3 posts / 0 new
Last post
Anf
Anf's picture
Stances and valuable energy

A thought suddenly occurred to me while practicing.

I fully get that stances train muscles, endurance, balance and many good things.

But take the fighting stance from tang soo do, which from what I can gather is the back stance from shotokan or the cat stance from various styles of kung fu. If you are fighting for real or in sparring, every joule of energy counts. I wonder why then, we would choose to put 70 to 90 percent of our entire body through one bent leg.

Chris R
Chris R's picture

I don't think you're supposed to stay in that stance for long enough that it would drain your energy. I see a stance like that as a position you move into as you do a specific technique, not one that you would stay in for any length of time. So therefore it doesn't matter how efficient the stance is at conserving energy, it's all about how effective you are in that instant, before you transition into another stance.

If I was sparring in one stance for any length of time, it would definitely be a more balanced one. Not only to conserve energy, but for practical reasons. Putting 70-90% of your weight on one leg might help you in some situations, but staying in that position for long puts you at a huge disadvantage, as your sparring partner will exploit the weaknesses of that stance and hit you easily.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Anf wrote:
I fully get that stances train muscles, endurance, balance and many good things.

I would class all of those things as unintentional side benefits of stances. The main purpose of stances is to ensure the efficient transfer of bodyweight. The are not supposed to be fixed postures, but positions we move fluidly to and through. This video gives a quick overview of it all:

 

Anf wrote:
I wonder why then, we would choose to put 70 to 90 percent of our entire body through one bent leg.

You’d do it momentarily when pulling. You’d them immediately and fluidly move on.

Chris expressed it well:

Chris R wrote:
I don't think you're supposed to stay in that stance for long enough that it would drain your energy. I see a stance like that as a position you move into as you do a specific technique, not one that you would stay in for any length of time. So therefore it doesn't matter how efficient the stance is at conserving energy, it's all about how effective you are in that instant, before you transition into another stance.

Chris R wrote:
Putting 70-90% of your weight on one leg might help you in some situations …

From a sparring perspective, it can help with lead leg kicks. That maybe why it’s being seen as standard position for the groups you’ve mentioned if lead leg kicking is favoured? You’re right that it will be tiring though, and it can limit mobility. My position is that ALL stances should be fluid and assumed as and when needed. Nothing should be held. Movement is key.

All the best,

Iain