Katana vs Sword and Buckler - Sparring Analysis

Great video and very interesting !
Thanks for sharing

I watch the video and see things through the lens of my experience and skill level, but I wasn't there so I can't give any useful commentary. Therefore I have a few questions for you about the sparring match.

What do you think was your greatest weakness? What was your greatest strength? After going up against the buckler, what should you practice on to reduce your weaknesses? Are there any strategies that you would employ next time to give you an advantage?

Thinking back on your match, what weakness did you see in the buckler that can be exploited next time? And what were it's strengths from your perspective that you should avoid confronting directly?

Thanks, appreciate it! Feel free to comment directly on Youtube so my friends can answer you too!

Regarding your questions, I believe I already answer them in my OP, but here goes:

My weaknesses: barring the inherent disadvantage of having to fight against sword and buckler, I do think that my ashiwaza/footwork as well as timing need to be better. Against an opponent with superior weaponry you have to have better techniques. As I described earlier the only time when I manage to get a hit in is when I do a perfectly timed counter strike or when I feint and force the opponent to respond.

Regarding the buckler itself, hard to find any "weakness" other than the fact that it's smaller than a shield? :D There's a reason swords and shield or spear and shield dominated battlefield across all cultures for thousand of years. That said, the shieldman can make the same mistake as a swordman makes for ex raising his shield to a feint, but that in itself doesnt give him any weakness, it's the same if he just had a sword. 

The other weakness you can exploit although its very hard to do is that one handed weapon tend to be slightly slower on return swing than two handed katana, so if you have good timing you can attack while he is preparing his attack, but then again the shield is there to cover any opening made by the attack.

Cheers,

Awesome video. Always good to see sparring on here, especially of different styles. It reminded me a lot of the sparring I did years ago against my friend who occasionally used sword and buckler. He was less proficient than the gentleman in the video but it was still good experience. Sparring between different weapons has led to some of the most interesting sessions for me and I hope you continue doing them.

I've been studying Musashi and dual wielding for the last few weeks. It's not as easy as you think, and there is very little actual evidence that shows exactly what that technique might have looked like. I have reconstructed something similar to what I think is probable based on established Japanese sword techniques and cultural influences, but without more hard data it amounts to little more than educated Bullshido.

I can say that it holds some tremendous potential if done correctly. The wakisashi acts as a block/ short strike and the katana acts as a strike weapon. Naturally, they can be reversed with the kat doing the blocking and the waki moving in and underneath for the strike. I definitely see now where Musashi was talking about "batting the sword away and hitting upwards". That's definitely 100% doable in Japanese dual wield as it forms a natural and fluid movement.

I need to find a sparring partner so I can try out some of these things to see if they actually work or not. Until I do that, it's still all an academic exercise.

In regards to the dual wielding of Japanese swords: yes, Musashi addresses the extra strength required for this method. As you stated, the swords were designed for two handed use and therefore using them one-handed required extra effort. Mushashi simply says that when you start out the swords will appear heavy, but keep working at it and then you will be able to use them properly. Musashi was known for being incredibly strong- I have sparred against such people in the past and they are very hard to fight against because even with good technique, then can absorb your best hit without harm, and if they get their hands on you then they can simply throw you across the room or otherwise cause injury. I would imagine this is the reason why you don't see much dual wielding in the Japanese styles.

I would think it fair to say that Musashi was as successful as he was because he managed to master a technique that was extraordinarily difficult and rare. He was the exception, not the rule. I think it a case of "bumblebee syndrome" in which it shouldn't fly, but it clearly does. I don't think it accidental that there is only a small handful of references to anybody other than Musashi using the dual wield in Japan (Hollywood and Anime notwithstanding) compared to the overwhelming majority using single sword techniques.

Long, long ago, I sparred with a SCA guy who used long sword (rattan) and shield (larger than buckler).
I am no great shakes of a sparring guy but I could not get thru his defense...he would basically hide behind his large shield and launch effective one-handed attacks over the top of his shield in an up,over&down sword strike that kept him behind his shield and all I could do was block or evade his strike...and imo he was being easy on my since he was wearing SCA armor and I just had kendo armor which was by far less protection.
Only way I could land a hit was one handed strikes to the leg, below his shield. I was using a shinai which is light weight so easy to use one handed but lacks much "punch" vs. armor.

Only time I was effective vs. European style was sparring a European style fencer (rapier vs shinai).
Holding the shinai, tsuka high, kissaki low at an est. 45' angle, I could block their thrusts and counter fast with my own thrust. Did good. Pissed them off for winning. Did not get invited back.
RinC

I don't know that I'd say that there isn't much dual wielding in Japanese arts... while Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu (and it's founder, Musashi Shinmen Fujiwara no Genshin) is best known for it, it's also found in Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu (termed "ryoto" there), Yagyu Shinkage Ryu (as well as methods to defeat people with two swords, referred to as "nito yaburi", or "two sword breaking"), Araki Ryu Gunyo Kogusoku (some interesting two-sword iai.. while the tachi/katana is occupied, draw and cut or stab with the kodachi), Shingyoto Ryu, Nito Shinkage Ryu (dual wielding with kusarigama... that's interesting!), Ikkaku Ryu (dual wielding with a tessen and jutte), Yagyu Shingan Ryu (dual short swords, known as "nito kodachi", pretty simply), Shindo Muso Ryu's methods for uchidachi include nito, and so on.

Is it the "standard"? No... but I'd put that more down to the fact that most Japanese weapons are designed to be used with two hands... especially "battlefield" weapons... yari, naginata, yumi (bow and arrow), tachi, odachi, tetsubo, and so on. This is also why there wasn't really any adoption of shields by the Japanese.. instead, they had them built into their yoroi (armour)... 

Interesting that you would describe the nito methods that way... Saotome-s certainly has a "retreating" attitude in his approach (not really sure why), but in Niten Ichi Ryu, the Nito Seiho is notable for the fact that it's far more aggressive than the Tachi Seiho and Kodachi Seiho that precede it... with regards to your Aiki-ken observations, I can understand that perception... with the waza themselves, though, the "aggression" is done in pressuring the uchidachi back, and forcing them to make a mistake... the first waza from the Nito Seiho kinda exemplifies this for me, with a steady walk in towards the enemy, keeping the tips of your swords in their face... they try to clear them, you just bring them straight back in, and move in, forcing them to retreat... not gonna give away the rest, but this is the salient aspect.

One thing that you may find interesting is that, in the Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu's Nito methods themselves, the kodachi is used pretty much exclusively defensively, in order to attack with the tachi (note: I would not make the assumption that a present defensive aspect equals a lack of aggression...), but an earlier version of Musashi's art, the Enmei Ryu, included offensive actions with both swords... they were removed as he refined his approach over the latter decades of his life, seemingly.

Hmm... not sure I'd agree with that... for one thing, Shinto Ryu (Katori) had been doing the whole dual wield thing for about a century and a half before Musashi... additionally, Musashi dominantly used nito in practical applications against groups... with single opponents, he used a single sword. I can only think of one example of using two swords against a single opponent, which is the case of his encounter with Baiken (the name "Shishido" comes from Eiji Yoshikawa's fictionalised novel), who wielded a kusari-gama (a kinda single-item dual-wield weapon in itself) against him. Musashi couldn't get past the spinning chain, so he drew his kodachi, and threw it at Baiken. While Baiken was distracted by the short sword now sticking out of his body, Musashi moved in and finished him with his tachi.

Musashi himself, though, stated that his success was not due to his superior technique, or tactics, or anything else. In fact, he attributed it to potentially a bit of luck, perhaps having opponents who weren't as skilled as they thought (or were believed to be), but dominantly to his attitude of "I will win, no matter what!". It was only after he finished his duelling career that he started to look more at the tactical and technical refinement and development of his skills (stating that it began after his final duel with Kojiro at the age of around 30, and he finally understood the subject after another 20 years, at the age of 50).

This is an interesting comment... and I agree completely that it brings up a whole discussion as to how swords were used strategically... however I don't know that it's an entirely different discussion. From watching the video, what strikes me is that it isn't really showing what I would consider either approach to swordsmanship in a genuine fashion... probably a lot closer for the sword and buckler exponent, but the katana side? Sadly, no... and I think there are a few reasons for this, and this format made them a bit unavoidable.

First is the equipment used... unsharpened steep (from the looks of things), kendo-style bogu... these factors encourage a range of actions (and discourage others) that removes it from a genuine example... much of the "action" is hesitant, trying to reach from a distance, and non-committed. Should the katana-side have been wearing something closer to yoroi, aspects such as the sode (the large-ish square panels hanging from each shoulder... basically the Japanese shields), as well as the more protective helmet and other facets, he may have been more confident to move in without hesitation... after all, many kamae are based around the idea of wearing yoroi, so (depending on the koryu the original poster studied... I didn't seen anything that resembled any I'm familiar with, so can't say there) to do them in a different set of semi-protective (but sporting-based, meaning based on protecting "legal" targets over life-threatening ones, lightweight, and with gaps) suit, or no armour at all, can make them less than ideal... 

Second is the (highly understandable!) aim to not actually injure each other. This means that much of the targeting is centred on targets that would not necessarily be high priority, so are unlikely to have been drilled in any practice... of course, that also then lends itself to the hesitation, and "pulling" of committed actions, as, with that basic protection, and steel weapons, a slip could be quite dangerous. Of course, that's part of the trade-off of sparring methods (which is one of the main reasons most koryu don't do it), so it's understandable to see it here.

Hats off to the participants, but I don't know that I'd put that forth as an example of "katana" in the sense of how they're meant to operate. But I don't think it could have been one with the set up there.