Mr. Nemo
02-16-2002, 10:01 PM
We've talked about the functions of the different "training stances" (I only call them that because I can't think of another name) of kung fu - horse stance, bow stance, cat stance, and so on. The consensus seems to be that these stances are usually transitional in nature, and that often the movement between them is used to generate power (the second point is less widely accepted than the first).
But instead of talking about transitional stances, why don't we talk about the "initial stance" - that is, the stance you start out in, and the stance you might revert to if you try a technique and it fails for some reason. Ideally, the initial stance mixes defense with the potential for offense. However, sometimes these two goals get in the way of each other, and defense against upper body throws is not the same as defense against lower body takedowns is not the same as defense against punches is not the same as defense against kicks.
Here are some sample stances found in various martial arts. I haven't trained in all of these, so if I get anything wrong, please tell me. These are only the basics.:
Muay Thai: In a "classical" muay thai stance, the weight is on the back leg, the body is held mostly upright, and the arms are held in front of the face, sometimes with the elbows away from the body. The lead foot has little to no weight on it.
This stance is good for defense against punches and kicks (the lead foot can quickly rise up to block a leg or body kick with the shin because there is no weight on it), can quickly go into "three-point stance" (both elbows in, knee up, there are very few openings for an attack against someone in this stance). The raised elbows gives good protection to the entire face, and helps thai boxers close to the thai-style "plum" clinch.
Boxing: In a typical american boxers' stance, more weight is generally placed on the front foot. Weight rests on the balls of the feet. The heel of the back foot is raised off of the ground. The hands are held on either side of the chin to protect the face, while the elbows are held close to the body to protect the body. Weight is low, with the boxer in a semi-crouched position.
A european boxer tends to stand more upright. I don't quite understand the pros and cons of the european style vs. the american style, maybe someone that knows more about boxing can help me.
This stance gives the boxer good mobility of the head and whole body. The rear heel raised off of the floor gives the boxer a greater range of motion in which to torque his or her hip when delivering a punch with the rear hand (the right hand if you're right handed, for example). The position of the hands gives good punch defense to both the head and body.
"Old School" Vale Tudo/BJJ: This is a stance such as the one Royce Gracie used in the early UFC's. Most of the weight is on the back foot, the knees are slightly bent, the front hand is held out at arms' length both as a ranging tool and as a defense against punches, the chin is tucked between the lead shoulder and the rear hand.
This stance offers good defense against strikes. Since the only objective in "old school" BJJ is to either shoot or close to the clinch, striking offense is not really an issue.
Wrestling: A freestyle wrestler will be more crouched over than a boxer, lower the the ground, and will keep his hands closer to his or her waist than the face, so he or she can get underhooks if the opponent shoots. Sometimes wrestlers use a staggered stance, with one foot in front of the other, and sometimes they use an even stance, with the feet on a straight line if you're looking at them from the side.
This stance gives a wrestler good mobility, good balance and base, and the ability to sprawl quickly and with good technique. However, the lowered hands, while they're good for underhooks, don't give the head protection from strikes.
Those are some examples. From those, we can conclude that having the right stance is kind of a four-way love-hate relationship between mobility, defense against strikes, potential to throw effective strikes of your own, and defense against takedowns. There are two basic contrasts that I see:
Higher stances (more mobility) vs. lower stances (more balance)
Hands up (better striking defense) vs. hands down (underhooks)
All these things are an issue in fighting. I rewatched a couple of Kaoru Uno's fights recently, and he uses a very unique stance - very crouched over, almost like a pure wrestler's stance, only with his hands up, one hand almost continually feinting jabs. This got me thinking that the american "crouchfighter's" boxing stance seems like a pretty happy medium between all these different options: good striking offensively and defensively, decent mobility, and decent defense against takedowns.
I haven't listed any kung fu stances because there are so many different styles, with subtle differences in their stances, and because I wanted some of the people here to describe their stances and why they use them. For instance, I know praying mantis' stance is weighted similar to muay thai's, while many other northern kung fu stances are much like a more crouched version of the old-school BJJ stance.
But instead of talking about transitional stances, why don't we talk about the "initial stance" - that is, the stance you start out in, and the stance you might revert to if you try a technique and it fails for some reason. Ideally, the initial stance mixes defense with the potential for offense. However, sometimes these two goals get in the way of each other, and defense against upper body throws is not the same as defense against lower body takedowns is not the same as defense against punches is not the same as defense against kicks.
Here are some sample stances found in various martial arts. I haven't trained in all of these, so if I get anything wrong, please tell me. These are only the basics.:
Muay Thai: In a "classical" muay thai stance, the weight is on the back leg, the body is held mostly upright, and the arms are held in front of the face, sometimes with the elbows away from the body. The lead foot has little to no weight on it.
This stance is good for defense against punches and kicks (the lead foot can quickly rise up to block a leg or body kick with the shin because there is no weight on it), can quickly go into "three-point stance" (both elbows in, knee up, there are very few openings for an attack against someone in this stance). The raised elbows gives good protection to the entire face, and helps thai boxers close to the thai-style "plum" clinch.
Boxing: In a typical american boxers' stance, more weight is generally placed on the front foot. Weight rests on the balls of the feet. The heel of the back foot is raised off of the ground. The hands are held on either side of the chin to protect the face, while the elbows are held close to the body to protect the body. Weight is low, with the boxer in a semi-crouched position.
A european boxer tends to stand more upright. I don't quite understand the pros and cons of the european style vs. the american style, maybe someone that knows more about boxing can help me.
This stance gives the boxer good mobility of the head and whole body. The rear heel raised off of the floor gives the boxer a greater range of motion in which to torque his or her hip when delivering a punch with the rear hand (the right hand if you're right handed, for example). The position of the hands gives good punch defense to both the head and body.
"Old School" Vale Tudo/BJJ: This is a stance such as the one Royce Gracie used in the early UFC's. Most of the weight is on the back foot, the knees are slightly bent, the front hand is held out at arms' length both as a ranging tool and as a defense against punches, the chin is tucked between the lead shoulder and the rear hand.
This stance offers good defense against strikes. Since the only objective in "old school" BJJ is to either shoot or close to the clinch, striking offense is not really an issue.
Wrestling: A freestyle wrestler will be more crouched over than a boxer, lower the the ground, and will keep his hands closer to his or her waist than the face, so he or she can get underhooks if the opponent shoots. Sometimes wrestlers use a staggered stance, with one foot in front of the other, and sometimes they use an even stance, with the feet on a straight line if you're looking at them from the side.
This stance gives a wrestler good mobility, good balance and base, and the ability to sprawl quickly and with good technique. However, the lowered hands, while they're good for underhooks, don't give the head protection from strikes.
Those are some examples. From those, we can conclude that having the right stance is kind of a four-way love-hate relationship between mobility, defense against strikes, potential to throw effective strikes of your own, and defense against takedowns. There are two basic contrasts that I see:
Higher stances (more mobility) vs. lower stances (more balance)
Hands up (better striking defense) vs. hands down (underhooks)
All these things are an issue in fighting. I rewatched a couple of Kaoru Uno's fights recently, and he uses a very unique stance - very crouched over, almost like a pure wrestler's stance, only with his hands up, one hand almost continually feinting jabs. This got me thinking that the american "crouchfighter's" boxing stance seems like a pretty happy medium between all these different options: good striking offensively and defensively, decent mobility, and decent defense against takedowns.
I haven't listed any kung fu stances because there are so many different styles, with subtle differences in their stances, and because I wanted some of the people here to describe their stances and why they use them. For instance, I know praying mantis' stance is weighted similar to muay thai's, while many other northern kung fu stances are much like a more crouched version of the old-school BJJ stance.