the structure of a practice session

[Stacy Clifford]

I'll agree with that as well. We do some pretty intense warmup exercises at the start of every class, but all of them except for touch and footwork drills are with sword in hand. We only have one class a week, so spending it on things that can be learned or done elsewhere is not an efficient use of our time. It is very obvious in our warmup though that we stress the importance of physical fitness.

I also have to disagree with Ilkka that fitness is less important in a duel. An arranged duel could become a defensive, drawn-out affair, and you never know when a street duel that starts out as one on one could suddenly have friends and enemies dragged into the fray and turn into a running battle. The unpredictable nature of violence dictates that it's best to be prepared for anything in any situation, regardless of the probabilities, and I think the masters understood this.

[Axel Pettersson]

@Matt;

sounds cool man, I have to try that out! We have increased our time on flourysh/parat or semidetermined cutting patterns lately, combined with footwork as you say it gives some real good results, it helps flow especially. I checked out your web page as well, those florysh of yours are impressive, I have something to strive for now, as soon as my rib heal I will be on it.

Anyone have any good tips on how to train or not to train while you have a crack in your rib?

@Ilkka;

no apologize needed man, I didn't take it that way at all .


You said: "This again is not directed to anyone, but generally I hope that people are really considering the difference between martial art and martial sport, or training for a duel and training for combat sports. "

Aboslutely. One can argue the sportive context of for example later german manuals like Meyer etc, this mostly happens in regards to his longsword part. Meyer himself writes in the longsword section, (I think even on the first page) something along the line of that this practice will help in cases of earnest protection of ones body. I think that the art of course were used for sport and competition, but were not created for that purpose, that being instead self defense (duel, street brawls,war and what have you).

We practice it the same way today, some of us in GHFS enjoy competition (for one it is good to fence with people outside of your group, for another it is a good way to practice to fence under stress), and some of us has had some success in them as well.

This however is not the goal with our practice, but rather a side effect of it. We want to be good HEMA fighters in any circumstance, not good sport fencers .



The classification you make of conditioning, practicing and learning the art makes sense to me, my first impression is that this classification is to some extent a loose one, in the sense that all three aspects are separate but also merge into one another at some points, and one can also be used to get skills in the other. Is this also how you see it, or have I misunderstood?

Also, do you use this classification actively when you run a class? for example, can you divide class time into these three parts? Or is it a tool you use to classify for example different drills and similar? Or is this how you see you own personal relationship and interaction with HEMA (WMA)?

Alot of questions here, don't feel you have to take valuable time to respond to all of them if you cannot, I can always try to steal your time at Swordfish!

@general;

I can see Ilkkas point in that sharp blades can give a different need for conditioning in a fight (you can see it along the lines of it taking less physical effort for steel to penetrate flesh than to subdue someone with a choke hold).

My point earlier was that it is necessary to reach a certain fitness level to understand this art, some need to work harder than others to get there. I am not entirely sure where exactly this level was (or how it changed from say the 1300s to the 1800s), the general idea though is that this level was probably very high, higher than it is for most of us today. This idea is also why I compared it to the notion that you have to dress up in some sort of medieval clothing to understand the art. While this can serve some purpose I think it is not near as important as being in adequate shape.

That said I completely understand your focus on technical aspects of HEMA if you meet up only once or twice every week, that give your members plenty of time to work on their conditioning outisde of HEMA practice! We have reached the amount of members where it is needed to have up to six classes a week, so we have found that most of our members (and especially those of us that both coach and practice and are very dedicated to this) simply do not have the time to condition themselves outside of our practice, or they lack the willpower to get it done outside of class, so for us it makes sense, and it has become necessary, to include a lot of conditioning in regular class.

Enough of my rambling for this day, thank you all for sharing your thought on this!

[I. Hartikainen]

Hi again!

Stacy,

you are free to disagree, of course, but I think you missed my point slightly. Firstly I wish to emphasize that I personally see conditioning (the term used loosely to include strength, balance, cardio, structure, power generation etc.) as a foundational part of an ideal swordsman. Basically, in my opinion, you need to prepare the body by exercising the aforementioned attributes, and prepare the mind by learning to understand the art. As Capoferro mentions, practice alone is all right, but not optimal, art alone does not save you but finally art with the practice is the preferred solution. Similarly, Dall'Agocchie talks on the same lines when he stresses the importance of practicing with various partners to learn timing and the measure, but also states that learning the underlying theory is the most efficient means of acquiring the skills. Indeed, I believe that after preparing the body with the right actions and the ability to execute them, and preparing the mind with the understanding of how, why and when to perform these actions you are well equipped for the actual practice, where you sharpen your instincts and learn to create and see the tempi, and execute your actions swiftly and smoothly so as not to lose it.

When I said that in a duel conditioning has less importance than in a ring fight, I simply meant that when the option of quickly ending the fight by dispatching your opponent is not available, and you are expected to display your ability by taking on perhaps multiple fights, multiple rounds etc. you can not rely on cunning and skill in quickly ending the fight.

However, I am not a professional fighter and not an expert in this matter myself, so I am not qualified for an expert opinion. The context is also too loose to make generalizations, so I will have to back off from the argument, or elaborate slightly. A weapon fight is less demanding strength/conditioningwise than wrestling, and even in wrestling all of the historical sources agree that while a strong man has the advantage, the weaker one can overcome through the use of the art. This is the same for a weapon fight, being one of the key reasons why we use weapons in the first place: to equalize differences in strength. By duel I was referring to a judicial duel, which will not end up as a running battle since it would be very closely regulated. I would think, not having participated in one, that skills in opening the fight intelligently, or responding intelligently and skills in controlling the measure and psychological understanding of what is going on weighs more than pure conditioning (of the body). As Fiore states, the fact that failing a single cover means death changes the fight considerably.

This is an interesting subject, and not one of simple opinion. The duel came in many different formats, and basically had different requirements than battlefield or self defense. These all were related, of course, and I am fairly certain that a medieval knight was well prepared for all of these.

One last point is the use of armor, which basically means two things: the demands on the body are much higher, and the fight is more likely to end up in wrestling. These both require a lot of conditioning and getting used to carry the extra weight, something that most modern people are not used to do. I hope this clarifies my position a bit!

Axel,

You got my point perfectly. I would love to see people do sport longsword one of these days, exhibiting skill and technique like that of what I imagine the fencing guilds doing back in Meyer's day (so actually utilizing the things described in his treatise and other accounts of the competitions in free play). That would be spectacular.

The classification I made can be used on class, but is rather a way for me to personally categorize things in my mind. If we take rapier practice for an example, and more specifically take a student who has bad knees and has very little experience. Optimally you would start by strengthening the knees in a way that prepares him/her for the actions required, e.g. the lunge. When the knee can take it, you would introduce the action in it's complete form, with the weapon, proper recovery &c. Then you would add a simple context, a partner so as to teach degree on the blade and distance. Then you would add a context to the context, where you create the tempo in which to perform the action. Finally you would practice this in various ways, with lots of reps, then introducing a tactical component, then a component of choice, a component of varying measure &C finally building up to what would in essence be free-play.

In this process you start with preparing the body through practice, and continue by learning the art through examples and practice finally ending up with just practice, where the art guides you. All three are working at the same time, and yes, this is quite a loose distinction but useful nonetheless. I think it would be a good idea to analyze every exercise through these three areas, if all three are built at the same time the exercise is very good, and then it is only up to picking the exercise where the emphasis is right for the situation in question.

Your point about the difference in training twice a week compared to six times a week is a good one, a student who works during the day and travels to training six nights a week does not necessarily have the time to do conditioning outside classes, and perhaps should not be expected to. This is exactly where the three areas come in to use: think for example about a game where you are supposed to slap your partners shoulders or thighs, this builds endurance, movement skills, posture, accuracy and timing all at the same time!

Yours,
Ilkka

[Aaron Pynenberg]

First off my congrats to everyone on a very good thread so far. I think everyone has made a very sincere effort to explain thier points. There are also many good efforts being made here in WMA.

As a Study Group Leader, I have changed how we have done things numerous times. These changes have taken place over the years based on trial and error, reasearch articles, and opinions found here with my fellow Scholars. I have also looked to me expirences in the Army and Law Enforcement, as well as training in MMA.

All of the points made so far have bearing, and sometimes when it comes down to it many of the decisions on how best to proceed depend greatly on the ability of the people involved in the study, the way in which the Instructor interacts with his/her class and fellow Instructors and time limitations on the group as well as availability of equipment.

In short there's never any one "correct" answer, which for newer folks always makes it a challenge, but without the benefit of years of study you should never place any one concept about practice structure in stone.

I would mention that for many of the other areas of expirence I have mentioned, the issue of personal fitness for duty/ability is a responsibility of the individual, outside of the practice sessions. This means that most of the very nice, and well-done routines that Axel and his group were performing should be done outside of the time constraints of a group practice. Again though for his group, it makes sense for them to do it together so it works. I just have to mention that like some other folks have said there are ways to achive warm-ups and muscle fatigue with sword in hand, with a partner seperate from the free-play and sparring concepts.

Things like, weight training, body weight exercises, lengthy periods of stretching, cardio work, lengthy warm-ups without the sword, etc..we try and avoid during our practice sessions, and use the time for working with each other- I aso believe that many of the drills, and exercises dne with the concepts shown by groups like OCHS on thier DVD are also not the answer, but also represent good effort.

At the 2009 IG I will be giving a class introducing numerous exercises we have had under development here in Appleton for about 4 years. These take full advantage of your partner, have you working with your weapon, and also develop skills needed for tactical function in a fight. They also have the ability to make you stronger, quicker, and have great all-round fitness benefits. What's really cool about them though is that they are built in a "template" type of format that allows for the rest of the ARMA curricula to be inserted when the individual scholar is able, and really allows for integration of those new skills on a real-fighting performance level, and not just a drill-performance level. For example, you see a new skill in Talhoffer, you no longer work out that skill, or reverse engineer it in a vaccum, but plug in that skill to this template and work with it to discover it's viability.

Naturally some core understanding of the new skillset is needed, and that is where Bart's ADVISE method would fit. Driving the whole process however is still, the core ARMA curriculum which in the end is still one of the most amazing training concepts I have seen...AP

[Vance Osterhout]

First off my congrats to everyone on a very good thread so far. I think everyone has made a very sincere effort to explain thier points. There are also many good efforts being made here in WMA.

As a Study Group Leader, I have changed how we have done things numerous times. These changes have taken place over the years based on trial and error, reasearch articles, and opinions found here with my fellow Scholars. I have also looked to me expirences in the Army and Law Enforcement, as well as training in MMA.

All of the points made so far have bearing, and sometimes when it comes down to it many of the decisions on how best to proceed depend greatly on the ability of the people involved in the study, the way in which the Instructor interacts with his/her class and fellow Instructors and time limitations on the group as well as availability of equipment.

In short there's never any one "correct" answer, which for newer folks always makes it a challenge, but without the benefit of years of study you should never place any one concept about practice structure in stone.

I would mention that for many of the other areas of expirence I have mentioned, the issue of personal fitness for duty/ability is a responsibility of the individual, outside of the practice sessions. This means that most of the very nice, and well-done routines that Axel and his group were performing should be done outside of the time constraints of a group practice. Again though for his group, it makes sense for them to do it together so it works. I just have to mention that like some other folks have said there are ways to achive warm-ups and muscle fatigue with sword in hand, with a partner seperate from the free-play and sparring concepts.

Things like, weight training, body weight exercises, lengthy periods of stretching, cardio work, lengthy warm-ups without the sword, etc..we try and avoid during our practice sessions, and use the time for working with each other- I aso believe that many of the drills, and exercises dne with the concepts shown by groups like OCHS on thier DVD are also not the answer, but also represent good effort.

At the 2009 IG I will be giving a class introducing numerous exercises we have had under development here in Appleton for about 4 years. These take full advantage of your partner, have you working with your weapon, and also develop skills needed for tactical function in a fight. They also have the ability to make you stronger, quicker, and have great all-round fitness benefits. What's really cool about them though is that they are built in a "template" type of format that allows for the rest of the ARMA curricula to be inserted when the individual scholar is able, and really allows for integration of those new skills on a real-fighting performance level, and not just a drill-performance level. For example, you see a new skill in Talhoffer, you no longer work out that skill, or reverse engineer it in a vaccum, but plug in that skill to this template and work with it to discover it's viability.

Naturally some core understanding of the new skillset is needed, and that is where Bart's ADVISE method would fit. Driving the whole process however is still, the core ARMA curriculum which in the end is still one of the most amazing training concepts I have seen...AP

Aaron,

Am I understanding this correctly; You are developing a sort of Standardized curriculum, which can be adapted to specific moves or material. THis will provide a set method of studying so that your time with partners will be maximized?

[Aaron Pynenberg]

That's the concept, and what's cool about it is it works with:

Any Scholar no matter the skill level
Any tool in ARMA's Current curricula
Any Historical Master's Material
All techniques and styles
Accounts for differing levels of fitness
Has built in learning curve features to either tune it up or down depending on skill and comfort level

It also takes away nothing at all from the overall ARMA training plan, and instead enhances it and gives everyone a base level of knowledge and context...and is right in line with JC's newest ideas about the core of the art.

All in all I am pretty proud of it so far, and when the Scholar's attend the class they will get a complete study guide and a DVD of the different concepts..should be cool- time will tell- later, AP

[Stacy Clifford]

Ilkka,

I really don't disagree with anything you're saying as regards skill vs. athleticism, because of course it's always better to have superior skill. Really I'm just trying to say that no matter what situation you're in, you really don't know what kind of fight it's going to be until you're in it. Even in the most tightly regulated judicial duel (mainly what I meant by an "arranged" duel), you still could wind up fighting someone who can best be beaten only by wearing them down. Quickly dispatching someone with skill is the ideal and the whole point of training of course, but you can't rely on every fight ending quickly because every opponent is different. Conditioning is your backup in case skill fails to come through in a timely manner. Even if there is a 99% chance that a judicial duel will end in less than 30 seconds, you still only get one mistake, and being unable to outlast your opponent could be that fatal mistake. Your approach to training is really well thought out and I can see you have a great appreciation for fitness that is similar to our own philosophy, I just think it's a mistake to assume that ANY fight will take less than everything you have to win it. When there is zero room for mistakes, assume the worst and hope for the best.

[JeremyDillon]

This discussion raises an interesting question to me. Regardless of the general benefits of physical fitness (i.e. endurance), how supplementally benificial to the execution of proper technique is a good level of fitness? Obviously an individual with a greater degree of fitness will find it easier to correctly pull off a technique, especially when that technique relies on quickness or general dexterity to be successfully executed. I know that after I started taking my physical training a bit more seriously a few months ago, correctly executing techniques, such as performing several quick Zwerchaw or recovering quickly form a lunge, became noticeably easier for me. I guess my question is this: Is it possible to be a truly skilled fencer without general physical fitness?

[Stacy Clifford]

I guess my question is this: Is it possible to be a truly skilled fencer without general physical fitness?

That's a good question, and my answer would be no. That doesn't mean you can't be a good fighter, but I think the masters are pretty clear that to be a skilled fencer, you have to be able to move well. You have to be able to apply both speed and force from any direction on the segno, both cutting and stepping, and that requires fitness, plain and simple.

[I. Hartikainen]

Stacy,

I am completely in agreement with you here.

Jeremy,

General level of fitness is required, especially in order to be able to practice the actual skills. An old man who is weakened by age, but who has trained for decades should be able to hold his own with a weapon, but even a young man can not acquire the skills unless they are fit to wield the weapon for the time it takes to practice.

Fitness, as is strength, is also very specific to the craft or task at hand. Generally you get good at what you do; for swordsmanship the best practice is swordsmanship. Still, to increase the potential for better and more effective practice, and to expand your comfort zone other exercises may prove useful.


Yours,
Ilkka

[JeremyDillon]

Stacy and Ilkka,
I totally agree. The important distinction, as pointed out by Stacy, is between someone who is a gifted fighter and someone who is a knowledgeable fencer. In my opinion, someone who is a well practiced and knowledgeable fencer, and has thus trained for specific and general fighting circumstances, will usually come out on top when set against someone who is merely naturally gifted with fighting instincts. (Instincts sounds a bit psuedo-metaphysical. By that I mean a natural tendancy towards quick reactions and fighting aggression, etc.)

[Brent Lambell]

I have enjoyed reading everyone's ideas thus far, it gives me some inspiration for our own group. That being said, I think that training sessions should be dedicated to group drills that cannot be done alone. I personally have committed myself to my fitness routine and solo cutting drills outside of ARMA time, we only get to meet once a week and that is not enough for a real fitness regiment anyhow.

Someone mentioned that they meet 3 - 5 times a week, and for that kind of schedule I think you can afford to spend some time for fencing specific strength and endurance training. But when that kind of time is not available, every scholar will dedicate as much as energy as they care to outside of ARMA and their performance will show it. I run on my own time and although I don't have the long term endurance I want yet, but my recovery time has become much shorter and that is invaluable for training and sparring. My fighting has improved dramatically as my conditioning has improved so I believe that makes a big difference.

[I. Hartikainen]

Brent,

True enough, the presence of training partners is one of the most important resources group training offers, and that should be taken advantage of as much as possible.

But remember that you also need to teach your students how to practice on their own, and this training also has to happen during the group lesson. For this reason you should do solo work, both for general conditioning and technical practice to some extent during the group lessons. This is important.

Yours,
Ilkka

[Stacy Clifford]

I agree with Ilkka on this one, you have to be sure everyone knows how to do their solo exercises correctly before going home and doing them alone. Bad practice can be worse than no practice. It takes time to correct bad habits, so it helps to do solo exercises as a group where you can watch each other and point out flaws that need to be worked on, as well as praise and encourage correctness.