|
|
Post by Derzis on Oct 9, 2016 1:50:27 GMT
There are also two different longsword vs katana debates. There's the "which is better" in a general sense, for which there's no good answer. They have different compromises in their designs, and have different strengths and weaknesses. Then there's longsword vs katana, in the sense of fighting with one against the other (like the OP). This one you can test! The answer doesn't say anything useful about the 1st general version of the question. The non-Eurocentric way to answer it is to change the question: which has the advantage in a duel - longsword or 27" messer with a hand-and-half hilt? In the "battle of the side arms" (Polearms...battlefield weapons...win by default) I would like to see heavy rapier with offhand dagger vs. longsword, as these (in my mind) are the top two contenders. You mentioned the 27" messer with a hand-and-half hilt, what about a half basket backsword or early cut and thrust with hand guard (like A&A or Windlass Munich) with an off hand dagger? Frankly, I believe all of these superior (by a large margin) to a Katana. Sidearm matchups are fascinating. katana + wakizashi will do fairly good against sword+dagger if you grew the muscles to handle katana one handed. At the end any REAL fight for life comes to who can use better the surprise factor. No matter what type of blade you use. To come back to original question of the topic, nobody can give a straight answer, use your imagination. Fighting with a sword is about strategy too, not pure force or blade length. And this is taught in all systems, be it Japanese, European, Chinese or Korean. |
|
|
|
Post by Croccifixio on Oct 9, 2016 1:59:00 GMT
Rapier + dagger would be me weapon of choice in a 1v1 non-armoured sword-only duel even if I'm not very good at it. Can't beat 40 inches of fast pointy steel. Except maybe with a zweihander or something.
|
|
|
|
Post by howler on Oct 9, 2016 4:32:37 GMT
In the "battle of the side arms" (Polearms...battlefield weapons...win by default) I would like to see heavy rapier with offhand dagger vs. longsword, as these (in my mind) are the top two contenders. You mentioned the 27" messer with a hand-and-half hilt, what about a half basket backsword or early cut and thrust with hand guard (like A&A or Windlass Munich) with an off hand dagger? Frankly, I believe all of these superior (by a large margin) to a Katana. Sidearm matchups are fascinating. katana + wakizashi will do fairly good against sword+dagger if you grew the muscles to handle katana one handed. At the end any REAL fight for life comes to who can use better the surprise factor. No matter what type of blade you use. To come back to original question of the topic, nobody can give a straight answer, use your imagination. Fighting with a sword is about strategy too, not pure force or blade length. And this is taught in all systems, be it Japanese, European, Chinese or Korean. The greatest elements of the katana are its two handed ability (for basically a one handed sized sword). It is downright awful as a one handed sword and, as such, would be CHEWED UP AND SPIT OUT against any number of European sword dagger combinations (with the INFINETLY superior hand protection and balance of the Euro swords...and they were meant to be one handed swords). NOBODY can argue your point on the importance of skill of the user, as it is the 1st thing to consider. But, in asking the question of which tool is better, one must assume equality of ability, otherwise the "thought experiment" is rendered moot. |
|
|
|
Post by howler on Oct 9, 2016 4:39:21 GMT
Rapier + dagger would be me weapon of choice in a 1v1 non-armoured sword-only duel even if I'm not very good at it. Can't beat 40 inches of fast pointy steel. Except maybe with a zweihander or something. The consensus is that you are correct on the Rapier/dagger combo. Btw, Great Swords were "polearm wannabe" battlefield niche weapons. Rapier/dagger would eat them alive in a duel. Now...lets look at a polearm vs. rapier/dagger or polearm vs. backsword, cut & thrust/dagger duel. |
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Oct 9, 2016 7:16:42 GMT
As someone who practices German/Italian longsword, and self teaches and drills with military sabre, I like to fence with my Sabre against longswords. What I find works is to feint and mix cuts going from the top down with other angles, such as angled coming up, and angled from the shoulder, or just straight across into the belly. I'd recommend keep mixing up feint and actual cuts to get around the length issue. Remember, it's not how long it is, it's how you use it  |
|
|
|
Post by howler on Oct 9, 2016 7:43:52 GMT
As someone who practices German/Italian longsword, and self teaches and drills with military sabre, I like to fence with my Sabre against longswords. What I find works is to feint and mix cuts going from the top down with other angles, such as angled coming up, and angled from the shoulder, or just straight across into the belly. I'd recommend keep mixing up feint and actual cuts to get around the length issue. Remember, it's not how long it is, it's how you use it Do you think an off hand dagger would help in a duel with a longsword? I believe it would/should have to. A good one handed sword (with guard) and dagger combo vs. longsword is an intriguing matchup. |
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Oct 9, 2016 7:50:21 GMT
As someone who practices German/Italian longsword, and self teaches and drills with military sabre, I like to fence with my Sabre against longswords. What I find works is to feint and mix cuts going from the top down with other angles, such as angled coming up, and angled from the shoulder, or just straight across into the belly. I'd recommend keep mixing up feint and actual cuts to get around the length issue. Remember, it's not how long it is, it's how you use it Do you think an off hand dagger would help in a duel with a longsword? I believe it would/should have to. A good one handed sword (with guard) and dagger combo vs. longsword is an intriguing matchup. I tried it, and didn't like it too much. Lighter one handed swords like arming swords or sabres (back swords, side swords, smallswords, Spadroons etc) lack the mass to actually stop the longsword and give you a good opportunity to use the dagger. Then again, I never trained for offhand dagger use, so someone more trained in it might very well fair better. For me it was a little awkward anyways though  |
|
|
|
Post by Derzis on Oct 9, 2016 12:15:20 GMT
katana + wakizashi will do fairly good against sword+dagger if you grew the muscles to handle katana one handed. At the end any REAL fight for life comes to who can use better the surprise factor. No matter what type of blade you use. To come back to original question of the topic, nobody can give a straight answer, use your imagination. Fighting with a sword is about strategy too, not pure force or blade length. And this is taught in all systems, be it Japanese, European, Chinese or Korean. The greatest elements of the katana are its two handed ability (for basically a one handed sized sword). It is downright awful as a one handed sword and, as such, would be CHEWED UP AND SPIT OUT against any number of European sword dagger combinations (with the INFINETLY superior hand protection and balance of the Euro swords...and they were meant to be one handed swords). NOBODY can argue your point on the importance of skill of the user, as it is the 1st thing to consider. But, in asking the question of which tool is better, one must assume equality of ability, otherwise the "thought experiment" is rendered moot. The thought experiment is rendered moot from the beginning in my opinion. Swords don't fight alone, people do. Sounds like "guns don't shot people, people do" but this is the reality. And no, the greatest elements of a katana are not the two handed ability or the curvature of the blade. Is the knowledge about the human nature that comes with it. Without it you are just a swinger of a piece of steel. But this is just me. |
|
|
|
Post by howler on Oct 9, 2016 20:12:00 GMT
Do you think an off hand dagger would help in a duel with a longsword? I believe it would/should have to. A good one handed sword (with guard) and dagger combo vs. longsword is an intriguing matchup. I tried it, and didn't like it too much. Lighter one handed swords like arming swords or sabres (back swords, side swords, smallswords, Spadroons etc) lack the mass to actually stop the longsword and give you a good opportunity to use the dagger. Then again, I never trained for offhand dagger use, so someone more trained in it might very well fair better. For me it was a little awkward anyways though Spadroons, and light smallswords would almost be in the category of offhand dagger by comparison.  Maybe a heavier back sword, cut and thrust (like the Windlass Munich...pushing 3 1/2 lb. but with closer POB), even light Cavalry saber should be enough to not have your guard smashed. It does make a lot of sense that it would be awkward at first to have a blade in your other hand and learn how to use it (and not cut your own wrists in the process). |
|
|
|
Post by howler on Oct 9, 2016 20:31:26 GMT
The greatest elements of the katana are its two handed ability (for basically a one handed sized sword). It is downright awful as a one handed sword and, as such, would be CHEWED UP AND SPIT OUT against any number of European sword dagger combinations (with the INFINETLY superior hand protection and balance of the Euro swords...and they were meant to be one handed swords). NOBODY can argue your point on the importance of skill of the user, as it is the 1st thing to consider. But, in asking the question of which tool is better, one must assume equality of ability, otherwise the "thought experiment" is rendered moot. The thought experiment is rendered moot from the beginning in my opinion. Swords don't fight alone, people do. Sounds like "guns don't shot people, people do" but this is the reality. And no, the greatest elements of a katana are not the two handed ability or the curvature of the blade. Is the knowledge about the human nature that comes with it. Without it you are just a swinger of a piece of steel. But this is just me. I think you just said everything I said, though in a slightly different way. Still, a thought experiment is never moot, as new designs and subtle tweaks of a particular tool are achieved in just this way (and a longsword, katana, halberd, beats a spoon). Again, the only possible way to even contemplate the merits of a tool matchup, is assuming the equality of the people wielding the tools. As an example, there are probably millions of people out there who could kill me with a cup or spoon, even though I was using a longsword, or hell, even a polearm. |
|
Arkhane
Member
Still figurin' this out.
Posts: 312 
|
Post by Arkhane on Jan 24, 2017 17:08:00 GMT
Has the idea of binding and grabbing his sword been mentioned? Or even better, his cross?
|
|
|
|
Post by howler on Jan 24, 2017 21:26:25 GMT
Has the idea of binding and grabbing his sword been mentioned? Or even better, his cross? The bind is where the Longsword really shines, as it turns into a two handed, four foot long short spear using a sliding thrust. |
|
Arkhane
Member
Still figurin' this out.
Posts: 312
|
Post by Arkhane on Jan 24, 2017 21:54:08 GMT
Has the idea of binding and grabbing his sword been mentioned? Or even better, his cross? The bind is where the Longsword really shines, as it turns into a two handed, four foot long short spear using a sliding thrust. That may be, but to get the thrust, you have to have your point online, as well as be in range. The katana guy binds the longsword, grabs the tip of the longsword with his non dominant hand, then moves in. OR, enter the bind, then take a step into grappling range before the opponent can wind. |
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Jan 24, 2017 22:39:24 GMT
Has the idea of binding and grabbing his sword been mentioned? Or even better, his cross? The bind is where the Longsword really shines, as it turns into a two handed, four foot long short spear using a sliding thrust. That may be, but to get the thrust, you have to have your point online, as well as be in range. The katana guy binds the longsword, grabs the tip of the longsword with his non dominant hand, then moves in. OR, enter the bind, then take a step into grappling range before the opponent can wind. It works. Since the katana blade is shorter, it's easier to grab, disengage, and cut or thrust with the katana. If longsword moves in just to get the bind, that's a bad move IMO. "Let me see. I have a 10" reach advantage. Why don't I just give that up, and move in and bind? Surely no problem will come of my opponent's sword being shorter and more mobile at that distance." 4" of reach difference is very significant. 10" is enormous. One should use it, rather than giving it up. (Grabbing the blade or cross was mentioned in the 3rd post.) |
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Jan 25, 2017 0:16:06 GMT
I'd be curious to see these possibilities tried out. In my experience it's difficult to stop a longsword with a blade used one handed. So the whole position may collapse if you try for a grab under pressure. Better to grab the blade while it lingers at longpoint, yank and cut the hand or torso.
|
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Jan 25, 2017 0:27:38 GMT
Grab the blade/cross in the bind can work with longsword vs longsword. The disengage to cut them will be easier with a katana.
You don't stop the longsword one-handed; you stop it two-handed. If they keep enough pressure on so that you can't let go and grab, do something else (like disengage and hit them as they move in the wrong direction from having been pressing too hard in the bind). If there is almost no pressure, don't grab - they can move to avoid it and punish you too easily. Push against their blade with your's first, and wait for them to push more.
Much easier and safer to grab the opponent's blade in the bind than, say, if they're in longpoint. The pressure in the bind commits them somewhat to keeping their sword there. If their blade is just sitting there free, it's very mobile, and an attempt to grab is an invitation for them to cut your fingers off or similar.
|
|
|
|
Post by Derzis on Jan 25, 2017 1:54:08 GMT
That may be, but to get the thrust, you have to have your point online, as well as be in range. The katana guy binds the longsword, grabs the tip of the longsword with his non dominant hand, then moves in. OR, enter the bind, then take a step into grappling range before the opponent can wind. It works. Since the katana blade is shorter, it's easier to grab, disengage, and cut or thrust with the katana. If longsword moves in just to get the bind, that's a bad move IMO. "Let me see. I have a 10" reach advantage. Why don't I just give that up, and move in and bind? Surely no problem will come of my opponent's sword being shorter and more mobile at that distance." 4" of reach difference is very significant. 10" is enormous. One should use it, rather than giving it up. (Grabbing the blade or cross was mentioned in the 3rd post.) It works if the katana guy is stupid and will get him killed. When a katana guy binds? Rarely if never when he is out of his own killing range. Against a longer blade will try to slap the other blade off the center and enter for a wrist cut first to finish after. That's not binding. The only way he can take advantage and try to grab the other sword is after he blocked an attack. To do that successfuly he has to make the other to comit for his attack. And this is hard when you let the longer blade to attack - even a "checking" attack with a long sword can do damages against a shorter blade. You block and hurry to grab and the other just pulls his blade from your hand and cuts you. I wouldn't let the initiative to a longer blade and is not quite in my mindset the idea of letting the other endless opportunities until he comits and after I block and grab the sword instead going for a kill from block (and I preffer parrying instead blocking anyway) To grab the handle or wrestling the opponent if the circumstances are right, yes. Grabbing the blade, not quite. Is not something ingrained in a katana fighter. It works just if the katana guy is a converted longsword fighter. And will get him killed. A kata might work, not real fighting. PS All the grabbing I've seen in longsword fights happens when the guys are very close. The katana should be wak or tanto to be able to stab easy from a grabbing distance. On paper it might work but at ideology level how can you make a bind and grab when on one side you have a wrestling mentality with a sword and the other is never let the initiative to the other? The winner is decided by skills, not scenarios - and can be any of them. |
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Jan 25, 2017 2:44:12 GMT
The only way he can take advantage and try to grab the other sword is after he blocked an attack. That's the most likely case, but not the only way. You can engage the opponent's sword and step in, ending up in the same position. You can attack, and they block. It's the position that matters (and how hard each pushes on the other's blade), not the details of how they got there. To do that successfuly he has to make the other to comit for his attack. Yes. And this is hard when you let the longer blade to attack - even a "checking" attack with a long sword can do damages against a shorter blade. What's hard? To block? Not really. As for damage to your blade - so what? Better your blade is damaged than you are. You block and hurry to grab and the other just pulls his blade from your hand and cuts you. No. Unless you do it wrong, or do it at the wrong time. The last point is very important. People who actively decide to grab the opponent's blade will often do it at the wrong time, and it will fail. But if your opponent freely offers you the opportunity, take it. You should not need to worry about them pulling the blade free and cutting your hand because you should have hit them decisively before they have the opportunity to pull free. If you can't do that (or transition to a takedown or something else suitable), it's the wrong time to grab. At most, if you're aiming to grab, you can offer your opponent the opportunity to offer you the opportunity to grab, and be ready to take advantage of the chance. Going for the grab no matter what is a Bad Idea (as is much over-commitment and over-planning in swordsmanship). |
|
|
|
Post by Derzis on Jan 25, 2017 3:08:02 GMT
Anything else I have to know? How about disregarding all the f*ing concepts like sen-no-sen, sen-sen-no-sen, deai and even go-no-sen to make bind and grab the blade possible because is the solution of the day? You can put technique vs technique, sword vs sword but you can't erase what is behind them. This "behind" them is what screws the pooch. If someone didn't use a technic until is part of his nature, it's just a rumour. And you can't win with rumours.
|
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Jan 25, 2017 8:17:53 GMT
How about disregarding all the f*ing concepts like sen-no-sen, sen-sen-no-sen, deai and even go-no-sen to make bind and grab the blade possible because is the solution of the day? You think that theoretical concepts stop you from using a technique? Timing, anticipation, initiative, and reaction are important for making it work - why would you ignore such concepts, or need to? If someone didn't use a technic until is part of his nature, it's just a rumour. And you can't win with rumours. Train. If you want it to work in real combat, "real" combat, or sparring, or whatever, train. If you don't train to use the technique, don't expect it to work. Neither "I can't do it, so nobody else can do it" nor "I can't imagine it working, so it can't possibly work" is a good argument. Nor is "Concepts stop me from doing it, so nobody else can do it". Grabbing longswords is in the old European sources, grabbing katanas is in Japanese koryu (e.g., Katori Shinto Ryu). This suggests that people with experience in fighting with sharp swords felt that it could work, and was useful enough to be worth teaching. Even if you dismiss modern people who can make it work in sparring*, I don't think you should dismiss those with real fighting experience. *But the OP was asking about modern sparring, so being able to make it work in modern sparring should be sufficient. |
|
Maybe a heavier back sword, cut and thrust (like the Windlass Munich...pushing 3 1/2 lb. but with closer POB), even light Cavalry saber should be enough to not have your guard smashed. It does make a lot of sense that it would be awkward at first to have a blade in your other hand and learn how to use it (and not cut your own wrists in the process).
