Saber Forum

I'm starting to talk about some concepts on our YouTube channel, such as onehand vs twohand grip. Please leave me your thoughts on how a lightsaber should really be held, and how well that translates into real world interpretations of the weapon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNILkwqfphI

This video was by no means comprehensive. I left out a lot, actually! I hope to go in-depth into the distinct advantages of two-handing sometime. Do you one-hand or two-hand? Both? How do you decide what to do when?

Great video! I'm a 2-handed guy. Love the stability. However, it's nice seeing the range effect with 1-handed. I will have to try to add this in.

Very informative video!  Looking forward to more. 

I use two hands because I am mainly defending against my son coming at me at full strength and speed.  I don't go on the offensive too much unfortunately cause I am worried about accidently hurting him.

In Functional Fiction, we begin by teaching the two-handed grip, because most hilts are built for it and it's easier to learn precision that way. Later on, we teach single-hand fencing as it is a lot faster and harder to do in a controlled manner. The goal is to fight the way it is most useful in a given situation.
I switch according to my opponent, sometimes even mid-swing. Also, it depends on the hilt I'm using - some are better suited to one-handed use than others.

Personally, I prefer using one hand due to my fencing background.  I can use two, and in many cases do, but it's not the comfort zone that I default to.  With TPLA, we start with two handed techniques in Shii-Cho, for stability and control.  It's not long before you switch though, since Makashi uses primarily one hand.  In truth, there are numerous techniques learned in Soresu and Ataru that are one handed as well, but overall our system has a mix of both.  I think you really do need that kind of a combination, to allow learners the opportunity to train with both scenarios.

Depends on the application im going for. For raw speed and maneuverability, i grip my Dominix V4 at the top choke point so i can have the natural leverage of the balance point, as well as the smaller grip width. If i want to uhh, smash someones saber into bits, ill use two hands! Not literally smash into dust, but you get the idea. Kenpachi Zaraki said it well, "sometimes, i must use two hands."  

In all seriousness, it depends on my opponents style and what the situation calls for. If i were to be against Nero, id probably go for a one handed grip for faster parries, as well as being an overall slimmer target for most of the exchanges. Against someone who uses more raw power, id likely go two handed for more control when maneuvering my blade around theirs for feints or blade to blade tricks.

Do i hold it "correctly?" Technically yes, if i regard the saber the same as a katana or epee. But, the Dominix V4 is not weighted the same as the epee, though it is about the same length as a katana, with a 32 inch blade.

Really great seeing versatility in people's style. It's one of the awesome things about lightsaber that sets it apart from traditional weapons.

In my classes I prefer to go straight to single-handed application / Makashi so I can get people fighting as soon as possible. But I do see the value of starting two-handed with Shii-cho. I'm still kind of torn on which form is best to start with. Does anyone else begin with Makashi or skip Shii-cho altogether?

To start, each instructors interpretation of Makashi or Shii-Cho can differ in many ways. With that out of the way, personally ive adapted my laijutsu training into a sort of Makashi-esque form. Since laijutsu has alot of one handed maneuvers for positioning the blade and attacking. Since a lightsaber doesnt need a scabbard, i start in some variation of whatever stance suits my fancy for the moment.

I tend to rarely use two handed strikes due to the stuff outlined in the video, as well as my formal training with two handed Katana usage being more centered around defensive actions and blade to blade control. For me, two handed usage is basically limited to trying to control where my opponents blade ends up when its in my area so im not at risk of taking a hit if i can help it. Im not nearly as confident in my ability to strike with two hands as the starting point as i am with my ability to strike starting with a one handed grip. Thats not to say i dont add or remove a hand mid exchange for one reason or another, or that i absolutely cant strike with a two hand grip from start to finish. All depends on the flow of battle, and i find one handed grips more comfortable for my offensive needs.

One hand for me because of my Canne background ... For that reason i took the AEON V2 with its perfect hilt diameter.

And sometime, i use two hands applying my french staff style background with the Sentinel + Yari.

Interesting, I'll bite

I favor two handed technique for sabering because of the hilts mostly. There are very few actual one handers out there. Even initites are about as long as my german longsword grip.

Also. I think with sabers two hands will enable quicker strikes. the extra hanging off the end will tend to slow down such strikes with one hand. With two I can throw a good 4 or 5 strikes in the space of about 2 with one hand. Keep in mind I began with one handed technique in my development. When using two hands you have a big mechanical advantage over one. especially with alight poly blade.

Now the reach thing is true. But, you can get more out of the reach then I think was shown. I can still wield two handed and not square my shoulders forward. These strikes would be at the tip so just thrusts and tags and nothing too demanding as far as vertical alignment goes.  If you have
a very long saber hilt, you may be able to get exactly the same reach if yo let the hilt run along the arm and chest.

But, the real issue is I don't think either way is more correct. There are too many variables. I just impress that the grip should not be too loose or tight and you should be abke to change your grip easily at will. No matter if you have two hands on it or one. And don't let go n orbits (spinning).
Here are a couple of video we did a whle back : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qF23Nmhi1D8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnGkFLRdWIQ

Thanks for biting!

No argument from me for most of what you said. I tried reaching with a two-handed grip without squaring like you said and I was only able to pull it off with my longest hilt, which was at 12", and just barely (I have short arms). Do you think you can you still attack with the same speed/power without squaring?

The thing limiting your reach with a two-handed grip is your LEFT shoulder. If you want to use the leverage provided by the left hand on the grip/pommel, you cannot reach farther than your left arm allows - and that is limited by your left shoulder.
You COULD reach farther, but then your grip will be so weak, that you're essentially striking with your right hand alone (having to stretch your left arm to its limit).

That's not saber-specific, it's simply how the human body is set up.  ;)

But, then, we'll get to the topic of "correct" cutting/striking ...  :-\

Speed, most definitely. I am faster with two hands. The speed of the lunge doesn't change much with reach if all the timing is down, and that is in one plane of motion.Not to mention you can easily just let go at the end of the reach if you are a bit short.   (I know that some groups allow up to an 18 inch hilt as a single regular saber without classifying it as a pole arm)

As to the point about leverage, neither method produces any leverage out at their extreme reach. These strikes are either glancing cuts with the tip or stabs. Most would do the same damage with either a one or two handed grip. true cuts that use leverage will make contact at the point of percussion which in either case requires you to be within your reach.

As far as power goes, I feel power is a fairly irrelevant factor in sabering.  At least what we do with them.

And this is not to mention binding. Against one handed saberists a two hand grip can bind and knock the opponents weapon around. It's possible to do disarms but beat parries work very well for keeping them on the defensive. Binding them up and getting a strike in is a common tactic in our neck of the woods .

Interesting question, I'll contribute.
In LudoSport, Form I is taught to all pupils first, because its forward-facing position and two-handed grip (there is only one single-handed technique, so let's say it's a 99% two-handed style) mean a lot of control (both visual and physical) and therefore maximum safety. We teach students to grip with the dominant hand close to the emitter, and with the other hand close to the pommel, though of course there are some small adaptations depending on anatomy.
Form II has stances and movements that are much more fencing-like, so we move to a single-handed pistol grip which can become a hammer grip in some close-distance techniques or for some defenses. The style also has an array of two-handed techniques, that are almost a separate body and are meant to defend against specific techniques. Form II is definitely a harder style to learn, much more tiring, more precise, more difficult to control, so it's taught later.
Form III has both two-handed and single-handed stances, two-handed and single-handed techniques, and moves much more freely around the arena and the opponent, with tempo and misura changes, so it's safe to say it's entirely an order of magnitude more difficult than Form I, and is usually approached by students after 3 to 4 years of practice. It uses both grips, sometimes during the same sequence, so you can't really use only one of them in Form III.
I can't really comment upon the higher forms, but from what I have seen Form IV is mostly one-handed, being based upon unpredictability, and Form V is mostly two-handed, being a powerful style.
And that's it, really.
Have fun!

One isn't really 'better' than the other. Realistically you should be switching depending on the situation. Like a shooter in a tactical setting being able to shoot either right or left depending on the environment, a swordsman should be able to change stance, grip etc depending on his opponent or opponents (or lightsaber forms, in this case). During duels I find myself going one or two handed throughout, switching possible dozens of times based on what I believe the threat to be, or what attack I'm looking to take, or even the saber I'm using. With a curved hilt I'm usually using one hand, and with a staff I'm normally using two, but certain strikes and blocks with either can dictate using the opposite (two on a curved or one of a stafff). I know the video was just covering the basic concept, and the video says just as much that switching is important. But my eye it's less of 'one or the other', and more akin to two sides of the same coin.

Thanks for giving us the Ludosport perspective! At the moment I only offer a short introductory program, but I start students in single-grip, then start to dabble a little in double-grip, and then finally begin to do switch-offs. I do agree that two-handed techniques are easier to learn. Though I find it stunts the students' abilities to get good sparring experience in the early stages.

In my saber group I'm having a bit of a dilemma of what's the best setup for me. I've been using an initiate hilt with a 32" blade trying for mostly one handed, but have been struggling to win most of my fights. When I started a year ago I was using an Aeon v2 with a 36" blade and seemed to be doing okay but wanted to learn doubles and that's why I started one handed with an initiate. Should I go back to a longer hilt and blade doing two handed until I'm better with that style, or continue using one handed to try to learn doubles down the road?

My question is... Where should the activation button be? I always thought it should be facing upward so you can pres it with your thumb, but the Consular's grip looks as though it should be facing down so your fingers can use the grip.

Well, you had a significant reach advantage with the 36" Aeon, and reach (or, more precisely, ranging) is the #1 factor in a duel. So that could be contributing to that. If you decide to plug on a 36" to your Initiate, you may want to try the "follow-through style" found in military saber-fencing.

IMHO, sticking to two-handed doesn't really prepare you for going one-handed.

alright, ill join this discussion.
Keep in mind, I was self taught.
I favor a two handed style, though i do switch depending on my opponent and the sitiuation at hand. i prefer a two handed style because i use a lot of techniques from Soresu, the defence form. However, when I attack I use very Ataru techniques, focusing on my speed. it may also be due to the fact that i use an Aeon with a 36 inch heavy grade blade. the only problem that i have found with this style is reach as yoy stated.

If you want a serious, truthful answer, I would train extensively with two hands first.  After that, you can learn the one handed methods, and eventually down the line translate them to dual wielding.  Using two weapons in tandem is pretty advanced, and difficult to pull off effectively if you don't have a strong foundation.  Two handed usage of a saber will give you better stability overall, as well as more leverage on the weapon to perform quick strikes.

Keep in mind this is coming from someone who primarily uses one hand, so it's not like I'm biased in this matter ;)

On the flip side, however, accidentally hurting him will teach him a set of valuable lessons, such as "Don't attack someone who has you outmatched in size and strength".  ;D

The reason why I teach two-handed use first is based on a totally different reason: footwork. Two hands on the hilt give you better leverage, so you don't have to rely so much on footwork to power your strikes, or keep you from being hit. Being a bit slow on the feet does not have so much of an impact with a two-handed grip (it still does, for experienced fencers, but not for beginners).
One-handed fighting requires a lot more moving around, voiding instead of parrying and powering attacks by using footwork. You have to be light on your feet, playing with distance and tempo.
The goal is to be able to use benefits from both ways, flowing between them as seems fitting.

I love this conversation everyone, great insights all around.  Exactly the reason I joined this forum.  At the AFA, we certainly begin all new students two-handed with Shii-Cho.  Even those with a fencing background.  This is done for many of the reasons already covered in this thread; mainly the development of footwork, striking methods and parries from a solid foundation.  Makashi and the one handed technique expands on those skills as the emphasis shifts to balance, movement, evasion and controlling of the center line of engagement. We also find it takes a while (even for those in good shape) to build up the arm strength and endurance required for one handed guards or extended sparring.
Personally, I enjoy the flexibility to switch between styles based on situation and opponent.  But in a serious duel against a equal or greater opponent, I always revert to my Kendo training and find comfort in the two-handed grip and footwork. 
Now as for one-handed VS two-handed in a duel, we find the two-handed practitioner to have a distinct advantage when skill levels are similar between opponents.  Even our quickest and most skilled have a tough time getting around the power and defense of a determined two-handed approach.  You can see from our matches (click my signature below), the AFAs style of dueling is a little different from some others in have seen. There are examples of several different styles and skill level at play in the latest video.  I would love any feedback!