# Stick/Club Disarms



## MJS (Jun 9, 2009)

Well, we have a thread or two dedicated to gun and knife disarms, so I figured we should discuss club disarms as well. This of course is not just limited to a stick....a bat, tire iron, or blunt objects of that nature can also fall into this category.

The nature of the attack can vary from overhead, forehand and backhand attacks. 

So....how do you all deal with these types of attacks? Any bread and butter moves that you feel best suit your defense?

Edit:*For clarification, for the sake of this thread, I'm referring to empty hand vs. stick, not stick vs. stick*


----------



## MJS (Jun 9, 2009)

For myself, I primarily fall back on the disarms I know from Kenpo as well as Arnis.  Seeing that the end of the stick is where the majority of the power is coming from, I like to move in.  Yes, as with the other weapons in the other threads, I like to gain control of the club hand/arm as well.  

IMO, there is so much that can be done.  Limb destruction, passing to a break and/or lock, takedown, transitioning the stick vs. stick disarms to empty hand, are just a few things that come to mind that I like to do.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jun 9, 2009)

I find that if you want to disarm a stick you are far better off initiating rather then trying to do it off the opponents attack.  If they are following through or attacking in combination like they should be the stick is very hard to trap and there is a good chance you will get clobbered trying.  If I initiate the attack I can predict the block a little better in terms of where the stick will be and when.

But the best disarm is hitting the hand / wrist really hard, disarms are not the most reliable technique and can easily leave you exposed.


----------



## MJS (Jun 10, 2009)

Andrew Green said:


> I find that if you want to disarm a stick you are far better off initiating rather then trying to do it off the opponents attack. If they are following through or attacking in combination like they should be the stick is very hard to trap and there is a good chance you will get clobbered trying. If I initiate the attack I can predict the block a little better in terms of where the stick will be and when.
> 
> But the best disarm is hitting the hand / wrist really hard, disarms are not the most reliable technique and can easily leave you exposed.


 
Once the attack is apparent, I like moving in.  Moving in, with a simultaneous block/jam/strike during the initial entry off the attack, seems to work well for me.


----------



## jarrod (Jun 10, 2009)

i train weapon disarms fairly infrequently, so when i do practice them, i tend to focus on principles rather than techniques.  those principles are 

1) control the weapon

2) fight like hell

i have no real world experience with weapons, but in live training it seems to go relatively well.

jf


----------



## MJS (Jun 10, 2009)

jarrod said:


> i train weapon disarms fairly infrequently, so when i do practice them, i tend to focus on principles rather than techniques. those principles are
> 
> 1) control the weapon
> 
> ...


 
Couldn't agree more with the underlined part.   The techs. that we learn, IMHO, give us a foundation to build from.  My main initial concern is not getting hit.  What happens after that is instinct and flow.    Like I said, there is so much to pick from.


----------



## geezer (Jun 10, 2009)

jarrod said:


> i train weapon disarms fairly infrequently, so when i do practice them, i tend to focus on principles rather than techniques.  those principles are
> 1) control the weapon
> 2) fight like hell
> i have no real world experience with weapons, but in live training it seems to go relatively well.
> jf



_"Live training?"_ I'm not sure what that means.

Bare stick and controlled speed and force? I would suggest either a padded stick, ... or bare rattan with gloves and headgear. Then test it against _hard force_ with a stubborn, non-compliant partner who won't let go of his stick unless you rip it from his unyielding hand... while he's punching the living hell out of you with the other. Then, if your techniques work, carefully consider the how it would go with a heavy, bare stick, no headgear, and someone hell bent on busting your skull.

At least one prominent Escrima master I know insists that, under these circumstances, disarms are unreliable. His advice? Forget the disarm and just clobber the guy.


----------



## MJS (Jun 10, 2009)

geezer said:


> _"Live training?"_ I'm not sure what that means.
> 
> Bare stick and controlled speed and force? I would suggest either a padded stick, ... or bare rattan with gloves and headgear. Then test it against _hard force_ with a stubborn, non-compliant partner who won't let go of his stick unless you rip it from his unyielding hand... while he's punching the living hell out of you with the other. Then, if your techniques work, carefully consider the how it would go with a heavy, bare stick, no headgear, and someone hell bent on busting your skull.


 
Yes, the 'live' training is just as you describe.   Its amazing what we can/can't pull off, when the stick is really moving.  I've been on the receiving end of more than a few welts from a padded stick.  



> At least one prominent Escrima master I know insists that, under these circumstances, disarms are unreliable. His advice? Forget the disarm and just clobber the guy.


 
My apologies...for clarification, I'm talking about empty hand vs. weapon defense, not stick vs. stick.  However, I do agree with you...when sparring or just going thru the techs., stick vs. stick, at a faster, harder pace, yes, the disarms go out the window.  The ideas are still there, however, to actually pull one off is pretty darn difficult.


----------



## arnisador (Jun 10, 2009)

I like to move in as soon as it can be done safely--_way_ in--then use modified Modern Arnis disarms if possible, or grapple him with the stick pinned to his body if a messy technique is all I can manage.

Once I get my hand on that stick, my mental philosophy is that it's _my_ stick, and _he's_ trying to disarm _me_. I change my mindset to weapon retention!


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 10, 2009)

My tactic is to either charge in before the weapon has accellerated, but after the attack is initiated, or to dodge the attack and then move in as the weapon completes its arc.  

Then get a hold of the weapon above and below their grip, circle it clockwise a half turn and then bring it down abruptly.  This will either break the wrist and get it out of their hand, or just get it out of their hand.  From there, a sharp cut/strike diagonally from inside to outside, which should strike the now open head in the temple.

I have practiced this one for several years and have used it in realtime against an actual attacker who was armed with a baseball bat.

Daniel


----------



## Andrew Green (Jun 10, 2009)

MJS said:


> My apologies...for clarification, I'm talking about empty hand vs. weapon defense, not stick vs. stick.  However, I do agree with you...when sparring or just going thru the techs., stick vs. stick, at a faster, harder pace, yes, the disarms go out the window.  The ideas are still there, however, to actually pull one off is pretty darn difficult.



Empty hand vs stick I'd go with the run for it, it's going to work out badly.  Otherwise the only thing we've had any success at all with is rushing and fighting from a clinch or takedown.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jun 10, 2009)

Empty Handed:

I tend to initiate and close the gap and control the stick and then disarm simultaneously while striking and disrupting their balance.  However if caught after they have initiated their strike I try to evade and stay at a distance until given the opportunity to close/clinch and disarm.  

Still if engaged out in the world and if I had a chance to run that would be the first course of action.  However if the family was present or it was work related then business must be taken care of efficiently. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





If I had a stick/blade etc. then I would try to pick them apart from distance if possible.  Still running would be the first option!


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jun 10, 2009)

While this is a stick on stick sparring session I am in just a fencing helmet and elbow pads. You can see the gap closed around the 27th or so second and the disarm immediately afterwards. This would be a similar quick disarm against a stick weilding opponent. This is a disarm that happens for me almost every time I spar. Close the gap, control, strip/disarm and then use it against them. Really not that much of a difference then if empty handed other than arm placement when going in.

[yt]BUW38ViV8aw&feature=channel_page[/yt]


----------



## MJS (Jun 10, 2009)

As with any weapon encounter, for myself, of course, the obvious is trying to get the heck away from the person.  If there was something available to use to aid in my defense, as Brian said, picking at them from a distance is another option.  And then of course emtpy handed.  

For me, the inward swing, especially when done fast, is always a bit tricky to get in on.  If they follow thru with a backhand strike, that would be easier to enter on.

If I can catch them on the initial swing, as they're drawing back, that IMO would be the time to do something.  But as I said, if its not possible, wait until the best option presents itself.


----------



## arnisador (Jun 10, 2009)

geezer said:


> At least one prominent Escrima master I know insists that, under these circumstances, disarms are unreliable. His advice? Forget the disarm and just clobber the guy.



Stick vs. stick? Absolutely! Empty hand vs. stick? That's a bit different. You must get in of you can't get away, and then once you do have a choice between controlling the stick and fighting with your other hand (if available) and legs, or going for the stick and making it _you_ who has the advantage in his favour.


----------



## BLACK LION (Jun 10, 2009)

I know the topic clearly states "disarms" but it is a relative subject to the knife/gun threads posted recently so I will chime in even though my response is the same as with the other tools...  



Ahhhhhh the stick... mans original killing utensil.  

Chances are I am going to get whacked with it and its safe to assume so just as with the knife and gun encounter.
My focus, as with the knife or the gun is serial injury to non-functionality and not the tool itself... 
They cant use the stick if they cant use thier brain or body.  

The stick will be moving faster than I can do anything about however his body will be moving at the same rate as me. If I watch the tool and try to counter it I could get beat to a pulp with it.  If I watch the threat, who will be moving much slower than the stick and pick targets and get in there an wreck them the whole stick problem is moot becuase of the injury.


  It takes a brain and a nody to use..destroy either and problem is solved.


----------



## MJS (Jun 10, 2009)

BLACK LION said:


> I know the topic clearly states "disarms" but it is a relative subject to the knife/gun threads posted recently so I will chime in even though my response is the same as with the other tools...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Well, lets look at the 3 weapons.  If I were to take a shot to the chest, a stab or slash to the chest or a hit across the chest with the stick, the one thats probably going to cause the least amount of injury is going to be the stick.  Still, regardless of the injury that each of the weapons cause, I want to minimize as much damage as possible.  

I see what you're saying...the object itself is harmless, its the person using it that will cause you the harm.  While that may be the case, I dont want to disregard the weapon all together.  As I have said before, there is nothing that says we cant control the weapon, while at the same time, attacking the person using it.  Don't mistake the word 'control' to mean that is all I'm focusing on.  I'm not going to just latch onto the stick and try to pull it from the guys hands.  No, I'm going to control that stick, control him, and strike.  



> The stick will be moving faster than I can do anything about however his body will be moving at the same rate as me. If I watch the tool and try to counter it I could get beat to a pulp with it. If I watch the threat, who will be moving much slower than the stick and pick targets and get in there an wreck them the whole stick problem is moot becuase of the injury.


 
The tip of the stick is where the majoirty of power is going to be.  Once I get inside, I'm in a good position to begin my defense.  

Both of our goals are to defend ourselves and take the person out.  The major difference is that I favor to control and strike, as Brian said in his post, while you prefer to disregard the weapon and just work for attacking the person.  Another difference is that by controlling, I'm taking that weapon out of play.  Not controlling, still leaves him wide open to continue to hit me.


----------



## K-man (Jun 11, 2009)

MJS said:


> Well, lets look at the 3 weapons. If I were to take a shot to the chest, a stab or slash to the chest or a hit across the chest with the stick, the one thats probably going to cause the least amount of injury is going to be the stick. Still, regardless of the injury that each of the weapons cause, I want to minimize as much damage as possible.
> 
> I see what you're saying...the object itself is harmless, its the person using it that will cause you the harm. While that may be the case, I dont want to disregard the weapon all together. As I have said before, there is nothing that says we cant control the weapon, while at the same time, attacking the person using it. Don't mistake the word 'control' to mean that is all I'm focusing on. I'm not going to just latch onto the stick and try to pull it from the guys hands. No, I'm going to control that stick, control him, and strike.
> 
> ...


I think I'm on the same page as Black Lion but not much different from MJS. I was taught to avoid the strike and hit at least three times to neutralise the threat before worrying about the disarm. This is not to ignore the weapon, just don't focus on it until the major danger has passed. If you get hung up on the weapon a stronger opponent is likely to trash you. If you are able to evade the initial attack and in turn attack the attacker, you don't need to 'control' the weapon in the sense that it is still available to the attacker but he really can't use it because he is pre-occupied with his own safety. Guns are a little different but the process is similar. In that instance I would prefer to have one hand on the weapon while attacking the person. In this situation you are not 'controlling' the gun but neither is the attacker. :asian:


----------



## MJS (Jun 11, 2009)

K-man said:


> I think I'm on the same page as Black Lion but not much different from MJS. I was taught to avoid the strike and hit at least three times to neutralise the threat before worrying about the disarm. This is not to ignore the weapon, just don't focus on it until the major danger has passed. If you get hung up on the weapon a stronger opponent is likely to trash you. If you are able to evade the initial attack and in turn attack the attacker, you don't need to 'control' the weapon in the sense that it is still available to the attacker but he really can't use it because he is pre-occupied with his own safety. Guns are a little different but the process is similar. In that instance I would prefer to have one hand on the weapon while attacking the person. In this situation you are not 'controlling' the gun but neither is the attacker. :asian:


 
Likewise, I am not worrying about the disarm either until after I've fired off shots.  The key word that you used here, was 'if' you are able to avoid the initial strike.  I agree with that for the most part.  For example, it may be best to avoid the inward strike and enter on the backhand.  I still can't help but think that when people see the word 'control' they think that means that all of the attention is on the weapon, the sole purpose to hang on and not let the badguy take it back.  I still feel that we can control and counter strike.  That, IMO, is not putting sole focus on the weapon, but also on countering.  I'm short on time this morning, but I wanted to post a few things that I came across.

Watch this clip from 1min on.  We see a club attack.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Xl3VadJfUI&feature=channel_page

At 45sec in, we see another club attack.  Notice how the person is moving in, controlling and firing off shots right away.  Same clip, about a min. in, we see another.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDHf6J_CcPo&feature=channel_page

Another clip, all club attacks.  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuVjSJyuSQA&feature=channel_page

2min into this clip, we see a few club and knife defenses
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yBue68Ilyw&feature=channel_page

Here is a slow motion clip.  We see a simultaneous block/counter shots.




 
Another Kajukenbo club defense.




 
As I've said before, anyone is free to do what they want.  I"ve grown up in my training, with control stressed all the time.  I suppose, in the end, what matters, is that we go home safe.  

Thanks for your post K-Man.:supcool:


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 11, 2009)

BLACK LION said:


> Ahhhhhh the stick... mans original killing utensil.


And still legal to carry in all fifty states.



BLACK LION said:


> Chances are I am going to get whacked with it and its safe to assume so just as with the knife and gun encounter.
> My focus, as with the knife or the gun is serial injury to non-functionality and not the tool itself...
> They cant use the stick if they cant use thier brain or body.


This is true, though I fall between you and MJS on this.  

I am very disinclined to maintain the notion that I will most likely get whacked.  It is an inherent risk and one that I train to minimize to the greatest degree possible.  Unlike the knife and the gun, I have a much better chance of negating that risk against a single stick wielding opponent.  Against multiple stick (or crowbar or baseball bat) wielding opponents, I am inclined to beat a hasty retreat.  If that is not possible, go for a quick disarm on one of them and use my other techniques to keep the others off of me long enough to then arm myself.  If nothing else, having an object would be helpful for parries.

Being a kendoka, I am *very* familiar with sticks roughly the same length as a baseball bat.  As a nito ryu practitioner, I am also familiar with the use of a stick the size of a nightstick.  We also train regularly to deal with stick wielding foes while ourselves unarmed.  

I had mentioned my wrist break/disarm earlier, but that can also be modified to a leg sweep/disarm as well, keeping you up and the attacker on the ground, perhaps with your foot in his trachea.



BLACK LION said:


> The stick will be moving faster than I can do anything about however his body will be moving at the same rate as me. If I watch the tool and try to counter it I could get beat to a pulp with it. If I watch the threat, who will be moving much slower than the stick and pick targets and get in there an wreck them the whole stick problem is moot becuase of the injury.


You are spot on here.  One of the most difficult things for people unfamiliar with armed combat is to *not *focus all of their attention on the weapon.



BLACK LION said:


> It takes a brain and a body to use..destroy either and problem is solved.


I do not remember which boxer it was that said this, though I believe that it was Joe Frazier.  "Kill the body and you kill the head."  Of course the opposite is, as you well know, equally true.

Daniel


----------



## BLACK LION (Jun 11, 2009)

MJS said:


> Well, lets look at the 3 weapons. If I were to take a shot to the chest, a stab or slash to the chest or a hit across the chest with the stick, the one thats probably going to cause the least amount of injury is going to be the stick. Still, regardless of the injury that each of the weapons cause, I want to minimize as much damage as possible.
> 
> I see what you're saying...the object itself is harmless, its the person using it that will cause you the harm. While that may be the case, I dont want to disregard the weapon all together. As I have said before, there is nothing that says we cant control the weapon, while at the same time, attacking the person using it. Don't mistake the word 'control' to mean that is all I'm focusing on. I'm not going to just latch onto the stick and try to pull it from the guys hands. No, I'm going to control that stick, control him, and strike.
> 
> ...


 
Your approach makes sense to me and I understand what you mean by control.  No there is nothing that says you cant hold the tool arm/ hand while beating them to nonfunctionality.    Its a more esoteric approach but not as much as attempting some sort of disarm or grappling with the tool.  Your reference to the knife at the throat with the back against the wall in the other thread is an instance in which a simultaneous strike to the tool arm/hand and to a target is an example of what I think you are conveying by control. 
I could be wrong.


----------



## BLACK LION (Jun 11, 2009)

_"As I've said before, anyone is free to do what they want. I"ve grown up in my training, with control stressed all the time. I suppose, in the end, what matters, is that we go home safe. " _

A very good point.


----------



## geezer (Jun 11, 2009)

arnisador said:


> ...Once I get my hand on that stick, my mental philosophy is that it's _my_ stick, and _he's_ trying to disarm _me_.* I change my mindset to weapon retention!*


 Interesting. The escrima master I referenced earlier advocated the exact opposite. If your stick got grabbed hard and tied up, he'd release it without losing a beat and transition to an empty hands strike. (He had boxing experience and had trained Kadena de Mano under the late Maximo Sarmiento.) His attitude was that the stick is just a stick. _You_ are the weapon. It's all in your state of mind.

Actually, as I write that phrase, "It's all in your state of mind" it occurs to me that you and he may be doing opposite actions, but in a deeper sense are working from the same place... _a fighting mentality._ Hmmmm.


----------



## MJS (Jun 11, 2009)

geezer said:


> Interesting. The escrima master I referenced earlier advocated the exact opposite. If your stick got grabbed hard and tied up, he'd release it without losing a beat and transition to an empty hands strike. (He had boxing experience and had trained Kadena de Mano under the late Maximo Sarmiento.) His attitude was that the stick is just a stick. _You_ are the weapon. It's all in your state of mind.
> 
> Actually, as I write that phrase, "It's all in your state of mind" it occurs to me that you and he may be doing opposite actions, but in a deeper sense are working from the same place... _a fighting mentality._ Hmmmm.


 
Well, I can understand that line of thinking to a point...I mean, simply letting go and hitting empty hand does make sense.  However, I've now just sacrificed my weapon to the badguy.  

Fortunately in my Arnis training, we cover other options aside from just letting go.


----------



## MJS (Jun 11, 2009)

BLACK LION said:


> Your approach makes sense to me and I understand what you mean by control. No there is nothing that says you cant hold the tool arm/ hand while beating them to nonfunctionality. Its a more esoteric approach but not as much as attempting some sort of disarm or grappling with the tool. Your reference to the knife at the throat with the back against the wall in the other thread is an instance in which a simultaneous strike to the tool arm/hand and to a target is an example of what I think you are conveying by control.
> I could be wrong.


 
Well, as I said, that is what I've been taught since I've been training in Kenpo and Arnis.  Not sure if you checked out the clips that I posted but that same method I'm using is in those as well.  

Now, this is not to say that my method is the best.  If someone wants to do something else, thats fine.  As for the knife to the throat...I'll comment in that thread shortly, but, yes, in that case, I want to control/strike and work from there.


----------



## K-man (Jun 12, 2009)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I am very disinclined to maintain the notion that I will most likely get whacked.  It is an inherent risk and one that I train to minimize to the greatest degree possible.  Unlike the knife and the gun, I have a much better chance of negating that risk against a single stick wielding opponent.  Against multiple stick (or crowbar or baseball bat) wielding opponents, I am inclined to beat a hasty retreat.  If that is not possible, go for a quick disarm on one of them and use my other techniques to keep the others off of me long enough to then arm myself.  If nothing else, having an object would be helpful for parries.
> 
> Being a kendoka, I am *very* familiar with sticks roughly the same length as a baseball bat.  As a nito ryu practitioner, I am also familiar with the use of a stick the size of a nightstick.  We also train regularly to deal with stick wielding foes while ourselves unarmed.
> 
> ...


I decided after reading this thread to try some stick attacks at training last night.  I gave the guys helmets and used a padded stick. The idea was for them to avoid getting belted and disable the attacker.  It was interesting to observe the attack. I asked them to attack as if they really meant to cause damage. The guys attacked at a slow pace which would have been easy to counter or disarm, even though I had instructed them to attack at full pace. After I took the stick and belted them around the ears a few times the message was learned.  Now, with a full speed attack no-one could catch the stick. They had to come inside the strike and take on the attacker.  Once they got inside the attacker's guard the disarm was easy. As Daniel said, the focus is not on the weapon. That looks after itself once you take out the attacker. Even so, I reckon about a third of the blows landed, even if they were partially stopped.  Everyone enjoyed they experience so we'll try it again and see if we can reduce the number of times we get hit.


----------



## MJS (Jun 12, 2009)

K-man said:


> I decided after reading this thread to try some stick attacks at training last night. I gave the guys helmets and used a padded stick. The idea was for them to avoid getting belted and disable the attacker. It was interesting to observe the attack. I asked them to attack as if they really meant to cause damage. The guys attacked at a slow pace which would have been easy to counter or disarm, even though I had instructed them to attack at full pace. After I took the stick and belted them around the ears a few times the message was learned. Now, with a full speed attack no-one could catch the stick. They had to come inside the strike and take on the attacker. Once they got inside the attacker's guard the disarm was easy. As Daniel said, the focus is not on the weapon. That looks after itself once you take out the attacker. Even so, I reckon about a third of the blows landed, even if they were partially stopped. Everyone enjoyed they experience so we'll try it again and see if we can reduce the number of times we get hit.


 
Difference is, is that I'm not trying to 'catch' the stick.  If you watch that KM clip I posted, you should see some pretty good example of what I'm talking about, as well as in the Control thread.  So, yes, it seems like we're pretty much on the same page...at least I think so.   As I said in that other thread, I'm moving in, if possible, which will serve as a shock to them as I slam into them.  Pretty much all of the stick techs. that I do, either from Kenpo or Arnis, have me moving in.  I'm not trying to catch the stick...I dont have to, because its coming to me.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 12, 2009)

It's probably been said, but understanding the nature of the weapon we see that the stick is different than the blade.  What works on the blade will work on the stick, but NOT necessarily vice versa.  Aside from some stick grappling techniques, the stick needs distance to generate damage.....the further out on the end of the sticks arc, the greater then power.  Getting inside that power arc is where the safety zone is.

In essence, the stick gives a far greater zone of safety that a gun or knife.  The gun is lethal from muzzle out to range.  The knife is lethal from extreme close range out to the end of the blade.  

The stick is most dangerous at the last few inches of the stick on the end of the arc of the swing.......if we stay beyond the tip of the stick we are safe, if we can enter past the power portion of the arc we are relatively safe (aside from punyos hits and stick grappling, which can be negated with our own grappling).

So the real trick in disarming the club comes in getting from outside of the arc to inside without meeting the power........several variables entering in to that equation.....

The length of the weapon/reach of the opponent
The weight of the weapon
The specific way in which the weapon is being swung 
The commitment of the opponent
The opponents attack style

There are some situations where it is better to force the attack, where the opponent hesitates, and crash on in.

In other situations the opponent is swinging aggressively with the weapon, in which case timing his strike is necessary, and crashing in between strikes.

With a more skilled opponent it may be necessary to apply a feint or in order to counter from the strike.  

Again, once inside the weapon, it is necessary to aggressively attack the opponent to the eliminate the threat using in-fighting strikes and grappling skills.......allowing the opponent to disengage with his weapon will allow him to apply a strike on the disengagement.......maintaining the distance until he is disarmed or incapacitated is paramount.



The important part to remember is that a stick is NOT a knife or a gun, despite it's potential to do damage, we can take considerable stick damage, if we learn how to absorb and deflect those blows, and not take them flush.....avoiding blows to the head and bony protrusions and taking blows at angles on meaty parts of the body......not so knife or gun.  So the stick is a weapon of advantage, but not so insurmountable as a knife or gun.


----------



## arnisador (Jun 12, 2009)

sgtmac_46 said:


> So the stick is a weapon of advantage, but not so insurmountable as a knife



I dunno...a baseball bat can do a lot of damage.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 12, 2009)

arnisador said:


> I dunno...a baseball bat can do a lot of damage.



It can......but I once watched a high school fight where a baseball bat wielding attacker was trading swing for blow with an unarmed opponent, and was being backed up every punch, until he finally lost the bat and took a serious beating.......this after smacking his opponent four or five times in the head with (what looked and sounded like) good powerful swings.

I've seen several occasions where guys got their heads split open by baseball bats, but never lost consciousness or physical ability to fight back.

Tough guys CAN take serious blows from a club...especially if the know how to angle out and take those blows on thick, meaty parts of the body.....not so a blade.



The big issue, however, is that it requires commitment to use a baseball bat effectively........a man with a knife can kill you accidentally if you try to take it away from him.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 12, 2009)

arnisador said:


> I dunno...a baseball bat can do a lot of damage.


It can.  It can kill you too.   But you have a lot more options against a bat than you do against a gun or a blade.

You do have the ability to deflect the bat, particularly if you can do so against an area closer to the grip.  As the bat is point heavy in its weight, most of its force and inertia are in the end.  Yes, it will likely hurt, but to deflect a knife is more difficult, as it is smaller and faster, and of course, edged, and you cannot perform such deflections against a bullet period.

The big issue with the bat is that it will can do serious injury to your bone mass, while a knife generally cannot.  If someone stabs or you in the head, it is more likely to cause damage to the scalp and potentially cut some serious arteries, depending on where the cut occurs, than it is to actually break the bone of the skull (though I know that that is still a possiblilty with enough force behind it).  

The biggest danger from a bat is damage to knees, ankles, elbows, wrist/forearm, hips, colarbone, head and neck.  The bat can kill your mobility and/or ability to fight more quickly and from a greater distance than the knife.  

Daniel


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jun 12, 2009)

A good hardwood stick like *Kamagong* will do tremendous and I mean tremendous damage. (bone breaking)  I would not advocate not addressing it.  A rattan stick quite a bit less.  Actually a lot less.  Padded sticks in training well it is good training but not the same thing as dealing with a hardwood stick. (absolutely not the same thing)  Also a professional or someone well trained will immediately start butting with the end of the stick closest to the hand once it get's close and those can deliver massive damage as well. (think end of stick to head, eye socket, etc.)  More than likely if you are only striking then your opponent will also get some licks in as well.  Hence why most people feel that you need to engage at the appropriate time, angle, etc. whether coming in before an attack or following an attack and then manage or control their ability to continue attacking while you strike and if you are fortunate get a disarm.


----------



## BLACK LION (Jun 12, 2009)

Good post Sgt. 

The stick differs from the blade in terms of the damage in that you can break bone and do damage pretty much in general on the body with a bludgeoning tool . You can get direct access to the brain  by whacking the skull with sufficient force or repeated blows. You dont necessarily have to hit a specific target to create injury.  It can also be done from a non-intimate distance.  Death most likely results from blunt force trauma .


The knife on the other hand needs to perforate arteries and you have to penetrate deep, dig and saw to get them. Distance has to be intimate meaning you are right on top of them thrusting and hacking away. Stabbing major organs wont ensure a kill. most often the target is an aorta or major artery. Hemorrhage and desanguination are the results of the injuries.  Death most often results from exsanguination.  

both are messy. 


I think free fighting with the tools is the best way to find whats practical in actuality.   Training to strike them with the tools and training to strike them when they are holding the tool.  Go slow and make sure you are getting to that target and smashing it or you wont get the results that ensure success. It takes a good, open training partner as well to help model success. 

 That is good you went out and trained like that with the sticks. thanks for sharing that K-MAN.

I can see control genralized as an understanding of the tool in relation to his brain and body or targets and yours.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 12, 2009)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> A good hardwood stick like *Kamagong* will do tremendous and I mean tremendous damage. (bone breaking)  I would not advocate not addressing it.  A rattan stick quite a bit less.  Actually a lot less.  Padded sticks in training well it is good training but not the same thing as dealing with a hardwood stick. (absolutely not the same thing)  Also a professional or someone well trained will immediately start butting with the end of the stick closest to the hand once it get's close and those can deliver massive damage as well. (think end of stick to head, eye socket, etc.)  More than likely if you are only striking then your opponent will also get some licks in as well.  Hence why most people feel that you need to engage at the appropriate time, angle, etc. whether coming in before an attack or following an attack and then manage or control their ability to continue attacking while you strike and if you are fortunate get a disarm.



Yeah, i've got a set of Kamagong sticks, and they're really like holding metal pipes.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 12, 2009)

BLACK LION said:


> Good post Sgt.
> 
> The stick differs from the blade in terms of the damage in that you can break bone and do damage pretty much in general on the body with a bludgeoning tool . You can get direct access to the brain  by whacking the skull with sufficient force or repeated blows. You dont necessarily have to hit a specific target to create injury.  It can also be done from a non-intimate distance.  Death most likely results from blunt force trauma .
> 
> ...



When you say 'knife' you're referring to small knives in your description.......large knives aren't nearly as limited.  Comparing a large knife to a club is apples and hand grenades.  A large knife can sever limbs and disembowel with a single swipe........that's why some systems differentiate between 'hand assistors' and 'battle blades', such as in Atienza Kali.....as the dynamics are very different.

At any rate, the blade, regardless of size, leaves only beyond Largo range as safe.......where as with a club beyond Largo and inside Corto (providing the unarmed subject's grappling skills are superior) are both relatively safe.





Put simply.......nobody in their right mind, if given the choice of weapons, would choose a stick to fight a battle blade if the choice is vice versa, using the battle blade to fight the stick........which is NOT to say that a club is NOT a tremendous advantage over being unarmed........don't misunderstand me.  The club is a LETHAL weapon in skilled or even unskilled hands......but relatively less so than gun or knife.


----------



## arnisador (Jun 12, 2009)

sgtmac_46 said:


> The big issue, however, is that it requires commitment to use a baseball bat effectively........a man with a knife can kill you accidentally if you try to take it away from him.



OK, I'll buy that...anyone can be dangerous with a knife!


----------

