View Full Version : Kodachi vs. katana
02-24-2001, 12:54 AM
I would like anyone's opinions on this matter. What are your personal pros and cons if you were armed with a kodachi and your opponent(s) has a katana. Personally I feel I would be quicker to parry and block and my footwork and evasion skills would have to be quicker and more clever to have to close in an my opponent. Against multiple opponents I would feel that the shorter length of my blade would help me maneuver it quickly enough to help defend myself against several incoming cuts. I'm sure there's more, but it is 3:00 AM here...
02-24-2001, 12:03 PM
I would give the advantage to the Katana. It is hard enough to deal with a sword when you have a similar style, but the kodachi makes it that more tougher.
Footwork and evasive moves might sound good, but if you are dealing with a competent swordsman the odds are very much against you. If you are totally unarmed (muto dori) than you are in a very bad situation. Never underestimate the ability of a good swordsman :).
I have only recently begun my journey into the sword arts, but I would have to also say the katana. It is not like we are comparing a broad sword to a cumbersome claymore. The kodachi may move faster, but the katana would strike harder. Besides, a skilled swordsman can really make that katana move, even if it is bigger. Also, depending on the tsuka length, it would be harder to get good two handed leverage on the kodachi.
I would hate to go up against multiple opponents no matter what I had. If you locked blades with one opponent, the others would slice you up.
02-26-2001, 02:17 PM
It should be remembered that Wakizashi were usually allowed in a house or place of business, while Katana were usually required to be left on a rack at the entrance. Most koryu have a small section of Wakizashi kata, while they concentrate on the katana. Samurai were permitted to carry katana, while merchants were relegated to the wakizashi. The Japanese Army's style Toyama Ryu was based on the Katana. I think all this would be visa versa if your theory was correct.
02-28-2001, 12:36 PM
It's been my experience that length/reach goes a very long way when considering an encounter between opponent's of comparable skill.
In swordsmanship, a quarter inch to an inch can make the difference between winning and losing. Some styles specialize in this kind of tactic.
I was invited to a knife fighting seminar sponsored by Cold Steel a few months ago that was really outstanding (I'm still planning on posting a review). This was also something that was demonstrated between two fairly even skilled instructor's. Both of them took turns with the shorter mock-knife, and in both cases the instructor with the shorter knife was clearly at a disadvantage.
The philosophy and tactics of your style/tradition would play a big part in this question, but technically I have found the shorter edged weapon to be at a disadvantage.
02-28-2001, 02:07 PM
Very much looking forward to your review!
02-28-2001, 03:37 PM
Thanks for the replies! I basically got what I was lookin for on both sides. For a duel, I realize the disadvantages of having a shorter weapon, due to the extra effort required to be within good cutting distance. And also if I was merely trying to gather information, stealthing, or trying to run and defend myself, the shorter katana would be ideal. I'm not really sure what else to expect from this, but keep them coming if you got somethin'! :look:
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.