| Author |
Message |
|
Nat Lamb
|
 Posted: Fri 23 Nov, 2012 12:12 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Ian S LaSpina wrote: | ...
Do you think your bout with the 72 year old gentlemen would have been different if you didn't make the mistake of underestimating his capability as an opponent based on his appearance as an old man? |
I did judo as a little tacker, then went on to other martial arts. When I was about 30 I re-joined my old judo club, and on my 2nd or third week back was paired up with the guy who effectively ran the mat. At the time I was 115 kilo, 188 cm tall, and had been working as a bouncer for 10 years. This guy was 69, and an ex-jockey.
Despite being more than double this guys weight and more than a foot taller than him, and less than half his age, and despite trying my hardest, this guy tied me up multiple ways before choking me into oblivion.
I would like to say that he exploited "rules" of judo that don't exist on the "street", but that is just the wounded pirde of someone who was beaten up by a 4'11 geriatric. While he was admirably fit (in a cardiovascular sense) for a 69 year old, the simple truth is that I outmatched him physically by so much it isn't funny, and his superior skill and 50+ years of experience alowed him to wipe the floor with me.
I know what you mean that the wisened sensei is an over used hollywoodism, but not a *totaly* innacurate one.
All that being said, I totally agree about what you say regarding greatness, no one is going to be a really good martial artist (of whatever ilk) without having both skill and the art specific physical attributes to back that skill up. An old guy (with a knee replacemen that I forgot to mention) may well hang onto those specialist forms of physical aptitude after his general strength and conditioning have left. Just thought I would share a personal, very embarassing annecdote 
|
|
  |
 |
|
Mike O'Hara
|
| Posted: Fri 23 Nov, 2012 12:35 am Post subject: Types of 'fitness' |
|
|
Thank you all for a very stimulating discussion, here's another 2 cents worth
There is a kata in various of the Japanese arts called Sanchin. It can be translated as The Three Battles - body, mind and spirit.
The battle of 'body' - in essence some of what we are calling fitness, can be won and maintained by a martial artist in 6 - 12 months of training. Fitness (recovery time) and stamina (ability to keep going) can be lost if you don't train.
The battle of mind - memory, judgment (Fiore's lynx) is gained to a certain level in ~3 years and then continues to improve with practice. The comment about the 'move smaller' is absolutely true - you have done it enough times to know just how much will do under a large variety of attack conditions.
The battle of spirit is fought anew every day - which is one reason why experienced martial artist sometime lose when they shouldn't.
What I think we are comparing is is physical to physical and mental fitness. I'll put money on the more mentally fit, all other things being nearly equal.
The battlefield question is a good one - there I think fitness (stamina) plays a big part. I am now over 50 <sigh> and just cannot continue executing technique as long as I used to. Unarmed and one on one, I'm a bit like the wrestling coach. Multiple opponents one after another - alas 10 x 2 minutes rounds are about it these days.
And thanks very much for the flourish. I am learning Fiore rather than the German masters but I can certainly see how to apply it!
Please keep the thoughts coming
cheers
mike
MIke O'Hara
Location: Plimmerton, New Zealand
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lafayette C Curtis
|
| Posted: Fri 23 Nov, 2012 4:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ian S LaSpina wrote: | | The idea of the ancient frail master using their almost magical prowess is a thing of fiction as far as I've seen in my research. We're not talking about ancient ninja secrets and Jedi Masters here. I think the idea of the old frail master trouncing the fit young student is a thing of fantasy and fiction. |
For me, the myth here is of the "frail" old master. I'm not that experienced in any martial sense, but I've had the privilege of running across a couple of 60- and 70-somethings acknowledged to be masters in their art, and I can say that they're anything but frail. One stripped down to his waist to lead the cooling-down exercises at the end of the seminar and I could swear he had more muscles than most of the 20-somethings in the hall (including me). None of us suspected it since he wore his clothes a couple of sizes too large, which some of us speculated was a deliberate ploy to create the false appearance of frailty.
So beware of the myth. Perhaps more than a few of these "frail old masters" helped to create it themselves so that younger folks would underestimate just how strong and fit they are. I'd certainly agree that it'd be impossible to achieve their levels of skill and martial understanding without being amazingly fit (or becoming amazingly fit in the process).
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Fri 23 Nov, 2012 2:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lafayette C Curtis wrote: | [
So beware of the myth. Perhaps more than a few of these "frail old masters" helped to create it themselves so that younger folks would underestimate just how strong and fit they are. I'd certainly agree that it'd be impossible to achieve their levels of skill and martial understanding without being amazingly fit (or becoming amazingly fit in the process). |
Maybe " Frail " was the wrong term: Although in some cases an old master might be frail, I think It might be better to say no longer as strong, agile, flexible, fast or in shape as in their prime.
Also, very old and " frail looking " but actually still with steel cable strong muscles and tendons and a grip that can crush walnuts.  
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew P. Adams
|
| Posted: Sat 24 Nov, 2012 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
And that clip was the founder of Aikido. My father has practiced it for 35 years, and is in his 60's and I used to study under his instructor in my early twenties. Those throws might look like "Jedi mind tricks" but having been thrown by them myself I can tell you they are not.
And I have seen that clip of the "Ki Master" being creamed by the MMA fighter.
They are different things. One can use the idea of Ki as a way of describing proper body structure, timing and alignment or as a "magical force". One is correct, and the other isn't.
My Aikido training has greatly informed my Armizare training, and in fact there are many identical techniques in both Fiore's abrazare section and in Aikido.
I don't believe for a second that I can sit here at home and type something that will change your mind, but I have personally bee thrown by these techniques and will vouch to their effectiveness.
I would put forward the idea that the fiction of Jedi powers may have been inspired by the reality of martial technique honed to the point of appearing effortless.
During the Boston Sword Gathering this year I was handed my ass in the fencing tournament. I did get in one particularly effective throw. Afterwords a few people came up and told me how clean it was. What they didn't see was that in the space of a second I had tried that throw three times and only the third was effective.
I had my opponent in a ligadura mezzana and was trying to find his tipping point, and it took a couple of tries. Since I have a familiarity with grappling based arts, to an observer it looked like a clean throw but from my vantage it felt like two failed attempts and a successful one.
Sometimes even clean and "effortless" looking throws are a lot more complicated from inside the conflict.
"We do not rise to the level of our expectations. We fall to the level of our training" Archilochus, Greek Soldier, Poet, c. 650 BC
|
|
|
|
|
James Anderson III
|
| Posted: Sat 24 Nov, 2012 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Speaking as a relatively out of shape, 40-hours-behind-a-desk computer guy....
I've watched martial arts movies (kung fu, ninja, samurai, medieval, even *fantasy* stuff) for a long time, like a lot of us, since I was a kid. I took a few years of karate, I did a year of SCA heavy weapons, and have been reading books on proper (non-movie) combat for almost as long. I've always believed that there are 3 key points to winning a fight.
1) Control
2) Timing
3) Ability
To win the fight, control the fight. When you can find or create an opening to strike, do so. Which brings us to...
Timing. Knowing when to strike that isn't too early or too late is important to landing your offense. However, when you land that offensive attack, you need...
Ability. As long as you have the ability to be effective with your technique, any power above and beyond is excessive. The difference between "dead and really dead" or "unconscious and really unconscious" is of little concern, as long as you can do enough. It doesn't require a lot of strength to be deadly, either. People performing CPR have broken ribs accidentally, with simple pushes (trying to save someone's life!). It takes somewhere around 10 pounds of pressure to collapse the trachea, and I think somewhere around 30 to break the neck. The spine is also weak to direct impact, etc.
You can be substantially out of shape, or weaker than your opponent, and still meet all those criteria. Control and timing are much more of 'martial' training than physical fitness, but ability is a physical aspect. Someone who can run for 15 minutes in harness can still take a very severe trouncing by someone who can only run 30 seconds, depending on how that energy is spent and execution of techniques. Craig Shackleton mentioned this:
| Craig Shackleton wrote: | | One of the things I tell my students is that the goal of martial arts is to be as lazy as possible while fighting. The more efficient we are in our motions the better they work, and the less energy we expend doing them. |
A video example - the fighter on the left (capoeira) could be arguably in much better physical condition than the fighter on the right (a "no frills" style). He flaunts his athleticism, and, well....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_StXp1CjuM
(Yes, it's from the movie Never Back Down, but the principle is there - one well timed, well placed strike....)
And for the "frail old master" reference, see 10th Dan Mifune (this is not from a movie). He has a very smooth, almost effortless control of the fight, and excellent timing - count the number of attacks he makes that don't connect. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YS-WF6nlA0
In context for us with WMA/HEMA, and apples to apples, it could be taken as conservation of energy vs expending energy. Let's say with inefficient movement I can strike 10 times. With efficient movement, I can strike 50. It takes less physical fitness to strike 10 times with efficient movement, meaning, overall, a well trained person can supplement their relative lack of fitness with technique if their opponent burns substantially more energy to also strike 10 times. In tandem with the high athleticism and lack of martial training, those people often tense up or waste a lot of energy with unnecessary movement(s). Comparing "overweight" to "muscular" or "well defined", with enough training, overweight can win over less training at least some of the time. If we're comparing "morbidly obese", well, they're probably only a challenge as physical mass, but not skill.
Now, if we're talking in a historical context, when you had to last for potentially hours or longer on the battlefield .... when you got tired, you probably got dead quickly. I'd place physical fitness over technique in importance in that situation, along with a good bit of luck.
Sable, a chevron between three lions statant Argent
Knight, Order of the Marshal
|
|
  |
|
|
Kel Rekuta
|
| Posted: Sat 24 Nov, 2012 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Matthew P. Adams wrote: |
My Aikido training has greatly informed my Armizare training, and in fact there are many identical techniques in both Fiore's abrazare section and in Aikido.
Sometimes even clean and "effortless" looking throws are a lot more complicated from inside the conflict. |
A close friend is an advanced student of aikido, (2ndD BB) we have had a few discussions and explorations of technique. Their's tend to be a couple moments past where Fiore is done with the situation. The generation of power and guidance of energy is remarkably similar.
Since Fiore's throws tend rely on dominating the center line and ejecting anything in one's path there are some significant similarities. The more I see of O Sensei's teaching, the more it syncs with Fiore's treatises.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike O'Hara
|
| Posted: Sun 25 Nov, 2012 12:40 am Post subject: Fitness in martial arts |
|
|
A few further thoughts
@ James. Very nicely summarised! Indeed, distance and timing are the things that you try very much to learn (or teach). Our swordsmaster tries to teach us to set technique so that we are just out of range or can be with a small body move so that we look inviting as a target. The idea is of course to turn back at just the right time to surprise the opponent.
As to the strike itself, that's a trickier one. If two people know how to fight some pretty fierce blows can be struck. The aim is not to get hit cleanly or squarely. I'm thinking unarmed here - hit an unarmored foe with a sword and the 'blow absorbing moves' don't really work
@Kel and Matthew. I've been training with an aikido nidan (2nd black) for a few years and the thing he keeps emphasising is to relax. He's absolutely right - most of the technique work so much better - and some only - if you are relaxed during the attack and redirection. Aiki-jutsu, which my friend practices, is more like Fiore. The circles are quite small and it looks like 'power' but really isn't.
Some of the karate style (Goju-Ryu - a hard/soft style) also blend a number of these things together - timing, use strong on weak attacks and vice versa.
So while fitness or more correctly 'working the body' helps because it can build coordination and stamina, very few one on one fights last long enough for fitness to be an issue.
Huge caveat - two skilled fighters who are working within a rule set (e.g. MMA, K-1 or any full contact fight) need fitness: those fights are rarely over quickly unless someone makes a mistake because both fighters know how to take a hit.
Questions for those of you out there that have fought Battle of Nations or something similar (full contact, armoured) - what do you think about balance between fitness and capability?
cheers
mike
MIke O'Hara
Location: Plimmerton, New Zealand
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kel Rekuta
|
| Posted: Sun 25 Nov, 2012 9:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mike,
I've played with the local guys doing BotN style fighting. Their game demands significant conditioning because it is substantially rugby with steel clubs. Bashing the armour and tackling opponents for up to ten minutes is hard work wearing 20kgs+ of 13thC kit. Technique? Well watch the videos and judge for yourself.
We (AEMMA) fight fully armoured to a late 14th-early 15thC standard which is 30kgs+ of plate and riveted mail. Our game is predominately thrusting and leverage either to points struck or to submission. Bouts rarely last longer than three minutes, less if one player is more experienced. Conditioning is important simply to stand your ground and dominate another man in those rigs. Skillful application of technique and proper timing are critical to placing thrusts effectively or casting down your playmate. Simply hitting the armour is a waste of energy and the blows are barely noticed by an experienced player.
Very different games but both are tough and exhausting.
|
|
|
|
|
T. Arndt
|
| Posted: Sun 25 Nov, 2012 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kel Rekuta wrote: | Mike,
I've played with the local guys doing BotN style fighting. Their game demands significant conditioning because it is substantially rugby with steel clubs. Bashing the armour and tackling opponents for up to ten minutes is hard work wearing 20kgs+ of 13thC kit. Technique? Well watch the videos and judge for yourself.
We (AEMMA) fight fully armoured to a late 14th-early 15thC standard which is 30kgs+ of plate and riveted mail. Our game is predominately thrusting and leverage either to points struck or to submission. Bouts rarely last longer than three minutes, less if one player is more experienced. Conditioning is important simply to stand your ground and dominate another man in those rigs. Skillful application of technique and proper timing are critical to placing thrusts effectively or casting down your playmate. Simply hitting the armour is a waste of energy and the blows are barely noticed by an experienced player.
Very different games but both are tough and exhausting. |
I assume the first sport presented is like an extreme SCA on steroids and in the second your are actual practising historical European martial arts (harnischfechten)? I would not describe anything I have seen from BotN as swordsmanship, regardless of the fact sword-like objects are involved. So I don't know how applicable it is to this thread (This is not to say it is not a hell of a lot of fun and worth while exercise for those involved. It is still not historical swordsmanship).
I do think the fitness vs. skill balance point slides more towards fitness if we transition from talking about blossfechten to harnischfechten.
Wisconsin Historical Fencing Association (WHFA) - La Crosse
A HEMA Alliance Affiliate
“Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” -Juvenal
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike O'Hara
|
| Posted: Sun 25 Nov, 2012 8:48 pm Post subject: Armoured fighting |
|
|
Hi Kel
Thanks very much for the reply.
Can relate to the rugby - or could many years ago anyway!
More interested in your AEMMA experience - your comment on thrusting and leverage.
Do you look to form a bind and then use that off-balance or out of position for the thrust or takedown? What little fighting I have done in armour (maille - its the period and warrior type I'm learning) certainly played into the hands of the 'patient'.
thanks
mike
MIke O'Hara
Location: Plimmerton, New Zealand
|
|
|
|
|
Bennison N
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Nov, 2012 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| T.Arndt wrote: | | I would not describe anything I have seen from BotN as swordsmanship, regardless of the fact sword-like objects are involved. |
Wait and see... Try as I might, I can't just settle for mindless bashing. Have you seen the 1 vs. 1 fights for BotN? There are Sword & Buckler, Sword & Shield and Longsword rounds... I think you may find the swordsmanship you seek there...
I can say right now that BotN fighting requires a very high level of fitness. I considered myself of above average fitness before, but I've had to double, and now triple the cardio workouts I was doing to not gas out in practice. I expect to have to double it again before long.
I've heard some Eastern European BotN fighters regularly run 20km on a treadmill in full kit to prepare for the events.
"Never give a sword to a man who can't dance" - Confucius
अजयखड्गधारी
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Edelson
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Nov, 2012 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I get into and out of shape incredibly quickly. I can go from being unable to breathe after 2 minutes of vigorous pell work to being able to keep it up for an hour within a 2-3 weeks (and I lose it almost as fast). As such, my degree of fitness varies tremendously from month to month. In the last couple of years I have competed in modern HEMA tournaments (Longpoint, Fechtschule America, etc.). I have found that my level of fitness does not impact my tournament performance in any meaningful way. Even when I had to fight Jake Norwood twice in a row in the finals at PNWHG, I was sucking wind in the second fight, but it didn't really change anything.
The only thing fitness does impact is my ability to train. At the height of fitness I fought for four hours straight at a demonstration we did for a local community day. Right now, at the height of unfitness, I can't fight for more than 15 minutes and drills tire me out a lot faster.
So...I guess the answer depends on how much training you need to do to get where you need to be. If you need to train hard to win, then you need to be fit. If you can coast on your charm, good looks and all the hard @ss training you did in the past, then fitness isn't really important. I would be fine coasting (I used to traintwo hours a day, five days a week so I have that behind me) but I intend to get better so I can pwn everyone's @ss and get all the HEMA groupies for myself. As such, I have another bout of fitness coming up.
New York Historical Fencing Association
www.newyorklongsword.com
Byakkokan Dojo
http://newyorkbattodo.com/
|
|
|
|
|
T. Arndt
|
| Posted: Tue 27 Nov, 2012 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
I ran into this little gem while reading an editorial on HROARR.com titledThe Wreath or the Cash? On Tournament fighting and thought this excerpt was applicable to here:
To beat the dead horse, yes I always want to be more fit than my opponent, it is an advantage (especially if we are close in skill). However in a fight for my life, if had a choice between being far more fit, or far more skillful, I would opt to be more skillful.
Wisconsin Historical Fencing Association (WHFA) - La Crosse
A HEMA Alliance Affiliate
“Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” -Juvenal
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kel Rekuta
|
| Posted: Tue 27 Nov, 2012 12:27 pm Post subject: Re: Armoured fighting |
|
|
| Mike O'Hara wrote: |
More interested in your AEMMA experience - your comment on thrusting and leverage.
Do you look to form a bind and then use that off-balance or out of position for the thrust or takedown? What little fighting I have done in armour (maille - its the period and warrior type I'm learning) certainly played into the hands of the 'patient'.
thanks
mike |
Hmm. Not really sure how to answer that. For the most part we try to dominate the center and place the point on the mail components of the harness at the throat, arms and hips. Failed thrusts generally become entries to lever or grapple. When the point is completely off line the foot or pommel of the weapon is engaged, often with the elbow and vambrace slamming the companion for disruption and distraction. Turning or overbalancing the companion sets up a throw or some other finishing blow. Does that help at all?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike O'Hara
|
| Posted: Tue 27 Nov, 2012 8:54 pm Post subject: Armored fight |
|
|
Hi Kel
| Quote: |
Kel Rekuta wrote
For the most part we try to dominate the center and place the point on the mail components of the harness at the throat, arms and hips.Failed thrusts generally become entries to lever or grapple. When the point is completely off line the foot or pommel of the weapon is engaged, often with the elbow and vambrace slamming the companion for disruption and distraction. Turning or overbalancing the companion sets up a throw or some other finishing blow |
I was hoping you'd say something like this - it's the sort of thing I have been trying to practice.
I have found it relatively easy to use aikido-like techniques against those that rush in or attack incautiously. I was more interested in understanding how you attacked and what you did where that did not succeed.
Do you use half-sword much as the lever/throw or release one hand or use elbow pushes etc more? Or is this more a case of what seems to be the right move for the situation rather than being overly pre-planned.
Thanks for the guidance
cheers
mike
MIke O'Hara
Location: Plimmerton, New Zealand
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kel Rekuta
|
| Posted: Wed 28 Nov, 2012 8:39 am Post subject: Re: Armored fight |
|
|
| Mike O'Hara wrote: | Hi Kel
I was hoping you'd say something like this - it's the sort of thing I have been trying to practice.
I have found it relatively easy to use aikido-like techniques against those that rush in or attack incautiously. I was more interested in understanding how you attacked and what you did where that did not succeed.
Do you use half-sword much as the lever/throw or release one hand or use elbow pushes etc more? Or is this more a case of what seems to be the right move for the situation rather than being overly pre-planned.
Thanks for the guidance
cheers
mike |
Ok, I think I get what you are looking for. Attacks need to be deliberate and committed. Jockeying around with a lot feints is very wasteful of time and energy, neither of which are in abundance in any fight. Every countered attack exposes some other target; the question is can you see it or know it will be there? CQC in harness is very much a process of feeling resistance or not, knowing your targets and postae transitions and having the absolute will to dominate. No second guessing, no planned sequence; that stuff clutters the mind.
As to half sword vs releasing the off hand to grapple? Yeah, all of the above. Elbow pushes are done with anything convenient to the elbow: hand, cross, pommel, vambrace, shoulder, whatever you can put structure behind for a solid push. Levering with the weapon is no different conceptually to using a hand in grappling. The lever simply extends reach and power. Neck, elbow, knee and foot hooks need to be practiced and controlled to succeed without injuring your playmate. Properly fitted harness is critical both to movement and for safety. Never borrow kit and play full on. It is suicidal.
I think the best advice we give anyone interested in harness fighting is this:
Study the system you are interested in from the basics of grappling to using every weapon you intend to use - out of harness. Build skills and sensitivity to tempo and physical pressure. Get harness that fits you comfortably and learn to move in it. Do simple tasks like climbing stairs, lifting weights and stepping over things under load to get accustomed to your new center of balance. Then practice all your martial activities learned out of kit all over again, in kit. Its different enough to be confusing if one just puts on harness and tries things they expect will work because they did out of harness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alen L
Location: Ljubljana, SLovenia Joined: 20 May 2010
Posts: 63
|
| Posted: Wed 28 Nov, 2012 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm really starting to think this conversation is going the wrong way. A lot of extremes are being thrown around, and that's just silly. It's not about a "grandmaster vs. Hulk" fight. It's not about whether pure athleticism and strength will overcome skill in martial arts. And frankly, such premises are rather stupid.
The thing here is do fitness and strength training have a roll in HEMA? And yes, it absolutely does. It doesn't compete with skill, it completes it. It will help develop your skill faster. It will help you do techniques better. It will help you be faster, more enduring, and a better fighter all around. So yes, you should do strength training. Do it wisely, train the muscles in pairs (antagonist-protagonist muscles) so that you don't mess up your range of motion, but do it.
It might be that downplaying strength and conditioning is holding HEMA back. And the debates of what is more important, skill or strength, are rather useless. They are akin to "which martial art is better, kickboxing or karate" debates.
|
|
|
|
|
Ian S LaSpina
|
| Posted: Wed 28 Nov, 2012 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Alen L wrote: |
The thing here is do fitness and strength training have a roll in HEMA? And yes, it absolutely does. It doesn't compete with skill, it completes it. It will help develop your skill faster. It will help you do techniques better. It will help you be faster, more enduring, and a better fighter all around. So yes, you should do strength training. Do it wisely, train the muscles in pairs (antagonist-protagonist muscles) so that you don't mess up your range of motion, but do it.
It might be that downplaying strength and conditioning is holding HEMA back. And the debates of what is more important, skill or strength, are rather useless. They are akin to "which martial art is better, kickboxing or karate" debates. |
Well said. I agree with everything said there. I especially think it's worth emphasizing that I firmly believe downplaying strength and conditioning is indeed holding HEMA back. To the public HEMA has an air of nerdy 'sport' about one step above LARP and SCA combat, and I think this has a lot to do with widespread avoidance of athleticism in the sport. What's the harm of being in shape? Getting better at your sport? How terrible... (And unless you have a serious medical condition, not getting in shape is purely a personal choice, no one doesn't have the 'time' to do it, that's a rationalization.)
My YouTube Channel - Knyght Errant
My Pinterest
"Monsters are dangerous, and just now Kings are dying like flies..."
|
|
|
|
|
T. Arndt
|
| Posted: Wed 28 Nov, 2012 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ian S LaSpina wrote: | | ...I think this has a lot to do with widespread avoidance of athleticism in the sport. What's the harm of being in shape? Getting better at your sport? How terrible... |
I don't disagree about the importance of fitness and the real possibility strength and conditioning is holding HEMA back, but avoidance of athleticism? This would scare me if I thought this was true. I have never met to someone who practices blossfechten and does not want to improve their physical condition as well as their skill- never.
You are right people do rationalize not making progress as fast as they would like. But sometimes true to the root word, these musings are rational. For example, I have to settle for solo drilling, lifting twice a day and going for a jog most days, I'm sure if I quit my job I could make progress faster but-- that would not be rational. When people try to rationalize making no progress at all, I agree that is absurd, but even those people at least desire to be in better shape.
Wisconsin Historical Fencing Association (WHFA) - La Crosse
A HEMA Alliance Affiliate
“Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” -Juvenal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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