Double underhooks

European historical unarmed fighting techniques & methods

Moderators: Webmaster, Stacy Clifford

User avatar
RayMcCullough
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:05 am
Location: Robertsdale, AL

Double underhooks

Postby RayMcCullough » Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:15 am

I started noticing that all the manuals that I have looked at have defenses for the double underhooks but they do not advocate the use of the double unerhooks.
Has anyone seen a manual that advocates the use of the double underhooks?
"The Lord is my strenght and my shield, my heart trusteth in Him and I am helped..." Psalms 28:7

"All fencing is done with the aid of God." Doebringer 1389 A.D.

User avatar
JeffGentry
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2004 8:35 am
Location: Columbus Ohio

Re: Double underhooks

Postby JeffGentry » Thu Dec 27, 2007 11:38 am

RayMcCullough wrote:I started noticing that all the manuals that I have looked at have defenses for the double underhooks but they do not advocate the use of the double unerhooks.
Has anyone seen a manual that advocates the use of the double underhooks?


Double underhook's and over under is a staple grip in wrestling for taking an opponent to the ground, the fighting at arm's length just get's you hit in the face, so closing to clinch is something you need to be willing to do in order to execute throw's and takedown's.

I have not seen it advocated in any manual it is a very basic technique though, even the untrained tend to do in desparation when getting overwhelmed by strike's.

Jeff
Semper Fidelis

Usque ad Finem

Grace, Focus, Fluidity

LynGrey
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 9:10 pm

Postby LynGrey » Wed Jan 16, 2008 2:18 pm

-mispost deleted-

User avatar
Jeff Hansen
Posts: 122
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 3:48 pm
Location: Pelham, AL

Re: Double underhooks

Postby Jeff Hansen » Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:53 am

JeffGentry wrote:
RayMcCullough wrote:I started noticing that all the manuals that I have looked at have defenses for the double underhooks but they do not advocate the use of the double unerhooks.
Has anyone seen a manual that advocates the use of the double underhooks?


Double underhook's and over under is a staple grip in wrestling for taking an opponent to the ground, the fighting at arm's length just get's you hit in the face, so closing to clinch is something you need to be willing to do in order to execute throw's and takedown's.

I have not seen it advocated in any manual it is a very basic technique though, even the untrained tend to do in desparation when getting overwhelmed by strike's.

Jeff

Agreed, and I think that like the grapevine, it'll work but it is difficult to do without going down yourself as well. So they show the defence but don't waste space on the technique itself.
Jeff Hansen
ARMA FS
Birmingham, AL study group leader

"A coward believes he will ever live
if he keep him safe from strife:
but old age leaves him not long in peace
though spears may spare his life." - from The Havamal

Stewart Sackett
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 5:46 am
Location: Portland, OR

Postby Stewart Sackett » Thu Jan 17, 2008 4:17 pm

While double underhooks or a body lock will serve to set up a takedown very well, such techniques don't tend to control an opponent's arms. This strikes me as dangerous in a culture where every man carries a dagger. If you don't want your enemy drawing his dagger or stealing yours then attacking from arm control makes sense.

A historical preferance for a 2-on-1 over a body hold is purely an assumption on my part. I've never read any primary source material that directly addressed the issue, but it does seem sensible & seems to work with a lot of the Codex plays that my group has been going over.

Edit: it also makes sense that weapon control would be emphasized in manuals written to adress the training of knights & soldiers, while more conventional grappling techniques would also exist in the sport wrestling that was common in the period.

User avatar
Robert Bertram
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 10:16 pm

Postby Robert Bertram » Fri May 23, 2008 9:32 pm

Stewart Sackett wrote:While double underhooks or a body lock will serve to set up a takedown very well, such techniques don't tend to control an opponent's arms. This strikes me as dangerous in a culture where every man carries a dagger. If you don't want your enemy drawing his dagger or stealing yours then attacking from arm control makes sense.

A historical preferance for a 2-on-1 over a body hold is purely an assumption on my part. I've never read any primary source material that directly addressed the issue, but it does seem sensible & seems to work with a lot of the Codex plays that my group has been going over.

Edit: it also makes sense that weapon control would be emphasized in manuals written to adress the training of knights & soldiers, while more conventional grappling techniques would also exist in the sport wrestling that was common in the period.


That's an interesting thought. Are there any manuels that suggest you try to get to your dagger and stab them when they get you into the double underhooks?

Also, I think that if someone is good at grappling, they would be able to get you on the ground before you could do much. By that time, the one who had his opponent with the double underhooks might have them at a mount or some other controlling and dominating position. It would be easy enough for him to pull his own dagger at this point without much worry.

Codex, as you're familiar with, tells us to "grasp his head quickly and strongly with both your hands and push it back a bit and down"

The key word in the phrase is "quickly" and if there is a delay at all, a scenario similar to the one I mentioned before will occur.

Trying to grab a dagger would take too long for it to be a real threat if you know how to grapple well.


Return to “Unarmed Skills Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

 
 

Note: ARMA - The Association for Renaissance Martial Arts and the ARMA logo are federally registered trademarks, copyright 2001. All rights reserved. No use of the ARMA name or emblem is permitted without authorization. Reproduction of material from this site without written permission of the authors is strictly prohibited. HACA and The Historical Armed Combat Association copyright 1999 by John Clements. All rights reserved. Contents of this site 1999 by ARMA.