Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2007 1:19:26 GMT
A very nicely done demo of various longsword techniques. There are some really nice counters toward the end.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Oct 10, 2007 2:33:56 GMT
That was awesome. Those swords were gorgeous, too. I want one. I'm slowly gaining an appreciation for the European sword arts. Heck, about two weeks ago I finally found Talhoffer's book on the discount table at Barnes & Noble and picked it up (for $8). Good reading. It's making me need to find more books like it. These videos are even better (worse?) in fueling my new fascination.
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Oct 10, 2007 2:57:11 GMT
That's a great find Tsafa. I liked it, but found myself really wishing I could read whatever language the captions were in. Anyone who likes this stuff would really enjoy this video starring Hans Heim and Alex Kiermeyer. I paid retail for my copy and it was money well spent.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2007 7:56:32 GMT
Mike, the vid was only posted two days ago. I think the guys in the vid you posted are the same as in the vid I posted.
Randomnobody, just one thing to keep in mind. What you see in the demo I posted is choreographed and rehearsed. That is why it looks so clean. These are very advanced moves and very hard to do in sparring. Durring the course of a match most strikes will be simple combinations of horizontal, vertical, diagonal cuts or thrusts with an occasional attampt at one of the finishing moves you saw in the vid I posted. There is usually a lot of beets and some pushing of the blade. By drilling under ideal circumstances, like the guys in the vid, you can create the muscle memory to react in a similar way when sparring, but it never looks so crisp and clean.
Something interesting I have noticed is most WMA and Live Steel guys use swords with handles that exceed 12 inches. In the SCA the great swords have handles as long as 24 inches to facilitate gauntlets. However the sword market seems to not offer too many sword options with long handles. Most longswords in the market have 8 inch handles. I think hand and half swords with 8 inch handles are more suited to mounted swordmen rather then dueling. The mounted knight, would mostly use his sword one handed. He might only rarely use it two handed in a castle defence situation. I think for the purpose of dueling in the tradition of Ringeck one would do better with the leverage of a longer handle.
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Oct 10, 2007 16:55:15 GMT
I don't think those are the same two guys. And those scenes and swords are different from the ones in my video. But you are right, they are along the same lines and well choreographed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2007 19:20:50 GMT
I disagree entirely.
I believe it's best summed up when you read what Capo Ferro has to say on the difference between 'the use' of the sword, and the 'art' of the sword. The Art is greater than the Use. The Art is true, universal, and perfect. The Art is true technique. The Use on the other hand is whatever you can do in a situation to win - it may win in some circumstance - but not in others. It may keep you safe against that guy, but not against the other guy. it'll work in this situation, but not others, etc. The Art is not so bound as the Use. I train in the Art.
It's much much harder to learn to fight effectively with the techniques demonstrated than by simply trying to hit your opponent with your sword as quickly as you can - which is hit or miss. A good technique always works - you can always trust and count on a good technique. If you don't think it's realistic to learn and practice techniques like that, then i'm sorry to say it, but that's not good fencing - at all.
When I spar, I always focus my absolute hardest on using good technique - there is no point otherwise. Any big guy with a lot of muscle can take a sword and pound someone into submission through relentlessly bashing at him - but if that was all there were for swordfighting then there'd be no point to study it - the strongest would always win, and those of smaller stature(i.e. myself) would never have reason to study at all. If that were the case - i'd be eternally a victim to the bigger guys in the world.
But technique does exist. It is true, and it does work - and more often is it clean like that than you'd expect. A lot of times it isn't - but a lot of times it is. I work on making it as clean as I can as much as I can because when it's clean it's good and when it's good it works the best.
As for them being very advanced and hard to do in sparring... what's so advanced about them? The Zwerchau? The Zornhau? Two of the first of the master strikes which are the most basic thing in german swordsmanship and first taught before almost anything else? Was is the fact that they were actually manipulating their opponent's swords in the wind such as when the one guy, to avoid getting stabbed, merely slid the strong of his sword against the weak of his opponent's blade? This isn't that advanced... it's merely done well because both of them are working on the ART. They have good solid intention, they move their bodies, they are doing what swordsmen are supposed to do and being bold and trusting their technique rather than just throwing out their swords and hoping to hit something.
You're sortof right when you say that a lot of time you don't see technique like that in sparring - that it's too hard. Well, I say it's not that they're too hard - just most combatant's are good enough yet. Notice how each sequence is built up from a simple overhead strike, and each step is a blow that could potentially end the fight. But in sparring, people often revert back to instinct and freak out after just one or two clashes of the sword and go back to swinging wildly. They can't calm themselves enough to practically become aware of how the opponent is moving, where is sword is going, and how to void the attack with an attack of their own - And in a circumstance like that then the good clean technique is impossible.
Certainly there are other ways they could've moved than demonstrated in the video that would also protect them from the attacks being thrown - but what they're demonstrating is the idea of simultaneous defense with an attack - closing off the vulnerable line in such a way as to threaten the line your opponent opens by virtue of his attack. All the techniques you see there are based on that principle - A principle completely foreign to JSA, SCA, Modern Fencing, and most other martial arts. people grow up watching movies, seeing demos, training in other more mainstream martial arts and get this turn based 'parry-riposte' mindset. 'He strikes, i block or parry, now I strike, he blocks or parrys, then He strikes, then I block or parry,' back and forth and back and forth. And people who are 'good' fighters take that to the next level where it's just a constant barrage of attacks(which isn't necessarily bad - as that is also taught in WMA - to keep the initiative to keep your opponent on the defensive - a defending sword is not an attacking sword and so can't hurt you) but then people get injured due to lack of control, and so to keep it up they start layering armor on themselves which changes how they move and respond to attack because now they've got this 'rhino hide' on themselves so they don't need to defend themselves well - they can absorb 9 out of ten of the hits thrown against them on their shield alone - so let's just bash away and learn tricks to get around the armor, and then the whole thing just degenerates into a 'who can hit me the hardest and give me the biggest bruise through my armor' kindof deal.
As for longswords and handle lengths I disagree also. It's an interesting conclusion you've come to - but remember these arts were mostly developed in the 1400s through the 1600s. Guns were throughout that time getting more and more common. Battles were fought less and less by men on horseback - which were always a minority on the battlefield to begin with - yet almost all longswords have hilts between 7 and 10 inches long - certainly this horseback minority wouldn't have had the majority of swords made for them?
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Oct 10, 2007 19:22:41 GMT
Karma for putting my thoughts into a congent argument, adam.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2007 21:40:38 GMT
I really don't have any disagreement with you Adam.
You said:
I said:
I just did not use the formal names. I was bringing out the frequency with which certain things are used. I was not advocating bashing away with no intended purpose.
In sparring there is also use of distance which is not used in the vids for the sake of the demo. If an opponent starts winding against your blade the easiest thing to do is lunge back and put out the longpoint so he can not easily follow. Of course not the opponent must beat aside the blade in order to engage. Such maneuvers like disengaging and stepping out of range break the fluidity of sparring so it does not look like a demo.
I respect Capo's explanation of "The Use" and "The Art" of a sword. I prefer to give equal attention to both. Reminds me of historical situations of military commanders who are educated at the finest military academies but then take command of troops in battle and meet disaster. I believe "the Art" and "the use" need to be developed together.
|
|
|
Post by chakobsa on Oct 10, 2007 21:48:15 GMT
+1, Adam for points well made, particularly your illuminating comments on art over use. And speaking as a complete novice who just had his first training session a couple of weeks ago I agree with your comments about trusting technique, our instructor said the same thing to us; trust your your technique and trust your weapon. Reminds me of a quote from Voltaire; "God is on the side not of the big battalions, but of the best shots.".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2007 6:19:52 GMT
Show me ONE instance by ANY medieval or renaissance master who advocated backing away from the opponent while fighting with longswords. I dare you.
If you back up and stick your sword in longpoint all you're doing is making it very very easy for your opponent to wind against you... it'd be like sticking your fist out and backing away from somebody in an unarmed fight... you might as well just impale yourself.
I think distance was a very key point in the demos - it's just more subtle than the giant leaps and retreats you see in modern fencing. Angles played an important part, and angles go with distancing like peanut butter goes with jelly on a sandwich. The japanese call it 'ma-ai'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2007 8:17:52 GMT
You got me on that one. Its not 15th century, its 20th century. The Russians used this technique in the 70's to dominate fencing in the Olympics. Before that fencing was all blade work. The Russians changed it into a distance game. The rule of thumb is, "if you control the distance, you control the match".
Playing with the distance may be out of period for Longswords, Rapiers, Polearms, shields and two-weapon forms. It works so I use it. If you fight in a big enough pool of people you will run into other people that mix time periods too. Purists always hate me for it but fighting is not about being fair. It is too subtle a manipulation for anyone to really complain that much about anyway. What can they say, "Stand still so I can hit you" or "your back-lunge is too big". It forces your opponent to reset himself and creates opportunities. You might say that changing the distance is part of being unpredictable and I am sure all 15th century masters would agree with that.
Also with regard with using the Longpoint, both Fiore and Ringeck do mention it as creating distance and commits your opponent to two maneuvers. Usually a beat followed by some strike. The fact that he must beat your blade and then strike can be an opportunity. The beat is harmless because it is against your weapon, if you time your strike while he beats, you got him.
Ringeck is specific about avoiding the use of the Longpoint, but that only means that other masters at the time did use it and just never published any manuals. Also consider that later styles evolved to favor point-in-line and the style has endured into modern times. You might say that the styles changed to favor the weapons used. I say the the weapons changed to fit the styles of fighting.
The way the wind works is your tip is placed near his hilt and he has natural leverage. If you back out the weak part of your blade is no longer in his strong and the wind is broken. If he rushes forward into your extended blade, he will be impaled first. We are back to what I said before about his need to beat or set aside the blade in order to safely attack you.
I agree with your comments about the use of different angles in your third paragraph. That is something I have been specifically trying to work into my fighting. I keep forgetting to take that half-step right or left while doing my combinations. I will have to drill this more on the pell.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Oct 11, 2007 19:04:18 GMT
I hazard a guess from adam's avatar that he may already be aware of this...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2007 19:14:42 GMT
There is more than one way to get to someone than straight in - if your blade is in my way, in longpoint, i don't need to beat it(though that is an option), all i need to do is put a stronger portion of my blade against a weaker portion of your blade and huzzah!, your point no longer blocks me from closing in. Heck, i don't even need to wind, just close my right opening, and step to my left(your right) and you can't follow me with that point because of how weak a position longpoint is.
As far as I can tell, the only reason medieval masters included longpoint was to show the final position of a thrust, and the position cuts were supposed to pass through - because it represents the limit of how far away you can threaten your opponent. If you look at German Fencing, just about everything they do is merely a transition from one guard into another. By including long point, and training your cuts and thrusts slowly to always pass into or through long point, you maximize your extension. By working on this I've managed to have longer-range cuts than guys 6 1/2 feet tall - We approached in the zufechten, and I threw out a cut before he even could think about being 'in range' and I got him.
Later styles - like olympic fencing - are so far removed from actual fighting it's just silly. When you're committed to thrust and not cut, and you cannot maneuver around but must stay on a thin strip, effectively limiting how you move your body to just forward and backward, yes backing off to created distance is a plausible maneuver. Just like if you're fully armored in fullplate you can block a blow with a gauntleted hand but you'd never do that without armor on.
Unarmored longsword and Olympic Fencing are two vastly different things, in different eras, yes, but also with different weapons, and different rules - so whatever you say about olympic fencing really doesn't hold weight here.
If backing away from an opponent works for you, then you're fighting crappy fencers that don't press the initiative. I can fight 5 year olds all day with crappy techniques and still win - because they're 5 year olds - but that doesn't make those techniques martially sound against anyone but 5 year olds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2007 3:29:34 GMT
I don't want to get into arguments that go in circles. I can't really comment on your fighting unless I see video of you and your opponents fighting. If your practice as often as you lead me to believe, you must have plenty of video. Video is a great training tool. Put some vids up on You Tube and then we can talk about something solid. I will not be malicious in any way are far as criticizing it. I only offer constructive criticism. We are all just students after all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2007 19:35:19 GMT
When I can get a decent camera, and someone to hold that camera to film some sparring, I'll put it up. Right now we had to balance a silly litle point-and-shoot on a tire and set it to 'record' and then hope to stay in the shot... let's just say it didn't work out too well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2007 8:23:23 GMT
Consider this digital camera for $29. It is the camera I use. www.ecost.com/Detail.aspx?edp=2850754The quality is slightly better then what you see in my vids because I have convered the format to more compressed one. You Tube then further compresses. I wrote some more specifics here: /index.cgi?board=swordtraining&action=display&thread=1192249953
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2007 23:53:23 GMT
I have an idea... Lets have everyone pay for one of you guys to get a plane ticket to the other's place, choose your favorite longswords, and duke it out! Ya'll could videotape it and then we would be free to critisize!
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Oct 17, 2007 2:41:11 GMT
I have an idea... Lets have everyone pay for one of you guys to get a plane ticket to the other's place, choose your favorite longswords, and duke it out! Ya'll could videotape it and then we would be free to critisize! I was going to offer my services as cameraman for this epic duel, but then I'd have to buy another plane ticket. I do think it'd be fun, though.
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Oct 17, 2007 3:59:59 GMT
Hmmm...interesting proposition. I have plenty of space and privacy, though it would require two plane tickets...experience at videography...yeah, I could video it...and a big hole to bury the loser.......... Nah, local constabulary would want to watch. But then they'd probably make a big stink.
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Oct 17, 2007 4:27:39 GMT
I think this is my new favorite.
|
|