Is it really a regular case out there? Being honest, the footwork, stance, and the correct distribution of muscles across the body for the type of martial art focused in is genuinely the first thing I was told to build in all of the martial arts I participated in.
I've already given an example with Taekwondo.
I have a few other examples:
In Wing Chun, instructors usually train you to
grab or frame against the wrist when trapping. This ensures that you're basically working against your opponent's bigger muscles. Optimally, you want to grab the hand when trapping and pull down:
(Skip to 4:05 for the trapping bits)
Pulling or pushing on the hand instead of the wrist ensures that you're fighting against your opponent's smaller arm muscles instead of their larger back muscles. This is a small but important detail that most Wing Chun instructors seem to miss.
The basic Karate punch from horse stance is a particularly egregious example. The basic Karate stance is usually bladed and sideways to the opponent. A chambered punch from horse stance requires you to be squared up to the opponent. How are you supposed to land a punch that you need to launch from a squared stance while in a sideways stance?
Stephen Thompson, arguably the best Karateka in MMA, actually (indirectly) explained how the punch can be launched. Basically, you use footwork to shuffle to a squared up stance relative to your opponent. This then allows you to actually throw something similar to a punch from horse stance. Unfortunately, the way the punch is taught gives you zero context of how to actually apply it in a fight. Note: Stephen here uses basic boxing punches to set up the Karate punch, but this would also work with combinations that start from a kick to a shuffle.
An alternative to this is to step to the outside while launching the punch, which also brings you square to your opponent. This works particularly well with the reverse punch. But again, you're not actually taught any of this when training the punch itself.
The primary problem isn't actually that the techniques are bad. It's that the way the techniques are trained does not automatically also train you in the proper footwork, positioning, and biomechanics required for the technique to work.
Here's a good Muay Thai roundhouse kick instructional video:
Note that the way the kick is trained incorporates the footwork needed for the kick to work: A lot of emphasis is put into the initial step forward. That first step with the lead (non-kicking) leg brings the kicker into the correct distance and moves the kicker off the centerline for safety against counterattacks. The way the kick is trained also automatically trains the correct footwork and positioning required for the kick to work.
Compare how a
Boxing Jab is trained to how a
Karate Chokuzuki (straight punch) is trained. The Boxing Jab is immediately trained while in a Boxing stance you will actually use in a fight and footwork lessons are immediately integrated into the instruction for both getting into range and followups punches. Meanwhile, the Karate straight punch is not trained in a stance you will actually use (Karatekas seem to prefer a sideways bladed stance, not the horse stance) and footwork lessons are not integrated into the instruction, so it's not clear how you should get into range to actually use the punch. What's weird here is that everything else in Karate is actually taught really well. It's only the punches that are taught seemingly devoid of context. It's bizarre.
I suspect the problem sometimes isn't that Martial Arts do not train proper stance or footwork. It's that stance and footwork are trained separately from offensive and defensive techniques. Footwork and stance should be the first thing you are taught. But it also should be the second thing you are taught. And the third. Basically, every time you're taught a technique, the instruction should also include how stance and footwork are integrated with the technique.
