Differences In Stances

[Siu Lum Fighter]

I just got finished reading the article on Tan Tui in the most recent issue of KF Magazine. This particular style is almost identical to my own. There were just some things I was wondering about the stances. One sihing of mine told me that in "true" bow stance both heels are lined up. This makes sense since it is the most efficient way to transition between horse stance and bow stance and back again like in Tan Tui.

I have to admit though, when I'm sparring or doing some other forms, my feet end up slightly wider, with the balls of my front foot lined up with the heel of my back foot. I think that it's slightly easier to keep my balance this way. Of course, this still isn't as wide as styles like Karate, who's practitioners feet are placed shoulder length apart (opening them up to a groin kick). I'm really just trying to see how much other practitioners "close the gate" in their bow stance. By this I mean to ask, how open is your bow stance?

Foot angles have alot to do with this too. Some schools emphasize having their feet at 20 degree angles in horse stance and then switching both to 45 degree angles in bow stance. I've always felt that this is somewhat awkward, but I aknowledge that this can offer good frontal protection.

In a deep horse stance I keep my feet at about 45 degrees. Some would argue that this isn't as stable as when your feet are angled more forward or completely parallel (like in Karate), but it feels less artificial this way and I would argue that it makes little difference in a deep and wide horse stance. When transitioning into bow stance, I angle my front foot at 30 degrees and my back foot at 45 degrees. Once again, this feels like the most natural way to stand while still offering frontal protection and maneuverability.

Any input?

[Jumpin'Sidekick]

In my opinion the feet should be parallered to one another when in a perfect and deep horse stance. I've heard that keeping the feet at 45 degree angles during horse stance can be detrimental to the knees, my shifu taught me that. I am doing northern long fist at the time (for one year). I could be wrong though. I guess it depends on the style.

[SevenStar]

In my opinion the feet should be parallered to one another when in a perfect and deep horse stance. I've heard that keeping the feet at 45 degree angles during horse stance can be detrimental to the knees, my shifu taught me that. I am doing northern long fist at the time (for one year). I could be wrong though. I guess it depends on the style.

Actually, it's the opposite. When the feet are perfectly forward or slightly inward, there is more stress on the knee than if they were angled outward.

[Siu Lum Fighter]

True dat. You can feel the stress on the knees the lower you go with your feet parallel. Also, in my style the front foot merely has to turn forward 30 degrees in order to get into a back stance (with 60% of the weight on the back leg).

I've been hearing for years from certain other martial artists about how a horse stance with the feet turned out is less stable and I think it's just total bull. The original Shaolin monks practiced it that way so I can't figure out why so many styles have sought to change some of these fundamental methods.

It's true that the outside edges ot the feet can possibly grip the ground a little better when the feet are parallel. But I really only think this is ideal when in a relaxed horse stance and not when one is really low.

[Jumpin'Sidekick]

Then my shifu must go to the local looney-bin for REEDUCATION LOL. By the way I have experience doing the horse stance with feet parallered and under the 45 degree angle. The parallered feet version has not put my knees under strain, but the 45 deg. version has. Maby becuase I'm 17.

[Siu Lum Fighter]

It's pretty cool that both opinions on the matter are expressed on this post. Honestly, this simple little question of what's best as far as foot placement had plagued me years. I learned two different approaches to Shaolin. In the first one, the feet were more or less parallel. At my next school, we always angled the foot outward. There was always some play between 20 and 45%. With the really low stances, and dynamic leg techniques, having the feet parallel seemed somewhat awkward.

Don't get me wrong, neither way is wrong or right, but I can't see how poiting the foot outward will hurt your knee any more than keeping it parallel. That certainly can't be the case in a low scattered stance. Keeping the back foot at a 90% when you're so low will definitely waste your knee.