People talk about good stances all the time in martial arts, and their apparent value in a fight. What do you consider would be the parameters of calling a stance "good"?
What do you consider a good stance?
- Thread starter Josh Oakley
- Start date
Flying Crane
Sr. Grandmaster
The feet and legs actively engage to brace against the ground, rather than simply being a passive platform on which you stand.
Using that bracing against the ground to actively channel energy from the ground up, thru the torso, to drive and power any strikes, in any direction.
Using that bracing against the ground to actively channel energy from the ground up, thru the torso, to drive and power any strikes, in any direction.
One that gives you neutrality to most situations, but if you consider punching you want to assume a stance that allows you to center that motion, while transfering energy and body weight into the target. Mobility is also important; so, depth of stance becomes an issue. Consider depth, then, should be just a bit less then you are comfortable with when trying to be strong, but right where you want it for the ability to move. Stances are more of a verb than a noun; so as you fight or spar, you are constantly stancing, rather than assuming a stance.
Sean
Plus what he said...; most of the time.:ultracool
Sean
Omar B
Senior Master
Depends on the stance. Some should be loose, some should be solid, it all depends.
Depends on the MA. In iaido and jodo we tend to be very square, with our weight very centred. Its the battleship theory, you need a stable gun platform from which to attack from.
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
What do you consider a good stance?
The way I happen to be standing at the time
The way I happen to be standing at the time
A good stance depends on what you're doing. Is it a posture of readiness during a fight or awaiting something, or is it a point of strength to support a kick or punch or absorb an attack? The characteristics will be different, though not necessarily exclusive.
If I'm judging a form or kata, I'm looking for stances that are "on", the right stance to support what they're showing, with adequate mobility or stability to support the technique. They can't violate some basic principles -- though they may appear to.
If I'm judging a form or kata, I'm looking for stances that are "on", the right stance to support what they're showing, with adequate mobility or stability to support the technique. They can't violate some basic principles -- though they may appear to.
Cirdan
Senior Master
You should be ready.
Langenschwert
Master Black Belt
Well, I study three different sword arts, and they hall have very different stances. However, all of them are "good". It depends on what you want to do fro the stance.
Even within Kunst des Fectens (the martial art of medieval Germany), there are differing stances. My feet aren't placed the same way in Ochs as they are in Vom Tag (both sword stances). However, if I'm in an unarmed wrestling clinch in the Kunst des Fechtens, it's different again but retains the basic principles. We do try to keep our hips square to the opponent if we can. If we profile ourselves, it's more biomechanical than trying to reduce target area.
A good stance is one that allows you to respond optimally with the tools at hand. If you're fighting a duel, you want to be able to move quickly. If you're setting a spear to receive a charge (the strongest contrast I can think of off the top of my head), it's not the same thing at all. If you're in a boxing match, it's not the same either.
Just like there's no "best" sword, there's no "best" stance either.
Best regards,
-Mark
Even within Kunst des Fectens (the martial art of medieval Germany), there are differing stances. My feet aren't placed the same way in Ochs as they are in Vom Tag (both sword stances). However, if I'm in an unarmed wrestling clinch in the Kunst des Fechtens, it's different again but retains the basic principles. We do try to keep our hips square to the opponent if we can. If we profile ourselves, it's more biomechanical than trying to reduce target area.
A good stance is one that allows you to respond optimally with the tools at hand. If you're fighting a duel, you want to be able to move quickly. If you're setting a spear to receive a charge (the strongest contrast I can think of off the top of my head), it's not the same thing at all. If you're in a boxing match, it's not the same either.
Just like there's no "best" sword, there's no "best" stance either.
Best regards,
-Mark
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2005
- Messages
- 10,826
- Reaction score
- 617
Stances have many uses in the martial arts. My explanations are from a Karate viewpoint:
There are stances that are used for training and performance purposes, such as your zen kutsu dachi (forward stance), kiba dachi (horse stance), and ko kutsu dachi (back stance). Perfecting such stances can yield great benefits to the practitioner, since doing so certainly helps with strength and conditioning of the legs, in addition to providing the practitioner a way of training the senses to know what's rooted, balanced, etc.
Some people scoff at the above notion, asserting that they're of zero "combative" value. To them, I scoff back, since the training of such stances helps teach you how to use the whole body to accomplish a given task, instead of just one limb. This principle can be applied to almost any technique that you practice, be it a punch, a block, a throw, etc.
Of course you're not going to get into a heavily rooted zen kutsu dachi stance in a sparring match, or an actual fight. There's simply no real mobility. However, because you practiced all of that stance work in the past, your legs are going to be a lot stronger, compared to if you hadn't done such training. Your foot muscles are stronger, giving you better balance, and so forth. The time was not wasted in any way, shape, or form, as long as you were doing your part to train hard with the correct mechanics.
There are stances that are used for training and performance purposes, such as your zen kutsu dachi (forward stance), kiba dachi (horse stance), and ko kutsu dachi (back stance). Perfecting such stances can yield great benefits to the practitioner, since doing so certainly helps with strength and conditioning of the legs, in addition to providing the practitioner a way of training the senses to know what's rooted, balanced, etc.
Some people scoff at the above notion, asserting that they're of zero "combative" value. To them, I scoff back, since the training of such stances helps teach you how to use the whole body to accomplish a given task, instead of just one limb. This principle can be applied to almost any technique that you practice, be it a punch, a block, a throw, etc.
Of course you're not going to get into a heavily rooted zen kutsu dachi stance in a sparring match, or an actual fight. There's simply no real mobility. However, because you practiced all of that stance work in the past, your legs are going to be a lot stronger, compared to if you hadn't done such training. Your foot muscles are stronger, giving you better balance, and so forth. The time was not wasted in any way, shape, or form, as long as you were doing your part to train hard with the correct mechanics.
All good replies. Once stances have been practice correctly for many years, you need to blend that knowledge into everyday movement. Once principals of balance, proper movement, proper standing have been recognized from dojo to everyday activities, that is your stance.
Omar B
Senior Master
You can't measure them all by any one criteria too. Sanchin dachi and Kamae dachi are so opposite that you can't use the same rubric to measure the relative "goodness" of the stance. Those are just two examples, there are many stances designed for different purposes and as such they are totally different ... unless you were to only measure their value in training.
When you punch or block, you are rooted. When you need to move, you can. Different stances for different applications.
The Isshin-Ryu Code (taken from the Bubish) explains it:
The Isshin-Ryu Code (taken from the Bubish) explains it:
- A persons unbalance is the same as a weight.
- The body should be able to change direction at any time.
This is mostly to Flying Crane, but anyone may chime in. If you assert, as you have in the past, that a bullet was once rooted upon the take off therefore rooting has occured, would that not also be true of a body, launched from a certain point (a couple feet back), striking a target with momentum, rather than rooting up(or down) from a fixed point?
Sean
Sean
Flying Crane
Sr. Grandmaster
It's possible, yes, but it depends.
I think what often happens is that people simply take a step as if they are walking casually. What they are doing in this case is simply leaning forward and allowing their body weight to carry them forward. They then take a step to put the next foot underneath them and catch them before they fall. This is essentially what is happening for most people, when they walk. If you step in this manner when you are throwing a punch, then no you did not launch the body from a rooted base.
However, if you do not allow the upper body to lean into the step, but instead drive the movement from the ground with your foot, using that deliberate drive to launch into the next step, then yes you took the step from a rooted base. This would be analogous to the bullet being launched from a rooted origin.
Feet on the ground
Not double weighted or necessarily single weighted in any one direction
Solid but mobile root
Not double weighted or necessarily single weighted in any one direction
Solid but mobile root
IMO, its going to depend on what you're doing. When doing kata, IMO, they should be strong and/or fluid, depending on the kata.
During sparring...I'd say be relaxed and mobil.
During SD/fighting...again, I'm going to say relaxed and mobil. You dont want to be so stiff and rigid that its hard to move but on the other hand, you dont want to be so relaxed that you have no power in anything that you throw.
Forward momentum will get you into trouble at the moment of contact, unless you are rooted. Your technique, as with the bullet, will get deflected, sending you off balance, and the bullet into left field. The bullet being an inanimate object can't think, so momentum carries through. I think.
"Of course you're not going to get into a heavily rooted zen kutsu dachi stance in a sparring match, or an actual fight." I would agree with the first part if you mean sparring as in tournement sparring which is conducted at a long range.
IMO the second part about the 'actual fight' is not right. In a real fight the range is much closer and zenkutsu dachi (and shiko dachi or kiba dachi for that matter) is part of close range fighting. To suggest that the masters of pre 1900 would have wasted time practising stances that have no practical application does not compute. Kata is a fighting system, not a conditioning system. :asian:
