I really like this vid. Virtually all of the vids on youtube displaying traditional European martial arts are done by obese or unathletic nerds who have about as much skill and grace as that fat star wars kid. It makes traditional European martial ats look so bad. Finally some skilled and athletic traditional fencers for once! You do exist!
PS. To anyone out there who's thinking of posting your own vids, if you haven't mastered the techniques and you're not in shape, please don't post them!
@TaskForceSixTwoSix I don't care about a man's weigh if he has a sword, and knows how to handle it. Or maybe a little, if he's very obese, I'm pretty sure I can run away.
But point being, skill weighs more than fitness. Pun intended ;P
@kaymo211 lol the reason they look similar is because the guy who choreographed that fight scene studies traditional european sword fighting. and if your a starwars fanboy like me youd no that light saber forms are completely ripped off 15th century longsword ;)
@xtcarnage15586 There are alot of things imo that should piss of people way more than a false claim that Knights lacked martial arts. But to each his/her own :D
With that said those nylons are very interesting, they can take quite a beating or ?
@Giagantus Martial arts is just a fancy way for saying a basic instinctive act = figthing. people like relabling it giving it different meaning to what ever bias they have build around it. heck to bucks fighting are doing martial arts in some way just than as intelectually though out. martial arts doesnt even mean self defense in many of the asian terms etheir . i just means defensive skill still against someone wiht arms or withi out arms(literal meaning) aka figthing
@kaindrg I respectfully disagree. Animals fight, but they do not practice martial arts. For something to be a martial art, it must involve the intent to hurt another person or defend oneself without relying solely on instinct. A martial art must include techniques, or disciplines, or practices (physical or mental) that improve one's fighting ability. Without learning *how* to fight better, as you say, you are not practicing martial arts.
@xtcarnage15586 fighting by definition is martial arts we could be a bunch of untrained scrubs and it would still be martials arts. when people say can u teach to fight i say reword that o "can u teach me to fight better"
it's great except at 0:33...WTF?! that's not any historical or realistic cut I've ever seen! LOL It happens, I know. I'd be lying if i said I never grabbed my rapier with both hands and swung it like a hammer just 'cause. Cool fight guys.
Gripping the longsword blade with two hands and swinging the hilt part at a person is called the "mordhau" or "murder-stroke", typically used against armored opponents as one would use the cross as a blunt hammer. You can see it in Talhoffer's text.
One hand on the blade and one on the hilt is known as halfswording; Fiore de Liberi's treatise shows the stances.
In this case I think Jake was in that position to set up for a one-handed swipe to the legs. I do that move a lot too.
Gripping the Longsword blade is both historical, and very common. This is known as halfswording. It can be found throughout the period source literature.
Actually I don't remember why those are in there. I think I put them there to help people looking at larp/SCA videos understand what more realistic swordplay looks like. I know that when I first started looking for swordsmanship stuff on the internet all I could find at first was SCA and boffer fighting. Fortunately I found ARMA before I joined either of those groups.
Allow me to explain to the YouTube community what I meant by everything is an anecdote. Everything starts out as someones tale or experience,and this is an anecdote. If one is lucky, it is published in a journal where narrow-minded people who obviously do not have the capacity to learn or understand anything outside of those lucky few published anecdotes read it and worship it, follow it so strictly that they take all the creativity and true learning out of it. Everything starts as an anecdote.
...Not really. Why do you keep mentioning publication? That's not the only non-anecdotal type of evidence. /Proof/ is what makes something not an anecdote. Mind you also, that anecdotal evidence is also based upon not having enough evidence to support an argument. For example, photographic, DNA, Measurements, etc, when all the evidence is available, are not anecdotal. Sure, they sometimes require faith, but they have more evidence and proof than a simple story.
Well then I have proof, which has been viewed by some, obviously not by you. So you are saying it is not an anecdote. Yes, my stories provide proof because they have been replicated amongst friends and acquaintances who live in my area. So I have people to support my claims. I could make a video I suppose...Would that tickle your taste buds?
Well, again, there's no way for me to know this. However, this is a discussion to be taken to /MyArmoury/. Their resources considering this point, that two foot cuts are as incapacitating and penetrating as you claim, are much greater than my own.
Note that I never stated that clothing, wool, and leather are immune to cuts.
allow me to quote you...You implied quite a bit in the following: or instance, short cuts are fouled by clothing. Your opponents would all have to be naked in order to target them effectively
You mentioned cotton. If they are wearing thick leather I wouldn't bother using a sword, and big cuts would just hurt more...they wouldn't draw blood. If they were wearing thick leather I would reply with a naginata or a bow.
Yes, I asked if it was cotton, because cotton would /not/ be a reliable material.
A sword should, if you have a good cut, go through the leather. Depends on the thickness of course. I wouldn't trust it against a Gambeson though. Thrusts would be more appropriate for that.
I have a gambeson. Will I shred it....No. I like my gambeson. But I could shred some leather for you and put it on film if it makes you happy. However, how thick is a person's street clothing going to be. If you walk around in a thick leather coat then you are going to get hot fast (assuming it is sunny). I find leather also restricts movement. Most clothes are made out of cotton so that argument is irrelevant, being as most people where clothes consisting of cotton.
Everything /starting/(A trait of origin) as an anecdote is a distinctly different argument from everything /being/ (A trait of being) an anecdote. For example, I'll demonstrate the difference.
Anecdotal evidence; I drove from home to the bank on January 1st, 2008, and got a traffic ticket.
Non-anecdotal evidence; I drove from home to bank on January 1st, 2008, and got a ticket. (The person hands you the ticket, which verifies the account.)
Another example to illustrate by point of origin versus being is that while every human /starts/ as a fetus, that does not mean /everyone/ is a fetus. Obviously not, the circumstances of form and function don't warrant that.
That is a horrible analogy. An anecdote is a story. You claim its no longer an anecdote if it is proven. So I film my story, it is still my story, only it is on film and can be a proven story. That does not change the fact it is a story, an incident.
My cookie and swordery analogy was better (not meant as an insult...I just want to be immature and brag about the analogy because I like cookies)
...And that was a story. The difference is that one story had no evidence, and another story had more evidence. Therefore, one is an anecdote, and the other is not really an anecdote. And filming something doesn't prove it, it's recording the evidence in some manner which can be verified.
Of course it proves it. You do not want me to be right. If I film what I say and put it on youtube for you to see, proves to you that that cloth and tree were cut. You are afraid I am right and refuse to call it proof because you may be wrong.
Read my post again. I said filming something doesn't prove something. That means that FILM DOESN'T PROVE THINGS. That is, Film is not exclusive to proof. It has to be any form of record, including but not limited to film. Read people's posts more closely.
No it doesn't. Read /that/ post again. "And filming something doesn't prove it, it's recording the evidence in some manner which can be verified. "
I'm stating that film is not exclusive proof. Does film record evidence, like I allowed for? Yes. This makes film /a/ form of proof, just like I've been saying. You need to learn to read people's posts more closely.
I will be sure to hold my tongue on myarmoury, so long as you hold yours, you will note that your first two comments were rude and inflammatory, they continued in that fashion until very very very recently.
Your distance game with Vom Tag, seems pretty ideal with even footing. The commitment your imagining is a hell of a lot easier to sustain when your footing is sure. Have you ever cut someone, or been cut by anybody? Your constant cry when your method has been challenged has been "this is anecdotal" but all evidence is anecdotal. The evidence you throw out as an alternative was anecdotal until it was copied into one of your precious books.
How long have I been studying the sword? Four or five years now. How long have the people I've learned from been studying? A collection of years more than either of us have existed. My strength of knowledge is not from my own limited experience, but from learning from the experiences of many other people who I've had correspondence and education from.
Caliburnis this will take longer than 500 characters: You have no idea of the cutting power of a good sword. You are obviously in disagreement with the oldest extant European sword manual, I.33, which regularly deals in punishing the arms. It was an unarmoured (civilian) system, but the monks appear not to have found the sleeves and cloaks to be as cut-proof as our correspondent imagines. Ive cut through combined leather and Kevlar without much effort, so Im inclined to side with the monks
When did I say clothes are cut-proof? The cuts in I.33 use a lot more 'arch' than two feet cuts. Four, or perhaps three, but not 'no more than two feet'.
Look, it is apparent that you have no idea what a sharp blade can do...when done properly. If you become skilled enough to actually be able to draw your cuts as an alternative to big swings, you will note the effect it has against flesh, even with clothing.
You know what. I'm going to invite you to a discussion on another forum with people who have much more adequate resources than I do. Come to a website called Myarmoury (dot) com, and let's discuss your points there.
I yes, I love that site. The people are snooty but the swords are amazing. Fiorinda Maia is the Durer Bastard Sword he reviews on it. Boy, did that thing cut threw almost anything (excluding armor of course) but clothes *whoosh*. I found it one day, and came off a week later.
You probably didn't format it correctly. Go to the ARMA's website and look for a video in their video lists with the following description "Cutting at a straw mat, John C. gives an impromptu demo explanation of how short quick downward chops even with a very sharp straight sword may not ".
As for now caliburnis, I bid you ado. I will undoubtedly pick this discussion up later but I want to go to bed and enjoy a nice holiday. As for yourself, enjoy and I will banter and bicker with you soon enough =)
I love the ARMA vids on here...people actually showing skill and fighting like they're trying to kill each other. It's a relief from all the Brothers at Arms nonsense.
Holding one's sword above one's head with the point tilted backwards is in fact a guard called "Vom tag" meaning "From the roof". It is specifically mentioned by several masters when teaching unarmored longsword. As well as adding power, holding the weapon in such a way also prevents your opponent from binding it up or playing off of it. It also allows the use of almost any cut. That and Alber (holding the hilt near your navel with the tip pointing down) are my two favorite guards.
You do not need power. You need to slice the muscle, that way they can not attack. Waving a sword about your head creates an opening, telegraphs your attack, and all it does is create unnecessary power. Small slicing cuts are quicker and harder to block, and they can cut their wrists and fingers without bringing yourself into their target range.
What facts? Tell me, how much experience do you have in longsword, or any serious sword art sparring? All the techniques demonstrated here have been well proven by experienced martial artists in freeplay against other skilled people. I have tried them as well and they work. While small cuts have their place as well, stronger attacks are vital to longsword fencing.
Several years experience in unarmored longsword swordery. I train under a man experienced in double-sword, katana, longsword, falchion, sword and buckler, knife, nunchaku, tonfa, english warhammer, and italian/german mace All those techniques are done against other people bearing similar technique. Against someone who fights with small quick cuts to fingers and wrists those big cuts are going to get less effective because every time they wind up they reveal themselves to another small cut.
I think you are missing the point. The techniques demonstrated are historical. The participants are following German (and maybe a bit of Italian) longsword treatises. Your experience seems to be more eastern than western MA. The "sword-over-the-head" (one variant of Vom Tag...aka Posta Falcone [Vadi]) stance is valid in context. Furthermore, I've not heard of any treatise on "italian/german mace" or "english warhammer". Do you mean Tallhoffer? English documents are notoriously rare.
Eastern styles are also fond of big cuts. The idea is to literally cut the enemy in half. My experience is just that, my experience. I have sparred against many people of different styles and come to my conclusions as to what is most effective when sparring against an unarmored enemy. Your experiences may be different. But, how many people have you fought outside of ARMA fighting in different styles. Big swings open one to little cuts that slowly disable the person.
Well, in my opinion, it's a little hard to judge which is more effective without actually drawing blood. ;) Again, my point is that the video is re-creating historical technique. Sword combat is not a practical art these days.
More to your criticism of the over-the-head Vom Tag, there are two advantages: 1) you can cut either left or right from the same stance, 2) you are not offering your blade to be bound. Meyer, however, offers a simple counter: just thrust to the chest. Given the level of protective equipment, the participants may be restricting thrusts for safety.
I am criticizing large strokes in general. Anyway, i would suggest the thrust to the chest like you said (meyer) or when the swing with that huge (telegraphed) cut, move one's body out of reach and cut at their wrists as they mid way through. I have tested it and it works like a charm.
To reiterate my initial criticism. Big cuts telegraph and can easily be countered when the enemy decides to your arm instead of your sweeping blade
Actually, Vom Tag offers the /illusion/ of a telegraphed attack, as you can maneuver your body to make it seem your sword is positioned somewhere where it actually isn't. For instance, by turning slightly, you can make your sword seem further behind your body than it actually is. Likewise, Vom Tag can allow a very powerful strike which, if you practice your timing and range properly, will be very difficult to defend against. Vom Tag doesn't necessarily lend itself to 'big cuts'.
I have fought against people who have implemented vom tag and used those sneaky cuts you are talking about. The first time I fought it, I got my side cut open. Vom Tag has not worked since, as I (and a great many other people) have the reflexes to alter a parry to block from a suddenly changing angle. And why does every one ignore my statement that big cuts are not necessary in *unarmored* swordery?
Your account is anecdotal, and ergo useless for this discussion. I, and an entire series of institutions and Martial Arts groups and styles, from Japan to Europe, all recognize the efficacy of cuts from above. I am going to negate your own 'position' here with arguments that; In all my years of martial arts experience, Vom Tag is extremely useful in certain situations. The great Feichtmeisters agree with me.
Because I 14, you are disregarding my martial experience? Yes I will concede that I am young. But, I have spent most of my youth reading history and learning how to fight. I specialize in unarmored longsword and I have developed a style that I think works very effectively against pretty much any other style. Being a wee bit younger than you does not change that my points are valid and that my experience is compromised. Experience comes with practice, not with years.
Based on your response, no, I'm not going to disregard your experience. Have a look at some of the books listed on my profile. I'm sure that you'll find them interesting and worthwhile.
At the age of 14, are you actually trying to say you know more about swordsmanship than men who lived and died by the sword hundreds of years before you were even born? That your play-fighting is a better tool of instruction than the sweat and blood they shed developing these systems when these weapons were actually viable tools which determined whether someone was going to live or die? Are you /ACTUALLY/ saying such a thing?
Are you suggesting that what I do is indeed "play fighting"? And are you so presumptuous to assume that you know as much or more than the people who died. What I do is not playfighting. What I do, is what has turned to be most effective for *myself*. Your experiences may differ and I will not yell at you for that. I do what has been most effective against the people I have sparred with. People outside of my own combat system. People skilled in both eastern and western martial arts.
Ah, no, I'm not saying I know anything more than them. I'm /echoing what they say/, as /they/ are the authorities. It is /them/ who created Vom Tag, and established it as an effective stance. It is /they/ who used it and fought with it. And yes, what you do /is/ play fight. That's what I do as well, that's what we all do in comparison to what they did. Their lives depended upon their skill to fight, and they turned out to be the victors. Obviously they were doing something right.
You are leaving out a huge factor that dictates the actions of the men who fight. Adrenaline and blood. It dictated their actions more than that fancy shmancy stances that were whipped into them. Regardless of what the manuscripts said happened, what do you think men on an adrenaline high tend to do? And everyones experiences differ. You have probably found the style most effective for yourself, kudos. I have found what works best for me and you shouldn't demonize that.
Vom Tag isn't very fancy. All the techniques the Medieval Fechtmeisters developed were very effective due to their sheer simplicity. You didn't have to perform 'fancy schmancy' stances or maneuvers. You could just use them on pure instinct. I don't demonize your style or method of fighting. Not everyone uses Vom Tag to the same degree. I'm more defensive, so I prefer Alber.
I demonize you coming into a thread and then demonizing a vital component to an age old, tried and true martial art.
Have you no sense of humor or fun? Fancy shmancy was obviously a term used to add spice to the post.
Did I ever demonize Vom Tag? No. My original post that sparked all of this is that big swings are not needed and that I would not be comfortable using a stance that involves exposing certain things (that depends on the stance the other person is using but I thinking of my usual stance). Also, there are bound to be misprints in those scripts.
But alas, its christmas eve. Santa might put you on
"The man on the left has the tendency to bring his sword behind his head...That is not needed, especially in unarmed sparring."
This is a criticism of Vom Tag. Misprints? You do realize they have /images/ of people holding the swords in those stances, correct? With the sword held high, correct? These were often supervised by the Feichmeisters themselves, so it's unlikely they'd make such a huge blunder.
Provide me with these first generation scripts, were these written down by either of them directly. I have much respect for Fiore and I know Hans Talhoffer was a *fencing* master in southern germany during 1400's. Define directly. And again those scripts can always be improved upon. Methods can always be revised and then those revised methods can be revised. Fiore was learning new things until he died, adding and revising his methods. Why can't we revise and modify things after?
You can find all of these scripts from w w w (dot) thearma (dot) c o m. Directly? As in they commissioned them, and sometimes posed in the paintings. They supervised them, and in some cases /wrote/ them. We can revise and 'improve' to a sense, but we must always check back with them. We /will not/ create something better than what they had, because our faculties are so limited. We don't have the crucible of life or death struggle to weed out the weak from the strong.
and yet we can always try to improve and through this we grow our own styles that work better for us than another's. (if you are on the east coast why are you up at around 1 in the morning reprimanding me. certainly a dolt like myself is not deserving of your time).
Yes, but we will never develop a 'fundamental' change which will strike down all previous martial artists as being 'fools' for not coming to a similar realization. You coming in and saying that Vom Tag, and all associated techniques are 'unneeded' is precisely that. If your point is; I /personally/ don't use Vom Tag and associated techniques, then I have no problem with you. However, you've presented yourself as dictating that they are 'useless' all around. This is sheer arrogance.
I am saying that I personally do not use Vom Tag. Stuff like that does not work *for me*. For someone else Vom Tag may work like a charm. At the end of the day, it comes down to personal preference. My preference leans one way while yours leans another. Perhaps Vom Tag works for you but it sure as hell doesn't work for me. Which I was trying to imply when I wrote the initial comment. Swordery is all about what works best for the person.
...Then why did you come in saying that Vom Tag and all associated techniques were unnecessary, while boasting that they only leave you open? You left /no/ room for interpretation that you were even talking about them being /for yourself/.
I have learned from my English teachers, in writing, one is always expressing their point of view, as a result, to write "I think" or "to me" is unnecessary. I will concede there is a time for a larger cut, but I will stand saying bringing a sword quite literally behind your head is a wee bit to much eh?
..Then your teachers are idiots. There is a difference between stating an opinion "I think", and stating a fact "This is true". Likewise no, bringing your sword behind your head is not too much. Once again, are you /actually/ trying to say you know more about sword fighting in your youth than all of the previous fencers in the world, from Japan to Europe? Are you /that/ arrogant?
When one is writing, one is always writing from their point of view, regardless of fact or fiction. Confirmed with Chicago Manual of Style. To say anything can be improved upon is not arrogant, it is stating a fact. I say that things can be improved upon, if you disagree, then you are truly hopeless. To think that methods had been absolutely perfected and never needed any further tweaking is arrogant.
Sure, you're always writing from a point of view, but this does not mean that "For me" is unnecessary, as you've earlier stated. Let's look at what you claim you were saying; "Stuff like that does not work *for me*." How does "writing from a point of view" answer this? It does not, because you were writing from a universalist point of view, and stating (At least in your point of view) that Vom Tag and such stances are 'unneeded'.
Now here's where I criticize you propose. Your 'style' involves an incredibly idealistic set of conditions. For instance, short cuts are fouled by clothing. Your opponents would all have to be naked in order to target them effectively. Likewise, you would have to be /much/ faster, and /much/ more skilled than them in order to not be hampered by only targetting the undersides of the arms, and specific tendons.
Short cuts are not fouled on clothing. This has been tested by myself and other people I train with. It involves a draw and the tip of the sword is razor sharp. Not even targeting specific tendons. I am rending muscle. Even a centimeter deep cut well effectively render that arm useless. I, personally, use a lot of thrusts, mostly leg, head, and shoulder. It is irrefutable that those stabs would cripple and kill.
A centimeter deep cut? No, no it will not. That is a wound, not an incapacitating wound. And irrefutable? No, not really. People have gone through duels in the past being stabbed /multiple/ times in those spots, with the exception of the head. They survived and continued fighting that way, so it is not 'irrefutable'.
Yes im going to have to agree with you on this one. a centimeter cut deep wound on an arm "will not" incapacitate the arm...no way..no how. ive been stabed 2 and half inches deep on my right forearm during training.....and i never droped my machete!
Ok, ofcourse you mean muscle. the muscle "on the arm" im assuming is what you mean. It is not a complete fact to say that a centimeter cut deep will disable muscle tissue. that is so far from the truth its not even funny. if you sever a tendon, ahhh now your going to definitley change the functionality of a limb. sever the bracial plexus....and now your really talking about disabling a limb. remember a centimeter isnt very deep.
Its relative to the size of the muscle. So my argument doesn't hold true for most people above my age...However almost all of the cuts I deliver are more than a centimeter. I am being very minimalist here. About 50% of my fights end because I have removed a few fingers and slashed the arms in several places. The rest end when my opponent gets annoyed and charges me, where his head is lopped off (well not technically but I sure hit them in the neck) or a thrust the face, or disembowel etc
An opponent of equivalent speed and skill would foul your attempts. After all, they wouldn't want to be hit. Likewise with how sharp you'd have to keep your weapon, if you mess up you're going to severely damage it.
Thats where feints, thusts, and taking impact on the sturdy and dull areas of the blade would come in. Thats also why one keeps a knife in their boot (throwing), and practices using a broken sword.
Paulmusic7373, That was replying to the idea that a sword couldn't cut through clothes, which it can...quite easily. I have cut into leather (not boiled)without much effort. Being as the average person wears cotton or polyester or something threaded or fibrous, a sword would glide through it, this has been tested by myself and others. Besides, one must learn methods of compensation (despite the fact this had nothing to do with compensating)
If you have a stated target which you target specifically and almost exclusively, such as the arms, you get predictable. Once you get predictable, you start to telegraph your attacks. Once you start to telegraph your attacks, you die.
Arms, legs, head (thrust), fingers, feints to get body.
But who ever said I was aggressive and run in aiming at those areas? When they strike I get my arms or slip my foot or move back while cutting at their extending limbs
Now, in essence the point is that with what you propose, with only using short, two foot cuts against the arms as a primary means of attack, if anything goes wrong, such as if they're wearing a coat, or wool, then you're fucked. You're not going to cut properly, you're not going to defend properly, and you're not going to be able to fight properly, and they're going to have the advantage.
One final point; you keep talking about your 'stance'. Tell me about this.
I have tested my claims against an inch thick tree limb with a two foot cut and it went through with a *whoosh* *snap* *thud*. I have done the same thing, putting cloth over it, that time it went through a little more than half way (enough to cripple). I have also done test cutting against Chile de Coyote (in the case that name is wrong I will correct myself later) and it cut it in two pieces. I will provide you with intel on the fruit after I get the name right. I will message you my stance>500
Well, once again an Anecdotal claim. Trees are not necessarily good targets. What /sort/ of tree? Also what /sort/ of cloth? Was it wool? Was it satin? What? Cotton? Also, cutting in a half inch is not significant to cripple. People have sustained these sorts of wounds in recorded duels and continued to fight. Where are you getting this?
Cotton. Obviously you have no idea what any damage to a muscle can do. Ninjitsu has a lot of hitting muscles in it. Hearing this, I tried a left jab and hit my bicep as I did it. I could not move the arm for around 10 seconds and then had limited use after that. A muscle cut can definitely disable an arm long enough to kill the person. All evidence is anecdotal.
All evidence is anecdotal? Not...really. Published experiments and such aren't anecdotal. "Anectdotal evidence" is described as;
"(2) Evidence, which may itself be true and verifiable, used to deduce a conclusion which does not follow from it, usually by generalizing from an insufficient amount of evidence."
Ah, so you are suggesting that if my "anecdotes" were to be published, you would no longer disregard them as anecdotes. Everything is an anecdote, some are lucky enough to be put onto paper where people like yourself find them and worship them as the "one true way"
Sheer publication does not transform something from an anecdote to something else. Anecdotes are "heresay". Published /experiments/ deal with hard data, and therefore are not 'heresay'. I did this, and this happened is an anecdote. I did this, and this happened, and here is all the data and proof that this actually happened is /not/ an anecdote.
You obviously do not know the definition of hearsay (nor how to spell it). Unverified information heard or received from another; rumor. I did not receive this information from another, and thus, it is not hearsay. My experiments have not been published (how would that happen to one of my age, without much effort) but it is hard data.
Point taken about hearsay. I don't see the point to arguing this, however. However no, it is not hard data, because I have no access to it. The only one who has access to it is yourself, in your memories, thus making it an 'anecdote'.
Haven't experimented with wool. I have experimented with leather *and* kevlar. Both which went through with little effort. These cuts can generate a significant amount of power, unless you *just* use your arms. If you get the wrists, arms, waist, and perhaps even legs, one can cut through most things (excluding armor) with ease.
I'm unimpressed. Kevlar is good at resisting blunt trauma, from objects like bullets. Sharp objects /would/ go through easily. Once again, I'm not saying these things are immune. I'm saying it requires more than a '2 foot' cut. Again, I'm going to invite you to myArmoury to discuss these points. We'll have to maintain a professional, academic tone though as we're sorting through this mess though. That site is not one for flame wars.
You seemed to totally ignore the part about leather, and shoot straight for kevlar. It went through leather if you bothered to actually read it. Perhaps you have been conducted your whole argument without reading what I have said (if so, kudos).
Allow me to conclude: Swordery, is like a cookie. I like chocolate chip, and you like snickerdoodle. At the end of the day, neither of us will be able to persuade the other that chocolate chip or snickerdoodle is better. Exploiting the privilege of distance, by employing verbal abuse against a style you cannot test for yourself, will never display a good example either of courage, or of prowess, or of honour. It can do no credit either to yourself or to your style.
...I like how you talk about this being simple preferences when you've said things which lead you to arguing that an entire set of stances and associated techniques are 'unneeded'. That's rather hypocritical, friend.
Unneeded in my point of view. As I said before one always writes in their point of view. Sure, you may prefer big stuff like Vom Tag (today I noticed myself using a strange version of it to provoke my opponent into a strike, so I stepped back and whacked his wrists, but I do not like the extreme stuff I have seen on here) but I do not, and stated my opinion. I never said stances and techniques were unnecessary, I criticized how large the swings were. I am fine with a milder Vom Tag
Ah, now this is quite a bit different from when you were saying that it was unneeded 'for you'. Your stance is becoming much more mild, but here I still disagree. In many situations Vom Tag is absolutely needed, due to the distance game, and the fact that it prevents blade-play. With Vom Tag you get much more range in a cut than in any other stance.
However, despite it being 'your point of view', that doesn't shield you from having definitively stated earlier that it is unneeded.
I have played the distance game without anything like Vom Tag in it. Distance game is also a loose term, there are different distance games, they may have the same objective, but are still different distance games accomplishing different goals which require distance...The same objective is distance, just for different reasons.
Sure, I never said Vom Tag is the only distance game. The stance "Langort" is also a distance game, but it is not a distance game like Vom Tag. Like I stated before, it is a distance game /that prevents blade-play/.
Let it be known though that I have no problem if you /personally/ don't like to use Vom Tag or larger cuts. THAT is an issue of different tastes. However, I will resist the statement that you made earlier, that they are absolutely 'unneeded' in unarmored combat. /Even/ if it is simply in your opinion.
Using 'it's my opinion' to hide from criticism is patently absurd, because that would invalidate all criticisms to any position ever made, including the one you made initially.
yeah i'll definitley agree with you on this. a blade can easily go through most various materials that most people are wearing. even kevlar vests. im primarily a knife fighter, so ive done alot of testing on kevlar vests with knives. a blade will pass right through it like a hot knife through butter. thick kevlar too, i used my old level III-A vest that i didnt need anymore.
On second thought, I'm going to have to pull back from this discussion. Your teacher has fought "duels"? This is absurd. I won't engage in this sort of folly. Good bye.
Take it as a victory if you wish, I'm actually consulting the 'experts' so to speak, as they have more experience on the issues than I. From initial responses, they're disagreeing with the assertions you're making.
For example here; The man on the left has the tendency to bring his sword behind his head...That is not needed, especially in unarmed sparring.
How does this even HINT towards you simply talking about it not working for yourself?
Or here;
You do not need power. You need to slice the muscle, that way they can not attack. Waving a sword about your head creates an opening, telegraphs your attack, and all it does is create unnecessary power.
How does this hint towards what you're now saying?
Sorry, I for the fencing in asterisks...When I wrote it I had modern fencing (grr...) in mind and then I remembered how different fencing was back then (and a bit more practical), but forgot to remove the asterisks.
Also, I have no humor when people make groundless, foolish assertions against a tried and true method, which was tested in a crucible far superior to any one they could have experienced.
What precisely do you mean by 'small cuts'? How long would the arch be?
I would never make foolish assertions against those who held the shield wall, those who died because the nobles said "hey that looks like a cool piece of land, I WANT IT!" Again, I have said before everything can be improved upon and there are different way of improving upon things. As for small cuts they are meant to draw so the actual swing is preferably no more than two feet from tip to tip of farthest away location. Of course there are exceptions.
And yet you claim that you've stumbled onto an epiphany about something so basic as whether or not to maintain Vom Tag, or use cuts.
A cut with no more than two feet of 'swing' will have little or no penetrating power. Any sort of clothing would obscure these attacks. Unless your sword were terribly sharp(To the extent where it becomes fragile) You won't do much actual damage. An extremely minor wound, perhaps, but not enough to disable a limb.
This is how I sharpen my swords. Razor (or almost) sharp near the tip, less so at the COP. Then it is progressively dulled down and areas not sharp at all. I have practiced taking all of my blocks in the lower *unsharpened or lightly sharpened* areas of my sword so it doesn't break.
The point of the strikes i use is to blood cut a vein, sever a tendon. The strike itself wouldn't do much, its the draw the does the trick, and we have tested this on Coyote de something another. Its a fruit that has an incredibly hard shell (the name of the fruit escapes me at the moment i will ask a comrade the next time I see him [and i will give you the name of course]) it has had bouts with human heads and won. We cut these in two using the cuts I described.
This is of course anecdotal. Short cuts do very little to cause damage. I have a video I should show you. w w w (dot) thearma (dot) org slash photos slash Gathering03 slash G03Vids slash AVIs slash No-hand_cuttings (dot) avi
There it is, with John C. demonstrating what you're suggesting, and coming to very little use. It wouldn't even cut veins significantly. A draw might help, certainly, but it won't 'trump' wider cuts, especially if they're being sent from Vom Tag properly.
The sword is very sharp, but there is admittedly little draw. However, the draw would not factor in as decisively as you suggest. Once again, it would be a technique you could use, but it would not trump an entire branch of a tried and true martial art, especially not if they are using their techniques properly.
"Double sword"? What is "Double sword"? "English Warhammer"? Italian/German mace? I'm unaware of such distinctions. Something tells me this person is quite unreliable as a source of information.
Double sword is the act of using two swords. Incredibly uncommon but did exist. English warhammers existed so naturally somebody could develop an effective method to use it. Same goes for the mace. Do you suggest that only the methods jotted down in your scripts are the most effective way? Are you so close-minded as to think that there is no way for which those methods to be improved?
Using two swords, sure, but it's mostly suicidal. I know of only one style in Europe, the Florentine style. It's useless with cutting swords however.
Read what I said again. I said I'm unaware of any /distinctions/. There's no functional difference between a 'german' warhammer and an 'english' warhammer. Why are you making such a distinction?
because of the warhammers, that is the one he i have seen him use. And again your close-mindedness has arisen. To suggest there is no plausible way to use two swords is ridiculous. You blindly read the scripts and leave no room for adjustment/improvement. If someone is dedicated (and good) enough they could easily find a way to use anything into a deadly combination. Everything can be improved upon. There is always a better way, and for some it may different than others.
Once again, there is no functional difference between English or German Warhammers. Why are you making such a distinction? Likewise, there are no extant treatise on traditional "English" warhammers. Why are you then calling it "English"?
I'm not close minded. I'm skeptical. I'm open to those methods existing, and I'd be willing to see them. Gladly, actually. But as of yet /I have seen no such thing/. I need things to be proven to me. I don't blindly accept things.
I am calling it English because there is a slight difference that i noted between two pictures, the functionality is not changed but that doesn't mean there is not a difference. I can criticize ARMA because i have seen their videos and techniques. You can't criticize my style because you have not seen it. I would be happy to invite you to our class if you care to prove us wrong. Just say yes and i will message you the details
Slight difference? What would that be? Why is it so significant as to warrant it being called "English" warhammer and not "Warhammer" or "European Warhammer"?
You're not just criticizing ARMA, you're criticizing an entire line of historical men who lived and died by the sword, hundreds of years before your Play-fighting. That is another point I have problems with. Are you /actually/ saying that you know better than these people, and that they simply 'got it wrong'?
Actually, Vom Tag /prevents/ certain openings as it prevents your opponent from binding your blade. As well, you can play a 'range game', which prevents your opponents from striking at your vital areas (Again, due to out-distancing them)
The man on the left is settling into the stance "Vom Tag", which as stated before is a legitimate stance in European Martial Arts. It is a stance that allows free movements into several cuts from above, as well as certain counters as cuts from Vom Tag have decidedly more range than cuts from other stances.
very impressive skills from these two. good stuff from ARMA, as always
FoolingWithFuhlen 6 months ago in playlist All ARMA Vids
I really like this vid. Virtually all of the vids on youtube displaying traditional European martial arts are done by obese or unathletic nerds who have about as much skill and grace as that fat star wars kid. It makes traditional European martial ats look so bad. Finally some skilled and athletic traditional fencers for once! You do exist!
PS. To anyone out there who's thinking of posting your own vids, if you haven't mastered the techniques and you're not in shape, please don't post them!
TaskForceSixTwoSix 7 months ago
@TaskForceSixTwoSix I don't care about a man's weigh if he has a sword, and knows how to handle it. Or maybe a little, if he's very obese, I'm pretty sure I can run away.
But point being, skill weighs more than fitness. Pun intended ;P
DiabolusIgnis 4 months ago
@kaymo211 lol the reason they look similar is because the guy who choreographed that fight scene studies traditional european sword fighting. and if your a starwars fanboy like me youd no that light saber forms are completely ripped off 15th century longsword ;)
TheKrazy7 7 months ago
It pisses me off when people say that Knights had no Martial Arts
xtcarnage15586 10 months ago 2
@xtcarnage15586 There are alot of things imo that should piss of people way more than a false claim that Knights lacked martial arts. But to each his/her own :D
With that said those nylons are very interesting, they can take quite a beating or ?
Giagantus 10 months ago
@Giagantus Martial arts is just a fancy way for saying a basic instinctive act = figthing. people like relabling it giving it different meaning to what ever bias they have build around it. heck to bucks fighting are doing martial arts in some way just than as intelectually though out. martial arts doesnt even mean self defense in many of the asian terms etheir . i just means defensive skill still against someone wiht arms or withi out arms(literal meaning) aka figthing
kaindrg 10 months ago
@kaindrg I respectfully disagree. Animals fight, but they do not practice martial arts. For something to be a martial art, it must involve the intent to hurt another person or defend oneself without relying solely on instinct. A martial art must include techniques, or disciplines, or practices (physical or mental) that improve one's fighting ability. Without learning *how* to fight better, as you say, you are not practicing martial arts.
ruebuscm 9 months ago
@xtcarnage15586 fighting by definition is martial arts we could be a bunch of untrained scrubs and it would still be martials arts. when people say can u teach to fight i say reword that o "can u teach me to fight better"
kaindrg 10 months ago
Damn, I wish I had the same feeling for distance.
Ranziel1 2 years ago 2
this was pretty cool, I like how they kept good form even in sparring.
seadawg93 2 years ago 2
it's great except at 0:33...WTF?! that's not any historical or realistic cut I've ever seen! LOL It happens, I know. I'd be lying if i said I never grabbed my rapier with both hands and swung it like a hammer just 'cause. Cool fight guys.
Dylan5131 2 years ago
Gripping the longsword blade with two hands and swinging the hilt part at a person is called the "mordhau" or "murder-stroke", typically used against armored opponents as one would use the cross as a blunt hammer. You can see it in Talhoffer's text.
One hand on the blade and one on the hilt is known as halfswording; Fiore de Liberi's treatise shows the stances.
In this case I think Jake was in that position to set up for a one-handed swipe to the legs. I do that move a lot too.
tiamat9989 2 years ago 8
Gripping the Longsword blade is both historical, and very common. This is known as halfswording. It can be found throughout the period source literature.
Zwerchhau 2 years ago 6
Why are SCA and larp, amongst the tags?
This video, has nothing to do, with either of those.
ZarlanTheGreen 2 years ago 2
Actually I don't remember why those are in there. I think I put them there to help people looking at larp/SCA videos understand what more realistic swordplay looks like. I know that when I first started looking for swordsmanship stuff on the internet all I could find at first was SCA and boffer fighting. Fortunately I found ARMA before I joined either of those groups.
SwordAndBuckler 2 years ago
So it's well intended, and I respect that.
It is, however, not how tags are supposed to be used, and somewhat dishonest (no offence).
I spotted two more inaccurate tags: katana, and shield.
I don't know if I knew about SCA, before, or after, I was pleasantly surprised, to discover HEMA.
I wanted to start with Kendo though, specifically as I though it'd be the closest I'd ever get, to how they fought in the middle ages.
ZarlanTheGreen 2 years ago
Its cool stuff me and friends spar too, is you whole channel dedicated to this?
vermanshane 2 years ago
@ZarlanTheGreen Because it is to teach the unenlightened masses what real fighting is.
D04S02B04 7 months ago
That was a really good match
wolfmaster555 3 years ago
Allow me to explain to the YouTube community what I meant by everything is an anecdote. Everything starts out as someones tale or experience,and this is an anecdote. If one is lucky, it is published in a journal where narrow-minded people who obviously do not have the capacity to learn or understand anything outside of those lucky few published anecdotes read it and worship it, follow it so strictly that they take all the creativity and true learning out of it. Everything starts as an anecdote.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
...Not really. Why do you keep mentioning publication? That's not the only non-anecdotal type of evidence. /Proof/ is what makes something not an anecdote. Mind you also, that anecdotal evidence is also based upon not having enough evidence to support an argument. For example, photographic, DNA, Measurements, etc, when all the evidence is available, are not anecdotal. Sure, they sometimes require faith, but they have more evidence and proof than a simple story.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Well then I have proof, which has been viewed by some, obviously not by you. So you are saying it is not an anecdote. Yes, my stories provide proof because they have been replicated amongst friends and acquaintances who live in my area. So I have people to support my claims. I could make a video I suppose...Would that tickle your taste buds?
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Well, again, there's no way for me to know this. However, this is a discussion to be taken to /MyArmoury/. Their resources considering this point, that two foot cuts are as incapacitating and penetrating as you claim, are much greater than my own.
Note that I never stated that clothing, wool, and leather are immune to cuts.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
allow me to quote you...You implied quite a bit in the following: or instance, short cuts are fouled by clothing. Your opponents would all have to be naked in order to target them effectively
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Did I say what kind of clothing? Specifically I mean wool, and leather. Particularly thick leather.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
You mentioned cotton. If they are wearing thick leather I wouldn't bother using a sword, and big cuts would just hurt more...they wouldn't draw blood. If they were wearing thick leather I would reply with a naginata or a bow.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Yes, I asked if it was cotton, because cotton would /not/ be a reliable material.
A sword should, if you have a good cut, go through the leather. Depends on the thickness of course. I wouldn't trust it against a Gambeson though. Thrusts would be more appropriate for that.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
I have a gambeson. Will I shred it....No. I like my gambeson. But I could shred some leather for you and put it on film if it makes you happy. However, how thick is a person's street clothing going to be. If you walk around in a thick leather coat then you are going to get hot fast (assuming it is sunny). I find leather also restricts movement. Most clothes are made out of cotton so that argument is irrelevant, being as most people where clothes consisting of cotton.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Everything /starting/(A trait of origin) as an anecdote is a distinctly different argument from everything /being/ (A trait of being) an anecdote. For example, I'll demonstrate the difference.
Anecdotal evidence; I drove from home to the bank on January 1st, 2008, and got a traffic ticket.
Non-anecdotal evidence; I drove from home to bank on January 1st, 2008, and got a ticket. (The person hands you the ticket, which verifies the account.)
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Another example to illustrate by point of origin versus being is that while every human /starts/ as a fetus, that does not mean /everyone/ is a fetus. Obviously not, the circumstances of form and function don't warrant that.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
That is a horrible analogy. An anecdote is a story. You claim its no longer an anecdote if it is proven. So I film my story, it is still my story, only it is on film and can be a proven story. That does not change the fact it is a story, an incident.
My cookie and swordery analogy was better (not meant as an insult...I just want to be immature and brag about the analogy because I like cookies)
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
...And that was a story. The difference is that one story had no evidence, and another story had more evidence. Therefore, one is an anecdote, and the other is not really an anecdote. And filming something doesn't prove it, it's recording the evidence in some manner which can be verified.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Of course it proves it. You do not want me to be right. If I film what I say and put it on youtube for you to see, proves to you that that cloth and tree were cut. You are afraid I am right and refuse to call it proof because you may be wrong.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Read my post again. I said filming something doesn't prove something. That means that FILM DOESN'T PROVE THINGS. That is, Film is not exclusive to proof. It has to be any form of record, including but not limited to film. Read people's posts more closely.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
why isn't filming something adequate proof? What the hell will do it for you?
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
....Read my post again.
That is, Film is not exclusive to proof. It has to be any form of record, including but not limited to film.
Read it very closely.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
I read that, however, that was in contradiction with a previous statement: And filming something doesn't prove it
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
No it doesn't. Read /that/ post again. "And filming something doesn't prove it, it's recording the evidence in some manner which can be verified. "
I'm stating that film is not exclusive proof. Does film record evidence, like I allowed for? Yes. This makes film /a/ form of proof, just like I've been saying. You need to learn to read people's posts more closely.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
I will read posts more clearly on the grounds you make an attempt to state things more clearly.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
The post was perfectly clear. I directly stated what would count. You just didn't take the extra step and process it properly. :>
Caliburnis 3 years ago
^^
Do we have an agreement?
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Sure.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
ok then
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Note, how I progressed the anecdote argument. Again see previous comment -- Would that satisfy you?
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Well that was fun...
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Are you going to go on MyArmoury or not?
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Already replied
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
I will be sure to hold my tongue on myarmoury, so long as you hold yours, you will note that your first two comments were rude and inflammatory, they continued in that fashion until very very very recently.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Your distance game with Vom Tag, seems pretty ideal with even footing. The commitment your imagining is a hell of a lot easier to sustain when your footing is sure. Have you ever cut someone, or been cut by anybody? Your constant cry when your method has been challenged has been "this is anecdotal" but all evidence is anecdotal. The evidence you throw out as an alternative was anecdotal until it was copied into one of your precious books.
How long have you been studying the sword?
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
How long have I been studying the sword? Four or five years now. How long have the people I've learned from been studying? A collection of years more than either of us have existed. My strength of knowledge is not from my own limited experience, but from learning from the experiences of many other people who I've had correspondence and education from.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Likewise, the person I have been studying from has been at it for 50 years (I think...it might be a bit more)
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Caliburnis this will take longer than 500 characters: You have no idea of the cutting power of a good sword. You are obviously in disagreement with the oldest extant European sword manual, I.33, which regularly deals in punishing the arms. It was an unarmoured (civilian) system, but the monks appear not to have found the sleeves and cloaks to be as cut-proof as our correspondent imagines. Ive cut through combined leather and Kevlar without much effort, so Im inclined to side with the monks
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
When did I say clothes are cut-proof? The cuts in I.33 use a lot more 'arch' than two feet cuts. Four, or perhaps three, but not 'no more than two feet'.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Look, it is apparent that you have no idea what a sharp blade can do...when done properly. If you become skilled enough to actually be able to draw your cuts as an alternative to big swings, you will note the effect it has against flesh, even with clothing.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
You know what. I'm going to invite you to a discussion on another forum with people who have much more adequate resources than I do. Come to a website called Myarmoury (dot) com, and let's discuss your points there.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
I yes, I love that site. The people are snooty but the swords are amazing. Fiorinda Maia is the Durer Bastard Sword he reviews on it. Boy, did that thing cut threw almost anything (excluding armor of course) but clothes *whoosh*. I found it one day, and came off a week later.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
your link got a 404 not found error code.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
You probably didn't format it correctly. Go to the ARMA's website and look for a video in their video lists with the following description "Cutting at a straw mat, John C. gives an impromptu demo explanation of how short quick downward chops even with a very sharp straight sword may not ".
Caliburnis 3 years ago
As for now caliburnis, I bid you ado. I will undoubtedly pick this discussion up later but I want to go to bed and enjoy a nice holiday. As for yourself, enjoy and I will banter and bicker with you soon enough =)
Good night...and good luck
(what a great talk show phrase eh?)
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
I love the ARMA vids on here...people actually showing skill and fighting like they're trying to kill each other. It's a relief from all the Brothers at Arms nonsense.
fenrirsget 3 years ago
The man on the left has the tendency to bring his sword behind his head...That is not needed, especially in unarmed sparring.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Holding one's sword above one's head with the point tilted backwards is in fact a guard called "Vom tag" meaning "From the roof". It is specifically mentioned by several masters when teaching unarmored longsword. As well as adding power, holding the weapon in such a way also prevents your opponent from binding it up or playing off of it. It also allows the use of almost any cut. That and Alber (holding the hilt near your navel with the tip pointing down) are my two favorite guards.
SwordAndBuckler 3 years ago
You do not need power. You need to slice the muscle, that way they can not attack. Waving a sword about your head creates an opening, telegraphs your attack, and all it does is create unnecessary power. Small slicing cuts are quicker and harder to block, and they can cut their wrists and fingers without bringing yourself into their target range.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Why am I getting thumbs down for just pointing out facts?
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
What facts? Tell me, how much experience do you have in longsword, or any serious sword art sparring? All the techniques demonstrated here have been well proven by experienced martial artists in freeplay against other skilled people. I have tried them as well and they work. While small cuts have their place as well, stronger attacks are vital to longsword fencing.
Konane12 3 years ago
Several years experience in unarmored longsword swordery. I train under a man experienced in double-sword, katana, longsword, falchion, sword and buckler, knife, nunchaku, tonfa, english warhammer, and italian/german mace All those techniques are done against other people bearing similar technique. Against someone who fights with small quick cuts to fingers and wrists those big cuts are going to get less effective because every time they wind up they reveal themselves to another small cut.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
I think you are missing the point. The techniques demonstrated are historical. The participants are following German (and maybe a bit of Italian) longsword treatises. Your experience seems to be more eastern than western MA. The "sword-over-the-head" (one variant of Vom Tag...aka Posta Falcone [Vadi]) stance is valid in context. Furthermore, I've not heard of any treatise on "italian/german mace" or "english warhammer". Do you mean Tallhoffer? English documents are notoriously rare.
buboetherat 3 years ago
Eastern styles are also fond of big cuts. The idea is to literally cut the enemy in half. My experience is just that, my experience. I have sparred against many people of different styles and come to my conclusions as to what is most effective when sparring against an unarmored enemy. Your experiences may be different. But, how many people have you fought outside of ARMA fighting in different styles. Big swings open one to little cuts that slowly disable the person.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Well, in my opinion, it's a little hard to judge which is more effective without actually drawing blood. ;) Again, my point is that the video is re-creating historical technique. Sword combat is not a practical art these days.
buboetherat 3 years ago
More to your criticism of the over-the-head Vom Tag, there are two advantages: 1) you can cut either left or right from the same stance, 2) you are not offering your blade to be bound. Meyer, however, offers a simple counter: just thrust to the chest. Given the level of protective equipment, the participants may be restricting thrusts for safety.
buboetherat 3 years ago
I am criticizing large strokes in general. Anyway, i would suggest the thrust to the chest like you said (meyer) or when the swing with that huge (telegraphed) cut, move one's body out of reach and cut at their wrists as they mid way through. I have tested it and it works like a charm.
To reiterate my initial criticism. Big cuts telegraph and can easily be countered when the enemy decides to your arm instead of your sweeping blade
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
I totally just left out a word. "enemy decides to (parry)your arm instead of your blade"
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Actually, Vom Tag offers the /illusion/ of a telegraphed attack, as you can maneuver your body to make it seem your sword is positioned somewhere where it actually isn't. For instance, by turning slightly, you can make your sword seem further behind your body than it actually is. Likewise, Vom Tag can allow a very powerful strike which, if you practice your timing and range properly, will be very difficult to defend against. Vom Tag doesn't necessarily lend itself to 'big cuts'.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
I have fought against people who have implemented vom tag and used those sneaky cuts you are talking about. The first time I fought it, I got my side cut open. Vom Tag has not worked since, as I (and a great many other people) have the reflexes to alter a parry to block from a suddenly changing angle. And why does every one ignore my statement that big cuts are not necessary in *unarmored* swordery?
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Your account is anecdotal, and ergo useless for this discussion. I, and an entire series of institutions and Martial Arts groups and styles, from Japan to Europe, all recognize the efficacy of cuts from above. I am going to negate your own 'position' here with arguments that; In all my years of martial arts experience, Vom Tag is extremely useful in certain situations. The great Feichtmeisters agree with me.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Excuse me, exchange "cuts from above" with "high guards", such as Vom Tag and a certain Kamae whose name escapes me at this moment.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
What are cuts from below, chopped liver?
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Cuts from Below and Cuts from Above are both extremely important.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Oh fer...your profile says that you are 14. Waste Of TIME!
buboetherat 3 years ago
Because I 14, you are disregarding my martial experience? Yes I will concede that I am young. But, I have spent most of my youth reading history and learning how to fight. I specialize in unarmored longsword and I have developed a style that I think works very effectively against pretty much any other style. Being a wee bit younger than you does not change that my points are valid and that my experience is compromised. Experience comes with practice, not with years.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Based on your response, no, I'm not going to disregard your experience. Have a look at some of the books listed on my profile. I'm sure that you'll find them interesting and worthwhile.
buboetherat 3 years ago
Hmm...Perhaps I will.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
At the age of 14, are you actually trying to say you know more about swordsmanship than men who lived and died by the sword hundreds of years before you were even born? That your play-fighting is a better tool of instruction than the sweat and blood they shed developing these systems when these weapons were actually viable tools which determined whether someone was going to live or die? Are you /ACTUALLY/ saying such a thing?
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Are you suggesting that what I do is indeed "play fighting"? And are you so presumptuous to assume that you know as much or more than the people who died. What I do is not playfighting. What I do, is what has turned to be most effective for *myself*. Your experiences may differ and I will not yell at you for that. I do what has been most effective against the people I have sparred with. People outside of my own combat system. People skilled in both eastern and western martial arts.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Ah, no, I'm not saying I know anything more than them. I'm /echoing what they say/, as /they/ are the authorities. It is /them/ who created Vom Tag, and established it as an effective stance. It is /they/ who used it and fought with it. And yes, what you do /is/ play fight. That's what I do as well, that's what we all do in comparison to what they did. Their lives depended upon their skill to fight, and they turned out to be the victors. Obviously they were doing something right.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
You are leaving out a huge factor that dictates the actions of the men who fight. Adrenaline and blood. It dictated their actions more than that fancy shmancy stances that were whipped into them. Regardless of what the manuscripts said happened, what do you think men on an adrenaline high tend to do? And everyones experiences differ. You have probably found the style most effective for yourself, kudos. I have found what works best for me and you shouldn't demonize that.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Vom Tag isn't very fancy. All the techniques the Medieval Fechtmeisters developed were very effective due to their sheer simplicity. You didn't have to perform 'fancy schmancy' stances or maneuvers. You could just use them on pure instinct. I don't demonize your style or method of fighting. Not everyone uses Vom Tag to the same degree. I'm more defensive, so I prefer Alber.
I demonize you coming into a thread and then demonizing a vital component to an age old, tried and true martial art.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Have you no sense of humor or fun? Fancy shmancy was obviously a term used to add spice to the post.
Did I ever demonize Vom Tag? No. My original post that sparked all of this is that big swings are not needed and that I would not be comfortable using a stance that involves exposing certain things (that depends on the stance the other person is using but I thinking of my usual stance). Also, there are bound to be misprints in those scripts.
But alas, its christmas eve. Santa might put you on
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
his naughty list
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
...I am going to quote you.
"The man on the left has the tendency to bring his sword behind his head...That is not needed, especially in unarmed sparring."
This is a criticism of Vom Tag. Misprints? You do realize they have /images/ of people holding the swords in those stances, correct? With the sword held high, correct? These were often supervised by the Feichmeisters themselves, so it's unlikely they'd make such a huge blunder.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Small blunders are still possible, which could have morphed over generations.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
...Not when we have first generation scripts which show the Fechtmeisters words and teachings directly (IE; Fiore Dei Liberi, Hans Talhoffer.)
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Provide me with these first generation scripts, were these written down by either of them directly. I have much respect for Fiore and I know Hans Talhoffer was a *fencing* master in southern germany during 1400's. Define directly. And again those scripts can always be improved upon. Methods can always be revised and then those revised methods can be revised. Fiore was learning new things until he died, adding and revising his methods. Why can't we revise and modify things after?
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
You can find all of these scripts from w w w (dot) thearma (dot) c o m. Directly? As in they commissioned them, and sometimes posed in the paintings. They supervised them, and in some cases /wrote/ them. We can revise and 'improve' to a sense, but we must always check back with them. We /will not/ create something better than what they had, because our faculties are so limited. We don't have the crucible of life or death struggle to weed out the weak from the strong.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
and yet we can always try to improve and through this we grow our own styles that work better for us than another's. (if you are on the east coast why are you up at around 1 in the morning reprimanding me. certainly a dolt like myself is not deserving of your time).
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Yes, but we will never develop a 'fundamental' change which will strike down all previous martial artists as being 'fools' for not coming to a similar realization. You coming in and saying that Vom Tag, and all associated techniques are 'unneeded' is precisely that. If your point is; I /personally/ don't use Vom Tag and associated techniques, then I have no problem with you. However, you've presented yourself as dictating that they are 'useless' all around. This is sheer arrogance.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
I am saying that I personally do not use Vom Tag. Stuff like that does not work *for me*. For someone else Vom Tag may work like a charm. At the end of the day, it comes down to personal preference. My preference leans one way while yours leans another. Perhaps Vom Tag works for you but it sure as hell doesn't work for me. Which I was trying to imply when I wrote the initial comment. Swordery is all about what works best for the person.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
...Then why did you come in saying that Vom Tag and all associated techniques were unnecessary, while boasting that they only leave you open? You left /no/ room for interpretation that you were even talking about them being /for yourself/.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
I have learned from my English teachers, in writing, one is always expressing their point of view, as a result, to write "I think" or "to me" is unnecessary. I will concede there is a time for a larger cut, but I will stand saying bringing a sword quite literally behind your head is a wee bit to much eh?
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
..Then your teachers are idiots. There is a difference between stating an opinion "I think", and stating a fact "This is true". Likewise no, bringing your sword behind your head is not too much. Once again, are you /actually/ trying to say you know more about sword fighting in your youth than all of the previous fencers in the world, from Japan to Europe? Are you /that/ arrogant?
Caliburnis 3 years ago
When one is writing, one is always writing from their point of view, regardless of fact or fiction. Confirmed with Chicago Manual of Style. To say anything can be improved upon is not arrogant, it is stating a fact. I say that things can be improved upon, if you disagree, then you are truly hopeless. To think that methods had been absolutely perfected and never needed any further tweaking is arrogant.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Sure, you're always writing from a point of view, but this does not mean that "For me" is unnecessary, as you've earlier stated. Let's look at what you claim you were saying; "Stuff like that does not work *for me*." How does "writing from a point of view" answer this? It does not, because you were writing from a universalist point of view, and stating (At least in your point of view) that Vom Tag and such stances are 'unneeded'.
paulsmusic7373 3 years ago
Now here's where I criticize you propose. Your 'style' involves an incredibly idealistic set of conditions. For instance, short cuts are fouled by clothing. Your opponents would all have to be naked in order to target them effectively. Likewise, you would have to be /much/ faster, and /much/ more skilled than them in order to not be hampered by only targetting the undersides of the arms, and specific tendons.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Short cuts are not fouled on clothing. This has been tested by myself and other people I train with. It involves a draw and the tip of the sword is razor sharp. Not even targeting specific tendons. I am rending muscle. Even a centimeter deep cut well effectively render that arm useless. I, personally, use a lot of thrusts, mostly leg, head, and shoulder. It is irrefutable that those stabs would cripple and kill.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
A centimeter deep cut? No, no it will not. That is a wound, not an incapacitating wound. And irrefutable? No, not really. People have gone through duels in the past being stabbed /multiple/ times in those spots, with the exception of the head. They survived and continued fighting that way, so it is not 'irrefutable'.
paulsmusic7373 3 years ago
My apologies, these were all me.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Yes im going to have to agree with you on this one. a centimeter cut deep wound on an arm "will not" incapacitate the arm...no way..no how. ive been stabed 2 and half inches deep on my right forearm during training.....and i never droped my machete!
realityfighting 3 years ago
I never said on the arm, I said on the muscle.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Ok, ofcourse you mean muscle. the muscle "on the arm" im assuming is what you mean. It is not a complete fact to say that a centimeter cut deep will disable muscle tissue. that is so far from the truth its not even funny. if you sever a tendon, ahhh now your going to definitley change the functionality of a limb. sever the bracial plexus....and now your really talking about disabling a limb. remember a centimeter isnt very deep.
realityfighting 3 years ago
Its relative to the size of the muscle. So my argument doesn't hold true for most people above my age...However almost all of the cuts I deliver are more than a centimeter. I am being very minimalist here. About 50% of my fights end because I have removed a few fingers and slashed the arms in several places. The rest end when my opponent gets annoyed and charges me, where his head is lopped off (well not technically but I sure hit them in the neck) or a thrust the face, or disembowel etc
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
An opponent of equivalent speed and skill would foul your attempts. After all, they wouldn't want to be hit. Likewise with how sharp you'd have to keep your weapon, if you mess up you're going to severely damage it.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Thats where feints, thusts, and taking impact on the sturdy and dull areas of the blade would come in. Thats also why one keeps a knife in their boot (throwing), and practices using a broken sword.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Agreed, but these are all methods of compensation, they are not signifiers of superiority.
paulsmusic7373 3 years ago
Paulmusic7373, That was replying to the idea that a sword couldn't cut through clothes, which it can...quite easily. I have cut into leather (not boiled)without much effort. Being as the average person wears cotton or polyester or something threaded or fibrous, a sword would glide through it, this has been tested by myself and others. Besides, one must learn methods of compensation (despite the fact this had nothing to do with compensating)
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
If you have a stated target which you target specifically and almost exclusively, such as the arms, you get predictable. Once you get predictable, you start to telegraph your attacks. Once you start to telegraph your attacks, you die.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Arms, legs, head (thrust), fingers, feints to get body.
But who ever said I was aggressive and run in aiming at those areas? When they strike I get my arms or slip my foot or move back while cutting at their extending limbs
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Now, in essence the point is that with what you propose, with only using short, two foot cuts against the arms as a primary means of attack, if anything goes wrong, such as if they're wearing a coat, or wool, then you're fucked. You're not going to cut properly, you're not going to defend properly, and you're not going to be able to fight properly, and they're going to have the advantage.
One final point; you keep talking about your 'stance'. Tell me about this.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
I have tested my claims against an inch thick tree limb with a two foot cut and it went through with a *whoosh* *snap* *thud*. I have done the same thing, putting cloth over it, that time it went through a little more than half way (enough to cripple). I have also done test cutting against Chile de Coyote (in the case that name is wrong I will correct myself later) and it cut it in two pieces. I will provide you with intel on the fruit after I get the name right. I will message you my stance>500
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Well, once again an Anecdotal claim. Trees are not necessarily good targets. What /sort/ of tree? Also what /sort/ of cloth? Was it wool? Was it satin? What? Cotton? Also, cutting in a half inch is not significant to cripple. People have sustained these sorts of wounds in recorded duels and continued to fight. Where are you getting this?
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Cotton. Obviously you have no idea what any damage to a muscle can do. Ninjitsu has a lot of hitting muscles in it. Hearing this, I tried a left jab and hit my bicep as I did it. I could not move the arm for around 10 seconds and then had limited use after that. A muscle cut can definitely disable an arm long enough to kill the person. All evidence is anecdotal.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
All evidence is anecdotal? Not...really. Published experiments and such aren't anecdotal. "Anectdotal evidence" is described as;
"(2) Evidence, which may itself be true and verifiable, used to deduce a conclusion which does not follow from it, usually by generalizing from an insufficient amount of evidence."
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Ah, so you are suggesting that if my "anecdotes" were to be published, you would no longer disregard them as anecdotes. Everything is an anecdote, some are lucky enough to be put onto paper where people like yourself find them and worship them as the "one true way"
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Sheer publication does not transform something from an anecdote to something else. Anecdotes are "heresay". Published /experiments/ deal with hard data, and therefore are not 'heresay'. I did this, and this happened is an anecdote. I did this, and this happened, and here is all the data and proof that this actually happened is /not/ an anecdote.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
You obviously do not know the definition of hearsay (nor how to spell it). Unverified information heard or received from another; rumor. I did not receive this information from another, and thus, it is not hearsay. My experiments have not been published (how would that happen to one of my age, without much effort) but it is hard data.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Point taken about hearsay. I don't see the point to arguing this, however. However no, it is not hard data, because I have no access to it. The only one who has access to it is yourself, in your memories, thus making it an 'anecdote'.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
The rest should be taken to the forums at MyArmoury.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
So are you now admitting you haven't experimented with wool or leather with your 'two foot cuts'?
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Haven't experimented with wool. I have experimented with leather *and* kevlar. Both which went through with little effort. These cuts can generate a significant amount of power, unless you *just* use your arms. If you get the wrists, arms, waist, and perhaps even legs, one can cut through most things (excluding armor) with ease.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
I'm unimpressed. Kevlar is good at resisting blunt trauma, from objects like bullets. Sharp objects /would/ go through easily. Once again, I'm not saying these things are immune. I'm saying it requires more than a '2 foot' cut. Again, I'm going to invite you to myArmoury to discuss these points. We'll have to maintain a professional, academic tone though as we're sorting through this mess though. That site is not one for flame wars.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
You seemed to totally ignore the part about leather, and shoot straight for kevlar. It went through leather if you bothered to actually read it. Perhaps you have been conducted your whole argument without reading what I have said (if so, kudos).
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
I'm holding my arguments here until we can get to MyArmoury and continue this discussion. I've already made a thread there.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Allow me to conclude: Swordery, is like a cookie. I like chocolate chip, and you like snickerdoodle. At the end of the day, neither of us will be able to persuade the other that chocolate chip or snickerdoodle is better. Exploiting the privilege of distance, by employing verbal abuse against a style you cannot test for yourself, will never display a good example either of courage, or of prowess, or of honour. It can do no credit either to yourself or to your style.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
...I like how you talk about this being simple preferences when you've said things which lead you to arguing that an entire set of stances and associated techniques are 'unneeded'. That's rather hypocritical, friend.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Unneeded in my point of view. As I said before one always writes in their point of view. Sure, you may prefer big stuff like Vom Tag (today I noticed myself using a strange version of it to provoke my opponent into a strike, so I stepped back and whacked his wrists, but I do not like the extreme stuff I have seen on here) but I do not, and stated my opinion. I never said stances and techniques were unnecessary, I criticized how large the swings were. I am fine with a milder Vom Tag
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Ah, now this is quite a bit different from when you were saying that it was unneeded 'for you'. Your stance is becoming much more mild, but here I still disagree. In many situations Vom Tag is absolutely needed, due to the distance game, and the fact that it prevents blade-play. With Vom Tag you get much more range in a cut than in any other stance.
However, despite it being 'your point of view', that doesn't shield you from having definitively stated earlier that it is unneeded.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Let me rephrase the first sentence. From when you were saying, that you were saying it was unneeded 'for you'.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
I have played the distance game without anything like Vom Tag in it. Distance game is also a loose term, there are different distance games, they may have the same objective, but are still different distance games accomplishing different goals which require distance...The same objective is distance, just for different reasons.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Sure, I never said Vom Tag is the only distance game. The stance "Langort" is also a distance game, but it is not a distance game like Vom Tag. Like I stated before, it is a distance game /that prevents blade-play/.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Let it be known though that I have no problem if you /personally/ don't like to use Vom Tag or larger cuts. THAT is an issue of different tastes. However, I will resist the statement that you made earlier, that they are absolutely 'unneeded' in unarmored combat. /Even/ if it is simply in your opinion.
Using 'it's my opinion' to hide from criticism is patently absurd, because that would invalidate all criticisms to any position ever made, including the one you made initially.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
yeah i'll definitley agree with you on this. a blade can easily go through most various materials that most people are wearing. even kevlar vests. im primarily a knife fighter, so ive done alot of testing on kevlar vests with knives. a blade will pass right through it like a hot knife through butter. thick kevlar too, i used my old level III-A vest that i didnt need anymore.
realityfighting 3 years ago 3
On second thought, I'm going to have to pull back from this discussion. Your teacher has fought "duels"? This is absurd. I won't engage in this sort of folly. Good bye.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Victory by forfeit. (that was horribly immature but just as much true)
By the way, it was only one.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Take it as a victory if you wish, I'm actually consulting the 'experts' so to speak, as they have more experience on the issues than I. From initial responses, they're disagreeing with the assertions you're making.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
For example here; The man on the left has the tendency to bring his sword behind his head...That is not needed, especially in unarmed sparring.
How does this even HINT towards you simply talking about it not working for yourself?
Or here;
You do not need power. You need to slice the muscle, that way they can not attack. Waving a sword about your head creates an opening, telegraphs your attack, and all it does is create unnecessary power.
How does this hint towards what you're now saying?
Caliburnis 3 years ago
[read earlier comment]
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
....Why are you putting "fencing" in asterisks as if it were unusual?
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Sorry, I for the fencing in asterisks...When I wrote it I had modern fencing (grr...) in mind and then I remembered how different fencing was back then (and a bit more practical), but forgot to remove the asterisks.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Fencing just means "sword fighting".
Caliburnis 3 years ago
It is one of the definitions and like I said before I forgot to remove the asterisks.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Also, I have no humor when people make groundless, foolish assertions against a tried and true method, which was tested in a crucible far superior to any one they could have experienced.
What precisely do you mean by 'small cuts'? How long would the arch be?
Caliburnis 3 years ago
I would never make foolish assertions against those who held the shield wall, those who died because the nobles said "hey that looks like a cool piece of land, I WANT IT!" Again, I have said before everything can be improved upon and there are different way of improving upon things. As for small cuts they are meant to draw so the actual swing is preferably no more than two feet from tip to tip of farthest away location. Of course there are exceptions.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
And yet you claim that you've stumbled onto an epiphany about something so basic as whether or not to maintain Vom Tag, or use cuts.
A cut with no more than two feet of 'swing' will have little or no penetrating power. Any sort of clothing would obscure these attacks. Unless your sword were terribly sharp(To the extent where it becomes fragile) You won't do much actual damage. An extremely minor wound, perhaps, but not enough to disable a limb.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Excuse me again; , or use wide cuts.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
This is how I sharpen my swords. Razor (or almost) sharp near the tip, less so at the COP. Then it is progressively dulled down and areas not sharp at all. I have practiced taking all of my blocks in the lower *unsharpened or lightly sharpened* areas of my sword so it doesn't break.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Naturally I cut the flesh at the tip
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
And yet it would still be fouled by clothing. You still won't deliver significantly damaging strikes.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
The point of the strikes i use is to blood cut a vein, sever a tendon. The strike itself wouldn't do much, its the draw the does the trick, and we have tested this on Coyote de something another. Its a fruit that has an incredibly hard shell (the name of the fruit escapes me at the moment i will ask a comrade the next time I see him [and i will give you the name of course]) it has had bouts with human heads and won. We cut these in two using the cuts I described.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
This is of course anecdotal. Short cuts do very little to cause damage. I have a video I should show you. w w w (dot) thearma (dot) org slash photos slash Gathering03 slash G03Vids slash AVIs slash No-hand_cuttings (dot) avi
There it is, with John C. demonstrating what you're suggesting, and coming to very little use. It wouldn't even cut veins significantly. A draw might help, certainly, but it won't 'trump' wider cuts, especially if they're being sent from Vom Tag properly.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
I will view these later, the edge on his blade certainly is a factor as well as if he is doing the draw properly.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
The sword is very sharp, but there is admittedly little draw. However, the draw would not factor in as decisively as you suggest. Once again, it would be a technique you could use, but it would not trump an entire branch of a tried and true martial art, especially not if they are using their techniques properly.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
"Double sword"? What is "Double sword"? "English Warhammer"? Italian/German mace? I'm unaware of such distinctions. Something tells me this person is quite unreliable as a source of information.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Double sword is the act of using two swords. Incredibly uncommon but did exist. English warhammers existed so naturally somebody could develop an effective method to use it. Same goes for the mace. Do you suggest that only the methods jotted down in your scripts are the most effective way? Are you so close-minded as to think that there is no way for which those methods to be improved?
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Using two swords, sure, but it's mostly suicidal. I know of only one style in Europe, the Florentine style. It's useless with cutting swords however.
Read what I said again. I said I'm unaware of any /distinctions/. There's no functional difference between a 'german' warhammer and an 'english' warhammer. Why are you making such a distinction?
Caliburnis 3 years ago
because of the warhammers, that is the one he i have seen him use. And again your close-mindedness has arisen. To suggest there is no plausible way to use two swords is ridiculous. You blindly read the scripts and leave no room for adjustment/improvement. If someone is dedicated (and good) enough they could easily find a way to use anything into a deadly combination. Everything can be improved upon. There is always a better way, and for some it may different than others.
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Once again, there is no functional difference between English or German Warhammers. Why are you making such a distinction? Likewise, there are no extant treatise on traditional "English" warhammers. Why are you then calling it "English"?
I'm not close minded. I'm skeptical. I'm open to those methods existing, and I'd be willing to see them. Gladly, actually. But as of yet /I have seen no such thing/. I need things to be proven to me. I don't blindly accept things.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
I am calling it English because there is a slight difference that i noted between two pictures, the functionality is not changed but that doesn't mean there is not a difference. I can criticize ARMA because i have seen their videos and techniques. You can't criticize my style because you have not seen it. I would be happy to invite you to our class if you care to prove us wrong. Just say yes and i will message you the details
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago
Slight difference? What would that be? Why is it so significant as to warrant it being called "English" warhammer and not "Warhammer" or "European Warhammer"?
You're not just criticizing ARMA, you're criticizing an entire line of historical men who lived and died by the sword, hundreds of years before your Play-fighting. That is another point I have problems with. Are you /actually/ saying that you know better than these people, and that they simply 'got it wrong'?
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Probably because they're not actually facts.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Actually, Vom Tag /prevents/ certain openings as it prevents your opponent from binding your blade. As well, you can play a 'range game', which prevents your opponents from striking at your vital areas (Again, due to out-distancing them)
Caliburnis 3 years ago
The man on the left is settling into the stance "Vom Tag", which as stated before is a legitimate stance in European Martial Arts. It is a stance that allows free movements into several cuts from above, as well as certain counters as cuts from Vom Tag have decidedly more range than cuts from other stances.
Caliburnis 3 years ago
Sorry bub, but playing keep away seems a little risky. Why not play keep away, *and* have the sword in a more ideal position to parry?
AgnotTheOdd 3 years ago