Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2017 21:18:16 GMT
Oh, that "Papa Machete" thing is entirely authentic, as far as I can tell. What's more, he never made any outlandish claims about having resurrected the one true ancient ancestral martial art from which all others are descended, either, or anything like that - it's just a style of fighting passed down in his family that he wanted to teach and preserve. That kind of honesty and humility gets a lot more respect from me than obvious self-aggrandizing bullsemprini, even if what I've seen of his work wasn't so much more grounded and down to earth. (There's actually a lot in that video that resembles German messer and Caucasian shashqa play - not always in detail of execution, but there's clearly a common basis of underlying tactical and structural principles, just as you'd expect with arts focused on similar weapons in similar contexts.) The bind and wind thing was a little confusing to me, considering how he turned around exposing his back and almost effortlessly kept someone at bay. But what I came to know was that since they are feeling the force of the opponent through the machete by gripping it in a seemingly careless manner, they are always ready to use that very force to re-direct and make the attacker over-extend, thus creating an easy opening. It works on a huge variety of weapons, plus it's kind of similar to how we might 'bind-parry' with a Dha... Another thing I just saw: Have no clue so knowledge is welcome;-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2017 21:25:30 GMT
Plus this is to anyone who might say that Asian arts 'do not spar so are useless'.
Don't really know the legitimacy of this very video but this isn't the first time I have seen such sparring in JSA. It just takes a lot more skill to spar and still avoid danger like this.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Oct 17, 2017 22:37:34 GMT
The bind and wind thing was a little confusing to me, considering how he turned around exposing his back and almost effortlessly kept someone at bay. But what I came to know was that since they are feeling the force of the opponent through the machete by gripping it in a seemingly careless manner, they are always ready to use that very force to re-direct and make the attacker over-extend, thus creating an easy opening. It works on a huge variety of weapons, plus it's kind of similar to how we might 'bind-parry' with a Dha... Yeah, whether you call it the German Fühlen, the French sentiment du fer or Musashi's "stickiness", it's a fairly ubiquitous concept in armed combat arts. FWIW, I can attest that since I abandoned regular thickly padded running shoes in favor of minimalist ones (just a tough but thin and entirely unpadded rubber sole with a webbing upper to keep them on), my calves are indeed bigger and stronger, my posture better and my gait significantly softer. People have actually told me it's creepy how silently I walk, simply by not stomping everywhere heel first. PS. Plus I just enjoy actually feeling the ground under my feet, pebbles and all. It makes running much less monotonous.
|
|
SeanF
Member
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by SeanF on Oct 17, 2017 23:05:33 GMT
If you read actual scientific anthropological literature it largely debunks the claims of people like Roland in regards to historical walking patterns. That's mainly modern psudo-science, actually archaeological and skeletal examination strongly supports heel walking. (Though that's not to say that most people don't have terrible posture, which is another issue entirely.... )
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Oct 18, 2017 1:14:39 GMT
I think the notion (and Roland's body language in the video) is often exaggerated a great deal and, as usual, saddled with claims of ridiculously wide ranging health benefits that really can't bear out in practice. But I also think it's fairly obvious how the thick, soft, "supporting" soles of modern running shoes change the way you use your legs and feet, and not always for the better (unless you're a competitive runner, in which case the longer stride they enable is a clear and obvious performance enhancement).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2017 2:25:50 GMT
I think the notion (and Roland's body language in the video) is often exaggerated a great deal and, as usual, saddled with claims of ridiculously wide ranging health benefits that really can't bear out in practice. But I also think it's fairly obvious how the thick, soft, "supporting" soles of modern running shoes change the way you use your legs and feet, and not always for the better (unless you're a competitive runner, in which case the longer stride they enable is a clear and obvious performance enhancement). If you ask me, I think it largely depends on the modern shoe. In my Muay Thai practice, I use the balls of my feet for support while barefoot. When I am shadow boxing on other surfaces, I do both barefoot and with a variety of shoes. Most running and even cross fit (like Nike Nano's) work great for ball-of-foot movement. Dedicated running shoes like Sketchers don't allow that, but most sneakers, formal, boots, and even select running shoes (like Nike Phoenix) allow a very liberal variety of movements. Still, I have dedicated thin soled and minimalist shoes for martial art practice and my Nike Nano's for strength and Phoenix for cardio. The variability in shoe for strength and cardio allow me to maintain better habits for my martial arts.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Oct 18, 2017 6:58:25 GMT
Oh yeah, variety is always good.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Oct 19, 2017 21:41:22 GMT
If you read actual scientific anthropological literature it largely debunks the claims of people like Roland in regards to historical walking patterns. That's mainly modern psudo-science, actually archaeological and skeletal examination strongly supports heel walking. (Though that's not to say that most people don't have terrible posture, which is another issue entirely.... x_x ) Roland has since clarified his remarks, but he's really addressing a very specific set of circumstances. Not how people walked in the ancient past, but on the much more specific issue--how the heck do you walk in medieval turnshoes without beating the hell out of your feet? Most adults who trod in them for the first time discover just how unforgiving the things are. They're way worse than padded mocs or even vibram five fingers. Or indeed barefoot, which is odd but true. A heel walk esp. on concrete both brutalizes your bones and wears out the leather. So you figure out how to adapt to them. By the renaissance new types of shoes with thicker soles started to dominate and the issue was resolved. Roland's idea, which is supported both in Ms. I.33 and in medieval art, is that the ball-of-the-foot walk was more prevalent during the medieval period. The turnshoe problem may well have been a factor, and some style or affectation by the upper classes may have been at play too. The result is a style of moving and fighting that is distinct from later systems where lunges become far more common. Try lunging on uneven ground in turnshoes. As far as whether it's healthier, that's best left to experts. I can attest that it is NOT healthy to walk with hard heel strikes in turnshoes.
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Oct 19, 2017 21:47:40 GMT
Roland's idea, which is supported both in Ms. I.33 and in medieval art, is that the ball-of-the-foot walk was more prevalent during the medieval period. MS I.33 isn't good evidence for general walking styles. Stepping in martial arts is often faster and more forceful than a relaxed walk, and you deliberately do it differently. I.33 is good evidence for period MA stepping methods, but not regular walking. Similarly, running isn't regular walking, and one often sees in barefoot cultures that walking is heel-first (but not as thumpy heel-first as modern shod people will often walk) and they transition to ball-of-foot first when running.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Oct 19, 2017 21:50:53 GMT
It's a good effort but they both seem to be striking a lot without having control of the center. So for example he knocks the blade aside at the ten second mark but then walks right into it. The German longsword approach would follow the displacement with a thrust from the high right, using the sword and crossguard to lock out the opponent's counter. Messer might increase the intensity of the displacement to beat the blade to the side then cut and step to the opposite side, while guarding against the blade. Getting there first really means nothing. You have to get there first and get back out safely.
At forty seconds he comes around the blade but then leaves his head directly under it. This would be a double kill under ordinary circumstances. This pattern repeats, and is VERY common when you're starting out freeplay. Pretty much everyone runs into this issue, and it just takes time and technique to improve. After doing this weekly since mid 2012 I'm only just now starting to really understand how to understand the center in freeplay. Let alone full speed. It's a constantly shifting space, so you have to know not only where it is at that moment but where it will be when both of you make your next move.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Oct 19, 2017 21:53:18 GMT
Roland's idea, which is supported both in Ms. I.33 and in medieval art, is that the ball-of-the-foot walk was more prevalent during the medieval period. MS I.33 isn't good evidence for general walking styles. Stepping in martial arts is often faster and more forceful than a relaxed walk, and you deliberately do it differently. I.33 is good evidence for period MA stepping methods, but not regular walking. Similarly, running isn't regular walking, and one often sees in barefoot cultures that walking is heel-first (but not as thumpy heel-first as modern shod people will often walk) and they transition to ball-of-foot first when running. True, and my focus is on the swordplay not the everyday walking. I have settled on a gentle step for reenactment times, sort of a strolling gait with my whole foot and avoiding heel strikes. Roland is running into trouble lately because he's suddenly and inexplicably becoming famous on the internet feeds. His videos are directed to those of us who do reenactment and S&B work and he's going to have to start being more careful about broad pronouncements ;-)
|
|
SeanF
Member
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by SeanF on Oct 20, 2017 4:08:40 GMT
...which is supported both in Ms. I.33 and in medieval art, is that the ball-of-the-foot walk was more prevalent during the medieval period. I've been told by numerous people who study art history that having people standing on their toes is a common period style to reflect movement, and shouldn't be taken literally in most contexts. I personally have zero expertise in the art area, but when everyone I know with an art history degree says one thing I tend to lean that way too. Edit: To clarify, I do favor having weight mostly on the ball of the foot while fighting. The above was about the reliability of period art in making these interpretations.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Oct 20, 2017 17:08:15 GMT
I've heard all that about the unreliability of medieval art, but it's not a terribly useful approach to reconstructing technique. And I'm not sure I believe it anymore. What we've found in working the minute details is that the Ms.'s art at least is actually quite precise.
For example, if you just assume the art is all stencil work in I.33 and go by the text, you can come up with all manner of interpretations for "cade sub gladius quoque scutum" (Fall under sword and shield). One fellow believes this means simply tossing your sword up into an underbind to the half shield. Another that you literally step underneath your sword. And going by the arcane Latin either could be possible. But if you look at the illustrations and presume they are showing something correctly, you find a consistent image of falling under where halfshield is neutralized by casting your blade over his exposed strong on his right and realigning to threaten his face. Sure enough, this approach is all but guaranteed to break halfshield.
Likewise, the weird illustration showing priest's special has long been dismissed as inaccurate medieval art because it seems so contorted. The right palm is up, the sword back and the buckler back. But if you actually do it, as shown, it turns out to be a very useful platform for attacking to an exposed right side. In fact we've found excellent results by doing what is shown in pretty much every ward. Right down to whether the thumb is pointing up or down. It's how we've unraveled the much discussed schutzen to second play
So yeah, you CAN just disregard the illustration details. But what people end up with are widely variant versions of I.33. Some look like saber fights, others like longsword or messer. None look like the text. And in this case if you assume the ball of the feet is showing motion forward, you'd end up with whatever footwork you learned before I.33. Maybe longsword side-steps, maybe rapier lunges. And again the text just becomes a mirror to whatever you already know.
Of course, much of the footwork of the system remains a mystery. It's 2D art. But if you use ball-of-the-feet stances as shown it works pretty well with the attacks and counters shown. If you start making lunges with the heel or doing smallsword stepping, the guards and counters don't really line up so well anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Oct 21, 2017 20:46:16 GMT
Roland's a bit of a contortionist. He can extend himself so far out that for the attacker there's almost nothing to hit. His head is way back, his arms behind the weapons and his torso is so far away you'd need a spear to get there. Plus he's a phenomenal swordsman so forget about out-fencing him. The only way I've gotten him is by forcing his weapons up while pushing him back. When he stands up more his torso is exposed and I did get a quick hit there last time. Then he was wise to me though. We've worked up a new batch of moves to try out on the folks in Berlin this year.
Personally, I do a bit of hinging but I need to keep my weight back most of the time to be able to move around.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2017 12:05:56 GMT
So, in my numerous expeditions of the internet and hunt for knowledge of all sorts, I (very) incidentally came across a photo of a burmese/thai (not sure) dha/daab. I was reading this last night with 20% charging left and somehow closed the browser with the settings on so no history is saved. No reference to the article but from what I read, it was a regional variant and a very popular candidate for Daab Song Mue since it could easily be hidden as two canes or a large cane (the swords being connected together by the ends through the scabbards, kinda like those fancy useless ninja swords). What do you guys think? Sound plausible? They had antique examples and book and text references but I have never seen or heard of anything remotely familiar. Do you think this would be a good weapon, vs the ordinary curved variants? How effective would they be in a dual wield?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2017 17:50:32 GMT
Before utilizing the vast reserves of your knowledge Timo Nieminen , I should state that if I was to classify this, it would be a daab yippon, and if not, then definitely a daab fa-rhang. What do you think MOK?
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Oct 30, 2017 12:39:04 GMT
Well, it doesn't really look all that Japanese either, to me, and the whole concept of disguising swords like this seems more like a rare curiosity than anything actually used for combat or self defense, more Hollywood than historical. And, yeah, I've never seen anything else resembling this from South-East Asia.
Timo would know better, though.
It's hard to tell from the photo, of course, but the tip seems to have the kind of vaguely defined, unintentionally recurved grind you see on really cheap modern replicas...
PS. Would love to be wrong, though!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2017 14:33:19 GMT
Well, it doesn't really look all that Japanese either, to me, and the whole concept of disguising swords like this seems more like a rare curiosity than anything actually used for combat or self defense, more Hollywood than historical. And, yeah, I've never seen anything else resembling this from South-East Asia. Timo would know better, though. It's hard to tell from the photo, of course, but the tip seems to have the kind of vaguely defined, unintentionally recurved grind you see on really cheap modern replicas... PS. Would love to be wrong, though! I am still very skeptical though. I can recognize the different types of daab pretty nicely, including the now-redundant Greaves-Winston typology. It matches NONE of the styles I have seen yet, not even many daab yippon (literally Japanese Sword) have any resemblance. Plus, the people of South East Asia never have had to undergo scrutiny of any sort in regards to weapon carrying, so they don't need to develop deceptive disguises. Even visitors to the king were allowed weapons, so such hiding methods make no sense...
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Oct 30, 2017 16:23:07 GMT
Yeah, exactly. Seems like a modern made-up thingie to me. The association with dual sword usage seems especially nonsensical at first glance...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2017 16:47:53 GMT
Yeah, exactly. Seems like a modern made-up thingie to me. The association with dual sword usage seems especially nonsensical at first glance... Yeah, l think that sword is kinda too long for dual wield. Looks some 27 inches of blade length. The listed was around 28 I think. Way too long for a implied song mue. Plus, the Daab song mue were worn on the back in a cross fashion. 22-24 inches I think someone could manage pulling out from the back carry. Any longer and you need to be super human or jello.
|
|