# Hammerfist vs. Backfist?



## Telfer (Jan 5, 2010)

Are there any good reasons to prefer a hammerfist to a good old backfist.

I've read that contrary to popular belief its easier to injure your hand with a hammerfist.

That doesnt seem to make sense...considering its a softer striking surface???


----------



## MJS (Jan 5, 2010)

Like the old saying goes....environment and target availability dictate what we do.  IMO, the hammerfist is going to be the stronger of the two.  The targets that you have with the hammerfist and greater than the backfist.  For example....I personally wouldn't use a backfist a backfist to strike a hard target.  Now, someone could counter and say that the backfist is thrown to the head, a hard target, during sparring.  And while this is true, the people throwing them are usually wearing hand protection.

I like them both and each IMO has their own purpose.


----------



## Blindside (Jan 5, 2010)

I prefer a hammerfist almost always, and I find it very hard to believe that its easier to break your hand with a hammerfist over a backfist, any references for that?

Also the hammerfist translates better to weapon use like yawara sticks, so if you are interested in a common platform that is my preference.


----------



## Telfer (Jan 5, 2010)

Blindside said:


> Also the hammerfist translates better to weapon use like yawara sticks, so if you are interested in a common platform that is my preference.


Thanks for mentioning the word yawara. Never heard of it, so I did some reading on the subject...interesting.

Reminds me of my foot massage roller!


----------



## Blindside (Jan 5, 2010)

Telfer said:


> Thanks for mentioning the word yawara. Never heard of it, so I did some reading on the subject...interesting.
> 
> Reminds me of my foot massage roller!



Yawara, palm stick, kubaton, fistload, dulo-dulo, whatever you want to call it, there are lots of variations.


----------



## ap Oweyn (Jan 6, 2010)

Blindside said:


> I prefer a hammerfist almost always, and I find it very hard to believe that its easier to break your hand with a hammerfist over a backfist, any references for that?
> 
> Also the hammerfist translates better to weapon use like yawara sticks, so if you are interested in a common platform that is my preference.


 
Great point.  And I'll have to remember that term for describing the FMA priority of translating between weapons with minimal change to technique.  Common platform.  Good stuff.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 6, 2010)

Basically, it comes down to the fact that the two different strikes are for two completely different set of circumstances. If you are in a position where a hammer fist is usable, a back fist probably won't be, and vice versa. 

Oh, and being easier to break your hand with a hammer than a back? Um, no, not sure what you're getting at there at all.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Jan 6, 2010)

Blindside said:


> Yawara, palm stick, kubaton, fistload, dulo-dulo, whatever you want to call it, there are lots of variations.



One of things I worked on when learning to disarm someone with a knife was, essentially, a hammer-fist strike with the hand I was holding the knife in, striking my opponent with the butt end of the tanto.


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Jan 6, 2010)

In my martial art we use alot of knife hands, which is merely a variation of the hammerfist (essentially a closed knife hand).  IMHO, the hammerfist and its variants are capable of much greater power, simply due to the mechanics of the techniques utilized in the execution of them.  The backfist, is a quick and great strike, which can generate alot of power as well.  So it just depends on the circumstance you would use them.  I rarely use the backfist, but often use the knife hand.  Although I admit if we allowed backfists in our sparring, I would use them more often.  I do use them quite frequently when I open spar or cross-train with other martial artists.


----------



## Blindside (Jan 6, 2010)

Gordon Nore said:


> One of things I worked on when learning to disarm someone with a knife was, essentially, a hammer-fist strike with the hand I was holding the knife in, striking my opponent with the butt end of the tanto.


 
Butt end or pointy end (in reverse grip) its all the same motion, just that the pointy end is messier.

To be fair, backfists (or back-knuckle) also have their translations to weapon work, but it isn't as apparent as the hammerfist and less common.  But when it comes to the gross motor skills that bad situations tend to bring out, hammerfist wins hands down, particularly if you are training people for relatively short periods of time and want to instill some useable skills.


----------



## punisher73 (Jan 6, 2010)

If I had to generalize the two strikes, I think of hammerfists as just that, a great way to deliver blunt trauma.  Even if your a little off, you are still going to be doing some damage.  Backfists are more a precision weapon with specific targets to create the damage.

Both have their time and place and have different supporting strategies to use them.

I have seen some people use their backfist in the same way that a boxer uses his jab.  A quick distraction and/or setup technique.  In fact, if you look at some jab variations they look VERY much like a jab but are slightly varied to be legal in boxing.  I think it is called a swing jab.  

Any rate, backfists have alot of usages and methods as well when mastered.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 6, 2010)

Telfer said:


> Are there any good reasons to prefer a hammerfist to a good old backfist.
> 
> I've read that contrary to popular belief its easier to injure your hand with a hammerfist.
> 
> That doesnt seem to make sense...considering its a softer striking surface???


Considering that each requires a different method of execution based on position I can't see where a preference would make any difference on which one you chose to use.
Sean


----------



## IcemanSK (Jan 6, 2010)

punisher73 said:


> If I had to generalize the two strikes, I think of hammerfists as just that, a great way to deliver blunt trauma.  Even if your a little off, you are still going to be doing some damage. * Backfists are more a precision weapon with specific targets to create the damage*.
> 
> Both have their time and place and have different supporting strategies to use them.
> 
> ...



I was going to say that a hammerfist would be more difficult to use because there is less surface area with which to make contact: therefore more of a precision weapon. But you are right, since there is more control with a backfist, it is more precise.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Jan 6, 2010)

Touch Of Death said:


> Considering that each requires a different method of execution based on position I can't see where a preference would make any difference on which one you chose to use.
> Sean



Agreed. It's not an either-or choice. As someone said above,  it will depend on the target and angle of attack. If I'm facing someone, I don't picture myself hammerfisting his nose. Conversely, if my attacker were down, with me just above, I don't see the back-fist coming into play.

The thread got me to thinking about my black belt test, and I recall that towards the end, when I was about ready to cough up a lung, I had several people coming at me, and I was throwing hammerfists at them. I had a height advantage over most, my natural speed was gone, but I could grab and hit -- easier and faster to grab and hammer, then do other strikes perhaps.

Mind you, my hammerfists were pretty much crap too.


----------



## seasoned (Jan 6, 2010)

Both very fine weapons. Back fist is for soft sufaces and the hammer fist is for hard sufaces. Both can be used 360 degrees around our body.


----------



## Aiki Lee (Jan 7, 2010)

I agree with pretty much everything that has been said here. Comparing a hammer fist with a back fist is like comparing a wrench and a hammer. They are different tools for different situations.


----------



## Telfer (Jan 7, 2010)

Himura Kenshin said:


> Comparing a hammer fist with a back fist is like comparing a wrench and a hammer.


Well the two most popular views are...

1. That backfists are for soft targets and hammerfists are for hard targets...and I agree, as long as you can pick and choose. Against a competent boxer just landing any punch is difficult, never mind accuracy.

You never see people breaking bricks with backfists.

2. That the two strikes are completely different in terms of their angle of attack, and therefore there is no sense in comparing them...this vs. that. 

And there I dont agree because its the same arm motion for both. 
The only difference being a 90 degree twist of the wrist.

When the Japan Karate Association's chief instructor Nakayama wrote his classic back in the 1960s he talked about both as if they are almost identical in the same paragraph.

http://i50.tinypic.com/fcmyk5.jpg


----------



## MJS (Jan 7, 2010)

Telfer said:


> Well the two most popular views are...
> 
> 1. That backfists are for soft targets and hammerfists are for hard targets...and I agree, as long as you can pick and choose. Against a competent boxer just landing any punch is difficult, never mind accuracy.
> 
> ...


 

2) Depending on how the hammerfist is thrown. If I'm hitting down on the face/nose, then no, it will not be the same arm motion. If I'm throwing it outward towards the face, then yes, its just a matter of the wrist.

As far as which is better...well, for me, I'd rather get the most bang for the buck.  Choosing between both of those stirkes, I'll pick the hammerfist every time.


----------



## xfighter88 (Jan 8, 2010)

Blindside said:


> Yawara, palm stick, kubaton, fistload, dulo-dulo, whatever you want to call it, there are lots of variations.


 
Roll of Quarters


----------



## Em MacIntosh (Jan 11, 2010)

With an unconditioned hand there's a psychological bonus to using the hammerfist over the backfist.  There will be far less reluctance for beginners to hit much harder with it.  The same is true but larger for those experienced.  My backfist is much faster because of the way my body's usually aligned when I strike.  When I strike really hard with my hammerfist it often becomes a forearm strike.


----------



## SensibleManiac (Jan 11, 2010)

I've heard it argued that the hammerfist can injure your wrist bone, if contact is made there, I don't believe it though, unless it hits a brick wall.

I prefer hammerfist, but both do have their uses, the hammerfist is more useful in my opinion.


----------



## Nishibi Ryu (Jan 12, 2010)

Personally I prefer to use a back fist around the nose area, I don't get a lot of power out of my arm in a back fist situation. The hammer fist is to me more versitile and caN BE USED IN MORE SITUATIONS EFFECTIVLY, ooopps cap lock came on. Standing or on the ground I just prefer it, its a personal thing I guess.


----------



## Aiki Lee (Jan 12, 2010)

I tend to use a hamerfist in a downward strike mostly to hit the face or the chest if I have someone off balance.

I use a back fist to strike the muscles and nerves on the arms and legs of an attacking limb or into the rib area.

With the hamer fist I'm aiming to hit broader targets and with the backfist I am trying for more pin point accuracy.

I don't see how either is better, perhaps one would be used more often depending on your style of fighting, but I really see them as being two seperate strikes with separate targets in mind.


----------



## Guardian (Jan 14, 2010)

I have to agree with those that say each has it's own unique uses, personally I like the spinning backfist but since it was not mentioned, I would say if I had to choose, the backfist for me would see more use.


----------



## kaizasosei (Jan 14, 2010)

The backfist is probably one of the fastest strikes of all.  That is why it is great for drawing first blood.  If an element of swing can be generated from the shoulder or with a forward lunging motion, it can even be quite powerful and do sufficient damage.  
The hammerfist can generate much power very quickly from many directions but is usually easier for the opponent to see and harder to controll in its many powerful applications-plus side is that it doesn't need that much distance to generate power. I think that it is especially suitable for weaker people as well as trained fighters because it is quite natural and does not require much strength or training.

 But when i think of striking surfaces, i think that one should be able to strike with almost any part of the forarm, even wrist if one does not hurt oneself at all or minimaly.  So anywhere from the fleshy part of hammerfist to the ulna, i believe it's called, to the forarm or elbow(probably one of the most devastating strikes). 
The spinning backfist is definately a kind of swing coming not only from the shoulder but elbow also as one should keep the arm bent until after the spin to whip the forarm and fist out close before the moment of impact.  

For backfist-Shoulder is powerful, elbow is fast and wrist is an art.


j


----------



## kaizasosei (Jan 14, 2010)

sorry for doubling but i just have to add that i think the backfist is similar to a basic iainuki or sworddraw.  

Also, a strike which is unusual but interesting is what i learned as the koppoken.  Where you press the tip of your thumb very tightly against the side of the middle knuckle of index finger to create a tense striking surface with the knuckle of the thumb.  It's dangerous especially following through, i guess one could break ones thumb, but if used well i think can be good.  Like with a motion like suddenly putting your palm to your ear, you can hit the underside of the chin and with swinging motions you could strike the temple- but that's already a bit difficult in the heat of combat.  I'm thinking it's good for short quick but painful shots.

Holy shizz i just tested it out on my leg and face!  ouch!


----------

