Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
Research Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsResearch Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic

Staff vs nunchucks?

DanielBishop

New member
Once upon a time I was arguing with a guy about which Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle was cooler, Donatello or Michaelangelo (yeah, so we're very immature.... so what?) and eventually the argument turned from which weapon is more effective in a fighting scenario.... staff or nunchucks.

Now.... I understand that no one weapon is BETTER than another per se, since every one has its pros and cons and different weapons are better in different situations.... and of course, ultimately it comes down to the better fighter.

However.... from a clean slate, all else being equal.... which do you think is more effective? I was arguing in favour of the staff....

.... allow me to make one point: I wouldn't have a clue. I know next to nothing about martial arts, especially weapons. But I can't see how nunchucks would have particularly good defensive capabilities, and the staff just seemed more versatile. As well as extra range, you could sweep, thrust and strike.... as well as using one or both ends. It also appears to me to be easier to return to a neutral position, whereas nunchucks could get kinda caught and tangled and awkward.

What do you think?
 
having only ever trained regularly with kali sticks, my opinion isnt exactly based on personal experience

but you cant really compare just on weapon.....all a nunchuka is is a short staff cut in 2 weith a chain in the middle.....what does this allow (IMHO that is)....the ability to swing something with a short sticks momentum (as the chain allows the swinging) but with the flexibilty in the middle to allow the weapon to be used for short range strikes, blocks, and to be interchanged between hanbds easier than if it were just one solid stick. i'm not sure if im making sense here but while losing a solid stick limits some of your options it creates others

a large staff gives you the extra range and power and all the attacks that come with it, but i would imagine it would be harder to use at close range and even if you were really fast twirling it around there would concieviably be points where you were vunerable

i;d go with the staff though, overall. just cos its easier to use.....:D
 
Agreed

Chucks are neat to watch, but if you have experience with chucks, where in the hell will you ever find a comparable object in real life?

If you are trained with the bo/jo/staff whatever, you can grab a broomstick, paint roller pole, length of pipe, or any number of things that are long and straight and easily found.

If I need to walk into a public place knowing that I'm going up against multiple opponents, if I walk there with a pair of chucks, I'll get busted with a felony, and I'd look just a little suspicious. Not to mention trying to beat a pre-meditated wrap when you use a pair of them. But, no one would question a painter with a long pole, or a guy with a broom and bucket. And they certainly wouldn't notice if that broom was actually made out of rattan:)

However, in my opinion, if I had to learn one to fight the other...I would actually choose the chucks because they are faster, can be used in a wider array of attacks/defenses, and can fairly easily render a bo useless.

In reality, I'd choose the staff, break it in half, then use it as Kali sticks.:)
 
As the joke used to go.

If I was going to fight someone and use nunchuks, my best offense would be to simply give them to my opponent and wait for him to hurt himself.

In reality a guy I know attempted to use them in a fight. He got bum rushed, knocked down and took a beating with his own weapon. Then I think he got charge for carrying a illegal weapon.

Sucked to be him.
 
Top Bottom