Horse stance: is it ineffective training?

Holding form under fatigue is certainly part of long sparring sessions. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't waste people's time with standing in horse stance for a chunk of a session, but I do see value in that kind of isometric tension being held while drilling other things. I think it feeds directly into things such as keeping the knees bent and hands up while sparring to fatigue, as well as building the muscle memory Tom Bailey mentioned.

Also, the kind of exercise that mixes isometric tension with one part of the body while the other is practicing technical finesse that I mentioned earlier has a benefit to things such as grappling, where it is often the case that isometric tension has to be held with one part while others must be dextrous and flowing. I really believe that it can help with that kind of limb independence.

 

I think you missed the point

both are examples of so called building mental fortitude and neither have much to do with building the kind of resilience needed to actually fight, to get back up and not give in just because something is mentally hard doesn't mean it translates to making you better in another arena.

And I'd say doing squats has a much better chance of improving your ability to fight than stance work by making you stronger and more explosive.

Something that is easier to do and easier to access isn't necessarily better if it was we would see less out of shape and weak martial artists.

 

Horse stance is a stance, it's not training. If you mean standing in horse stance, there are better ways to train than than static holds. You might do it with beginners initially to teach them good form or while you have them do other things, but then you should move on to dynamic footwork. Standing in one spot for too long is a waste of your training time.

 

I'm not sure if the book goes into any other comparison, but that part seems quite obvious and not a comparable as a training means to outcome.
isometric training does not transfer much to speed of movement, more so it could show an indication of endurance and range of motion.

I have been through stance sessions that left me unable to walk for days, and the gains from it were not noticeable, but it did put me off. however I became involved in weight training to help the stance work, which was more beneficial in the long run.
I'm sure there are some classes that still encourage long periods of time in stances. I don't see how it is beneficial as a physical exercise to anyone other than people new to exercise.

 

Wow, that sounds... counterproductive.

That's the kind of "character building" I could do without.

 

yeah, that rapidly put me off that part of training.

 

You can

1. stand on horse stance for 15 minutes.
2. repeat hip throw solo drill for 200 times.

IMO, 2 > 1. The reason is simple. You can kill 2 birds with 1 stone.

 

I suspect that was the initial use. Because isometric training develops strength within a specific range you can have beginners build within that range and then move on to other things because they've developed the specific endurance necessary for the technical training.

 

but it is a perfectly reasonable way to multitask when waiting for a bus or watching tv.

 

My understanding of certain stances is similar to that of Yoga poses.

Yogis would contort their bodies and hold uncomfortable positions so that when they came to meditate, their bodies were suitably conditioned to endure hours of meditation at a time.

If you can hold a Horse Stance for 10 mins and then actually need to do something that resembles a Horse Stance in a real world scenario, you'll be better equipped.

With regards to holding horse stances for incredibly long times, I believe this is about training the mind. Horse Stances hurt, anyone who says any different is a liar. In order to hold a Horse Stance for a prolonged period you need strength, flexibility and good breathing. If you can maintain the will to fight after being in a horse stance for a substantial period of time then that's a huge mental boost for future fights.

 

The idea that holding stances for long periods of time builds mental strength (or resilience, or fortitude, or whatever substitute word you prefer) for fighting, either real or simulated (i.e., sparring) is nonsense.

You get 'good' at what you specifically do. The way to build mental strength for fighting is to fight with people who are better at fighting than you.

Holding stances for longer than a few minutes prepares you for nothing other than holding stances for longer than a few minutes. I would rather spend my training time more effectively.

 

I agree with Van Zandt: I’d rather spend my training time more effectively.

I’d also argue that it’s it’s very important for training methods to be time efficient, because most people have limited time in which to train. Thus, it’s imperative that training methods make the most effective use of time - making the maximum improvement within the finite time available.

 

I never said it was the BEST way to train but it’s a way to train. Saying it’s nonsense is a bit big headed of you in my opinion. Traditional methods of training involved holding stances for longer periods than in modern martial arts. It doesnt mean that method is wrong.

I agree that fighting stronger opponents would be more beneficial for fight training but martial arts mean different things to different people. I do my martial arts training along with my yoga and meditation practise. Stance training within my Kung Fu practise helps bridge some of those gaps.

 

Its not really big headed he is simply applying the SAID principle which is universal in sports science

 

I believe kungfu is one of the few traditional arts that used stance training.

wrestling, boxing, muay Thai, jujitsu are some of many traditional arts that don't have holding stance training.

 

Maybe ‘big headed’ was the wrong term. I’m sorry for that.

I just don't think stance training can or should be swept aside so easily.

If you want to wipe away stance training you may aswell get rid of Tai Chi and Forms/patterns. They both use stances and any training you put towards stances will only help.

 

Some arts do quite well without stances forms or patterns

And those arts tend to both be able to fight very well and have conditioned strong flexible athletes all without ever doing forms or long stance work.

If you are doing them just make sure you know why you are doing them and are getting the results you want from them

 

Again I wont deny that, again. However, I know of quite a few boxers and Ju Jitsu practitioners who do pilates to aid with their training. Pilates and Yoga are very similar and the similarities are shared woth forms and stances.

Like I said, they may not be ‘the best’ way to train. But to say they serve no purpose, in my opinion, just seems a bit close minded maybe. Again, sorry for my big headed comment earlier.

 

The similarities are only superficial really, yoga doesn't hold stances as long as you do in the horse stance its a breathing and stretching exercise mainly

Horse stance doesnt emphasise upper body strength positions or core strengthening positions like yoga or Pilate's,

And he never said they serve no purpose just that its silly to say they build fighting spirit or fighting grit, no one makes those claims about yoga ever.

What we are saying is that they don't do something some seem to think they do building fighting spirit, and they are sub optimal to do other things like build strength explosiveness etc