| Author |
Message |
|
Hugh Knight
|
 Posted: Fri 11 Jan, 2008 8:47 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Marton Pap wrote: | | Hugh Knight wrote: | and even more so, the safety swords, but your group obviously doesn't have that problem) make it impossible to do realistic Bloßfechten bouting; as just one example, in tests in our Schule we found that it's almost impossible to wear hand protection of the sort you're using and still Winden fast enough in the bind because the hand protection made the hands too clumsy. I call this the "Kendo Syndrome" because it reflects the same problem Kenjutsuka faced which lead to the change from Kenjutsu to Kendo, two almost completely unrelated arts.
|
Could you please describe the hand protection you have tried? Was it the "thumbgrip" that was effected so heavily by it? Could you give me a few further examples where safety seriously deforms the technique?
As I mentioned earlier I desperately seeking for information about this problem. |
We tried a range of things from very light street-hockey gloves (which I don't see being sold any more--the ones today seem heavier, but I had some old ones in my posssession) to heavy street-hockey gloves to lacrosse gloves to hockey gloves to various steel gauntlets.
We found they impeded any winding action of the sword; not that such absolutely couldn't be done (although they were much slower) but to the point that they made it impossible to do these kinds of techniques in a free play environment. This matches well with the fact that I never see any winding-type actions in free play videos that people post.
Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
|
|
    |
 |
|
Hugh Knight
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Jan, 2008 8:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mick Czerep wrote: | | In our case the gauntlet makes it slightly more difficult to turn the hand fron standard to thumbing grip, but nothing is impossible if you have a little bit if practice. The gauntlets were made especially for us (and for himself) by Jan. |
Then why weren't there any winding actions or related actions like the Durchwechseln in the bouting videos?
Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Henry Tobler
Location: Oxford, CT Joined: 25 Aug 2003
Posts: 704
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Jan, 2008 9:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hello everyone,
I haven't had the chance yet to watch the videos (but will when I get home from work), but wanted to comment quickly on a couple of discussion points:
1. There are folks doing bouting where obvious elements of the art are expressed including winding.
2. I bout regularly with steel gauntlets - I can wind with them just fine. I can do a Krumphau just fine in my hourglass gauntlets too.
3. I've bouted with steel swords with varying degrees of protective gear. In particular, my demonstration bout with Bill Grandy during the feast at WMAW was well-regarded, and high-level practitioners and researchers of Liechtenauer's art felt it showed the techniques well. We were able to leverage most of the five blows well, some winden, some techniques out of the Nebenhut, and certainly Durchwechseln. My friends from Germany were quite happy with what they saw, and that meant the world to me, as I know it did to Bill.
Poorly fitted gauntlets will make winding just about impossible, but even those shouldn't hinder a properly executed Durchwechseln.
You won't however see much winding in free play videos because winding is only likely between very skilled combatants; most mid-level guys parry to hard to make winden viable. It's only done when someone parries conservatively.
All these things can be done, but they require gobs of practice, properly fitted gear, and a mindset that focuses first and foremost on expressing and experiencing the true Art and considering the idea of 'winning' a distant fourth place priority.
All the best,
Christian
Christian Henry Tobler
Order of Selohaar
Freelance Academy Press: Books on Western Martial Arts and Historical Swordsmanship
Author, In Saint George's Name: An Anthology of Medieval German Fighting Arts
|
|
 |
|
|
Marton Pap
Location: Hungary Joined: 16 Jan 2006
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Jan, 2008 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hugh Knight wrote: |
We tried a range of things from very light street-hockey gloves (which I don't see being sold any more--the ones today seem heavier, but I had some old ones in my posssession) to heavy street-hockey gloves to lacrosse gloves to hockey gloves to various steel gauntlets.
We found they impeded any winding action of the sword; not that such absolutely couldn't be done (although they were much slower) but to the point that they made it impossible to do these kinds of techniques in a free play environment. This matches well with the fact that I never see any winding-type actions in free play videos that people post. |
What kind of sword did you use? I mean it may be possible to use nice light feders and even lighter gloves (even dethumbed), and maybe guard rings too (although not authentic for feders). Any opinions?
| Mick Czerep wrote: | In our case the gauntlet makes it slightly more difficult to turn the hand fron standard to thumbing grip, but nothing is impossible if you have a little bit if practice. The gauntlets were made especially for us (and for himself) by Jan.
Cheers
Mick |
Does the breastplate have a serious negative effect?
I'm wondering what if the fact of sparring is the greatest impediment of using proper techniques? I mean when drilling, one knows what will happen and what he has to do, but in sparring not. I often see some clumsiness in any kind of free fight compared to the preformed katas of the same art. Maybe from a level of drilling it would be useful to learn the striking combinations of higher level manuscripts and then use them during bouting. At least it helps to apply the advice: cut two or three times regardless of it hits or misses 
Thank You for the replies!
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kel Rekuta
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Jan, 2008 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mick Czerep wrote: | Hi Jan!
I think the films of you kicking my ass are not very popular around here 
Gentlemen? No comments at all? I'm sure there are some longsword fencing afficionados who could share their hints and tips with us. |
I've watched the first four. They are much like other groups' longsword sparring videos. Hugh's comments are pretty accurate IMHO but would apply to any group's videos at this point in the resurrection of these dead arts. Nobody is sufficiently skilled with the material and can perform the techniques under pressure in bouting, reliably. We just aren't there yet.
I don't study the Liechtenaur tradition so commenting on techniques that should be in evidence in your vids would be pointless. I will comment on two things:
-Very linear foot movement : all of you seem to enter straight on and stay there trying to bash around the blade in the centre line, usually attacking the sword. Bind it and then get the job done. Don't slap at it, hoping it will go away so one can tag the other with a quick snap.
-The "L" tradition has a number of primary guards besides left pflug. Use some of them. You may be surprised at the different opportunities available.
These comments are not directed at any one person in the vids. Free play is usually a mess. Spotting particular moments of quality technique in small, dark videos is very difficult for viewers. I would be more interested in seeing vids of your training at full speed than this free play. Your interpretations could be more easily discussed then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Czerep
Location: Poland Joined: 30 May 2007
Posts: 59
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Jan, 2008 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think the slapping on the sword and other silly maneouvres come from the fact that we know each other very well. We just know that our partners/opponents will counter us instantly. One of the downsides of a realtively small longsword community in our area...
Sordes ocurrit
|
|
 |
|
|
Thomas Parsons
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Jan, 2008 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
just to share some decent videos 
These guys aren't of my group or anything, they're just good researchers and presenters of some of the Art.
enjoy 
http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=HC5FIyfI8TA
http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=Kj4Ng6DBfrg
the work shown is set pieces not free bouting, however it conveys a very clear image of what the "academic" version could have been...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kel Rekuta
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Jan, 2008 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mick Czerep wrote: | | I think the slapping on the sword and other silly maneouvres come from the fact that we know each other very well. We just know that our partners/opponents will counter us instantly. One of the downsides of a realtively small longsword community in our area... |
And clearly a downside of posting playtime with friends and soliciting useful feedback. 
Here's a thought. Videorecord some full speed drills, even short ones demonstrating actions against fast committed attacks. Look carefully at the counters that fail and a little at the ones that succeed. Show us how it was going wrong, how you think it should be fixed and then the successes. That would be helpful to a lot of people, IMHO. You'd gather lots of feedback to be sure. 
|
|
|
|
|
Steven H
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Jan, 2008 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hello,
Largely I agree with points that Hugh makes as far as what needs improvement in your sparring. However, I will agree with Christian Tobler on the ability to practice blossfechten well with appropriate gear. Our groups uses hockey and lacrosse gloves of various types as well as hardened leather gauntlets of my own design. We are able to readily make use of the various binding and winding techniques of the Lichtenauer tradition.
There are three points made that I must disagree with:
| Jan Chodkiewicz wrote: | Things change, when you sparing for real.
Besides, I think that people who learned german longsword, don't remember that is " forbidden and secret words of the teachings are hereafter in the glosa clarified and explained so that anyone who otherwise understands fencing can understand them." So, it's not the basics - we have to discover them by ourselves. If you study modern fencing, you can find, that most of medieval techniqes now belong to advanced actions in sport fencing. Sombody without few years of training, simply cannot use only these techniques in sparing. |
1. If things change when sparring then what is the point of the treatises? While the treatises are intended for experienced students they are not merely collections of advanced techniques. There is plenty of discussion of principles. Von Danzig tells you not to attack the opponents sword. This is not advanced technical advice, it is a basic principle, which you do not follow. You are advised to step with your right foot as you attack from the right and you don't - you remain left foot forward almost always and rely on footwork more akin to Kendo or modern sport fencing. The value of a displacing cut like Zornhau is clearly spelled out and attacking the blade referred to as a bad parry, yet this basic principle also does not appear in your sparring.
All of these are basics. Not techniques too advanced to learn in the first three years. They are core principles of the system repeated several times in almost every treatise.
| Mick Czerep wrote: |
What you see is obviously different from 'pure treatise' technique, as it is extremely difficult to DO the prescribed moves in a fight against a determined opponent who doesn't conform to 'the system' and not just DEMONSTRATE them in more or less isolation or at lower speed level. |
2. If the opponent must conform to the system for the techniques to work then you must question your understanding of the material or practice it more. I've held my own against fighters using Fiore and modern practice by using German technique. There is not an attack or technique in any other system which cannot be countered within the German system. At least I've not found it. And neither player in the videos were using unusual techniques so outside of the system that Lichtenauer couldn't handle them.
| Jan Chodkiewicz wrote: |
When you attack with series of strikes , when you try to bounce oponent sword and then attack, when you provoke smb to attack to parry/displace and riposte - I know, that it's not describe precisly in von Danzig treatise, but if you think about it, search, you can draw a conclusion that it was used. |
3. We, as a community, must be careful when using this kind of logic. We can't know for sure what is in the gaps that aren't clearly spelled out in the treatises. There is an American term for this: frog DNA - it refers to the problems caused by filling the gaps with our modern material. As such we should look at any additions to the system to see if they fit within the principles of the system. I do not believe that this technique does because it relies on attacking the opponents blade which is specifically advised against. A canny opponent will duchwechseln, zucken or abnemen against such a maneuver.
I would recommend more antagonistic drilling as you continue your studies. Specifically:
1. Have the players line up against each other (a fathom apart (Meyer)) and one throws an attack and the other must defend with Zornhau. Reset and repeat.
This will teach the judgment of timing and distance necessary to use the technique; it will teach how to enter the bind so you can make use of binding and winding techniques. And it will prove that the technique works just fine against a non-cooperative opponent.
2. Start in the bind. Free play without leaving the bind. You'll have to learn how to apply winding techniques for anything to happen.
There are plenty of other kinds of antagonistic drills you can use but these two will likely address the biggest areas of improvement.
Good luck with your further studies
-Steven
P.S. Sorry if I sound harsh. I really want the WMA to be well done. So we must all learn from each other.
Kunstbruder - Boston area Historical Combat Study
|
|
|
|
|
Jan Chodkiewicz
Industry Professional
Location: Danzig - POLAND Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 31
|
| Posted: Sun 13 Jan, 2008 4:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hugh and Steven,
Thank you for your comments, but in my opinion the treatises are not so canonical, as you wrote. One and only true, that you decribes simply doesn't exist in fencing. There are many possibilities. You can find them in the treatises too, it's not frog DNA
ATTACKING THE BLADE
| Quote: | | on Danzig tells you not to attack the opponents sword. This is not advanced technical advice, it is a basic principle, which you do not follow. |
| Quote: | | but I couldn't identify any specific German Meisterhauen and he tended to cut at his opponent's sword rather than his head and body as the masters direct us to do (both men did this) |
Of course, you can find this advice in treatise, but .... What you do when you defend by first and basic Maisterhau -Zornhau? - you exacly attack the oponent sword , and then thrust. "And this do thus: When you come to him in the Zufechten and he strikes to you then from his right side above to the head, then strike also from your right side from above to completely displace his sword with wrath.If he is soft at the sword, then shoot the point skillfully along it and thrust to his face or breast. Thus set upon him."
Krumphau, the same situation, "strike against his strike = sword", - . If he then strikes above to your opening, then strike strongly with the long edge with crossed arms against his strike. And as soon as the swords clash, then wind immediately (Indes) against his to your left side with the short edge on his sword and thrust to his face. Or, if you do not want to thrust, then strike him immediately with the short edge from the sword to his head or body.
another, - Note, This means when he wants to strike above from his right side to you, then drive high with the hands and pretend as if you intend to bind against his sword with the Krumphau. And drive with the point under through his sword and thrust to his other side to the face or breast and remember well to defend your head with the hilt.
in this one, you even pretend to atack the oponent sword, and then make durchwechseln. Pure fencing
Schielhau - Note, When you come to him in the Zufechten and he stands against you and holds the Langenort (Long Point) to your face or chest, then hold your sword at the right shoulder. ‘Squint’ with your face at his point and pretend as if you want to strike to it. But strike strongly with the Squinter with the short edge to his sword and shoot the point long to his throat with a step of your right foot.
This is also clear attacking the blade, then thrust....
Besides, in Kendo and sport fencing "slapping the blade" is not "l silly maneouvre". It's called Harai- waza, or Beat, and it works.
UBERLAUFEN
| Quote: | | White failed to respond to these legs attacks with an Uberlauffen as he ought to have. |
Yes, he failed. Becouse usualy I attack lower opening during series of attack. Then it works. Doebringer tells that it's risky, becouse it is, but it's not forbidden.
You should always look for the upper openings rather then the lower, and go over his hilt with strikes or thrusts artfully and quickly. For you have better reach over the hilt then under it and you are also much safer in all fencing. The upper touch is much better then the lower. It may happen that you are closer to the lower opening and therefore seek it, as often happens.
GUARDS
| Quote: | | he "L" tradition has a number of primary guards besides left pflug. Use some of them. You may be surprised at the different opportunities available. |
Of course, you are right. But I think, that for right-handed, Left Pflug is most comfortable, and safe guard. (protects from quick attack to the hands, feint - thrust etc.) We mostly pass through the guards, when we decide to strike. Or stand in, after stike, at the bind (Ochs) In my opinion, standing in guards, and waiting is wrong. It shows, what you will do, and that's why is without any sense. I see this on many videos, and it's rather like samurai duel in Kurosawa movies, then real sparing. (Doebringer wrote:
"And what you would try readily in earnest or in play, should be hidden from him so that he does not know what you intend to try against him")
DISPLACEMENTS and BIND
Modern fencing distinguish two types of fighting - with or without the bind. Both have advantage and disadvantage. In my opinion it works in sword fencing, too.
Best Regards
Jan Chodkiewicz
"Omnis enim artifex intendit producere opus pulcrum et utile et stabile."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Randall Pleasant
Location: Flower Mound, Texas Joined: 24 Aug 2003
Posts: 333
|
| Posted: Sun 13 Jan, 2008 7:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jan Chodkiewicz wrote: |
Of course, you can find this advice in treatise, but .... What you do when you defend by first and basic Maisterhau -Zornhau? - you exacly attack the oponent sword , and then thrust. "And this do thus: When you come to him in the Zufechten and he strikes to you then from his right side above to the head, then strike also from your right side from above to completely displace his sword with wrath.If he is soft at the sword, then shoot the point skillfully along it and thrust to his face or breast. Thus set upon him." |
Jan
The masters did clearly state to not strike at the sword and the master clearly described techniques which involve striking at the sword. Most people take this to mean that striking at the sword should not be the primary mode of defense. In ARMA we make the assumption that the masters wanted you to hit your adversary whenever possible. Thus the Zorn-to-Zorn counter is not interpreted as just a strike to the sword followed by a thrust from the bind. Rather it is an attempt to actually counter-cut, the thrust is what you follow up with when you fail to cut and only established a bind.
| Jan Chodkiewicz wrote: | | Besides, in Kendo and sport fencing "slapping the blade" is not "l silly maneouvre". It's called Harai- waza, or Beat, and it works. |
In ARMA's interpretations using the flat to protect one's self is clearly found in the German manuals. It is the basic action of an Absetzen. Three guards make it very easy and safe to protect one's self with the flat of the blade: Pflug, Alber, & Ochs.
Ran Pleasant
ARMA DFW
|
|
|
|
|
|
Randall Pleasant
Location: Flower Mound, Texas Joined: 24 Aug 2003
Posts: 333
|
| Posted: Sun 13 Jan, 2008 7:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Randall Pleasant wrote: | | Jan Chodkiewicz wrote: |
Of course, you can find this advice in treatise, but .... What you do when you defend by first and basic Maisterhau -Zornhau? - you exacly attack the oponent sword , and then thrust. "And this do thus: When you come to him in the Zufechten and he strikes to you then from his right side above to the head, then strike also from your right side from above to completely displace his sword with wrath.If he is soft at the sword, then shoot the point skillfully along it and thrust to his face or breast. Thus set upon him." |
Jan
The masters did clearly state to not strike at the sword and the master clearly described techniques which involve striking at the sword. Most people take this to mean that striking at the sword should not be the primary mode of defense. Rather, counter-cutting should be the primary mode of defense. In ARMA we make the assumption that the masters wanted you to hit your adversary whenever possible. Thus the Zorn-to-Zorn counter is not interpreted as just a strike to the sword followed by a thrust from the bind. Rather it is an attempt to actually counter-cut, the thrust is what you follow up with when you fail to cut and only established a bind.
| Jan Chodkiewicz wrote: | | Besides, in Kendo and sport fencing "slapping the blade" is not "l silly maneouvre". It's called Harai- waza, or Beat, and it works. |
In ARMA's interpretations using the flat to protect one's self is clearly found in the German manuals. It is the basic action of an Absetzen. Three guards make it very easy and safe to protect one's self with the flat of the blade: Pflug, Alber, & Ochs.
Ran Pleasant
ARMA DFW |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas Parsons
|
| Posted: Sun 13 Jan, 2008 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
just to tie in with Randall pleasants' comment: it is also a possibility that the masters describe techniques "from the cross/bind/blade" in the event that your attempt to strike your man met with his blade on the way. The mindset remains the same throughout: strike the man!
This probably echoes many: the techniques used with the mindset to strike the man will void or counter his attack, when correclty executed , without you needing to concentrate on the defensive aspect of the action: this leaves you to concentrate on the serious trouble-free maiming of your opponent 
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Sun 13 Jan, 2008 10:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Thomas Parsons wrote: | just to tie in with Randall pleasants' comment: it is also a possibility that the masters describe techniques "from the cross/bind/blade" in the event that your attempt to strike your man met with his blade on the way. The mindset remains the same throughout: strike the man!
This probably echoes many: the techniques used with the mindset to strike the man will void or counter his attack, when correclty executed , without you needing to concentrate on the defensive aspect of the action: this leaves you to concentrate on the serious trouble-free maiming of your opponent |
That would seem to be the ideal and the mindset one should keep in mind when trying to meet the ideal.
The danger of mutual kills seem fairly high ?
Sort of a game of chicken if both swordsmen aim at each other and not the sword the goal of each is to force the other onto the defensive: If neither does go to the defensive or one has a timing/speed/displacement advantage the results are a mutual kill if neither goes defensive. If the other goes into the defensive then the winding etc ,,, come into play.
A disparity of skill also makes a great difference to the results I think because if we have two swordsmen of equal skill and experience the results of the fight become much more unpredictable and I would think experienced fighters would become very cautious and there would be a lot of shifting of guards and counter guards as well as staying out of distance until a opportunity seemed to appear. The actual fight could be very short but most of it would be positioning for an extended time?
One thing to try with bouting is to get into the state of mind that any mistake would be lethal for each exchange and make sure that a long enough pause is there between exchanges that is doesn't become a fast pace competitive game.
Note: I don't have the level of training/experience/knowledge to even discuss the actual techniques, so I'm talking more about the approach to training that simulates the lethal stakes of a real duel the best, and suggesting an approach.
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Czerep
Location: Poland Joined: 30 May 2007
Posts: 59
|
| Posted: Sun 13 Jan, 2008 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Jean!
I think you expressed very aptly what we failed to express. Between two people of similar skill, who, what is worse, know each other well, a bout will not look pretty, fluid or decisive.
Look at competing wrestlers or judoka - all this rolling about or trying to tear your opponents sleeve off... Unless there is a significant disparity of skill, of course...
Cheers
Mick
Sordes ocurrit
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Knight
|
| Posted: Sun 13 Jan, 2008 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jan Chodkiewicz wrote: | | Of course, you can find this advice in treatise, but .... What you do when you defend by first and basic Maisterhau -Zornhau? - you exacly attack the oponent sword , and then thrust. "And this do thus: When you come to him in the Zufechten and he strikes to you then from his right side above to the head, then strike also from your right side from above to completely displace his sword with wrath.If he is soft at the sword, then shoot the point skillfully along it and thrust to his face or breast. Thus set upon him." |
You misunderstand the instruction. The Zornhau does result in a bind, it's true, but you are to cut it as if you were trying to cut your opponent and just let his sword get in the way. That way, if he reacts and tries to do something else he will die from your cut in the fencing time before he can do anything else. You simply cut at one another's blades in what Ringeck calls "empty displacements", which is very different. Most of the time you couldn't even have reached your opponent when you did one of these "sword slaps".
| Quote: | | Krumphau, the same situation, "strike against his strike = sword", - . If he then strikes above to your opening, then strike strongly with the long edge with crossed arms against his strike. And as soon as the swords clash, then wind immediately (Indes) against his to your left side with the short edge on his sword and thrust to his face. Or, if you do not want to thrust, then strike him immediately with the short edge from the sword to his head or body. |
Again, sorry, but you misunderstand. The version of the Krumphau to which you refer is a momentary bind just to prevent your opponent's sword from tracking you as you move to cut him. You must immediately move up to cut with an Unterhau or Wind from that bind (and neither of you even attempted a Winden). Neither of you did either a Krumphau or any of the follow-on actions from it. As I said, you just smacked at one another's swords in empty displacements. Indeed, in many of the "slaps" neither of you could even reach the other, so action that was the reason for the blade contact mentioned wasn't possible.
| Quote: | Schielhau - Note, When you come to him in the Zufechten and he stands against you and holds the Langenort (Long Point) to your face or chest, then hold your sword at the right shoulder. ‘Squint’ with your face at his point and pretend as if you want to strike to it. But strike strongly with the Squinter with the short edge to his sword and shoot the point long to his throat with a step of your right foot.
This is also clear attacking the blade, then thrust.... |
You make the same mistake again. This bind is almost a single-time action, not a useless beat of the blade as you and your partner were doing.
| Quote: | | Besides, in Kendo and sport fencing "slapping the blade" is not "l silly maneouvre". It's called Harai- waza, or Beat, and it works. |
You aren't supposed to be demonstrating Kendo, you're supposedly demonstrating der Kunst des Fechtens. I noticed other strictly Kendo techniques in what you did, too; your bout looked a lot more like Kendo than the KdF.
| Quote: | Yes, he failed. Becouse usualy I attack lower opening during series of attack. Then it works. Doebringer tells that it's risky, becouse it is, but it's not forbidden.
You should always look for the upper openings rather then the lower, and go over his hilt with strikes or thrusts artfully and quickly. For you have better reach over the hilt then under it and you are also much safer in all fencing. The upper touch is much better then the lower. It may happen that you are closer to the lower opening and therefore seek it, as often happens. |
First, you launched leg attacks from the Zufechten several times, which means that it wasn't part of a combination as you imply. Second, Döbringer's comments about attacking the legs clearly refer to actions from the bind--in the Krieg--not from the Zufechten as you did them; that's what he means by being closer to the lower openings: he's talking about where your blade is in a bind. Third, what you did worked (when it did) only because your opponent didn't react as he should have; from any art's standpoint it was poor technique.
Look, I gather you posted those video expecting universal applause, and I'm sorry you're not getting it. But if you post them you have to be willing to accept the valid criticisms you've received. Previously I assumed that, like many others who post bouting videos, you knew the techniques but were just having trouble doing them correctly or were so carried away by the fun of bouting that you ignored the manuals you're supposed to be studying. Now I'm forced to believe that either you simply don't understand the intent of those manuals *at all*, even at the most basic level, or else are wilfully ignoring what you know to defend what you were doing.
Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Sun 13 Jan, 2008 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mick Czerep wrote: | Hi Jean!
I think you expressed very aptly what we failed to express. Between two people of similar skill, who, what is worse, know each other well, a bout will not look pretty, fluid or decisive.
Look at competing wrestlers or judoka - all this rolling about or trying to tear your opponents sleeve off... Unless there is a significant disparity of skill, of course...
Cheers
Mick |
Thanks.
With Judo at the Olympics I always thought it just looked like a brawl by two drunken guys at a bar.  And funny enough my theory was like yours that at equal skill levels a lot of the technique just cancels itself out ! Or at least it looks that way.
I could be wrong as I don't remember the source, but I think the period Japanese master swordsmen would tend to want to avoid fighting each other unless they had a really REALLY good reason to do so.
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Knight
|
| Posted: Sun 13 Jan, 2008 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mick Czerep wrote: | Hi Jean!
I think you expressed very aptly what we failed to express. Between two people of similar skill, who, what is worse, know each other well, a bout will not look pretty, fluid or decisive.
Look at competing wrestlers or judoka - all this rolling about or trying to tear your opponents sleeve off... Unless there is a significant disparity of skill, of course... |
But a Judoka who attacks still does so with techniques from Judo, however sloppy or inaccurate they may appear to the untrained eye. He doesn't throw a spinning back kick in the middle of the bout because, after all, Kano didn't know everything, and the kick works better than those silly old throws!
Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
|
|
|
|
|
Vincent Le Chevalier
|
| Posted: Sun 13 Jan, 2008 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | The danger of mutual kills seem fairly high ?
Sort of a game of chicken if both swordsmen aim at each other and not the sword the goal of each is to force the other onto the defensive: If neither does go to the defensive or one has a timing/speed/displacement advantage the results are a mutual kill if neither goes defensive. If the other goes into the defensive then the winding etc ,,, come into play.
|
I think this exact observation is what led to the priority rules that still exist nowadays in modern fencing.
Even though targetting the man and seeking the counter is ideal, I believe there are cases when one must recognize that the timing difference is too great, and focus on the direct threat from the sword, thus defend the sword first, then eventually go to the man. This blends from two-time parry and riposte if possible, to almost single-time displace then thrust, to single time cut and displace.
It seems to me that the one objective in many martial traditions is to stay alive. Killing the opponent is one efficient way to end the danger. But it remains a secondary objective, and shouldn't be detrimental to the first one, in my opinion. So there must be some trade-off at times...
--
Vincent
Ensis Sub Caelo
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas Parsons
|
| Posted: Sun 13 Jan, 2008 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | | Thomas Parsons wrote: | just to tie in with Randall pleasants' comment: it is also a possibility that the masters describe techniques "from the cross/bind/blade" in the event that your attempt to strike your man met with his blade on the way. The mindset remains the same throughout: strike the man!
This probably echoes many: the techniques used with the mindset to strike the man will void or counter his attack, when correclty executed , without you needing to concentrate on the defensive aspect of the action: this leaves you to concentrate on the serious trouble-free maiming of your opponent |
That would seem to be the ideal and the mindset one should keep in mind when trying to meet the ideal.
The danger of mutual kills seem fairly high ?
Sort of a game of chicken if both swordsmen aim at each other and not the sword the goal of each is to force the other onto the defensive: If neither does go to the defensive or one has a timing/speed/displacement advantage the results are a mutual kill if neither goes defensive. If the other goes into the defensive then the winding etc ,,, come into play.
A disparity of skill also makes a great difference to the results I think because if we have two swordsmen of equal skill and experience the results of the fight become much more unpredictable and I would think experienced fighters would become very cautious and there would be a lot of shifting of guards and counter guards as well as staying out of distance until a opportunity seemed to appear. The actual fight could be very short but most of it would be positioning for an extended time?
One thing to try with bouting is to get into the state of mind that any mistake would be lethal for each exchange and make sure that a long enough pause is there between exchanges that is doesn't become a fast pace competitive game.
Note: I don't have the level of training/experience/knowledge to even discuss the actual techniques, so I'm talking more about the approach to training that simulates the lethal stakes of a real duel the best, and suggesting an approach. |
Please don't get me wrong: I am not proning the unresponsable hacking of training partners just for the sake of historic accuracy I believe that: using the appropriate sparring equipement, coupled with the strictly necessary (and not "overdone") protection, a accurate control of your weapon and finally accepting the fact that this might hurt; then you can hope to reach a degree of technical accuracy and intent in your sparring. As Master Ringeck tells us:
"If you are fearful you should not fence, for a despondant heart will always be beaten regardless of skill"
As to the "simultaneous kill" I would not say that the likelihood of such an occurrence is increased with the aforementioned mindset regardless of the levels of each fencer:
1) whatever position your opponent adopts this automatically narrows down your possibilities of action / your opponents' mind will run through this analytical process equally...
2) according to what you know is a viable technique against your opponents stance so shall you move in upon your opponent: if you have correclty selected your action from the available panel then the most likely actions your opponent can perform will be adequately protected by your action as it homes in on him / your opponent goes through this train of thought and action as well
Yes I hear you saying: "But this just proves my point!"
Here's the catch: both fencers will not react at the same time - the fastest fencer (from analytical process to action) will automatically take the "Vor" (initiative) thus forcing the other fencer onto the defensive after the initial crossing of swords; unless of course he slashes the guys head off ...
This is by no means an absolute "rule" but it is what I have seen and experienced more often than not in my fencing and in observing others... apart from the serious slashing of heads ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic