I would hope not. However, you have just turned the study of a weapon into an exercise - with no acknowledgement of it's true purpose. Sure, you could say that genbudo Japanese swordsmanship is purely there to develop the person and therefore no different to nunchaku - but sword arts still train as if to use the sword, not relegate the weapon to something akin to a speedball.
The idea of approximating combat applications in one's daily training is an on-going challenge. I completely agree that if one is going to train with this weapon....or any other.....that the entire range of a weapon's capabilities needs to be researched. This flashy flailing techniques that are so popular in the media and on the tournament circuit represent only about 30% of how this weapon system can be used. I can't remember the last time I saw practice that included throws, trapping, escapes, come-alongs, blocks or thrusts. As far as the history of the weapon, I think we may need to eat a reality sandwich here. I have not been able to find any respectable resource that documents that these flails were anything more than a local curiousity that has enjoyed media celebrity. My own thought is that these may have developed into a system in much the same way as the East Coast policeman' night-stick of the 19th Century developed into the baton and baton training of today. FWIW. Best Wishes, Bruce
I quite like this video of Guro Dan Inosanto. Obviously, some of it is theatrical, but you do get a look at him using the handles together as a short stick, using the nunchaku to choke and take down an opponent, and using the full reach of the nunchaku to hit the opponent's weapon hand at long range (largo mano). [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoNY85MiSyY"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoNY85MiSyY[/ame]
Like most of other guys here have mentioned, you can become "pro" from just watching youtube, if your definition of pro is "baton twirling" (why so much hate guys? Its impressive in a non-MA way) However if you want to learn real, proper usage of them you're best off finding a kobudo dojo (or some style that supports weapons, such as ishinryu) Keep practising with those foam chucks tho, chucks do amuse me how they're almost as likely to KO the wielder as they are the opponent if the wielder is novice Keep training tho, don't let yourself down
A few reasons really. My kung fu teacher told me years ago that they wasn't a traditional weapon, he said nunchucks had evolved from the three section staff and that there were no traditional forms for them in their modern form. I'm not sure about their origins but I did some research and found no historical evidence that proved him wrong about their traditional status. A glance at wikipedia supports that, although it's not exactly an infallible website. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nunchucks Whats more interesting is that Bruce has also done research, and by the sounds of it much more indepth than I did, and came to a similar conclusion. Another point is that the pictures of rice flails I saw wouldn't have looked anything like modern chucks. Two exactly similar bits of wood with a chain linking them... Not a typical farm implement. And I personally have known of three schools, a TKD school, a karate school and a kung fu school, where the nunchucks forms they taught had been by the instructors there. I think that is probably the case in many schools, even if they were created by previous generations of instructors. In the 70's following Bruce Lee's popularity for example... And finally because most nunchucks forms I've seen have been pretty terrible. The clip of Nick Diaz I posted represents a far higher level of skills with them than I have usually seen displayed by most 'masters'.
I think we see nunchucks differently, I don't put them in the same bracket as say, a Katana or a Tiger Fork. Nunchucks are fun, they develop reflexs, handspeed and condition your arms. A Katana on the other hand, thats not fun, thats a serious weapon that has been used to kill for centuries. I don't think a weapon consisting of two pieces of wood connected together, that has probably existed in its modern form for not much more than half a century, deserves anything like that level of respect. And practice with them alot, with the 'twirls' as you call them, and you could absolutely use them in a real fight. I was able to strike a punch bag full force with 5-6 strikes in a row, easily able to control the chucks. I split the bag right open several times and had to repair it with tape, and it was a tough bag. Just out of interest does your more realistic training involve striking anything with the chucks? Because if not you aren't really training to learn the skills needed to actually hit someone with one. Its not easy to control without practice.
Its funny actually cos the only time I hurt myself with chucks was when using foam ones. I somehow drew blood on the top of my head with the end of one of them, no idea how! Never hit myself like that with woodern ones.
I can't image a person intending to use chucks as a striking weapon and NOT spending tons of time actually hitting something. Depending on the vector of the strike, the material struck, velocity of the weapon at the time and the owner's anticipation of the result, a chuck can recoil in a number of directions. I see practice at actually striking something as imperative. FWIW. Best Wishes, Bruce
Yep, I would have to say it is pretty hard to imagine the gentleman in the 'good' example of nunchaku not being able to hit things accurately, and hard. It is also hard to imagine why anyone that genuinely scary looking would need weapons at all.... paul
BTW: Not to derail an interesting thread, but has anyone seen those batons that are carried collapsed into a grip about 6 inches long. I have seen them used infrequently as movie props. Seems that they are deployed with a simple snap of the wrist and used to great effect. I'm thinking that if someone were considering using Chucks for S-D, that such a baton as I'm asking about might be a more acceptable alternative. Anyone? Best Wishes, Bruce
there should be more laughter associated with these forums in general.... intentionally created laughter even! And Bruce, those expandable batons are an Arnis persons dream come true, and in my country at least, totally illegal. But tghen again just carrying around the 'chucks would be as well. It's all about death by umbrella here in Australia. paul
I'm all for more laughter. But not at other people's expense. At least not people who are asking a sincere question and hoping for genuine guidance. TaeAno has already removed the video in question, quite likely in response to the pasting he took here. Seems a shame. Seems like we don't leave a lot of room for growth on these forums sometimes. If you don't ask a "mature" question, sometimes you get treated little differently than a clear case of trolling. Perhaps I'm misreading the situation. But I think we could have trodden more softly on this one. Stuart
Not sure where I come down on this one, except to say that I honestly believe that Forums can be put to better use all the way around. For instance, if people want a little T&A in the form of identifying "hot" MA practitioners, I can cut them some slack. All in good fun, I guess. But then I start to wonder where the socially redeeming part of the forum comes in. There seems to be an honest reluctance to seriously investigate what we do and why we do it and I am not sure why that is. Its not like I haven't asked the question more than once, right? So....OK...we have a place for trolls....and we have a place for newbies...and we have a place for thread themes that get repeated every couple of months....and the same old personality-based flame wars. When the heck do we ever get a chance to make any meaningful contributions such that MAP gets a rep for being the place to go to for getting the straight dope on a given subject? Is this even a goal? Thoughts? Best Wishes, Bruce
No, you're right Ap, I'm not into that sort of funny either. The OP asked a legitimate and sensible question in the right place, and having just looked back through the thread, got a range of good answers from folks. Being mean to people asking normal questions and flaming them simply for being new isn't ok. What was funny were at least some of the videos that appeared afterwards - and which I related to the subsequent conversation about what was 'good' as opposed to 'bad' nunchacku practice. In short, people hitting themselves with wooden things by accident and/or people not taking themselves too seriously = funny Being nasty to people = not funny at least for me paul
Probably posted before, but this is the funnies video ever, and if you can avoid using this dude's approach towards Nunchaku, I think you've come a long way: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsEZ2lpM0Yw"]YouTube - Nunchucks Pro[/ame]
Hi Bruce, I apologise in advance for what might be a very totured metaphor, but... I guess it is a question of being able to filter out the noise from the signal. the huge advantage of public forums - for me at least - is the amazing possibilities in terms of just who might contribute. But that obviously works in all directions. Often at once. So rather than this not living up to its' potential, isn't it more the case that the forum is actually exactly living up to its potential - in all of its crazy, anarchic glory. The trouble with insisting on 'quality' posts that contribute is that it then becomes someones job to decide what that actually means. There are gems, it is just a case of sifting? Apologies for thread drift and rampant philosophising. The news about Koyo sensei has me feeling a touch inward looking. paul
Very well said.Thanks for your thoughts. There's a lot to think about in a very few sentences. Thanks again. Best Wishes, Bruce
