Stance training in ancient Shaolin styles

[Kung Fu Wang]

Knees are bent so not the same as knees straight, feet together is it?

When did I ever said that the horse stance has anything to do with "knees straight"?

 

[Flying Crane]

Mmm however the discussion is in English and therefore to save any confusion the poster (KFW) should have said stance, don't you think?

Well, it all sort of blends together in the discussion.

 

[Tez3]

When did I ever said that the horse stance has anything to do with "knees straight"?

I said a knees straight, feet together stance and you posted a picture of the gent with the knees bent saying' here you are there is a stance like that'

 

[Tez3]

I find it hard to believe though that standing still, knees straight, feet together could ever be described as a horse stance.

Such stance does exist in CMA. Since this training doesn't achieve "kill 2 birds with 1 stone" principle, I prefer the shoulder width horse stance instead.

You didn't put my full sentence in when you quoted.

 

[PhotonGuy]

So anyway, I was wondering how it would be today for a MA school to only teach stances for the first day or the first few days and not start teaching techniques until after that.

 

[dlcox]

So anyway, I was wondering how it would be today for a MA school to only teach stances for the first day or the first few days and not start teaching techniques until after that.

My first year of training consisted of stances, footwork, bridges, parries, punches and kicks. Only 4 of each for a total of 24 techniques. This Jibengong combined with basic theory and application was required before any forms or specific "Self Defense" scenario/applications or advanced theory were introduced. Even once training progressed these 24 Jibengong were performed at the beginning of every class after conditioning exercises. If you do the math that's two months for 4 techniques. One technique every two weeks. Three 2 hour classes a week (at a minimum), or 12 hours per technique. I teach in the same manner for any newcomer that has never learned any MA (probably why I don't have many students). For others coming from other systems I generally reduce this time to three months. Take it or leave it, I won't compromise. The foundation is the most important aspect. I know of some traditional CMA schools that follow a similar progression, they too, have a high turnover rate. If quality is the goal there can be no short cuts, if you're just looking for quick progression......

 

[dboeren]

So anyway, I was wondering how it would be today for a MA school to only teach stances for the first day or the first few days and not start teaching techniques until after that.

Personally I'd see this as a good sign in a school, and I don't think a few days is enough to drive people away although the instructor should set appropriate expectations for new students. If they know it's going to be like that and they know (at at least some level) the reason why, I would think people can deal with a short delay before learning more "cool stuff".

 

[PhotonGuy]

My first year of training consisted of stances, footwork, bridges, parries, punches and kicks. Only 4 of each for a total of 24 techniques. This Jibengong combined with basic theory and application was required before any forms or specific "Self Defense" scenario/applications or advanced theory were introduced. Even once training progressed these 24 Jibengong were performed at the beginning of every class after conditioning exercises. If you do the math that's two months for 4 techniques. One technique every two weeks. Three 2 hour classes a week (at a minimum), or 12 hours per technique. I teach in the same manner for any newcomer that has never learned any MA (probably why I don't have many students). For others coming from other systems I generally reduce this time to three months. Take it or leave it, I won't compromise. The foundation is the most important aspect. I know of some traditional CMA schools that follow a similar progression, they too, have a high turnover rate. If quality is the goal there can be no short cuts, if you're just looking for quick progression......

Personally I'd see this as a good sign in a school, and I don't think a few days is enough to drive people away although the instructor should set appropriate expectations for new students. If they know it's going to be like that and they know (at at least some level) the reason why, I would think people can deal with a short delay before learning more "cool stuff".

I think that learning only a few techniques a year can be good in some ways, after all you only need a few really good techniques to be effective and some MA students, especially brand new ones, get the misconception that more is better when actually its usually the other way around. If a new student learns too many moves too soon they can become watered down as the student tries to focus on all of them. I think that just teaching stances for the first day is a good idea and as for the "cool stuff" from my experience the stuff you learn within the first yeat of taking up a martial art is the stuff you will use about 90 percent of the time in the martial arts no matter how advanced you get. Its all in the basics. The more advanced techniques are just add ons and are good for developing skill and coordination but not stuff you would usually use in a fight. I would also like to say that while its good for students to only focus on a few techniques, it might be good for students to be exposed to many techniques so they can find which ones work best for them and focus on those.

 

[clfsean]

Actually most TCMA's have a core of techniques, or seed. Everything else done in that "style" or training method, is a variation on a seed technique. Once you have the core techniques, everything else that happens like "jazz". Ask serious CMA players & the "cool stuff" is the basic stuff done really, really well.

 

[sinthetik_mistik]

I took Shaolin Kung Fu a long time ago and I didn't understand it well. Like for instance, they would tell us to do 30 pushups on our fingers. Now how am I supposed to do that as a white belt? That's something you need to build up to until your fingers get super strong. Another thing I didn't understand was the animal dances. I took the crane and the tiger. I can't remember them really well but they weren't like any form of fighting i've ever seen. Now I'm sure if you practice and get really good at Shaolin Kung Fu you can be just as fierce as any martial art, but personally I prefer more down to earth punching, kicking and blocking, which Shaolin probably does at some point, and I guess I can see how the animal forms could build up strength or whatever, but it just wasn't my style, not to bash on it it is a great martial art.

 

[mograph]

So anyway, I was wondering how it would be today for a MA school to only teach stances for the first day or the first few days and not start teaching techniques until after that.

I think that the students would have more patience with the stances, if attempting to resist a force while in a stance were emphasized. Of course, the stance would have to be taught properly.

 

[greytowhite]

Xingyiquan baby....
In the old days there was stance training in Taijiquan too and there still is some in certain styles of Baguazhang.

Some taiji instructors still do stance training, my Chen teacher was quite insistent I learn eight different stances that he could "load" well before I could start learning the form. I think the taiji zhuang and silk reeling were extremely important.

 

[Mephisto]

Are there any scientific studies that can validate the benefits of stance training? it seems stance training could be considered isometric training, and there have been several studies and papers written on isometric training, although I'm not sure there's any studies done on martial arts isometrics specifically. From what I've read, isometrics aren't completely useless and have their value but dynamic sport specific exercises are better for performance. Here's a link on one study: Isometric exercises Good for strength training - Mayo Clinic

I see it as a carry over from a time before sports medicine and scientific study related to fitness. At one time it was the best we had, but now the "technology" and training methods have improved. You also have to know what you're doing and how to get results though. If you're not doing any supplemental exercise routines, or working a regime that doesn't translate to sport specific movements, static stance training may very well be superior.

Another example is body weight trainjng in boxing. Some trainers and gyms are critical of weight training and favor only body weight exercise and running. Newer trainers disagree with this method and also use specific weight training exercise. Old school trainers argue that their methods have proven results so why change things? I see stance training as a parallel here. It can give results, but perhaps isn't the best method.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Some taiji instructors still do stance training, my Chen teacher was quite insistent I learn eight different stances that he could "load" well before I could start learning the form. I think the taiji zhuang and silk reeling were extremely important.

I have done some Chen Stance training and I would agree that Zhan Zhuang and silk reeling are quite beneficial