[split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

An experienced fighter does not want to keep the enemy at maximum distance, he wants to get close and personal and finish the job. This is not a theory, this is what medieval pole arm fighting manuals describe.
Of course medieval pole arms were handled with two hands, and they didn't need to move the point of balance backwards, this is why Greek spears are considerably longer, SOME times, because one needs to have some reach while holding it with one hand.

You may argue now that pole arms have nothing to do with how hoplites fought, and you may be right, but then rennaissance spear fighting with big round domed shields suggest to ALWAYS use your spear overhand...

Once a friend who is familiar with medieval spear and shield fighting in arguing about the real length of the Hoplite spear asked, "why is it so long?!" Experienced fighters do not fear to get close to their enemy, in fact it is a necessary process in order to kill them.

This is for experienced hoplites though, archaic and classical aristocrats in the first rank, who only care in their lives about their physical beauty and military prowess, for they have all their other problems solved.

Need to form a new army by bringing down to the plains farm boys from the mountains, who don't even speak the common Greek language? Then give them five meter long sarissas, and spare them the expensive and aristocratic aspis, for they don't even know how to use it, and voila! A cheap, effective phalanx, that can stop, but not beat, the old style hoplites.
There is not one account where the Macedonian phalanx, not even under Alexander, beat the old style phalanx on its own. Actually in their first encounter, in Chaironeia, Philip almost lost, and had the Macedonian cavalry not surrounded the Thebans, the battle would have been lost for Philip.

So the point about which method gives you a few inches more reach is mute.