Page 1 of 1

Live- or cane-hand forward?

PostPosted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:08 pm
by Tye Botting
Michael H

Live- or cane-hand forward?
Started at Thu May 27 11:57:37 2004 IP128.194.207.53 Most styles seem to present the cane-hand forward and the live-hand behind when standing in fighting position. I have heard remarks extolling either position: i.e., cane-hand back or cane-hand forward. One remark against cane-hand forward was that the weapon hand presented an easy target for disarm and striking. However, another remark supporting cane-hand forward was that the weapon is in a position for optimal use. Do you guys have thoughts or experiences to support either position?


Tye Botting
Administrator

Re: Live- or cane-hand forward?
Reply #1 Posted at Thu May 27 13:48:19 2004 IP204.196.55.102 Hmmm - best answer is probably "it depends". However, as you know, I've always been taught that you keep the weapon hand back - much like in knife fighting. For knife fighting, though, there's the added benefit of hiding the weapon until it's actually used, which is not the same issue as in the case of the stick.

Still, if the cane is back and the live hand is forward, you have the added benefit of having a quick unencumbered hand ready for grabs, disarms, etc. And, while keeping the cane back might make the weapon a little less quick to use, its reach and tip speed can overcome much of that - if the situation were reversed, however, the live hand would be severely out of useful range and even more slow to use.

I think I'll stick (no pun intended!) with my cane-in-rear-hand-until-actually-whomping strategy... unless I don't. wink

I'd be interested in hearing what other people in FMA say about this, as well. Roland? Mike Casto? Arte? others?


Fire and Rain

Re: Live- or cane-hand forward?
Reply #2 Posted at Sat Jun 19 20:01:14 2004 IP24.175.151.195 My experience is limited to a smidgen (seven or eight classes total in Pekiti Tirsia Kali undecided), but from what I remember in PTK we tended to keep the weapon in the forward hand most of the time. Of course, like Tye (Guru Botting? wink ) already said, it varies by preference and situation.

What I recall was that we tended to do a lot of deflections with the weapon and move the attacking appendage into the live hand. For example, off an overhead strike cane vs. cane we'd tap and parry the attack using the cane, and parry it into the live hand, which could proceed with a second tap/trap that would then keep their cane isolated and under some amount of control (since we could now feel their weapon movement with our live hand) and go to work with our weapon hand, which is now closer to their body and free to make with the whomping/mangling, etc.

Bearing in mind that the translation I was given for Pekiti Tirsia was "up close, in little pieces" the techniques seemed to have a propensity for looking for any excuse to get in pretty close and begin working with a lot of short-range movements chained together as fluidly as possible.

- Fire and Rain


Michael h

Re: Live- or cane-hand forward?
Reply #3 Posted at Fri Jun 25 11:57:58 2004 IP128.194.207.145 I agree with the "depends" reply. Which hand is forward depends on which technique is being applied and which hand is in transition; the live hand is always active. However, the question was directed more towards the specific use of cane hand or live hand forward as the predominant forward hand. I have heard exponents of both positions state their preference for a given hand forward or reserved. All, if not most, of the posed pictures of escrimadors I have seen have the cane hand forward and the live hand sequestered or in a fencing position. I was wondering if there was a style which presents the live hand predominantly and not merely during transition.

I can see benefits as well as disadvantages of both positions. However, I do favor keeping the live hand protected, while moving it in and out for control of the opponent, and presenting the cane hand for quicker attacks and distraction. Hmmm, I wonder what Abel would say, Tye.


Tye Botting
Administrator

Re: Re: Live- or cane-hand forward?
Reply #4 Posted at Fri Jun 25 13:00:46 2004 IP204.196.55.102

On Fri Jun 25 11:57:58 2004, Michael h wrote: (read quoted post)I can see benefits as well as disadvantages of both positions. However, I do favor keeping the live hand protected, while moving it in and out for control of the opponent, and presenting the cane hand for quicker attacks and distraction. Hmmm, I wonder what Abel would say, Tye.

Well, he used to would have agreed w/ my live-hand-forward idea, as it came from Guro Alexander as well as Montoya - we've talked about it a lot. Not sure anymore...

Still, we could ask Dr. Schea and get a definitive answer I suppose, though I'm guessing the "it depends" idea would hold for him as well as the Masters of Tapi-Tapi, with varying emphases depending on who.


Michael H

Re: Live- or cane-hand forward?
Reply #5 Posted at Fri Jun 25 21:52:26 2004 IP69.5.200.125 Tye, I have to apologize. For some reason I misunderstood your stance. I thought you were advocating weapon hand forward. So, I reverse my views concerning your post. That being said, "it depends" does seem to be the choice to meet the situation, with the start point being the live hand back and the weapon hand in front, ready to lead the fray. It appears that the live hand back is a preferred stance among us three. Still, the question is posed whether there is a style out there which presents the live hand forward. Anyway, thanks for the input.

I will be away for a while, so you arnis guys try and keep things active so that I will have a little fun catching up on the give and take.


Tye Botting
Administrator

Re: Re: Live- or cane-hand forward?
Reply #6 Posted at Fri Jun 25 22:53:17 2004 IP65.0.32.100

On Fri Jun 25 21:52:26 2004, Michael H wrote: (read quoted post)Tye, I have to apologize. For some reason I misunderstood your stance. I thought you were advocating weapon hand forward. So, I reverse my views concerning your post. That being said, "it depends" does seem to be the choice to meet the situation, with the start point being the live hand back and the weapon hand in front, ready to lead the fray. It appears that the live hand back is a preferred stance among us three. Still, the question is posed whether there is a style out there which presents the live hand forward. Anyway, thanks for the input.

I will be away for a while, so you arnis guys try and keep things active so that I will have a little fun catching up on the give and take.


No, no. I and Abel and Guro Alexander prefer the live hand forward. So, you'd be the odd man out. A very odd man indeed. wink I still say "it depends" though - like many things in MA, a static stance or position on such things is more of a problem than having the 'right answer.'


Mike Casto

Re: Re: Live- or cane-hand forward?
Reply #7 Posted at Fri Aug 6 17:13:55 2004 IP68.210.159.158

On Thu May 27 13:48:19 2004, Tye Botting wrote: (read quoted post)Hmmm - best answer is probably "it depends". However, as you know, I've always been taught that you keep the weapon hand back - much like in knife fighting. For knife fighting, though, there's the added benefit of hiding the weapon until it's actually used, which is not the same issue as in the case of the stick.

Still, if the cane is back and the live hand is forward, you have the added benefit of having a quick unencumbered hand ready for grabs, disarms, etc. And, while keeping the cane back might make the weapon a little less quick to use, its reach and tip speed can overcome much of that - if the situation were reversed, however, the live hand would be severely out of useful range and even more slow to use.

I think I'll stick (no pun intended!) with my cane-in-rear-hand-until-actually-whomping strategy... unless I don't. wink

I'd be interested in hearing what other people in FMA say about this, as well. Roland? Mike Casto? Arte? others?


I'd agree with the "depends" answer. However, as a general rule of thumb, I prefer to keep my weapon in the lead to answer anything that's coming in and give less distance to travel from weapon to target.

But, of course, there's nothing set in stone.

Mike