Use of range in single, double stick, empty hands

[David]

Crafty, et al,

I?ve got a question regarding the difference between single vs. single stick and double vs. double stick as it may apply to empty hand fighting.  How similar are the outer three ranges, snake, weapon contact, and largo, in single stick fighting compared to double stick fighting?  

When fighting single stick vs. single stick, in snake range, and even in the weapon contact range, you can strategically zone by using the opponent?s stick as a moving reference point, if that makes sense.  With double stick, this seems a bit more difficult.  At least it would be more difficult to match or strategically position two moving sticks against two moving sticks simultaneously.  Watching Top Dog on the instructional tapes, it is clear that he ?counters? the opponent?s possible angles of entry at times, before the opponent strikes?using the ?snaky? stick.  

In theory it might make sense to zone to the outside of the lead stick, somewhat negating the rear stick, but in practice, the rear stick can become the lead stick and vice versa with short notice.  

Many of the two-person drills, such as ?Attacking Blocks? make a great deal of sense with single sticks.  Are these drills equally applicable in a heavy double stick fight with no gear, as they would be in a heavy single stick fight with no gear?  Do you guys have double stick ?Attacking Blocks? drills?  If there is a difference, would that difference translate into empty hand fighting, where less emphasis is place on any one weapon?

I am very interested in the empty hand application of FMA?s, and would be interested to get some of your perspectives on these questions.  Thanks,

David

[Anonymous]

Woof David:

  I'm just checking in from my hotel's lobby in Rome and won't have time to get to this until sometime next week.  Any one else please feel free to jump in.

Yip!
Crafty Dog

[Anonymous]

Crafty,

You might have to use some of your footwork crossing the streets.  I look forward to your reply.  Have a safe trip,

David

[bjung]

I guess I'll take a stab at this...parts of it anyway.

David wrote:

"At least it would be more difficult to match or strategically position two moving sticks against two moving sticks simultaneously."

  It's not much more difficult, but then again i get to train with guro   . One thing training with Guro Crafty has helped me with is being able to recognize different fighting structures. Just like there are structures with single stick and empty hand, there are several structures a double stick fighter may use. However, these become more difficult to discern depending on how active one is at snake range. That said a person can only have their sticks in so many places, both on their right side, both on their left, one on each side, both above, etc. After recognizing this, it is a matter of finding an applicable technique...

"Do you guys have double stick “Attacking Blocks” drills?"

  I feel that Guro Crafty's Los Triques Siniwali has similar elements found in the attacking blocks. I also feel that Krabi Krabong helps cultivate an attacking blocks mentality.

Brian Jung...aka C-pornstar

[Guest]

Try using one stick as a shield to simultaneously deflect or block two incoming sticks while attacking with your other.  Treat the double stick attack as one single attack.  Also, experiment with various grips as it would optimize your technique depending on the situation or context.

[Guest]

Try using one stick as a shield to simultaneously deflect or block two incoming sticks while attacking with your other.  Treat the double stick attack as one single attack.  Also, experiment with various grips as it would optimize your technique depending on the situation or context.

Blocking two sticks with one is harder than it sounds.  I'm not saying you should never use the above strategy, but that one stick will typically not be enough to stop a double-stick attack from a big guy putting who's serious power behind each stick.

[David]

Brian,

Thanks.  That makes a lot of sense.  If a practitioner is very good in snake range, do you find it more difficult if he is using single or double stick?  I've done a decent amount of single stick sparring, and do practice with double sticks, but haven't sparred with them.  I will however soon.  But, I would imagine that if an opponent doesn't have an identifieable structure, or if his structure is no particular structure, that it might be a bit more difficult to deal with two weapons rather than one.  Maybe this is not the case...  

In empty hands, if you limit each participant to only jabs for instance, it's much harder to hit each other than when either hand is allowed, and much more so when anything goes.  For that reason, I figured double sticks would be harder than single...to read, avoid, etc.  Do you find differences in that sense between empty hand and stick fighting?  

Guests,

Thanks.  I'm not particularly interested in specific ways to fight single vs. double, or double vs. double.  I'm more interested in the strategy in FMA's and the applications and implications regarding empty hand fighting...and weapons.  

David

[Guest]

The most dangerous part of the weapon is the part meant for impact.  Whether it be foot, knee, hand, elbow, head, edge of sword, end of stick, etc... it is only effective in a certain range.  It is the point of contact which is the most dangerous.  Do not be or have a target in the operational effective range of the weapon and you have already nullified it.  Then it is a matter of neautralizing it for good.  I'll leave you to decide what techniques are good for that.

[bjung]

David wrote:
 
 "If a practitioner is very good in snake range, do you find it more difficult if he is using single or double stick?"

 Hmmm...Guro Crafty has shown me things to look for when fighting double stick, and this has made it much easier for me to fight using doubles. However, I feel that when I watch Crafty move with two sticks it can be hard to discern what strikes are coming. I feel that he has an ambidexterity that i lack (but am working on..) that makes both hands equally dangerous. While watching double stick fights however, you'll notice that many people have a dominant hand and do not fully utilize their other side. In single stick people focus on their stick hand and seem to use a wider range of angles (as well as put more emotional content into their strikes) which can also make them hard to read. So I feel as if I'm rambling, so to make it short, I feel both can be equally as difficult (or easy).

David wrote:

  "For that reason, I figured double sticks would be harder than single...to read, avoid, etc. Do you find differences in that sense between empty hand and stick fighting?"

 My empty hand is not all that great (one reason I like weapons), and when you integrate more variables there is of course more to keep track of. But I feel whether it is boxing, kickboxing, grappling, stick fighting, etc., you will see certain structures. In grappling, when I'm in the guard, I go over a checklist of things I can do, reversals, submissions, etc. I also go over what my opponent is doing, passing the guard, punching, etc. Although stickfighting can move incredibly fast, I try to keep a similar mental checklist. If my opponent does this, I do this. If I can draw my opponent here, I can do this. So whether it is boxing, wrestling, stick, etc. I have a go-to checklist of things i like to do, and so therefore things are only difficult when i dont have an answer for them yet. Just boxing with jabs can be difficult if you don't know how to slip or parry, I think it's all just a matter of researching and experiencing, and even seemingly more complex things like double stick can be broken down and made easier.

Brian

[Anonymous]

Woof DAvid, Brian (C-Porn Star Dog) et al:

  I just missed the last train from downtown Rome downtown back to my hotel   and so have a few hours on my hands , , ,

 Double stick is an important area of DBMAA for several reasons, amongst them the cultivation of ambidexterity/bilateralism (of value in empty hand as well as 360 degree situations).  An underappreciated point in this regard is the matter of footwork.

One way of organizing it is that there are triangles that start and finish in left lead, in right lead, and those that change lead.  In real time most single stick fighters are really only operating with one third of the deck- if that.  Frankly MOST people don't use any triangles at all.  Certainly the off-lead is a possiblity, but the only non-KK trained fighter I can think of who used it was Tom Meadows  (seen in RCSG using the whip BTW)

As C-Porn Star correctly notes, many double stick fighters are really only operating in a complementary hand/dominant hand structure and thus are not manifesting the smokey potential of doiublestick in snake range.

Occasionally, interesting variations come along.  The fight between southpaw Sleeping Dog and righty Sleeping Dog in DBMA 5: Krabi Krabong is fascinating to me because when both are in a left lead, Sleeping Dog's dominant hand is in front and Salty's dominant hand is in the rear.

The cultivation of true deep bilaterlism requires certain medium and long term training methods-- known by some as dead patterns.  DPs, properly used are games to play in order to "install" (a term we take from Sayoc Kali) certain skill sets.  Done in isolation, they are indeed dead, but done with the fighter's understanding they give a game to play when the sun of youthful attributes begins to set.

Once acquired the application of these skills is, as C-Porn notes, of tremendous benefit in Snake range--but to bark further would be to put the scent of secrets upwind.

BTW, in my opinion C-Porn is on the cusp of really putting the potential of all this together.  There were some excellent flashes in the last Gathering, and either this Gathering or next I think he may well exceed his imaginings  

Woof,
Guro Crafty

[David]

Brian, Crafty,

Thanks for the answers.  They make a great deal of sense, and it's a very interesting topic.  I ordered the KK tape a couple of days ago, after Brian mentioned it, and look forward to seeing this material.  

Crafty, I agree 100% that "deep bilaterlism requires certain medium and long term training methods".  This is a great point.  It would be difficult, if not impossible, to "install" or ingrain these things in an inconsitent environment.  And, the point on the Attacking Blocks tape that you've also made here, regarding the fighters understanding, is equally important.  

Brian, you also make a great point about the dominant hand, wider range of angles in the single stick use by most, and emotional content.  

But, if we are talking about a practitioner who uses the "entire deck", manifests the smokey potential in snake range, etc., how does this change the way you might approach double vs. single stick?  Are the same concepts equally applicable?  Thanks,

David

[LG Dog Russ]

Just to go back to the original question about range in single versus double, I believe that it will largely depend on the fighter.  As True Dog told me- bravery makes a big difference in what range you feel comfortable fighting in!  For a single stick fighter against a skilled double stick fighter, I believe this (ie. bravery to stand in front of a double stick onslaught) is primarily what will allow the single stick fighter to contend, as well as patience.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Double stick has a tendency to open up different footwork applications than single stick.  I feel I have more mobility double than single, but to be as good double as you are single (a thing that many good fighters do not believe they are) takes a lot of coordination training.  We were working on this with my "Man Sticks" last night (two 40' tree trunks made by Pappy Dog that I bought from Tuhon Chris Sayoc two weeks ago).  Imagine Redondo threes with those!  Last night, I had two experienced Kali guys trying to figure out how to keep them moving without creating a gap in swings.  Very interesting!

We also worked some empty-hand last night, drawing from Guro Inosanto's Panatukan material.  Empty-hand is definitely a different range than any stick range (ie. absence of a weapon).  However, I do like to use this material to train my standing grapple material as opposed to pure grappling or clinch material.  This is Kali, right?

Here's an example:


Panatukan/ JKD Series off Feeder?s Jab/ Cross-

1) parry jab, split entry cross (fist to the bicep), ball and socket to gua choi (backfist to neck or chin), lead hand slap to face or neck with zone in direction of slap, C/H/C. (La Coste)

2) parry jab, forearm hack to cross (shot rebounds off arm for neck shot), lead hand slap with zone, C/H/C. (La Coste)

3) parry jab, meet cross, back hand bolo punch to chin, circular spin to backhand bolo to groin, slap with lead hand and zone, C/H/C, nao tek.


Response to Feeder's rear round shin kick-

1) Destruction to feeder's shin with both hands guiding feeder's leg to your lead knee, eye gouge, return cross/hook/cross, lead nao tek.

2) Shield kick with lead leg, eye gouge, panajakman sweep to feeder?s lead leg, low cross/H/ low cross, nao tek.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Honestly, I had a difficult time understanding what the empty-hands question was in relation to double and single stick, but this is what I believe the placement of these skills to be.

Woof,
Dog Russ

[Alex (UK)]

When you're in hitting range, make sure you're the one doing the hitting.



Woof

[David]

Dog Russ,

I'm sure the bravery or confidence issue plays a significant part.  

My question regarding empty hands in relation to single vs. double stick, was, can the same concepts be applied in single and double stick fighting?  How much more difficult, if at all, is it to apply these concepts to double stick?  And, does an empty hand fight resemble a double stick match more than a single stick match?  If empty hands is closer to double than single stick ()  what implications does that have?  

I only have a few minutes left now, and this is a bit hard for me to put into words, but I'll try.  Take a drill like hubud...when the number one angle comes in, you stop, pass, press, and return.  I'm aware that this is just a training method, and that you could easily strike as you stop, pass, or press, enter, or do any other number of things.

If the "attacker" is trying to hit you with the butt of his stick, and if he is concentrated on his stick, maybe you could actually stop, then pass to put him in a worse position, then attack.  But, in an empty hand situation, or possibly in a double stick situation, if you stoped the angle one as you could possibly in single stick, you would most likely get cracked with the other hand, or punyo.  

So, how does this effect the way you fight double in relation to single stick, or single stick in relation to empty hands (where there are more than two weapons...since the opponent will most likely not be concentrating on one primary weapon).  

The fact that most people reveal a particular "style" or structure in double stick, and that that structure can be exploited is a good point.  And, the fact that most people will concentrate on a dominant hand even in double stick, is also a good point.  But, my question is, how do the principles learned in drills such as hubud, sombrada, attacking blocks, etc. apply when more than one weapon is allowed?  Do you guys feel the apply to a lesser extent?  

David

[Crafty_Dog]

Woof:

"I'm sure the bravery or confidence issue plays a significant part."

Good point by LG Dog Russ.

"My question regarding empty hands in relation to single vs. double stick, was, can the same concepts be applied in single and double stick fighting? How much more difficult, if at all, is it to apply these concepts to double stick? And, does an empty hand fight resemble a double stick match more than a single stick match? If empty hands is closer to double than single stick () what implications does that have?"

It depends  

" , , , Take a drill like hubud...when the number one angle comes in, you stop, pass, press, and return. I'm aware that this is just a training method, and that you could easily strike as you stop, pass, or press, enter, or do any other number of things.

"If the "attacker" is trying to hit you with the butt of his stick, and if he is concentrated on his stick, maybe you could actually stop, then pass to put him in a worse position, then attack. But, in an empty hand situation, or possibly in a double stick situation, if you stoped the angle one as you could possibly in single stick, you would most likely get cracked with the other hand, or punyo."

Said in a friendly respectful way: You are thinking in terms of static range and absent footwork and angling.  That is, you are thinking like most people train these methods  

"So, how does this effect the way you fight double in relation to single stick, or single stick in relation to empty hands (where there are more than two weapons...since the opponent will most likely not be concentrating on one primary weapon)?"

In DBMA this question is solved with the theory of 7 ranges, the triangle from the third dimension and our footwork matrix.

"The fact that most people reveal a particular "style" or structure in double stick, and that that structure can be exploited is a good point. And, the fact that most people will concentrate on a dominant hand even in double stick, is also a good point. But, my question is, how do the principles learned in drills such as hubud, sombrada, attacking blocks, etc. apply when more than one weapon is allowed? Do you guys feel they apply to a lesser extent?"

T'aint the drills, its the skills and understandings acquired-- or not.  If hubud is trained bilaterally with triangular footwork, ditto sombrada, attacking blocks etc then they apply more, not less.  If these drills are trained without the fighter's understanding they can impart certain skills but the absence of the fighter's understanding (which can shared to surprising extend by a good teacher or are acquired through experience/observation) then they may well apply less.

That's probably as far as we can go in a public forum David, if you want to come on by and go into it further, we'd be glad to help as best we can.

Excellent questions.

Woof,
Guro Crafty

[David]

Crafty,

I'd love to come by for classes, and will as soon as things slow down a bit here.  Your place is next on my list.  

"It depends"... I know...that's what I was asking about.

When I wrote the part about hubud, I had written, "This may not be a good example", but erased it.  I stress footwork and angling as the foundation of these drills.  The example was my attempt at a quick explanation.  Maybe the forum isn't the best place.  

The theory of 7 ranges and the role of the fighter's understanding you write and talk about changed my view of various drills when I first heard you mention them in a sombrada debate a couple of years ago.  I had done the triangular footwork for many years before, but until you put it together, and I began taking classes in Pekiti Tirsia, I didn't quite get it.  Thanks.  I hope to visit soon,

David