Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Practice with sharpe sword? Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next 
Author Message
Klaus Gimm




Location: Germany
Joined: 08 Aug 2008

Posts: 62

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 1:04 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Vassilis Tsafatinos wrote:
I love sword fighting very much but its not worth loosing an eye over.


That line should be put on a practice shirt to be worn whenever you handle swords or sword like objects with a partner .

Regards

Memento Mori
View user's profile Send private message ICQ Number
P. Cha




PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 1:34 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

M. Eversberg II wrote:


Case point: Fighting with sharps should never be done unless you fully intend to kill someone, or die trying. Thusly, it shouldn't be attempted.

M.


Why just a sharp? With full intent you can kill with a blunt or a wooden waster even. If I don't pull a blow and follow through, a fencing mask wont save you from a fractured skull with either of those...and a sharp sword or blunt or wood, your still dead. Now don't get me wrong, I see nothing wrong with training with a wooden waster or a blunt, but I don't see why the distinction there. What matter is intent in that case I think. And the intent actually is why I see value if SCA combat...you just don't get that in other forms of sparring...as well...that generally tends to end in death...and nobody wants that.

I can see the point about the logical extension of training...and I can see say you and your master doing it between just you two. Hell I can even see you and your master using sharps for drills as long as it is between you and your master and you both feel comfortable with it (small testing with sharps and blunts at EXTREMELY slow speed does hint that sharps and blunts bind differently...don't anybody take this as a reason to drill with sharps BTW as it certainly is not...this was a very controlled experiment done for the sake of curiosity with an EMS standing nearby). My issue is that this isn't between two people who have trained together for years. This behavior and views is something that is being spread through an organization...a rather large organization. Which then in turn has less well trained people in the organization who THINK they know what they are doing mucking things up even more. The new fighter in the SCA look up to the knights to emulate what they are doing. The new practioner in other WMA groups looks to their teacher/best fighters to emulate what they are doing. The new people in ARMA are looking up to those two to emulate what they are doing. This isn't about just two guys...this is about what they are teaching a generation of WMA practicioner what they should act like. So the question isn't about two peopel choosing to cross the line, it's about how they are leading their organization now. If it was just two random people doing it and being proud, all I can really complain about it other then why ARMA isn't doing sanctions against them(lack of action is a form of accepence BTW which I assumed is what was going on). When it's their leaders doing it...then we have to ask the question of is that responsible for the WMA community at large. My answer is rather obvious Happy .

ps: is this better Nathan? Although I may have to bow out of the discussion as it is making me rather angry ATM....
View user's profile Send private message
M. Eversberg II




Location: California, Maryland, USA
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Reading list: 3 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,435

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 3:02 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I limited my closing statement to only sharps as a nod towards the original topic.

M.

This space for rent or lease.
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger ICQ Number
Christopher VaughnStrever




Location: San Antonio, TX
Joined: 13 Jun 2008
Reading list: 1 book

Posts: 382

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 5:57 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Very interesting topic at hand. However I have to raise a question that has always stood out in my mind. The base question is...

If one were clothed from sabotons to helm in full plate steel armour combined with proper padding and full chain maile covering any areas plate did not cover, then would one practice with a sharpe sword?

Other questions would entail.

Shall each piece of armour have a test cut with the sharpe sword to be used? That is in order to prove the relience upon the grade of steel of the armour.

And to clarify i do mean fully armoured knights, with gorgets combined with a mail aventail to protect the neck or a Bevor, and Gauntlets, I do mean the full workings of a knight, that a knight should have on.

Personally even at that point of being fuly armoured myself, only then would I tempt to practice with another with a sharpe sword if i had no less than 5,000 hours of training with blunt swords with that one person.

Experience and learning from such defines maturity, not a number of age
View user's profile Send private message
Bill Tsafa




Location: Brooklyn, NY
Joined: 20 May 2004

Posts: 599

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 7:47 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Christopher VaughnStrever wrote:


Personally even at that point of being fuly armoured myself, only then would I tempt to practice with another with a sharpe sword if i had no less than 5,000 hours of training with blunt swords with that one person.


I have herd this sort of statement before. It makes a lot of sense in Stage Fighting. There, the goal is entertainment and they are following a set choreographed routine. Practicing with the same partner over and over will achieve this. It makes no sense at all in combat training. The last thing I want is a predictable partner. I try never fight the same person more then once the same day at practice. I try to get around to as many different practices and fight as many different people as possible.

I think it is wrong to think that training without equipment fosters some heightened level of intent or realism. Intent comes from training yourself to follow through on the blows, not pulling them. I think it works against realism to get comfortable with your partner.

My comment is not directed specifically at ARMA. I have had this discussion with other people too.

No athlete/youth can fight tenaciously who has never received any blows: he must see his blood flow and hear his teeth crack... then he will be ready for battle.
Roger of Hoveden, 1174-1201
www.poconoshooting.com
www.poconogym.com
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Greg Coffman




Location: Lubbock, TX
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Reading list: 4 books

Posts: 254

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 9:50 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quote:
The last thing I want is a predictable partner....I think it works against realism to get comfortable with your partner.

I certainly agree that fighting different people is necessary to this craft. My point would be that only in the situations where I intimately know somebody, how they fight, their level of skill and control, etc., would it be safe to fight with steel blunts without face and head protection.

Quote:
If one were clothed from sabotons to helm in full plate steel armour combined with proper padding and full chain maile covering any areas plate did not cover, then would one practice with a sharpe sword?

I don't really see a point in this. You use a sword differently when armoured. The safety that the armour provides in stopping a cut goes out the window when fighters are using methods appropriate to countering armour. When you start thrusting or half-swording against the armour, you become just as unsafe as if you were cutting at somebody who was unarmoured.

Quote:
I think it is wrong to think that training without equipment fosters some heightened level of intent or realism. Intent comes from training yourself to follow through on the blows, not pulling them.

That is certainly a good argument. But there is room for disagreement. The people who lived and died by these skills trained largely without head and face protection. They had to learn how to train in such a way to adequately prepare them for real combat while not harming themselves or their training partners. Now, you can counter argue that if they had resources available, like fencing masks, then they would have used them. My point is that it can be argued both ways and that both sides make good arguments.

Quote:
With full intent you can kill with a blunt or a wooden waster even. If I don't pull a blow and follow through, a fencing mask wont save you from a fractured skull with either of those...and a sharp sword or blunt or wood, your still dead. Now don't get me wrong, I see nothing wrong with training with a wooden waster or a blunt, but I don't see why the distinction there. What matter is intent in that case I think. And the intent actually is why I see value if SCA combat...you just don't get that in other forms of sparring...as well...that generally tends to end in death...and nobody wants that.

I think this a very good point. Wasters, wooden or plastic, are only marginally less dangerous then steel blunts. As for pulling your blow, it is one thing to fight with full intent, another to fight at full speed, and another to strike as hard as you can. The sword does not require all of you strengths to make fully debilitating and lethal blows. Going full speed is not the same as hitting as hard as you possibly can. Even with padded weapons you shouldn't be hitting as hard as you can. That would still be too dangerous to your practice partner and really not necessary to get the weapon to function as it was designed. With wasters and steel you have to pull you blow even more. You can still hit hard enough that it would hurt and leave a mark, but not so much that your partner would need to take more than a 5 minute break in the sparring. Somewhere in there is a balance and fighting with different weapon simulators, at different speeds, helps achieve that balance and understanding of what is martially sound and what is not in just the same way as it is important to fight different people. So I would argue that full martial intent can be achieved without having to hit the person with full force and that ideal force is something different than full force.

As a side note, SCA combat tends to be within a paradigm of simulating hitting somebody hard enough for them to be affected while armoured in mail. So you will naturally be attempting to hit harder than you would if the person was unarmoured.

For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.
-Hebrews 4:12
View user's profile Send private message
Randall Pleasant




Location: Flower Mound, Texas
Joined: 24 Aug 2003

Posts: 333

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 10:32 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

P. Cha wrote:
It was the ARMA group in nor cal. They met up in pleasanton.


The only ARMA study group in California is down in Orange County. To the best of my knowledge we don't have any members from the North California area. Are you sure these were actual ARMA members?

In any case, within ARMA sharps are used for cutting practice and many of us will also practice guard transitions with sharps. I have never heard of any ARMA members doing any type of paired drills with sharps, such unsafe behavior would probably result in a very quick boot from the orgainziation.
View user's profile Send private message
P. Cha




PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 10:54 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Randall Pleasant wrote:


In any case, within ARMA sharps are used for cutting practice and many of us will also practice guard transitions with sharps. I have never heard of any ARMA members doing any type of paired drills with sharps, such unsafe behavior would probably result in a very quick boot from the orgainziation.


Maybe that has happened then(I honestly hope so anyways). This was years ago. I'll go try and see if they are still around sometime this week. I haven't exactly kept track of them after I saw what they were doing after all Happy .
View user's profile Send private message
Bill Tsafa




Location: Brooklyn, NY
Joined: 20 May 2004

Posts: 599

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 11:15 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Greg Coffman wrote:

That is certainly a good argument. But there is room for disagreement. The people who lived and died by these skills trained largely without head and face protection. They had to learn how to train in such a way to adequately prepare them for real combat while not harming themselves or their training partners. Now, you can counter argue that if they had resources available, like fencing masks, then they would have used them. My point is that it can be argued both ways and that both sides make good arguments.


Very interesting point. While they did not have fencing masks they did have Great Helms, Sallets and Burgonets that covered the whole face. The question now is... is there any evidence that they would have used these helmets in a similar manor to how we use fencing masks in training. We know they did so in tournaments. This is a similar situation where there armor serves only as personal protection and they are aiming for the armor. I wonder if such use extended beyond the tournament to battle training.

No athlete/youth can fight tenaciously who has never received any blows: he must see his blood flow and hear his teeth crack... then he will be ready for battle.
Roger of Hoveden, 1174-1201
www.poconoshooting.com
www.poconogym.com
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Alex Spreier




Location: Central Oregon
Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Likes: 2 pages

Posts: 82

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 11:50 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Greg Coffman wrote:

That is certainly a good argument. But there is room for disagreement. The people who lived and died by these skills trained largely without head and face protection. They had to learn how to train in such a way to adequately prepare them for real combat while not harming themselves or their training partners. Now, you can counter argue that if they had resources available, like fencing masks, then they would have used them. My point is that it can be argued both ways and that both sides make good arguments.


Can we really say that they didn't use training masks? After all, it's not like some fencer in 18th century France woke up and said "Doh, a mask for my face would make this whole sword-fighting thing much safer!" Remember that most of the images in medieval manuscripts weren't instant, real-life images. I honestly doubt that the medieval maestri did not think about basic self-preservation during training. Yes they were training for real life-or-death situations, but that doesn't mean they would want to risk a life -ending or crippling injury during training.

Just my two cents.
View user's profile Send private message
D. Austin
Industry Professional



Location: Melbourne, Australia
Joined: 20 Sep 2007

Posts: 208

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 12:34 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I know it's off the original topic, but while we're talking about fencing masks, here's a 16th century "tournament helm" from the State Hermitage Museum. If this sort of thing was used with wooden batons, not sharp swords, it would seem to have obvious similarities to SCA fighting.


 Attachment: 45.02 KB
tournament helm.jpg

View user's profile Send private message
Vincent Le Chevalier




Location: Paris, France
Joined: 07 Dec 2005
Reading list: 15 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 870

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 12:45 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Alex Spreier wrote:
Can we really say that they didn't use training masks? After all, it's not like some fencer in 18th century France woke up and said "Doh, a mask for my face would make this whole sword-fighting thing much safer!" Remember that most of the images in medieval manuscripts weren't instant, real-life images. I honestly doubt that the medieval maestri did not think about basic self-preservation during training. Yes they were training for real life-or-death situations, but that doesn't mean they would want to risk a life -ending or crippling injury during training.


I have no exact source for this, but I think foils predate the fencing mask by a fair length of time... It's not so easy to build a mask that protects from cuts and thrusts, especially from a thin blade.

And then we have Viggiani that explicitely advocates training with a sharp sword and not one meant for play, without any mention of additional protections. In Japan, the protection of the face for training apparently goes back to the seventeenth century, quite some time after the foundation of many schools, and not in the most unstable era either. Two things can explain that people were not overly concerned about injuries in practice:

1) They were a lot more tolerant of minor injuries (the most common) and willing to just forget a few accidents, because their life was riskier
2) Their training wasn't quite as free as we would like to believe.

Personnally I think the second option should not be set aside. If you just do paired drills, with preset attacks and defences, or slow down, or put restrictions on timing (I think this was originally done with foils before the mask appeared), training with steel blunts becomes a lot safer. Perhaps to the point that option 1 can come into play...

--
Vincent
Ensis Sub Caelo
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Greg Coffman




Location: Lubbock, TX
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Reading list: 4 books

Posts: 254

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 12:49 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Alex Spreier wrote:

Can we really say that they didn't use training masks? After all, it's not like some fencer in 18th century France woke up and said "Doh, a mask for my face would make this whole sword-fighting thing much safer!" Remember that most of the images in medieval manuscripts weren't instant, real-life images. I honestly doubt that the medieval maestri did not think about basic self-preservation during training. Yes they were training for real life-or-death situations, but that doesn't mean they would want to risk a life -ending or crippling injury during training.

Just my two cents.

While it might be possible that a very few people used closed faced helms or masks for training, over and over again we see images of people training without any sort of head or face protection. Even if some sort of practice helm or practice mask was ever used, and I don't think we have any evidence of this at all, the vast majority of fighters trained without head or face protection. So I would say, yes, we can be sure.

But this doesn't mean they risked life-ending or crippling injury. If you can't protect your head in training, every time you train, how can you hope to survive a real fight? Nor were they fighting for fun as a hobby. They lived with the potential that they might have to use these skills against somebody trying to kill them. It really takes it up a notch.

Vincent Le Chevalier wrote:

1) They were a lot more tolerant of minor injuries (the most common) and willing to just forget a few accidents, because their life was riskier

That is what I think. You become a lot more tolerant of mishaps in training if that training is sufficiently effective in keeping you alive when somebody is really trying to kill you.
Vincent Le Chevalier wrote:
If you just do paired drills, with preset attacks and defences, or slow down, or put restrictions on timing (I think this was originally done with foils before the mask appeared), training with steel blunts becomes a lot safer.

But that isn't really training for combat then, is it? And the foil come after these skill were no longer used for actual combat on or off the battlefield.

For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.
-Hebrews 4:12
View user's profile Send private message
Randall Pleasant




Location: Flower Mound, Texas
Joined: 24 Aug 2003

Posts: 333

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 1:14 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Vassilis Tsafatinos wrote:
I was told that John Clements half-sworded a sharp sword into his own leg at a demo. He then refused medical attention until the end of the demo. I was told he carried on the demo soaked in his own blood.


Yes, about 10 years ago John Clements did hit his leg with the point of a sharp sword during a demo, it was a lesson well learned by him and passed on to his students. Yes, John did wait until after he completed the demo to have his leg checked out. And yes, the cut did bleed but John was not "soaked" in blood. Think about it, when people are soaked in their own blood they are usually in shock and losing consciousness, not doing demos. Wink

Ran Pleasant
ARMA DFW
View user's profile Send private message
Vincent Le Chevalier




Location: Paris, France
Joined: 07 Dec 2005
Reading list: 15 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 870

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 1:23 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Greg Coffman wrote:
Vincent Le Chevalier wrote:
If you just do paired drills, with preset attacks and defences, or slow down, or put restrictions on timing (I think this was originally done with foils before the mask appeared), training with steel blunts becomes a lot safer.

But that isn't really training for combat then, is it? And the foil come after these skill were no longer used for actual combat on or off the battlefield.


Well I don't know... I'm not convinced at all that a lot of free sparring (as we want to do it nowadays, that is, with very few rules and as close to a real fight as possible) was taking place as part of day-to-day training. Plenty of fights were taking place, not necessarily ending in death but still very risky even back then, however this is not sparring, as there was an actual intent of harming the other guy (even if unsuccessful Wink ).

As for foils, I think their method of use derived from that developed for the rapier. This is still training for life and death situation; France from the XVIth-XVIIth c. was not safe at all, and in a duel skill with the weapon becomes overly important, perhaps even more so than in war, where general stamina and group training can save your life just as well. Foils appear early, within the duel craze, Girard Thibault uses the name in his treatise published in 1628. They can't be discarded as mere toys so easily...

Anyhow it's an error to believe that we can or should train exactly as they did. We do not live in the same society, we have different expectations, different backgrounds. We are not them. As I said Viggiani, and probably others, favoured the use of sharps for training right from the begining. Yet we won't do that, with good reason.

--
Vincent
Ensis Sub Caelo
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bill Tsafa




Location: Brooklyn, NY
Joined: 20 May 2004

Posts: 599

PostPosted: Mon 02 Feb, 2009 1:50 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

D. Austin wrote:
I know it's off the original topic, but while we're talking about fencing masks, here's a 16th century "tournament helm" from the State Hermitage Museum. If this sort of thing was used with wooden batons, not sharp swords, it would seem to have obvious similarities to SCA fighting.


Awesome! Thanks for posting that. I downloaded and saved that picture.

Randall Pleasant wrote:
Vassilis Tsafatinos wrote:
I was told that John Clements half-sworded a sharp sword into his own leg at a demo. He then refused medical attention until the end of the demo. I was told he carried on the demo soaked in his own blood.


Yes, about 10 years ago John Clements did hit his leg with the point of a sharp sword during a demo, it was a lesson well learned by him and passed on to his students. Yes, John did wait until after he completed the demo to have his leg checked out. And yes, the cut did bleed but John was not "soaked" in blood. Think about it, when people are soaked in their own blood they are usually in shock and losing consciousness, not doing demos. Wink

Ran Pleasant
ARMA DFW


Thank you for clearing that up Randal. I don't think this reflects badly in any way. We all handle sharp swords and accidents do happen. I am sure we have all cut ourselves at some point while oiling them or cleaning them. If anything it just punctuates the point that people should not even think of sparring with sharp swords and should at least wear a fencing masks with blunts. Regardless how careful we may try to be, accidents do happen.

No athlete/youth can fight tenaciously who has never received any blows: he must see his blood flow and hear his teeth crack... then he will be ready for battle.
Roger of Hoveden, 1174-1201
www.poconoshooting.com
www.poconogym.com
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Ed Toton




Location: Northern VA
Joined: 16 Sep 2005

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 462

PostPosted: Tue 03 Feb, 2009 8:35 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

P. Cha wrote:

Why just a sharp? With full intent you can kill with a blunt or a wooden waster even. If I don't pull a blow and follow through, a fencing mask wont save you from a fractured skull with either of those...and a sharp sword or blunt or wood, your still dead. Now don't get me wrong, I see nothing wrong with training with a wooden waster or a blunt, but I don't see why the distinction there. What matter is intent in that case I think. And the intent actually is why I see value if SCA combat...you just don't get that in other forms of sparring...as well...that generally tends to end in death...and nobody wants that.


As others have pointed out, there's a difference between striking as hard as you can, and sparring in a reasonable manner. There's also a common myth that it requires a very powerful blow to kill or maim an opponent. If you're talking about unarmored combat, it doesn't require much force to end a fight. With that in mind, using "sufficient" and not excessive force, you can fence with a high degree of speed and intent with basic safety gear (mask/helm, gambeson, and gauntlets, and a steel blunt), and it will protect you quite well.

If I were trying to kill someone with one of my blunts, you can bet I would do a variety of things that I wouldn't do in normal sparring, such as striking with much more force, and specifically targeting areas that are not covered with safety equipment. Can you seriously injure or kill someone with a blunt? Of course you can. But as with anything, just because you can doesn't mean you should, and the speed and strength you use when sparring with someone should be appropriate to the gear you're using.

And of course, I don't think the argument that safety gear CAN be defeated in any way diminishes its value.

Now having said that, it doesn't mean that sparring without safety gear is out of the question. It's up to the people involved to choose how much gear they feel is appropriate and what level of risk they're comfortable with. But I share some of the concerns people have about the public image of WMA, if we start seeing a lot of youtube videos with instructors sparring without even basic eye protection. And personally, I won't fence without eye protection (usually a fencing mask). Mistakes happen, no matter how well practiced you are.

As for the wasters, I'm not convinced they're any more safe than steel blunts like Albion's Meyer or A&A's Fechterspiel. They can certainly strike just as hard, if not harder, and have no give. Try flexing one, and you'll see what I mean. I think of them as a more affordable alternative, not a more safety-conscious one.

Anyway, just some humble opinions. Happy YMMV.

-Ed T. Toton III
ed.toton.org | ModernChivalry.org
My armor photos on facebook
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Rim Andries




Location: The Netherlands
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Likes: 10 pages
Reading list: 5 books

Posts: 151

PostPosted: Wed 25 Feb, 2015 11:27 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

After reading this topic I wonder how you guys feel about this video.

I for one have a lot of respect for Roland and I can see the merit in this type of training, yet I am unsure if we really need it. On the other hand it can provide so much insight in the ways of the old masters and the techniques they advocated...

Will the benefits outweigh the risks?

I think this is a really difficult question... and I am really unsure of the answer.

https://youtube.com/results?q=roland%20warzecha&sm=1

Sir Dreamin'
View user's profile Send private message
Johannes Zenker





Joined: 15 Sep 2014

Posts: 159

PostPosted: Wed 25 Feb, 2015 2:17 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Roland is a very advanced swordsman for all I know. I am very sure that he can appreciate the risk. The sparring videos in his channel are interesting as well, as they show far more blade contact and working in the bind than regular armored full-contact sparring. Still, donning a mask would surely be a good idea.

I assume you mainly speak about this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T21uXihIZcI where he explains that blade contact works differently with sharp blades vs blunt blades. One could thereby make the argument that he is advocating the use of sharp swords for controlled bind practice at advanced levels and I can certainly see the merit. Instead of saying "no way no how" I would let people decide from themselves, as long as they are fully aware of the risks.

Another thing of note: Roland Warzecha sometimes goes a little crazy: in this sparring video he and his partner are using sharp blades after the 2:30 minutes mark. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ipbin3vhMlI You can tell that they are even more careful and controlled than before, but it is still a thing that requires great confidence in the attitude and skill of oneself and the partner. One mistake by either could leave either of them injured or potentially dead.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
J. Nicolaysen




Location: Wyoming
Joined: 03 Feb 2014
Likes: 32 pages

Posts: 795

PostPosted: Wed 25 Feb, 2015 3:00 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

It is not unusual for high-ranking practitioners of JSA to practice with sharp blades. In the style I used to study this was reserved for rokudan and higher. However, this was paired kata, not free-form sparring.
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Practice with sharpe sword?
Page 3 of 5 Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
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