Horse stance obsolete?

Adam,

Here are the best reasons I've read/been told. Note that your milage with them will vary:

1. Sitting in horse stance is a mental exercise first and foremost. Being willing to hold position even when you don't want to show personal discipline. To you point squats could be used to the same effect.

2. Body alignment and positioning. This one is a case where squats don't work as well. The idea here is that you're learning a posture to transition from or into. Again, some may consider horse stance (or at least a deep horse) of dubious value. I'm not arguing for or against. But the squat isn't necessarily something that would be used in combat.

3. Working stabilizer muscles. Ok, I know very little about anatomy. So I can't speak to the accuracy of such a statement. Hopefully someone else can address: a. the existance/function of stabilizer muscles and b. are they worked better by static or dynamic drilling.

4. Finding root/leaning to sink weight. The ability to develop root and sink your weight is a critical skill in any realistic form of fighting. Horse stance will help develop this. Not sure about squats. I don't do them enough to be able to comment.

Now here's the kicker that we are not discussing. Static stance training is beginner material. The goal of doing it is to develop the things perviously listed in a short amount of time (and arguably weed out less dedicated students). After that almost all stance work is typically practiced dynamically either by stepping or through forms. So I would actually question programs that are on a regular basis doing static stance work with advanced students. I think the train mix is off in that type of scenario.

Once the program moves to dynamic stances, I think things become far more applicable. Of course this begs the question, do you need to bother with the static work as a first step. I'm not willing to comment on that one way or the other as I'm not well enough versed in the issue.

- Matt

 

But the squat isn't necessarily something that would be used in combat.
used in throws.


imo, squats are the best way to work the stabilizers as that is exactly what they have to do to keep your knees and legs from flaring out and in keeping great form. (off topic) yet another reason you should not do smith machine squats.

Finding root/leaning to sink weight.
When squating you have to have a good core. you have to expand your stomach out in order to make your core larger and your base more stable.

 

why not do squats in horse stance?

 

You'll find that you can hit the muscles in various locations just by narrowing or widening your stance, or pointing your toes in or out. This burns the hell out of the stabilizer muscles that otherwise would not benefit.

The squat is used in combat all the time. You drop level for body shots and takedowns, you are using your quads. This is what is meant in boxing when they tell you to "sit down" on your punches.

This is a good pic of sitting on your punches.

 

Great picture Trent. And we do practice sitting on our punches. But in a case like the one you show, even though I know there is a dropping compoent, is that really squatting or is more of a lunge?

I guess the question is can squats be done in such a way that the person is both working on the exercise and the application at the same time?

Great dialog all.

- Matt

 

Horse stance Vs Squats

I'm new to this forum, so I'm a little aprehensive about posting with the more reputable members, but here's my 2 cents.

In the few kung-fu classes I attended, the horse stance was used as a 'punishment' or was held while working on hand movements (I can't think of the right word for them, series of hand movements, bugger it, I've got a really crap memory), the idea of which was, i assume, to condition the mind as well as the lower body. I know I found it harder to concentrate on hand movements while my legs felt like they were on fire.

As for squats, because of my height (I hit 6'2" at the tender age of 12) I've had ALOT of knee problems. By doing hindu squats every morning and evening, and the wall chair exercise (hope you know what that is) I've eliminated my knee problems and strengthened my knees. I did try weighted squats at one point, but they made my knees worse, hindu squats helped them.

I guess the general gist of this post is that in my humble oppinion, horse stance should be used in training, and squats should be used for conditioning. Think of it this way, try throwing punches in the horse stance, you can swing and aim well, now try throwing punches while squatting, they lack power and its alot harder to aim.

I can't remember who it was, and I'm too lazy to look back, but I seem to remember someone wanted an illustration of a squat, check this out
http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/mahler19.htm
Also, I would reccomend buying the book mentioned, but that'd sound like I'm trying to sell something on the boards, and I believe thats a bannable offence, so I won't suggest it... or did I just suggest it without realising it, oh well, if I get banned, I guess I did.

 

"Think of it this way, try throwing punches in the horse stance, you can swing and aim well, now try throwing punches while squatting, they lack power and its alot harder to aim."

It's easy to throw punches when you don't have to move. In a fight, you are constantly shifting, changing, always on the move.

Matt, that pic does show more of a lunge, but I meant to show the dynamic use of the quads in combat application.

I do lunges also, but I don't hold position there, either.

 

It doesnt float my boat though...I was trying to make the monkey cut and prove a point.

 

I much prefer my Hindu squats or bootstrappers over sitting in the horse stance in my own workouts. Sometimes in class, my instructor will get us to drop into it for a couple of minutes, but only because he's a sadist and likes to see the out of shape guys suffer
I don't think most people would seriously argue that horse stance works your legs more than squats, I think it's more of a mental thing used in certain TMA schools. My old karate class, for example, used to have an awful lot of standing in stances as a way of "toughening the mind", but at the same time we were told frequently to not even think about dropping into a stance in a fight, they were just a mental thing.
Also, in that pic, is anyone else questioning the logic of punching Akebono in the stomach?

 

He looks pretty soft there.

 

True, but his fist would probably need to be about eight feet in before he'd feel it!

 

Wow this thread got pretty long lol.

A lot of CMA people I've talked to swear by stable, low, 'rooted' stances. I personally see no point in trying to use a bow and arrow stance, horse stance, etc in a fight. If you 'sink your weight' it's going to be harder to move quickly and you will be easy to take down.

Why do the horse stance in the first place, let alone squat in it? The reason sqauts keep your feet shoulder width apart and you are supposed to use correct form is that with a lot of weight you can mess up your knees if you do them wrong. If you squatted in a typical horse stance your knees are going to get pretty messed up.

A horse stance is a horrible position to punch from IMO. In a normal boxing/kickboxing stance you can pivot on your rear foot when you throw crosses etc (which means you have the motion of your leg pivoting, all the muscles in your legs, the rotation of your hips/torso, and the muscles in your arm behind the cross) and pivot your lead foot when throwing lead hooks etc. which gives you more power than just standing in a horse stance and punching would.

 

I have no source for this but I read somewhere that to pass the the bureaucrat exams in China, part of the exam was fighting on horse back. As poor people wanting to pass the exam did not have access to horses they developed the hose stance.

 

...that's odd because I've ridden horses and you're feet definitely aren't spread that far. There may be some truth to that, if it's true them somewhere along the way someone must have either got a horse confused with an elephant or just made it wider.

 

Take down, not necessarily. The better connectionyou have with the ground, the more you can resist take downs; that is displayed in a Judoka's connection with the mat. The ability to dynamically sink your weigh does aid in striking and stability. However, the idea is to be able to maintain a stable and movable base while rooted.

Agreed. The only way it allows effectiive punching is when you're puching to the "front" of the stance, 90 degrees to the leg line. But the problem is your trying to fight along the weakest line of the stance if your doing that.

It can be used for a dropping punch in "line" with the stance, but that's a single technique and you're not going to stay static in there.

 

I completely agree Matt. If you look at it historically. Gichin Funakoshi was initially taught the naihanchi/tekki forms before learning others - they are all in nahainchi and horse stance. Certainlt from a traditional point of view the horse stance was aught before all others - for good reason:

The advantage of horse stance is that both legs are trained equally. A beginner doent get the opportunity to favour a stronger side.

Basic horse stance is structurally the same as all stances - the knee position is constant, whether you do back stance or front stance, sanchin, cat stance - what ever. Have a look at Best Karate by Nakayama for picture sof what I'm refering to. therefore train one stance and you build a foundation in the rest of them.

Another important aspect that nobody has mentioned is that horse stance is very important in the training of ankle flexibility, again a requirement for more advanced stance work. The more flexible the ankle the greater use can be made of leg power to aid hip rotation and overall more powerful technique.

True, however older versions are much narrower. Also the name also decsribes the feeling of pulling the legs together as if you were trying keep upright on a horse.

 

Why would you want power if your practicing? But you are right, no power in that position. So i asked my MT teacher, since he is such a karate fan. He said that, you would want to practice the technicial aspect of punching , do it as a boxer or MT kick boxer, he said that, to get power do so in horse stance. His arguement is that power is less in horse stance, but if someone can punch hard in a position that comprimised power, then when they get in a boxing/kick boxing stance, and start practicing punches in that stance, then switch to practicing punches in horse stance, then practice again in a Boxing/kickboxing position, thier power will be unbelievable.

But thats what he said. He DOES hit like an S.O.B................
EDIT: I wasnt very clear, what i mean to say is that if someone can punch hard in horse stance, which often reduces power, then you will be able to punch hard in an ordinary position. After that is achieved try to combine your training with practcing punches throught the guidelines of MT and boxing, and combine it with karate.EDIT: karate HORSE STANCE.

 

Sounds abit far fetched to me. There are far more mechanics in a punch than just pushing your fist out at a speed...

Shoulder, Hip rotation, foot placement are major factors which contribute to a powerful, solid punch.

If what you say is true; then why do we not see boxers practising this horse stance so they can acheive a "powerful punch in an ordinary position"... If you want a hard jab, cross... you practise the jab, cross over and over again.

 

I completely agree with Yuki. Look at the mechanics of a cross. You have to pivot your rear foot. If you practice punching without pivoting your foot, you're going to be developing bad habits. Why not just learn to hit hard in the position you actually fight from?

Oh and about lunges vs. squats (as in the pic where the guy is doing more of a lunge while punching), squats and lunges are both good. With squats it's very easy to use heavy weights, while with lunges you'd probably end up messing up your knee. If you want to exercise without weights, I'd go for lunges though. They make me tired faster than (weightless) squats do.

 

The purpose of horse stance is to give your opponent a clear shot at the nuts, after he's kicked you in the nuts three or four times with no effect he will run off in terror thus you have defeated you opponent without fighting him making you the ultimate martial artist.

Obviously you havge to be a shaolin monk for this to work which is why its a TMA thing because you dont get many shaolin monks in MMA competitions.

Argument settled, everyone go home.