Bo vs Sword

[karatekaBR86]

Bo vs sword, any thoughts? bo does have the adavantage in range....

[Type_0]

well, i hvae heard that the bo was used to trap when struck(stick into the wood) and even snapped the sword. although i cannot back this(im at school at the moment) il look it up.

[Sauzin]

I have heard that in reference to a jo.

 

Classically Muso Gonosuke a master at the bo attacked Miyamoto Musashi with a rokushaku (6ft) bo in their first duel and lost. He then meditated on Mount Homan realizing that his staff was too long, and then faced Miyamoto with a jo. This was Miyamoto's only defeat.

 

In most cases I think the katana would have the advantage. There was an interesting sword vs bo discussion earlier, try doing a search you may find it.

[karatekaBR86]

I have heard that too. Except it wasn't musaishis defeat. it ended up a draw. (Read The Lone Samurai by William Scott Wilson) I still don't understand why the jo prevailed over the bo

[Sauzin]

Speed and the jo's ability to change hand positions in transition. A bo is too long to do many of the jo's changes, but with a jo you can maintain control. The jo is just long enough to have reach over the sword, but not loose speed. A jo vs a bo would be a different story. Given the space the bo would have a serious advantage.

[username4]

is the bo made of metal or wood? is the sword mediaval or is it a katana or another type? if the bo was metal it would win if wood it has a slim chance unless they are very skilled the swords also make big diffrence if medival it would shatter a wood bo it it came into contact with it and ect....

[Sauzin]

Actually a wood bo would have a better chance then a metal bo. It would be faster, the katana could get stuck in the wood of the bo, and the wood bo could shatter the katana. Still a katana would likely win, but you would have an even worse time if the bo were metal.

[Shorin Ryuu]

is the bo made of metal or wood? is the sword mediaval or is it a katana or another type? if the bo was metal it would win if wood it has a slim chance unless they are very skilled the swords also make big diffrence if medival it would shatter a wood bo it it came into contact with it and ect....

 

I think you are approaching this from the wrong angle. You're assuming that it's going to be a full out clash of bo against sword with both of them directly impacting each other. It's foolish (and this goes for all weapons in my opinion) to simply bash the weapons against each other or block one directly with the other. Sure, you may end up doing it if you absolutely have to, but the principle is to redirect his weapon rather than pound it into submission. Even if you are talking about the katana, that I suppose in the hands of a trained expert could cut through a bo, you would much prefer to simply cut the person rather than the bo in the first place. If you were using a more bludgeoning type of weapon, then perhaps you would be less inclined to care if he blocks (since you would overpower him), but if he isn't there, than it doesn't matter how hard you swing.

 

At any rate, you certainly don't want your weapon to be the only thing between you and your opponent's weapon. You simply want to be out of the path of the weapon and/or redirecting the path of the weapon so that the opponent's "power zone" is not where you're standing. You didn't necessarily say you were opposed to these principles, but from what you stated, you don't necessarily take them into account either.

 

Let me relate a little anecdote that I think is of relevance to all this.

 

Sokon Matsumura (Big pioneer of Okinawan karate) once said to his student Itosu, "With your strong punch you can knock anything down but you can't so much as touch me." In other words, you may be correct in assuming that a big sword may shatter a bo. However, you don't use the bo in that manner. For that matter, you don't use the short weapons like that either. How do you expect to block a sword or bo with the kama or the sai? Certainly not with a direct block, but a redirect and/or moving yourself out of the way.

[White Warlock]

Agreed. Again, it is the practitioner, not the style (or, in this case, the weapon).

 

A personal example was when i had a student of mine attack me with a nunchaku. I was armed with a bo. I easily deflected all his attacks whilst continuously 'touching' him on his chest or abdomen. In frustration, he argued that it was an unfair fight because my weapon had a really long range and was sturdy. I let him argue his point. Even agreed with him.

 

I then asked for the nunchaku, handed him the bo, and asked him to attack me.

 

The rest, you can figure out for yourself.

[Sauzin]

I think you are approaching this from the wrong angle. You're assuming that it's going to be a full out clash of bo against sword with both of them directly impacting each other. It's foolish (and this goes for all weapons in my opinion) to simply bash the weapons against each other or block one directly with the other. Sure, you may end up doing it if you absolutely have to, but the principle is to redirect his weapon rather than pound it into submission. Even if you are talking about the katana, that I suppose in the hands of a trained expert could cut through a bo, you would much prefer to simply cut the person rather than the bo in the first place.

I agree and I disagree. Cross grain, no matter how skilled the cut, a katana is not going through a red oak bo. It would make about a 1/3" - 1/2" cut then stop. Now if it were at a 45 degree angle then maybe. But a katana can't even go trough a straw mat or bamboo shaft at a 90 degree angle. Let alone 1 1/4" of hardwood.

 

Under most if not all most all circumstances I would completely agree that clashing is not optimal. Under almost all circumstances the opponent's weapon should not be the target (a common mistake in fight choreography). This is perhaps the only exception I could think of. The very first thing I would do if I were facing a swordsman with a bo is I would attempt to either break the blade by clashing it's side or wait for his strike and intercept it using a 90 degree angle with my bo. Once the weapon was lodged I would quickly remove it from his hands or break the blade. He would be the one avoiding my weapon not the other way around.

 

Why do you think Miyamoto was so successful at besting enemy swordsmen with a boken? A boken can take a clash, a katana cannot. This is another reason the jo became so popular against the katana. There was no quicker way to remove a swordsman of his weapon then to use a staff. Similar accounts can be found in Europe as well. Quarterstaffs were often used to disable an enemy’s sword then pummel them to death with the sword often still attached to the end of the stick that is hitting them.