Horse stance: is it ineffective training?

“Continuous isometric training over an extended period of time will be less effective when developing high speed movement,” according to Darren Yas Parr’s excellent Strength and Conditioning for Combat Sports book. It’s an evidence-based book, drawing on modern sports science.

Whilst Parr doesn’t dismiss isometric training completely, it’s clearly not the ideal training method for combat sports. Perhaps spending an eternity in horse stance is over-rated as a training tool.

Should we be better investing our time in multi-joint, dynamic exercises like squats? I think so. Multi-joint, dynamic exercises that develop power seem to me a better investment of time.

Discuss!

 

Define "effective".

If you mean, it doesn't turn you into a super-duper fighter: correct.

But the purpose of horse-stance training isn't to develop fighting skill.
Heck, it's not really to build leg strength (although it probably achieves this better than it achieves fighting skill).

From my IMA perspective, any form of stance training is a doorway to working on alignments and aspects of bringing that are easier to pick up statically, before transitioning into a moving practice.

 

People good at squats, have excellent low body strength and mobility, excellent lower body strength and mobility leads to an excellent horse stance.

Therefore good kung-fu doesn't skip leg day.

 

Could you site some of the studies he uses in the book to back his points, ?

Also which fighters he has worked with extensively ?

But to discuss tour point above its ineffective for a means of training both absolute strength and strength endurance and probably has a negatively impact on speed strength but it will still be used because it's a traditional method of training along with other traditional methods such as heavier weapons.

But the most effective methods of building absolute strength are well known and easy enough to find if traditional teachers are so Inclined

 

I reckon it's as much a test of character as anything. Yes, as strength training for martial arts it's not great, but it could help with building mental grit?

 

Losing during sparring and coming back for more builds grit better I would suggest

 

I wouldn't disagree with that at all, but it's good to test it in different ways. I've never had a problem with getting on the floor and getting battered, but I've had weights sessions where my mind has beaten me, and I've had to do it again.

 

Parr's point regarding the diminished utility of isometric training may be true if that was the only training a person did.

But a rational training program will not rely on just one exercise done in isolation.

Isometrics are excellent, as long as they are part of a more expansive training program.

 

there are some good threads discussing stance work. in summary many people are in agreement with dan bain. stances are intended for use in dynamic movement and in application. For me static stance work has less to do with strength and more to do with building a sense of kinesthesia and for building muscle memory. the less I have to think about how I am doing my stances the more mental space I have for thinking about how to use them in application.

 

Static stances are also an opportunity for instructors to gauge the readiness of trainees to learn combat techniques. For example, a person too weak to hold a horse stance (feet double shoulder width apart, hips level with knees) for at least a couple of minutes has no place trying to do kicks.

 

There're millions of people doing kicks that shouldn't be doing them then. Me included!

 

Yes, which is why poor technique is so prevalent in the kicking arts.

 

Static stances can be useful for both limb independence and keeping a relaxed mind under pressure if you mix them with light technical work with the upper body. I think relaxed finesse with the upper body while the legs are screaming is a worthwhile exercise.

 

There is also the argument that much of the strength in tma is in bones and tendons supporting the body through good structure. static stance work places an emphasis on getting the structure working. good static structure is a skill that can be transferred to moving structure. this reduces the load on the muscles, reduces oxygen consumption, and therefore is a bonus when fighting.

 

Sparring in horse stance and losing must beat everything

This is one of those endless discussions that pops up all the time, isn't it. Having done karate horse stances I like the points people are making about character, endurance, and let's face it some decent lactic acid burn reminding you where your quads are located...I'm wincing just thinking about. Haven't tried it in many years...maybe I should see how weak I am at it.

That's the general idea I was taught, it's not so much that you should spend a lot of time on it...you see how far you can go with it. 15m spent one time doing a horse stance would make me feel like a king of the world, once I got the feeling in my jelly legs back. That's a challenge for anyone, but being able to do it says a lot about your core and legs and willpower. You're a beast, at least from the waist down.

There's something to be said for low to the ground body weight exercises, and that seem's to be the key physical benefit. Planking and squats all operate on the same ideas. You might not get speed with isometrics, but you can definitely increase strength and endurance. Otherwise planking wouldn't work. I've seen people attempt planking for insane amounts of time.

 

Aha, and check this out. The world record for planking was just set at 10 hours 10m, two days ago. Who needs horse stance

WATCH: Man breaks world record after planking for 8 hours

 

My vote would be that the main advantage is to build 'mental fortitude' - there is an old saying - corny as heck - "It's not the dog in the fight, it's the fight in the dog" - In Tai Chi you have the Qigong practice of Zhàn zhuāng - standing until your arms and legs fall off - Yes it is a physical discipline but it is MUCH more a mental one. Learning to persevere is important in many many ways. Of course everything has a Yin and a Yang so a possible downside is that you could become too stubborn and 'fixed' in your ways

 

Planks are building endurance in a specific way, a way that is practical and useful the core is a stabilizer and specific endurance is needed in a particular position which is what planks build.

Its not making your core stronger its increasing the endurance in those muscles in the back and core.

And McGill etc would rather you trained multiple yeps of low time than a big set

 

I honestly have a hard time correlation the mental fortitude build from standing in a stance with building an attitude towards fighting

If you want to build mental fortitude it can be done lots of ways . go stand under a squat bar for example with a weight you know will crush you or pop a knee if you fail, that builds mental strength like nothing still really doesn't relate to fighting though