Critical of Sport Fencing

For Historical European Fighting Arts, Weaponry, & Armor

Moderators: Webmaster, Stacy Clifford

Guest

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Guest » Sun May 16, 2004 11:20 pm

OK... this "holier than thou" stuff is cloying. Stop getting defensive.


Um, I think I've been pretty fair and respectable considering how little time it took for John to start throwing insults at me and sport fencing. Get on the white line.

I thought safety was the hallmark of sport fencing...


Nope. Not at all. Safety is a goal, but on the World Cup level, it's dog-eat-dog. I've seen guys get chased off the strip, which is raised mind you, and then fall down a set of high steps and hit the floor. Tough luck, the person who fell should have worked on his retreats. I've seen Olympic sabereurs attack someone with such force that they drew blood. Tough luck. The attack had better technique. Fencing is more of a martial art than you understand. When you see a World Class sabereur draw blood, to a standing, cheering crowd, you'll understand what I mean.

Guest

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Guest » Sun May 16, 2004 11:23 pm

What happens if you lunge so hard you could do damage like that and your opponent simply wasn't there to be hit? Would you even have time to recover before he killed you?


Yes. But, it depends on the person. Not every fencer works on those muscles necessary to recover quickly. I can send you videos of both those who do recover quickly, and those that don't.

Guest

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Guest » Sun May 16, 2004 11:34 pm

However, the rapier/smallsword, whichever you want to use as an example, was never a bludgeoning or impact weapon; it's made to pierce flesh and cloth and kill.


That's true. But, if you do hit bone, the technique is there to help you get through the bone, and into the vital organs. About a hundred years ago, some great fencers recognized that the sport was getting too stylish, and so they set about seeking the roots of combat. They believed that in order to mimic combat conditions, a fencer should be prepared to stab through bone, and so they started improving the lunge. (An example of that philosophy's influence can be seen in modern electric weapons that are used in tournaments. They have have a spring that resists with the same amount of pressure that would be necessary to actually penetrate flesh.) Not every modern fencer uses the improved techniques. As I said, they are dangerous and usually kept within small circles. I use them sparringly, but I have been seeking to perfect my execution, and thus I started reading the ARMA articles and was surprised to find no mention of the more powerful lunging techniques. And, so began this thread after I found some rather baseless attacks against sport fencing.

Guest

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing - change over time

Postby Guest » Sun May 16, 2004 11:41 pm

For example, consider:


Um... I'm not sure what you were trying to do with that long, long post, but I don't think a 19th or 20th century fencer would know anything about 21st century fencing because the 20th century fencer is probably dead.

As one fencing text in the 1930’s put it: “In gaining speed, the evolution of fence has perfected those movements that may be made the fastest and discarded anything that tended to slow the play.” (Cass, p. 50). This is certainly the case still today with modern sport fencing, where at it highest levels of international contest and Olympic competition, naturally nothing is of any concern other than scoring a point by any means permitted under the rules.


Cass is not one of those fencers who knew how to improve power at the same time as his speed. Today's fencers are faster AND more powerful. All pluses, no negatives with the exception of needing to be more physically fit.

User avatar
Ryan Ricks
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 10:15 am
Location: marietta, GA

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Ryan Ricks » Sun May 16, 2004 11:48 pm

A sport fencer can advance more quickly, attack more quickly and hit much harder without sacrificing balance or recovery time


i think the assumption behind this is that the combatants are moving only forward and back as per fencing rules.

if rapier is anything like sword and shield or longsword, anyone who used a powerful sport fencing type lunge would be very vulnerable to evasion and counter attack.

instead of taking a step back and trying to parry, a historical scholar would evade to either side. possibly by moving forward and to either side and stabbing you as you go by, or possibly by moving forward and to the right, while delivering a special strike to your outstretched wrist.

historical scholars employ footwork that allows eight basic directions of movement. as someone in ARMA said, envision an X superimposed on a +. this allows for a wide range of motion and evasion. Because of this, one would not want to attack more vigorously than necessary. because if the attack misses, it makes it that much easier for your opponent to move out of the way while counter attacking at the same time.

ryan
ARMA associate member

User avatar
Roger Soucy
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 7:13 am
Location: Staten Island, NY
Contact:

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Roger Soucy » Sun May 16, 2004 11:50 pm

They believed that in order to mimic combat conditions, a fencer should be prepared to stab through bone, and so they started improving the lunge.


In respect to the rapier, I would tend to disagree with this. But I will specifically say I have virtually no experience with rapier yet, or fencing ever. That said, it would seem to me, if you're attacking the right targets, you should almost never hit bone (ie, groin, stomach, kidneys, lungs, heart, and throat).

There are much better targets for piercing than trying to push through bone. The only bones I can see are the skull, the sternum, and the ribs if you hit them at the wrong angle or perfectly centered on a rib, anything else I expect would slip off the curve and between the ribs. In respect to the skull, the eyes, nasal cavity, and mouth offer fairly large openings.

Really, there's little reason to try and push through bone when you could recover and strike a more lethal target.

If for some reason you target a bone and for whatever reason fail to go through it completely your opponent will likely get a free vital area strike to you. Keeping in mind that in the adrenaline of fighting a simple broken bone has only a chance of stopping your opponent before he kills you.
::: Sic transit gloria mundi :::

ARMA Staten Island
http://www.arma-si.org

Guest

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Guest » Sun May 16, 2004 11:53 pm

Incidentally, Mr. Fin, where are you located?


Currently, I'm in Maryland. I just left Texas a couple weeks ago, and I'll be leaving the country a little while from now. But, if there are some Maryland ARMA types, I'll try some free sparring with them.

and I'm sure I'll have some commentary once I've digested what's been said.


:-)

User avatar
Tony_Indurante
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2002 11:05 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Tony_Indurante » Sun May 16, 2004 11:54 pm

Anyway, I'm not impressed that you can cut raw meat and bone - I see that happen on Iron Chef all the time. What I'd like to see you do is break the ribs of a moving target, that is wearing protection, using an FIE epee blade. I think the best way for you to do this is to get a USFA membership, go down to San Marcos and hope to meet John Moreau in an event. If you can break his ribs, I will eat crow.


You have mentioned several times this "breaking ribs with and epee" thing. I have say I don't believe it. Provide some evidence of this- and if it was a one time accident, well prepare for me to be totally unimpressed.

As for the validity of actually hitting a target with a sharp- well it shows exactly how little effort it takes to put a blade through someone. Which is the only point of the martial art.
Anthony Indurante

User avatar
Ryan Ricks
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 10:15 am
Location: marietta, GA

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Ryan Ricks » Mon May 17, 2004 12:01 am

hiya. i'm going to be in DC soon. i'd love to work with you, but i study sword and shield and long sword. so i'm not sure how you'd feel about that.
ARMA associate member

Guest

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Guest » Mon May 17, 2004 12:16 am

"If there was an ARMA in my area"

where is your area?
If you are in Oregon I would love to invite you to train some time. No I'm not saying I can beat you or anything(heck I have no rank lol) But maybe we can sit down and demonstrate some techniques and maybe calmly clear up some issues. I personaly think everyone is missing the simple point that if it has rules it's not truly a martial art as a whole(I'm not saying that some techniques arent deadly because i'm sure that some probably are.) But as a whole it isent a martial art it is a martial sport(no insult intended). If it has no rules it is a martial art because in combat anything goes and one must train for that factor. In martial sport I just cant see anyone training to grab another mans fun parts and trying to rip or cut them off lol.
Dave McGirl
ARMA Oregon

Guest

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Guest » Mon May 17, 2004 1:42 am

You have mentioned several times this "breaking ribs with and epee" thing. I have say I don't believe it. Provide some evidence of this.


I'm afraid I can't. It's not like when our club comrades comeback from World Cup, we go out and announce their broken bones to the press. Mostly, we just stand around looking very impressed. So, I guess you'll just have to go on not believing me. If you speak French, German or Italian, you might be able to find something on broken bones on their newspapers. I'll look none-the-less, and post any relevant information I can find for you.

Guest

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Guest » Mon May 17, 2004 1:46 am

hiya. i'm going to be in DC soon. i'd love to work with you, but i study sword and shield and long sword. so i'm not sure how you'd feel about that.


I've never used a long sword, or shield. But, PM with details about your seminar in D.C., we might be able to work something out.

Guest

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Guest » Mon May 17, 2004 1:50 am

where is your area?


Maryland, for the moment.

No I'm not saying I can beat you or anything(heck I have no rank lol)


Don't worry, I don't have a chip on my shoulder about that kind thing. I'd be embarrassed about losing, but that's about it. My C-rating is pretty good, but I can't hold a candle to the A-rated fencers in my area. I've got a lot to learn, I'm sure.

Guest

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Guest » Mon May 17, 2004 2:26 am

That said, it would seem to me, if you're attacking the right targets, you should almost never hit bone (ie, groin, stomach, kidneys, lungs, heart, and throat).


The heart is behind the ribcage. There's every chance your blade will hit a rib when trying to hit the heart.

Really, there's little reason to try and push through bone when you could recover and strike a more lethal target.


Since the strike and recovery is executed so quickly, you could push through the bone and make another strike. I can't do it, but there are plenty of people who can. There's a Frenchman named Pluminail (sp?) that can as well. I can't find any digital video of the little bugger, but PM with an e-mail and I'll send it off to you if I find any.

Guest

Re: Critical of Sport Fencing

Postby Guest » Mon May 17, 2004 2:30 am

i think the assumption behind this is that the combatants are moving only forward and back as per fencing rules.


The fencing strip is 2m wide, there's enough room to side-step, but not much. Side-stepping is discussed often, and the typical response usually involves Spanish style fencing. Some fencers still use a Spanish "two-step" to avoid attacks. I haven't quite learned it.


Return to “Research and Training Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests

 
 

Note: ARMA - The Association for Renaissance Martial Arts and the ARMA logo are federally registered trademarks, copyright 2001. All rights reserved. No use of the ARMA name or emblem is permitted without authorization. Reproduction of material from this site without written permission of the authors is strictly prohibited. HACA and The Historical Armed Combat Association copyright 1999 by John Clements. All rights reserved. Contents of this site 1999 by ARMA.