|
Post by markus313 on Oct 12, 2019 11:09:24 GMT
Gotta love how…
…they seem to think of axes as smallswords with hooks on top. …they start out with their toothbrush grips but quickly change to hammer as soon as contact arises. …how for (one of many) example(s) at 0:58 Roland gets his hand struck, ‘cause they don’t know distance and where to leave their hands during their inane fiddling. …they use almost no footwork except their silly ballerina steps. …they put up no pressure, probably 'cause their thumbs suck up all energy. …they keep up their frisky mood and don't think they’d get their knuckles broken and their hands sliced. …the opponent just stands there with his shield overbound, staring mesmerized at his also overbound sword, waiting to get "struck". …they make a habit of everything that can be done wrong and call it artful fencing, while babbling about “warrior combat”. …and on.
It's beyond ridiculous. I have seen kids do better sparring.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Oct 12, 2019 13:08:56 GMT
Don't sell Roland short.
|
|
|
Post by theophilus736 on Oct 12, 2019 13:38:20 GMT
It has always looked pretty contrived to me. I wonder if he would be able to last more than a few seconds in just a regular scrap. Wrestling and boxing.
|
|
|
Post by Adventurer'sBlade on Oct 12, 2019 13:45:19 GMT
That's not sparring at all. That's either choreography or shadowboxing with weapons. It's not sparring unless you have enough protective gear to hit each other, and are actually trying. I'm sure Roland knows the difference.
Doesn't he?
I prefer Hurstwic's methods.
|
|
|
Post by Adventurer'sBlade on Oct 12, 2019 13:47:37 GMT
Some of it just looks like some kind of Viking fuhlen winding exercise.
|
|
|
Post by theophilus736 on Oct 12, 2019 15:05:24 GMT
Yeah I think if Roland had been trying to teach his methods 1000 years ago, it would have quickly deflated. Now that no one is taking them to battle, meh.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Oct 12, 2019 18:05:16 GMT
Here is another one of Roland’s videos. At 15:57 they start horsing around as in the OP. At 16:47 he admits that style wouldn’t be a real fight. In fact, none of his opponents in the OP are wearing protective gear, telling me something. He goes on to talk about 1.33, in a way that I hadn’t seen before.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2019 18:59:51 GMT
Roland has some amazing work and some amazing ideas.
But he also has some cringey stuff too that he chooses to over sell. I see forced behavior that just wouldn't translate to a sparring match. I don't think that's the point of what he does though
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Oct 12, 2019 19:08:08 GMT
His old stuff is much better. Nowadays he tries to sell his concepts, that’s all. Which he claims to be “universal”, in all contexts of swordsmanship. I see no sparring with intention from them, none. They live in their encapsulated world. Yet they claim “warrior” here and there, all the time. Drills, and little more. Conditioning themselves for the worst tactics, with good technique – still a bad way to go about fighting.
In a real fight there won’t be many binds or times to work with Fühlen. As simple as that. And that’s coming from someone who sparred a lot with people who extensively practice styles using “Fühlen” and gaining the center, armed and unarmed. From a long-time bouncer having worked with (used in conflict situations) a lot of Wing Tsun. But not in serious situations. When the poo goes down for real, sticking to the weapons (arms or impact multipliers) at mid-range doesn’t work (reliably, even for the “masters”). You see it everywhere, in all full-contact sports and of course the streets.
Of course it’s good to be able to work forwards from a bind. But taking one (small) part of swordmanship and making it the center of your style (or worse, claiming that is “the way to fight”), just because it’s so nice to explain with physics, is a bad idea and disregards reality.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2019 19:19:47 GMT
I agree with you. I do definitely prefer his old stuff
But at the same time, I been reconsidering how we view the past. Our modern mind is always thinking about what system is most effective at killing a person. But they weren't like us. Sometimes I wonder if they chose to be stylistic, as even Fiore had some questionable rondell work.
Sometimes I wonder if they chose to be stylistic to seperate them from the "Savage beasts". Rich people have always had pointless customs and rituals, without having practicality in mind. I sometimes wonder if fighting was any different
Even with musashi miyamoto. They distinct how his Savage murder of a first duel was nothing at all like the duels they normally had
Not saying it's my own preferred practice. I always prefer the most swift route from point a to b
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Oct 12, 2019 19:27:50 GMT
Sometimes I wonder if they chose to be stylistic to seperate them from the "Savage beasts". Rich people have always had pointless customs and rituals, without having practicality in mind. Couldn't agree more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2019 20:01:35 GMT
Sometimes I wonder if they chose to be stylistic to seperate them from the "Savage beasts". Rich people have always had pointless customs and rituals, without having practicality in mind. Couldn't agree more. I am happy to not be alone on that unconventional thought
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Oct 12, 2019 20:23:08 GMT
I am happy to not be alone on that unconventional thought Distinction is the name of the game. Not to be mistaken for achievement.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2019 1:39:12 GMT
To me, this video has some merits. It would be incredibly flawed as a be all end all system, which is how most tend tk value schools of martial arts.
But as a supplemental system, I can see how well this kind of training might be beneficial
Feel free to share thoughts
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Oct 15, 2019 8:07:19 GMT
Totally insane. Staying in mid-range, depending on a mixture of tactile and visual information, blocking your own sight with the shield a lot – you must be insane to fight this way for real without armor. With armor, there is no power to injure. I can’t understand why people think this is good or what this exercise is meant to replicate/aim at. Supplemental, perhaps. Not a sound "system", though. And incorporating a wrong mindset.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2019 13:49:27 GMT
Totally insane. Staying in mid-range, depending on a mixture of tactile and visual information, blocking your own sight with the shield a lot – you must be insane to fight this way for real without armor. With armor, there is no power to injure. I can’t understand why people think this is good or what this exercise is meant to replicate/aim at. Supplemental, perhaps. Not a sound "system", though. And incorporating a wrong mindset. This isn't really different than what I said lol. I did say supplemental. To practice a very specific maneuver in order to enhance what is known
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Oct 15, 2019 13:57:12 GMT
This isn't really different than what I said lol. I did say supplemental. That’s where I got that word from
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2019 13:57:46 GMT
This isn't really different than what I said lol. I did say supplemental. That’s where I got that word from Woops, sorry haha. Just woke up. My reading comprehension is low
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Oct 15, 2019 18:49:54 GMT
Go fence with him. There's an odd little cult of Roland-haters, but without exception none of them have actually met the guy or cross swords with him. Broislav goes on the same rants, and he's within spitting distance of Germany. Roland will show you how he does things. He likes doing it that way. You can take it or leave it, but he's a really good sword fighter and some of his students are even better.
I absolutely see limitations to the slow-sparing/light gear method. And I absolutely see limitations to the hard-hitting HEMA armor method. Neither is the complete picture, but both are useful tools in getting closer to a real picture. Roland's methods have a number of advantages. They allow much more precise recreation of plates and movements from the treatises. Roland's method also mirrors the approach in most of the treatises, where there is zero evidence of masks or armor being used to train unarmored fighting. Obviously he started with I.33 where tunics and hoods alone were used. But you can see the same thing in later sources. Padding is referenced in "The King's Mirror," but no details are given and it may well have been in preparing for harness combat. Now, maybe the methods shown in these treatises were crappy. Maybe I.33, KDF, Fiore, etc. were garbage. We really don't know at this point how these approaches were viewed in period as Michael Chidester of Wiktenauer recently discussed in a lecture I went to. So maybe a knight of the period would laugh at you if you mentioned these idiots with their bind work. But there's no denying that they were working binds, oppositions and special secret five-finger death strikes. It's in the books. And as always we work with the tools we have.
The HEMA approach of adding modern padding allows for full-force strikes but also distorts the psychology and gives a false sense of reality. You aren't really sword fighting just because you're hitting hard. And what we see almost invariably are artifacts of over-powered strikes due to the presence of padding and a lack of bind work due to the use of feders. The biggest problem is that this training method is wholly anachronistic prior to the late 18th century. Unless we're just going to pretend the masters were using padding and helmets "off screen." But, again, the best is the enemy of the good enough. I detest nylon and I hate hot gear, but if a bunch of people who rarely fight want to compete you really need to start out with both if you want to avoid injuries. And if you want to try out fast strikes there's little choice now. In Meyer's day if you flubbed your counter you got an ear clipped and bled. Tough. Now, that's a lawsuit. So you have to work with kit. And also I don't care to lose ears or fingers to this stuff. Use it but understand it's not "the real thing" either.
Overall, it's all good. I've found that many many hours of gear-lite freeplay and slow play have honed my winding game very well. And I can beat most people if I can get them caught in a bind. It also really helps me control the center. But there are limitations to it, namely that it doesn't train you on how to deal with fast cuts very well. And for that, we have the padded approach.
My advice is to not turn into some frothing-at-the-mouth loon over this stuff. Just experiment around and take what you can get from people without getting hung up in dojo syndrome on one side or the other.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2019 18:52:43 GMT
Go fence with him. There's an odd little cult of Roland-haters, but without exception none of them have actually met the guy or cross swords with him. Broislav does the same thing, and he's within spitting distance of Germany. Roland will show you how he does things. He likes doing it that way. You can take it or leave it, but he's a really good sword fighter and some of his students are even better. I absolutely see limitations to the slow-sparing/light gear method. And I absolutely see limitations to the hard-hitting HEMA armor method. Neither is the complete picture, but both are useful tools in getting closer to a real picture. Roland's methods have a number of advantages. They allow much more precise recreation of plates and movements from the treatises. Roland's method also mirrors the approach in most of the treatises, where there is zero evidence of masks or armor being used to train unarmored fighting. Obviously he started with I.33 where tunics and hoods alone were used. But you can see the same thing in later sources. Padding is referenced in "The King's Mirror," but no details are given and it may well have been in preparing for harness combat. Now, maybe the methods shown in these treatises were crappy. Maybe I.33, KDF, Fiore, etc. were garbage. We really don't know at this point how these approaches were viewed in period as Michael Chidester of Wiktenauer recently discussed in a lecture I went to. So maybe a knight of the period would laugh at you if you mentioned these idiots with their bind work. But there's no denying that they were working binds, oppositions and special secret five-finger death strikes. It's in the books. And as always we work with the tools we have. The HEMA approach of adding modern padding allows for full-force strikes but also distorts the psychology and gives a false sense of reality. You aren't really sword fighting just because you're hitting hard. And what we see almost invariably are artifacts of over-powered strikes due to the presence of padding and a lack of bind work due to the use of feders. The biggest problem is that this training method is wholly anachronistic prior to the late 18th century. Unless we're just going to pretend the masters were using padding and helmets "off screen." Overall, it's all good. I've found that many many hours of gear-lite freeplay and slow play have honed my winding game very well. And I can beat most people if I can get them caught in a bind. It also really helps me control the center. But there are limitations to it, namely that it doesn't train you on how to deal with fast cuts very well. And for that, we have the padded approach. My advice is to not turn into some frothing-at-the-mouth loon over this stuff. Just experiment around and take what you can get from people without getting hung up in dojo syndrome on one side or the other. Thanks for saying so. I've always thought a lot of this before, and I've never been able to word it as well as you have, so I kind of avoided it altogether
|
|