"Natural" fighting stance

A place to share ideas, concerns, questions, and thoughts about women and the martial arts.

Moderator: Megan Lieff

"Natural" fighting stance

Postby Dana Sheets » Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:56 am

Of late I've been watching the "natural" fighting stance of western men.

Left lead forward, body bladed, left fist at shoulder height ready to jab, right fist near the chin ready to hook.

I've seen guys from 16 to 65 take this stance in the last two months and it ial almost always identical. Note: this is never how men stand when they're about to hit a woman, just another man.

What is really interesting to me, at the moment, is that if most everyone in the west takes this stance, why in the world would it be rocket science to defeat it?
Did you show compassion today?
User avatar
Dana Sheets
 
Posts: 2714
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 6:01 am

Postby MikeK » Sun Apr 20, 2008 3:20 am

This may sound snarky but I believe the reason is that traditional Asian martial artists spend most if not all of their time training students to defeat their own art. And it's tougher to defeat what you don't know or respect. After all boxing is inferior to art X, so why bother learning how to counter it, eh? :wink:

FWIW, These days I use modified versions of the Western ready stance.
I was dreaming of the past...
MikeK
 
Posts: 3672
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:40 pm

Postby Stryke » Sun Apr 20, 2008 3:48 am

maybe I`m missing something , isnt a natural stance pretty similar all round

slight crouch arms up one leg slightly forward of the other . The blading thing varies etc , but its all the same , wrestlers and boxers can get very square

sounds like Sanchin to me

two arms to legs , its solid , and its not rocket science to defeat any stance , you just got to be better

Id like to see what a natural asian stance is , greco roman stance , western boxing stance , southpaw makes a difference .



Image

how bad a stance is this ?

Image

maybe a bit lower

Image

A brazillain stance perhaps

Image

does this look so different ?

Image

Image
Stryke
 

Re: "Natural" fighting stance

Postby mhosea » Sun Apr 20, 2008 4:43 am

Dana Sheets wrote:Note: this is never how men stand when they're about to hit a woman, just another man.


I guess that would be because it is a defensive stance. One important thing to factor in is that this stance is mainly used when outside of your opponent's range, or for moving in and out of range quickly. However, for a close-range exchange lasting more than couple of strikes each, watch a boxer's stance shallow and square to his opponent.
Mike
User avatar
mhosea
 
Posts: 1142
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 9:52 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: "Natural" fighting stance

Postby MikeK » Sun Apr 20, 2008 3:24 pm

Dana Sheets wrote: Note: this is never how men stand when they're about to hit a woman, just another man.


It's not a man/woman thing Dana, it's also not how a male stands when they are about to hit another man who isn't a physical threat. Nothing to do with sex, more to do with perceived threat and the difference between fighting someone and just beating someone.

One important thing to factor in is that this stance is mainly used when outside of your opponent's range, or for moving in and out of range quickly. However, for a close-range exchange lasting more than couple of strikes each, watch a boxer's stance shallow and square to his opponent.


Good point Mike and why I learned it as a ready stance and not a fighting stance. It's easy to cover the six gates and/or launch an attack using most of your tools. It's actually very dynamic and not really static at all. So you really don't defeat this stance but the other guy.
I was dreaming of the past...
MikeK
 
Posts: 3672
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:40 pm

Postby Stryke » Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:59 pm

It's actually very dynamic and not really static at all. So you really don't defeat this stance but the other guy.


Bingo Mike , was my initial thought as well
Stryke
 

Postby JimHawkins » Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:56 am

MikeK wrote:This may sound snarky but I believe the reason is that traditional Asian martial artists spend most if not all of their time training students to defeat their own art. And it's tougher to defeat what you don't know or respect. After all boxing is inferior to art X, so why bother learning how to counter it, eh? :wink:

FWIW, These days I use modified versions of the Western ready stance.

True but also false IMO..

The reality is that if you train a method that has a particular strategy then most of the time training will be devoted to training that strategy...

You can't possibly train, especially regularly, with every other method so...... You focus on yours, your game and you do your best to implement that game..

These days most folks fight the same way IMO with small differences--soooo... There is plenty of opportunity to work with those who use the most common methods out there and tweak your strategy <Assumes one uses a primary strategy--positional/energy) For SD working the HAOV is doing much the same thing..

What makes some of these inside styles interesting is the idea of cheating and not playing fair whenever possible.. Folks can explore just how sneaky some of the moves are.. Cheat: time, space, energy and position as much as you can.

But today more than ever folks are cross training so it widens the spectrum quite a bit.
Shaolin
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit
User avatar
JimHawkins
 
Posts: 2164
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:21 am
Location: NYC

Postby Stryke » Mon Apr 21, 2008 5:58 am

Has anyone taken this training as a student or received the trainer certification?


am I missing the context here ?
Stryke
 

Postby JimHawkins » Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:30 am

I'm guessing that was a cross post from the rape defense thread...
Shaolin
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit
User avatar
JimHawkins
 
Posts: 2164
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:21 am
Location: NYC

Postby Stryke » Mon Apr 21, 2008 8:37 am

ahh ok doh !!! :D
Stryke
 

Postby tigereye » Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:47 pm

The "Natural" fighting stance is which provides you good protection, balance and mobility.

The "Natural fighting stance may look like Sanchin because in a fight you are not only have to be well protected /guarded/, but still be able to move quickly and maintain your balance.
Sanchin stance will allow you to protect your head,body from attack,teaches you how to gain good
balance,how to respond quickly to any action of your opponent and provides you the flexibility of movements in any direction .
You can execute any hand or foot attacks from this position, without allow your opponent to read your
intentions.

Level of guard:
I think to use a middle guard will protect your head and your body too.
Low guard leave your head unprotected, while high guard leave the body open to an attack.

But because we are all unique individuals or choice of a fighting stance will always be different. :wink:
Eva
User avatar
tigereye
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:32 pm

Re: "Natural" fighting stance

Postby Dana Sheets » Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:15 am

mhosea wrote:I guess that would be because it is a defensive stance.


This is what I'm getting at. The "natural fighting stance" is taken when you already know a fight is on. And I think we spend a fair bit of time on this situation.
Did you show compassion today?
User avatar
Dana Sheets
 
Posts: 2714
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 6:01 am

Postby MikeK » Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:56 am

On the money Dana. One of the things I did notice back when I was dipping my toe into Uechi is that the Kyu Kumites worked better for me if I started with my hands down. So I do think that in Uechi there is some training for surprise encounters that happens as a side effect, but that also should be trained stand alone 30-50% of the time.

Also remember we may know a fight is on but the positioning is not face to face, and it may be with us in the aggressor role, so what role would stances play in that? :wink:
I was dreaming of the past...
MikeK
 
Posts: 3672
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:40 pm

Postby Stryke » Wed Apr 23, 2008 5:25 pm

This is what I'm getting at. The "natural fighting stance" is taken when you already know a fight is on. And I think we spend a fair bit of time on this situation.


Ok so is a natural stance , a mimcry or actual flinch response/position , Is it truly natural and does it mimic our natural flinch postures ?

why is it natural ? , nature or nurture ?
Stryke
 

Postby JimHawkins » Thu Apr 24, 2008 6:32 am

I think it's mainly learned..

Folks want to feel comfortable when they start.

Many classical styles have their own lessor used versions of these poses.. I have always found it uncomfortable using our classical ready pose in its entirety, regardless of how practical it is because I started sparring with a side facing kibi dachi, chambered rear, etc..

Once the range closes then the "stance" to me becomes a constantly changing thing, almost with a mind of its own.
Shaolin
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit
User avatar
JimHawkins
 
Posts: 2164
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:21 am
Location: NYC

Next

Return to Women and the Martial Arts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron