|
Post by howler on Jun 11, 2019 19:33:13 GMT
So one thing I'm surprised hasn't been brought up yet is the very nature of rapier technique. Rapier, or at least Italian rapier, operates off of a sideface lunge and recover system. That system gets watered down once you introduce a dagger because to bring the dagger to bear, you have to square your shoulders with your target (presenting a bigger target for them to stab, abandon stability in the lunge (by giving up an off hand to throw out and balance yourself with), and reduce your lunge range (by not presenting your rapier shoulder forward as much). I'm not saying rapier and dagger was necessarily worse than single rapier, but I think it is fair to take into account adding a dagger is not a strict pro for rapier, but rather it has its own pros and cons. Can one still employ the Italian style sideface lunge by using a lighter dagger in the off hand to throw out and balance yourself with? With practice, though maybe not quite as nimble as having nothing in the offhand, it may still be nice to have that dagger (though grappling ability with offhand should not be discounted).
|
|
|
Post by nordmann on Jun 11, 2019 19:35:29 GMT
I don't think you can start saying this is better than that. The number one reason the rapier disappeared was fashion. For some reason in the late 17th century, small sword became popular, and that is that. Why did people and soldiers start using the tricorne? Fashion. What is the logical reason for having ripped jeans?
Sometimes it's simply fashion and style. And that the smallsword was a bit handier to walk around with.
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on Jun 11, 2019 19:47:28 GMT
So one thing I'm surprised hasn't been brought up yet is the very nature of rapier technique. Rapier, or at least Italian rapier, operates off of a sideface lunge and recover system. That system gets watered down once you introduce a dagger because to bring the dagger to bear, you have to square your shoulders with your target (presenting a bigger target for them to stab, abandon stability in the lunge (by giving up an off hand to throw out and balance yourself with), and reduce your lunge range (by not presenting your rapier shoulder forward as much). I'm not saying rapier and dagger was necessarily worse than single rapier, but I think it is fair to take into account adding a dagger is not a strict pro for rapier, but rather it has its own pros and cons. Can one still employ the Italian style sideface lunge by using a lighter dagger in the off hand to throw out and balance yourself with? With practice, though maybe not quite as nimble as having nothing in the offhand, it may still be nice to have that dagger (though grappling ability with offhand should not be discounted). There's nothing stopping you from throwing the dagger out behind you as a balance, but then it is 180 degrees away from your opponent so what's the point of having it if it isn't position to parry with?
|
|
|
Post by howler on Jun 12, 2019 0:25:29 GMT
Can one still employ the Italian style sideface lunge by using a lighter dagger in the off hand to throw out and balance yourself with? With practice, though maybe not quite as nimble as having nothing in the offhand, it may still be nice to have that dagger (though grappling ability with offhand should not be discounted). There's nothing stopping you from throwing the dagger out behind you as a balance, but then it is 180 degrees away from your opponent so what's the point of having it if it isn't position to parry with? Good question. Maybe ability to change up styles mid fight or if things break down and your in a contact grapple (your more knowledgeable than I), maybe it's more counter intuitive than a layman can imagine and you have to run through the drills & sparring matches to see if it's advantageous.
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on Jun 12, 2019 1:25:19 GMT
There's nothing stopping you from throwing the dagger out behind you as a balance, but then it is 180 degrees away from your opponent so what's the point of having it if it isn't position to parry with? Good question. Maybe ability to change up styles mid fight or if things break down and your in a contact grapple (your more knowledgeable than I), maybe it's more counter intuitive than a layman can imagine and you have to run through the drills & sparring matches to see if it's advantageous. I don't think swapping between a dagger stance and a more exaggerated side stance on the fly is impossible, but it would certainly be tricky. I've recently started doing multiple footwork systems in saber at the same time and that sort of thing trips you up (pun intended).
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jun 12, 2019 5:33:20 GMT
As to the bind - that's easy, just don't enter the bind. Well said.
And no, not hostile at all, and very good counter arguments. My argument stems from the fact the rapier does lack certain degrees of versatility, it lacks the ability to cut, depending on how thick/robust the blade is it can have slow recovery, it is not good at binding and is arguably an inferior weapon with regards to being solely dependent on excelling with another accompanying armament.
So again how much versatility do you really need though? Certainly most examples lack the ability to effectively cut, but those examples don't need to. They rely on the fact that they are capable of extremely quick disengages, deceptive movements, great hand protection, quick movement as well, and being longer than practically any other single handed sword type in Europe. Perhaps our experience with rapier is different? I have never handled a rapier I was not able to move quickly. Then again, I do not own a windlass piece. The rapier being good or not in the bind is reliant on example and what weapon it faces. The shorter rapiers are absolutely capable of heavy bind work, as are the much longer examples once you get used to having a long weak of blade. I've fenced single rapier and rapier and dagger, and either against each other or different weapon sets, including a sidesword and smallsword. The rapier can certainly hold it's own against them and I am no master of the fence. It does not need a companion, that just adds an advantage as it does with any weapon set. Any single sword is disadvantaged compared to the same sword paired with a defensive or offensive off hand, even if that's just a baton. I actually have used a cut and thrust sword and dagger, my regenyei sabre and my polish made main gauche. A good combo, but that extra near foot of reach makes the long rapier hard to beat. It's not as simple as just "closing and cutting", because your opponent isn't (or shouldn't be) a moron who stands still or falls over. They will step back, reverse posture, do any number of things to offend you while you move forward or to regain the measure and wait out your advance. And again with the thrust only sword - if your argument is against it getting stuck (which did happen) than you should also argue for a cutting only sword right? Here are some of the solutions to the blade being stuck problem for foot. Rapier and dagger - pretty obvious here, just parry your opponents afterblow because if your sword is lodged so hard it's stuck, they're probably not far from death. Single sword - With single rapier (and indeed from what I've seen small sword) you need to control the blade for safe offense anyways, this means bind work, and is where the shorter (36"/39" or so blade for example) come in to play as they are actually quite good in the bind. Better I will say than the cut and thrust swords I've used. I agree, though smallswords are popular for being so darn light. In your opinion, and not according the French cuirassiers, or their derivitaves, nor the French/British/American/WhatHaveYou officers who used smallswords throughout the 18th and into the 19th centuries. Interestingly enough the British, who had by that time amassed a massive amount of sword and melee fighting experience in colonial ventures actually went to the P1897, which is more a thruster than a cutter. And I would honestly argue against that. I don't think it's any more fatal than overcommitting to a cut. If you are in a lunge and recover system, the lunge is the same. The cut/thrust is parried, and you recover. I think I know what you mean here. I disagree that it leaves one paralyzed in any aspect unless one is too physically weak to move their arm from a thrust position to a guard. Same as the arm being spent from a cut though. Do you mean it's easier to move from a cut to a guard or ward? I can see that, but still don't really think that's necessarily a fault worth naming one weapon as inferior. There are trade offs for both. For example, a thrusting sword can be much lighter than a cutting sword for the same effect (incapacitating an opponent). The thrust is also harder to parry than the cut, in that it can be more deceptive. You cannot redirect a cut near your target and still effect them greatly, as you can with the thrust by merely turning the wrist. The foot work though depends on your system. For example in British and American military sabre the thrust and cut are given with the same sort of lunge and both are just as stable unless you screw up the step, and both just as easy to recover into a guard from. Just drilled this in the mirror actually when I got off work to make sure I wasn't talking out my ass. A foiled thrust is as deadly as a foiled cut, not more so. At least in my own experience. At least we agree destreza is trash So I think I'll go back to the question of how much versatility do you need for what the rapier was usually used for, self defense and dueling. You don't need to cut the wrist off a robber if you stab through his bicep, and count bouliball will stop his assault just as fast with a thrust to the chest as a cut to the chest. Why would symmetry between the weapons used be important? Isn't a sword and buckler also a good combo despite the round small buckler being worlds apart, or the side sword and rotella? Or indeed the gladius and scutum? Again, the rapier does not need to cut very effectively. It is engineered not to, in how advantaged it is in the thrust it makes up for in being disadvantaged in the cut. [/div]
[/quote] It doesn't honestly, least not with the dagger imo. I've tried it, fenced with and against it, and in my own experience the cut needs a more defensive off hand to really prosper. But others may have a different experience. [/div]
[/quote] Sure seems to work for me Actually, at this point in my fencing career, I have sparred far more with thrusting weapons and specifically the rapier and dagger than with cut and thrust swords, and I've doubled less with the rapier and dagger set than with cut and thrust it would seem.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jun 12, 2019 5:37:37 GMT
Good question. Maybe ability to change up styles mid fight or if things break down and your in a contact grapple (your more knowledgeable than I), maybe it's more counter intuitive than a layman can imagine and you have to run through the drills & sparring matches to see if it's advantageous. I don't think swapping between a dagger stance and a more exaggerated side stance on the fly is impossible, but it would certainly be tricky. I've recently started doing multiple footwork systems in saber at the same time and that sort of thing trips you up (pun intended). Would depend on the rapier and dagger style being practiced. Pretty easy to move from the refused blade style to a "normal" fencing style for instance in one moment. For me it would work like this - I would start with the dagger forward and rapier refused, in a more squared stance than side. I would put my rear foot more behind my front, put the dagger to my chest, and just raise and extend the sword arm. Easier done then said Trying this from destreza is harder though. But yeah, I don't know why I would do this outside of just form work.
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on Jun 12, 2019 5:40:21 GMT
I don't think swapping between a dagger stance and a more exaggerated side stance on the fly is impossible, but it would certainly be tricky. I've recently started doing multiple footwork systems in saber at the same time and that sort of thing trips you up (pun intended). Would depend on the rapier and dagger style being practiced. Pretty easy to move from the refused blade style to a "normal" fencing style for instance in one moment. For me it would work like this - I would start with the dagger forward and rapier refused, in a more squared stance than side. I would put my rear foot more behind my front, put the dagger to my chest, and just raise and extend the sword arm. Easier done then said Trying this from destreza is harder though. But yeah, I don't know why I would do this outside of just form work. For what it's worth, I took a Destreza seminar a week ago and was pretty impressed. I need to try it more before I make hard judgement, but I liked the constant presentation of a threat.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jun 12, 2019 5:44:39 GMT
Would depend on the rapier and dagger style being practiced. Pretty easy to move from the refused blade style to a "normal" fencing style for instance in one moment. For me it would work like this - I would start with the dagger forward and rapier refused, in a more squared stance than side. I would put my rear foot more behind my front, put the dagger to my chest, and just raise and extend the sword arm. Easier done then said Trying this from destreza is harder though. But yeah, I don't know why I would do this outside of just form work. For what it's worth, I took a Destreza seminar a week ago and was pretty impressed. I need to try it more before I make hard judgement, but I liked the constant presentation of a threat. In my experience fencing against it it's easy to fake out and take advantage of the circular stepping motion. That and the fact the arm is spent and the sword is presented in a perfect position to bind into. But I don't really know the skill level of those destreza fencers I've fought against. Only myself and fellow student/and teacher really.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jun 12, 2019 5:55:40 GMT
So one thing I'm surprised hasn't been brought up yet is the very nature of rapier technique. Rapier, or at least Italian rapier, operates off of a sideface lunge and recover system. That system gets watered down once you introduce a dagger because to bring the dagger to bear, you have to square your shoulders with your target (presenting a bigger target for them to stab, abandon stability in the lunge (by giving up an off hand to throw out and balance yourself with), and reduce your lunge range (by not presenting your rapier shoulder forward as much). I'm not saying rapier and dagger was necessarily worse than single rapier, but I think it is fair to take into account adding a dagger is not a strict pro for rapier, but rather it has its own pros and cons. Interesting post, and while something I've noticed it's never something I actually considered. Btw, I got that budget castille sabre in. Good weight, pretty light but not too bad, grip is imo not wide enough for the curved blade, guard is scary because I don't have good gloves for it. Haven't done any sparring with it yet, but it took a hard blow and parry a few times from my mongo sword (regenyei strong, cav officer weight basically) without a flinch.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jun 12, 2019 5:58:14 GMT
There's nothing stopping you from throwing the dagger out behind you as a balance, but then it is 180 degrees away from your opponent so what's the point of having it if it isn't position to parry with? Good question. Maybe ability to change up styles mid fight or if things break down and your in a contact grapple (your more knowledgeable than I), maybe it's more counter intuitive than a layman can imagine and you have to run through the drills & sparring matches to see if it's advantageous. You can change style, but changing it so much you remove one side of your body and your off hand entirely from the equation without a reason just doesn't make sense. In a grapple, I think you should retract your rapier as much as possible of not dropping it (only if you need to though) and stab the crap out of the one who got you into the grapple.
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on Jun 12, 2019 6:37:07 GMT
So one thing I'm surprised hasn't been brought up yet is the very nature of rapier technique. Rapier, or at least Italian rapier, operates off of a sideface lunge and recover system. That system gets watered down once you introduce a dagger because to bring the dagger to bear, you have to square your shoulders with your target (presenting a bigger target for them to stab, abandon stability in the lunge (by giving up an off hand to throw out and balance yourself with), and reduce your lunge range (by not presenting your rapier shoulder forward as much). I'm not saying rapier and dagger was necessarily worse than single rapier, but I think it is fair to take into account adding a dagger is not a strict pro for rapier, but rather it has its own pros and cons. Interesting post, and while something I've noticed it's never something I actually considered. Btw, I got that budget castille sabre in. Good weight, pretty light but not too bad, grip is imo not wide enough for the curved blade, guard is scary because I don't have good gloves for it. Haven't done any sparring with it yet, but it took a hard blow and parry a few times from my mongo sword (regenyei strong, cav officer weight basically) without a flinch. Embrace the knucklebow life style, just keep that blade whirling
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Jun 12, 2019 8:05:51 GMT
Would depend on the rapier and dagger style being practiced. Pretty easy to move from the refused blade style to a "normal" fencing style for instance in one moment. For me it would work like this - I would start with the dagger forward and rapier refused, in a more squared stance than side. I would put my rear foot more behind my front, put the dagger to my chest, and just raise and extend the sword arm. Easier done then said Trying this from destreza is harder though. But yeah, I don't know why I would do this outside of just form work. For what it's worth, I took a Destreza seminar a week ago and was pretty impressed. I need to try it more before I make hard judgement, but I liked the constant presentation of a threat. It has it's merits, although the tendency of posture can be restrictive. I do think if one were limited to only a rapier (no companion piece), it is effective at maintaining pressure. Although given a companion piece, I do advocate a more level, perhaps 'sleepy' posture which lures and strikes up from below myself.
Each style has its merits, incorporating elements from each style into the appropriate situation is the really fun part.
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Jun 12, 2019 8:37:00 GMT
Jordan Williams That being said, that reply was simply a reiteration of your prior response. We both enjoy rapier, you appreciably more so. However, if you were to present a rapier duelist an opponent versed in styles of swordsmanship stemming from the ideas of Meyer, Kamiizumi Nobutsuna, Musashi (I dread to mention Silver given some of his attitudes)...the rapier has serious disadvantages. Anachronistic, but interesting.
I don't really know how to argue on behalf of my stylistic preference for symmetrical armaments, since you are stylistically inclined to not like them. It's really that simple. Unless you practice something with dedication for years on end, it is difficult to have a fully nuanced opinion. Hence our impasse: I've studied dual wielding weapons of equal lengths and find that advantageous, and you've studied dual wielding weapons of disproportionate lengths and find that advantageous. Perhaps if we flip-flopped then this discussion could become more involved and interesting. After all, I really should practice rapier more frequently. Any suggestions on better rapier to shop for since I've been unimpressed with more economical production runs?
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jun 12, 2019 20:58:56 GMT
I have been nothing but impressed with the quality of castille rapiers. I would reccomend them, the "standard rapier blade" is the best bang for the buck as the basic blade uses different steel and heat treating to make it more affordable.
I would love to fence against some JSA folks sometime. I've heard sparring against a sword like the katana is more difficult than it would seem.
I think we probably fence similarly, but I'm really curious about your emphasis on symmetry, it does make sense to me, but I've been thinking about it and not sure I totally understand it.
Case of sabres is very symmetric and a b!tch to fight lol.
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on Jun 12, 2019 21:11:41 GMT
I have been nothing but impressed with the quality of castille rapiers. I would reccomend them, the "standard rapier blade" is the best bang for the buck as the basic blade uses different steel and heat treating to make it more affordable. I would love to fence against some JSA folks sometime. I've heard sparring against a sword like the katana is more difficult than it would seem. I think we probably fence similarly, but I'm really curious about your emphasis on symmetry, it does make sense to me, but I've been thinking about it and not sure I totally understand it. Case of sabres is very symmetric and a b!tch to fight lol. castilles are a little wimpy for my taste, almost feel like smallswords. My friend has a beefier Darkwood that I like.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jun 12, 2019 21:18:45 GMT
I have been nothing but impressed with the quality of castille rapiers. I would reccomend them, the "standard rapier blade" is the best bang for the buck as the basic blade uses different steel and heat treating to make it more affordable. I would love to fence against some JSA folks sometime. I've heard sparring against a sword like the katana is more difficult than it would seem. I think we probably fence similarly, but I'm really curious about your emphasis on symmetry, it does make sense to me, but I've been thinking about it and not sure I totally understand it. Case of sabres is very symmetric and a b!tch to fight lol. castilles are a little wimpy for my taste, almost feel like smallswords. My friend has a beefier Darkwood that I like. Which blade length was on the castille? Haven't handled too many darkwoods, but am a fan of how long you can use a castille for without feeling like your forearm is dead compared to some other breeds. They do tend to be lighter and more thrust centric (actually, mine is basically a copy in handling, a little more blade presence than that antique rapier I wrote about a while back). Did you get a darkwood in your trade deal yet?
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on Jun 12, 2019 21:37:19 GMT
castilles are a little wimpy for my taste, almost feel like smallswords. My friend has a beefier Darkwood that I like. Which blade length was on the castille? Haven't handled too many darkwoods, but am a fan of how long you can use a castille for without feeling like your forearm is dead compared to some other breeds. They do tend to be lighter and more thrust centric (actually, mine is basically a copy in handling, a little more blade presence than that antique rapier I wrote about a while back). Did you get a darkwood in your trade deal yet? nope, still no rapier of my own. And I don't have the numbers on his Darkwood, but it's massive. Probably at least 48 inches overall and broad bladed (for a rapier). The again, this guy is well over six feet tall so it suits him. The castille I've used is considerably shorter and lighter. It comes up to around by sternum.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jun 12, 2019 22:21:05 GMT
Which blade length was on the castille? Haven't handled too many darkwoods, but am a fan of how long you can use a castille for without feeling like your forearm is dead compared to some other breeds. They do tend to be lighter and more thrust centric (actually, mine is basically a copy in handling, a little more blade presence than that antique rapier I wrote about a while back). Did you get a darkwood in your trade deal yet? nope, still no rapier of my own. And I don't have the numbers on his Darkwood, but it's massive. Probably at least 48 inches overall and broad bladed (for a rapier). The again, this guy is well over six feet tall so it suits him. The castille I've used is considerably shorter and lighter. It comes up to around by sternum. Mine is probably around 50 inches overall, 45" from the quillons, and the pommel rests right about the center of my sternum, and I stand without shoes about 5' 8.5". Did the blade have cut outs? Of the three styles that they make, the blades are in order heavier to lightest I think. I got the heavier one because it's the cheapest. A good weight for a thrusting weapon but I agree for cuts would be wimpy.
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Jun 14, 2019 5:26:14 GMT
I have been nothing but impressed with the quality of castille rapiers. I would reccomend them, the "standard rapier blade" is the best bang for the buck as the basic blade uses different steel and heat treating to make it more affordable. I would love to fence against some JSA folks sometime. I've heard sparring against a sword like the katana is more difficult than it would seem. I think we probably fence similarly, but I'm really curious about your emphasis on symmetry, it does make sense to me, but I've been thinking about it and not sure I totally understand it. Case of sabres is very symmetric and a b!tch to fight lol. Yet another recommendation for Castille! I would be lacking brain cells if I wouldn't investigate them further!
Yes! A cage of sabre is the approximation to what I study. A katana is simply a hand and a half sabre...with more punch! The added weight does wonders. A statistically 'slight' difference in weight yields a fascinating difference in inertia! It is so much fun, I encourage any and all to try the system (dual katana).
So, for symmetry, it is a matter of biological tendency. When you punch, kick, bind, block....it is symmetrical? Yes, so it should be with arms! So wonderful, and enjoyable are the tactics employed by symmetrical armaments! Shall you thrust with the left? The right? When shall a cut occur? Or a parry? This is the symmetry I describe and prefer. With either arm, and both, do you reach and entagle the opponent! By either left or right shall you engage, disengage, attack and deflect any opponent. Is the rapier in your left or right? Does it matter? Is the dagger or messer in your left or right? What difference does it make? With perfection of form, you slay! You dance, your opponent cannot match the rhythm and yet you dance! You slay, and you slay, they cannot fathom the rhythm!
Is the rapier in your left, or your right? What difference does it make? You move and slay! Whether it be left or right, you seize the moment, for this is your dance. You capture the rhythm, for this is natural. Your arms, the catalyst, the blade the instrument.
Keep in mind hand to hand combat! The same principles are at work with blades. And that is where the fun is at. Symmetry is merely following the body and allowing the natural form to actualize the self in combat.
It is foolish, and disadvantageous to lead with one arm or the other! It is better to 'flail' with both, or be still, so as to fool the opponent, lure them and capture them. Such is the joy of swordplay. To keep lively is to keep alive. This is the way I practice.
|
|