05-03-2005, 10:01 PM

But what if my sifu says that SAID is the way to go? :D

wall

05-04-2005, 12:59 AM

Stance training is actually quite important and should not be neglected nor replaced with other training methods. However holding a stance only builds endurance in a static position, therefore a limited muscle range. It is better to perform stance training by transitioning from one stance to another, holding each for 30sec or so, remaining low and planted on all stances and all transitions.
This stance exercise, repeated for several minutes, improves legs and hip-area muscular endurance, balance, hip rotation and power generation (an essential part of most CMA), body positioning, etc, all things beneficial to performing both forms and combat.
Then squats must be trained for leg strength, jumps and plyos for explosive power ... and must also not be neglected as they complement stance training and cannot be replaced by it!

So stance training if done right and in the right context of other complementary exercises it is an invaluable and integral part of CMA training.

If somebody does not believe so just try it for 1 month every second day by adding it to a squat and plyos program ... it will be a VERY interesting experiment :)

W

omarthefish

05-04-2005, 01:40 AM

I am trying to picture it - so you hook your leg behind theirs and pull their leg forward and up to dump them on their butt?

To oversimplify a bit, do you know what an osoto gari is? Just in case, here's a video:

http://judoinfo.com/video/gokyo/OSotoGari.wmv

In case the direct link doesn't work it's on this page:

http://judoinfo.com/gokyo1.htm

Now in the video the person being thrown is in a fairly high stance but the basic mechanics are close enough for what I am talking about. Look carefully and you'll see the uke actually pick up his left foot so that his entire weight is on the leg that get's swept. Basically if you use your leg to hook his leg behind the knee while you pull his upper body in the other direction like that, it doesn't matter how low his stance is. It doesn't help at all because you are picking up his leg not his COG. Furthermore, you are not lifting his leg straight up so it really doesn't matter how sunk he is. All that matters is that he leaves his weight on his lead leg. In the video the stance is not a horse stance. For a deep horse the guy doing the sweep just needs a slightly different grip and needs to sweep the lead leg.

I've done it a number of times. For the time being, I am leaving out the spiraling aspect because I think it's too hard to describe in text. But the basic throw is a modified osoto gari.

omarthefish

05-04-2005, 01:49 AM

There's actually at least another half dozen throws on there that should be effective aginst someone sunk into a deep horse but I have only really gotten good at osoto-gari and the occasional koichi gari or modified ouichi gari.

I don't train Judo but that website has videos of at least rough approximations of every throw I've ever learned or been taught so I like to use it as a reference even if I learned the throw somewhere else.

JusticeZero

05-04-2005, 03:22 AM

I don't know about horse stance in particular, but I usually recommend long holding of various stances as an error correction method - see if something aches or is strained that shouldn't be. Duration means more things start aching, which means you can better map exactly what it is that you're using to hold that piece of structure.

kungfu cowboy

05-04-2005, 03:40 AM

There may be more to stance training than is apparent on the surface. Check out these articles:

http://www.yiquan.org.uk/art-zz.html

http://www.yiquan.org.uk/art-pom1.html

Royal Dragon

05-04-2005, 06:56 AM

Horse stance and kicking do go together. I know after a couple of minutes it's all muscular endurance, however it also develops and losens the hips which gives stronger kicks as well.

The looser you are, the easier it is to maintian the correct mechanics.

I have also found the twisted horse stance to be superior for developing a good side kick.

Once you can hold for 3 minutes, add ever increasing weighted vests, that helps too.

When you are done, and too tired to really muscle anything, kick the bag. This forces you to use good mechanics as you are too tired to perform well without them.

Lowlynobody

05-04-2005, 07:48 AM

ewallace

05-04-2005, 08:13 AM

Shaolinlueb

05-04-2005, 08:34 AM

i practice mabu training alot. i like it. it helps strengthen joints that are weak and give you soem ncie muslce and conditions the muscle. also more importantly it will make you have a strong stance when done right. now is mabu training alone important? yes, but more important is the mabu to gonbu training and other pivoting exercises with stances, so you learn how to use your twisting power and how to connect everything for striking. total all in all. i spend about 4/5 hours a week doing the stance training. dont just single this training out for learning to use your pivoting, these are mostly strengthen enxercises. you actually have to hit bags too in your fighting stance too, so you learn it that was too.

David Jamieson

05-04-2005, 08:36 AM

horse stance-

develops leg strength at the tendons which surround the joints.

develop strength in the quadriceps

develop basic strength in legs which augments ability to be solid in the rooting and hard in the kicking.

Deep horse stance is for augmentation training. Think of it in terms of strength development as opposed to a functional fighting method. Like a boxer who lifts weights to increase arm strength which in turn increase power and even moreso when structure and alignment is correct.

Good horse stance should develop correct structure and alignment and improve and build leg strength in large muscle mass as well as in the tendons.

that's what it's for. It has been said, "you are only as strong as your horse stance"

fighters should be mobile, but should also be able to root. staying rooted is not recommended when fighting, but getting strong root when making your attack will only make your offense stronger.

If you can sit in big square horse for 45 minutes, then move on and start to work on using that strength.

Anyone can sit in yee gee kim yeung ma for 45 minutes with a little determination.

Big square horse (sei ping dai ma) is not the same as other horse stances. It is very strong by comparison to other forms of the horse stance. All horse stance will develop some strength and root and balance, but big square horse is the ultimate of this practice. Many styles do not use it at all. it is mostly found in shaolin based martial arts.

Lowlynobody

05-04-2005, 08:36 AM

I agree that you don't do horse stance for leg strength. What's your point?

My point was that if there isn't more to this SAID (and there very well could be) it sounds like a bunch of crap. Just as you said :p you jump rope for better cardio not for better jump rope. Just like football players do push-ups but when they play a game of football no one actually does a push-up do they?

MasterKiller

05-04-2005, 08:41 AM

Just like football players do push-ups but when they play a game of football no one actually does a push-up do they? Lineman use that same motion every play against a 300-lb opponent. I'd say it translates well.

Reggie1

05-04-2005, 08:42 AM

Back to the original question:

I do horse stance for ~1-3 minutes a day, 5 days a week. We are a school (God forbid :rolleyes: ) that does a fair amount of horse stance training. Thighs are supposed to be parallel to the floor.

I've never been told that holding horse stance is the best way to make your legs strong or that it will turn you into some champion martial artist. Our school uses horse stance to:

help develop leg strength + stability in new students
help develop the body to get used to low stances for forms work (we use very low stances in all of our forms)
help develop mental toughness and patience
warm up the legs at the beginning of a class

I think prolonged horse stance is one of those 'mental toughness' type tests that our sifu uses to see if you've 'got what it takes'. I know this type of stuff is more CMA-oriented and you MMA guys typically bash stuff like this, but I don't really mind. I like the fact that you have to test yourself this way in our school. That you have to hold horse for a while. Our BB and beyond tests all incorporate holding a parallel horse stance for at least 10 minutes, for up to an hour.

Lowlynobody

05-04-2005, 08:51 AM

Good horse stance should develop correct structure and alignment....

That is a lot of it right there. Horse stance can be a meditation. An exercise for the mind as much as the body building the will, determination and character. Horse stance is one way to get your mind used to pain. Remember these are martial arts not sport fighting. There is a difference and there is a lot of things that go together to make up a martial art other then kicks, punches, locks, throws, etc.

If any one is moving around in horse stance constantly they are using it wrong. The connectivity it will bring will help you to hit with you whole body using a strong connection with the ground (root). So when fighting footwork is fast and light then as you connect you root for an instant and then are light and moving again.

With a well trained horse stance (in southern styles at least) you bridge not only with your arms but also with your legs and and utilise a strong root to disrupt their balance by stepping through their centre line (off balance point). This reduces their striking ability and sets them up for your throw or locks or what have you. Horse stance is also a great thing to throw someone over again by steping behind and past the person and throwing them over your lead leg with your lead arm.

Hose stance has its place.

IronFist

05-04-2005, 08:56 AM

If you SAID to a MMA person training for a fight that he is wasting his time skipping rope because all it will ever do is make him better at skipping I think he would say that just because you SAID so does not make it true.

You dig?

You are partially correct. Jumping rope is done to gain endurance. An MMA guy training for a fight would get better endurnace for fighting by practicing fighting instead of jumping rope. This is why a lot of MMA guys will train for endurance before a fight by getting lots and lots of mat time, fighting a new fresh opponent every minute or two while they themselves don't get any breaks. This is a perfect example of SAID, and will prepare the fighting much better than jumping rope would. However, jumping rope has some cardio benefits that carry over into fighting.

What I said before was that holding a horse stance past a certain point will not have any transferrable benefit into fighting. Then I gave examples. I said it won't increase your strength for kicking, for example, because it's not increasing the force with which the muscles can contract.

I agree that you don't do horse stance for leg strength. What's your point?

My point was that past a certain point it doesn't have any carryover to fighting.

ewallace answered your other questions.

I can tell from your post that you are thinking, though.

Lowlynobody

05-04-2005, 08:56 AM

Lineman use that same motion every play against a 300-lb opponent. I'd say it translates well.

I'm Australian. Not everyone lives in America. What about the rest of the team? And well again you just made my point. Push ups help a Lineman against their 300-lb opponents they don't just make them better at push ups. Do I need to type out more examples?

MasterKiller

05-04-2005, 09:02 AM

I'm Australian. Not everyone lives in America. What about the rest of the team? And well again you just made my point. Push ups help a Lineman against their 300-lb opponents they don't just make them better at push ups. Do I need to type out more examples? Most players will push block, push tackle, or stiff-arm an opponent with the same approximate motion in an American-style football game.

Lowlynobody

05-04-2005, 09:07 AM

What I said before was that holding a horse stance past a certain point will not have any transferrable benefit into fighting. Then I gave examples. I said it won't increase your strength for kicking, for example, because it's not increasing the force with which the muscles can contract.

What about building the will and mental endurance of pain. Does not fighting spirit and mental toughness have benefits that transfer into fighting? I read in a MMA or knife fighting book that the author recomended road running. Not simmply for the cadio but so the runner/fighter can benefit from the pain that is experienced. Same deal with horse stance.

Aside from some things I agree with a lot of what you are saying about much of the physical benefits from horse stance. I must mention that I do not do thighs parallel to the floor when doing horse stance.

You are partially correct. Jumping rope is done to gain endurance. An MMA guy training for a fight would get better endurnace for fighting by practicing fighting instead of jumping rope.

If its all about the most efficent and beneficial methodology why then do they jump rope? Why do boxers do it? How about because there are more benefits then just cardio. Maybe it makes their footwork lighter and faster? Wow multiple benefits now! :p :D

Lowlynobody

05-04-2005, 09:10 AM

Most players will push block, push tackle, or stiff-arm an opponent with the same approximate motion in an American-style football game.

So your saying they don't actually spend time doing push ups just to get better at push ups?

MasterKiller

05-04-2005, 09:13 AM

So your saying they don't actually spend time doing push ups just to get better at push ups?

Actually, they probably don't do many push-ups at all; they bench press because weights provide MORE RESISTANCE than another person would if all you did was practice the motion live all the time. You get stronger using weights than you would if all you did was play football, which makes you a better football player.

But at any rate, I'm not arguing with you. Quit trying to argue with me.

Lowlynobody

05-04-2005, 09:18 AM

Sorry mate. If my writing sounds like I'm arguing I appologise because I'm not. Just trying to make a point tis all. I could make it with bench press if you like?

:)

Shaolinlueb

05-04-2005, 09:58 AM

dude dont worry about master killer. ever since he left the temple to start the 36th chamber, he has been a little too confident. :p

Oso

05-04-2005, 10:08 AM

We do our ba shi almost every day of class (4 times a week).

we do it for 30~60 seconds per stance so 4-8 minutes total. depends on the day and what else I have planned for class.

Sometimes (maybe once a month) we'll do ma bu for 2-4 minutes w/o doing any of the other stances.

I like to mix stuff up a lot though. The other day I had them do 10 break falls then, 30 seconds in a posture, then another 10 falls, repeated till they did 30 seconds in each stance. They ended up w/ 4 minutes of stance training and 80 falls in about 8 minutes total.

they hated me :D

also, we don't just exercise our legs while doing posture training. Our arms are held in different blocks and strikes while holding the posture so our arms are getting some development as well.

Chief Fox

05-04-2005, 10:18 AM

Sorry mate. If my writing sounds like I'm arguing I appologise because I'm not. Just trying to make a point tis all. I could make it with bench press if you like?

:)

So if you're trying to make a point then maybe you should just make it instead of keeping us all in suspense. :D

MasterKiller

05-04-2005, 10:33 AM

dude dont worry about master killer. ever since he left the temple to start the 36th chamber, he has been a little too confident. :p I'm bringing Kung Fu to the people!

Shaolinlueb

05-04-2005, 10:36 AM

I'm bringing Kung Fu to the people!

by people you mean "select few beautiful women, who I hand choose."

;) :p :cool:

PangQuan

05-04-2005, 11:41 AM

When I train ma bu I meditate on my forms. I break them down section by section, movement by movement. I find the most obvious application and run it through my minds eye in slow motion, paying close attention to the whole picture, how each body part moves in conjunction with each other. In so doing I can more easily spot where I need improvement with my movement. I am able to understand much more easily how the movement can be made more fluid by adjusting specific joint movement to a better timed full body syncronization.

By doing this I am completing several things.

1) I am building my ma bu strength.

2) I am building my will power (of mind over body), if you have ever held ma bu for a long time you know it can be very difficult, especially with proper form, this is why alot of people make excuses why they dont do it. Simply they do not have the will power to get pass the pain and suffering.

3) I am building a firm mental understanding of the exact body mechanics involved in each movement.

4) I am building a longer list of applications for each movement in my form, through in depth self scrutinization.

5) I am building a list of things that can be physically worked on for each form, and also building a list of applications to physically practice with a trainng partiner.

Through maximization of my time I am able to do much more than just stand in horse. I am able to improve my inner qualities through standing meditation, and at the same time build my foundation for strong stances.

This is Chinese Kung Fu. This is part of the root. This is tradition and application proved useful through years of war and personal combat. This is also only for those who wish to practice Chinese Kung Fu in a traditional sense. This is also a method adopted by many schools, but not all.

The above mentioned practices need not be used, but if used can maximize the use of your time.

You could do these meditations sitting down, but why not meditate and improve your physical aspects as well. This is what we call looking beyond the veil.

Many will not be able to understand this or even believe in meditative boost, but this means nothing to those of us who practice and understand this type of method.

Many in the modern world of martial arts will never understand kung fu. It is their loss. Not ours. It matters not.

Shaolinlueb

05-04-2005, 12:18 PM

you seem to forget holding a mabu for a long time teaches you concentration, focus, and discipline. to stay in the mabu. to make the pain go away. your not looking aroung, looking at your sifu thinking when is this going to end. your staying in your mabu concentrating, controlling your breathing and focusing on what you are doing at the moment.

PangQuan

05-04-2005, 12:27 PM

sorry, I vaugely include that with will power. I should pay more attention to what I write.

but you are very correct.

I also guess I should add that you whould find as many applications as you can for each part of your forms. This in turn, after much practice of doing this, will develope the ability to more easily spot actual applications for movement. In time you will be able to instantly spot application and memorize movements.

You will have what your sifu shows you, but he will not have shown you everything most likely. Unless your really cool.

Shaolinlueb

05-04-2005, 12:44 PM

PangQuan

05-04-2005, 01:00 PM

oh...okalie dokalie.

I can be pretty vauge sometimes, so I looked back and realized I was being kind of vauge there.

Discapline is a very important factor, and I like how you mention breathing. Stance training is an excellent opportunity to practice some basic qi gung.

SevenStar

05-04-2005, 01:21 PM

SevenStar

05-04-2005, 01:51 PM

So dropping your centre of gravity is not going to help against a sweep or reaping throw?

not really. you are actually planting your leg and giving it to me. common follow ups to dropping the weight against a shoulder throw are the major outer reap and the minor inner reap - o soto gari and ko uchi gari.

SevenStar

05-04-2005, 02:09 PM

I am trying to picture it - so you hook your leg behind theirs and pull their leg forward and up to dump them on their butt?

omar is describing what I was talking about as well:

http://judoinfo.com/images/nauta/kouchigake.htm

SevenStar

05-04-2005, 03:14 PM

If its all about the most efficent and beneficial methodology why then do they jump rope? Why do boxers do it? How about because there are more benefits then just cardio. Maybe it makes their footwork lighter and faster? Wow multiple benefits now! :p :D

Actually, jumping rope doesn't have that great of an effect on footwork. once you understand basic footwork, jumping rope really does nothing for you in that department. footwork training builds better footwork.

fa_jing

05-04-2005, 03:27 PM

paper_crane

05-04-2005, 04:09 PM

PangQuan

05-04-2005, 04:34 PM

That is a very good point fa jing. I dont think one could even take N. Shaolin partially serious if they did not practice ma bu.

Paper Crane

I would listen to your sifu. Sometimes yes you will see wider horse, this can be for improvisation or depending on style. If you mean you see others in your class do it wide, yet your sifu says shoulder. then they are doing it wrong in regards to what your sifu teaches.

Liokault

05-04-2005, 05:11 PM

Have you guys ever taken a vigorous N. Shaolin - style class? You will need Ma Bu training just to get through the class, which involves moving around in low stances and punching, executing techniques etc. Plus, do you want to be concentrating on your shaking/tired legs, or on the technique?

Yeah, thats like my friend the body builder, he does hours of really heavy weights at home so that when he goes to the gym he can lift lighter weights and not look stoopid by sweating and trying hard and stuff :confused:

word of honor

05-04-2005, 06:12 PM

maybe its stupid to ask but when do u know that your mabu is too wide :o cause my sifu say that the horse stance should be slightly wider than your shoulders but i have seen others do way more than that. just what i'm getting at is the mobility factor thats all...... :) thankx
the thing is it takes less work to hold a too-wide horse stance. and if the stance is too wide, it is less mobile generally. and definitely yes paper crane trust your sifu about determining your proper stance. my sifu taught me a way to determine my sei ping ma where you start with feel parallel together and turn out toe heel toe and then heel in line with toe and maybe straight out another inch or two depending on flexibility. every now and again i will check my sei ping ma against this test to be sure i haven't drifted too wide or too narrow :rolleyes:

omarthefish

05-04-2005, 08:48 PM

So if you're trying to make a point then maybe you should just make it instead of keeping us all in suspense. :D

Are you just being stubborn or are you really that dense? Or maybe just didn't read the thread from the beggining. (benifit of the doubt and all that.) The POINT is that this statement:

Might I also mention the basic physiology principle called SAID?

Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demands

In other words, you get better at what you make your body do, and worse at what you don't do.

Holding a horse stance for long periods of time will make you better at holding a horse stance for long periods of time.

Is irrelecant distracting nonsense. The argument says that there is no point in doing ANY supplementary training like weight training, skipping rope, kicking pads etc. Because after all the only the you will get better at by doing 'x' is doing 'x'. so why bother. . .

I edited out the rest of his post because THAT part made sense.

Also, 7* asked a very pointed question to Lost track's comment:

Also, when you train deep stances, it creates a better kick. (7*'s quote of the full post on page 4)

Stances do little for kicking. They are one of the lamest ways of all to develope most kicks. Not only Muay Thai but just overall, punching styles in China emphaise stance work far more. Southern shaolin is the low stable one. Northen is higher and more agile.

I make an exception for front stomp kicks since the structure is pretty much the same. Stance work is for punching, throwing and other upper body weapons. Not that you can't "step through" someone elses stance for a good throw but in general it's the solid root and sound structure that you want to ingrain through the stances. Like key points in a dynamic system. You must contain a snapshot of that point in the film of your technique. Hung Gar is filled with transitions between bow and horse and back again. That's where most of the power comes from.

The isometric aspect is even relevant in the aforementioned "SAID" comment. It's at the moment of impact, you will need strong isometric strength/structure for a clean technique.

p.s.

http://judoinfo.com/images/nauta/kouchigake.htm

That wasn't what I was thinking of but it makes my point equally well. Same basic principle. For throws, I have never really learned specific throws like that. I have some basic exercises from Tajiquan I practice a lot. Basically just drilling standing on one foot (say left) and using the other side (right) hand and foot to trace horizontal circles. Hand clockwise, foot counter-clockwise and vice versa. Once that gets thouroughly engrained and you can do it on either side with your eyes closed and in both directions then you can work with it on a partner and it suddenly blossoms into at least 8 different throws.

Leg hooks their"

right leg from the outside
right leg from the inside
left leg from the outside
left leg from the inside

and then hooking with either your own right or left leg. Add to that the various relative positions of you and your partners body and you suddenly have LOTS of throws but all basically from one single movement principle, namely, hook the leg and grab the upper body and move them in circles the top and botom circling in opposite directions.

Akhilleus

05-04-2005, 09:01 PM

It's great for camping.

joedoe

05-04-2005, 09:15 PM

It's great for camping.

LOL! Yes, and for other emergency situations :D

word of honor

05-04-2005, 09:57 PM

LOL yeah that and a low square horse stance can also come in quite handy using the toilets in china

IronFist

05-04-2005, 10:41 PM

My point was that horse stance training develops no real skill outside of doing a horse stance. Even if it did, there are better ways to accomplish whatever your goals are (unless your goal is holding a horse stance).

If it developed some form of power or something that was useful in actual sports/athletics/combat/etc., don't you think that athletes in the upper echelons of some sport would train horse stance? No one in the Olympics does it (maybe Olympic Wushu people... hey did they ever make Wushu an Olympic event? j/w). Not swimmers, runners, boxers, olympic lifters, track and field guys, marathoners, etc. Pro fighers don't, MMA guys don't, wrestlers don't, pro boxers don't, pro football players, soccer players, baseball players, etc. all don't.

You can't deny that. People whose income and sometimes whose very livelihood depends on their athletic prowess do everything to get absolutely every edge in their chosen sport. They get the best coaches and trainers, they get the best chemists and the best drugs, they get the best nutritionists, and they get the best training programs that come from the most advanced research available. Yet, not one professional sport uses extended horse stance training as a part of its training.

Does it develop willpower, as someone mentioned before? Sure. But so does lifting weights for higher reps to failure, if you want to talk about using your will to go through a "burn" when you want to give up. You all probably know that muscles only get stronger in the angles they're worked +/- about 15 degrees, so other than building endurance in your legs in the angles at which you're holding your stances, it really is not doing much else.

Someone said it opens up the hip joints or something. This is nothing that couldn't also be achieved (perhaps even more effectively) by a specific flexibility program.

So I guess it all depends on what your goals are. If you want to be able to hold a horse stance for a while and to go through your forms smoothly, then by all means, practice holding your stances. If you want to develop maximal strength, power, or be a good fighter, then it's absolutely not required, as evidenced by the world's strongest, most powerful, and best fighters, none of which train horse stance.

joedoe

05-04-2005, 10:48 PM

Actually, the ma bu might actually be good training for ... wait for it ... horse riding! :D

omarthefish

05-04-2005, 11:33 PM

My point was that horse stance training develops no real skill outside of doing a horse stance.

And MY point is that your argument applies to bench press, running, wind sprints, running stairs, kicking a heavy bag, skipping rope and any other supplementary exercise you can think of. To whit:

-Bench Pressing develops no real skill our side of doing a bench press.
-Clean and Jerk develpps no real skill out side of doing a clean and jerk.
-kicking thai pads develpps no real skill out side of kicking thai pads.
-burpee's develop no real skill out side of doing burpees. . .

In other words, it doesn't really say much. BUT I will give you that in a way, I agree. The primary "skill" it gives you is a good horse stance.

If it developed some form of power or something that was useful in actual sports/athletics/combat/etc., don't you think that athletes in the upper echelons of some sport would train horse stance?

Absolutely! That's why the atheletes at the top eschelons of the martial arts incorporating those deep stances DO train the horse stance. Mas Oyama, Chang Dong Sheng and others. Just to be clear, I am NOT taking a stand on the value of sitting in a horse for enourmous amounts of time lilke 45 minutes or even half an hour. Separate issue.

No one in the Olympics does it

Relevance? Gong Fu is not an Olympic sport. Would a track and field guy use a figure skaters training methods?

(maybe Olympic Wushu people... hey did they ever make Wushu an Olympic event? j/w).

No. Not yet. Still working on it.

Not swimmers, runners, boxers, olympic lifters, track and field guys, marathoners, etc.

See my comment above. No Gong Fu in the Olympics.

Pro fighers don't, MMA guys don't,

Many do. Depends on the sport. Stance training is certainly part of Kyokshinkai. Same thing for Shuai Jiao.

[/quote]wrestlers don't, pro boxers don't, pro football players, soccer players, baseball players, etc. all don't.[/quote]

Once again, more irrelevant comparisons. It's like saying bag works is not valuable training. Wrestlers don't, pro boxers don't, pro football players, soccer players, baseball players, etc. all don't.

Yet, not one professional sport uses extended horse stance training as a part of its training.

Except for the exceptions I noted, Kyokshin Karate, Shuai Jiao, Gong Fu competitors in China.

Does it develop willpower, as someone mentioned before? Sure. But so does lifting weights for higher reps to failure, if you want to talk about using your will to go through a "burn" when you want to give up.

Agreed.

You all probably know that muscles only get stronger in the angles they're worked +/- about 15 degrees, so other than building endurance in your legs in the angles at which you're holding your stances, it really is not doing much else.

That's interesting. I didn't know about the +/- 15 degree's part. That means that it is building endurance in exactly the range of motion you need it most for many traditional martial arts. No wonder it is such a vital part of traditional training.

Someone said it opens up the hip joints or something. This is nothing that couldn't also be achieved (perhaps even more effectively) by a specific flexibility program.

That was me I think. Or at least I mentioned it in passing. There IS a specific flexibility program for it. It's called stance training. :D It's an odd kind of flexibility though. The kind of stance's I like to hold are impossible for most begginers regardless of whatever background they have in Yoga or Ballet or whatever. Even the wushu guys typically can't do it once you make the appropriate postural corrections. This is what I think the real benifit is. I agree with ONE OF your points that there are better more efficient ways to develop leg strength or endurance. Strength, yes. Endurance....no other exercise developes the same kind of endurance. Mainly your argument is based on explaining why horse stance training is not usefull for people who don't make active use of horse stances. Well duh. For those of us who DO use these things though...we need to work on those horses.

fiercest tiger

05-04-2005, 11:38 PM

Horse stance is a load of sh!t, good for beginners to know how to stand only, some pain but you better off fighting and learning to move fast on your feet. I think some sick f@ck has made alot of **** up and thought i wonder if i can get people to sit like this for an Hr!

LOL
FT

omarthefish

05-04-2005, 11:57 PM

Yet, not one professional sport uses extended horse stance training as a part of its training.

Just spent some time on google and was surprised to find that GOLFERS of all people do stance training. lol

Oh yeah, I can add various Xing Yi professional fighters to the list of professionals who use stance training.

I think some sick f@ck has made alot of **** up and thought i wonder if i can get people to sit like this for an Hr!

Someone like your teacher I guess. From your own homepage listed in your profile:

http://www.yaukungmun.com.au/Photos.htm Scroll down to the bottom where it says, "Technique drills and stance training." Although, based on the pic:

http://www.yaukungmun.com.au/images/Photos/horse_class.jpg

It hardly qualifies. But what do you expect when the student(s) think the training they do is something "some sick (expletive) made up for his own sadistic fun. :confused:

Talk about yer self Pwnage. lol

fiercest tiger

05-05-2005, 12:15 AM

YES, I am a sick f@ck, you know me? My sifu was a sicker f@ck he kept me in 1 gr horse stances for his enjoyment.

What good does it give you, cant you root from a natural stance?

FT SICK F@CK

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 12:43 AM

lol

Good answer.

"natural" stance? Not sure what you mean. I know that the thread was titled "horse stance" training but I've only been talking about "stance" training. My bad. I don't really use the shaolin horse at all. Also, although it wasn't on this thread, I've said before and will say again that deep stances don't really help you "root". That's not where I see their value. IMO the most "rooted" stance is on one leg. But that's another story.

Rather than asking you to wade though my REALLY long posts above to see what I think they do I'll try to sum it up:

- engraining muscle memory for key postures. Postures you MUST move though to make certain techniques work or to get certain kinds of power out.
- developing certain kinds of flexibility, especially withing the pelvic girdle in the joints that are "officially" fused at a certain age.
- developing postural habits that "normal" people don't have.
-lastly and least importantly, to develop endurance though a very specific range of motion, the part MOST important to the application of the given style.

Also, the specific pattern of muscular tension/develpment created by certain stances is really not mimicked by any other exercise. But I think most of the confusion is because very very few people have ever really learned enough of the postural requirements to make it anything more than a simple isometric exercise for the legs.

If you manage to train a stance on into the 30 minute + range then I believe the entire issue and quality of training changes. A LOT of little physiological, psychological, and extrmely small postural changes and patterns of tension happen when you hold a position for that long. I've only done basic shoulder width zhan zhuang for that kind of time. Never done a low horse more than maybe 3 or 4 minutes tops.

kungfu cowboy

05-05-2005, 06:36 AM

Good posts, omarthefish! Nails and heads and all.

Chief Fox

05-05-2005, 07:50 AM

-Bench Pressing develops no real skill our side of doing a bench press.
-Clean and Jerk develpps no real skill out side of doing a clean and jerk.
-kicking thai pads develpps no real skill out side of kicking thai pads.
-burpee's develop no real skill out side of doing burpees. . .

So you are saying that the bench press doesn't develop the muscles that you use in a push or hmmmm....... let me think..... a punch?

And the clean and jerk doesn't help you to develop full body explosive power?

Kicking thai pads doesn't help you to improve your kicking form?

Burpee's don't help to improve your cardio?

and a horse stance doesn't help to build leg strength, improve flexibility and improve your ability to be rooted?

You sound like the kind of person that talks sooooo much that you start to believe your own press.

Looking forward to your long winded response. :rolleyes:

Reggie1

05-05-2005, 08:04 AM

So you are saying that the bench press doesn't develop the muscles that you use in a push or hmmmm....... let me think..... a punch?

That's debatable. Guys who bench a lot aren't necessarily the hardest hitters.

MasterKiller

05-05-2005, 08:06 AM

So you are saying that the bench press doesn't develop the muscles that you use in a push or hmmmm....... let me think..... a punch?

And the clean and jerk doesn't help you to develop full body explosive power?

Kicking thai pads doesn't help you to improve your kicking form?

Burpee's don't help to improve your cardio?

and a horse stance doesn't help to build leg strength, improve flexibility and improve your ability to be rooted?

You sound like the kind of person that talks sooooo much that you start to believe your own press.

Looking forward to your long winded response. :rolleyes:

No.............he's saying that is basically what IronFist is saying. Omar is arguing that extracurricular exercises do add value to training, which is counter-point to IronFist's argument that the most efficient way to become a great fighter is to only fight all the time.

gwa sow

05-05-2005, 08:07 AM

i've seen some pretty big guys come trought our school who couldn't punch out of a paper bag. muscles do help but as with all other things, technique is the best.

fa_jing

05-05-2005, 08:08 AM

CF - Actually, OTF was pointing out the flaw in that line of thinking.

IF - most of the people you named don't train Kung Fu either. If they did, they would practice stance training, though not to an arbitrarily large degree.

7* -- Lack of horse training doesn't explain the Muy Thai round kick, but it does explain the lack of a side kick.

Liokault - have you ever taken that kind of class? If you had you would see that I am not talking crap and that a weak horse will distract from the learning process.

Reggie1

05-05-2005, 08:25 AM

7* -- Lack of horse training doesn't explain the Muy Thai round kick, but it does explain the lack of a side kick.

I thought that Thai boxers didn't use a side kick as much because there weren't standing throws in Thai boxing (supposedly a side kick is harder to catch).

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 08:39 AM

THANK YOU! Masterkiller for actually being able to .. . uh... read the context and have a little reading comprehension instead of quoting out of context entirely and MISSING THE POINT like most people seem to do to me these days.

It's called satire guys. I think there's also a formal debate term for taking your opponents argument to it's logical extremit to demonstrate it's absurdity but I can't remember what it's called at the moment.

oh...Fa Jing too.

who knows. There may even be some lurkers here who got my point. :)

Liokault

05-05-2005, 08:46 AM

Liokault - have you ever taken that kind of class? If you had you would see that I am not talking crap and that a weak horse will distract from the learning process.

No, I have no interest in Kung Fu atall (tai chi however:cool: ), mostly because of the thinking that got this thread started.

I find your point to have flaws:

So you train horse stance so you can get through a kung fu class?: I think my analogy stands up here.

Rest periods: So if your working your legs to the max in class, plus your doing it at home (so that it becomes easy in class), where are you recovering? Do you only have one class a week?

Wouldn't the leg work in class, after a few weeks give you enough leg stamina to get through a class ok?

Chief Fox

05-05-2005, 08:51 AM

No.............he's saying that is basically what IronFist is saying. Omar is arguing that extracurricular exercises do add value to training, which is counter-point to IronFist's argument that the most efficient way to become a great fighter is to only fight all the time.

You see, I wasn't getting his point after all. Sorry dude. I'll shut up now.

Chief Fox

05-05-2005, 08:54 AM

PangQuan

05-05-2005, 09:08 AM

This is getting funny.

Its like horse vs. no horse.

If you went to any high level martial artists who has been a kung fu practitioner for many years, and you told them that ma bu has no benefit, well you would likely get laughed out of the building. Why? Because generally every high level kung fu practitioner has experienced the benefits. Its pretty simple really. I know a good sidekick to the stomach works really well, why? Because I have been sidekicked in the stomach, and I have sidekicked people in the stomach, from this first hand experience I have felt the benefits of the sidekick to stomach. Likewise I have experienced benefits from ma bu.

People who argue ma bu is no good, well simply have not experienced the benefits. They may have practiced ma bu but did not stick with it long enough to find out the benefits.

Like someone who wont eat a certain food, even though they have never tried. They say "that food does not look like it will suit me" so they go without eating it even though they do not really KNOW anything about how it tastes.

Then when they eventually do try the food they say "that is not tasting so good, I dont think I will eat that anymore" Little do they know that the food is actual good for them. It may not be to their liking so they decide to eat food that is good for them and to their liking.

Well this other food is an aquired taste and will be eaten by those who do like it and will benefit those who eat it.

Ma Bu is an effective method, it is not the only method. But you cannot denounce it because I have proof it is effective. Pretty common sense really.

fa_jing

05-05-2005, 09:09 AM

No, I have no interest in Kung Fu atall (tai chi however:cool: ), mostly because of the thinking that got this thread started.

I find your point to have flaws:

So you train horse stance so you can get through a kung fu class?: I think my analogy stands up here.

Rest periods: So if your working your legs to the max in class, plus your doing it at home (so that it becomes easy in class), where are you recovering? Do you only have one class a week?

Wouldn't the leg work in class, after a few weeks give you enough leg stamina to get through a class ok?

Well it will but it will take longer. I remember that when I took TKD, we did lots and lots of wall kicks and swing kicks. At first keeping up was tough. You know what helped? Practicing more wall kicks and swing kicks at home. Then again, that class was only twice a week.
The kung fu class I am talking about met up to 5 times a week. However, not everyone could make it all 5 days - I averaged 3 I think. Horse stance is something that you can practice nearly every day like long-distance running, and still make progress.

IronFist

05-05-2005, 09:56 AM

And MY point is that your argument applies to bench press, running, wind sprints, running stairs, kicking a heavy bag, skipping rope and any other supplementary exercise you can think of. To whit:

-Bench Pressing develops no real skill our side of doing a bench press.
-Clean and Jerk develpps no real skill out side of doing a clean and jerk.
-kicking thai pads develpps no real skill out side of kicking thai pads.
-burpee's develop no real skill out side of doing burpees. . .

Not exactly. You're right in a way. Bench pressing is the best at developing your bench pressing ability. However, it has some carryover to similar motions. Is throwing a punch the same as bench pressing? No. But once one has the proper mechanics of a punch, the added strength gained from benching will make them punch harder. Obviously someone who benches a lot but doesn't know how to throw a punch won't be able to hit that hard.

Let me address your other examples.

Clean and Jerk - The nature of this exercise develops strength across the entire body, which is fiarly transferrable to other motions that use those muscles.

The reason horse stance doesn't fit that same description is because you're just sitting there and, as I explained before, not developing strength or anything other than endurance with your legs at a 90 degree angle (or whatever).

Kicking thai pads - develops neurological coordination (the same reason you get better at anything you practice over and over. Possible cardio benefits, too, if you do it with eough intensity.

Burpees - cardio and endurance.

Again, the difference between those two and horse stance is that with those you're actually using a motion similar to one you might use in a fight and therefore there is some carryover.

In other words, it doesn't really say much. BUT I will give you that in a way, I agree. The primary "skill" it gives you is a good horse stance.

You are correct.

Absolutely! That's why the atheletes at the top eschelons of the martial arts incorporating those deep stances DO train the horse stance. Mas Oyama, Chang Dong Sheng and others.

Correct, but you're kind of just proving my point that the only people who need horse stance training are TMAists. I never disagreed that it wasn't valuable for that type of training. My only point was that it has no real carryover into anything else, including fighting.

Once again, more irrelevant comparisons. It's like saying bag works is not valuable training. Wrestlers don't, pro boxers don't, pro football players, soccer players, baseball players, etc. all don't.

Right, but boxers do do bag work. My point was that if no one does something, it's probably of little value. Pro boxers do bag work because it is vaulable for boxing (fighting). Pro boxers also lift weights because it helps them develop power.

That's interesting. I didn't know about the +/- 15 degree's part. That means that it is building endurance in exactly the range of motion you need it most for many traditional martial arts. No wonder it is such a vital part of traditional training.

What in the world do you do that requires increased endurance with your knees at a 90 degree angle? You surely don't fight in that stance.

Ok listen. We all agree that horse stance builds endurance in that position, right? Let's suppose that in fighting you may take that position for 2 seconds (which is a very liberal estimate because if you took that position at all it would likely be for a split second, not 2 seconds). During those 2 seconds, your performance will not be any different if you regularly train horse stance for 30 seconds or for 10 minutes a day. In other words, all the endurance you've gained from all your horse stance training would not come into play unless you were in a fighting situation similar to your training conditions, where you were in a horse stance for extended periods of time. So due to the SAID principle, the only way horse stance training (for more than 30 seconds to a minute) would be valuable i a fight would be if you had a reason to hold it for long periods of time in the fight.

That was me I think. Or at least I mentioned it in passing. There IS a specific flexibility program for it. It's called stance training. :D

lol you know what I meant :p

Mainly your argument is based on explaining why horse stance training is not usefull for people who don't make active use of horse stances. Well duh. For those of us who DO use these things though...we need to work on those horses.

Right. The other part of my argument was to make sure everyone knows that that's the only thing they're getting from their horse stance training.

I used to think that cuz I could do a horse stance for a while I'd be strong and able to kick harder and squat more than people who didn't, like it was some super secret form of training. I was kind of brought back into reality by some awesome people I had the privledge of meeting.

Anyway, good discussion. I have to go eat lunch.

SevenStar

05-05-2005, 11:19 AM

7* -- Lack of horse training doesn't explain the Muy Thai round kick, but it does explain the lack of a side kick.

the thais have a sidekick, you'll just never see it. It was seen traditionally, and as time progressed has been phased out, as the teep is preferred. There is also a back kick, and spinning kicks...

MasterKiller

05-05-2005, 11:21 AM

the thais have a sidekick, you'll just never see it. It was seen traditionally, and as time progressed has been phased out, as the teep is preferred. There is also a back kick, and spinning kicks...
If Muay Thai guys eat side kicks all the time, why don't more Muay Thai guys use them?

SevenStar

05-05-2005, 11:50 AM

Have you guys ever taken a vigorous N. Shaolin - style class? You will need Ma Bu training just to get through the class, which involves moving around in low stances and punching, executing techniques etc. Plus, do you want to be concentrating on your shaking/tired legs, or on the technique? Ma Bu is something that you can fairly quickly practice on your own and it will help you get more out of your class.

In my longfist days we did stance training religiously. From a standpoint of fighting, I didn't think we needed it then, either. I can't deny that you get a good workout from it, though.

SevenStar

05-05-2005, 12:16 PM

If Muay Thai guys eat side kicks all the time, why don't more Muay Thai guys use them?

because they eat them in san shou, which ultimately isn't what they train for, I'd imagine. I use them, and the hook kick, but don't teach either of them regularly...

Reggie1

05-05-2005, 12:18 PM

I used to think that cuz I could do a horse stance for a while I'd be strong and able to kick harder and squat more than people who didn't, like it was some super secret form of training.

Just out of curiousity--is this something that you thought, or is this something that your teacher was telling you?

MasterKiller

05-05-2005, 12:22 PM

because they eat them in san shou, which ultimately isn't what they train for, I'd imagine. I use them, and the hook kick, but don't teach either of them regularly... But if they work....why don't Muay Thai guys use them in Muay Thai fights? I mean, no one goes into a grappling match saying "I'm only gonna use the scissor sweep today." You use what works, right?

SevenStar

05-05-2005, 12:38 PM

Stances do little for kicking. They are one of the lamest ways of all to develope most kicks. Not only Muay Thai but just overall, punching styles in China emphaise stance work far more. Southern shaolin is the low stable one. Northen is higher and more agile.

yeah, that was our take on them - we didn't use them for strong kicks at all. It was for throwing and stance disruptions.

SevenStar

05-05-2005, 12:46 PM

But if they work....why don't Muay Thai guys use them in Muay Thai fights? I mean, no one goes into a grappling match saying "I'm only gonna use the scissor sweep today." You use what works, right?

good question. My initial gues is preference, plain and simple - the teep accomplishes pretty much the same thing, so maybe coaches figure they will have them mater it instead of trying to introduce an extra technique into the works.

My next guess would be ignorance of it - it's not taught, so it's possible that alot of guys don't know about it. If I never teach it, then I am training a bunch of guys who don't know what it is, who will eventually train other guys who will never know what it is - until they run across it somehow. The sweep is actually IN the system, so they know what it is and use it if they see fit. The sidekick in modern thai is practically nonexistant.

word of honor

05-05-2005, 01:17 PM

yeah, that was our take on them - we didn't use them for strong kicks at all. It was for throwing and stance disruptions.
oh yes strong low stances definitely help with throws and pushes. as far as kicks go, strength is only one important factor, transitional speed from a stance into the kick (not explosive power, more like fluidity) and precision of the strike itself (more precise, less power required) are also extremely important factors imo, and strong command of stances can really help accentuate those factors. so in these ways i was thinking how stance training can help enable more effective kicks. also i find training in duk lup ma (crane stance) directly correlates to my ability to block certain kicks faster higher and more effectively-

Judge Pen

05-05-2005, 01:31 PM

Lots of great ways to develope leg strength and stamina....all of them are better than horse stance.

Again, horse stance for longer than about 6 mins is only training you to hold horse stance for more than 6 mins, which is a great hobby, but not for me.

Sure, but the bonding experience of making an etire class sit there in pain holding a parallel horse stance is priceless. :D

We practice them in class for endurance and will power (we actually do put staffs on our thighs to see if they will roll off) but we don't do it excessively. It's part of our warm-ups and we have to hold it for increasing durations in our conditioning portion of our tests. It does help to sink into a horse stance in a form or application when you get used to holding one properly for a few minutes. No way I can hold one with correct posture for 45 minutes though.

SevenStar

05-05-2005, 02:20 PM

oh yes strong low stances definitely help with throws and pushes. as far as kicks go, strength is only one important factor, transitional speed from a stance into the kick (not explosive power, more like fluidity) and precision of the strike itself (more precise, less power required) are also extremely important factors imo, and strong command of stances can really help accentuate those factors. so in these ways i was thinking how stance training can help enable more effective kicks. also i find training in duk lup ma (crane stance) directly correlates to my ability to block certain kicks faster higher and more effectively-

I dunno if I agree with the "more precise, less power required" part. If I kick you right on the sciatic nerve, but it's a weaker kick, it doesn't do much. If it's a hard kick, the leg can go numb. If I punch you with a cross right in the jaw, you may not get knocked out, but with a harder punch, you likely will. strength and precision kinda go hand in hand.

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 03:23 PM

If most people are doing this then maybe you should look at the way you write. Now I'm shutting up.

I was thinking about that but I'd rather just chalk it up to the fact that I rarely post here so no one realizes I have things to say that are better said without dumbing my posts down to a 3rd grade level.

But I dunno. Maybe I should just stick to my "regular" boards.

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 03:59 PM

No. But once one has the proper mechanics of a punch, the added strength gained from benching will make them punch harder. Obviously someone who benches a lot but doesn't know how to throw a punch won't be able to hit that hard.

Bench press is still almost worthless for developing punching power. It can only help you arm punch better. Like you said, SAID, training to push will get you better at PUSHING, not punching. I assume there are many atheletic endeavor where this is important. A striking style MA is not one.

Let me address your other examples.

Clean and Jerk -
Kicking thai pads -
Burpees -

I can't believe you actually went through the trouble of trying to explain the use of those common exercises. So you actually thought that even AFTER I explained and Masterkiller explained and Fa Jing explained and we all teased Chief Fox for not realizing the first time that I was presenting those exercises in order to demonstrate the absurdity of your argument and NOT in some sort of lame non-sequeter attempt to say that they were no good.. . . you still felt compelled to defend those exercises.

Again, the difference between those two and horse stance is that with those you're actually using a motion similar to one you might use in a fight and therefore there is some carryover.

That's not a difference? :confused: Horse stances ARE similar to one you might use in a fight. Mine all are. I certainly use them in sparring anyways. I can only conclude that you have not been fortunate enough to ever learn a style of MA where the moves in the forms or in training actually had crossover into application. You must be only familiar with the modern Chinese style of training where you do some pointless drills and forms are for performance and then for fighting you switch to Sanda.

Correct, but you're kind of just proving my point that the only people who need horse stance training are TMAists. I never disagreed that it wasn't valuable for that type of training. My only point was that it has no real carryover into anything else, including fighting.

You just PWNED yourself big time. :D The 2 TMAists I named were famous FIGHTERS. One, Mas Oyama, FOUNDER of Kyuokshinkai Karate ...you know, the one the Japanese K1 fighters are so fond of, the one with all the bare knuckle full contact tournaments. The other Chang Dong Sheng, all China full contact fighting champion of the 30's. Also known for challenging people thoguhout china. Undefeated in his lifetime. Then let's also add that "only TMA" includes Judo, Muay Thai and BJJ. :p I think your slip is showing. Apparently you are not capable of objective thought were TMA is concerned. I now see the real basis of your argument:

Ironfist: "Stance training is employed by traditional martial artists for their training therefor it is bad because TMA sucks so by implication, so do their methods."

Right, but boxers do do bag work. My point was that if no one does something, it's probably of little value. Pro boxers do bag work because it is vaulable for boxing (fighting). Pro boxers also lift weights because it helps them develop power.

And once again TMA-ists do stance work and guess what:

So do lot's of atheletes. They just don't usually call it that . . .but they often do. 45 minutes in a stance, you don't see. But then again, most TMA'ists don't either. Most of us just hold each one for a couple minutes or untill our legs shake or whatever. Golfers do. Gymnasts do. Waterskiers do. (It should be obvious for them. They actually DO sit in a crouch for extended periods of time in their sport) Basketball coaches often have players "sit" knees bent 90 degrees with their backs supported by the wall behind them. Archers and sharpshooters absolutely do. Where do you get this stuff? You just make it up because it sounds good?

What in the world do you do that requires increased endurance with your knees at a 90 degree angle? You surely don't fight in that stance.

Be specific. What stance? I fight from the stances I train. I suspect I don't fight from the (most likely) Shaolin Sei Ping Ma that you are imagining. But I sure as hell used a rough approximation of it when I was in Hung Gar along with bow and empty stances. Now that I'm training Baji, I tend to use the Baji stances more which are different.

Ok listen. We all agree that horse stance builds endurance in that position, right? Let's suppose that in fighting you may take that position for 2 seconds

I'm not going to address the rest because I don't accept your premise. It's a stupid premise and highlights both your ignorance of how stances are used and the fact that you didn't read my summary on the last page of why they are important.

lol you know what I meant :p

Yes. Obviously. Just teasing.

Right. The other part of my argument was to make sure everyone knows that that's the only thing they're getting from their horse stance training.

I used to think that cuz I could do a horse stance for a while I'd be strong and able to kick harder and squat more than people who didn't, like it was some super secret form of training. I was kind of brought back into reality by some awesome people I had the privledge of meeting.

Anyway, good discussion. I have to go eat lunch.

Holy crap! We've just agreed with each other. :confused: Your right. They won't help you kick harder or squat more well they sort of DO help with that actually, just not as much as Squatting. It's those alignments I was talking about. You'll pick up the Olypic lifts better IF you have learned the postural details. They SHOULD be teaching you how to use leg power in your arms which is what you want for deadlifts, cleans etc. For squats it's the strictness of form that you need. I always see people trying to squat with their feet not parallel or not going down enough.

The problems are:

No one learns the important details.
People tend to be mislead about what they are for. (dumb applications and extrapolations)

Where we disagree is on the second one and I suspect you are guilty of the first causing you to miss out on much of their true vallue. You seem to have figured out much of what they are NOT for but haven't earned/been shown what they ARE for which I guess is better than where most people are at, just blindly training on faith.

word of honor

05-05-2005, 04:05 PM

I dunno if I agree with the "more precise, less power required" part. If I kick you right on the sciatic nerve, but it's a weaker kick, it doesn't do much. If it's a hard kick, the leg can go numb. If I punch you with a cross right in the jaw, you may not get knocked out, but with a harder punch, you likely will. strength and precision kinda go hand in hand.
:) Yes power is very important but it's not the only factor at play, you illustrate this point very well with your examples! I had been musing how strong stances from stance training can help with consistency and precision of technique/aim. Using your example, a hard precise kick to the sciatic nerve can be far more effective than two harder more wild kicks more stemming from a weak inconsistent stance. And being more precise and efficient with the use of one's power ("more precise, less power required") also leaves more power in reserve just in case, which is always a good strategy imo :cool:

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 04:06 PM

MK and 7*,

I think in the larger context side kicks don't work that well. The MT vs. Sanda fights always have the Sanda guys landing a lot but from what I've seen they tend to get tired out. Side kicks take a lot more energy than teeps. Also, grabbing the ropes is a penalty in Muay Thai. The Muay Thai vs. Sanda I have on VCD, the Sanda guy grabs it constantly for support when he throws his side kick.

I'm not sure. I think more signifigant is that they just don't mesh with the Muay Thai system of fighting, tactically and strategically. A lot of people tend to think of Sanda as "just Muay Thai with throws" but the 2 styles are really stylistically, tactically and strategically pretty different each with their own way of thinking about things.

It's like looking at 2 MMA fighters and asking why the sprawl and brawler doesn't ground and pound like the other guy since it obviously works. (or vice versa)

fiercest tiger

05-05-2005, 04:33 PM

Yes u are right, having a stance doesnt give you root at all, natural stances are just that natural and when one is natural you are centered and rooted. One leg stance i catch your drift!

FT:)

Fu-Pow

05-05-2005, 04:47 PM

My point was that horse stance training develops no real skill outside of doing a horse stance. Even if it did, there are better ways to accomplish whatever your goals are (unless your goal is holding a horse stance).

Horse stance is an integral part of external martial arts training. But it is very basic. Its a starting point to develop the leg and mind endurance necessary to complete other aspects of the training. In other words it just a way to get into shape, so that you can get into shape.

If it developed some form of power or something that was useful in actual sports/athletics/combat/etc., don't you think that athletes in the upper echelons of some sport would train horse stance?

I think you kind of miss the point here. Horse stance is a starting point for a certain kind of training for a certain kind of fighting. In styles of kung fu that emphasize horse stance training there is a progression. Static stance---->moving stance-------> stance work + hand techique (ie hand form.) In general the lower the stance that is required for forms, the more the style will emphasize uprooting and off-balancing your opponent (and seek to defend against uprooting). The key here is that the lower stance allows you to move without raising your center of gravity. (Speaking of external styles here, not internal.)

No one in the Olympics does it (maybe Olympic Wushu people... hey did they ever make Wushu an Olympic event? j/w). Not swimmers, runners, boxers, olympic lifters, track and field guys, marathoners, etc. Pro fighers don't, MMA guys don't, wrestlers don't, pro boxers don't, pro football players, soccer players, baseball players, etc. all don't.

True, but many sports have you transition through stances that are similar to horse stance. They just skip the static stance training part. Which as I stated before is just the beginning.

You can't deny that. People whose income and sometimes whose very livelihood depends on their athletic prowess do everything to get absolutely every edge in their chosen sport.

Kung fu is not a sport.

They get the best coaches and trainers, they get the best chemists and the best drugs, they get the best nutritionists, and they get the best training programs that come from the most advanced research available. Yet, not one professional sport uses extended horse stance training as a part of its training.

The only correlation I can think of is with "contact" sports. And personally I think that they could benefit from some of that training. If I'd had the solid foundation that I have now when I played football I would have owned the other lineman.

Does it develop willpower, as someone mentioned before? Sure. But so does lifting weights for higher reps to failure, if you want to talk about using your will to go through a "burn" when you want to give up. You all probably know that muscles only get stronger in the angles they're worked +/- about 15 degrees, so other than building endurance in your legs in the angles at which you're holding your stances, it really is not doing much else.

It does create mental discipline but it may even go beyond that. When there is the threat of violence (or other stressors) your flight or fight response is activated. Your blood tends to withdraw into the center of your body. Ever been really scared or nervous and had your legs become suddenly weak? Stance training, breathing, meditation, forms are all designed to help you mediate that response. Its not just a matter of strength training.

So I guess it all depends on what your goals are. If you want to be able to hold a horse stance for a while and to go through your forms smoothly, then by all means, practice holding your stances. If you want to develop maximal strength, power, or be a good fighter, then it's absolutely not required, as evidenced by the world's strongest, most powerful, and best fighters, none of which train horse stance.

Thats a pretty grandiose statement. My current sparring partner is a former golden gloves boxer. When we first started sparring he adopted the very classic boxing stance. He would move in and try to blitzkrieg me with punches. Soon I learned that I could utilize my stances, sweeps and trips to disrupt his root. No root, no punches and he soon adopted a lower stance to avoid that kind of thing. There is a purpose for horse stance training as part of the progression of learning kung fu.
So I reject your assertion that it is a waste of time.

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 04:51 PM

Yes u are right, having a stance doesnt give you root at all, natural stances are just that natural and when one is natural you are centered and rooted. One leg stance i catch your drift!

FT:)

Cool. :cool:

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 04:54 PM

More fuel for the fire...I got a discussion going here on stance training in sports here:

http://www.emptyflower.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi/YaBB.cgi?board=Xing;action=display;num=1115275144

joedoe

05-05-2005, 05:02 PM

I found horse stance useful when I played volleyball. In the defensive mode in the back court, you need to stay low to the ground in a position very similar to ma bu. In fact we did stance training in volleyball for this reason (and to improve mobility in that position).

Losttrak

05-05-2005, 05:03 PM

I was thinking about that but I'd rather just chalk it up to the fact that I rarely post here so no one realizes I have things to say that are better said without dumbing my posts down to a 3rd grade level.

But I dunno. Maybe I should just stick to my "regular" boards.

Do us all a favor and never come back, you *****. =D

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 05:19 PM

The person I wrote that too undertood the context.

You on the other hand:

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36624

Losttrak

05-05-2005, 05:42 PM

Link all you want... :p

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 05:51 PM

Still waiting to hear what "lies and falsehoods" I've been spreading.

As long as you keep the personal insults and profanities out I'll respond on the thread. The random trolling just gets the link.

Losttrak

05-05-2005, 06:15 PM

I never said lies... and by not mentioning topics, I don't allow you an opportunity to grandstand, which is your specialty. :cool:

IronFist

05-05-2005, 07:32 PM

Bench press is still almost worthless for developing punching power. It can only help you arm punch better. Like you said, SAID, training to push will get you better at PUSHING, not punching. I assume there are many atheletic endeavor where this is important. A striking style MA is not one.

Yes, punching is a full body motion. The legs, waist, arms, shoulder, ect., are all involved in it. Let's look at just the arms and shoulders for now:

Take two people who are identical. They have both trained in a punching art for 5 years, they've both practiced the same way for the same time. The only difference is one guy can bench press 400 pounds and the other guy never lifts weights and can only bench 90. All else being equal (ie. economy of motion, neurological efficiency in the movement, coordination, skill, etc.) the guy who can bench 400lbs will have muscles that are capable of generating more power than the other guy. So assuming the two people's punches are otherwise exactly the same, the bench presser will hit harder because he can generate more force with his muscles.

Now if you take that same premise and extrapolate to all the other muscles in his body, you can see how being strong (ie. able to generate a lot of force) will let you hit harder. We're talking trained fighers here, of course; not Joe Schmoe the weight lifter who has no fighting experience vs. John Doe the boxer who has never lifted a weight. Of course in that case the boxer could probably hit harder.

This ties in with my original point because I said holding a horse stance for long periods of time does not increase the amount of tension (power) one can generate.

But we're deviating from the original argument I think.

Be specific. What stance?

Horse stance. Isn't that what this thread was about?

I fight from the stances I train. I suspect I don't fight from the (most likely) Shaolin Sei Ping Ma that you are imagining. But I sure as hell used a rough approximation of it when I was in Hung Gar along with bow and empty stances. Now that I'm training Baji, I tend to use the Baji stances more which are different.

You use bow and arrow stances in a fight? I'm sure it's transitional and you don't fight in the stance for long periods of time (ie. hold it). If that is true, then holding it for a long period of time in your training isn't benefitting you much in fighting. It would be like practicing your sprinting because you have a marathon coming up; completely pointless.

As for the rest of the thread, :yawn:

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 08:00 PM

Horse stance. Isn't that what this thread was about?

Yeah but then you asked me a question directly. And technically all gong fu stances are "horses". I know which one you mean but I just wanted to be extra clear.

You use bow and arrow stances in a fight? I'm sure it's transitional and you don't fight in the stance for long periods of time (ie. hold it).

Yes, that's true, but if I don't work those stances specifically then they don't show up in the sparring. The reason we are able to find some common ground here is that it looks like we agree on a lot of what stances aren't for and what holding them for long periods doesn't do. If you don't settle down for some serious stance training I don't know how else you can ingrain those postures into your body deep enough to fall into them under pressure. For example, I may only move through a bow and then empty stance for a fraction of a second as I slip a punch stepping forward and to the left shooting a verticle (right) punch to the body (bow stance) and then follow up with a left to the face (empty stance, weighted on the left leg) and then scoot back out. That quick 2 hit combo uses bow and empty.

But here's the thing, for those punches to have any power you need those stances solid. If you haven't built up sound structure through stance training you are likely to lack power for those punches since you have no good connection to the ground. Simply doing weight training will not train the posture, only the muscles. We agree in that I don't view stance training as primarily for developing "strength" per se. More like structure. And although I don't hold those stances individially for any length of time, during sparring I DO stay fairly continually in one or another. Training them extensively for long periods of time allows me to fight comfortably froma very low crouch if I need to, which when I did Hung Gar was extremely usefull for dealing with taller people.

Take two people who are identical. . . . one guy can bench press 400 pounds and the other guy never lifts weights and can only bench 90. . . .the guy who can bench 400lbs will have muscles that are capable of generating more power than the other guy.... the bench presser will hit harder because he can generate more force with his muscles.

Here's the problem with that line of thinking, and this is slightly changing the topic, the chest, of all the parts involved in punching is almost the least important of all. It is barely relevant. It IS relevant but in the chain of legs->waist->arms->fist, it barely does anything at all. Let me change your story a bit. In my version one guy can bench 400 but only squat 90 and the other guy can squat 400 but bench 90. The squatter will punch the bench presser into next year. Bench pressing to increase your punching power is an incredibly innefective method. Even pushups are more relevant than benching.

Your supposed to "punch with the legs".

Liokault

05-05-2005, 08:09 PM

Your supposed to "punch with the legs".

Ah, I see the problem now.....punching with the legs is what we call kicking.

BlueTravesty

05-05-2005, 08:12 PM

Cool thread, despite the name-calling and what not :)

I've only been studying my chosen style (MyJhong LawHorn) for about a year and a half now, but I have made some interesting observations in regards to stance training.

I've noticed that for some reason or other, some people are just naturally better at nailing a good horse stance; the "90 degrees" (probably leg strength, looser joints, etc.) but no matter what, almost everyone who tries it, unless they have horse stance experience, has great difficulty holding the position for long periods of time (in all honesty, my horse stance endurance isn't the greatest, and I'm still a bit further from 90 degrees than I'd like.) Interestingly enough, those with good natural flexibility (like myself) tend to have more trouble holding it than those whose flexibility is lacking (who are better able to attain the 90 degrees.) I'm not well versed in physiology, so I'm not concluding that leg strength and flexibility are mutual exclusives, or that overtraining one can lead to a lack of the other (though my own experience would make me lean that way) just observing.

Also, the guys and gals with good horse stance right off the bat also tend to have a good sidekick too, even if their lack of flexibility has them kicking at hip-level.

Our instructor has told us numerous times that the horse stance is used to develop mental toughness, discipline and a good pain threshold. I can definitely agree that my ability to cope with pain has increased dramatically. He's also indicated that rooting is an elementary form of generating power and that more advanced techniques of gaining maximum power exist to the point where at its highest levels, rooting isn't used so much (except to stay stable.) However, this demands a solid foundation.

As for discipline and mental toughness, well that's something everyone can use more of, be they a "MMAist" or "TMAist." If you develop it better by training to failure doing presses and squats, that's your thing, I can't argue it. The idea with horse stance is to train for success- I try to reach a goal, and everytime I do, I feel like I'm on top of the world. :)

A lot of that probably falls into the category of "Sifu says" so take it however you like- my experiences and those of the others in class have so far proven him right and that's good enough for me :cool:

Liokault

05-05-2005, 08:12 PM

Here's the problem with that line of thinking, and this is slightly changing the topic, the chest, of all the parts involved in punching is almost the least important of all. It is barely relevant. It IS relevant but in the chain of legs->waist->arms->fist, it barely does anything at all. Let me change your story a bit. In my version one guy can bench 400 but only squat 90 and the other guy can squat 400 but bench 90. The squatter will punch the bench presser into next year. Bench pressing to increase your punching power is an incredibly innefective method. Even pushups are more relevant than benching.

But the guy doing the press is not just pressing with his chest. He is using his arms. So infact he is training to push away from him self, with his arm at great force (if not always great speed).

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 08:15 PM

Liokault

05-05-2005, 08:27 PM

[
But here's the thing, for those punches to have any power you need those stances solid. If you haven't built up sound structure through stance training you are likely to lack power for those punches since you have no good connection to the ground. Simply doing weight training will not train the posture, only the muscles. We agree in that I don't view stance training as primarily for developing "strength" per se. More like structure. And although I don't hold those stances individially for any length of time, during sparring I DO stay fairly continually in one or another. Training them extensively for long periods of time allows me to fight comfortably froma very low crouch if I need to, which when I did Hung Gar was extremely usefull for dealing with taller people.

Again I cant help but feel your looking for reasons to justify your investment in long lonley hours of stance training.

But here's the thing, for those punches to have any power you need those stances solid.

I know guys who can punch really hard with out being in contact with the floor.

Simply doing weight training will not train the posture, only the muscles.

But its the muscles that your generate the force, and there is no reason that you can not work on posture while doing weights. Why is posture a stance thing? Shouldnt we be working on good posture all the time?

I met a guy a few just before xmas at a seminar. One of the hardest hitters I have ever held a pad for (the only 2 harder hitters were running the seminar) and I could rest a beer glass on the back of this guys neck, his posture was so bad!

And although I don't hold those stances individially for any length of time, during sparring I DO stay fairly continually in one or another

Well we are all in one stance or another all the time we are standing up......but come to think about it I dont feel like holding my "waiting for the bus" stance for 45 mins just so im sure im doing it right.

Training them extensively for long periods of time allows me to fight comfortably froma very low crouch if I need to, which when I did Hung Gar was extremely usefull for dealing with taller people

You dont need to hold stances to get this result.....if it is infact a result. Why would you want to make your self less mobile when fighting taller people?

Liokault

05-05-2005, 08:38 PM

I know your just trolling me anyways but I'll pretend for the moment that you actually didn't understand my comment and dumb it down for you.

The other option is what in boxing circles is called "arm punching".

Well, if you stop trying to make stupid points, like "a guy doing weights is not going to get stronger" (to miss quote) I will stop trolling (if it is trolling) you.

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 08:47 PM

Again I cant help but feel your looking for reasons to justify your investment in long lonley hours of stance training.

Your entitled to your opinion. You don't know much about me, my training background, training habits etc. so you make a lot of assumptions. Not much to be done or said about that.

But its the muscles that your generate the force,

...and the structure that amplifies it.

and there is no reason that you can not work on posture while doing weights. Why is posture a stance thing? Shouldnt we be working on good posture all the time?

Not "posture", "THE posture" ie. the stance. There is more to a particular stance than just set your feet paralell and squat down. I'm talking about form. The proper alignment of the lumbars, the appropriate curve of the chest, the tucking of the tail bone, the folding of the pelvis and more. There is no way to use weight training for instance to give you a good san ti shi or in my case, the Baji "ding zhou shi" and my other favorite for supplementary training, the "fu hu zhuang".

Getting back to your previous coment about "wasted" time. Don't forget we...er . . I am talking about supplementary training. Not the core really. For me it's usually 1 of several cases when I do stance training.

1. At the end of a long workout. Like on Sundays, I have a 40 minute bike ride followed by a roughly 3 hour practice. At the end of that 3 hours I am typically too tired to keep practicing my other stuff. So to keep going I will often settle for some stance trainng.

2. When I get interupted in my training and someone needs to talk to me about soimething, I'll keep the low stance while I chat. Or at home it's one of those things you can do when watching TV. I fit it in in those times when I have no space to train like in my office at school between classes or on my lunch break which is 2 hours long. Sometimes I even train in restaurants here. At lunch with Shifu, while we're waiting for other people to arrive or for the servers to show up, just lifting my body weight off the chair. Not enough for everyone to see, just support the weight but leave your but touching the chair.

3. To correct errors in my form. Find the spot where you lost your balance or felt there was no good power or wherever you think your form needs improving and hold it there for as long as possible. A lot of this happens when getting instruction even in applications. You do the move and teacher yells "freeze!" and starts to make corrections. He might start giving some explanations as well, showing you where you are vulnerable or discussing some potential coutnerattack at this point in the move. So you take it all in but generally don't stand up and relaxe during the lecture part of your class.

Why would you want to make your self less mobile when fighting taller people?

If you have done some decent stance work then you won't be less mobile.

*sigh* but I think you have already made your mind up on this one anyways.

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 08:50 PM

Well, if you stop trying to make stupid points, like "a guy doing weights is not going to get stronger" (to miss quote) I will stop trolling (if it is trolling) you.

Not just a mis quote, a complete fabrication. I can't even tell what post of mine it is supposedly making fun of.

Liokault

05-05-2005, 09:03 PM

Not just a mis quote, a complete fabrication. I can't even tell what post of mine it is supposedly making fun of.

Ok, heres part of the paragraph where you deliberatly miss constructed a point about bench pressing to back up your frail grip on the out moded way you train.

Bench pressing to increase your punching power is an incredibly innefective method. Even pushups are more relevant than benching.

IronFist

05-05-2005, 09:12 PM

Here's the problem with that line of thinking, and this is slightly changing the topic, the chest, of all the parts involved in punching is almost the least important of all. It is barely relevant.

I was using bench as an example of an exercise that trains the arms (triceps) and shoulders (front deltoid).

But the pecs are used quite a bit in a hook.

btw, pushups and bench press are very similar as far as your muscles are concerned. The only difference is most people bench with more weight than they can get from pushups. Yes, there are some differences, but let's not dwell on them. It's very similar.

IronFist

05-05-2005, 09:20 PM

Here, how about you just answer this question for me:

Assuming the following:

1. You never use a horse stance in actual combat
2. SAID

How then, can any "structure" or anything gained from horse stance training be used in a fight?

You say it trains your bones/posture/whatever, but if you're not actually using it, what good is training it?

And about being "rooted." Is being flat footed and sunken into a stance having good root? You're not actually going to be like that in a fight. I don't think that's necessary for generating power. How rooted is a Thai boxer on one foot while kicking? Maybe my definition of "rooting" is wrong, but I'm pretty sure he could be easily knocked over while in that position, yet a Thai kick is arguably the strongest strike known. (No one come in here and say "nuh-uh, a finger strike to the eye is the most damaging" or something. I'm talking about force per square inch generated, not actual damage done. You could poke someone's eye out while roller skating backwards. There's no root there.)

Vash

05-05-2005, 09:21 PM

Originally Posted by omarthefish
Here's the problem with that line of thinking, and this is slightly changing the topic, the chest, of all the parts involved in punching is almost the least important of all. It is barely relevant.

. . . Wow. Here I was, thinking the pectoralis was responsible for adduction of the arm. Silly me.

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 09:46 PM

They just help you aim Vash. Power comes from the legs and waist. ie. The chest and arm muscles do little more than position the arm correctly for the punch. I must admit I'm fairly stunned that the concept is so foreign considering this is supposed to be a martial arts forum. That's why I was considering that push ups in their way may be more relevant.

As Ironfist pointed out (this is aimed at your first of the 2 posts here Ironfist), they are very similar in what muscles they use to bench press but with less weight which makes them more of an endurance exercise and you DO need endurance in you arms to keep punching over and over. Plus pushups have the added benifit of working your full body connection in a way that bench press doesn't. Abs, waist, various little stabilizers have to work together to keep your body straight.

As for the second post, IF I accept your postulate, THEN yeah, no point really. But I have and do use them. Silly me.

And about being "rooted." Is being flat footed and sunken into a stance having good root?

No. In fact I posted a couple pages back that I felt the most "rooted" stance was one where you are standing on one leg. Which brings me to your next queestion:

How rooted is a Thai boxer on one foot while kicking? Maybe my definition of "rooting" is wrong, but I'm pretty sure he could be easily knocked over while in that position, yet a Thai kick is arguably the strongest strike known....

He could be rooted, or not. Like I just said, IMHO "rooting" has nothing to do with the depth of you stance. It is dynamic. You must have missed my argument several pages back where I was explaining how incredibly easy it is to sweep someone who is standing in a deep "horse stance". I even posted a couple of links to Judoinfo.com to get my point across. "Rooting" ios dynamic. Let's put it this way, in your example, I have seen people who "leap" up into their kicks and if you move forward a bit in the middle you can knock them down. No root. I have also seen round kicks where the kicker steps into the kick instead of pivoting and sinks into it rather than "floating" as he kicks. Both can be very powerfull but the second way is more rooted.

Almost forgot:

I don't think that's necessary for generating power.

Not in absolute terms but VERY helpful. This is not specific to eastern MA either. Check out the old Jack Demspey book or even just slomo some heavyweight fighters. The big hitters tend to stay on their toes but they plant when they punch. Most of them need to.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incidentally, the SIDE kick or the BACK kick are the "most powerfull". Ironically the thai round kick IS more damaging for just the kinds of reasons you were trying to avoid, targeting, weapon shape and one you didn't mention, it's more of a "strike" IMO whereas side kicks always have more of a push component to them. In strict phsyics terms, way more power available for a back kick.

Liokault

05-05-2005, 09:50 PM

I would have thaugh a flying elbow was the most powerful!

Lots of force behind it and a small weapon area.......On, but hes jumping so hes not rooted right?

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 10:01 PM

lol yes.

btw, here's Rocky Marciano vs. Ezzard Charles.

Classic horse stance: http://img69.photo.163.com/bailewen/8417053/178036561.jpg

A couple frames later in the clip, bow stance: http://img69.photo.163.com/bailewen/8417053/178036535.jpg

At the moment of impact his foot is flat. In the very next frame his heel comes up again but he's always flat when his fist hits face in that fight.

Here's another one I liked because it is the "er zi ma" the narrower horse stance taught in Hung Gar's opening sequence for most forms:

http://img69.photo.163.com/bailewen/8417053/178036560.jpg

I like it because he's doing everythiung right, shoulders rounded, pelvise tucked, feet parallel, lumbars pressed out. Excellent Hung Gar right there.

edit: I got Lewis/Marciano too. Same thing. They both plany their feet flat. No tippy toes for those guys.

TAO YIN

05-05-2005, 10:05 PM

Horse Stance?? I apologize, but what is a "horse stance?" I hear martial artists saying these words regularly. Is this a new martial arts fad phrase? What do people mean when they say, "the horse stance is the first thing you learn?" I thought that the rifle was the first thing...No? I thought that the rifle was the most basic...No? I could be completely wrong here, so if anyone can help me understand I would appreciate it. Thanks in advance.

TY

joedoe

05-05-2005, 10:10 PM

I have always considered it to be just a contraction of the full name - horse riding stance

IronFist

05-05-2005, 10:21 PM

When I said bench and pushups were almost the same I wasn't talking about weight. If pushups are with "less weight and more for endurance," then just lower the weight with which you're benching and it will be the same. Yes, the angle is a little different, and there's the abs/legs/stabilze thing but that's negligable and was included in the "little difference" I mentioned. All that stabilizing work won't translate into anything you can really use (other than getting better at pushups).

TAO YIN

05-05-2005, 10:34 PM

Joe Doe,

Thank you for your answer, but I still do not understand really.

Are these guys, like, doing a "horse stance?"

http://www.sherdog.com/news/pictures.asp?n_id=2668#

In that 3rd picture from the left, first row, those guys are standing kind of like what peeps have been talking on this thread. In that 4th picture from the left, first row, that guy in the back kind of looks like he is riding a horse. In that 3rd and 4th picture from the left, second row, that guy standing kind of looks like how someone might "stand" while riding a horse. Is this what everyone is talking about? What gives? I still don't understand this, "horse stance"...???

TY

omarthefish

05-05-2005, 10:49 PM

The guy on the left here:

http://www.sherdog.com/images/pictures/11918.jpg

That qualifies. The other guy, not really. The other guy is in more of what in Baji, we call a "half horse-half bow".

FatherDog

05-06-2005, 09:32 AM

But here's the thing, for those punches to have any power you need those stances solid. If you haven't built up sound structure through stance training you are likely to lack power for those punches since you have no good connection to the ground. Simply doing weight training will not train the posture, only the muscles.

If you engage in long hours of stance training, you will develop sound structure in order to have a good connection to the ground so that your punches will be powerful.

If you engage in long hours of actually punching, you will develop sound structure in order to have a good connection to the ground so that your punches will be powerful, and you will also develop good punching form.

I leave it to you to determine which is a more efficient use of time.

red5angel

05-06-2005, 09:52 AM

If you engage in long hours of actuall structural sound punching, you will develop sound structure in order to have a good connection to the ground so that your punches will be powerful, and you will also develop good punching form.

..........

BlueTravesty

05-06-2005, 10:05 AM

If you engage in long hours of stance training, you will develop sound structure in order to have a good connection to the ground so that your punches will be powerful.

If you engage in long hours of actually punching, you will develop sound structure in order to have a good connection to the ground so that your punches will be powerful, and you will also develop good punching form.

I leave it to you to determine which is a more efficient use of time.

yes, the second would be the more efficient use of time. But then, most CMA practitioners practice both, thus working on two different aspects of structuring, while still developing good punching form.

And let us not forget the famous/infamous horse stance punch drills. Ready? Yut, yee, sam, sei, ng....

Chief Fox

05-06-2005, 10:15 AM

Picture attached.

BlueTravesty

05-06-2005, 10:23 AM

lollerskates :p

Lowlynobody

05-06-2005, 10:25 AM

I'm gone for a few days and this thread blows up. Way to much here for me to be bothered to reply to. I'm glad though that at least some people have a reasonable level of comprehension skills.

One of the main things I don't like about SAID is the inclusion of the "Ceterus Paribas"(sp?) statement i.e. all other thing being equal. Fighting is not a social science such as economics where you ignore large sets of variables so that you can draw conclusions based upon empirical evidence. Fighting, be it in the ring with its rule sets or in the all encompassing street, is nothing but variables as we all know. Fighting is not like bench press (or any other simple example one can think of) as it involves interaction with both a variable environment and a variable opponent and requires an array of trained skills to be successful.

If SAID was correct all fighters would do is fight (spar) all the time and nothing else. But fighters don't just spar all the time. The pressure placed upon the fighter when sparing or fighting by both the environment and the opponent does not easily (at least initially) allow for the correct development of foundation skills. So fighters train other things other than fighting. They lift weights, they stretch, they jog, the do pad drills, the hit the heavy bag, train evasion, footwork and covering, etc. Then they take those things and put them together when they spar or fight.

Horse stance for many kung fu players is traditionally part and parcel of their martial art's foundation. So get over it.

:)

D4NNY

05-06-2005, 10:41 AM

I try to practice horse stance for 30min a day as i have found that it does help with all other stances as well as this one. Also allows alot of power between you and the floor making it harder to bein thrown or pushed back.

Danny

ewallace

05-06-2005, 10:43 AM

I don't think many...if any are saying not to do stance training, in this case Ma Bu. But rather debunking the myths of the benefits one might gain by holding stances for excessive periods of time.

BlueTravesty

05-06-2005, 12:40 PM

I have yet to hear anyone citing any "mythical" benefits of horsef stance. The closest to "myth" I've heard is the mention of spiral energy or spring energy. What's laughable about this is the notion that it doesn't exist. I mean come on, boxers, kickboxers, and even some grapplers will use it to some degree.

Granted, I'm just a newb to kung fu, but I have seen the use of the whole body being rotated to focus impact upon a single point being used to devastating effect in both CMA and in the pro fights I have been lucky enough to watch.

Anyone who uses their feet to put their whole body into a punch, uses torque to execute a throw or takedown, etc. is using spiral energy/silk reeling to a certain extent (I'm talking fundamental silk reeling/spiraling rather than the specialized training in Chen Taiji.) The difference lies only in the emphasis, and the name. It's found all over the world, not just in CMA, but a lot of CMA puts a unique emphasis on this aspect of body movement.

Most people who like to entertain the fantasy of being a "no-nonsense, no B.S." martial artist will scoff at poetic names like "Silk Reeling Energy" and debunk them as myth despite the fact that they make use of it too. The fact is, names don't matter and if something seems too "flowery" for one's taste, well, perhaps it's a case of "he doth protest too much" or just plain compensation for... something else :rolleyes:

The question isn't whether spiral energy exists, however, but whether horse stance can help further develop this attribute. I can't say for sure myself, but I have seen my instructors and fellow practitioners who are able to pack quite a punch in one hit, be it an actual punch, or a sidekick. The difference between them and most MMAists is how recently and regularly they put this skill to the test. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that at least 50% of Kung Fu, TKD, Karate, Kenpo, Taiji (martial Taiji, not health Taiji, mind you) etc. instructors could hit just as hard and fast as Randy Couture, Bas Rutten, Chuck Lidell or (insert the name of your favorite UFC striker here) The difference would lie only in their strategy, training methods, the frequency of their fights (and perhaps the type of opponents they face.)

ewallace

05-06-2005, 01:07 PM

I have yet to hear anyone citing any "mythical" benefits of horsef stance.
By myths I was referring to those (and there are many, and not necessarily posted on THIS thread) that believe holding stances for long periods of time develop muscles better and increase kicking power. I am not saying that stance training doesn't do that at all, I am saying that holding stances for long amounts of time only have certain benefits, strength and power not being amongst them.

IronFist

05-06-2005, 03:56 PM

"Spiral Energy" does not exist. A muscle either contracts or it relaxes. You have tension or you have no tension. A muscle doesn't have special things that it can do.

If you're referring to some motion, then that would be a function of body mechanics which is caused by either tension or lack of tension in the muscles. Your muscles don't go "ok, now we're going to use spiral energy."

SevenStar

05-06-2005, 04:03 PM

can you say...pwned?

SevenStar

05-06-2005, 04:05 PM

this brings us to something I am always saying though - CMA analyze EVERYTHING and have names for things that sport guys don't, even though we are taught it as part of good technique. On ANY level, even the most basic, do you see spiraling (for example) in a sport fighter's technique?

Fu-Pow

05-06-2005, 04:07 PM

If SAID was correct all fighters would do is fight (spar) all the time and nothing else. But fighters don't just spar all the time. The pressure placed upon the fighter when sparing or fighting by both the environment and the opponent does not easily (at least initially) allow for the correct development of foundation skills. So fighters train other things other than fighting. They lift weights, they stretch, they jog, the do pad drills, the hit the heavy bag, train evasion, footwork and covering, etc. Then they take those things and put them together when they spar or fight.

Horse stance for many kung fu players is traditionally part and parcel of their martial art's foundation. So get over it.

:)

Nice work. You just demolished all the "wannabe MMA."

IronFist

05-06-2005, 04:44 PM

Are you talking about me? He didn't prove anything I said wrong.

SAID is correct.

If SAID was correct all fighters would do is fight (spar) all the time and nothing else.

Fighting (sparring) makes them better at fighting.

They lift weights,

Lifting weights allows the muscles to generate more tension and therefore striker harder. How is that not SAID?

Again, my point was that extended horse stance training does not carry over into fighting due to SAID because there is nothing in fighting that approximates horse stance training.

There, I said it in once sentence. Did you guys understand it this time?

word of honor

05-06-2005, 05:23 PM

:) yes i am understanding how people who only want to fight are interested in spending their time training to advance that practice. But as a traditional chinese martial artist like Eggman i do much more than just spar. Stance training is vital for push hands and form practice, for example. And i definitely find the mental discipline, focus and physical endurance all wrapped up in stance training directly benefit my sparring practice, even if these benefits wouldn't be recognized under a SAID paradigm. So from my perspective stance training is an incredibly efficient practice for a traditional chinese martial artist since it has so many applications across all the disciplines we practice-

paper_crane

05-06-2005, 05:42 PM

Again, my point was that extended horse stance training does not carry over into fighting due to SAID because there is nothing in fighting that approximates horse stance training.

i was to believe one of the reason we do horse stance is to lower our center of gravity therefore improving our balance....surely that could carry over? :)

IronFist

05-06-2005, 05:43 PM

i was to believe one of the reason we do horse stance is to lower our center of gravity therefore improving our balance....surely that could carry over? :)

Your center of gravity is lowered when you're in a horse stance because you're physically lower to the ground. It doesn't carry over tho when you stand up again. The same thing happens if you crouch down not in a horse stance, and the same thing happens to a car if you lower it. It's physics.

Word of Honor, I agree with what you said.

paper_crane

05-06-2005, 05:51 PM

to add..... i know a trainer of mine who is current Australian kickboxing champion who holds true to the POWER of Mabu!!!. He said to me that after every match his legs would shake uncontrolably, but every since he started doing mabu training for 5 mins after his 5k run every morn he doesn't have that problem anymore. Now this guy does serious spar training and its Testament to the Power of Mabu!!

SevenStar

05-06-2005, 05:59 PM

it's odd that he has the endurance to run 5k, but lacked the endurance to remain standing in a ring...

However, you did say that his legs would shake AFTER his fights...so he was fine while he was fighting, but shaky after?

IronFist

05-06-2005, 06:05 PM

it's odd that he has the endurance to run 5k, but lacked the endurance to remain standing in a ring...

It's not that odd. A lot of people feel gassed in the ring, so they increase their running from 5k to 10k and still feel gassed in the ring and wonder why. The energy systems being taxed are different. Long distance running is low-output over a long period of time. Fighting is definately NOT low output. Fighters seem to have better success with interval training.

:gasp: that sounds like SAID :D

However, you did say that his legs would shake AFTER his fights...so he was fine while he was fighting, but shaky after?

Being shaky after a fight could be partially due to leftover adrenaline, as well as other things.

SevenStar

05-06-2005, 06:08 PM

It's not that odd. A lot of people feel gassed in the ring, so they increase their running from 5k to 10k and still feel gassed in the ring and wonder why. The energy systems being taxed are different. Long distance running is low-output over a long period of time. Fighting is definately NOT low output. Fighters seem to have better success with interval training.

:gasp: that sounds like SAID :D

Being shaky after a fight could be partially due to leftover adrenaline, as well as other things.

Nah, I'm not talking about gassing, I'm talking specifically about his legs. I agree about interval training - because fighting is largely anaerobic.

fa_jing

05-06-2005, 06:11 PM

"If you develop it better by training to failure doing presses and squats, that's your thing, I can't argue it. The idea with horse stance is to train for success- I try to reach a goal, and everytime I do, I feel like I'm on top of the world. "

Actually, that's the idea behind not training to failure and goal-oriented training. It has nothing to do with your choice of exercise.

fa_jing

05-06-2005, 06:18 PM

Iron, you know I disagree with you. The low horse is just like the initial part of a chambered front or side kick. It trains this position statically. I know that you are very flexible, but for me the hardest part of executing a chambered front or side kick, and the key to its success, is getting the leg in the correct initial position. Now, TKD guys have great chambered side kicks and they don't practice a low horse. They get it from 1000's of kicks per day on the wall. But, that approach also has drawbacks.

Akhilleus

05-06-2005, 06:32 PM

I remember when I played bball back in school, we would do a drill where we were in like a horse stance and then did like machine guns with our feet (ie we would like pick them up put them down as quick as possible while only bringing them a few inches off the ground, one foot at a time) also we would work on sliding from side to side in the horse stance...come to think of it, we did this in football too, the sliding/shuffle part....without crossing the legs...

SevenStar

05-06-2005, 06:49 PM

we did the fast foot thing as well - it was called chopping. When you are a lineman and you come off the line to block, what position are you in? We also did the slide. That position is very relevant to them though - blocking. same thing with round ball - what position are you in when playing that man to man d? In these cases, it falls into SAID.

BlueTravesty

05-06-2005, 06:54 PM

"Spiral Energy" does not exist. A muscle either contracts or it relaxes. You have tension or you have no tension. A muscle doesn't have special things that it can do.

<.unnecessarily long-winded response>
Perhaps we're talking in circles then. As it was explained to me, spiral energy isn't a "special" way of moving the body, just a different one i.e- most street brawlers and thugs will **** their arm back and punch, a boxer will bring the energy up through his feet, coordinating the punch with his body movements (not consciously of course, it's just my own way of envisioning the contractions of many muscles working in unison.) There's nothing "special" about it. As for sport fighters using spiraling, when you use your waist in any sort of torque and twisting, that is spiraling at its most basic level. (Hip throws for example- how many Judoka do hip throws by pulling someone's arm straight over? They turn the hips along with it.)

Many old-time boxers in the Marquis of Queensbury era would put their up their "dukes" (named after the Duke of York) with the thumbs facing toward them rather than out, therefore drilling their punches as they extended. This should sound somewhat familiar to anyone who has done basic punches in just about any TMA class, the main difference being that they did not chamber at the waist (TMA meaning the usual suspects, Karate, TKD, etc.) Yes, that's right, it's not a crude, goofy stereotype on old-timey boxers, that's how quite a few of them fought. (Not to mention that quite a few of the boxers around Jack Dempsey's time fought with a vertical fist too- kinda like wing chun, but instead of calling it chum chuy, they just called it a "punch.")

When you move your body in a curve you have a greater amount of physical space to work with. When you coordinate your punches with the movement of your feet, your hips will usually move as well, generating a curve. and again, you will get more power by rotating with your punch than you will by drawing your arm back and pushing your fist forward using only your fist and elbows. A lot of this is due to the fact that by doing so, you're able to put more of your body weight behind a punch. Does anyone disagree with this?

If you're referring to some motion, then that would be a function of body mechanics which is caused by either tension or lack of tension in the muscles. Your muscles don't go "ok, now we're going to use spiral energy."

You are correct, sir. Neither do one's muscles say "Ok agonists, you're going work against the antagonists, and antagonists, you go ahead and get ready to reciprocate, thereby causing a sudden contraction which will..." Yes, I am referring to "some motion." The Chinese call it Spiral Energy/ Silk Reeling because that's what the heck they felt like calling it. One particular long-fist named Sifu Henry Gong, just calls it "Lower Spinal Rotation" since he feels this power originates in the lower spine rather than the waist. In their opinion, the energy traveled through the feet and up the body in a spiral. Sort of like how we call it a Roundhouse Kick despite the fact that there are no circular dwellings involved. How many Kickers have you seen kicking around someone's house? If a Thai boxer decided to call a Teep "Wallaby Bounds o'er the Fruited Plains", that should be fine too. A bit long winded and somewhat esoteric, but there'd be nothing wrong with it so long as it gets the job done. Just like if Grog the caveman calls Dumping a Big-Azz Rock On Ya Face simply "grugghhh...." it wouldn't make any difference. Get over it.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to practice "Badger Plays in the Stream"... I'm stank :-\
<./unnecessarily long-winded response>

Akhilleus

05-06-2005, 07:10 PM

Chopping okay good I'm glad you knew what I meant, that was a hard one to describe...also the horse stance is similar to how a baseball player usually stands when leading off a base, or when playing in the field...I use to bat out of a horse stance, and did pretty good with it, till some professional :rolleyes: batting coach screwed me up by trying to get me to assume a more conventional stance...

Lowlynobody

05-06-2005, 10:38 PM

Fighting (sparring) makes them better at fighting.

They don't just fight they do other things. If SAID was the be all end all then they wouldn't do any other forms of training at all. They wouldn't lift weights for one.

Lifting weights allows the muscles to generate more tension and therefore striker harder. How is that not SAID?

Because SAID tells us that really they should only be lifting weights so that they get better at lifting weights. Not to get better at fighting. Doesn't that debunk it? If lifting weights allows the muscles to generate more tension and therefore strike harder then it does actually have other benifits other than just helping you to get better at lifting weights.

The real big problem I have with SAID (as I touched on previously) is that the world is not black and white but infinate shades of grey. Which is why we can have a 15 page discussion about horse stance :)

Again, my point was that extended horse stance training does not carry over into fighting due to SAID because there is nothing in fighting that approximates horse stance training.

There may be nothing in fighting resembling horse stance TRAINING but there certainly is things in fighting that resemble horse stance and benefit from the training.

Lastly I think I skimmed over some posts yesterday and I found you correlated lifting weights to failure to the mental exercise of holding a horse stance for a long period of time. This is incorrect due to the fact that you arn't at the painfull point of failure for 20 minutes. When pushing to failure you know it will be over in just a little while. With horse stance the pain stretches out into infinity before you.

In adition holding horse stance for a very long period of time (after training it for a while) can actually get boring before the pain reaches a level sufficent to force most people to stand up. Then it becomes a fight against yourself. It can even become an exercise in mindfulness meditation as you watch your boordoom, see it for what it is, and watch it pass.

Again these are martial arts. There must be something in them for the word "art" to be included.

omarthefish

05-06-2005, 10:39 PM

Originally Posted by IronFist
"Spiral Energy" does not exist. A muscle either contracts or it relaxes. You have tension or you have no tension. A muscle doesn't have special things that it can do.

ROFL@the ignorance.

IronFist is just putting his head in the sand now. Presented with endless examples, photos of boxers, typical sports drill and even a champion kickboxer he still plays the ostrich and sticks to his own little world.

But that statement there is staggering in it's narrowmindedness. Here's a clue:

There is more than ONE muscle in the body and those muscles work in unison with all the other muscles, bones and tendons, synergistically creating said "spiral energy". Trying to apply muscular physiology to it is about as relevent as applying quantum mechanics.

edit: remembering why I usually just lurk here.

IronFist

05-06-2005, 11:34 PM

Because SAID tells us that really they should only be lifting weights so that they get better at lifting weights. Not to get better at fighting. Doesn't that debunk it?

No. Lifting weights for power allows the muscles to contract harder (generate more tension) which when combined with proper body mechanics will allow for a harder punch/kick/etc. than somebody who does not lift weights could throw.

If lifting weights allows the muscles to generate more tension and therefore strike harder then it does actually have other benifits other than just helping you to get better at lifting weights.

Yes. I never said it only made you better at lifting weights. Ok look at it like this:

Lifting weights = training your muscles to generate more force, whether through hypertrophy (muscle growth), neural adaptation, or both. That's SAID.

^ The additional strength gained from that transfers into punching or kicking or whatever where you want to generate maximal force from your muscles.

That is exactly how SAID works. I cannot break it down any more than that.

The reason horse stance does NOT have the same carry over is because long endurance training does not result in the muscles being able to generate more tension. If you increase your horse stance from 1 minute to 10 minutes, the maximal tension your muscles are capable of generating doesn't increase. That is also SAID.

The real big problem I have with SAID (as I touched on previously) is that the world is not black and white but infinate shades of grey. Which is why we can have a 15 page discussion about horse stance :)

Cheers to that.

There may be nothing in fighting resembling horse stance TRAINING but there certainly is things in fighting that resemble horse stance and benefit from the training.

My point when I mentioned that was that in a fight you're never in a horse stance long enough for the added endurance gained from training to pay off.

Lastly I think I skimmed over some posts yesterday and I found you correlated lifting weights to failure to the mental exercise of holding a horse stance for a long period of time. This is incorrect due to the fact that you arn't at the painfull point of failure for 20 minutes. When pushing to failure you know it will be over in just a little while. With horse stance the pain stretches out into infinity before you.

If time matters, just reduce the weight. The correlation was fighting through pain. A kung fu newbie who can only hold a horse stance for 30 seconds vs. a weight lifter who does a set to failure with a TUT (time under tension) of 60 seconds. If time matters you could theoretically do a set of bench with like 5lbs for 20 minutes or however long you want to hold your horse stance for. I never argued that holding a horse stance didn't build mental toughness.

Fu-Pow

05-06-2005, 11:39 PM

also we would work on sliding from side to side in the horse stance...come to think of it, we did this in football too, the sliding/shuffle part....without crossing the legs...

Gosh I think I said something similar about a million post ago. Notice how it was conveniently ignored by Ironfist.

Fu-Pow

05-06-2005, 11:50 PM

Your center of gravity is lowered when you're in a horse stance because you're physically lower to the ground. It doesn't carry over tho when you stand up again.

Well I think you need to distinguish between center of gravity and center of mass. There not exactly the same thing. Depending on how you train you can change your center of mass and therefore change how your body is effected by gravity. Most guys that build a massive upperbody without compensating in the lower half (ie chicken legs syndrrome) shift there center of mass upward. In the acceleration of gravity that makes them top heavy.

True, if you drop the entire mass then the center of gravity is lower.

But there are other factors like stability of the structure, etc.

IronFist

05-06-2005, 11:50 PM

Originally Posted by IronFist
"Spiral Energy" does not exist. A muscle either contracts or it relaxes. You have tension or you have no tension. A muscle doesn't have special things that it can do.

ROFL@the ignorance.

Hilarious. What's ignoranant about that? Everything I said is 100% accurate and demonstratable in laboratory settings.

Proof (http://www.chat11.com/Stretching_FAQ_1.2.1_-_How_Muscles_Contract)

Proof (http://biology.clc.uc.edu/courses/bio105/muscles.htm)

IronFist is just putting his head in the sand now. Presented with endless examples, photos of boxers, typical sports drill and even a champion kickboxer he still plays the ostrich and sticks to his own little world.

Yeah, citing psyiological prinples is putting my head in the sand. Geez some of you guys are dense. Here let me bold it for you:

Being in a horse stance (or any other stance) for 2 seconds in a fight is NOT affected by holding a horse stance for 20 minutes in training.

There is more than ONE muscle in the body and those muscles work in unison with all the other muscles, bones and tendons, synergistically creating said "spiral energy". Trying to apply muscular physiology to it is about as relevent as applying quantum mechanics.

Wow. First you talk about muscles working in unison and then you say it's irrelevant to "apply muscular physiology?" Absolutely incredible.

You still haven't shown me that anything I've said has been incorrect.

edit: remembering why I usually just lurk here.

edit: cuz you can't subtantiate anything you say with proof?

It seems that quite a few people in this thread are missing the basic principles of SAID which may be why we keep arguing. I've tried as best I can to explain it because I know that not everyone has an elementary foundation in physiology and anatomy. SAID is one of the most basic principles in physiology and nothing is exempt from it. Everything you do is causing some sort of adaptation, and the fact remains that endurance training does not increase maximal strength output which was my whole point in this thread. So if those of you who don't understand that want to keep arguing, that's fine with me.

IronFist

05-06-2005, 11:51 PM

Well I think you need to distinguish between center of gravity and center of mass. There not exactly the same thing. Depending on how you train you can change your center of mass and therefore change how your body is effected by gravity. Most guys that build a massive upperbody without compensating in the lower half (ie chicken legs syndrrome) shift there center of mass upward. In the acceleration of gravity that makes them top heavy.

True, if you drop the entire mass then the center of gravity is lower.

But there are other factors like stability of the structure, etc.

Yes, but "center of gravity" is what was said before.

I've heard stories of qigong masters who could "change their center of gravity at will" to avoid being pushed over. Your center of gravity may slowly change over time as your upper/lower body proportions change, but it's not something you can randomly move around at will and it certainly has nothing to do with holding stances.

I certainly don't hope you think holding horse stance for any period of time is going to increase lower body mass.

word of honor

05-07-2005, 12:01 AM

Well I certaintly don't hope you think holding horse stance for any period of time is going to develop lower body mass.
?? holding sei ping ma to the point of collapse will definitely develop more mass in the muscles of the legs !!

IronFist

05-07-2005, 12:05 AM

?? holding sei ping ma to the point of collapse will definitely develop more mass in the muscles of the legs !!

No, not once the "point of collapse" is past around 30-45 seconds.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. People are arguing without knowing what they're talking about. You're new to the board so I'll let it go, but trust me, endurance activities will absolutely NOT build size. There's a reason sprinters have huge quads and marathoners don't.

It takes a specific combination of time under tension (TUT), intensity, and volume (and making sure you eat enough calories to facilitate growth) to create muscle growth. Holding horse stances will not do it. If it did, every kung fu guy who held his stances for a while would have elite level bodybuilder legs. Your legs are hard enough to build muscle on when everything I mentioned above is in check. It's not going to randomly happen cuz some guy holds stances for 5, 10, 20, or even 60 minutes a day.

Newbies may notice a little growth or something from it, but these gains will die off shortly.

Lowlynobody

05-07-2005, 12:13 AM

I did a lot of weights when I was young. Basically got taken to the gym by older brothers (one of which competed in local bodybuilding) when I was as young as 12. By the time I was 15 - 16 I was 85 kg and doing body weight bench press for 3+ reps. Because I grew so quick (6 foot by the time I was 13) I had long relatively thin legs. Back then I did a lot of squating and other powerlifting movements to try to even things out. Now years later I haven't done weights in a very long time and have more muscular legs than I ever had when I was weight lifting. For me horse stance and other stance training HAS increased the size of my legs.

Lowlynobody

05-07-2005, 12:18 AM

I must add though that I am an easy gainer and my body responds quickly to any regular type of training. Always has.

omarthefish

05-07-2005, 12:21 AM

Hilarious. What's ignoranant about that? Everything I said is 100% accurate and demonstratable in laboratory settings.

Accurate and completely irrelevant. As is the rest of your post here. Kinesiology yes, physiology no. Nothing whatsoever to do with chansijin.

All you have done with that huge post is demonstrate a collosal ignorance of what chansijin is. Your trying to debunk a term for something where you don't even have the faintest clue what the term means.

IronFist

05-07-2005, 12:24 AM

Are you sure there was nothing else you did that could have contributed to it? Is horse stance the ONLY thing you've done?

Are you sure it didn't have anything to do with your age and the amount of hormones in your system at the time? If you experience leg growth while training horse stance, how do you know it wouldn't have happened anyway during those years?

How do you know you experience leg growth? Did you measure? How do you know it wasn't just a reduction in bodyfat that made the muscles appear more visible and giving the illusion of growth?

How do you know it wasn't the "newbie gains?" The growth isn't continuing past an initial threshold.

Please don't make me explain "newbie gains." Let's just leave it at people who do something shockingly different for the first time experience very rapid adaptation for a while that is completely uncharacteristic of normal circumstances. Examples include people increasing their max bench press by 10-20% after their first few workouts, or people doubling the maximum running distance in their first week or two of training. These types of increases will never be seen again (diminishing returns) and when a lot of people experience them for the first time they assume that they'll go on forever and thus proclaim a given exercise as doing all this stuff that it really doesn't. You may gain some size on your legs from horse stance in the first month or two, but it definately won't continue over the years.

IronFist

05-07-2005, 12:31 AM

omarthefish

05-07-2005, 12:33 AM

Please don't make me explain "newbie gains." Let's just leave it at people who do something shockingly different for the first time experience very rapid adaptation for a while that is completely uncharacteristic of normal circumstances. Examples include people increasing their max bench press by 10-20% after their first few workouts, or people doubling the maximum running distance in their first week or two of training. These types of increases will never be seen again (diminishing returns) and when a lot of people experience them for the first time they assume that they'll go on forever and thus proclaim a given exercise as doing all this stuff that it really doesn't. You may gain some size on your legs from horse stance in the first month or two, but it definately won't continue over the years.

Just taking advantage of the opportunity to agree on something.

omarthefish

05-07-2005, 12:47 AM

Ok, when I said "spiraling energy" before, I wasn't referring to body mechanics. Someone a while ago tried to tell me that horse stance makes your muscles store "spiral energy" that was some how a special kind of muscle contraction or something that was different from a "normal" contraction. :confused:

I didn't know when I brought that up that "spiraling energy" was your term for "using body mechanics to generate more force." But I never argued against that, either.

But that's why I said before that a muscle can only contract or relax, and there's no such thing as "spiral energy."

Now, back to arguing about horse stance.

I missed that post. Sounds like someone took a partial understanding of the concept and made false extrapolations or just didn't understand it well enough to explain. "Spiraling energy", to be clear, is a typical English shorthand for "chansijin" which more literally is "silk reeling energy".

The thing is, it IS developed through horse stance training. But yes, it's not literally stored in the muscles. But that is a close description. It's stored in the patterns of tension across various muscles throughout the body. One of the primary ways of developing this is through stance training. Static training, just holding a stance for a long period is just the first stage. You need to be able to be comfortable "down there". But then typically you would move on to slowly shifting between stances without coming up. You also will typically hold a "static" stance for a long time but are not truly static. You continually make small adjustments often not in posture but in patterns of tension as you develop better kinesthetic awareness and do "research" into the kineseology of your own body.

To borrow a term you like, body mechanics, are studied though carefull training in various stances, the "horse" being primary. Dynamic exercises are used as well but without the supplementary relatively static practices you will never achieve the same result in the dynamic drills as you won't have a chance to see/feel what's happening at key points.

This is a messy thread because I agree with you on many points and also feel that many of the "supporters" of horse stance training are positing all kinds of wrong reasons so I find I barely agree with anybody here. For me, the proof is in the pudding. I DO lift. I head out to the gym and squat, snatch and occasionally even bench. But they really don't give you the same benifit. Not making a better/worse comparison. They each have their own values and much of the "debate" is from people on one side having many wrong ideas about what they get out of stance training and on the other side someone like yourself who doesn't train a type of martial art that even uses the things.

So yes, SAID. If you fight the way you do and never actually use the things, aren't conerned with developing various jin, don't bother with the traditional stuff, then their relevance is limited. If you actually DO use a lot of that stuff then well, SAID. I need good stances because they are critical to my techniques.

Lowlynobody

05-07-2005, 12:49 AM

Are you sure there was nothing else you did that could have contributed to it? Is horse stance the ONLY thing you've done?

Martial arts is the only thing I have done and for a few years stance training was a big part of it.

Are you sure it didn't have anything to do with your age and the amount of hormones in your system at the time? If you experience leg growth while training horse stance, how do you know it wouldn't have happened anyway during those years?

This is a good point. I couldn't answer this either way with 100% assurity. Though I doubt I would have experience an increase in muscle size in my legs as a result of the passing of time. When ever I've stoped training for any reason my body has either stayed as it was or gotten smaller. Depending on the period of time.

How do you know you experience leg growth? Did you measure? How do you know it wasn't just a reduction in bodyfat that made the muscles appear more visible and giving the illusion of growth?

The leg growth was quite apparent. Like I said I grew quick so I had long thin legs despite constantly working hard with weights.

I don't have very much body fat. I actually have a little more now then I did when I was yonger and lifting weights but the muscles on my legs are more defined now.

How do you know it wasn't the "newbie gains?" The growth isn't continuing past an initial threshold.

I know what newbie gains are. I have been around a lot of experienced weight lifters and personal trainers since I was young. I did also introduce a lot of people to lifting weights and helped them train. The growth wasn't massive and instant. It continued over a period of around 2 years of constant training. At which point I could hold a correct low horse stance (not thighs parallel which I don't personally agree with) for up to 45 minutes.

word of honor

05-07-2005, 12:54 AM

sorry if i wasn't clear but i didn't say anything about continuous gains
i was just astonished by this overstatement on your part:

Well I certaintly don't hope you think holding horse stance for any period of time is going to develop lower body mass.but then you acknowledged:

Newbies may notice a little growth or something from it, but these gains will die off shortly.yes since i'm new to this forum i'm not familiar with the different voices and how they present their arguments so i'm sorry if i got hung up on symantics. thanks for cutting me some slack and i'll try to cut you more slack as well :)

IronFist

05-07-2005, 12:57 AM

I cannot believe how fast you guys respond to this thread :D

What timezones are you all in? Holy crap.

omarthefish

05-07-2005, 01:33 AM

4:30 Saturday afternoon in China here.

edit: Plus it's a national holidy here the whole first week of May so no work or other responsabilities.

Lowlynobody

05-07-2005, 01:37 AM

6:30 Saturday evening here in Sydney. Just considering dinner :)

word of honor

05-07-2005, 10:16 AM

it was 1:30am then but now it's 10:10 saturday morning and time for some caffeine :D

BlueTravesty

05-07-2005, 10:18 AM

I did that "sleeping" thing I keep hearing so much about :-D

almost 1:30 PM here (EST)

Akhilleus

05-07-2005, 03:27 PM

OK gang this is a good thread, good discussion, lots of great info...but can I please add my two cents? Alright then...

Earlier in this thread, there was some debate regarding drills practice vs. actual practice...I think this has something to do with SAID...sorry I will go back and read the whole thread later...but for now...

What I mean by actual practice would be something like what you are really training for...for a mixed martial artist it would involve sparring where you keep fighting on the ground...for a hoopster, it would involve scrimmaging...now I can say as a former hoopster, that scrimmaging is much more fun than drills, and is very beneficial to your growth as a baller...however, you still should do drills, here's why...

Let's say Mickey up in Harlem plays 8 scrimmage games per day...he's getting pretty good at man-to-man "D", ball handling and develops a good feel for the court...over the course of the 8 scrimmages per day he takes about 20 jump shots, 15 set shot, 10 lay ups, 4 dunks, 10 free throws, 5 three-pointers, makes a few passes and gets a few rebounds....

Now Billy Bob, down in Indiana, never scrimmages, but he takes 100 free throws, 100 three pointers, 100 lay ups, he can't dunk, and 100 set shots per day...

As you can see, a balance is what is needed...Mickey has never really taken enough of each kind of shot to reach his full potential...he may find himself in a position he's never happened to find himself in in his previous scrimmages...Billy Bob on the other hand, is prepared to shoot from any spot on the floor, but has never been in a game type situation, so he doesn't have a feel for the court or all of the different variables that come into play in a game...

fa_jing

05-07-2005, 05:00 PM

For some data on muscle hypertrophy, here's my experience: When I began training Kung Fu, I hadn't been active for a few years. I had some back injuries but Kung Fu didn't bother them, and improved them somewhat. I did horse stance training, working up to 4 minutes or so in a thighs-parallel-to-floor stance and I saw growth in my legs, as well as much better lower back strength. I also hit bags, did drills, jumped rope and stuff. Then I did Hindu Squats for 7-8 months, working up to 400 straight, and saw more thigh gain than I had than I did from working my horse. It's hard to say exactly since I was no longer hitting the bags at that point, but I'm pretty sure that Hindu Squats are more effective for putting on muscle than holding a parallel horse stance. Hindu Squats also work the lower back well. Then, I did kettlebells for a period of time. This didn't target the quads quite as much as the Hindu Squats do, but overall doing kettlebell jerks, snatches, swings, and weighted pistols was a better leg developer than the Hindu Squats. Now, I've been lifting barbells for about a year, doing power lifts and oly lifts, and they are yet better for putting on muscle.

I haven't been training MA for a few years and I haven't kept up with any of the MA exercises. I can only hold that low horse for about 2 minutes now! My flexibility is not great since my muscles are sore from lifting, and I don't want to experience any more pain :D :D . Even though I am not some lifelong MA devotee, I'm doing kettlebells again, I want to do Hindu Squats and Horse stance again. All these things have their benefit to the average person, and me in particular. The problem is that there are too many things to choose from, and only so much recovery ability, not to mention time for a busy person! I do need to cycle away from heavy lifting in order to work on my other attributes and most of all stay healthy. That's just me though ( and most other people. )

All that said, Kung Fu people need to lift more weights, that's for sure.

fa_jing

05-07-2005, 05:04 PM

and the students should practice their horse stance more too! Kung Fu students are lazy, they want everything handed to them on a platter nowadays! Real Kung Fu training break your bones! :p

WinterPalm

05-07-2005, 07:53 PM

Amen to that last post!

SevenStar

05-09-2005, 01:38 PM

Gosh I think I said something similar about a million post ago. Notice how it was conveniently ignored by Ironfist.

in those examples, it applies directly, as that is the exact position that those players use when guarding a man, blocking linemen, etc. Iron's point is that in fighting, you won't rely on that position for extended periods of time, making the need to hold a static position for extended periods unnecessary

PangQuan

05-09-2005, 02:15 PM

Of course you're not going to fight out of a horse stance

I do. Of course I dont stay in horse the entire time, but I do use horse quite a bit when I spar. I learned this from my sifu, he fights from very low stances. Of course there are higher stances adapted into the fight/sparring match, but dont think for a second that low stances have no place. I have used low stances a number of times to get in on my opponent.

Just because some people cannot see how low stances are of an advantage in a combat situation, just means they cant see why or how.

If you can not hold your horse for a long amount of time, then good luck staying in low stances for several minutes while fighting. You wont be able to. Now if you can stay in low stances for, say, half an hour, then you will be able to utilize the effectiveness of low stances in a fight, when ever you need to, without the possiblilty of becoming more fatigued from the strain low stance standing, walking and moving can put on your body.

SevenStar

05-09-2005, 03:23 PM

"in those examples, it applies directly, as that is the exact position that those players use when guarding a man, blocking linemen, etc. Iron's point is that in fighting, you won't rely on that position for extended periods of time, making the need to hold a static position for extended periods unnecessary"

Your thinking is so limited. Of course you're not going to fight out of a horse stance, but it is important to develop the internal feeling that comes from training in static positions. There is mind and body connection thing going on there. Static stances are an historical part of gongfu training for a reason. The Chinese understood weightlifting, it's a part of Shuai Jiao training. So, modern weightlifting does not replace what is going on with static stances.

As a note, don't discard old style training methods, because you don't understand them or because Bruce Lee said so.

it's not limited at all - it's just outside of the cma box. and if you notice, I didn't mention weight training at all. but, yeah, you're right - shuai chiao guys use pulleys, the rock pole, etc. To be precise, neither of them are necessary for learning how to fight. Mind body connection can be achieved in other ways than stance training. you cannot give one logical justification how a 40 min horse is directly helping you in a fight.

as for fighting from the horse, sure you do - but its transitional, so actually, you just helped to make my point. you will transition into and out of various stances - not statically hold them.

IronFist

05-09-2005, 03:24 PM

SevenStar gets it.

word of honor

05-09-2005, 04:47 PM

i'm not into long static stance training either but ime 3m training a low static stance does help with transitioning through low stances during sparring. increasing your range of motion isn't exactly the right term but it comes close-

Shaolinlueb

05-09-2005, 06:50 PM

heres an idea. stop complaining, do some nice deep horse stance training and have stronger legs. :D it will all be good in the end. ;) :D

Liokault

05-09-2005, 09:30 PM

Whatever....a thousand years of Chinese martial arts is trumped by lifting weights and transitioning through stances.? They got that gun powder thing right, but fighting? Well now that takes some good ole' fightin'

Got gun powder right? Who was doing the shooting and who was doing the iron shirt during the boxer rebellion, and who won? :D

IronFist

05-09-2005, 09:41 PM

^ True.

6789

IronFist

05-09-2005, 09:42 PM

Liokault

05-09-2005, 09:55 PM

Sounds like someone didn't read this thread.

It's old and traditional therefore it must be correct. Right? So when you get sick do you go to the doctor to get bled by leaches? Why not? Cuz science proved that other methods were better.

Was In Turkey last year, every market sells leaches....I assume for medical reasons. Some of them Turks have huge legs to, but only the women :cool:

joedoe

05-09-2005, 10:02 PM

Funny you should pick that particular example IF, because a lot of hospitals are starting to use leaches again :D

Akhilleus

05-09-2005, 10:34 PM

Whatever....a thousand years of Chinese martial arts is trumped by lifting weights and transitioning through stances....I guess they just missed that one. Who'd a thunk it? They got that gun powder thing right, but fighting? Well now that takes some good ole' fightin' American boys to figure out. A good ole' cowboy punch and some rasslin' will do it.

I'm no historist, but I do know that at one point China was a very advanced civilization compared to the rest of the world, from a technological standpoint...however, then they cut themselves off from outside contact, for a long time until Forrest Gump went there to play ping pong...so by cutting themselves off they fell behind because they didn't get new ideas or inventions that the rest of the world was discovering...so it wouldn't be that surprising if some of the things they were doing during this period of isolation were less productive than those being used by the rest of the world...

Also if a society did have very advanced weapons, I wouldn't expect them to be as good at hand to hand combat as a society that relied more on hand to hand combat that such weapons...

Akhilleus

05-09-2005, 10:54 PM

Some of them Turks have huge legs to, but only the women

Really would you say its more muscle or fat? Or both?

Lowlynobody

05-10-2005, 12:01 AM

MasterKiller

05-10-2005, 06:37 AM

It's old and traditional therefore it must be correct. Right? So when you get sick do you go to the doctor to get bled by leaches? Why not? Cuz science proved that other methods were better.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5319129

Akhilleus

05-10-2005, 07:38 PM

Originally posted by star chaser
"but ...but ..but ..
china invented gunpowder but it wasn't really being used for firearms."

Wow I didn't know that thank you for the info...but I do know for a fact that they had Chu No Kus...guys with crossbows that could shoot many arrows at the same time! They are the unique unit for the Chinese in Age of Empires 2: The Age of Kings...

IronFist

05-10-2005, 07:40 PM

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5319129

Geez, the one example I pick... :D

SevenStar

05-11-2005, 11:26 AM

I watched a Randy Couture vid the other day about clinch work. Notice a lot of things. One example where he's in a tai type double collar tie (hopefully the correct description) instead of trying to back out and thus bending his body forward into knees he tucks his butt under and pushes his hips forward and "turtles" his neck.

This way he connects his body with his legs by making his spine straight. Then he walks into the guy making the tai boxing clinch behind his neck which causes the guy's arms to jam and Randy to escape the clinch and go to where he is comfortable.

This is the same posture (minus the turtling of the neck) that we train in horse stance - butt tucked under, pelvis pushed forward, connecting body to legs with straight spine, etc. I imagine it would translate quite well and help stop the "What the hell did I do to my neck?" feeling after a clinch workout session as well as helping you out a lot so you don't get menipulated all over the place.

ducking out of a plam is the absolute WRONG thing to do, for the reason you stated - you run the risk of getting kneed in the head, which means lights out for you. There are numerous ways to get out of a clinch though, and ways to prevent getting manipulated. As long as he doesn't have control of your head, you are good. He can still do things, like eat up all of your space, but you are owned if he has your head under control. As for the sore neck feeling - I think it's just a neck strength and endurance issue. the more you neck wrestle, the less the soreness happens.