The Iron Chicken stance has got to go (SCA).

[Thorsteinn]

OK.. I got to say this: The Iron Chicken stance has got to go. It's mildly dishonorable, and not really historic.

If were all armoured like in 1066 then there are no basket hilts and no gauntlets, and while chopping at someones hand may not be telling, it certainly is possible if he puts his stationary hand out there to be hit!

Thus using, what in period would be an unarmoured hand, to cover your head because you are relying upon the honor of your opponent to not strike your hand like a fool deserves is dumb, unhistoric (even for us), and dishonorable. Let alone what it would do for your sword, and what it is doing to your shoulder.

The Iron Chicken, and all it's derivatives, have got to go. They are crap. Stupid dishonorable crap.

Discuss.

-Ivan

[SirNathanQ]

Well ou can tell by the name that it's a coward's tool afterall.....

But could you provide pictures? I would like to see this lunacy.

[Thorsteinn]

I disagree about the guy in the 1st shot a little bit, it looks like a modified Iron chicken but I'm probably wrong as I cannot see his sword position. One guy sarcastically related it to something called "Guardia di Testa"

"The guy on his knees in this picture is in a fairly typical SCA high guard (not "iron chicken"):"- Blaine de Navarre


"The guy on the right in this picture is in what I would call true "iron chicken":"-Blaine de Navarre


Not Guardia del Pollo di Ferro:

(Ox guard (Left), High guard (Right). From here: Viking Sword and Shield Combat Technique and Viking Shields.)

 Those are good guards, and they do not look like Guardia del Pollo di Ferro.


-Ivan

[Sir Edward]

Yeah, the Iron Chicken strikes me as gaming the system via the rules. Any rule system will be susceptible to abuses, unfortunately. Personally I think to some degree this is inevitable when strikes to the hand and below the knee are disallowed, since the person can expose both their hands and their feet safely in an unrealistic way. I'd want to take the fingers off, or cut to the lower leg, since they're exposed.

I guess one potential side-effect here, is that the person doing this is exposing themselves to "being taught a lesson" by their opponent. I don't advocate anyone intentionally causing pain to their opponent, but the possibility exists that someone will target these "off target" areas anyway, and hit hard. Personally I'd rather use real guards and real technique, and not get hit at all.

If the blade gets past my defense and touches me, I feel I've failed to defend properly. Even if the rules of that bout discard the point.

EDIT: I also had a thought. I think the SCA rules can also allow some people to use shields that are larger than would have been used historically. Aircraft aluminum has revolutionized shield-making. But back in the day, a large shield would get in your own way, perhaps worse than it gets in the way of your opponent.

[Thorsteinn]

I would say that I love about 95% of SCA combat. I even love the knee fighting as it adds a whole new side to how to beat an opponent, and I total get why we do not target where we do and I am behind the various reasons for it.

But if you were to imagine a behould tourney held in 1066 that even used a padded sword tip & a hardened leather face guard, but didn't do anything for the hands. Then you added in the Rules of the Lists, and thus discounted hands and lower legs as targets...

... you STILL wouldn't see folks using the Iron Chicken. They had an awareness that this would be training for war, and even baring that you wouldn't put your bare hand hanging out where it could be hit even accidentally. Heck, they don't even use that guard in Escrima right?

Iron Chicken bothers me as a Martial Artist, an SCA Fighter, and a West Kingdom Marshal.

-Ivan

[Sir James A]

They had an awareness that this would be training for war, and even baring that you wouldn't put your bare hand hanging out where it could be hit even accidentally.

I think you've answered your own question right there - to most of us, it's a game. To them, it was a mild distraction and test of skill for the life and death battles they would fight.

[Thorsteinn]

From the SCA Marshals Handbook:

III. CONVENTIONS OF COMBAT
-B. Behavior on the Field
--6. Any behavior that takes deliberate advantage of an opponent’s chivalry or safety-consciousness, or that takes deliberate unfair advantage of an opponent, is prohibited.
...
Western Customs:
14. Extend the utmost courtesy to your opponent. You do each other honor by
meeting on the field. If there is question regarding a point of honor (such as blow
strength), give your opponent the benefit of the doubt as far as is reasonable.

V. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF BLOWS
-B. When judging the effect of blows, all fighters are presumed to be fully armored. Special tournaments or combat rules may redefine what areas of the body are armored, and to what extent, so long as all the participants are made aware of the special conditions prior to the start of combat.
---1. All “fully armored” fighters are presumed to be wearing a chain hauberk over a padded gambeson, with boiled leather arm and leg defenses and an open-faced iron helm with a nasal. The helm may be presumed by Kingdom convention to include a very light chain mail drape, permitting vision and resisting cuts by the mere touch of a bladed weapon.

Edit 3/28/11: I have just talked to my Step-dad (Sir Connor M. FitzJames), and he has told me that while it is not expressly stated in the rules, it has been interpreted in the past to be part of the sword by Kingdom EM's.

Here's MY take: If you use the front and side part of the basket hilt that cover's the fist to repeatedly & purposefully block my shot and/or deny me a legal target area you are taking advantage of my Honor, and are insulting all those wonderful folks who have taken such wonderful steps to make armour on the field more historic. You are saying that you just don't care if you are taking advantage of an unfair ruling. A ruling a man with a gauntlet & cross guard just can't.

Now, do not take my posts to mean that I dislike basket hilts. I don't. I love 'em. I use 'em. I think they are one of the best way's to get folks on the field with safe hands, and I don't blame anyone for making good single sword gauntlets the last thing they improve on their kit. Hey I know that good SS gauntlets are expensive and hard to get. I know that some folks mundane jobs depend on them having healthy hands on Monday, and that, for them, basket hilts are the only way to go.

But what I do not agree with is having someone use their opponents Honor & Training against them by gaming the Rules. It isn't right, it isn't fair, and it isn't Honorable or Chivalrous.

If you do it to me then I will concede the Fight and let you take your hollow Victory, knowing that you will leave your Renown on the Field.

-Ivan

(Note: I am attaching a pic of basket hilts & crosshilts to help explain my post & my thinking.
Grey is Sword area hat may be struck, blocked with or anviled dead as appropriate.
Blue is illegal target area (the hand), and should not be struck, or purposefully blocked with. (Remember: Basket hilts did not occur for most of our period on war swords, especially not for 'Viking Age' types.)
Red is equivalent & valid parrying/blocking area.)