(Approx 2 minute 25 second read)

In everyday English, we use the word ‘stance’ to infer a fixed, unchanging position or viewpoint. This common usage of the word can confuse people into thinking that we utilize our karate ‘stances’ in the same way, that they represent a fixed position….. They do not!
.
A recent discussion on one of my articles turned into a debate about whether the rear leg in a front stance should be locked straight.
.
The commenter argued that in his style, this has been practiced for centuries and that the locked rear leg is meant to briefly transmit power to the floor during techniques like a lunge punch.
.
Now, I have to ask – is it truly functional? If the purpose is purely historical, then we have to question whether it serves a practical role in generating power and mobility.
.
Power generation in striking starts at the feet, moves through the legs, hips, and core, and is finally expressed in the technique. Locking the rear leg can actually interrupt this chain by creating unnecessary tension and limiting mobility.
.
Locking any joint over time can also lead to long-term issues and injuries. Introducing this idea to children with growing bones, tendons, and muscles? I’m not sure that’s a prudent way to teach stance structure.
.
I’ve seen people spend endless amounts of time – even a weekend seminar – trying to create the “perfect” stance. The foot, a degree this way; the width, an inch that way; knees over toes by this much. The list goes on.
.
For me, I explain to my students that a stance is a snapshot in time – a position you move to, from, and through for tactical advantages or defensive actions, and as a way to control an opponent’s position. We are certainly not supposed to remain stationary with the leg and knee locked in place.
.
‘Kihon’ is often used to justify performing a stance this way, with the disclaimer that when we free spar, it all changes. And to be honest, I have a problem with that too (you knew I would).
.
Why drill stepping punches in a rigid stance if it has no place in application? What’s the point of teaching something that immediately changes when you actually fight?
.
I often get moaned at online for saying that I don’t subscribe to the idea of teaching one way for beginners, only to have them unlearn it later. This is a pointless exercise. Would you teach someone to ride a bike by having them pedal in reverse, only to later tell them, “Actually, just pedal forward”?
.
I’m not criticizing the commenter’s tradition, but we need to ask: is this something we do because it works, or simply because it has always been done this way?
.
I often wonder about tradition – whether what we have today has come from cultural or translation misunderstandings. Decades ago, a master may have tried to impart a lesson, only for it to be slightly misunderstood, and now it’s ‘locked’ in history.
.
We all remember, as I did back in the 1970s and 1980s, doing things because you were told to. But as I grew, I realized some techniques just didn’t feel right, didn’t make sense. Now, I encourage everyone to do the same. If a technique doesn’t feel right, question it. Don’t be afraid to explore and find what truly works for you.
.
Karate was never meant to be just a vehicle for demonstration. It was a functional self-defense system. It’s time we brought it back.
.
.
Written by Adam Carter