Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kellen Bassette
Argument: Stance training does not build leg strength.
Question: When someone who has never done stance training attempts to hold a stance, they typically cannot do it for 30 seconds. After a while of training they can do it for 1 minute, then 2, then 5. How is this phenomenon possible if there wasn't some strengthening of certain muscles?
it is a muscular endurance exercise. just as doing 100 push ups is. there is limited strengthening if the muscle is untrained. after that period, you ate building endurance, not strength. such us the case with any high rep exercise our isometric exercise held for long periods of time.
Quote:
Argument: Stance training builds muscles, but only those necessary to hold that particular stance; in that specific shape. Stance training can only help you hold that particular stance longer, nothing more.
Question: I find it hard to believe that these muscles only serve one specific function, i.e. holding Ma Bu. They don't have any other uses? Whenever you do any kind of new exercise, you will have sore muscles you don't normally notice. If I run and lift weights and do aerobics everyday, then one day decide to swim 100 laps, I'm going to feel a whole new world of sore muscles. It seems to me strengthening these different groups must benefit your overall strength. Is this incorrect?
this is the nature of isometric exercises - they don't work through a range of motion, so you only get benefit in the positron being held. a squat works through a range of motion; ma bu is static, this you aren't improving throughout an entire squat motion.
Quote:
My other problem with the above argument is that it seems to make an assumption that you're only training one shape. For instance, you only train horse stance. If you train 10 different stances, your using all different muscles and angles. It seems to me that I would then be working a whole lot of different muscle groups and that should, in theory, be beneficial to my overall leg strength. Why would this not be the case?
when you kick, does only one part of your leg move? no. it's a whole body movement. what you described isolates motions - the very same reason we say bodybuilding is inefficient for ma training - your body functions as a unit, so to train it in isolated quadrants is not as effective for improving ma performance as say, power lifting, which works the body as a unit.
Quote:
Argument: After 2 minutes of holding a static stance there is no additional benefit.
Question: So is it beneficial to hold the stance for 2 minutes as opposed to 15?
it has a benefit, but that benefit is not strength; it's endurance.
Quote:
Argument: Stance training has no direct benefit to a fighter.
Question: Putting aside mental toughness and rooting, some stances make for good stretches. Gung Bu and Pu Bu, for instance. These same stances are often trained as stretches outside the martial arts world. Some other stances are great for balance, I would consider the cat stance and the various versions of one footed stances to be helpful in maintaining balance and developing sensitivity in the ankle, to help regain compromised balance. I feel like this skill is very beneficial to a fighter. Is there no benefit to the stretching and balancing practice either?
you don't need formal stance training for that. gung bu is indeed a great stretch, but a person doesn't have to know it is a stance, and never needs to hold that stretch longer than two minutes. stances are great for throwing. judo guys use gung bu, ma bu, sou pan bu and jin ji du li regularly, but they have no idea that they are even doing them. they are used in throwing and transitions. the stance isn't taught at all and the stances are never named.