Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 120

Thread: Stance Training

  1. #1

    Stance Training

    I know many people who claim to be progressive are vehemently opposed to static stance training. There seems to be a consensus that it is a useless training method. I do have some questions and reservations, however.

    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?

    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?

    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?

    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?

    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?
    Last edited by Kellen Bassette; 02-27-2013 at 09:09 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    This is 100% TCMA principle. It may be used in non-TCMA also. Since I did learn it from TCMA, I have to say it's TCMA principle.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    We should not use "TCMA is more than combat" as excuse for not "evolving".

    You can have Kung Fu in cooking, it really has nothing to do with fighting!

  2. #2

    stance training

    the stance training also trains your proper alignment. i am shocked to see how many martial artists stances are incorrect. You need a good teacher who can show you the correct and incorrect alignment and demonstrate the difference to you.
    if you do your forms in low stances it will develop leg strength so if you can move well in low stances you will be a lot quicker in a higher fighting stance.

    beside the physical training, one of the major parts is the mental training, if you cannot overcome the pain in holding a stance, how can you be a true fighter? you have to be able to push your body mentally.

  3. #3
    I'll defer to this:

    Do as you want, f*ck what others think.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by MightyB View Post
    I'll defer to this:

    Do as you want, f*ck what others think.
    I'm not opposed to modern methods or more efficient training...I just feel like we're throwing the baby out with the bathwater on this.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    This is 100% TCMA principle. It may be used in non-TCMA also. Since I did learn it from TCMA, I have to say it's TCMA principle.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    We should not use "TCMA is more than combat" as excuse for not "evolving".

    You can have Kung Fu in cooking, it really has nothing to do with fighting!

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellen Bassette View Post
    I'm not opposed to modern methods or more efficient training...I just feel like we're throwing the baby out with the bathwater on this.
    hear you there brother. I do specific arm patterns with weights as in the way that it's been done for hundreds of years. I think it works and it helps me to keep my rock'n bod... so f*ck the haters.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    4,381
    Stances build endurance which is specific for that position they do not build maximum strength (past a basic level which can be build much quicker with other methods anyway)
    Strength is both general and sports specific, the problem is general strength is build quicker faster and better with other methods, as is sports specific strength
    Yes there is benefit to balance and stretch work BUT how much benefit and whether it can be built in a better way should be the question we ask ourselves
    Train what you like BUT don’t ignore the secience and just rely on what others in the past did

  7. #7
    Frost, since you have a traditional and modern background...how do you feel personally about stance training? Would you forgo it completely for combat based training, or would you retain it?

    If you were inclined to keep traditional stance training, how much/often would you do it...at what point do you think it stops being useful and is just wasting time?

    I suspect there's no exact, scientific formula here; but what's your personal opinion?
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    This is 100% TCMA principle. It may be used in non-TCMA also. Since I did learn it from TCMA, I have to say it's TCMA principle.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    We should not use "TCMA is more than combat" as excuse for not "evolving".

    You can have Kung Fu in cooking, it really has nothing to do with fighting!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    4,381
    I think it comes down to what are you trying to develop using the stances?
    Do you want Maximum strength? Endurance? Mental toughness?Balance training or a good stretch? It all depends on your goals but for most of them I feel there are better methods, and im not alone to build strength in the legs the old chinese masters used to work the fields, do manual labour and also lift heavy weights be it weapsons, stone locks or stones, for endurance they ran lifted each other for throws over and over etc, to stretch they seemed to by chi kung or a form of yoga……when was stance training separate from forms actually brought into TCMA I wonder?
    How I feel personally has changed, I went through years of stance training ever day, then I discovered powerlifting and MMA and didn’t do it for a decade, how I tend to do some form practise training everyday ( I run through hung gars 5 animals 5 elements every morning) this set includes a lot of stance work which I find useful for stretching out issues I have, I also do forms which involve heavy weapons and low stances as my sifu feels they build power issuage specific to what we need, and I agree it can help (and ecause I like doing them lo)

    If I was inclined to keep stance work I would ensure it was not a separate thing, ie it involved weapons or was part of a developmental form which worked the upper body as well, like 5 animals or iron wire, and was used as a warm up and cool down

  9. #9
    there is a science to it, do not just think of it as leg strengthening, you have to pay attention to your body alignment and structure. if the frame of a house is not strong it has poor structure.
    so a golfer never keeps practicing their swing? Pitchers stop pitching?
    Why would you stop your stance training?
    Basics, basics, basics.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    1,436
    Static stance training I have found to be beneficial for leg conditioning and for strength in transitions, which is what is most important in training stances. There may not be strength specific benefits, but strength in rooting is there.

    When doing clinch training and standing grappling, sinking your weight is essential. (Think pummeling and plum) Now from a personal standpoint stance training and the mechanics of low southern style stances improve this rooting system. Think about doing a hip throw, turning the body, sinking into a somewhat horse, before rolling the opponent over the hip. Personally stance training through the years have improved this and other methods of dropping one's weight.

    But to each his own, as someone else said, Do what the f**k you want!!
    "The hero and the coward both feel the same thing, but the hero projects his fear onto his opponent while the coward runs. 'Fear'. It's the same thing, but it's what you do with it that matters". -Cus D'Amato

  11. #11
    I'm of the opinion that stance training is beneficial, not so much because of strength, mental aspect, balance, the different things mentioned by Elders and I, ect...there are, as you say Frost, better avenues for most of these, I think the benefit lies in the fact that it is something of a combination of all these things.

    I've always felt like that is a strong point with TCMA, the fact that most exercises have numerous different benefits.

    Really, my agenda isn't any sort of traditional vs modern thing. I like, and am in, both camps. What I am really interested in is utilizing traditional methods to their full potential. I don't want to throw away what has value, even if something else may have more value, but I'm also not into exercises in futility or diminishing returns.

    I'm hoping to strike a good balance between utilizing the old methods, progressively, and being effective in real/modern application.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    This is 100% TCMA principle. It may be used in non-TCMA also. Since I did learn it from TCMA, I have to say it's TCMA principle.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    We should not use "TCMA is more than combat" as excuse for not "evolving".

    You can have Kung Fu in cooking, it really has nothing to do with fighting!

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Iron_Eagle_76 View Post
    Static stance training I have found to be beneficial for leg conditioning and for strength in transitions, which is what is most important in training stances. There may not be strength specific benefits, but strength in rooting is there.
    But what would you suggest as a good, well rounded training regimen to include these things?

    Just by practicing forms, or doing static stances? 1 minute, 2, 5? Using weight resistance methods while holding stances, (old or new)? All of the above?

    How much do you think is good for teaching mechanics, rooting, transition, ect. and when does it become overkill and your just wasting time that could be better spent?

    These are the opinions I'm hoping to hear.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    This is 100% TCMA principle. It may be used in non-TCMA also. Since I did learn it from TCMA, I have to say it's TCMA principle.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    We should not use "TCMA is more than combat" as excuse for not "evolving".

    You can have Kung Fu in cooking, it really has nothing to do with fighting!

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellen Bassette View Post

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.
    i'm nobody...i'm nobody. i'm a tramp, a bum, a hobo... a boxcar and a jug of wine... but i'm a straight razor if you get to close to me.

    -Charles Manson

    I will punch, kick, choke, throw or joint manipulate any nationality equally without predjudice.

    - Shonie Carter

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by 18elders View Post
    the stance training also trains your proper alignment. i am shocked to see how many martial artists stances are incorrect. You need a good teacher who can show you the correct and incorrect alignment and demonstrate the difference to you.
    if you do your forms in low stances it will develop leg strength so if you can move well in low stances you will be a lot quicker in a higher fighting stance.

    beside the physical training, one of the major parts is the mental training, if you cannot overcome the pain in holding a stance, how can you be a true fighter? you have to be able to push your body mentally.
    I agree with your points, but stance training isn't necessary for those things. boxers and wrestlers don't stance train, and their pain tolerance is pretty high. also, they both move very fast.

    it's just a different training methodology. it isn't required, just another means to a similar end.
    i'm nobody...i'm nobody. i'm a tramp, a bum, a hobo... a boxcar and a jug of wine... but i'm a straight razor if you get to close to me.

    -Charles Manson

    I will punch, kick, choke, throw or joint manipulate any nationality equally without predjudice.

    - Shonie Carter

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by SevenStar View Post
    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.
    Wouldn't the same hold true then for high reps of weight lifting as well?
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    This is 100% TCMA principle. It may be used in non-TCMA also. Since I did learn it from TCMA, I have to say it's TCMA principle.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    We should not use "TCMA is more than combat" as excuse for not "evolving".

    You can have Kung Fu in cooking, it really has nothing to do with fighting!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •