| Author |
Messages |
|
Kristophe
Provost
Posts:82
 |
| 08/19/2006 8:49 AM |
 Alert
|
Ramon:
While I hesitate to put words into Samuael's mouth I think this is what's being conveyed:
The 'win' situation of any contest is shaped in part by the rules governing the contest. IE: modern fencing allows for the 'tip flick' whereas it would never actually work with a period blade. It sounds like the Tattershall rules have requirements regarding the kinds of actions that are acceptable in certain situations. Namely, permitted strategy is designed to provide the maximum protection for the fighter: attacks with opposition, contra-guardia, stringere etc. It sounds like they're working to reduce 'rules lawyering'.
|
|
|
|
|
jgreywolf
Hai Gioco?
Posts:685
|
| 08/19/2006 2:51 PM |
Alert
|
Perhaps it has something to do with my own state of mind when I read the post, or the grammar used....
I was having a very hard time following what it was that Samuael was trying to say. After the third or fifth read though I was able to get it, but now I am not following what you are saying.  Let's just assume it is something on my end.
I would love to see the "Tattershall" rules. Being a TSD Member for the past 4 years or so, I am not sure if I know 100% what these are. |
|
Justin Greywolf (SCA: Ramon Diaz de la Vega)
Director
Old World Martial Arts - Teaching Historical Italian Swordplay in the Pacific Northwest |
|
|
Blayde
Free Scholar
Posts:56
|
| 08/28/2006 9:39 PM |
Alert
|
I play a lot of online FPS (First Person Shooters), and the same problem exists. There are not enough consequences for poor behavior. The good players have a good K/D ratio meaning they shoot straighter, faster, better, but it doesn't mean they do what a smart soldier would do under the same circumstances. The penalty for death is 15 seconds in the rez queue. Now, there are some games where everyone starts and when you die, you wait. In those games, players play more defensive. Unfortunately, without serious pain, you can't recreate an actual duel. And, even smart players have to take chances. You are faced with a situation where if you stand still you die. So, with limited choices, you make your choice and live with the consequences. Fencing is no different.
In some historical fencing groups, blunts are smaller and they hit harder. My experience is most of those guys play a more defensive game due to the pain factor. Rules such as single elim, double kills aren't replayed, keep wounds, etc., help to promote realistic play but it definitely starts with instruction. It should be taught that defense is the meaning of "fence."
So, it appears to be the common belief that the 17th century fighters fought way different from what we do today. I don't believe that to be the case. Here's why.
So, if this were the case, then why were there so many documented double kills in historical duels? Why were so many nobles killed, many from wounds days after, and often both combatants?
Secondly, why is it that DiGrassi, Saviolo and many other masters went their whole lives without having to actually kill anyone. Fabris, according to differing accounts, may or may not have been an assassin. That being the case, how can we say that the historical masters trained as if their life was on the line? Obviously, it never really was since they never fought any duels and both Fabris and Capo Ferro were quite old when their treatises were published with no historical record of ever having fought a duel. Unfortunately, and we don't have a lot of evidence, only statistics, many of their students may have died as the result of the teachings of their master. So, how do we know that Saviolo was any good? How do we know that Benetti's style was better than Silvers? How do we know that some other guy who's manual wasn't published was better than Capo Ferro?
What I'm getting at, is back in the day, masters and students may have trained for defense, but after sparring in class for years and getting hit hundreds of times without really dying, did those students adapt the proper defense when they eventually fought a duel, or did they revert to the practice field? It's common knowledge that marines and soldiers in battle do many many foolish things at risk of their lives in an attempt to kill the enemy. This goes back to limited choices and limited time to make the choice. All you have to do is read the accounts of all the valor medals given out in the past century, and you'll know what I mean. A life threatening situation doesn't always result in the expected behavior of preservation first. Many times, wanting to kill the other guy causes foolish behavior. So, are we really that far off from reality? My guess is not as far as one might think.
|
|
|
|
|
Tora
Provost
Posts:105
|
| 08/29/2006 9:20 AM |
Alert
|
I certainly have read a lot about undistinguished "nobles" and the like going out and running each other through in their enthusiasm to kill the other guy--and usually over some perceived slight rather than a real one, no less. What I have not read a whole lot about is period masters dueling with other period masters--or even just dueling with someone who challenged them.
In Japan there is documentation galore about Miyamoto Musashi defeating his first swordmaster when he was barely into his teens. As more and more swordmasters fell to him over the years and his notoriety grew, he himself was challenged again and again by others who wanted the same fame for themselves but, oddly, we don't see that in the European masters--at least not documented anyway.
I know about Aldo Nadi's duel and some others that occurred in more recent times, but if anyone knows where I could find a documentable account or two between two period masters, or just a period master and a challenger, I'd love to read about it.
Tora |
|
Tora
I'm the optimist who plans for when the pessimist is right. |
|
|
Alvarro
Too many posts...
Posts:301
|
| 08/29/2006 9:06 PM |
Alert
|
http://www.the-exiles.org/FioreProject/Project.htm
Click on the Getty Translation, read Fiore's intro. Go find a really good history book and read up the names of the people he mentions as his students.
For the later period rapier manuals...We have an open fight night on friday nights. Students face all comers, from every martial art style you can name, including modern fencing and SCA heavy. Mostly with rapier, but hey, we aren't picky. We are a duelling school. The martial art system works. |
|
Prudence. Temperance. Fortitude. Justice. |
|
|
Tora
Provost
Posts:105
|
| 08/30/2006 8:53 AM |
Alert
|
For the later period rapier manuals...We have an open fight night on friday nights. Students face all comers, from every martial art style you can name, including modern fencing and SCA heavy. Mostly with rapier, but hey, we aren't picky. We are a duelling school. The martial art system works.
It sounds to me like you guys know how to have fun. I might have to make a trip up there some Friday and say hello.
Tora
|
|
Tora
I'm the optimist who plans for when the pessimist is right. |
|
|
Alvarro
Too many posts...
Posts:301
|
| 08/30/2006 9:59 AM |
Alert
|
| Tora, you'd have a hoot. Knife, quarterstaff, singlestick, longsword, submission wrestling...and a great pub with really good french fries just around the corner. Aaaannd...the occasional special guest. Give us a heads up before you come, and Devon and I will make sure we're there. We don't make every fight night, since we teach from dawn til midnight the rest of the week... |
|
Prudence. Temperance. Fortitude. Justice. |
|
|
Tora
Provost
Posts:105
|
| 08/30/2006 6:40 PM |
Alert
|
Well, if you're going to throw good french fries into it too then I have to come (a bit of an afficionado, I am). I have classes in a new degree kicking off in a couple of weeks, but as soon as I settle into a rhythm I'll let you know I'm on my way up.
Tora |
|
Tora
I'm the optimist who plans for when the pessimist is right. |
|
|
Samauel
Free Scholar
Posts:58
|
| 08/30/2006 10:33 PM |
Alert
|
| Tora, if you have room some time, I'll split the gas with you. |
|
|
|
|
Tora
Provost
Posts:105
|
| 08/31/2006 8:15 AM |
Alert
|
Sure, sounds good.
Tora |
|
Tora
I'm the optimist who plans for when the pessimist is right. |
|
|
warwick
Provost
Posts:125
|
| 09/04/2006 10:16 AM |
Alert
|
Utilising period technique is a conscious decision, just like properly paying attention to the threat of your opponent's blade is a conscious decision (btw my technique for teaching this respect is allowing them to pez themselves on my bonker - when I hear complaints of hard hits I recommend they stop parrying with their face).
Deconstructing Digrassi several years ago we realised we could perform 95% of his techniques in SCA combat - the 5% we couldn't use were the progression finishers - where you finish with your blade buried up to the hilt in your opponent's body. But with Digrassi if you're at that point you've already won your SCA fight.
How to train people out of accepting the possibility of a double kill when they attack? Call them on it in practice - call it out as a bad habit and poor technique. As teachers it's our responsibility. I don't support "how to win in the SCA" training styles for the simple reason that I believe we should promote period technique at all times. In the long run they'll be better fencers for it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
mahee_of_acre
Scholar
Posts:26
|
| 09/04/2006 5:26 PM |
Alert
|
| Everyone should get a real blade in their hand every now and then and do some test cutting/thrusting. This does help. |
|
Your servant,
mahee |
|
|
|