ModernChivalry.org
Main => The Courtyard => Topic started by: Sir Edward on 2012-06-13, 18:59:04
-
Sir Brian, Sir Nathan, and myself have been having a discussion through private messages that started with our longsword demo, then moved into longsword combat in general. The discussion is quite interesting, so we thought others might like to read and chime in. So I'm quoting the discussion here to start the thread (omitting bits that were non-technical):
I’m not sure if you’ve ever been to the MASHS website but Larry Tom has compiled some general longsword tactics that are good and sound principles of longsword combat.
[url=http://www.mashs.org/LongswordTactics.pdf]http://www.mashs.org/LongswordTactics.pdf (http://www.mashs.org/LongswordTactics.pdf)[/url]
Rule: # 8 comes to mind when I reflect upon your duels this weekend with Sir Edward and I. If you recall me mentioning to you that the Longsword is an offensive weapon? – It is ok to be cautious but do not let it become habitual by persistently giving ground. Trust in your blade work and try to stay in the Vor more. One exercise we do at MASHS is to basically put our back foot about 12” away from a wall and then defend against attacks. It instills upon you to have more reliance in your blade work than just voiding attacks and giving ground.
You and Sir James really need to consider getting together more often to practice some of these two person drills which of course will require both of you getting some fencing masks in order for both of you getting the full benefit and feel your blade control. In fact if we have another gathering of our Order on some weekend we should do some of those two man drills. :)
I'll also reiterate again about trying to carefully control power. We all hit hard accidentally from time to time. It happens. But it's worth keeping it in mind.
Sir Nathan, did I show you on Sunday that the crossguard got bent on the Fechterspiel, during your fight with Sir Brian? Ouch. Something hard happened close to your hands, and I'm not sure what exactly. Anyway, that shows that there was at least one potential finger-breaking moment this weekend, and the gauntlets can't be trusted to stop all of it (so thankfully the guard did! Though it doesn't indicate who hit who). I've taken some pretty hard hits right through steel gaunts, as they're great at protecting the back of your hand, but can only do so much for the fingers, so we need to be careful.
When we have our practices, I might recommend that we use the shinai and/or plastic trainers, since they're more forgiving and don't need as much gear. The lacrosse gloves and kevlar gloves do a pretty good job with those. I rigged up a second shinai "longsword" last time we had that workshop day over at Sir James' place, so we have that option.
....
I wanted to add some thoughts before I go off to dinner for the evening. :)
I mean it when I say it's not clear who hit who. I don't want it to sound like I'm pointing fingers, so don't take it that way.
In my experience, guard-bends seem to happen when both people step in and the hilts get close to each other. Either the crossguards hit each other, or the guard hit the "strong" of the other blade. The "weak" has the speed and momentum, but not really much leverage. So all it shows is that you guys probably brought your hands out at the same moment, within punching distance. I think I took a bend like that on the Meyer once, and then straightened it. But the Fechterspiel has a shorter and thicker guard, so it's actually a little scary.
But just like with the hard thrust against an opponent who stepped in, who is really to blame? Both guys did something the other didn't expect, in all likelihood. And I'd rather a crossguard take a pounding than someone's hand. That's what it's there for.
But I think these discussions and analysis of our accidents will help us be safer swordsmen.
Amen Sir Ed.
Concerning the bend in the Fechterspiel (Which I did see at VARF), I was pretty stunned seeing that, and my first thought was exactly "I'm glad I didn't take that one on the hand!" Knowing my over-reliance on thrusting, it probably was a situation where I received sir Brian's strong on the guard during one of his counters. Sir Brian, if you have any idea as to the specific exchange (which I don't) it probably could prove insightful to better understand what went on.
...
Concerning some technical stuff, I noticed that I scored a bunch of my points by voiding the attack and then countering, with a thrust or a strike to the hands or forearms. I know it's not good to get into the practice of constantly backing up, but I got many hits that way. Is there some validity to the practice, or were you guys giving me those?
I know it's better and much more proper to manipulate the opponent's blade, and control the vor, but when you guys increase the intensity I simply cannot keep up with the rapidity and skill of your cuts (by all means don't take down the intensity though, learning to deal with it makes me a better swordsman), and quite frankly, I find it much easier to manipulate your measure than your blade. My reasoning revealed, is it an effective strategy, perhaps against swordsmen who have faster cuts at least?
Also, I got many of my points through thrusts, or strikes evolving from thrusts. I observed in our duels and watching you two fight that you guys use thrusts rather sparingly, to the point of it being a rarity. Is there a specific reason for this, a preference or some type of advantage?
Concerning some technical stuff, I noticed that I scored a bunch of my points by voiding the attack and then countering, with a thrust or a strike to the hands or forearms. I know it's not good to get into the practice of constantly backing up, but I got many hits that way. Is there some validity to the practice, or were you guys giving me those?
I know it's better and much more proper to manipulate the opponent's blade, and control the vor, but when you guys increase the intensity I simply cannot keep up with the rapidity and skill of your cuts (by all means don't take down the intensity though, learning to deal with it makes me a better swordsman), and quite frankly, I find it much easier to manipulate your measure than your blade. My reasoning revealed, is it an effective strategy, perhaps against swordsmen who have faster cuts at least?
No, I don't think that's wrong, but it's good to recognize it as a launching point to work on the other things. Voiding an attack and then countering is very effective, and in fact is something we recently worked on specifically at VAF. It's something I need to work on, because my instinct is to suicidally rush in. So I'm making an active effort to do it more. Often I'm more likely to press in, unless we've exchanged 3 or 4 attacks each, then I'm going to probably try to back out (aggressively, with more attacks), which isn't the same thing. The important thing with a true "void" is to avoid the attack, just barely (and with your hands out of harm's way), so that you can come right back in. Backing away is a different matter. Maybe in the future, instead of backing up, if you're not comfortable with how close the opponent is, try using longenort, or throw a few thrusts out of measure. It's like Sir Brian says, "I have a longsword and I know how to use it!" :)
But yes, I see your point. If you think the other person is more skilled, playing a more defensive game might work to your advantage. But only as long as the other guy "respects" that and doesn't come charging into your space. At that point all you've done is let him get the Vor. You might be surprised how effective the Vor is. Your cuts don't even have to be that great, as long as you keep pressure on your opponent.
Also, I got many of my points through thrusts, or strikes evolving from thrusts. I observed in our duels and watching you two fight that you guys use thrusts rather sparingly, to the point of it being a rarity. Is there a specific reason for this, a preference or some type of advantage?
Thrusts are an important part of the art. It really depends on who I'm fighting as to whether I'll be able to land them. Sir Brian keeps his sword in motion a lot, so if I'm not thinking about where I need to defend, we'll get a double-kill, and that makes the thrusts risky against him. In that case I'm more likely to throw a one-handed thrust to make up for the fact that I couldn't close the distance safely, but in a way that's even riskier because you can quickly lose control of your weapon.
The amusing thing here is that when I was first getting started, that was often the best way for me to hit people that were better than me. As I got better, I found myself less likely to be in a good position to safely land one. :)
Training with dueling weapons, dueling epees especially exposed to me the inherent weakness of the thrust attack insofar as it boils down to a matter of mere inches. If your opponent misses with the thrust and you can get past the point then you are much safer. Even with thrust and cut weapons like the longsword and sabre a thrust is effective but not the primary method of attack and even though you might be able to salvage a draw cut or schnitt from a missed thrust it still wouldn’t stop a heavy riposte cut from an opponent that got past your point.
You can also consider the reality aspect: If these were sharps and you thrust into a non-lethal area of your opponent's body you have then effectively ‘entrapped’ your blade and gave your opponent even if grievously wounded, the time necessary to cleave your head in two. ;)
I find our private discussion very interesting and revealing and wonder if we should move it to the public forum or at least the order discussion so all may interject their thoughts, however I will leave it up to you fine gentlemen to deem it suitable or not to do so. :-\
Ok, I'm glad to find I have validity with my void and counter. Doing that really feels natural to me, and almost instinctive. Concerning getting an opponent to "respect" your distance, when I was dueling you guys I tried to do that by throwing lots of thrust feints and probing actions. As far as getting someone to keep their distance, is that a good way of doing it?
Sir Brian, I see your point (pun unintended) concerning the vulnerability beyond the point. Although I do like them for their speed, and small profile. Though I did score a bunch of points my turning thrusts into strikes (especially oberhaus). Do you think that combined with a backstep could help minimize the vulnerability of an opponent getting past a thrusting sword's tip? ???
Also, for purposes of realism, I do try to keep my thrusts aimed at the body or (especially the sword breaking ones) the throat. ;)
Concerning getting an opponent to "respect" your distance, when I was dueling you guys I tried to do that by throwing lots of thrust feints and probing actions. As far as getting someone to keep their distance, is that a good way of doing it?
The primary distance you need to be concerned with is your measure. If you possess a longer reach than your opponent then you want to keep them within YOUR measure and effectively out of theirs which is essentially the typical instance to give ground in order to maintain that advantage.
Do you think that combined with a backstep could help minimize the vulnerability of an opponent getting past a thrusting sword's tip?
In longsword this particular combination would actually be counterproductive as it restricts the effective penetration of your point unless it is well timed and aimed for a vital area (i.e. throat or face). I assure you I am not opposed to using the thrust; it’s just that I find a cut is much harder to be voided than a thrust but will use a thrust as it is one of the more intimidating attacks, most especially if aimed for the eyes. – It typically gets a reflexive action which can mean the difference of your secondary attack being successful or not. ;)
Concerning getting an opponent to "respect" your distance, when I was dueling you guys I tried to do that by throwing lots of thrust feints and probing actions. As far as getting someone to keep their distance, is that a good way of doing it?
The primary distance you need to be concerned with is your measure. If you possess a longer reach than your opponent then you want to keep them within YOUR measure and effectively out of theirs which is essentially the typical instance to give ground in order to maintain that advantage.
I'll also add that the feints and probes are fine as long as you are prepared to turn them into real attacks if the need arises, otherwise you'll be taken off guard when the other guy responds. It's like we've said before, the ideal feint is one that will successfully hit if the other guy does nothing.
-
Ahh, homework! I'm not skilled or learned enough to offer anything in the way of advice, so I'll sit back with a tall lager and absorb the discussion.
-
But yes, I see your point. If you think the other person is more skilled, playing a more defensive game might work to your advantage. But only as long as the other guy "respects" that and doesn't come charging into your space. At that point all you've done is let him get the Vor. You might be surprised how effective the Vor is. Your cuts don't even have to be that great, as long as you keep pressure on your opponent.
My fighting style is a bit more reactive. If my opponent is aggressive then I'll react by being just as or more aggressive. I don't mind going on the offensive with a few combinations but I usually struggle with the more laid back opponents as I typically would rather conserve energy and not constantly pursue them, after all I'm more accustom to dueling MASHS students who generally seem to rely upon a flurry of attacks instead of fewer technically precise ones. ;)
-
Sir Brian, I think you may be misreading my message on the thrust. You mentioned that a thrust is weaker because your opponent is more dangerous inside the point. I was not referring to a backstep during the initial thrust, but against an opponent who has stepped beyond the point, and that backstep would be giving power to a backcut. While there's really no defense against letting your opponent an entire step inside your measure, a backcut would at least give the other swordsman something to worry about, and not make a failed thrust so vulnerable. Is there any merit to this line of thinking? ???
Well I'm still in the process of formulating an effective fighting style, I would say that my preferred style of fighting is primarily defensive, and uses lots of feints, thrusts, and probes into forcing the opponent to perform a move I can exploit.
Anything I should add to that blurb? You guys can probably analyze my fighting better than I can...
-
Sir Brian, I think you may be misreading my message on the thrust. You mentioned that a thrust is weaker because your opponent is more dangerous inside the point. I was not referring to a backstep during the initial thrust, but against an opponent who has stepped beyond the point, and that backstep would be giving power to a backcut. While there's really no defense against letting your opponent an entire step inside your measure, a backcut would at least give the other swordsman something to worry about, and not make a failed thrust so vulnerable. Is there any merit to this line of thinking? ???
I'm trying to picture what you're asking. So you mean after you've made a thrust that failed, you want to step back to regain a comfortable measure while making a back-edge cut? If I'm not understanding that correctly, let me know.
I'll make a few observations in general about this sort of thing:
If you're going to step back, yes, please attack while doing so! That's something that Bill drills into us at VAF as well. Always withdraw with attacks and guards, because you're in danger any time you're within measure. Even if you've already hit the person three times. (in a life-and-death duel, you can't count on any of them being fight-stopping for sure, and in a tournament you can't count on the judges seeing them)
If you're at the position where your thrust fell short, you're technically still too far away to hit well. If your thrust missed, you're either at the right distance or too close. If you're too close, then you either need to grapple, or move back some. Of course we downplay the grappling, since it's hard to do safely, and we're here to play with swords.
If your thrust just missed by a little, simply pressing the sword's edge into the person isn't really a cut. You might only have a swing that covers a couple of inches. I think the better move, strategically, is to pull back into Ochs or Pflug (or parry or whatever), since you can bet the other guy's sword is coming at you. From there you can thrust again or do a cut.
Remember, at the end of a thrust, you're essentially in some variant of Longenort. You have great parrying options from there, but not much in the way of good attacks.
-
My thinking here was to counter someone in the process of stepping past your tip. Say I made a thrust, and it was short. The person attempts to sidestep past my tip, to where I'm vulnerable. That's when I would take a backstep with cut.
It's a preventative measure, not one to deal with the guy already in your face. Does it make sense now?
-
If your thrust just missed by a little, simply pressing the sword's edge into the person isn't really a cut. You might only have a swing that covers a couple of inches. I think the better move, strategically, is to pull back into Ochs or Pflug (or parry or whatever), since you can bet the other guy's sword is coming at you. From there you can thrust again or do a cut.
My thinking here was to counter someone in the process of stepping past your tip. Say I made a thrust, and it was short. The person attempts to sidestep past my tip, to where I'm vulnerable. That's when I would take a backstep with cut.
It's a preventative measure, not one to deal with the guy already in your face. Does it make sense now?
Fortunately concerning duels it isn’t resolved with a Rock, Paper, Scissors answer. Many of the should’ve, could’ve, would’ve actions are dependent upon tempo and measure. The counter-counter action you are describing Sir Nathan really falls into the realm of ‘Indes’ (Instantly) state of timing which the Lichtenauer tradition describes as:
The tradition distinguishes three states of timing: the Before, when one has the initiative; the After, where one's opponent has the initiative; and the Instantly, the use of swift countermoves designed to gain the initiative when the opponent has it.
The main disadvantage of theoretical duels on paper and in hindsight is everything is absolutely clear however while in the moment the tempo can be missed. Yet the action you describe Sir Nathan is very plausible IF properly and consistently executed which really occurs more often when it is practiced frequently as Sir Edward prescribed in his earlier comments:
If you're going to step back, yes, please attack while doing so! That's something that Bill drills into us at VAF as well. Always withdraw with attacks and guards, because you're in danger any time you're within measure. Even if you've already hit the person three times. (in a life-and-death duel, you can't count on any of them being fight-stopping for sure, and in a tournament you can't count on the judges seeing them)
-
But yes, I see your point. If you think the other person is more skilled, playing a more defensive game might work to your advantage. But only as long as the other guy "respects" that and doesn't come charging into your space. At that point all you've done is let him get the Vor. You might be surprised how effective the Vor is. Your cuts don't even have to be that great, as long as you keep pressure on your opponent.
My fighting style is a bit more reactive. If my opponent is aggressive then I'll react by being just as or more aggressive. I don't mind going on the offensive with a few combinations but I usually struggle with the more laid back opponents as I typically would rather conserve energy and not constantly pursue them, after all I'm more accustom to dueling MASHS students who generally seem to rely upon a flurry of attacks instead of fewer technically precise ones. ;)
It is a bit ironic that at last night’s training this sentiment was reinforced when we had two new longsword students start their first lesson and Matt Lawrence related at one point in our discussion with them about ‘States of Timing’ in which he observed during most duels with me and Josh or pretty much anyone from MASHS that whenever he was in the Nach (After) it was only a matter of time before he got hit. Essentially when he was slow on gaining the Vor (Before) he usually lost in the engagement. This is typically what we at MASHS are fighting for and try to be aggressive to obtain and maintain. ;)
-
Is there a way to achieve and maintain the vor with reactive fencing?
-
Is there a way to achieve and maintain the vor with reactive fencing?
Not really, since by definition the Vor is proactive, and the Nach is reactive. If you're fast enough, you can regain the Vor, but then you're not being reactive anymore, but rather proactive (and keeping the other guy in the Nach, where he's having to deal with you).
Having said that, more often than not, both people are moving at similar speeds and it's questionable as to who has the Vor, or the Vor switches back and forth whenever someone executes a maneuver that's a little slow. But starting from a place that's reactive can put you at a disadvantage if you're not careful.
Something else to consider: You can create a false opening to draw your opponent's attack, by intentionally attacking slightly out of distance, or slightly off-target. This can still put you in the Vor, even though it wasn't a "real" attack, since the other guy's attack to your opening was by your own "invitation".
I know a lot of this boils down to how to enter measure without getting hit.
-
Is there a way to achieve and maintain the vor with reactive fencing?
Not really, since by definition the Vor is proactive, and the Nach is reactive. If you're fast enough, you can regain the Vor, but then you're not being reactive anymore, but rather proactive (and keeping the other guy in the Nach, where he's having to deal with you).
Having said that, more often than not, both people are moving at similar speeds and it's questionable as to who has the Vor, or the Vor switches back and forth whenever someone executes a maneuver that's a little slow. But starting from a place that's reactive can put you at a disadvantage if you're not careful.
The real conundrum is the genuine ability to practice regaining the vor after you’ve lost it. You can do two man drills until the cows come home but that at best will only condition your muscle memory and reflexes IF you recognize the particular attack that the drill is intended to counter. What it can never provide is the situation awareness which you can truly only develop with actual duels.
Something else to consider: You can create a false opening to draw your opponent's attack, by intentionally attacking slightly out of distance, or slightly off-target. This can still put you in the Vor, even though it wasn't a "real" attack, since the other guy's attack to your opening was by your own "invitation".
I know a lot of this boils down to how to enter measure without getting hit.
One of which I’m sure Sir Edward is alluding to is the Nebenhut play, where you execute a zornhau deliberately out of measure ending up in Nebenhut and essentially ‘inviting’ your opponent to strike (typically with a zornhau) at your wide open upper body or head. When your opponent moves in to make the cut you come back with a powerful back cut to parry and displace their blade and follow up with a devastating Oberhau or whatever else you fancy as you effectively have them at your complete mercy. ;D
True story: I pulled this off last Wednesday night against Josh. He managed to realize his mistake of falling for the play halfway through my follow up back cut and managed to disrupt most of the follow up coup de grace zornhau so I would have only scalped him as far down as his eyebrows when I intended to decapitate him, but half a head trophy is better than BEING a full head trophy. ;)
-
One of which I’m sure Sir Edward is alluding to is the Nebenhut play, where you execute a zornhau deliberately out of measure ending up in Nebenhut and essentially ‘inviting’ your opponent to strike (typically with a zornhau) at your wide open upper body or head. When your opponent moves in to make the cut you come back with a powerful back cut to parry and displace their blade and follow up with a devastating Oberhau or whatever else you fancy as you effectively have them at your complete mercy. ;D
True story: I pulled this off last Wednesday night against Josh. He managed to realize his mistake of falling for the play halfway through my follow up back cut and managed to disrupt most of the follow up coup de grace zornhau so I would have only scalped him as far down as his eyebrows when I intended to decapitate him, but half a head trophy is better than BEING a full head trophy. ;)
(note: I moved this topic to The Courtyard so we can talk with a wider audience)
Indeed, I had this play in mind. When I executed this play against Sir Nathan this past weekend, I completely 100% fell back onto our drills from VAF. We've drilled it enough times that you can start to get a feel for the right speed of things to happen, and slow down or speed up the back cut according to how quickly (or not) the opponent is stepping in to take the bait. We ended up showing the audience a completely textbook play from right out of the manuals, even though it was a live bout. Which is awesome.
This is one of the reasons I'd like for us to have some practice days where we can just work on techniques. I'd love to have more guys in our group up to speed on how a few of these things work.
-
Yes! I believe Sir Nathan's father was video recording that duel, hopefully he got that exchange as well! :)
Uh Sir Nathan, speaking of that video… ;)
-
Quite an amazing discussion! I see plenty of good points here and I will try to be brief with my take on this discussion.
What I can tell is that it is true that Vor and Nach or two different ways of attacking and defending. Distance and measure is vital when attempting to thrust or cut while stepping backwards. I know this for a fact that I myself have attempted it while training at SIGMA and it has worked well for me. I recall two instances where I took into consideration my opponent's ability to power through the bind I would create (my opponent/partner was taller than me) so what I did was I did a Scheilhau thrust into his right shoulder while using Fuhlen and Indes in the bind. The second instance is where upon using Fuhlen and Indes in the bind, I performed a Mutieren (Mutating). In both scenarios I took one step backwards to maintain the appropriate distance and to use measure against him.
My fighting style is a bit more reactive. If my opponent is aggressive then I'll react by being just as or more aggressive. I don't mind going on the offensive with a few combinations but I usually struggle with the more laid back opponents as I typically would rather conserve energy and not constantly pursue them, after all I'm more accustom to dueling MASHS students who generally seem to rely upon a flurry of attacks instead of fewer technically precise ones.
That is not a bad thing, however be careful that you do not exert yourself and put you in harm's way. It is better to be aggressive only when you have to.
Well I'm still in the process of formulating an effective fighting style, I would say that my preferred style of fighting is primarily defensive, and uses lots of feints, thrusts, and probes into forcing the opponent to perform a move I can exploit.
I can say the same except I base my fighting strategies and tactics directly from the Historical Sources (Liechtenauer, Ringeck, Goliath Fechtbuch, Meyer, Mair, Von Danzig and yes Fiore). There is nothing wrong about being defensive but be aware that "you cannot attack without defending and likewise you cannot defend without attacking" Offensive and Defensive are interconnected that they cannot be separated but rather used together. It is a good thing to use Feints, Thrusts "probes" or what I call "Provocations" (where you provoke your opponent) but use them in their proper perspectives.
If you're at the position where your thrust fell short, you're technically still too far away to hit well. If your thrust missed, you're either at the right distance or too close. If you're too close, then you either need to grapple, or move back some. Of course we downplay the grappling, since it's hard to do safely, and we're here to play with swords.
If your thrust just missed by a little, simply pressing the sword's edge into the person isn't really a cut. You might only have a swing that covers a couple of inches. I think the better move, strategically, is to pull back into Ochs or Pflug (or parry or whatever), since you can bet the other guy's sword is coming at you. From there you can thrust again or do a cut.
Yep, I agree.
Remember, at the end of a thrust, you're essentially in some variant of Longenort. You have great parrying options from there, but not much in the way of good attacks.
Parrying yes, Sprechfenster or Winden will work if you end up in Langenort as well.
My thinking here was to counter someone in the process of stepping past your tip. Say I made a thrust, and it was short. The person attempts to sidestep past my tip, to where I'm vulnerable. That's when I would take a backstep with cut.
It's a preventative measure, not one to deal with the guy already in your face.
At that point, sidestep to face your opponent and pull your sword either into Pflug or keep Langenort at your opponents face (defense by threat with footwork).
The main disadvantage of theoretical duels on paper and in hindsight is everything is absolutely clear however while in the moment the tempo can be missed. Yet the action you describe Sir Nathan is very plausible
Quite true, one can discuss theory yet can only be proven if practiced and proven in fighting/bouting.
It is a bit ironic that at last night’s training this sentiment was reinforced when we had two new longsword students start their first lesson and Matt Lawrence related at one point in our discussion with them about ‘States of Timing’ in which he observed during most duels with me and Josh or pretty much anyone from MASHS that whenever he was in the Nach (After) it was only a matter of time before he got hit. Essentially when he was slow on gaining the Vor (Before) he usually lost in the engagement. This is typically what we at MASHS are fighting for and try to be aggressive to obtain and maintain.
Vor Training is quite difficult yet it is worth it for it's strategical value.
Is there a way to achieve and maintain the vor with reactive fencing?
Not really, since by definition the Vor is proactive, and the Nach is reactive. If you're fast enough, you can regain the Vor, but then you're not being reactive anymore, but rather proactive (and keeping the other guy in the Nach, where he's having to deal with you).
Having said that, more often than not, both people are moving at similar speeds and it's questionable as to who has the Vor, or the Vor switches back and forth whenever someone executes a maneuver that's a little slow. But starting from a place that's reactive can put you at a disadvantage if you're not careful.
Something else to consider: You can create a false opening to draw your opponent's attack, by intentionally attacking slightly out of distance, or slightly off-target. This can still put you in the Vor, even though it wasn't a "real" attack, since the other guy's attack to your opening was by your own "invitation".
I know a lot of this boils down to how to enter measure without getting hit.
I agree in this case, fighting is like a chess match where you have to gain and keep the initiative of the fight and if you loose it, regain it back.
The real conundrum is the genuine ability to practice regaining the vor after you’ve lost it. You can do two man drills until the cows come home but that at best will only condition your muscle memory and reflexes IF you recognize the particular attack that the drill is intended to counter. What it can never provide is the situation awareness which you can truly only develop with actual duels.
Yep, exactly.
One of which I’m sure Sir Edward is alluding to is the Nebenhut play, where you execute a zornhau deliberately out of measure ending up in Nebenhut and essentially ‘inviting’ your opponent to strike (typically with a zornhau) at your wide open upper body or head. When your opponent moves in to make the cut you come back with a powerful back cut to parry and displace their blade and follow up with a devastating Oberhau or whatever else you fancy as you effectively have them at your complete mercy.
Are your referring to the Nebunhut Play from Ringeck? If so that is an excellent example of technique used to regain the Vor.
Indeed, I had this play in mind. When I executed this play against Sir Nathan this past weekend, I completely 100% fell back onto our drills from VAF. We've drilled it enough times that you can start to get a feel for the right speed of things to happen, and slow down or speed up the back cut according to how quickly (or not) the opponent is stepping in to take the bait. We ended up showing the audience a completely textbook play from right out of the manuals, even though it was a live bout. Which is awesome.
This is one of the reasons I'd like for us to have some practice days where we can just work on techniques. I'd love to have more guys in our group up to speed on how a few of these things work.
All I can say is count me in, I am dying for some good practice, let me know of a good weekend where we can get together and practice. :D
-
I have no idea what any of the german terms are.
Im still learning the Italian terms as well.
On the topic of thrusting:
In my group we try to limit thrusting since we use wooden wasters.
They to a lot more damage to the plate armour we wear and anyone in light armour can be hurt because the blades don't give.
Some of us do not have neck protection so there's always the potential for it to slip under a helmet and cause problems. Another was if you thrusted and your opponent walked into the thrust it's hard to pull it if they are still moving forward. So we try to avoid thrusting just due to safety's sake. It still happens but we keep a hard eye on it to make sure nothing gets out of hand. Control is very key to our sparring whether it's steel or wood.
I am still learning to string various attacks together on the offensive as well as the defensive.
My own experience shows me that I am either on the offensive or the defensive with little thought about swapping between the two.
I am having to consciously think about 1-2 attacks max followed by backing out of range with a guard or an attack.
Currently I find that I attack/parry and I'm still in close. I want to keep pressing the attack but I can't because I haven't thought that far ahead...
Another thing I also learned is trying to have a good spatial awareness of how big your sword is, how to catch your opponent's blade and either deflect, parry or redirect the blade to open something else up. After that is done, then realizing and being able to analyze what is now open and can be struck as part of the parry, or taking the option to fly out of the melee to reset.
-
Be careful not to over think it or get over specialized in the Same vs Same weapon fights.
I've seen this happen to SCA Sword & Shield guys who do nothing but train to defeat other Sword & Shield guys. The dojo artifacts creep in and the moment they face a spear, axe, mace, etc the fall apart.
-Ivan
BTW & OT: Vor is also Russian for Thief, as in the Vory V Zakone.
-
I'm working on adding a bunch of the German terms to the glossary so they'll highlight. That'll help everyone out. I know I have a hard time keeping them straight myself.
Don't worry about the same vs mixed weapons issue for this discussion. We mix it up all the time in class, but this discussion sprang out of the longsword demo we performed at VARF, so for the sake of this discussion, it's OK to consider just longsword vs longsword. Also, with the German system, it's really not any different if you switch to single-hand sword, or sword and buckler. The techniques change very little.
With reasonably well made steel swords, we can do thrusts safely, as long as people wear their gorgets or at least have a decent bib on their fencing mask. We do just have to be careful to keep it under control.
-
I am still learning to string various attacks together on the offensive as well as the defensive.
I’ve found working a pell as a good means of developing attack and defense then counter attack combinations which can become fairly elaborate as you try to visualize the parries and counter moves an opponent could take and let that lead into your next angle of attack. – Several training partners have told me that I make some of my attacks from unconventional angles, which derives from my work with the pell.
A good place to start when dueling is to consider which guard your opponent is in and maneuvering yourself and taking a guard (usually vom tag) to launch an attack to break that particular guard they are in. Then expand upon that concept by working into a particular attack from a guard not considered to be optimum to initiate the appropriate Meisterhau verses the guard they are in.
My own experience shows me that I am either on the offensive or the defensive with little thought about swapping between the two.
I am having to consciously think about 1-2 attacks max followed by backing out of range with a guard or an attack.
Currently I find that I attack/parry and I'm still in close. I want to keep pressing the attack but I can't because I haven't thought that far ahead...
Another thing I also learned is trying to have a good spatial awareness of how big your sword is, how to catch your opponent's blade and either deflect, parry or redirect the blade to open something else up. After that is done, then realizing and being able to analyze what is now open and can be struck as part of the parry, or taking the option to fly out of the melee to reset.
Everyone struggles with this. Everyone! Those that have been dueling longer have a much deeper repertoire to draw from but the key conditional modifier is that every engagement is different. No two binds with the blades are the same and every disengagement holds the potential of leaving a line of attack open to be exploited by an opponent with a little better reflexes and tactical perception at that given moment but all in all judging from your perceptions you are well on your way in developing a keen fighting instinct. :)
-
I am having to consciously think about 1-2 attacks max followed by backing out of range with a guard or an attack.
"Flow" is one of the hardest skills to get and an easy one to lose as it's 50/50 mental & physical.
Do you do any Eastern Martial Arts? The same things that let you flow in those will let you flow here. I have been recently told that my form has just sucked (it has) & for some reason my flow has left me. I think it's because I worry about my shoulders giving out, thusly not giving myself to the fight, and thusly put my shoulders in greater danger of injury.
Strange as it seems, good circuit training in the gym will help. Working the whole body while zoning out will help.
-
Sir Brian, I'm in the process of getting that video. Things have been busy, so I haven't had a chance yet to get my paws on the video camera.
My biggest thing right now is trying to get my cuts speed up, and being able to string them into combinations. Also trying to get myself to correctly break a guard. I need to get myself that pell....
-
Also trying to get myself to correctly break a guard.
This is a tricky one. While you do want to instinctively flow into the correct attack based on what guard your opponent is, the problem is that the other guy will probably be expecting that. So if you want to be less predictable, you need to not always do the "right" thing here, and instead do something else. So if you're not naturally falling right into the "correct" attack all the time, as long as you can do it sometimes, you're probably not that bad off.
-
Also trying to get myself to correctly break a guard.
This is a tricky one. While you do want to instinctively flow into the correct attack based on what guard your opponent is, the problem is that the other guy will probably be expecting that. So if you want to be less predictable, you need to not always do the "right" thing here, and instead do something else. So if you're not naturally falling right into the "correct" attack all the time, as long as you can do it sometimes, you're probably not that bad off.
Bingo! Sir Edward is absolutely correct. Everyone knows which Meisterhau conquers which guard therefore unless you intend to stay in the nach and hope to land a riposte or stop thrust you will have to engage surreptitiously to their open line from an unconventional angle.
i.e. Instead of executing a Krumphau to an Ochs guard try an unterhau to the opposite lower quadrant for a couple of exchanges when your opponent takes that guard. Even if you don't get past their parry you are essentially 'conditioning' your opponent to expect that attack angle from you when they are in that particular guard. Then on the third or four go at their Ochs guard you execute a krumphau. - Remember our first duel? You relied upon the thrust once too often and on the third time you tried it I voided it entirely and stepped into your line with my Oberhau. I was able to do that because I 'knew' you would probably continue with what you thought was working out for you, but you cannot expect your opponent to so readily accommodate you in such a manner and so you must anticipate that they will figure out your shenanigans fairly quickly and do the exact opposite of what you want or expect them to do. As a general rule expect your opponent to be at least as good or far better than you and engage them accordingly. ;)
-
Bingo! Sir Edward is absolutely correct. Everyone knows which Meisterhau conquers which guard therefore unless you intend to stay in the nach and hope to land a riposte or stop thrust you will have to engage surreptitiously to their open line from an unconventional angle.
i.e. Instead of executing a Krumphau to an Ochs guard try an unterhau to the opposite lower quadrant for a couple of exchanges when your opponent takes that guard. Even if you don't get past their parry you are essentially 'conditioning' your opponent to expect that attack angle from you when they are in that particular guard. Then on the third or four go at their Ochs guard you execute a krumphau. - Remember our first duel? You relied upon the thrust once too often and on the third time you tried it I voided it entirely and stepped into your line with my Oberhau. I was able to do that because I 'knew' you would probably continue with what you thought was working out for you, but you cannot expect your opponent to so readily accommodate you in such a manner and so you must anticipate that they will figure out your shenanigans fairly quickly and do the exact opposite of what you want or expect them to do. As a general rule expect your opponent to be at least as good or far better than you and engage them accordingly.
Quite true indeed, the better skilled opponent will use anything in his repertoire to stop his opponent's offense and to get the better of the situation.
Best advice is to mix up your fighting strategies and adjust according to what your opponent throws at you.
-
Sir Brian, I'm in the process of getting that video. Things have been busy, so I haven't had a chance yet to get my paws on the video camera.
My biggest thing right now is trying to get my cuts speed up, and being able to string them into combinations. Also trying to get myself to correctly break a guard. I need to get myself that pell....
I'm working on the one my wife recorded too. It's 436MB, and we have it on the PC, but way too big to email or post; I might just burn a CD and have it sent via sneaker-net.
-
I'm working on the one my wife recorded too. It's 436MB, and we have it on the PC, but way too big to email or post; I might just burn a CD and have it sent via sneaker-net.
Break it up into pieces & load it onto Youtube or put it into your Google Docs account & send out a download link. If you don't have Movie Maker I would be happy to do it for you. :)
BTW why so large? 486 mb is bigger than some of the Game Of Thrones episodes I have.
-
Probably a raw AVI from the camera. It can always be re-compressed into something smaller, of course. How long is the video?
-
Good conversation topic to have. Tactics & techniques are always worth sharing as are video footage of actual combat. Even training instructors are always the student, learning & improving. I love to practice my combat technique so I can improve myself. Fighting is a practical skill that always needs improvement so it's not forgotten or sloppy.
-
Probably a raw AVI from the camera. It can always be re-compressed into something smaller, of course. How long is the video?
Yep, uncompressed, "fresh from the factory". It's 3:35 long. The compressed / mangled / webified video is here:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10150934847752372&set=t.1132478990&type=3&theater (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10150934847752372&set=t.1132478990&type=3&theater)
Not sure if that's public or will work... but we'll figure out something for getting it posted. I'm a bit ashamed of it since it's the only demo I wasn't in harness, but totally my fault anyway. :) A few good exchanges in there that should be worthy of discussion.
-
It looks like thats the wrong link. :(
-
It comes up for me, but we're friended on facebook, so that's probably why.
-
It comes up for me, but we're friended on facebook, so that's probably why.
OK, yep, thought that might be the case, since it just says "custom" and not "public", but it's not on my page, so I can't do anything with it. I'll get a copy to you sometime soon.