Low or high stance ?

[old jong]

How much do you bend your knees in your wing chun?
Do you like to stay high or are you sinking your stance?...
I do a 50/50 structure and I like to go fairly low as my knees are bent around 40/45 degree.I realise many will find this a little low but I find it beneficial to me as I like to use my structure as a tactical thing.(I still have good mobility with it)
I know many like it very different so without getting into "my Si-fu sez or my way is better" what are your opinions and reasons behind your stance?

[kungfu cowboy]

Hey old jong, what's up! I think that the lower the stance the better! Fist distance between the knees is the ideal for structure, leg training, and groin kick defence. Or so my momma said.:p

[[Censored]]

When I practice, I go as low as I can go comfortably, then I go a little bit lower. Strong, relaxed legs and a low COG give you extra options in a tussle.

Low training does not necessarily require low applications. High training DOES require high applications. If you try to sink your structure under pressure, but you haven't "done the time" in the low stance, you will be moved or collapsed easily.

[Martial Joe]

I am more upright...

[anerlich]

I don't think "lower is better" is all there is to it.

I see lots of junior students in my kwoon, especially males, take this "maxim" and take it beyond common sense, to the point where their feet are too wide for them to hold their pelvis in the correct position, so that their weight is not on the flat of the feet but on the inner edges, and their pelvis is tilted forward, so that the stance is less stable and their structural integrity is violated.

"'More is better', they seem to think,'so if I take my feet REALLY wide and get REALLY low my training will be SO much more effective'". I disagree.

The training stance to me is not about getting a good burn in the quads and other muscles around the hips, which squats, duck walking, bunny hops, and hung gar style horse stances will do much better, thank you. To me the stance is about correct skeletal alignment, learning to stand so that the skeleton, tendons and ligaments are holding you in place, rather than excess muscular tension, which is the enemy of biomechanical efficiency, and the flow of chi (if you buy into that).

[whippinghand]

What goes up, must come down.

[kungfu cowboy]

Going low does not require going wide.

[CanadianBadAss]

If your feet are really wide it also becomes harder to kick, because it takes longer to transfer wieght on to the other foot.

[Martial Joe]

Then dont transfer the weight...

[Martial Joe]

The one posistion that really slows you down, is when your knees are pointing in to much...

[alienofwar]

Also would not a lower stance intefere with movement of stepping?

[Sihing73]

Hello,

I think that when one considers training as oppossed to application then a lower stance, and perhaps even a slightly wider stance would be better.

A lower stance is harder to perform correctly but will give additional benefits such as strength and stability. If one trains to move from a low stance then when one goes higher your movement will be even more fluid, stable and faster than someone who trains only for a high stance. The additional strength will carry over for kicking and other movements.

Having a slightly wider base can also provide more stability, although too much width can have severe drawbacks. :D

Take a look at some other styles and observe their training methods. The one which comes to mind right away is Pakua. Pakua is known for its fast and fluid footwork. Yet in training some styles of Pakua train their stances to be low. In application they may not be low but the foundation is there.

One last thing; don't confuse a low stance with some type of competition to see how low one can go. The important thing is to achieve a low stance which still allows you to move and react quickly and effectively.

Just like the Pontiac commerical, with a slight paraphrase :p
Wider is better, so is lower ;)

Peace,

Dave

[Marshdrifter]

My Sifu always told us to have a low stance. I can do a low
stance, but now prefer a slightly higher one. I found that, with
my low stance, I had excellent structure, but I was so rooted in
that I react fast enough to move. Perhaps this isn't a problem
with the stance so much as me, but I found that with a higher
stance, I could still maintain a good root and have added mobility.

I'm sure there's a happy medium, but I haven't quite gotten it
yet.

Another concern I have is the knees. In western sport science,
having the knees over the toes, which happens in the low stance,
is a bad thing, especially if you're a person with mass (I'm not).
I had read that eventually, the knees will adapt to this way of
positioning so it won't damage them, but I don't know if this is
true.

[red5angel]

Hey guys, as far as stance goes I like to look at it this way:

Everyone I have ever trained with, has said the stance should eb low for Sil Lim Tao. This makes sense for training since you are building strength, endurance, structure, and Qi in your body. So when I am practicing or doing my forms, I go low, and try to stay that way. But for practical use I think lower is not necessrily better, you want to go low, that is what helps you get your root, lower CofG, but you also want to leave some room to go lower. I have been taught that in certain circumstances, going lower can get you out of a tight bind, so you want to leave some room either way, it gives you more flexibility and range of motion.

[dzu]

A low horse does not automatically equal good root.
A high horse does not automatically equal bad root.

IMHO, the transition between high and low/ low and high is where good root is developed.

Dzu

[red5angel]

Dzu, can you expound upon that answer?

[GiantMidget]

My own preference is a high stance. I'd rather have mobility than immoveability.

Whenever Ive used wide stances Ive always been kicked in the groin and had difficulty with lateral movement. I find that if Im still in a high stance I'm often swept on my ass though so i have to keep moving.

I suppose a lot depends on your body type and other attributes though.

[old jong]

And when you want to use a system,you must adapt it to your style! So...Everybody is right here...as long as you can use your own thing effectively.

[vingtsunstudent]

there is another reason the stance is sometimes practiced a little lower that often seems to not be discussed, it is the same reason to some degree that all wing chun techniques are practiced from 1 extreme to another.
this reason is that when in a fight you will lose a certain degree of your technique, your legs will straighten somewhat but seeing as though you have practiced with them a little more bent than usual you should find that they do not straighten in combat & therefor your knees should not become targets.
vts

[old jong]

This makes sense VTS:cool:

[vingtsunstudent]

thanx old jong,
if you think about it besides all the other odvious benefits of training, to say, get the elbow on centre, how often are you really going to have your tan or fook exactly in centre.
the thing is if you can do that & lose a certain degree in a real fight then you will still do fine however if you can not control it in your own centre then when you lose a certain degree(through adrenaline, excitement whatever) you will find that your arms will be easily moved aside.
i find this to be a topic that nobody seems to talk about much but is quite interesting once it is thought about.
vts

[Jeff Liboiron]

i like a fairly high stance because it fits my prosthetic better

[whippinghand]

For a low stance to work, you must know how to move with it. The same for a high stance.

Since a higher stance is more common in Wing Chun, Wing Chun practitioners generally are not comfortable in a low stance, for the above stated reason:they don't know how to move with it.

Most don't know how to move with the pigeon-toe stance either, but that's another thread.

As a result, there is the misconception that a higher stance is more mobile than a lower stance, and a lower stance is more rooted than a higher stance.

[red5angel]

Whipping hands, what lineage do you practice? My first encounter with Wing Chun was with a local sifu who studied Pan Nam Lineage and that was a low stance, even in application, low stance with weight probably 80% on back leg. Now I study Leung Sheung Lineage and we are still in a low stance most of the time. A high stance would seem to go against a lot of what WC teaches.
Basically I have always been taught that it is much easier to uproot an opponent who is in a high stance, this makes sense if you consider the center of gravity aspect.

[whippinghand]

Originally posted by red5angel
A high stance would seem to go against a lot of what WC teaches.

What concepts are you referring to?

[red5angel]

I tried posting before but apparently it did not go through....

Whipping hands, you stated in an earlier post: "Since a higher stance is more common in Wing Chun, Wing Chun practitioners "

In my WC training, I have always been told to sink, and stay sunk. This allows my root to stay strong and lowers my center of gravity. I mean no disrespect, I am just trying to find out if I am misunderstaning your statement.........

[mun hung]

Would you, or do you fight in this "sunk" position?

[red5angel]

yes, to a certain extent. I have been taught to sink (this is not only for training, the training is to strengthen the stance, which is sunk.) Sinking down on the back leg, you dont want to sink as far as you can because like someone already pointed out, you loose mobility, but you sink to sort of a median position, where you have mobility but can sink lower if you have to to avoid a grab, or strike or what have you. Doe sthat answer your question Mun Hung?

[whippinghand]

My reference to high stance and low stance was in regard to stances such as horse stance and pigeon toe stance, not sunken and unsunken.

Being in a sunken position all the time does render you limited from the standpoint of power.

[old jong]

Stance is the basic and most important part of structure.Why spend countless hours in ygkym doing siu lim tao perfecting something if we forget all about it when doing chi sau or sparring?...I seen so much people with straight knees (and sticking out butts!) getting knocked in walls and pushed around,relying on hand techniques and chi sau tricks instead of using proper alignment and structure.It is not a matter of "how low should it be".It is a matter of "Is it effective in all circumstances?"

Btw, I know moving in pigeon toe stance is practiced in Sunny Tang lineage schools. Just an other way to use wing chun structure.

[whippinghand]

Originally posted by old jong
It is not a matter of "how low should it be".It is a matter of "Is it effective in all circumstances?"
It IS a matter of how low or high it should be. If you stick to one height for all situations, you'll make your Wing Chun very technique based, and very predictable.

[old jong]

I dont really know on what you base your last starement but I can tell you that if I see someone bouncing up and down during chi sau or sparring,I'll just wait for the moment he goes up to drive him off his feet!

[Apprentice]

i think whippinghand is refferring to sinking and rising...am i correct?

[whippinghand]

I don't recall writing the word "bounce"... Is that what you read?

[old jong]

Bouncing can be done at different speeds. I still think we should apply "the principles" of YGKYM at all times. Otherwise...We should migrate to the JKD forum!;)

[yuanfen]

Tyrrany of words and some miscommunication. Yes. (old jong)wc principles are super but the principles allow for and even call for "adjustment". I think WH was referring to adjustment rather than bouncing.

[old jong]

You could be right Yuanfen and I dont want to suffer from tyranny of words for sure! So, I will concede that I'm predictable in a sense. I punch the other guy everytimes!;) :D

[yuanfen]

On the ygkym there is no bouncing. The knees are springy. but
you stand , sink, open, and pivot... all of it is basically "sinking" into the stand. Lots of folks from what I have seen bounce before the final pivot....a bad habit IMO.
Where "rising" can take place is where one has lost the line
and a third form motion gets you into position.

[old jong]

In form or application?

[mun hung]

I've got a good question to ask.

What if you've got two guys who are the same height but one wears a size 7 shoe and the other a 13 - would the width of their stance still be the same if they both open their horse this way?

[old jong]

Sorry,this tread was good in the beginning but due to uncontrolable circumstances it took a bad turn.I dont feel like answering questions just to give flank to mysterious one line critics.
There is a good place for that kind of discussions.
There (http://www.vingtsun.com.hk/forum/default.asp)

[whippinghand]

The question being: how do you open your stance? Well, I'll answer it for you, since you're having such difficulty with the question.

If you do it anything like your sifu does, you open the feet in 2 movements, and then you sink. What do you think the significance of that sink is? Let me put it another way.... why not sink first before going into the stance?

[old jong]

I notice that some of this rich conversation was deleted...It makes the thread a little hard to follow through. Why not delete all of it?...
BTW. Whippinghand, You say you know my Si-Fu?...I don't hide my lineage like you do! you know how we do?...I'm not sure!
Open up to the forum,say who you are and where you come from (Dont have to get intimate), stop acting so superior and I will consider having a constructive talk with you.
I know you are not stupid by many of your posts.Why the need to play games like that?

[whippinghand]

Sorry old jong, I'm not insecure enough to hide my lineage, and I'm certainly not insecure enough to advertise it, in order to substantiate my points.

Your remark about game playing... wouldn't you say that's like the pot calling the kettle black?

And thank you for your offer of consideration. I shall consider and reflect upon the value of a "constructive talk with you".

[old jong]

O.K.