Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2008 10:00:37 GMT
Let me specify here, I haven't been apart of the SCA and wouldn't because from what I have seen of the kingdoms here they are really not something that appeals to me. The reason is not because I can't hack it or whatever, it is because the SCA fighters here remind me of delinquent children who have no understanding of what it means to fight safely against an opponent.
Again respecification, we stab with steel swords that don't have thrusting tips on them. I was being facetious with the comment about baseball bats, what I was trying to say is that a rattan stick is not a representation of sword. If they shave down the sides and whatnot, all well and good but I haven't seen any evidence of it.
I again reiterate, I was not apart of the SCA and would not join a kingdom here in Australia because it is about guys hitting each other with pvc wrapped in gaffa tape (yes it is that bad!). I think SCA combat is a lot more useless than re-enactment, but I didn't say it was completely useless in the first place. When it comes down to it I would much rather use a "real" sword than a rattan simulator, because they aren't as I said a very good or life like simulation of a real sword. That is just my opinion, I have alot of respect for Tsafa and what he does but he isn't just an SCA fighter and he actually is more interested in bettering himself that just doing SCA combat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2008 10:16:43 GMT
I've made my point about SCA rattan swords many times and I'm not going to again apart from to say: Distribution of mass balances a sword, not overall weight and CoG. Are you implying that grappling/wrestling is a skill-less art? I remember fencing a guy at a ren. faire that was 8 inches taller and easily 100lbs heavier, and wore armor(vs. my unarmored self). You know what I did? threw him to the ground(hip throw) and kicked him right in his helmeted head. He didn't fight me after that. According to you he should've killed me because he was bigger and stronger. By the same token, I've had my butt royally handed to me on a shiny silver platter by guys that were just tiny by comparison to even my modest build. No. They can't. If anything SCA is proof of that. Two guys in armor duking it out - sometimes takes minutes for one of them to go down. You can wear all the damned armor you want - and a wristlock is still a wristlock, and it can still break bones. An armbar will still break your elbow and dislocate the shoulder. Etc. This is *exactly* why styles such as jujutsu developed in japan, chin na in china, and the wrestling techniques in europe - all remarkably similar. Nor is it a club that bashes. A sword is a cutting weapon(or thrusting). If you use it for things other than cutting(or thrusting - but if you're doing 12th century combat than 90% should be cutting) then there are other weapons much better suited to the task(club, mace, etc). Power? I've cut clean through tatami with a cut light enough that you SCA guys would probably laugh out loud at the force were I to hit you that hard with my waster. And I hit easily much harder than that when I spar. Therefore - if i'm hitting harder than I do when I actually cut things of fleshy consistency - then I'm hitting hard enough. And if that doesn't cut it due to circumstances(armor or another material that inhibits my cut's effectiveness) then there is thrusting, which I also do in sparring, and also grappling - which is not like collegiate wrestling while prone, but rather ideally when the combatants are standing. The goal is to make your opponent not-stand while you stand. Then you win. The fact of the matter is, that SCA guys fight really close. Or rather 90% of the ones I've seen do. So close in fact, that the only effective hit that either can do with their swords is a 'wrap'. Frankly, a pommel strike would be easier and more effective. Also - daggers would be drawn at that distance. Also - again, grappling. That's really my biggest complaint against the SCA - no grappling. Here's my Summary of why I don't like them: 1: No grappling. Period. Including disarms. 2: No Hand Shots. 3: Poor weapon simulators. 4: Far too high standards on what constitutes a 'good' hit, in regards to the necessary power in the strike. 5: Far more armor than was worn historically at the time.(I've been told 13th century. Most people did NOT have full on plate at that time). As for hitting will 'full power'. You're right - your skill goes down when you hit as hard as you can. But the thing is you DON'T NEED TO HIT AS HARD AS YOU CAN WITH A SWORD IN ORDER FOR THE SWORD TO DO DAMAGE. Even our 'wussy' WMA hits that you deride so much have left more than one person one time with big nasty bruises that would sure have cut real deep into flesh and bone had they been real sword strikes. Seeing an opponent in armor that would resist cuts and then trying to compensate by just hitting harder is silly. If you want to join two pieces of wood and you have a nail and a screwdriver, obviously the screwdriver won't do too well smacking the nail - and the answer is not to just smack harder(though, eventually that would work). Far easier to just use a more appropriate tool(a hammer) or get a more appropriate use out of the tool you do have(switching to a screw instead of a nail).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2008 16:45:31 GMT
because the SCA fighters here remind me of delinquent children who have no understanding of what it means to fight safely against an opponent. Really? The safety record of the SCA is quite high. In over 30 years of combat, only one person has died, and that was due to a pre-existing heart condition. When you realize that the number of authorized fighters in the SCA probably numbers in the 10,000s, that is a pretty respectable safety record. My membership number is 166120, and that would assume that 1/166 people are currently fighting. Again, the number is probably higher than that. Again respecification, we stab with steel swords that don't have thrusting tips on them. I was being facetious with the comment about baseball bats, what I was trying to say is that a rattan stick is not a representation of sword. If they shave down the sides and whatnot, all well and good but I haven't seen any evidence of it. And I haven't seen you fight. That doesnt mean I dont take your word for it. Try assuming that we understand what we are talking about, and common practices. Guys hitting each other with pvc wrapped in gaffa tape (yes it is that bad!). Really? I would love to see a picture or hear a name of someone using PVC. That has not been allowed since the late 1960's, when the move to rattan was developed. The ONLY place PVC has in our game is for Youth combat, for safety issues of letting 10yo. fight each other. Stabbing with rattan is impractical because you could break someone ribs or collarbone or whatever very easily with a rattan weapon. I think that the SCA needs to find a better medium than rattan, why not use wooden wasters that accurately represent a sword rather than rattan? The fact that the SCA uses rattan is of itself ridiculous, ok guaranteed that it is resistant to breaking and whatnot but it isn't accurate to anything in the slightest. You may as well give them weighted baseball bats and let them have at it. The reason we use rattan instead of steel/baseball bats/bokken/other hard rigid objects is one of safety. For both the people and the weapons. Could we go full speed/full power with steel swords (assuming the armour standards were upped)? Yeah, but unless we were using SSO/crowbars, we would be buying new ones about every week or two. Bokken/baseball bats have absolutely 0 give. If I were to take a bokken and swing it like I did an SCA rattan sword, you would have broken bones/concussion/serious damage. In a real situation, I would want that. Here, I dont, hence the use of rattan which has some "give" and "springyness" to it. Are you telling me you wouldn't damage someone delivering a full force thrust to them? That the sword wouldnt penetrate through maille? ______________________________________________________ Adam, can you please reference who you are quoting? It makes it a lot easier to re-reference your quotes into context. The following are from you. Distribution of mass balances a sword, not overall weight and CoG You are right. That is why people have started to shave their rattan, as well as distribute more of the weight towards the back of the sword, into the hand. Does it have a weak/strong section of the blade? Yes, but not as much as steel. According to you he should've killed me because he was bigger and stronger. No, that was completely out of context. You referenced a point about needing skill to win. Obviously, you had more skill, and were able to win against a bigger opponent. You can wear all the damned armor you want - and a wristlock is still a wristlock, and it can still break bones. An armbar will still break your elbow and dislocate the shoulder. Etc. This is *exactly* why styles such as jujutsu developed in japan, chin na in china, and the wrestling techniques in europe - all remarkably similar. How does this bear any relevance to the original post? Yes, grappling developed in Japan, etc. Can you show me any evidence AT ALL showing that grappling was done during teh 11-12th century? As I discussed earlier, you would be highly reluctant to give up any solid defense to simply armlock a guy. The two styles are comparing apples to oranges. If you use it for things other than cutting(or thrusting - but if you're doing 12th century combat than 90% should be cutting) then there are other weapons much better suited to the task(club, mace, etc). Yet a sword can be used for blunt trauma. Just because there are better weapons, doesnt mean people didnt use the available tools. If you had a sword, and ran across the 1 in 10 guys which were wearing armour, do you suddenly drop your sword and grab a club? Or do you simply bash him with your sword? There is nothing saying that people did not use swords against others in armour, and in fact iconographic evidence would highly argue against your point. Power? I've cut clean through tatami with a cut light enough that you SCA guys would probably laugh out loud at the force were I to hit you that hard with my waster. And I hit easily much harder than that when I spar. Therefore - if i'm hitting harder than I do when I actually cut things of fleshy consistency - then I'm hitting hard enough. This is not UNARMOURED combat! Referencing the power used to cut through a grass mat means absolutely nothing when used against an oppenent in maille. So, no you are not hitting hard enough. The fact of the matter is, that SCA guys fight really close. Or rather 90% of the ones I've seen do. So close in fact, that the only effective hit that either can do with their swords is a 'wrap'. Frankly, a pommel strike would be easier and more effective. Also - daggers would be drawn at that distance. Also - again, grappling. That's really my biggest complaint against the SCA - no grappling. That is the style some use. Others stay at their maximum distance and hit you with the last inch of their sword. Still others get close, grab their dagger and stab you in the face. All are legal. As I have said before, why grapple? You have absolutely no rigid armour. So I am going to give up my shield, which takes time to get out of, to throw you to the ground? As for hitting will 'full power'. You're right - your skill goes down when you hit as hard as you can. But the thing is you DON'T NEED TO HIT AS HARD AS YOU CAN WITH A SWORD IN ORDER FOR THE SWORD TO DO DAMAGE. Even our 'wussy' WMA hits that you deride so much have left more than one person one time with big nasty bruises that would sure have cut real deep into flesh and bone had they been real sword strikes. I have NEVER hit anyone as hard as I can with rattan in SCA combat. I have hit them stoutly, but hitting someone as hard as I can usually would result in them having a concussion, or denting/deforming 12ga steel. We frequently get bruises. I am not "deriding" your "wussy" WMA shots. I am simply pointing out that they would be fairly useless as a CUTTING swing against maille.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2008 18:03:31 GMT
Sorry, Adam, but from an engineering standpoint, CG precisely defines distribution of mass e.g. balance, although CP (and COP in a sword) is an entirely different matter, perhaps you meant to say something else?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2008 18:24:51 GMT
In the middle ages, knights practiced through "behourd" combat. This typically used rebated swords or batons, sometimes made from whalebone. This has been converted into a combat sport by the SCA. www.chronique.com/Library/Tourneys/behourds.htmLately, attempts have been made to introduce more historical simulations of medieval combat, based on studies of extant manuscripts - to varying degrees of sucess. I used to do SCA combat many years ago. I understand that a lot has changed since.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2008 19:34:07 GMT
Not to be nerdy, but because I work in academia...
"Whatever the method or the weapon of the time, let there be ample practice for our youth, with as great variety of exercises as can be devised, so that they may be ready for combat hand to hand or in troop, in the headlong charge or in skirmish. We cannot forestall the reality of war, its sudden emergencies, or its vivid terrors, but by training and practice we can at least provide such preparation as the case admits" - Pierpaolo Vergerio quoted by Sydney Anglo in The Martial Arts of Renaissance Europe
I don't think there is any greater turnoff for me with regard to modern day WMA then the rampant idea that one's form/style/practice of MA is REAL while subjectively discounting value in others. This is not the case in EMA...why? EMA certainly has different opinions but comparatively to WMA one seldom if ever hears one within the EMA sphere complaining that another discipline is 'not real'. Some WMA disciplines (or lack thereof) might be more martial then others and thereby adding to the collective understanding of swordsmanship at a more efficient rate. However even two kids with long sticks can learn valuable martial skill from play fighting. When one keeps getting hit at the same place one tends to learn something just to survive.
Reality... there are strong imperfections with every single modern approach at learning swordsmanship. (Heck, I include Kendo et al here as well) We are not really sword fighting today. We are trying to resuscitate a lost art with at most vague pictures. And although they are helpful, all the manual pictures in the world cannot compensate for lack of experience. Which brings me to another issue/point. There likewise are many different goals with regard to WMA. Or in other words, everyone has a unique goal as to their own potential and success. And this, on an individual by individual basis, must be acknowledged with regard to assessing any discipline (or lack thereof).
The truth is whether SCA or any other discipline is in fact a martial art has a lot more to do with the individual's approach. I am sure there are meat-heads enjoying the 'sport' of banging swords and shields at an SCA event. I am also sure there are individuals that are endeavoring to continue to hone years of experience and understanding to improve their martial skill.
I think it unwise to discount one discipline because its not our taste. I would take an experienced SCA student over a more experienced manual studying test cut-only student in a real fight any day. Even with all those SCA rules that make it so imperfect and 'unrealistic'. That being said, in regard to the quote given above, if there is value to be gained in any discipline or practice than I am interested in that value...even if I have to ignore other obvious weaknesses.
"let there be ample practice... with as great variety of exercises as can be devised, so that they may be ready for combat"
The best sword fighter in the world today likely is the one with the widest experience. The one that has used their weapon in the greatest breadth of conditions and against the widest range of disciplines and weaponry.
Christian
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2008 19:40:52 GMT
Really? I would love to see a picture or hear a name of someone using PVC. That has not been allowed since the late 1960's, when the move to rattan was developed. The ONLY place PVC has in our game is for Youth combat, for safety issues of letting 10yo. fight each other. Too often people confuse SCA with LARP. LARP uses padded PVC weapons. LARP is more about rollplaying then fighting. Kortoso, that link you gave is very enlightening. The best sword fighter in the world today likely is the one with the widest experience. The one that has used their weapon in the greatest breadth of conditions and against the widest range of disciplines and weaponry. Christian Christian, I only have quoted the last paragraph of your post, these are words I live by. Your whole post was brilliant. Karma. People have asked why we don't use blunt swords. Considering the speed and power we hit with, a blunt sword would break the bones just as good as a sharp one. A blunt sword still concentrates the force on its edge. Only thing a blunt sword can't do is slice. Also, people have gaps in the their armor. A blunt sword can still destroy a bicep or get in between the helmet and neck or into the face grill. The 1.25 inch diameter of the rattan is essential for spreading out the force and keeping it out of sensitive areas. On the issue of SCA fighters "just going at it". There are two issues. First there are many different levels of fighters. You might really have some beginners who are just swinging wildly. Withing a year of consistent training fighters begin to learn to conserve their energy and look for opening in defense or try to create openings. As the fighter get better and better there is a second issue, it is hard for onlookers to see what is going on because the sword is moving faster then the eye can keep up. What seems like wild shots is actually an attempt to run the sword down a narrow corridor between the opponents sword and shield. Another example, might be striking near an opponents eyes. This will force him to move the shield there and temporarily blind himself so another area can be attacked. These are just two examples of things you can not see by observing. The sword is moving too fast. You can only know by experience. As someone who does WMA, Rapier, and SCA I like the fact that each is different from the other. Each has a different approuch to training. The SCA teaches speed and power that can not be learned in the others. Rapier teaches point control and distance best. WMA teaches fighting from the bind and grappling fundamentals. Given that we can not recreate actual combat the most certain method of not missing anything is to train under a lot of different systems.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Feb 8, 2008 23:48:03 GMT
THere's no argueing that the SCA is not based on ANY evidence we have coming directly from the middle ages - that right there excludes it from WMA.
I'm sorry, but anything otherwiseis a delusion. WMA - WESTERN (SCA isn't based on western combat) - MARTIAL (Not a shred of evidence suggests that what the SCA is even remotely resebmles war or combat) - ART (If you call fat men with strength as their only trait beating each other with clubs and chugging a keg afterwards an "Art" there's something wrong)
I fails to meet all three requirements - whatever it is, it's no more WMA than Iaido.
Whatever you say "Lord Callum Mc Dougal!"
While showing you're complete misunderstanding of the history and application of WMA. THumbs up from me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2008 0:31:04 GMT
Hmmm.. Perhaps you should look at this again, without the elitist fallacy.
Western - Well, even if I chose to grant the point that it is not 100% historically correct, you can't get much further west than the US, so that assertion is invalid.
Martial - Your contention that SCA has no relation to actual combat, I must reject out of hand. The American Heritage Dictionary defines combat as: v. tr. 1. To oppose in battle; fight against. 1. To oppose vigorously; struggle against.
v. intr. 1. To engage in fighting; contend or struggle.
n. (kŏm'bât') 1. Fighting, especially armed battle; strife.
adj. (kŏm'bât') 1. Of or relating to combat: flew 50 combat missions.
Whether one is armed with beer bottles, tanks and missiles, or even a longsword, combat is in the conflict only. There is no more or less correct form of combat.
Art - Is there an art to SCA combat? Sure. Art, in any context other than purely aesthetic notions, pertains to skilled endeavor, (which has nothing to do with stylized notions of form over function), but instead just means it must be learned, and is not natural. While someone could theoretically engage in SCA list without training, the brutally Darwinian nature of conflict teaches its participants quickly what is required to survive, or they do not.
Hand to hand combat as taught in the U.S. Army, is not drawn from medieval documents, and yet I would argue that there is nothing more western or martial, and as a fighting system, it would certainly be classified as an art.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2008 0:36:11 GMT
Ok, I gather what you are referring to as far as SCA being not a WMA in the fact that it meets the definition. I really should change the title. How about "SCA combat, What can it teach us?". What I am referring to is that I think it can teach us things about armoured combat before rigid armour.
Technically, I would disagree.
The SCA started at Berkley, which is Western both by the definition of the geographical US and culture.
Martial - I would disagree that the SCA doesn't represent any form of combat. Two men enter, one leaves. Then the other leaves after being declared the winner. It is more like combat in a competitive sense. By the same reasoning, fencing would not be combat. 8)
There is a certain degree of "art" in an SCA fight, yet it takes a trained eye to follow it. As Tsafa says, sometimes people do not realize the interplay, where one shot follows another. It is different than most of the WMA videos I have seen, as since it is complete freeplay, there is no one "right" response. The only "right" response is the one that keeps you alive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2008 0:36:59 GMT
Guess I posted too late. I am feeling like crap right now, so I might not be on for a bit.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Feb 9, 2008 0:39:59 GMT
Well, I'm off to the JSA world now that I've completely lost faith in the sensibilities of the european world.
(It's no wonder why the SCA is the laughingstock of those who participate in REAL recreation of historical martial arts).
(Maybe something accurate for a change?)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2008 1:12:31 GMT
Yes, what you posted was two new people, probably from the 1970's, which could be the worst the SCA could bring. I am sure if I searched, I could find WMA groups equally ridiculous. If you wanted to search SCA Crown or Combat of the Thirty on Youtube, then you might see things which would change your mind. Otherwise, you are being childish.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2008 3:21:14 GMT
Rammstine, you are very well aware that the video you posted in nothing more then a street fair demonstration to entertain kids. I have done it myself. The purpose is to make kids laugh rather then actually fight. The video as you posted it is completely out of context. If you want to be taken seriously will will have to construct arguments. Preferably based on some historical facts or some experience.
The other video you posted, is a demonstration of form and technique rather then fighting. A person might be able to demonstrate such technique perfectly and not be able to reproduce it in combat.
The fact that you can't tell the deference (or choose to ignore it) between combat fighting and a demo is a direct result of your lack of experience either in WMA or in SCA. Quite honestly I have rarely ever know you to engage in meaningful discussion. You seem to just get your kicks trolling and baiting people into confrontations.
I can take criticism and I can even admit if I am wrong or don't know something. I can argue with meaningful supporting information. Please try to do the same so we can have a discussion that is intelligent and mature.
Note: My apologies to other people following this thread. I normally don't come down on people so harsh, but Rammstien does this trolling and baiting stuff all the time and has had conflicts with other people and moderators before.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2008 3:26:25 GMT
Here is a video of which I was referring to earlier La Prova Dura.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Feb 9, 2008 3:26:55 GMT
One can say that you get your kicks from posting misinormattion and passing it off as fact.
As you've rarely done much else.
But I recant all of my western knowledge, I'm a JSA guy. WMA is dead, slow, and a laughable system of combat as the SCA clearly shows since it is undoubtedly correct.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Feb 9, 2008 3:28:26 GMT
Here is a video of which I was referring to earlier La Prova Dura. Well that's rich. I think my original SCA video was a better representation of fighting, honestly. (Man with the plumes and frills does have substantial combat skill, though obviously he is the exception not the rule) 4:02 and 5:27 are hilarious
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2008 3:37:53 GMT
That was a pretty good video. There are a lot of good fighters in there. I am guessing that this video was taken out on the West Coast. West Coast fighters are know for using smaller shields and fighting with their sword behind their head. In the East Coast, bigger shields are more popular and people use more of a boxing style with the sword in front of their face.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2008 3:52:41 GMT
I wasn't go to go there but I am going to have to, hand to hand combat that is taught in the US Army is a derivative of BJJ, and therefor it is not western and I most definitely wouldn't class it as a martial art. There is no art to it, it is all about brawn not brains, take something like ninjitsu or jujitsu and you will see the art, take something like Iaido or Iaijitsu and again you see the art. What the US Military teaches in regards to hand to hand combat is not art, it is scrapping.
Tsafa: No I'm not mixing up SCA and LARP, I know the difference and these guys actually are apart of the Australian SCA. What I have seen from your videos looks like it takes alot of skill, well for the most part and is probably a lot of fun but I really still can't call it a WMA. I hope that that doesn't offend you it is after all just my opinion. If you were to ask whether I would get involved with an SCA group that was a lot like yours then the answer is yes. I can see the martial skill involved in what you are doing and I am appreciative of that skill but I still can't bring myself to call the SCA a WMA.
Ramm: You are very elitist about things without actually showing any evidence of your abilities. I know that you know a lot of scholarly information about swords and their types and things but when it comes to actually having used them in any type of activity that isn't backyard cutting you are severely lacking from my understanding. I think that you do deliberately bait these kinds of threads because you disagree with what is being said and want to make a mockery of it. Surely there is a better way to voice your objections, nay your distaste for these things in a more constructive and edifying manner?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2008 3:54:04 GMT
There are also these:
Showing some with larger shields, some fighting at range, etc.
I am curious why you think your video was a better representation of fighting. Do you mean that you are judging the SCA on one video, or that is what you see the SCA as? Either one is a bit outrageous.
|
|