What size Bō to get

[Gerry Seymour]

We had told Jacob that once he stopped growing we would look into buying a purple heart wood bo......luckily Jacob's sensei gave one to Jacob that belonged to his sensei....so it has some sentimental value....plus it saved me some money, lol.

That's a bit of luck, there. I've had my hands on a purple heart bo once, and loved the feel of it.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

That answer is based on nothing. Some styles are quite specific on their recommended/specified staff characteristics, and those specs may or may not be based on the size of the individual. Some styles don't much care.

I can assure you, its very much based on something. thats meant to be a general purpose rule of thumb, its meant to be slightly taller than you to be said staff and thats the size you should get if you are looking for said size of staff.

 

[Flying Crane]

I can assure you, its very much based on something. thats meant to be a general purpose rule of thumb, its meant to be slightly taller than you to be said staff and thats the size you should get if you are looking for said size of staff.

As has been said, different systems will have different recommendations on staff length, based on their training and technical methodology. Length can vary tremendously. Wing Chun uses a staff that can be something like 10-12 feet long.

The OP has not given further details of what system he trains or what the methodology is. We don’t even know with certainty that it is Japanese or Okinawan. People often use the term “bo” for staff, regardless of the source of their material, at least until they become more educated on the topic. If the OP is in fact training in a Chinese method, then the length of the staff can vary tremendously.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I can assure you, its very much based on something. thats meant to be a general purpose rule of thumb, its meant to be slightly taller than you to be said staff and thats the size you should get if you are looking for said size of staff.

Based on what something? Where are you getting this general rule of thumb from? It doesn't make sense as a rule since different styles use different size staffs.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I can assure you, its very much based on something. thats meant to be a general purpose rule of thumb, its meant to be slightly taller than you to be said staff and thats the size you should get if you are looking for said size of staff.

The length of your staff depends on what skill do you intend to train.

If you want to hold at

- 1/3 and 2/3 spots, the length may depend on your height (double heads staff).
- one end of your staff, the length can be as long as you can handle (single head staff).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I can assure you, its very much based on something. thats meant to be a general purpose rule of thumb, its meant to be slightly taller than you to be said staff and thats the size you should get if you are looking for said size of staff.

It's a generalization, not a general rule of thumb. It's only based on something if we know anything about his training or style. Otherwise, it's just quoting a number that may or may not have application.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

As has been said, different systems will have different recommendations on staff length, based on their training and technical methodology. Length can vary tremendously. Wing Chun uses a staff that can be something like 10-12 feet long.

The OP has not given further details of what system he trains or what the methodology is. We don’t even know with certainty that it is Japanese or Okinawan. People often use the term “bo” for staff, regardless of the source of their material, at least until they become more educated on the topic. If the OP is in fact training in a Chinese method, then the length of the staff can vary tremendously.

I am aware it has, and its common sense. The dispute is the claim that it is "based on nothing" when it is based on something. And i belive i wrote, for general staff work and not using it more as a spear or more as a club, so in the middle and for the height catergoirsation given. The catorgy is reletive to your height as well, and bo's go from slightly above your head height to higher to be bo's. (if i recall the definition correctly)

 

[Flying Crane]

I am aware it has, and its common sense. The dispute is the claim that it is "based on nothing" when it is based on something. And i belive i wrote, for general staff work and not using it more as a spear or more as a club, so in the middle and for the height catergoirsation given. The catorgy is reletive to your height as well, and bo's go from slightly above your head height to higher to be bo's. (if i recall the definition correctly)

Ok it’s based on something, but you have no idea if that something is at all relevant in this instance.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

Ok it’s based on something, but you have no idea if that something is at all relevant in this instance.

Seperate argument.

 

[Flying Crane]

Seperate argument.

Ok, I think the point is we don’t have enough info from the OP to really suggest with any certainty how long the staff should be.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I am aware it has, and its common sense. The dispute is the claim that it is "based on nothing" when it is based on something. And i belive i wrote, for general staff work and not using it more as a spear or more as a club, so in the middle and for the height catergoirsation given. The catorgy is reletive to your height as well, and bo's go from slightly above your head height to higher to be bo's. (if i recall the definition correctly)

It's still not based on something. Unless your inaccurate belief on what general staff work is counts as something. There is no such thing as 'general staff work' which is why your claim is bonkers.

 

[Flying Crane]

It's still not based on something. Unless your inaccurate belief on what general staff work is counts as something. There is no such thing as 'general staff work' which is why your claim is bonkers.

Well to be fair, an overactive imagination is still something...

 

[lklawson]

I can assure you, its very much based on something. thats meant to be a general purpose rule of thumb, its meant to be slightly taller than you to be said staff and thats the size you should get if you are looking for said size of staff.

The same issue of "how long" shows up with Quarterstaff too. Some will specify 6' and others up to 8'. IIRC there are some references to even longer.

George Silver says:

"To know the perfect length of your short staff, or half pike, forest bill, partisan, or glaive, or such like weapons of vantage and perfect lengths, you shall stand upright, holding the staff upright close by your body, with your left hand, reaching with your right hand your staff as high as you can, and then allow to that length a space to set both your hands, when you come to fight, wherein you may conveniently strike, thrust, and ward, & that is the just length to be made according to your stature. And this note, that these lengths will commonly fall out to be eight or nine foot long, and will fit, although not just, the statures of all men without any hindrance at all unto them in their fight, because in any weapon wherein the hands may be removed, and at liberty, to make the weapon longer of shorter in fight at his pleasure, a foot of the staff being behind the backmost hand does no harm. And wherefore these weapons ought to be of the lengths aforesaid, and no shorter, these are the reasons: If they should be shorter, then the long staff, morris pike, and such like weapons over and above the perfect length, should have great advantage over them, because he may come boldly and safe without any guard or ward, to the place where he may thrust home, and at every thrust put him in danger of his life, then can the long staff, the morris pike, or any longer weapon lie nowhere within the compass of the true cross, to cross and uncross, whereby he may safely pass home to the place, where he may strike or thrust him that has the long weapon, in the head, face, or body at his pleasure."

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I can assure you, its very much based on something. thats meant to be a general purpose rule of thumb, its meant to be slightly taller than you to be said staff and thats the size you should get if you are looking for said size of staff.

The longer weapon always has advantage over the short weapon.

The hot weapon also has advantage over the cold weapon.

 

[Flying Crane]

Longer weapon does not always have the advantage. For starters, it depends on the terrain and how much space is available, as well as tactics. Example: in a thick forest with heavy understory, I give the advantage to the guy with tomahawk and long knife, over the pikeman.

In open ground with lots of room, I give advantage to the guy with a six foot staff over the lone pikeman with a 14 foot pike.

In open ground with lots of room, I give the advantage to a group of three or four pikemen over one or two guys with six-foot staffs or longswords.

That is in general. Exceptions may apply. Ones mileage may vary.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

The same issue of "how long" shows up with Quarterstaff too. Some will specify 6' and others up to 8'. IIRC there are some references to even longer.

George Silver says:

"To know the perfect length of your short staff, or half pike, forest bill, partisan, or glaive, or such like weapons of vantage and perfect lengths, you shall stand upright, holding the staff upright close by your body, with your left hand, reaching with your right hand your staff as high as you can, and then allow to that length a space to set both your hands, when you come to fight, wherein you may conveniently strike, thrust, and ward, & that is the just length to be made according to your stature. And this note, that these lengths will commonly fall out to be eight or nine foot long, and will fit, although not just, the statures of all men without any hindrance at all unto them in their fight, because in any weapon wherein the hands may be removed, and at liberty, to make the weapon longer of shorter in fight at his pleasure, a foot of the staff being behind the backmost hand does no harm. And wherefore these weapons ought to be of the lengths aforesaid, and no shorter, these are the reasons: If they should be shorter, then the long staff, morris pike, and such like weapons over and above the perfect length, should have great advantage over them, because he may come boldly and safe without any guard or ward, to the place where he may thrust home, and at every thrust put him in danger of his life, then can the long staff, the morris pike, or any longer weapon lie nowhere within the compass of the true cross, to cross and uncross, whereby he may safely pass home to the place, where he may strike or thrust him that has the long weapon, in the head, face, or body at his pleasure."

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Thats specfically where the basis for my rule of thumb comes from. Quaterstaff and for general use, not as a primarily thrusting or clubbing weapon. The length of a weapon always varies with the user anyway. a Longbow is literally a bow longer than you for example.

Longer weapon does not always have the advantage. For starters, it depends on the terrain and how much space is available, as well as tactics. Example: in a thick forest with heavy understory, I give the advantage to the guy with tomahawk and long knife, over the pikeman.

In open ground with lots of room, I give advantage to the guy with a six foot staff over the lone pikeman with a 14 foot pike.

In open ground with lots of room, I give the advantage to a group of three or four pikemen over one or two guys with six-foot staffs or longswords.

That is in general. Exceptions may apply. Ones mileage may vary.

if you are fighting pikemen with a quater staff you have all ready lost. Your a lowly peasant vs at best some cheap mercinieries, at worse some very good mercinaries/soldiers. (or your going to get shot by a musketeer)

 

[Deleted member 39746]

It's still not based on something. Unless your inaccurate belief on what general staff work is counts as something. There is no such thing as 'general staff work' which is why your claim is bonkers.

It is based on soemthing, i have explained what my statment is based on.

I have also definined "general staff work". And by the words combined, i obviously mean a staff that isnt too long to be a effective club, but isnt too short to be a ineffective spear. So you would fight with a mixture of thrusts and clubs/swings as opposed to primarily clubbing or thrusting.

 

[Flying Crane]

if you are fighting pikemen with a quater staff you have all ready lost. Your a lowly peasant vs at best some cheap mercinieries, at worse some very good mercinaries/soldiers. (or your going to get shot by a musketeer)

Once again, that depends.

Against a group of pikemen in open ground? Probably not going to go well for the staff man.

Against one pikeman? I’d put money on the staff man, all else being equal. Pike is meant to be used in a group formation. It’s effectiveness breaks down as the group shrinks. A lone pikeman, I’m skeptical. Pike is long and relatively heavy. Makes it tough to be quick and to redirect. Staff man can defect the pikehead, maybe even smash it out of the pikeman’s hands, then rush in and close the gap where the pike isn’t too useful. Now he smashes the pikeman’s Head into pulp with a good solid hickory staff.

Pike in confined quarters is useless. Thick forest with heavy undergrowth, or inside a typical two/bedroom house, or inside a trailer home, or in a fenced back yard with little room to retreat or reposition, for example.

In those examples, I would give the advantage to a guy with a dagger or a hunting knife or a tomahawk.

 

[Flying Crane]

It is based on soemthing, i have explained what my statment is based on.

I have also definined "general staff work". And by the words combined, i obviously mean a staff that isnt too long to be a effective club, but isnt too short to be a ineffective spear. So you would fight with a mixture of thrusts and clubs/swings as opposed to primarily clubbing or thrusting.

There is no such thing as “general staff work”. It is a methodology. There are many different methodologies. It isn’t generic.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It is based on soemthing, i have explained what my statment is based on.

I have also definined "general staff work". And by the words combined, i obviously mean a staff that isnt too long to be a effective club, but isnt too short to be a ineffective spear. So you would fight with a mixture of thrusts and clubs/swings as opposed to primarily clubbing or thrusting.

That’s like saying the best size for a car is 15’ long. Without knowing the intended use (the staff fighting style), it’s based on nothing.