Main > The Courtyard
Historical HEMA Tournaments and Deeds of Arms
Sir Edward:
--- Quote from: Ian on 2014-06-05, 17:53:03 ---I still don't get how wood is magically safer than steel. You guys seem to be of the opinion that it is, but have offered no reason as to why. Explain why a non-flexible piece of wood that doesn't give at all in a thrust is safer than a piece of steel that absorbs the force of thrust by converting the energy of the thrust into the spring energy of flexing the blade.
--- End quote ---
You're completely misunderstanding me on this point then. I 100% agree that steel swords are safer in almost every way. The only way in which they're not, is the eye-slot issue. A secondary concern is if the particular sword you're using is too flimsy for effective half-swording. Most of the trainers out there are designed to flex well for Blossfechten, and aren't always designed more like the later period, rigid diamond-section sword.
I dislike wasters, and aluminum trainers, precisely because they have no flex to them. But for the time being, we have used them because of the eye-slots, and the slightly too flexible nature of the cheaper steel trainers (and some desire not to abuse the Albion trainers).
Ian:
Well then we need to be finding out how the guys who do this all the time with steel are not gouging each other's eyes out instead of guessing at what may or may not happen, because that's all we're really doing.
And it sounds like there's a confusion over the types of steel swords suitable for training. Yes, a diamond cross-section rigid steel sword is great for fighting in armor if you really want to kill the other person. They don't sound suitable for training. That's why I'm a bit thrown off when you guys are pointing to steel swords that are flexible for blossfechten not being suitable for armor. They seem like they would be preferable because they won't kill you.
Sir Edward:
Ninja'd... posting anyway:
--- Quote from: Ian on 2014-06-05, 19:40:19 ---I'm much more likely to do in an aviation accident than taking a sword through the eye, and I don't stop flying because of that.
You're more likely to die on the way to the tournament in your car than taking a sword through the eye, and the stakes are equally as high (death, disfigurement) and the statistics prove that you should be deathly afraid of driving, but we're not...
--- End quote ---
Those are some very good arguments, of course. I will counter that with anecdotal evidence, that as a programmer / systems engineer, if you design an error case that should never, ever happen in your program, someone will hit it, probably within the first week. :)
I'm all for using steel for this. But as Sir Brian pointed out, there may be cost issues in getting several good trainers in the group for people to use. Plus I would want us to disallow face-thrusts. But it would also depend on the size/shape of the eye-slots, and the comfort zone of the fighters doing it, of course.
Ian:
I get the cost part. That's certainly a concern. I'm not even saying The Order of the Marshal should adopt steel. I just want to know the realities of steel and not just guess at it. I want to know how the guys who use steel are doing it safely, and why the groups that use wood are using wood.
Guessing and using thought experiments and anecdotal evidence and false comparisons doesn't teach us anything. I want to know the facts before coming to a conclusion on which is better based on real evidence. My only personal preference for steel is that it's 'cooler.' lol :)
Sir Edward:
Ninja'd again.. lol :)
--- Quote from: Ian on 2014-06-05, 20:22:18 ---And it sounds like there's a confusion over the types of steel swords suitable for training. Yes, a diamond cross-section rigid steel sword is great for fighting in armor if you really want to kill the other person. They don't sound suitable for training. That's why I'm a bit thrown off when you guys are pointing to steel swords that are flexible for blossfechten not being suitable for armor. They seem like they would be preferable because they won't kill you.
--- End quote ---
It's not that they're unsuitable, just some are more suitable than others.
As a comparison, the Albion Meyer will work for both. But most of the flex is in the last half of the blade, so they tend to bend around parries a little more than would be preferable. The A&A Fechterspiel works great for Harnessfechten. It's slightly more hard-hitting in Blossfechten though, because it is slightly more rigid.
Basically, I feel there's a "sweet spot" that's slightly more rigid in Harnessfechten than in Blossfechten.
The same comparisons can be made in the Synthetics too. The Rawlings are so flimsy, that they suck for half-swording, winding, or any bind-work in general. The Purple Heart synthetics have a flex that's more realistic (plus have thicker tips too).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version