PDA

View Full Version : Tape on the Jo-staff



Joman
21st June 2005, 18:28
Hello all i am just wondering on your opnion on putting hockeytape or any other sort of thick tape at both ends of the JO. Not covering it completly but it is noticable and allows for easier maniuplation when sliding the Jo from hand to hand. I only ask this because the tape genrally makes it easier to stop your hand from sliding off the jo when performing ceartin techniques and i am just wondering if u agree witht he taping method or not. Please leave me your feedback.-TY

Alfred Ignacio.

Trevor Johnson
21st June 2005, 20:22
I'd say you'd better learn to control the jo better, not use tape on it as a shortcut.

kmorgan
21st June 2005, 21:38
Tape is not the answer.
As Trevor said, you need more control. However check the finish on the Jo is it too tacky? To slippery? Perhaps you need to adjust the finish?
Good luck

Mekugi
22nd June 2005, 06:45
Sand the ends with a semi-rough grade paper instead. Sanding takes the slippery off the ends and doesn't compramise anything, so it's a good alternative. Taping would be a mess, kind of funny looking and not exactly traditional or relavent to the use of the jo IMHO.

Make sure to test-sand a small area first, to see if that is what you want before doing the whole thing. If you don't, you will ultimately end up buying more paper and doing more sanding to get it where you want it to be.
When you are done, wipe some boiled linseed oil on it for good measure as it will seal the wood up; make sure to dry the jo well after oiling, as it will be slippery and make your hands smell funny.

Andy Watson
22nd June 2005, 12:00
Jeez, why do people look for technical fixes to problems which are only related to depth of practise. The reason for training with a weapon is to develop versatility and skill with the weapon, not to put things in place so that you can instantly pull off flashy techniques.

I do agree with Russ's point about sanding the jo but not to put extra texture on the end to stop your hand flying off - one should train so that this doesn't happen.

Sorry for the rant but not a small amount of teaching and coaching gets wasted on eradicating bad habits caused by students creating tricks to overcome difficult techniques.

jfkcotter
22nd June 2005, 12:46
Told to me by Draeger.

The Jo is too short for the non Japanese who is generally about 4-6 inches taller than the Japanese. He practiced with a longer Jo. Many techniques work much better for the non Japanese when using a Jo about 6 inches longer. Try it and see.

Joman
22nd June 2005, 13:10
Thankyou all for your replies. I will try the sanding techinque though it sounds a bit tough but doable. The wood on the Jo is very, very smooth and the sanding should allow me to control the Jo better than taping. As for the size suggestion it is very intresting and I think I may take that into consdieration next time I purchase a Jo, or at least try out a longer Jo.

Alfred Ignacio.

Steve Delaney
22nd June 2005, 16:28
Just do kihon until you know your weapon inside and out.

Andy Watson
22nd June 2005, 16:43
Just do kihon until you know your weapon inside and out.


Absolutely!

Trevor Johnson
22nd June 2005, 16:59
Told to me by Draeger.

The Jo is too short for the non Japanese who is generally about 4-6 inches taller than the Japanese. He practiced with a longer Jo. Many techniques work much better for the non Japanese when using a Jo about 6 inches longer. Try it and see.

Depends on the art you're practising. In some schools, the length of the jo is absolutely fixed, no matter how big you are.

A. Bakken
22nd June 2005, 17:05
Depends on the art you're practising. In some schools, the length of the jo is absolutely fixed, no matter how big you are.

Wasn't the "standard" jo length determined by the prevailing sword length? At least in Shindo Muso ryu, sword vs. jo is the most common scenario, and exploiting the advantage the longer ma-ai gives, seems to be a central point in many of the kihon and kata.

C.Z.Lockhart
22nd June 2005, 18:25
Hello all i am just wondering on your opnion on putting hockeytape or any other sort of thick tape at both ends of the JO. Not covering it completly but it is noticable and allows for easier maniuplation when sliding the Jo from hand to hand. I only ask this because the tape genrally makes it easier to stop your hand from sliding off the jo when performing ceartin techniques and i am just wondering if u agree witht he taping method or not. Please leave me your feedback.-TY
.

I'm having a hard time picturing it. If you're talking about actually winding the tape along some length of the jo, say the last foot on either end, that might help for retention if you're just going to use the jo as a big stick for beating on people. I think that's why they wrap baseball bats.

If you're thinking of just wrapping a ring of tape at the very ends, I could see that as being useful as a marker to let you know that you've reached the end, until you just get used to the length and feel like taking the tape off. But it's kind of like working with training wheels when you probably ought to be just trying to ride the bike.

I can't picture any teacher being enthused with a student modding their jo for any reason short of a genuine physical handicap. And I don't think having tape on your jo would be a long term benefit either. Eventually it'll get damp and/or wear through, and you'll start smudging the glue, then it'll be sticky. Have you seen American Pie 2? A sticky stick really didn't work out well for that kid, now did it?

The only time I ever have a problem with stopping my hand on the jo is when it's raining. Generally I have a bigger problem with my hands sweating, and then the jo gets a little tacky, and it's hard to get the slide to work. If anybody has advice on how to fix that, lemme know.

Cheers to my unqualified opinions! :nw:

Trevor Johnson
22nd June 2005, 19:04
The only time I ever have a problem with stopping my hand on the jo is when it's raining. Generally I have a bigger problem with my hands sweating, and then the jo gets a little tacky, and it's hard to get the slide to work. If anybody has advice on how to fix that, lemme know.
Train harder. Getting a bit of dirt on your hands may also help, but it's more of a quick fix.

C.Z.Lockhart
22nd June 2005, 23:59
Train harder.
Specifically? Considering the fact that we've never met and I'm reasonably certain you've never seen me train, I really don't know what you're talking about. But since I get tired of being the squeakiest guy out there in the field, I'm willing to listen.

I tried the dirt thing when I first started. Didn't work out so well, basically "mudded up" and made everything too slick, even when I tried just using a tiny bit. It's kind of humit here. Tried some of the chalky stuff that the gymnastics guys use, and that worked pretty well, but it was a bit of a stretch to think that was something I'd be using all the time.

~Charles

SMJodo
23rd June 2005, 15:27
Just my opinion, but I like the fact that Jodo is over 400 years old and that I am practicing (basically) the same way as those generations before me. I'm sure they found a way to deal with the elements and shortcomings in their technique without mods. Just can't picture Gonnoske, Shimazu, or Otofuji taping up the Jo like a hockey stick. I would no sooner put tape on a jo than I would a bell on a katana.

I think the advice about appiles to about 90% of posts concerning technique - find a good teacher, train hard, and have patience. I wouldn't rely on tape to correct my technique - what's the point? I'd question what teacher would let you use it anyway. You can't use it in demonstrations, it's not practical for real use, and could be distracting to your partner. Besides, it would look kind of cheesey.

Trevor Johnson
23rd June 2005, 17:58
Just my opinion, but I like the fact that Jodo is over 400 years old and that I am practicing (basically) the same way as those generations before me. I'm sure they found a way to deal with the elements and shortcomings in their technique without mods. Just can't picture Gonnoske, Shimazu, or Otofuji taping up the Jo like a hockey stick. I would no sooner put tape on a jo than I would a bell on a katana.

I think the advice about appiles to about 90% of posts concerning technique - find a good teacher, train hard, and have patience. I wouldn't rely on tape to correct my technique - what's the point? I'd question what teacher would let you use it anyway. You can't use it in demonstrations, it's not practical for real use, and could be distracting to your partner. Besides, it would look kind of cheesey.

Exactly. Train harder, you'll eventually get the hang of it.

SMJodo
23rd June 2005, 18:19
Trevor - I agree with your post about the Jo length. Why would you change a 400 year old weapon (and essentially the art) because we might be a few inches taller. I think some people are losing sight of (or have no concept of) what appeals to most of us who practice. Jodo is not something to be blended into some pseudo tactical fighting art produced on DVD and advertised in Black Belt Magazine.

The Jo is only about 8-10 inches shorter than the Bo - why make it bigger and make a "Jobo" out of it? If you want to study a bigger weapon for whatever reason, pick up a bo. Of course, then you'd have to shorten it so that Hikiotoshi Uchi would be easier. LOL

jfkcotter
23rd June 2005, 22:40
Trevor - I agree with your post about the Jo length.
He's not talking about Jo length. Where does he say that? The comments was about taping the Jo nothing about Jo length.

Shimizu himself agreed that taller people should use longer Jo.

Perhaps you haven't been practicing long enough to understand the principles involved. Again try it and see the difference.

Trevor Johnson
23rd June 2005, 23:04
Depends on the art you're practising. In some schools, the length of the jo is absolutely fixed, no matter how big you are.

Someone made the suggestion that a longer jo would help. The length of the jo is fixed in a number of schools of jodo, and cannot be changed. Ask Dave Lowry about it if you want, he knows well.

jfkcotter
24th June 2005, 00:39
The length of the jo is fixed in a number of schools of Jodo, and cannot be changed
In most things I agree with you but it does seem to me that the length of the jo would definitely be something that should be adapted to the user. I have anyway.

I know Jon Bluming used a jo about 8-9 inches longer than the standard and you can't seriously expect guys over 6.6 to be using a standard 50" Jo.

Apart from the fact that several techniques plain just don't work it really looks funny.

SMJodo
24th June 2005, 04:57
I know Jon Bluming used a jo about 8-9 inches longer than the standard and you can't seriously expect guys over 6.6 to be using a standard 50" Jo.

Maybe a bad assumption on my part. I'll consede that if your pushing 7 ft. tall you might need to try something different. However, for the rest of the general population - a regular Jo should work just fine. Gonnoske himself was reported to be over 6ft and it seemed to work OK for him.


Perhaps you haven't been practicing long enough to understand the principles involved. Again try it and see the difference.

Maybe not, but I know that the Jo length was derived from the length of the average sword. If you're large enough to manuver a bo (essentially that what you're talking about) with the effectiveness of a jo - hey, go for it. I practice with two guys over 6.2 and they don't seem to have an issue. My teacher hasn't recommended they use something else either. I'll rest on his experience.

Andy Watson
24th June 2005, 09:35
Guys, I think we are going to have to agree to disagree here. There are some of us who may be under the governance of the ZNKR and practise seitei jodo as well as SMR in which case the jo length is fixed at 4 shaku 2 sun and 1 bu. There are others of us who may be practising SMR alone in which case they may have licence to make changes.

If you think about why they set the standard length (e.g. to stop people using jo's which undermined the principle of the techniques) it makes some sense.

We are just going to have to play nicely.

Brian Owens
30th June 2005, 07:01
It is true that in some schools the length of the jo is fixed.

In others, though, the length of the jo is dependent on the user's height, as is the length of the sword.

I have heard some people advise a prospective iaito buyer to buy a sword that is long enough to almost touch the ground when held at the side (or some other rule-of-thumb), but then say that a jo should always be one length. That seems contradictory on its face. If sword length is dependent on the swordsman's stature, then why not the jo length?

Our reach, the length of our strides, etc. all depend on our individual stature, so there is nothing inherently wrong with adapting the length of the weapons we hold to our stature -- if its allowed within our school.

In my school, the rule-of-thumb was that the jo should be long enough to just reach the solar plexus when rested upright in front of the user. Other schools I am familiar with say it should just fit under your armpit, and so on.

If your school mandates a fixed length, that's fine, and there may be sound reasons for it; but I wouldn't be as quick as some here to disparage those who do not follow that dictate in their schools.

Mateo
6th July 2005, 02:49
Trevor - I agree with your post about the Jo length. Why would you change a 400 year old weapon (and essentially the art) because we might be a few inches taller. I think some people are losing sight of (or have no concept of) what appeals to most of us who practice. Jodo is not something to be blended into some pseudo tactical fighting art produced on DVD and advertised in Black Belt Magazine. LOL

Draeger was not some guy from Blackbelt magazine trying to change tradition to make some "pseudo tactical fighting art". He was a serious jojutsu practitioner under Shimizu and one of the first Westerners to be granted a menkyo in one of the most traditional ko ryu schools of Japan.

As for standard lengths for pairing against the sword there is no, nor has there ever been a 'standard length' for sword. Not having a standard length for jo makes sense to me. Standardization smacks more of modernity and sport's 'even playing field' concept than Japanese fighting tradition, which is not about that at all. Its well and fine to argue for a specific length but the 'tradition' idea in not I think the strongest way to defend standardized weapon lengths. Most schools of swordsmanship have their own different ideas about what constitutes a 'good' sword length and different lengths make different techniques stronger. Why would this not be the case for jo?

Andy Watson
6th July 2005, 14:44
Matthew

Please don't think that I am arguing wholeheatedly against having varying jo lengths as I see both sides of the argument, however I believe the rationale for having fixed lengths of both weapons are that many of the techniques in SMR jodo utilise the relative difference in lengths to certain advantages. This relationship of length is very subtle. To some degrees, some whole kata are built around the specific length restrictions and advantages of each weapon.

While it shouldn't make too much difference if the lengths are varied by one or two inches (as happens with the sword in iai), problems occur where complete freedom is given to the individual and you find a short jodo person using a 100cm jo fighting against a tall person with a 110cm sword. The meaning of many of the forms is lost in this instance.

I am also not a great lover of the standardization process and would hate it if someone dictated what size sword I use in iai but in paired forms the relationship is critical.

jest
6th July 2005, 23:15
Matthew

Please don't think that I am arguing wholeheatedly against having varying jo lengths as I see both sides of the argument, however I believe the rationale for having fixed lengths of both weapons are that many of the techniques in SMR jodo utilise the relative difference in lengths to certain advantages. This relationship of length is very subtle. To some degrees, some whole kata are built around the specific length restrictions and advantages of each weapon.

While it shouldn't make too much difference if the lengths are varied by one or two inches (as happens with the sword in iai), problems occur where complete freedom is given to the individual and you find a short jodo person using a 100cm jo fighting against a tall person with a 110cm sword. The meaning of many of the forms is lost in this instance.

I am also not a great lover of the standardization process and would hate it if someone dictated what size sword I use in iai but in paired forms the relationship is critical.

Good point, but I think I see one problem with your logic (that said, I've only done SMR jodo for about a year, so I know next to nothing!); I've noticed that in Sakan after I've slid back and initiated tsuki hazushi uchi (off the top of my head...) I have to lean in quite deeply, tilting forwards at the hips, to be able to contact the sword at all with the jo. I suspect this is mostly my terrible technique's fault but also a small part must be due to me being a little over 6'.
So I have the feeling that I have to adapt the kihon a little, by bending slight further, to make it an effective swipe of the bokken; a longer jo would allow me to remain more upright while performing the technique.
While I'm probably as wrong as wrong can get here, I do hope it's at least clear what I mean. :)

Brian Owens
7th July 2005, 02:05
BTW, just a little aside, based on the title of this thread.

Please; it's not a "jo staff," it's a jo.

No one says "katana sword" or "kama sickle" so why say "jo staff" ("staff staff"?).

I think it started with people saying "bo staff" to differentiate "bo" from "bow" (yumi), but I think it's unneccesary, as context should indicate which you mean.

It's just a niggling little detail, but one that bothers me each time I hear it.

kinopah
7th July 2005, 03:39
like "bo staff skills, nunchaku skills, computer-hacking skills..."

SMJodo
7th July 2005, 13:34
Draeger was not some guy from Blackbelt magazine trying to change tradition to make some "pseudo tactical fighting art". He was a serious jojutsu practitioner under Shimizu and one of the first Westerners to be granted a menkyo in one of the most traditional ko ryu schools of Japan.

I'm not disputing that Draeger was a revered martial artist. I'm just trying to illustrate that I feel it to be unwise and self-defeating for a lesser accomplished martial artist to significantly modify a traditional weapon (by applying tape, altering the length, or installling a handle) that has existed for 400 years.


problems occur where complete freedom is given to the individual and you find a short jodo person using a 100cm jo fighting against a tall person with a 110cm sword. The meaning of many of the forms is lost in this instance.

I fall more into the Andy's line of reasoning.

Alex Dale
7th July 2005, 16:55
(LOL Ed. I was about to cite Napoleon Dynamite. )



Regards,

Andy Watson
8th July 2005, 12:22
Joost

I am also 6'2" but the changes in seitei now stop us from leaning forwards too much or scooping. If the tachi thrusts correctly and the shijo doesn't leap back too far then it is possible to cover the thrust without bending.

Mekugi
11th July 2005, 18:46
PLEASE! Everyone knows it's not the size of the jo that counts....it's the way you use it (Thanks SD and DS for that!!)
-Russ

Joost

I am also 6'2" but the changes in seitei now stop us from leaning forwards too much or scooping. If the tachi thrusts correctly and the shijo doesn't leap back too far then it is possible to cover the thrust without bending.