zerohour Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 I was just wondering if there are many things that you can do with a Jo staff that you can't do with a Bo, and vice versa. Basically i'd like to learn both of them, maybe focusing more on the Jo - but can only find instructional DVD's for the Bo Staff. (Unfortunately there is nobody in my area that can teach me much about either, at least not regularly.)
Shorin Ryuu Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 A theory that I've heard is that the jo was used indoors where there was less room and the bo was used outdoors where there was more room. Some jo techniques may be able to be done in a tighter space, but since it isn't exactly a one-handed weapon (maybe it could be, but...) it wouldn't differ as much as say the bo and the tanbo. All the same, the techniques and principles in the whole "bo" family (bo, jo, hanbo, tanbo) are pretty much the same. It's just a matter of slight differences in speed and distance. Martial Arts Blog:http://bujutsublogger.blogspot.com/
Sauzin Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 I don't know if I agree with you on this one Shorin Ryuu, not entirely anyway. While you can use a jo like an Okinawan bo, I think it is a grave error. I really don't see the jo as a bo that can be used indoors, though I have seen it trained that way. The jo's length gives it several properties that are very unique and really change the dynamic of how it is optimally handled and how the strikes can be performed. A bo is too long to swing like a sword. It is also to long to handle and maneuver form both ends at once. At least half the blocks/parries performed with the jo cannot be done with a bo. The bo makes slip thrusts less necessary due to it's extended range. It also has a slower slip thrust (more distance to slide down). Full thrusts are generally more effective. The most important thing though to me is that the bo and the jo handle a lot differently overall in terms of balance and weight. You just can't get the feel of a good Okinawan bo side strike without the proper length. You can perform it with a jo, but you will never refine the power and timing unless you tirelessly practice with a full length bo. Now I do agree the differences between a tanbo and a bo are greater, slightly. And I do agree that there are basic principles that hold true between a bo and a jo. But not necessarily more then any other two weapons, at least not by much if they are used properly. I would strongly disagree that the techniques are basically the same between a bo and a jo. I see many people train this way and I think they do themselves a disservice in not taking advantage of and learning the unique properties of each weapon. The only two things that stand between an effective art and one that isn't are a tradition to draw knowledge from and the mind to practice it.
Shorin Ryuu Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 I have a lot less jo training then I do with the bo, so I'll concede to someone with more experience. I will mention though that a lot of Yamani Ryu focuses on a lot of hand position changes (still holding onto the bo of course) and a lot of the strikes can be likened to that of a sword. But in terms of grappling and the like, I think a lot of people downplay the bo's effectiveness (not saying you are, I just mean people in general). So while it is impossible to pretty much hold it at both ends, there is a reason (one of them anyways) that Yamani ryu holds the bo in "thirds" but will change the grip so that on strikes, there is only about a fist length or so sticking out behind your back. But yes, my first post was rather vague, and you are right, there are more differences then speed and distance. I was thinking more principles-wise rather than technique-wise and probably should have said so. Martial Arts Blog:http://bujutsublogger.blogspot.com/
Sauzin Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 Good points... There are similarities. I think the biggest ones are just as you said, grappling and the duel arc motions used to generate power in the strikes. I'd say the only real difference in regards to grappling between the bo and jo is leverage. I wouldn't try hooking an opponent's leg with a jo unless the guy was really light. In close though the two weapons are very similar. And I wouldn’t want to downplay the bo's grappling applications. I just wanted to stress the differences I saw so that we don't have people going around thinking they can learn everything there is to know about a bo or a jo just by learning one of them. Thanks for the reply. The only two things that stand between an effective art and one that isn't are a tradition to draw knowledge from and the mind to practice it.
Shorin Ryuu Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 Thanks for the reply. No, thank you for the great points you brought up and forcing me to really think about what I had posted. Martial Arts Blog:http://bujutsublogger.blogspot.com/
Recommended Posts