I have no problems with a spike on a Tomahawk.
However,the problem is not striking with the Tomahawk, like a hammer.
The problem is when the Tomahawk is grabbed by your opponent in a fight or sparring.
Now your opponent has as much weapon as you do.
With a sword/knife you can only grab the opponents wrist as the rest of the weapon is blade.
Grab the blade and your fingers are going to be cut.
This gives all disarm and leverage advantage to the user of the sword.
Grab a Tomahawk handle and the opponent now has equal control of the weapon.
If he grabs the Hawk closer to the edge he has a better leverage advantage then the user.
With a spike on the back as opposed to a pol or nothing, you are now at a disadvantage.
I don't want to put words in Dwights mouth but I believe this is what he was refering too.
When faced with a weapon you have two choises.
Close the gap and deal with your opponent in grappling range or stay outside of striking range.
In grappling range the spike Tomahawk can be used against the users more effectively than a hammer pol.
I would not want to get hit with eithter but the spike is a one strike stopper,even with a less than full force blow.
...
respectfully disagree on your last, brother grappler...;
a poll can do worse than a spike just as often, if you know what you are doing - you can't get as good of autonomic reactions with a spike that cuts or penetrates through, as a bared ulna or a hammer poll can in parts of the body - that's over most folks' heads though - they just want a good tool.
i can stick a spike through your superorbital nerve and into your frontal lobe, and you might still be 98 percent operational, at least for the next few minutes;
now you take a poll to that same target, or to that cluster under your nose, and you are going down hard.
i've seen it in the real deal, not on the mat.
a lot of folks who haven't killed or "seen killed" with any amount of clarity are under the mistaken impression that penetration equals better contact than blunt impact.
not always the case.
....good points on knowing weaknesses and strengths, brother grappler ...and understanding them, etc.
i have a little experience in these things...;
i'd like to see you try some of the things you are talking about, brother grappler, against a serious opponent.
- not saying you couldn't - i would enjoy seeing it.
hawks are hitting a re-birth with all the gun control ...there are a lot of tricks that some folks are going to learn the hard way.
i think the sentiment that a spike is more valuable than a hammer poll is limiting too ...i want to be naive in a combat, so every opportunity is clearly that, a chance...;
a hammer poll would be nice on sternums and scapulae, knees and femurs, and aortic clusters like the subclavians, which tend to get out of the way of a spike or a blade. - a trachea will sometimes glance a spike or a blade, where a poll will do better in my experience
(i haven't always been this sweet, you see ...hehehe...!)
....but, as you know, ...spikes are nice for scalloping too, if you are a real technician, you beasties out there ...har...! ...and multiple strikes on the lower spine with a spike can beat a poll because of the 20 percent blood volume in each kidney (something you might see especially in multiple adversaries sorties, where you hit on the swing, and on the recovery, too be most efficient)...but that is splitting hairs, just for the purposes of discussion.
i think the poll and a spike are about the same, in utility as well as combat.
folks just don't think of the applications usually.
killing is pretty straight forward;
arm yourself, get there before the other guy does, and kill him.
if a grappler
(not our good brother here hopefully) gets your weapon, as far as i am concerned, you effed up - and you still have counter-measures so get going.
go for beers and debrief.
....YMMV.
vec
