SPEAR(Hanmudo) VS ARNIS 

Those movements of so call "han moo do" is exactly the same of Japanese Jo jutsu and Yari jutsu. There is no real historical background of Han moo do but it’s made after WW2 by based on the Japanese jo jutsu and yari jutsu.

​​@@sk_design7255웃기는소리 하지마라.. 한무도는 구한말 대한제국시기에 만들어진 가전무술이다 뒷발을떼는 보법만봐도 일본무술과의 차이가 두드러지는데 어디서 남의나라무술을 멋대로 왜곡하는가?? 그건 굉장히 무례한발언이다.

Not sure this video is really representative. I'd consider several factors on a battlefield: - Most soldiers where not professionals. The spear wasn't used in such an artistic fashion by them, but rather because it's a simple weapon to use, where you can poke somebody from a distance and then retreat behind a line of swordmen that shield you. So spears where longer and more crude. As well it was an important counter against troops on horses. - On a battlefield you often will not have the space to swing your spear generously like here, otherwise you'll hit your fellow soldiers. - The techniques shown here might work against a fighter that isn't wearing an amour (sure where plenty on the battlefield, but using a skilled fighter against them might not be the best use). On the other hand a skilled opponent will wear some kind of amour and a really light one would do here, since most of the hits are just slices. As soon as an opponent gets close, the spear fighter is screwed. Not an expert, just my thoughts on the matter.

​@@maggnet4829 People have the misconception that spears become useless at extreme CQC. The spear shown here is short by martial arts standard but a perfect size for quarterstaff. Quarterstaff is the basics of most pole weapons. The anti armor weapons of Europe such as the pollaxe or the halberd techniques are based off the quarterstaff. If you simulate battlefield conditions such that a spear line can be formed, the spear infantry wouldn't have to worry about people closing in that much. People beside you can help defend the line. Poke from the right/ left at unsuspecting targets. This is why special type of soldiers need to be used like the landsknechts greatswords or the Spanish rodeleros. They are well paid because their job is suicidal.

@@chang1865 The angle I'm coming from is a different one. Though I accept the correction that a line of spears can be efficient without sword men. What I'm saying is that the way a spear is used here in this video, is not how it was used in the big wars of the past and wouldn't have worked for particularly the reason of lack of space. Speer fighters in particular need to close ranks, as one can see in the video I linked below. I think this video explains my point better, since it presents how mostly spears where used and discusses as well the limiting factors. It shows too that spears against foot soldieres where mostly used in combination with shields, in particular to protect against other speer fighters. I'm pointing that out because before I said that an amour would mostly nullify a spear fighters threat. Now imagine that a fighter would swing his speer like in the video and make artistic evasive moves, he'd quickly be in a lot of free space, breaking ranks, where an armored fighter with a sword or any other short weapon could easily walk in. Btw.: the video I linked highly motivates why the tactic of putting swordmen in first line is a good idea, to compensate for the issue that speer fighters can not deal well with opponents that manage to get close and thus I think it was quite commonly used. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3XuhoFszfe8.html

Shorter two-handed spears like this one played a role in historical warfare, but weren't dominant or that prevalent. Circa 1600, George Silver considered an 8-9ft spear about the best weapon for single unarmored combat in the open, but thought pikes & halberds better for the battlefield. Renaissance armies typically had only a few soldiers with partizans & such spear-type weapons around 8ft long. Admittedly, earlier European armies seem to have had more of them, & possibly Japanese & Chinese infantry in the same period (15th & 16th centuries) used more shorter spear-type weapons. However, as far as I can, pikes saw more use there as well. In a tightly packed infantry formation, a soldier was often better off with either a longer spear like a pike or versatile, powerful polearm like a halberd.

If I'm not mistaken, in the ancient Chinese Martial Arts world, the Spear was referred to as the King of Weapons. There is a reason why a lot of famous historical Chinese generals were masters of polearms. Guanyu comes to mind.

thanks a lot🙏

You're absolutely right, a skilled opponent with superior reach is extremely hard to deal with, in the group that I'm a part of we call this Florentine(or Flo for short), which is essentially a blanket term for two weapon stick work, these fighters constantly have to contend with fast and hard spear fighting. My personal experience coming from a high speed battle sport, is that learning proper approaches, pins, and not being afraid to really push your target (and I mean get right in their face) usually gets better results, that being said spear wins most of the time. All you can do is keep practicing, oh and cover you hands, many bloody knuckles from smashing into weapon shafts, no bueno.

He was doing really well in the first half, considering all the disadvantages. I think he was tired towards the end though.

@@siegfriedc2332 oh he sure did. But if you have to put so much energy in your footwork, you'll pay for it sooner or later. In his case a lot later than me, if I'd been in his shoes.😅

Do Escrimador throw their sword just to get advantage. I hardly see that in tournament

@@AN71H3RO Every one of the Escrima practitioner's first several scores were fatal. Who landed the first fatal blow? Who landed the most fatal blows of the first five strikes? The footwork of the Escrima practitioner is designed to end the fight as soon as possible. You can't have a longterm plan, like in western boxing, when weapons are involved.

FMA should also teach sibat in mainstream, not just focusing on one handling and dual wielding

@@unlimited6884 They do teach "sibat" or "malayung sibat" but you don't see a lot of videos on it online as it is a very advanced technique. Also, "spear" techniques of FMA is more akin to bayonet fighting...this is why the spear wielding shown in the video is very awesome

Can you teach me alchemy then? I really want to know it

@@LuisFelipe-pq9lr I believe this is not that type of alchemy you are looking for hehehe

Indeed, this is very elegant

Agreed, however, it would also be nice to see an experienced escrimadore in this fight as well. The guy with the escrima sticks. Did not understand distancing and timing against a much longer weapon, he was too aggressive when he needed to be a counter fighter and missed some opportunities to close the gap during the retraction of the spear. Now, that being said... The guy wielding the spear was damn decent and most likely would have won no matter how well the escrimadore fought simply due to the spear being the Superior weapon in this matchup. However, as someone who made it a point to spar against a variety of weapons,

@@TotalKombatArts He could have done better. The amount of round-kicks he threw was hilarious, he left himself super open. But spear really is almost impossible to fight against, especially in this kind of matchup where touches win the point. In true life or death in proper armor... The majority of all these attacks would do nothing.

@@dylanperkins7939 yeah, thats what i thought. It need effort and momentum to strike

@@zee9709 A spear just doesn't have much force behind it. It's a very light weapon. Tapping someone on the leg won't disable it even without armor, you need to really stab them, or slash the patellar tendon or something.

The bow was but I understand lol

The spear was the primary weapon of almost any historical army

@@damuvang1915 no. Samurai learned archery. But spear was primary weapon. Then sword.

@@newagain9964 Wouldn't their primary weapon still be the bow? The bow is still a weapon.

There were also a rare few Samurai used guns occasionally too lol

I've never been to the Philipines so I'm largely guessing, but I don't think there's a lot of open terrain suitable for field cavalry. The spear originated from that style of fighting, field armies of either mounted spearmen, or in the case of pike-men, dismounted light infantry. You're taking a weapon designed to de-horse a man at range using a lot of momentum and penetrating force vs. armor. A close-in block or deflect is going to get overpowered. But the spearmen should have a lot of problems fighting in a dense forest, or close quarters inside buildings, where I think Arnis would shine. Both are valid for their environs.

the spear guy has better understanding of his advantages. he is the better fighter here. can't blame the arnis guy. modern FMA focuses more on fancy stuff rather than its effectivity.. he's way of fighting is more like against another arnis player in a sports competition where they will rush and bash each other til the end. but this match-up is good. it might improve modern FMA in the future.

@@m0i4x The Arnis guy has the odds stacked against him on this particular situation, shorter weapon reach, lots of space for the spear user to maneuver and a disparity in the power( 2handed spear vs 1handed stick).The fact that the guy can still deal fatal blows shows that the martial art is effective just that it's a bad matchup. From a modern practical stand point, it's more convenient to carry a short stick than a spear as tall as yourself or maybe just buy a gun.

@@highblast2554 having more range doesn't mean you have the advantage all the time.. he got 2 sticks with him.. then it means he has an extra weapon with him that outranges the spear..😆😆 if it hits, then it''s a kill. if not, then it will give him a chance to close in.. a weapon with a free hand is much more troublesome to deal with.

@@m0i4x umm correct me if I'm wrong but 2 short sticks is still shorter compared to a spear unless you can magically combine to the two to be a staff or something. And why would you choose a 1 stick for 2 stick when fighting against a competent spearman in an open space? I suggest you look at the video again if you think catching an incoming spear strike is easier because the arnis guy clearly struggles deflecting those strikes with his stick much less with a free hand, you're just asking to be a cripple at that point.

The Arnis fighter lost overwhelmingly. Wasn’t even a match really. Any time the Arnis guy got close the spear already dealt the devastating blow. A good spearman will 99 times out of 100 beat a Arnis fighter

lost to range. Close the distance, Kali fighter stands a chance

Kungfu tends to use the weapon like how you use your arm... to connect and Feel whats happening, via touch / interception. When you eliminate that... you can easily be overtaken, as the motions can be faster than your visual center can process in time. Combine that with him pulling the spear in too close to the body... and you have the ability for the shorter weapons player to enter successfully.

@@johndough8115 I used my staff more to poke and break. Maybe that's why today I do FMA and Krav😀

@@randyranderson In an earnest fight with real weapons, a single attack doesn't necessarily incapacitate. It's possible a number of these exchanges would have lead to both people seriously hurt or killed, as we know sometimes happened in historical duels, skirmishes, & battlefield encounters.

She* The spear master is a woman

@@rycroftphilostratem3536 source? It's not in the description, and his outline doesn't look like an girl.

@@stefthorman8548 this master is also the RU-vidr(channel owner) who is a woman. And i don't know what kind of girls have you met because it looks like it.

@@stefthorman8548 and why would someone put the gender of fighters in the description? Tf

@@rycroftphilostratem3536 Lol 3:58 , people like projecting their delusions right ? Amazing spear master = woman lol so funny .

What the man needed was a light shield or buckler. Could still use his Arnis, just a way to block those ranged power strikes at varied distance. When the spear guy half-handed his spear shaft or thread it through his forehand, he made it impossible to guess the next distance it would strike from. Sure want a shield for exactly that problem.

@@yakamen just grabbing a shield won’t solve it for the Arnis fighter. You have to train with that shield in your fighting style. Arnis fighters don’t do that. It’s not as simple as saying hey bro bro. Just pick up that shield and use it without ever training with it. Doesn’t work that way.

@@randyranderson Fascinating! Although...it can't be any simpler than training with FOAM WEAPONS CAN IT...maybe apply the square root to however long the arnisador spent learning his art form. I bet he's capable of figuring it out.

@@yakamen not on this kind of terrain and this range. There are some weapons others can’t figure out. The only variable that would change things is skill level. If the Spear fighter was much less experienced then the Arnis fighter has a chance. If these two trained together everyday the outcome would never change. The Arnis fighter would only get in because the Spear fighter is working on a advanced technique. If this was truly a real world fight the Spear would take no chances and the inevitable will always happen. Range is king. Always will be. It’s why humans invented the Spear and it has lasted us thousands of years.

​@@randyranderson'just grabbing a shield wont solve it for the arnis fighter'... it would have been great if they made him use one at the end anyways. i'm more interested in seeing how he would adapt and solve it for him.

Is it just me or the spear guy didn’t look like he was trying very hard. Arnis guy definitely looked like he was trying close to 100%

She is using the Chinese style

Until you fought the great longsword rip your spear :D

@@phoebe3122 I think Hellenic hoplites would disagree with you. :)

@@phoebe3122 nah, even heavily armored knights in the 15th and 16th century used spears. Poleaxes and other polearms are better to penetrate plate armors but spears are still usable

@@aleksejjovanovic986 ok

@@irfannurhadisatria2540 ok

Pole arms win in a lot of categories. More simple to learn, easier to re-equip, does good damage. The spear is the simplest form of using something effective and replenishable for the least amount of risk.. dont let pop fiction make you think otherwise.. pole arms were the king of the battlefield, especially if you wanted to live. The closer you are to the fighting, the more likely you are to die.

The Yari on the Battlefield was considered one of the most dangerous weapons in Japan. Samurai wives were trained in using the naginata to protect their homes.

i recently learned that samurai had the spear/polearms as the main weapon and not the katanas. but pop culture popularized the use of katanas as something super cool

Watch the lindybeige piece on spear vs sword. If you can prevent the sword from getting close they are almost useless.

@@monocyte2210 bows were the primary weapon. Spears were the primary weapon of footsoldiers, the ashigaru. Samurai used bows then their swords when they ran out of ammo. They were sent in as the elite forces after the ashigaru softened up the enemy.

The yari is good.. I prefer the Naginata or Chinese Pu dao..

It's more like the weapon usage that's being pitted here. Fighting styles are only taught to you to give you a fighting chance. Pre-Hispanic Philippines use spears as their primary weapons. Normally, you'd be deadbeat when going against spear users. Otherwise, just run away.

Martial arts arts are not deterministic though. Being good at technique does not make you good at strategy and that is what the arnis guy lacked.Its like that "knife in gun fight" talk. Yeah,you don't take a knife to a gun fight,you use the knife to stab the guy before he draws his gun so the fight doesn't start.

@@king_pinmax7189 so you're saying that he shouldn't have even fought.

I did notice the initial parts he'd just go in a straight line.

I agree, i practice it and the dual stick user keeps on commiting head on. Eskrima, if done right, wouldnt have so much of frontal commited attacks. Move around, play with the angles and distance, lots of feints, lose the stance and run if you have to, use "torque" (dont swing your arms too much for strikes, arms are prime target during eskrima duels). But to be fair cant do much against spear, especially against someone really good.

I think this is the case with many sports rules that stop the fight after one hit.

This is a spar, probably the rules is you score when you hit the enemy, the battle continues until the time limit, the one with more hits wins. This is different from fencing.

The weapon is a existsion of u

Agreed. Also needs to be mention that in arnis, escrima, Kali, whatever you want to call it, you should defend and attack at the same time. Lacking other techniques, this arnis guy is a novice at best.

What about halberds/poleaxes? Those seem really good too

Well duh swords are sidearms and not the main weapon

While its true that the spear has the greater advantage... its not impossible for dual sticks to defeat a spear (especially if thats all you had at the moment of attack). The issue is how he is trying to use the sticks. Hes mostly trying to swing around the spear, rather than actually deflecting the spear, riding it while advancing, using dual gate protection, hitting the spearmans arms/hands...etc. It would be more realistic, against dual butterfly swords, rather than thin arnis sticks. Mostly because... if the Spearman used heavy powered long-range-swings... it would be much more difficult to deflect the attacks. Forming an X block with the sticks, is an option for gaining more structural strength + covering more area / funneling in the heavier attack. And personally, I think id rather take my chances with dual sticks, rather than a single stick and a shield. The shield may offer some protection.. but it comes at cost of reduced speed, range, and capability. Basically put... you will likely always end up being too far away... and eventually, the spearman will tag you.

@@johndough8115 A spear is also a mass of wood. If it weren't foam you're talking pure momentum with nasty vectors with each swing not even counting the pointy part. X block might work once. Then you better get the guy. Greek helots dealt with spears, shields, and swords, because the combination worked. I think even if a real spear user decided to use the haft like a quarterstaff the butterfly swords would be crushed into your body by the force of the swing. Wing Chun was invented in the 19th century when by and large mass melee combat was over. A small buckler would sacrifice no mobility a d would be more structurally sound than a dual wielding fantasy fighter who probably never saw massive melee combat in history.

@@yakamen Large scale armies were generally taught low level combat to their forces... because higher level combat, took too much time and energy. This was especially true in the differences between Japanese arts like Karate, and Chinese arts. The Japanese reduced the complexity down.. and was able to train masses of men quickly. They were considered expendable pawns. Where as the Chinese combat arts were designed with the highest level of quality output potentials. It was more of an Individual path. There was a noted division, however... between typical combat artists, and the Emperors combat troops. The emperors troops were likely also trained with complexity reduction as well. Anyway... here is the deal... As a person whom studied high level combat arts... I used to spar against fighters that were often 2x my own mass and strength. If you made a little mistake.. you paid for it dearly. But when fully mastered... I was virtually untouchable to the local blackbelts in the sportized arts. I learned how to "Fence" with my arms and legs, in such a way, that gave me superior advantages. Such as the correct extended arm positions, giving you far superior defense coverage, and abilities to easily defect even the strongest of attacks. If you think about weapons as an extension of your arms / legs... then you realize that a punch is a representation of a forward spear attack. That a strong swing / hook... is like a staffs swing. A simple example you can try... is against a Hook to your head. While you might be able to defend with the same side arm as their attack... its quite easy for the OP to overpower your deflection. Instead, try using the opposite side arm, with a side palm to their middle-forearm. (contact point should be your wristbone or lower arm bone.. not your bendable finger area) What you will notice, is that you have superior strength and full body backed support. And that even if the OP is 5x stronger than you... they wont be able to collapse your arm.. let alone come close to hitting your head. Admittedly... it takes a lot of hardcore training to get yourself to use the opposite side arm... rather than the same-side arm... which seems much more intuitive. Now, you could always make the point: Why not just step back / diagonal, or duck? Stepping back means you cant counterstrike + gives the Op more changes to attack long distance. Ducking presents the back of your neck (spine), and creates structural weaknesses. And finally, the most important reasons: Staying upright and close, allows you to remain safer... while also putting you in perfect range for a devastating counter-strike. (right from the interception, into a Chop to the OPs neck... a backfist, or punch..etc.) Once you get to an advanced level of interception training and understanding... you realize that you can use your arms.. or the weapons angles... to provide the same level of defensive coverage as any "Shield". The difference is... that you dont have the bulk of a shield, and you can often use dual arm / weapons to accomplish two actions per the OPs every single action. Ive never spend enough time playing with weapons to be fully confident. I once used dual top-foamed kali type sticks against a single pole.. and I found it to be easy to defeat the OP. But that was just one other inexperienced dude, with one session. I also had a former session, where I tried using a staff against someone (I think they had a single sword)... and they strongly grabbed my pole as they rushed in. As well as deflected and rushed in, sliding along the pole edge.. right to the point of my hand grip. All I can say, is that its a combination of many factors. Experience. Training depth. Mastery. And much more... that determines the actual outcomes. And that, if you are not masterclass level in hand to hand advanced combat methods.. then you certainly want a shield, instead of a 2nd weapon.

@@johndough8115 Thanks for your well thought out argument, this has been stimulating. I respond that Bone crushing momentum with a haft of wood is going to probabilistically crumple most deflects, and reduce you to physics and momentum. Zweihander weren't part of this discussion, so we keep it simple, only the dual wield sticks he used and the posited single sword and shield...that second weapon doesn't add much return. Everything you said about stylistic complexity is over optimistic if not over simple, perhaps both. But you'renot thematically wrong?... Simple is complex, complex is simple. You trended more correct toward the end, I feel. I studied kung fu spear and dao for some years. It's not all as reductionistic as you say, and I detect a bias there. Soldiers must learn their craft and master their equipment, no more, no less. High level interceptions are the same as any level due to it's calculus and geometry (now I'm reductionistic). You're hoping for the improved reaction time from one who's mastered his fight IQ. The stylism of all martial arts over all scenarios were all simple, the fight IQ was what evolved. Any complexity was added by technological advances, or artistic license due to peace time, i.e. neither fellow sparred from horseback now did they. Complexity is a relative measure and so are skill levels, but "cultural flourish" sort of taint our values today: (Japanese bushido martial arts made after the sengoku jidai ended and Chinese wushu vs actual military use in history then Cultural Revolution)... All else equal, give the man a shield and expect him to train with his weapon system, because any dullard will kill you when you you teach him about force, energy, vector, and timing. That is independent of historical period, logistics, or complexity. A mid-level guy with a constant fight IQ and a spear vs. mid-level guy with same fight IQ dual wielding sticks or butterfly swords... I still say replace the latter's second weapon with a small mobile shield. Answer raw physics with raw physics, and skill will return to the equation, due to probabilities being better for the man who actually has the tools to deflect long range blows at any oevel of argument. Doesn't mean he'll win.

Arnis also have long sticks and spears fighting styles.... a complete fma fighting style would include those and also panuntukan(dirty boxing, sikaran(taekwando like style) or yawyan(muay thai like), dumog(grappling), knives, swords and empty hands...

since if you are talking about real battle, if they used the real weapon the arnis guy will easily win the fight since all he has to do is cut that spears in half.

@@ian3087 I think you're underestimating how difficult it is to break a spear- And grossly overestimating how powerful an arnis is.

@@gabrielegenota1480 lmao, arnis sticks are for just for practice. Kali is for swords and knives.

@@ian3087 My bad lol Still, you heavily underestimate how difficult it is to break a spear. Sure, you may be strong enough to damage it with a good strike- but the spear wielder probably won't keep the spear static. There's a reason why most armies up until the mass mobilization of Gunpowder units used the spear as a primary weapon- (because spears are super powerful weapons) There's a minor problem with comparing the effectiveness of two ancient weapon systems, however. Pre-Colonial warfare primarily focused on minor raids and ambushes- very rarely was there a clash between two large formations of troops. The quick skirmish-y nature of Pre-Colonial Filipino warfare made it useful to utilize short and quick weapons as opposed to spears (which were used most effectively in formation). The terrain of the Philippine Islands also was a factor in that formation fighting was just not worth it for the most part. Forestry disrupts formations :\ TL;DR it's unfair to compare the two to begin with since they're shaped by two very different environments of warfare. but when in a straight fight- the spear would probably still reign supreme.