John Clement, not being knightly.... again.

[Sir James A]

For one, you could hardly call yourself the best if you've gone largely unchallenged by worthy opponents- beating up on your students only proves you can beat them.

Shhhhhh, Charlie Andrews will hear you.

[Sir William]

LOL @ the Andrews reference

Yea...you get me.

[Ian]

Because John Clements is not saying he can beat everyone in the world in a sword fight like those stupid chi ball fools.  He's not claiming that at all, no one in WMA is claiming they're the ones who can beat everyone else.  It's about understanding a lost art, not about who can beat who at it.  The whole point of HEMA/WMA is to figure out what the masters were teaching in the 14th/15th centuries and understand it.  It's a quest for knowledge and the practical application of that knowledge.  Fighting one another is how we begin to understand.  It's the process by which we unlock the mysteries because it reveals how biomechanics play in and what works and what doesn't.  Insisting that people fight each other to prove their prowess is misguided bravado that has little to do with the point of this particular martial art in the first place.

[Sir William]

I see your approach to it all, but I don't know if I agree with you Sir Ian; from my POV, the point of any martial art was guided by one underlying principle, regardless of which style you choose to study- to impose your will on your opponent and win.  HEMA/WMA, as you say, is to figure out what was taught, what was most effective- but the sole purpose of any of these arts was to best your opponent.  Nowadays, we have the luxury of taking up martial arts for any number of reasons- physical fitness, to learn discipline, holistic balance, and/or to defend one's self, or to study a lost art just for the sake of it or purely for sport as it is with most of us here- or any combination you care to come up with; still doesn't take away the original purpose of said art.  Also, I might add that the sword was made for but one purpose only- to kill.  Axes, maces, hammers, bows, arrows, daggers, knives, quarterstaves- all of these sorts of weapons had other uses, domestic and otherwise; not so with the sword.  That people have used it for other than what it was intended changes nothing.  And from a sporting perspective, it is always a competition, is it not?

As far as proving one's self goes...since Mr. Clements has given the bird to pretty much anyone outside of his circle, I don't see why someone similarly skilled in another style (or even the same, but from outside said circle) couldn't issue a challenge and have it accepted.  Naturally, he need not answer it- that's his choice.  However, and this is just my POV but if you're gonna talk the talk, you should also be able to (and willing) to walk the walk.

[Ian]

But Sir William, HEMA/WMA is not a developed martial art.  It is a but a fraction of a once developed martial art.  It's a martial art in it's infancy of rebirth.  I would agree with you if we were talking about fully developed Eastern Martial Arts where the actual techniques themselves are known, but your proficiency at them is what differs.  In HEMA/WMA, it is the very techniques that we are unsure of because no continuous line to the masters exists.  Without knowing the techniques, it is difficult to apply the same standards of who is better than who.

Mr. Clements hasn't really given the bird to everyone outside of his circle.  I would say he's surely given the bird to the SCA because of how he feels some people within the SCA misrepresent their sport as something historical, and I can't say I blame him there.  He actually disagrees on only a few points here and there and on certain techniques within the HEMA/WMA community, most famously, the Krumphau.  But he's not the villain everyone outside his circles make him out to be.  I would argue that it is the very people who claim we should all work together in peace and harmony who are equally responsible for John Clements being pushed from the rest of the HEMA community.

I don't see anyone clamoring for other HEMA/WMA teachers to go fight people.  It's just fun to pile on and hate the 'bad boy' of WMA.  I see a lot of hypocrisy within WMA with regards to how ARMA is treated.  People get mad at Clements for so vociferously defending his own opinions on techniques by doing the same about their own... And Clements isn't going around saying he can beat every other school in a sword fight, so why is the burden of proof to be laid upon his head?  I don't see people yelling and screaming for Christian Tobler to go fight someone to prove what he teaches, or anyone else for that matter.

[Thorsteinn]

JC has said more than once he is one of the best swordsmen on the planet, and that others don't count as Swordsmen because they do not meet his definition of the term, and has said that's why he turned down some challenges because he wasn't being challenged by "Real Swordsmen (tm)". As for Christian Tobler, if you challenged him and offered to pay for his travel and room & board then I bet he'd show up no problem. JC had that chance and blew off the folks at the last minute after initially agreeing to the deal.

So yeah... that's why I think say... Syr Gemini is a better swordsman, martial artist, and chivalrous man than JC ever will. Good example: When he got challenged very formally by a group to his north he went up there and took it up. Heck he even filmed it (see below). He beat the entire group and the head master 10 for 10 on their turf under their rules.

Gemini talks the talk, and walks the walk. He studied the masters and came to his own system that way. He teaches, he fights, he's gone into HEMA & SCA tourneys and won or placed well, and if you challenge him he'll kit up and say "Lets go". He's not alone in this attitude. I bet Jake Norwood, Paul Bellatrix, Axel Peterson, and more would & could show up JC in proving to be more than just words & dance moves.

http://youtu.be/f7nBMezkJgQ?t=4m13s

[Sir Edward]

I don't see anyone clamoring for other HEMA/WMA teachers to go fight people.  It's just fun to pile on and hate the 'bad boy' of WMA.  I see a lot of hypocrisy within WMA with regards to how ARMA is treated.  People get mad at Clements for so vociferously defending his own opinions on techniques by doing the same about their own... And Clements isn't going around saying he can beat every other school in a sword fight, so why is the burden of proof to be laid upon his head?  I don't see people yelling and screaming for Christian Tobler to go fight someone to prove what he teaches, or anyone else for that matter.

JC has said more than once he is one of the best swordsmen on the planet, and that others don't count as Swordsmen because they do not meet his definition of the term, and has said that's why he turned down some challenges because he wasn't being challenged by "Real Swordsmen (tm)". As for Christian Tobler, if you challenged him and offered to pay for his travel and room & board then I bet he'd show up no problem. JC had that chance and blew off the folks at the last minute after initially agreeing to the deal.

Interesting points here.

While I will agree that JC/ARMA probably does get heaped with an unfair amount of criticism, I still see the fault largely with JC/ARMA, as they have a long history of disparaging other WMA/HEMA practitioners and groups, not showing up for things they agreed to (especially if there was any sort of "honor match" or comparative process involved), self aggrandizing, and so on. When JC claimed to personally be the "rosetta stone" of historical sword fighting, I decided I can't really take him seriously anymore. It's a shame, because I know he's skilled and knowledgeable, but he's destroying his own credibility. He comes off as a complete narcissist.

Certainly, he doesn't have to prove anything to anyone. I'm sure he could mop the floor with a lot of the community's instructors, because of his athleticism and how much time he spends training. But he's just one man, so if he and his group believe he's the only one who is "correct", they're limiting themselves unnecessarily.

Again, I don't hate JC/ARMA, I just think it's a shame that they've gone off in this isolationist direction, and there's so much they could have done to avoid that, or still could do to come back into the larger community.

[Sir William]

You make a good point, Sir Ian- it is not yet a fully developed art...who is to say we know half of what we should?  With that said, does he really possess the wherewithal to cast aspersions when the truth really isn't fully known?  I'm no fan of the SCA or some of its denizens (present company excluded of course) but I'll use them as an example anyway.  Speculation being what it is, who is to say that what they do has no basis in history?  Its probably the closest thing to a tourney we're like to see this side of the pond...granted, there's a good bit of leeway that's allowed w/regard to being historically accurate, mostly for safety and inclusion reasons.  I know there's a lot of period nazis who take offense to anyone whose garb or accoutrements don't match their level of snuff but the majority of players don't for various reasons.  Yet, they indulge in armored combat on a much larger scale- as we all know, not every man on the field was a consummate swordsman, pikeman, archer or even knight, conscripts rarely are so who can honestly say whether or not how they go about it is totally inaccurate or not?  None of us were there...you can quote texts and cite pictorial references but those aren't always set down by people who witnessed the events.  I say take it w/a grain of salt when its necessary, or the whole shaker if it suits you- but none of us can say they truly know.

[Sir Vander Linde]

I unfortunately don't have the time to read this whole thing at the moment but here is my two cents.

John is a nice guy and we share similar opinions about the SCA and other HMB groups. I have also seen people he has challenge walk away from it, and I have also seen him lose a number of fights. He receives a lot  of hate because he defends his interpretations of martial science, and people don't like that it conflicts with their interpretations even though a majority have only looked at depictions with out reading the accompanying text. I have only ever disagreed with Clements once, and it was on use of sword and buckler. As for him acting knightly, well he never as far to my knowledge clamed to be.

Basically, he is either liked or hated, I have never met someone who held him in a neutral position, well maybe not never but very few.   

my 2 cents.

[Sir James A]

He studied the masters and came to his own system that way. He teaches, he fights, he's gone into HEMA & SCA tourneys and won or placed well

If he didn't win, and "placed well"... that means he lost to someone, at some point. Does that mean he has no credibility at all any more?

Would that be different from JC showing up to spar with someone, and losing? Would that one fight between JC and someone make or break his "career"?

[Ian]

You make a good point, Sir Ian- it is not yet a fully developed art...who is to say we know half of what we should?  With that said, does he really possess the wherewithal to cast aspersions when the truth really isn't fully known?  I'm no fan of the SCA or some of its denizens (present company excluded of course) but I'll use them as an example anyway.  Speculation being what it is, who is to say that what they do has no basis in history?  Its probably the closest thing to a tourney we're like to see this side of the pond...granted, there's a good bit of leeway that's allowed w/regard to being historically accurate, mostly for safety and inclusion reasons.  I know there's a lot of period nazis who take offense to anyone whose garb or accoutrements don't match their level of snuff but the majority of players don't for various reasons.  Yet, they indulge in armored combat on a much larger scale- as we all know, not every man on the field was a consummate swordsman, pikeman, archer or even knight, conscripts rarely are so who can honestly say whether or not how they go about it is totally inaccurate or not?  None of us were there...you can quote texts and cite pictorial references but those aren't always set down by people who witnessed the events.  I say take it w/a grain of salt when its necessary, or the whole shaker if it suits you- but none of us can say they truly know.

Well, we can almost certainly say that what the SCA does has no basis in history.  Read any surviving treatise on the sword, polearm, messer... whatever, and show me SCA techniques.  I'm not talking about the way they dress and depict themselves.  I'm talking about the techniques they use in their wars and heavy fighting.  Wrap shots, and bizarre guards etc.  These techniques are honed and designed for one specific purpose, and that is to be good at SCA heavy.  They were never intended to be based on historical techniques.  They came up with a game of hitting people with sticks and pretend their swords, they were never designed to use them like an actual sword was used in period.  Most importantly, this is not something the SCA should take offense too, because it's simply it's own sport. 

The problem JC has is that so many people in the SCA get all bent out of shape when you dare claim what they do is not a historical martial art.  It was never intended to be!  It doesn't look like any surviving text on real historical martial arts!  It was invented by a bunch of people looking to have fun in armor in the 70's!  Certain members of the SCA misrepresent what they do as a historical martial art to the public at demos etc... this is a problem when people like us are trying to bring real historical martial arts to the public and we literally have to battle the SCA's misinformation.  I'm not claiming all SCA members do this, but the few who do cause a lot of damage to the minds of the public interested in real historical swordsmanship.  Why can't it just be fun for fun's sake and be it's own sport?  I don't get it.... It's like Renaissance Faire organizers getting offended because Living History enthusiasts assert that a Ren Faire is primarily for entertainment and not history.  It's the same thing with SCA vs HEMA.

I unfortunately don't have the time to read this whole thing at the moment but here is my two cents.

John is a nice guy and we share similar opinions about the SCA and other HMB groups. I have also seen people he has challenge walk away from it, and I have also seen him lose a number of fights. He receives a lot  of hate because he defends his interpretations of martial science, and people don't like that it conflicts with their interpretations even though a majority have only looked at depictions with out reading the accompanying text. I have only ever disagreed with Clements once, and it was on use of sword and buckler. As for him acting knightly, well he never as far to my knowledge clamed to be.

Basically, he is either liked or hated, I have never met someone who held him in a neutral position, well maybe not never but very few.   

my 2 cents.

Well said.

[Thorsteinn]

If he didn't win, and "placed well"... that means he lost to someone, at some point. Does that mean he has no credibility at all any more?

Would that be different from JC showing up to spar with someone, and losing? Would that one fight between JC and someone make or break his "career"?

Gemini has never said he is King & God of the One True Path, (nor has Tobler, Capwell, Loades, & others), but it seems often to me that that's exactly what JC is saying. Gemini has entered Combatcon, La Prova Dura, Crown, Coronet, & other EMA & WMA tourney's. He faced other Ways, changed his style, and is constantly improving. I don't really see that as much in ARMA.

I don't care if JC wins or loses. It's not about winning or losing. It's about being more than just words & not being a braggart. Hell I have more honest fight vids, both SCA & HEMA, out there than JC cause I win & lose in them in honest contest.

Words feed Air. Deeds feed Ravens.

On a side note: Is it not nifty that folks like Christian Tobler exist? Still reading my free copy of Fighting with the German Longsword. Still very much liking the continued good work of Freelance Academy Press.

[Sir Edward]

On the lighter side... 10 minute flourish.

[Lord Dane]

It has a nice beat & I can dance to it. 

[Sir Wolf]