There is an ongoing debate within our community as to whether or not to use gloves, what type of gloves to use, etc.. I have trained and free played with no gloves, with leather gloves, padded leather gloves, and recently, with some gloves that I have added gel insole "armor" to.
I feel that my hands are best protected when I use proper technique and my partners use proper control. The problem is, all my techniques are not yet "proper" and my training partners sometimes slip up. Because of these facts I choose to wear gloves when I train. I sometimes still get hit in the hand and I still feel the pain, but instead of losing skin and blood, I just have a bruise. With steel blunts it does not seem to take much force to draw blood but even thin gloves seem to prevent this. I want to train as much and as hard as possible, and for as many years as this body will allow.
I recently acquired some lacrosse gloves to evaluate. After a couple of good workout's using them I have some thoughts. The bulk of the gloves do slightly affect the range of motion in using techniques, especially when the wrists cross. This may change with use and familiarity. My question is this:
In this art, there were times when gauntlets and gloves were worn. I have seen illustrations where gauntlets where laid out among the other weapons and training tools in the students arsenal. Did the masters record teachings specific to the use of gauntlets. It seems that this is just another aspect of the art that we must become familiar with. I want to be able to effectively wield my blade using no gloves, light gloves, or heavy gloves/gauntlets.
Another thought that has come to mind is that I wonder if the variety of hilts and grips that we see, was a reflection of weather or not gauntlets/gloves would be worn. The length of the grip would also be an issue in my thinking.
As a training tool, I can see using the heavy gloves to allow more intense practice using techniques against the hands. Much like a coaches fencing jacket.
Jesus blessings!
Bro. chris

