What I did say was that there is far too much emphasis on it--it's one of the criticisms that Bruce Lee had with traditional Chinese martial arts. No amount of training the stance will help you learn about timing, distancing, reading one's opponent or even more importantly muscle memory
Traditionally there is much emphasis in it and those who teach it have a reason for it. If you disagree with it you are entitled to but if you want to train traditionally in traditional Chinese arts it is what lays the founation. Bruce Lee wrote quite alot on his ideal stance and spoke alot on the proper stance needed in his mind and style
to be effective and efficent. In his book he lays his foundation which is first his JKD stance he then goes into his idea on how to generate power from this stance and how to move in his stance. On the subject of timing, distancing and reading the opponent a student learns this in free form and application. But in order to do well in this you need a foundation.
Understanding how to use strength is of no use, if you don't know how to move, where to block, how to read your opponent etc. I know what I'm talking about.
When a toddler learns to walk it must first learn balance and have a strong stance then when it has learned how to control his balance and has proper strength and coordination then it can walk and start to run.
You can hold a stance for hours each day, but your muscle memory and contact sensitivity WILL NOT BE TRAINED.
Which is why after you can stand and all the wonderful things gained from stance training you move on to the next level of lessons. Learn to sink and root so when you learn free form you do not loose your balance easy, learn to coordinate mind and body and you can move naturally, learn to burn through the pain of stance training you gain will power, inner strength and endurance, learning to root you learn to sink your weight downwards leaving your top lighter so that the legs generate the power to the hips and upward through the arms giving you whole body power as a unit rather then just throwing your arm.
These are some of the reasons that A LOT of kung-fu guys don't do all that well in real fights. In a real fight, it's those attributes which I previously mentioned which count, because your stance becomes disrupted or even worse the fight can be taken to the ground.
Plenty of people who practice Wushu who used their art fine in real fights what ever real fights mean. I am guessing you are thinking of stance training like something you just do right when people fight. How about thinking of stance training similar to squats you do in a gym but with more of a martial application.
Now have a look at this video
The "kungfu" guy shot in and Gracie took him down. But what does this mean that grappling beats striking? a person with no grappling looses to a superior grappler if taken to the ground? I think everyone in the martial art world realize the need to look at how grappling takes place but let me show you now a clip of a taijiquan person
and a grappler:
This is Chen Bing. Does it mean he can not be taken down no but it does show that having a proper foundation in stance training plays an important role.
If you watch it, you'll realise that the fight goes to the ground. Where is the kung-fu guy's stance once he's on the ground? Once Royce Gracie got close to him, the other guy got flogged. You need to realise Flying Crane, that the empirical evidence of most kung-fu fighters is not that great when they go against guys in the ring.
Ah the key here is the RING. The RING and fighting for your life are very different. The Ring implies there are rules and fairness fighting for your life no rules.
If I am ever in a fight for my life maybe I do not use anything I learned from my martial art class and pick up a rock to hit someone in the head with I am observant like that. Cung Le is a Wushu guy he is doing great in the ring actually quite alot of Sanda guys are doing well in the ring but I recall a story about a kick boxer who went after someone who robbed some lady's purse and was shot dead.
There are exceptions--where I trained with Ian Protheroe, we did a LOT of punches and kicks, drills, actual grabs and holds, how to move, where to position yourself etc.
Glad your found a teacher who works for you and others on this site have found what works for them.
Also, a lot of the stance training, particularly in wing chun, is WRONG
I only know 3 Chinese styles (Taijiquan, Baguazhang,Xingyiquan) I would be interested to hear what makes are stance training wrong since we do sp
end alot of time doing them. In Wushu you have Wai kua and Nei kua 外胯内胯 putting your feet more
inwards strengthens the Nei kua area IMO sitting more in Ma bu IMO works more of the Wai kua both are needed usually standing in Zhan Zhuang accomplish a more balance approach but focusing more inner or outer does have its place and I am sure in Wing Chun the more narrow stance and the Nei kua focus more on the principle of the center line.
The inverted toe stance gives one insufficient mobility.
Same can be said if you are in Ma bu with your feet pointing out too. I find Jeet Kun do with the foot pointing back to be akward but if someone likes it and works for them great.
Many people in martial arts are not particularly bright--they don't stop and think whether something works or not, and just blindly listen.
I don't think many people are like this at all. But I guess it depends on your experience and how you see things. Alot of how we see the world is how we think about the world and how we see our selves. I think Simon we will have to agree to disagree good luck in your training.
