One good reason for an angled stance.

[Gerry Seymour]

I am not counting on blocking anything with my body. It would be such a small advantage as to be not worth bothering about.

I wouldn’t want to, either. I was just responding to the post.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

- You are talking about the Judo approach "wait for opportunity".
- I'm talking about the Chinese wrestling approach "create opportunity".

If I want to throw my opponent counter-clockwise, I'll twist him toward the clockwise direction first.

That’s not a foreign concept in Judo.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Also want to make it super clear that the original post wasn’t meant to comment on or insult anyone’s style or thinking at all on this. Really just a very small, very singular, easily reproduced observation, with assumptions baked in of perpendicularity to the target line. It had just occurred to me, when asking myself just how much my gates narrowed, that I could draw it out and get a sense.

I don't think anyone was insulted. But instead of looking at it from the perspective of math. Try looking at it from a functional perspective.

For example, You gates become narrow. What benefit is that to you? How does it help you? Does it open opportunities? Does it create new limitations? Does it work for your fighting strategy? How does it help your fighting strategy? Was there a difference of how you were able to deal with punches in comparison to being more squared? How does distanced and time change in comparison to being squared off? What type of techniques are easier or harder to do? How did defense improve? What are the strong and weak points of the the 45º approach?" Have someone take a picture of you while you are in fighting position. Use the photo to understand how your opponent sees you. What openings do you have how does the width of you stance open and close you off to certain attacks.

These type of observations are going to be more meaningful to your development because it puts it into context. I understand that math and science is often prove things but it has it's limitations when it comes to martial arts. There is quite a bit of behavioral concepts tied into martial arts. For example, a bladed stance is more intimidating than a squared off stance, but a squared off stance is more deceptive. This is something you can test out. Simply try to hold someone off and maintain the distance while in a bladed stance. Record how long it takes for your opponent to attack. Do the same with the same opponent but use a square stance. Then ask your opponent. Why did it take longer to attack while you were in the bladed stance in comparison to being squared off?

Now if your opponent blasts through your bladed stance with ease, then ask him the same question and you'll learn what you did wrong with in your stance.

But you should use the notebook to track progress, stuff you need to fix, visual aids to seat concepts that much further into memory, and totally bank on the kung fu of math to workout problems that are too complicated to work out in your head.

You'll get better results with a good training partner who isn't going to knock you out while you are trying to learn. There is just too many variable that happen in Martial Arts to try to figure it out on a note book. You will be be better off watching a video of you sparing and trying to use your techniques. That way you can see why you failed. You can understand what you were thinking of at that time and how it affected the way you did the technique. Did you bail? or did your follow through? Many people will say that a martial arts technique doesn't work, but if you watch a video of them sparring they never make an attempt to actually do the technique. They may be attempting to do it in their mind, but that attempt never makes it to action. Other times people will say that it doesn't work, and when you go back over the video you can point out how bad timing or using the wrong technique for situation ends up playing a part.

If you need to workout something out then do it on the mat. Use a video, watch the video, and then analyze the video. Take notes from that and leave the math out. I'm not saying that you can't do the math if that's something you enjoy doing, but if you want some really good results then use what I have recommended.

 

[JowGaWolf]

This all makes sense. That said, I feel like there’s a theme across responses and I want to add some more background.

Totally appreciate and respect that angles change and adapt throughout a fight, that timing/rhythm is complex and continuous, that feinting/deceiving movements are par for course, the need to maintain calm when hit to avoid panicking or worse overreacting, the adrenaline rush when the buzzer goes off and I have to deal with the problem in front of me. I won’t pretend I’m a seasoned pro fighter, I make a living by other means.

I, personally, do better with an angled stance in my experience. I used to be overly squared until I found my hips, then I really exaggerated it and over shot. I found my balance at ~45d and like it for mobility (my strafing improved dramatically as I was effectively moving forward and backward relative to center), my lead and rear hand positions improved, my kicks were easier to chamber, my deflections felt sharper/smoother (which I didn’t realize until now was because the gates were narrower, hence the post), and it’s just the game I’ve stacked up on. To each their game.

I love sparring, it’s a rush and incredible workout. It’s made me a better fighter and forced me to check my assumptions over and over again. I’ve had fun sparring with other wing chun guys, a few Muay Thai folk, a few boxers, and this one BJJ guy. I’ve been hit plenty, have hit plenty, and take what I can from it every time.

Also want to make it super clear that the original post wasn’t meant to comment on or insult anyone’s style or thinking at all on this. Really just a very small, very singular, easily reproduced observation, with assumptions baked in of perpendicularity to the target line. It had just occurred to me, when asking myself just how much my gates narrowed, that I could draw it out and get a sense.

I think it’s important to rotate between theory (using paper and pencil), practice (drills/abstract movements), and regular performance (getting in there and sparring with diverse backgrounds). To stay in one always is to never benefit from the vantage point of the others, and to be that much more limited in your growth.

Of course, you don’t just sit at a notebook and say “ok, based on these calculations I’m a great fighter, let me tell everyone what they should do.” I’m truly sorry if that’s what this came across as. But you should use the notebook to track progress, stuff you need to fix, visual aids to seat concepts that much further into memory, and totally bank on the kung fu of math to workout problems that are too complicated to work out in your head.

I’m really proud of this thread and the depth of information everyone shared. I feel like this thread makes for interesting insight for future members who read through it to better understand their own game and why it works.

Blown away by responses from pdg, hoshin, and others. A lot of respect for this community and the wealth of knowledge in it. That’s why I post this kind of ish in the first place.

Much of what you get is how you respond. You aren't taking the responses personal and you are keeping an opened mind, and that makes people want to give you more information. It's definitely nice to share information with people like you.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The square stance is not a stance that you can spring from it. By definition, it's not a good combat stance. The reason is simple. You will need one extra step before you can spring forward. Sometime you just don't have the luxury for that extra step.

In wrestling, you cannot hop in like this if you have a square stance. 1 is better than 1,2.

Completely agree with you, which is why I don't use a squared off stance, unless it's for a quick moment, something that eventually gets me out of that stance and into a better one. My entire concept is that a person can't retreat beyond the back leg. I have yet to come across anything that proves this concept incorrect. If my feet are standing next to each other side by side then I'm have no retreat.

 

[lansao]

I don't think anyone was insulted. But instead of looking at it from the perspective of math. Try looking at it from a functional perspective.

For example, You gates become narrow. What benefit is that to you? How does it help you? Does it open opportunities? Does it create new limitations? Does it work for your fighting strategy? How does it help your fighting strategy? Was there a difference of how you were able to deal with punches in comparison to being more squared? How does distanced and time change in comparison to being squared off? What type of techniques are easier or harder to do? How did defense improve? What are the strong and weak points of the the 45º approach?" Have someone take a picture of you while you are in fighting position. Use the photo to understand how your opponent sees you. What openings do you have how does the width of you stance open and close you off to certain attacks.

These type of observations are going to be more meaningful to your development because it puts it into context. I understand that math and science is often prove things but it has it's limitations when it comes to martial arts. There is quite a bit of behavioral concepts tied into martial arts. For example, a bladed stance is more intimidating than a squared off stance, but a squared off stance is more deceptive. This is something you can test out. Simply try to hold someone off and maintain the distance while in a bladed stance. Record how long it takes for your opponent to attack. Do the same with the same opponent but use a square stance. Then ask your opponent. Why did it take longer to attack while you were in the bladed stance in comparison to being squared off?

Now if your opponent blasts through your bladed stance with ease, then ask him the same question and you'll learn what you did wrong with in your stance.

You'll get better results with a good training partner who isn't going to knock you out while you are trying to learn. There is just too many variable that happen in Martial Arts to try to figure it out on a note book. You will be be better off watching a video of you sparing and trying to use your techniques. That way you can see why you failed. You can understand what you were thinking of at that time and how it affected the way you did the technique. Did you bail? or did your follow through? Many people will say that a martial arts technique doesn't work, but if you watch a video of them sparring they never make an attempt to actually do the technique. They may be attempting to do it in their mind, but that attempt never makes it to action. Other times people will say that it doesn't work, and when you go back over the video you can point out how bad timing or using the wrong technique for situation ends up playing a part.

If you need to workout something out then do it on the mat. Use a video, watch the video, and then analyze the video. Take notes from that and leave the math out. I'm not saying that you can't do the math if that's something you enjoy doing, but if you want some really good results then use what I have recommended.

Thanks for the feedback. I’ll add one note about the math. I know it’s got a reputation for being robotic in nature and full of formulas, but it’s just very concise language to me. Like shorthand for note-taking more than anything else.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Why are feet less mobile than in a bladed or angled stance? The only difference should be which direction you are mobile in.

They aren't less mobile. They are just not the same mobility. Based on what I have seen from Kung Fu Wangs videos, a square stance would take away a lot of the mobility that is required for the techniques that he uses. For example, while it's possible to sweep and do foot hooks from a squared stance, it's more effective from a bladed stance. By more effective I mean you have more options and variations available. A practical low back sweep isn't going to flow from a squared off stance. Foot hooks are extremely limited when in a square stance. Side kicks, round houses, low kicks and certain punches aren't going to be effective when squared off. This doesn't mean that the squared off isn't good or doesn't have mobility. It just doesn't have the same mobility that a bladed stance would have and that's fine because it's not supposed to have the same type of movement.

 

[marques]

I'm not saying any angle is universally wrong, but some are certainly situationally wrong.

Again, it can be a ‘technical’ trap. Or a mental game: “I am so much better than you that I can do whatever I want” (cross legs, chin up, hands on the back, dance... ‘wrong angles’.

Then, if you respond, it is predictable; if you don’t, it is sort of humiliation..

But if these games end badly... then it is wrong, no doubts.

 

[JowGaWolf]

but it’s just very concise language to me.

Martial arts forms are concise. Martial arts applications are far from concise. Which is why math is done in the context (if all things remain constant, then this formula works). 2+2 will always = 4, right up to the point someone throws another number in there.

This is the reality of martial arts. Here Thanksgiving = math. Lucy = the psychology of humans. The math of kicking a football is AWLAYS correct right up until someone pulls it away. The danger is that you go in with one set of math formulas that are based on a constant. The moment someone sees you trying to add 2+2, they will throw a different number into your equation.

Think of it like jumping over a ditch, your brain calculates the distance but if that ditch moves back at the last moment then math becomes a problem. Here's a similar situation. This guy's brain is calculating a puddle, so right now his brain is doing the math for "jumping into a puddle" His friends knew that he would do the math for jumping into the puddle so they added some more numbers to the situation. The math didn't calculate the behavior of his friends and as a result he got wet.

It's fine to do the math but just be aware that someone is always throwing some extra elements into a situation when they see that you are trying to "add something up."

Maybe this has made a bigger impact on my childhood than I realize lol

 

[lansao]

Martial arts forms are concise. Martial arts applications are far from concise. Which is why math is done in the context (if all things remain constant, then this formula works). 2+2 will always = 4, right up to the point someone throws another number in there.

This is the reality of martial arts. Here Thanksgiving = math. Lucy = the psychology of humans. The math of kicking a football is AWLAYS correct right up until someone pulls it away. The danger is that you go in with one set of math formulas that are based on a constant. The moment someone sees you trying to add 2+2, they will throw a different number into your equation.

Think of it like jumping over a ditch, your brain calculates the distance but if that ditch moves back at the last moment then math becomes a problem. Here's a similar situation. This guy's brain is calculating a puddle, so right now his brain is doing the math for "jumping into a puddle" His friends knew that he would do the math for jumping into the puddle so they added some more numbers to the situation. The math didn't calculate the behavior of his friends and as a result he got wet.

It's fine to do the math but just be aware that someone is always throwing some extra elements into a situation when they see that you are trying to "add something up."

Maybe this has made a bigger impact on my childhood than I realize lol

This is a popular perspective of what math is that’s largely taught in grade school. I wouldn’t suggest anyone try to calculate anything in a fight, too much thinking will get you planted.

But I guess the point I’m trying to make is that math runs deeper than arithmetic and has been used to describe and discover truth about natural phenomena for a very long time. For example, I could rewrite your post in maths and reduce it to fewer words. Philosophers do similar exercises and find small units of truth that they can use to check their assumptions against.

We can speak more about it but important that these thoughts not be confused with formulas and arithmetic. At it’s root, math is kung fu.

 

[JowGaWolf]

For example, I could rewrite your post in maths and reduce it to fewer words.

Well I'm a wordy person by nature, so reducing what I say wouldn't be a difficult task. lol.

At it’s root, math is kung fu

And this is the error that I didn't want you to make. Say this is like missing 75% of what kung fu is and why it works.

 

[lansao]

Well I'm a wordy person by nature, so reducing what I say wouldn't be a difficult task. lol.

Didn’t mean it that way. In general stuff we say translates.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Thanks for the feedback. I’ll add one note about the math. I know it’s got a reputation for being robotic in nature and full of formulas, but it’s just very concise language to me. Like shorthand for note-taking more than anything else.

As long as you accept approximations (as you did with your ~30%), math can be an easy way to view a single aspect separately, to focus on it apart from the other variables. This often gives a starting point for exploration or discussion.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

They aren't less mobile. They are just not the same mobility.

That was my point, really. If I use the same weight distribution both times, the feet have the same mobility, just angled differently, making different moves easier or harder.

Based on what I have seen from Kung Fu Wangs videos, a square stance would take away a lot of the mobility that is required for the techniques that he uses. For example, while it's possible to sweep and do foot hooks from a squared stance, it's more effective from a bladed stance. By more effective I mean you have more options and variations available. A practical low back sweep isn't going to flow from a squared off stance. Foot hooks are extremely limited when in a square stance. Side kicks, round houses, low kicks and certain punches aren't going to be effective when squared off. This doesn't mean that the squared off isn't good or doesn't have mobility. It just doesn't have the same mobility that a bladed stance would have and that's fine because it's not supposed to have the same type of movement.

Agreed. Of course in most cases the reality is that while grappling we are moving through stAnces, so the advantage or disadvantage is transitory.

 

[JowGaWolf]

At it’s root, math is kung fu.

I'm going to use my real life experiences do give you an example of some ways that math does don't factor into. My desire to train and push through has nothing to do with math. My ability to relax when I need to and tense up when I need to have nothing to do with math. How I perceive a punch, kick, attack or defense has nothing to do with math. How I manipulate my opponent (bait, intimidate, mislead) has nothing to do with math. My timing of my striking and defending has very little to do with math and more to do with biology. Did I sleep well the night before sparring? Am I in a good mood? Do I feel lazy? Factors these into your angled stance and that 30% reduction of width in your gates may or may not be of any importance. It definitely won't have any importance if a person doesn't have any skills to make use of it. By this I don't mean a person can't fight. Because some BJJ guys will look at the 30% reduction in width and ask you how well did that work out for you when you were on your back lol.

Didn’t mean it that way. In general stuff we say translates.

lol. I knew what you meant. But I am wordy lol

 

[Gerry Seymour]

And this is the error that I didn't want you to make. Say this is like missing 75% of what kung fu is and why it works.

Once you get into chaos theory and the like, I’m not sure math doesn’t have the language for that other 75%.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm going to use my real life experiences do give you an example of some ways that math does don't factor into. My desire to train and push through has nothing to do with math. My ability to relax when I need to and tense up when I need to have nothing to do with math. How I perceive a punch, kick, attack or defense has nothing to do with math. How I manipulate my opponent (bait, intimidate, mislead) has nothing to do with math. My timing of my striking and defending has very little to do with math and more to do with biology. Did I sleep well the night before sparring? Am I in a good mood? Do I feel lazy? Factors these into your angled stance and that 30% reduction of width in your gates may or may not be of any importance. It definitely won't have any importance if a person doesn't have any skills to make use of it. By this I don't mean a person can't fight. Because some BJJ guys will look at the 30% reduction in width and ask you how well did that work out for you when you were on your back lol.

lol. I knew what you meant. But I am wordy lol

You’re asking a very brief approximation to accept vague variables unrelated to it. We could actually address those things with math - just a more complex and theoretical branch of math. I’m not sure it would always be useful to do so, but that’s a different question.

 

[wckf92]

The square stance is not a stance that you can spring from it

Well, I gotta respectfully disagree. I find it is quite omni-directional and easy to mobilize from...just as much as in a lead leg stance.
Plus, if opponent is keen on leg wrapping or ankle picks...It may be useful to not have that lead leg closer to them.

 

[lansao]

I'm going to use my real life experiences do give you an example of some ways that math does don't factor into. My desire to train and push through has nothing to do with math. My ability to relax when I need to and tense up when I need to have nothing to do with math. How I perceive a punch, kick, attack or defense has nothing to do with math. How I manipulate my opponent (bait, intimidate, mislead) has nothing to do with math. My timing of my striking and defending has very little to do with math and more to do with biology. Did I sleep well the night before sparring? Am I in a good mood? Do I feel lazy? Factors these into your angled stance and that 30% reduction of width in your gates may or may not be of any importance. It definitely won't have any importance if a person doesn't have any skills to make use of it. By this I don't mean a person can't fight. Because some BJJ guys will look at the 30% reduction in width and ask you how well did that work out for you when you were on your back lol.

lol. I knew what you meant. But I am wordy lol

We need to hang out some time. Good stuff. I’m out of Austin if you’re ever in town.

 

[JowGaWolf]

That was my point, really. If I use the same weight distribution both times, the feet have the same mobility, just angled differently, making different moves easier or harder.



Agreed. Of course in most cases the reality is that while grappling we are moving through stAnces, so the advantage or disadvantage is transitory.

I think many in the martial arts world forget that each system is an option and with that option certain opportunities are available while other options aren't. I would be willing to bet that few have even thought what's options are available from various positions and how that plays into the function of the system that they train. I guess I blame the teachers of the past for being such a hardass about "This is the way to do it. Everything else is wrong." or "Don't question, just do."