Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2017 12:50:16 GMT
So, I have been recently trying to learn HEMA swordsmanship and have been much more successful than I initially thought I would be.
However, in my research to find suitable sources to learn, I have gone into much detail about various things and still have a long long list of links to read and then some. Doing all this plus my medical college stuff, one is bound to get very confused and overloaded and stuff. And now, I have two things that have extensively confused and befuddled me. One is quite small and maybe answered very easily, albeit at length. The other is a much bigger discussion.
The shorter and more inconsequential one is regarding martial traditions of the sword and their effectiveness. No limit to era, any can be mentioned, no matter how old or new or stupid seeming. I just want a list of arts that exist or existed and how effective they would be in a multitude of situations. E.g., Krabi Krabong is a valid martial art but in my opinion, their unarmed grappling or fighting is the only valid thing. The weapon system is somewhat weak and highly biased and opinionated without a basis in a source (the reason I turn to more dedicated arts for weapon training). Their effectiveness in regards to fighting armed or unarmed foes with unarmed combat or with a select few weapons (like the cudgels or the staff and pole weapons etc) is pretty much unrivaled. It's their sword or knife systems that lack, especially the sword one.
The second, more controversial and complex problem lies within HEMA itself. As much as I can tell, there are two major branches of swordsmanship in this, Italian (Fiore DeLiberi) or German (Meyer?). There are a few other, but the only one worth mention is the still young and neonatal English system. But I do not want to concern myself to that.
My problem is that I wish to receive quick information regarding Italian and German systems, their effectiveness, variations, differences, alignment (more defensive, offensive, wrestling-y, etc) etc.
So, hope it is worth the time of some more informed forum members to actually bother with this?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2017 14:56:29 GMT
A bit short on time and much less qualified than other forum members, but nonetheless… I always thought it was interesting that earlier German sources (e.g. Liechtenauer) seemed to prefer the thrust even more so than contemporary Italians (e.g. Fiore, although he taught a bit later), while in the times of the rapier coming into fashion the Germans where the ones who seemed to put a comparably larger focus on cutting (eg. Meyer and Fabris). By the way, I love English sources (here: Silver, Swetnam, Hope - especially Hope) for their pragmatic and straight-forward approach and their clear language. No problem. Whenever you have time, do elaborate. |
|
SeanF
Member
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by SeanF on May 7, 2017 15:37:06 GMT
The Italian/German division is mainly a longsword thing, which is by far the most popular weapon in HEMA today. I'll try to keep a brief list of the more un-controversial things about each. But everyone (including myself) has their opinions which they will happily tell you as the truth about everything in HEMA.  Italian- Not actually indicative of a system common through Italy. It is simply the system of Fiore de Libre who happened to be Italian. - System includes a large number of plays from different weapons, with common themes. (ie several grappling locks are repeated in multiple weapons. - Almost exclusively has plays where the opponent attacks first. - Heavily dominated by grappling plays. For example: Longsword is 65-85% grappling, depending on what you want to consider a grapple. Lichtenauer Glosses- Usually what people mean when they say German - There is a cryptic poem that is supposed to be a memorization tool for students of 'Lichtenauer'. What we have are glosses: a collection of clarifying texts to explain the verses of this poem, written by later masters of the tradition. - Names for these glosses you may have heard: Dobringer, MS 3227, Ringeck, Danzig, psudo-Danzig. - A heavy emphasis on attacking first, and continuing the attack not allowing them a chance to counter until they are overwhelmed. - Many plays feature what to do when the swords have bound on each other. Meyer- German fencing master who lived ~150 years after the Lichtenauer glosses started showing up. - Published a very complete book with many weapons, which form the complete system between them. Expected to learn and apply principles between all weapons, even if they are explained only in one of them. - Includes elements of the Lichtenauer tradition, along with other things not seen in the tradition. People disagree whether is should be considered a modified part of the KDF (Kunst des Fechtens) tradition or something different. - Also includes sportive techniques for the Fechtshule, leading to some people considering the whole thing as non martial sport fencing. - Does not include any thrusts in the longsword section, as it was illegal to do or teach in Germany at the time. It is expected that you learn and apply thrusts from other weapons, but this has contributed to the non-martial reputation among people who just read the longsword. These are the quick facts for each. If you have any more specific questions I can also try to answer. As for your first question, I don't know if you could possibly list all traditions in the sword. Also it's hard to judge how effective each is. Is it the system being ineffective, or just the people who tend to practice it nowadays? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2017 17:29:56 GMT
The Italian/German division is mainly a longsword thing, which is by far the most popular weapon in HEMA today. I'll try to keep a brief list of the more un-controversial things about each. But everyone (including myself) has their opinions which they will happily tell you as the truth about everything in HEMA. Italian- Not actually indicative of a system common through Italy. It is simply the system of Fiore de Libre who happened to be Italian. - System includes a large number of plays from different weapons, with common themes. (ie several grappling locks are repeated in multiple weapons. - Almost exclusively has plays where the opponent attacks first. - Heavily dominated by grappling plays. For example: Longsword is 65-85% grappling, depending on what you want to consider a grapple. Lichtenauer Glosses- Usually what people mean when they say German - There is a cryptic poem that is supposed to be a memorization tool for students of 'Lichtenauer'. What we have are glosses: a collection of clarifying texts to explain the verses of this poem, written by later masters of the tradition. - Names for these glosses you may have heard: Dobringer, MS 3227, Ringeck, Danzig, psudo-Danzig. - A heavy emphasis on attacking first, and continuing the attack not allowing them a chance to counter until they are overwhelmed. - Many plays feature what to do when the swords have bound on each other. Meyer- German fencing master who lived ~150 years after the Lichtenauer glosses started showing up. - Published a very complete book with many weapons, which form the complete system between them. Expected to learn and apply principles between all weapons, even if they are explained only in one of them. - Includes elements of the Lichtenauer tradition, along with other things not seen in the tradition. People disagree whether is should be considered a modified part of the KDF (Kunst des Fechtens) tradition or something different. - Also includes sportive techniques for the Fechtshule, leading to some people considering the whole thing as non martial sport fencing. - Does not include any thrusts in the longsword section, as it was illegal to do or teach in Germany at the time. It is expected that you learn and apply thrusts from other weapons, but this has contributed to the non-martial reputation among people who just read the longsword. These are the quick facts for each. If you have any more specific questions I can also try to answer. As for your first question, I don't know if you could possibly list all traditions in the sword. Also it's hard to judge how effective each is. Is it the system being ineffective, or just the people who tend to practice it nowadays? Hmm...that is the quite basis of what I knew when I asked the question, though of course this had a few points I shall research since they seem to contradict what I know. Thank you for taking the time. Also, I believe none of the martial disciplines practiced in the days of old was ineffective. To me, it seems that our ancestors were much more inclined and quick to get rid of ineffective things than us, usually because it effected them directly. It is probably our own interpretations that make them seemingly redundant. HEMA is a popular artifact for that case study. If I remember, just 7-8 years ago, many were skeptical about it's success rate, but now I believe it is a system that gains as much, if not more, respect as the more established systems. My own dislike of Krabi forms occurs due to the fact that even my kruu admits the ineffectiveness of the techniques left for the descendants. The Dha combat system quickly became unfavorable when firearms were introduced and due to the diverse variety of the Thai MA system, no one codified ANYTHING. The true usage was quickly lost, in favor of staff and blunt weapons, that still were applicable. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2017 17:31:50 GMT
No problem. Whenever you have time, do elaborate. As far as I understand, Liechtenauer and followers gave advice against the "common" fencer, attacking with overhead strikes and running in to wrestle. Since the focus on the principles for the winden and point work in general. There is a theory that Fiore spend some time learning from German masters. It seems questionable if he was able to grasp the deeper core of the system, though. What I like most about the English is their large emphasis on defense and safe parries. For example, George Silver goes a long way to criticize the offensive Italian rapier style and especially Sir William Hope's later work is full of warnings on the dangers of sword fighting in earnest. My question mainly is this: Would Fiore's discipline be in any way lesser than that of Lichtenstein? And from what I have seen, the Germans do get the job done most of the time (seeing their technique, it gives that idea no?) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2017 8:08:42 GMT
Oh well then...
Could you guys tell me what sort of sword would generally qualify as 'Fiore approved' ?
|
|
AndiTheBarvarian
Member
"Lord of the Memes"
Bavarianbarbarian - Semper Semprini
Posts: 10,345
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on May 8, 2017 8:54:02 GMT
I don't practise HEMA so take this with a grain of salt, but I have some learning/teaching stuff of both german and italian longsword school.
There is not a big difference, rather a different emphasis in some details.
Both use slender fast longswords with thrusting ability, like the Oakeshott types XVa, XVIa or XVIIIb.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2017 10:42:56 GMT
I don't practise HEMA so take this with a grain of salt, but I have some learning/teaching stuff of both german and italian longsword school. There is not a big difference, rather a different emphasis in some details. Both use slender fast longswords with thrusting ability, like the Oakeshott types XVa, XVIa or XVIIIb. Is it really necessary though? Wouldn't type XXa work too? |
|
AndiTheBarvarian
Member
"Lord of the Memes"
Bavarianbarbarian - Semper Semprini
Posts: 10,345
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on May 8, 2017 10:51:47 GMT
No problem, if it's on the slender side, I listed only the most typical types.
XXa can be broad warswords too, that wouldn't be ideal, but not impossible.
|
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on May 8, 2017 11:24:44 GMT
My problem is that I wish to receive quick information regarding Italian and German systems, their effectiveness, variations, differences, alignment (more defensive, offensive, wrestling-y, etc) etc. There is a diverse range of German sources, drawing of the Liechtenauer tradition, from Liechtenauer's teaching verse through to Meyer. Many commentaries and glosses on Liechtenauer's verse. Italian, there's Fiore and Vadi. The Italian stuff is simpler, less advanced content. The German stuff covers various principles better, and techniques are often described better (in some of the sources, certainly not in all of the sources). Which to choose? If you have local teachers of both schools, pick the better teacher - that will make far more difference than German vs Italian. If you're learning without a teacher, check Guy Windsor's books for Italian, and Christian Tobler's books for German. Which book do you like better? Pick that. Both work. Emphasis on fighting in the bind and wrestling will vary a lot from group/school to group/school. As far as the sources go, the German stuff has more complex technique in the bind. |
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on May 8, 2017 16:49:24 GMT
Keep in mind that HEMA is bigger than just Fiore vs. Liechtenauer. Italian sources, for example, explode in the Renaissance and include a wide array of systems for side sword, rapier, and all sorts of other things. Fiore is just the earliest surviving Italian source, and one of the earliest examinations of the longsword.
As others have noted, Liechtenauer's verse is describing how to defeat common fencers. Some people consider Fiore to be indicative of common fencers, others do not. Jake Norwood has been trying to reverse-engineer the text to try to figure out what common fencers were doing. But in any case the verse is something of an advanced course, and we don't really have the beginner course. There's also the earliest of all the detailed sources-- Ms. I.33. It's from around 1320 and focuses on sword and buckler. There are some similarities with later systems but also some differences.
To determine which was most effective you have to know the purpose of each. And that's trickier than you'd think. In the case of I.33 it's difficult to tell what the purpose of the teachings were from the text itself. Liechtenauer's system seemed to be a way of teaching young knights how to fight properly with a variety of weapons using the longsword as the didactic basis for the whole system. So there's some notion that these people were going out and fighting with this system. Both in judicial duels and in war. But there is much that we don't know about how they trained or how they bridged the gap between training and harsh reality.
There are also special purpose texts such as the surviving montante source that describes using the monster blades for close quarters defense in urban environments. And arguably Meyer's sources were by that point geared for the purpose of training in a controlled environment for possible dueling, but probably not for war which by that point had changed a lot.
As far as which simulators or feders, the answer is simple--go to the group first! Different groups have different focuses and requirements. And steel blades are expensive. Ours rarely use feders, others rarely use simulators. Same thing with gear. Go to the group first, then you'll be able to know.
The main difference between HEMA and the Asian sword arts--at least the ones I know of--is that in HEMA you can start sparring relatively soon after starting your training. There's no requirement that you get a certain belt before you can handle weapons. This leads to an atmosphere of experimentation in HEMA and a willingness to spar. It's not unusual for events these days to include sparring pits that run the whole weekend. Some events are pretty much just sparring pits. So you learn through experience and bruising. Instructors who are unwilling to cross blades with anyone outside the dojo are not well regarded. And conversely there's no great shame in losing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2017 19:02:48 GMT
My problem is that I wish to receive quick information regarding Italian and German systems, their effectiveness, variations, differences, alignment (more defensive, offensive, wrestling-y, etc) etc. There is a diverse range of German sources, drawing of the Liechtenauer tradition, from Liechtenauer's teaching verse through to Meyer. Many commentaries and glosses on Liechtenauer's verse. Italian, there's Fiore and Vadi. The Italian stuff is simpler, less advanced content. The German stuff covers various principles better, and techniques are often described better (in some of the sources, certainly not in all of the sources). Which to choose? If you have local teachers of both schools, pick the better teacher - that will make far more difference than German vs Italian. If you're learning without a teacher, check Guy Windsor's books for Italian, and Christian Tobler's books for German. Which book do you like better? Pick that. Both work. Emphasis on fighting in the bind and wrestling will vary a lot from group/school to group/school. As far as the sources go, the German stuff has more complex technique in the bind. Keep in mind that HEMA is bigger than just Fiore vs. Liechtenauer. Italian sources, for example, explode in the Renaissance and include a wide array of systems for side sword, rapier, and all sorts of other things. Fiore is just the earliest surviving Italian source, and one of the earliest examinations of the longsword. As others have noted, Liechtenauer's verse is describing how to defeat common fencers. Some people consider Fiore to be indicative of common fencers, others do not. Jake Norwood has been trying to reverse-engineer the text to try to figure out what common fencers were doing. But in any case the verse is something of an advanced course, and we don't really have the beginner course. There's also the earliest of all the detailed sources-- Ms. I.33. It's from around 1320 and focuses on sword and buckler. There are some similarities with later systems but also some differences. To determine which was most effective you have to know the purpose of each. And that's trickier than you'd think. In the case of I.33 it's difficult to tell what the purpose of the teachings were from the text itself. Liechtenauer's system seemed to be a way of teaching young knights how to fight properly with a variety of weapons using the longsword as the didactic basis for the whole system. So there's some notion that these people were going out and fighting with this system. Both in judicial duels and in war. But there is much that we don't know about how they trained or how they bridged the gap between training and harsh reality. There are also special purpose texts such as the surviving montante source that describes using the monster blades for close quarters defense in urban environments. And arguably Meyer's sources were by that point geared for the purpose of training in a controlled environment for possible dueling, but probably not for war which by that point had changed a lot. As far as which simulators or feders, the answer is simple--go to the group first! Different groups have different focuses and requirements. And steel blades are expensive. Ours rarely use feders, others rarely use simulators. Same thing with gear. Go to the group first, then you'll be able to know. The main difference between HEMA and the Asian sword arts--at least the ones I know of--is that in HEMA you can start sparring relatively soon after starting your training. There's no requirement that you get a certain belt before you can handle weapons. This leads to an atmosphere of experimentation in HEMA and a willingness to spar. It's not unusual for events these days to include sparring pits that run the whole weekend. Some events are pretty much just sparring pits. So you learn through experience and bruising. Instructors who are unwilling to cross blades with anyone outside the dojo are not well regarded. And conversely there's no great shame in losing. These answers are a lot like what I was hoping to get. I don't have a group here currently, though I did find a guy who said he knew some Italian swordsmanship. I sparred with him with what little I learned, and he mostly just got me into a bind and would then somehow wrestle me into a position in which he could easily cut, stab or disarm me. Since I have no German sources to compare to, I really liked the way he safely just handled the situation, granted I wasn't the best opponent in that regard. Timo Nieminen: Could you explain more about what you meant when you said that the Fiore was more simplistic? From what I heard and read, German sources tend to be more divided in armored and unarmored combat, while Fiore was basically focused on doing something that would handle both? Cosmoline: You are entirely right about the sparring thing and the comparison. But right now, I don't have pre-requisites or conditions to fulfill. I just have to make do with myself and maybe get a partner to train with me so we can spar. In a year or two there is talk of HEMA being introduced here, but I can be somewhat ready till then. So more questions. Which swords are considered more standard for German or Italian swordsmanship? Seeing just an overview of Oakeshott's excellent typology, I can say I like types XVIIIb and XXa. TYPE XXa:
TYPE XVIIIb:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2017 19:06:40 GMT
But of course, I wish to want something complementary to what I need. There is currenlty a sudden ban on weapon import in Pakistan, so this gives me time to think and I got over the leaf blade spell. I really want to learn HEMA and want a clear path to research. It's just how I did with my other training, major portion of Thai MA, and some specific parts of other MAs as I thought they were much more practical in application, and so HEMA swordsmanship seems to be what I want to add to my knowledge.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on May 8, 2017 19:18:49 GMT
Keep in mind that actual swords are not usually used in sparring, though some of us do some very focused work with sharps. So really for HEMA you'll be looking at types of simulators or feders. Simulators are stiff non-cutting steel blades that have handling characteristics as close to the originals as possible. So the Albion Liechtenauer is very close to a real longsword in handling. But it also hits hard and is considered too dangerous for full speed, full contact sparring. It is often used for slow play and controlled drills. The feders are thin bladed, somewhat flexible training tools used in most HEMA competition. They don't hit as hard but still simulate aspects of longswords while being safer to use at full speed.
Your sharps collection is a different animal, and people buy what they like. Later period longswords tend to have more complex hilts. Earlier ones tend to be simpler. But there are always exceptions. Personally I've found that my taste in sharps has changed as I've done more sparring. And much of it comes down to how the weapon handles, rather than any specific type.
|
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on May 8, 2017 21:21:19 GMT
Timo Nieminen: Could you explain more about what you meant when you said that the Fiore was more simplistic? From what I heard and read, German sources tend to be more divided in armored and unarmored combat, while Fiore was basically focused on doing something that would handle both? Big emphasis on the master strikes in the German stuff - the Meisterhauwen. The German stuff also has more complex, and potentially much riskier but potentially more rewarding techniques in the bind. That's advanced stuff. Also why Liechtenauer is described as "anti-common-fencer". The absence of such advanced technique makes the Italian stuff simpler (also why it's sometimes described as being for the "common fencer"). Which swords are considered more standard for German or Italian swordsmanship? A non-tiny longsword, but short of being a big two-hander. A lot of people like long light longswords, and a lot of Medieval people might have liked them too, if they could get them with 21st century steel and 21st century heat treatment. But I think it's better to be more authentic (unless you're gaming the system to score points in sporting competition). 36" blade, 12" hilt, 1.5kg works fine. Needle-point if you want anti-armour, more cutting tip for unarmoured. Go to 38" blade, 1.6kg if you want bigger. The systems aren't designed for The One Perfect Sword, but will work for a variety of longswords. I wouldn't recommend a tiny longsword for longsword vs longsword. Avoid large wheel pommels (small ones are OK) and other wide pommel types. Pivot point near the tip (ideally, at the tip), POB as needed to achieve that. Don't worry about what sword. Just practice solo with whatever longsword you have, sharp or blunt. If you don't have a longsword (yet), just get a 4'/125cm stick and practice with that. Don't worry about Italian vs German, just follow a good book or good videos. (What's better: Shotokan karate or ITF taekwondo? A good Shotokan school will be better than a mediocre ITF school, and a good ITF school will be better than a mediocre Shotokan school.) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 10:59:08 GMT
Thanks a lot Timo Nieminen! I am currently looking at a few books and (predominantly) following videos from the great many YouTube channels that show various techniques. Cosmoline: I use a generally simple wooden longswords for practice right now. Since I have no one to spar with, at least until I can convince some one to 'mock fight me with a blunt sword', I will be using it on a smaller punching bag I rigged up that somewhat stimulates an opponent. I gave it tires for arms and head, and legs, and used harder and more resistant rubber for the legs and arms, so when I make it hold a sword (in multiple positions too), I can have it point at me and go against some sort of resistance to execute a technique. Not the best way I know, but should suffice for some time till I move above the total beginner level. I made it for grappling practice and it holds strong, though I will be modifying it soon. Regarding sharps, I wanted to finalize some design for it. I was going for a leafblade from LongShip but due to politics and panama cases at most of our politicians (plus I don't think they appreciate the 16 attempts at murdering the Prime Minister, President and etc) weapons have been banned from import until further notice. Really sucks too. Just when I was finally going to be near to getting a sword :'-( But the time did change my mind towards a more important and positive aspect of my MA. There are a few ColdSteel swords (Hand-and-a-half, MAA version etc) in the market here but at almost double prices, so I never bothered. Now I might start trying to add cutting to my practice by getting one locally. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 11:03:49 GMT
Also, I prefer cutting abilities more in my swords.
I also learned why people should not try learning MA without some semblance of guidance. It is confusing and a pain in the nether region. At least I have you guys till I find some more physically present source of guidance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on May 9, 2017 20:42:12 GMT
It's really important to at least get to some basic training at a group or event. Repetitive stress injuries are absolutely a risk from longswords in particular if you aren't casting your blows properly and are locking out joints. Plus it's very difficult to conceptualize how some of this stuff is supposed to work without seeing it in three dimensions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 10:06:55 GMT
Well, until the guy I talked about makes a visit to a city nearer to me, I have theory to go on with only.
Though if you can give me some technical knowledge, like positions and movements during cutting, practice, important things to keep in mind etc, I would be grateful.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on May 10, 2017 16:08:49 GMT
If there's no HEMA school nearby, I'd suggest Olympic style blade work to help with fundamentals. It's hard to explain, and every instructor has a different focus, but generally:
--All fighting arts have length and measure. Developing an awareness of the danger zone is absolutely critical. It starts about where an extended thrust could hit you.
--When entering measure, the sword moves in front of you, not behind. There are exceptions but typically you do not want to move chest-first into measure with your sword behind you.
--Be aware of points of rotation. Each style of fencing tends to have different points. 19th century saber uses the wrist for example, while in I.33 we often have the point of rotation on the blade itself. If you can control where the rotation is you will be better suited to learn. Avoid the shoulder as a point of rotation for most cuts, since it is too slow. To control rotation you have to have a relaxed grip and the ability to hold your blade in a variety of ways. This is particularly true of medieval blades.
--In longsword and pretty much any system where there's no shield or buckler, your sword *is* the shield. This means you need to cover your line with the blade so any counter-attack will hit your blade first.
--Be aware of initiative. The Germans refer to vor indes and nach. The Italians to tempo. The theories get pretty complex, but in a simple sense you want to be the first person to hit the other, while protecting yourself. But if you're not first to move, there are many ways of getting back in front.
--Avoid attacking or watching the blade. This is particularly true for longsword, where you want to move in and hit in a single flowing move. Even with later systems that emphasize a distinct parry, the target remains the person not the blade. Keep your eyes on the opponent.
--Avoid being a buffalo. These are people who use strength and size to try to bash through. While there are many occasions where *controlled* strength is used such as the zorn-ort, wild hacking is pretty much universally rejected in every source we have. Real strength in sword fighting comes from skeletal alignment and technique. If you have to use big biceps you'll be moving too slowly.
--Do not shun applied weakness. The classic case is the bind of two blades from vom tag. In every Hollywood movie when this position is reached, the actors get close and shove at each other. In the Liechtenauer tradition, you learn to let the opponent push himself off line as you attack around him. If you strongly cling to a point in space for more than a moment, it will soon become worthless real estate. Even big longswords can move around stubborn blades with extreme speed. And the more force you give, the easier it is.
--Don't get too fancy. It takes about three years of weekly study and additional solo drills to become competent at any of these arts. That's just for the basic moves and their application in freeplay and sparring. Trying to add a bunch out of the system will tend to lead you astray
--The text is critical. Always be referring back to your source and third party interpretations of it. Study the illustrations closely. Trust in it, and don't let your focus stray too far from it.
--Stay focused. Avoid the temptation to try to tackle multiple texts, let alone multiple weapon sets, simultaneously. Not unless you have a tutor and five days a week to spend. Keep it simple and focused. Understand a strike and drill it. Videotape yourself and compare it carefully to more experienced people.
|
|
