New Article on the Mastercuts

[Webmaster]

And now for an article you've all been waiting for, by Bart Walczak and Jake Norwood (with a little help from Stew Feil):

The Mastercuts - What They Are and What They Aren't

This thread is going to be very popular, I can tell already.

[Chris Readle]

Cool article, and I quite like the pics.

I haven't had a chance to try these interpretations out with sword in hand, but the pics for the krumphaw seem confusing...would it be possible to number them, as the order I *think* they belong in doesn't seem to follow. And the PDF slideshow also looks to be a bit out of order.

It doesn't help that the description differs from how we've typically been doing the krump (as a true edge strike to the blade, with a false edge follow up), but once we get a chance to get together we'll probably be able to clear up my confusion. Also, me reading somewhat *earlier* than midnight might help. <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />

All that said, if I read the description correctly, this might clear up one of the nagging issues I've had with how we do the krump. Namely, it's never seemed particularly effective when used in the Vor, as there just a bit *too* much telegraphing going on to really break someone's Ochs.

crr

[Jeffrey Hull]

Hey guys good work.

It was cool to see two ways of doing Schieler (squinter), as there is validity in each approach.

I am unsure which I think is better, though some definitely have their preference.

Perhaps also it is useful to think of the Schielhaw as a strike which can become a stop-thrust.

Thanks and compliments,

JH

[Alfred Wong]

Oh my Goodness! I have been waiting for this article for so long! I love it! It surely help us understanding the mastercuts!

<img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

[philippewillaume]

well done, lads I think it is a very good article

i do not necessary agree with some iterpretation of the actual strike. (krump and sheitel but i do agree with the scheil)
but the essences of the masterhaw are well captured.

[Shawn Cathcart]

Nice article. Step by step illustrations always helps a lot. I do have a question though. I notice with the exception of one of the schielhau cuts the opponent always starts in Vom Tag. Would it not have been better to have the opponent starting in the guards that the mastercuts break? Such as krumphau and ochs, and scheitelhau breaking alber. Was there a particular reason for starting from Vom Tag in those examples. Just curious.

We also do the krumphau using the true edge. I've found both variants work well enough.

[Jared L. Cass]

Thanks so much Bart and Jake and Stew! A great article.

As far as why they chose to show them working against strikes from above rather than to break guards. IMO it's to show how and why the masterstrikes work. They simotaniously attack while defending. It's what makes them cool <img src="/forum/images/icons/cool.gif" alt="" /> While each of the strikes break the various guards is neat and nessassary too, by showing the strikes against an attack, the reader has a more imediate practicality shown' them. Just MO, though. Maybe BArt or Stew will weigh in with there reasons.

Jared L. Cass, ARMA Associate, Wisconsin

[Jeffrey Hull]

Yes, I appreciate that myself, that these guys show us the breaking of strikes (in des) rather than the breaking of wards (vor), though each has its place (or rather, time). This is the more difficult use of the master-strikes to grasp, I think, so I am finding this presentation helpful. JH

[Webmaster]

Given the early feedback, it's likely that we'll be doing some revisions to the picture sequences to improve the comprehensability of the article, but we do have to give Stew some time to get back in the "studio" again. (Hey Stew, aren't you glad we don't have to draw you with pen and ink?) In the meantime, since this is designed to be a very practical article, the more reviews the better.

[Shane Smith]

I do not see how a krump from my right VomTag is easily possible with my short edge.The true edge lines up perfectly with a thumbed flat and allows Ringecks false-edge cut to the ear to follow efficiently. What have I missed? <img src="/forum/images/icons/confused.gif" alt="" />

[Casper Bradak]

Get in right ochs, and then look 45 to 90 deg. to your right, and you're doing it. Sort of a sideways shielhau in a way. They both work fine, though the possibilities of each should be explored before sticking to one too much.

[JeffGentry]

Hey Shane

I do not see how a krump from my right VomTag is easily possible with my short edge

If your right handed and you are in right vow tag turn the knuckles of your right hand so you are looking at them and push your left hand to the right, and it will cross your left in front of your right and the blade will go to your left.

Hope that is what you meant.

Jeff

[Alfred Wong]

I would really like to look some master hit video by Bart and Jake... That will make the article even better! I had already been inspired by the pictures...

[philippewillaume]

Hello shane.
I do not think you have missed anything. (I am not sure that is any thing to go by though...)

The problem with the krump is that a source does not seem to agree.
The all agree that it breaks the ox, and ober and unterhaw and we jump to the right
And we need to find what is the shape of the blow first.

For Doringer, it is an oberhaw where you end you point to the hands. And that&amp;#8217;s

For Vd and lew.
He takes a left plug and that what we breaks so it is reasonable to assume that the blow unter and ober are going to come from there.
So basically we jump to his left and strike over the hand with the long edge

Speyer has the same lines as VD and lew however he call it the the unterhaw version of the krump
but has as well the same verses as Ringeck (in fact he start the chapter on the
However the difference is that he says we extended arms as opposed crossed arms. This is the oberhaw version of the strike
Like ringeck he mentions that the guy he striking from our right.

Ringeck:
I always had doubt on the transcription, as the world in the manuscript do not look like gecrutsen at all. I think it is more likely to be in any case I think it is safer to assume that it has the same sense as Speyer.

I think Bart and Jacob are showing the VD/lew version. I.e the unterhaw version of speyer.
However I think ringeck and speyer use the oberhaw version. (for all inten and purpose a yokomen uchi strike)

I think what mislead you is that the piece they show is mentioned only in ringeck (and not in VD or Lew or speyer they have the strike the hand from the schankhut piece instead). This is the abzetsen from the krump
What ringeck says is that you strike a krump with crossed arms, pass by the schrakurt (which is different that he on in VD, ringeck one always have the long edge on top) and hit him with the shot edge.
After that ringeck mention Ringeck describe strike against the master the one you end up thrusting or striking with the short edge and of course ringeck does not start from the schrankhurt. (I think ringeck version is more direct and uses the oberhaw)

In any case, either doing the uberhau or unterhau version but from what I understand, if you want to do the abzetzen, you have to do the krump to schank at the very beginning of the piece
With a tad of exaggeration you do that part with out moving, you start to move with strike with the short edge (thing are more blured in reality)

What Bart and Jacob have done is just to put VD start to a Ringeck piece. (Which is bad and evil if you are mono manual, but is perfectly sound in an Arma context)

But basically that is why they hit with the long edge; if you want to hit the BG with the short edge you need to do the piece against the master
Ie you do not pass by the schankhurt but you wind directly and thrusting or striking

So if you the B&amp;J (that mean Bart and Jacob), ie tge unterhaw stike you are not necessarily strike and cover into the opposite schannkurt but take off a soon as possible from their blade so you strike will be a tad flater and will probably never reach the shrankhurt

I hope I made sense&amp;#8230;

[JeffGentry]

Hey guy's

The Krump is actualy a very versatile thing i have used it to set aside a zornhau from pflug and then step through and cut, alot of these are very versatile in that they do set you in a good position to be in the vor if you do happen to not be successful on the first strike of the meisterhau, they do give you many option's for other thing's i think that is part of the usefulness of these strike's when done with intent, if you can go out and do these in a flourysh it will kind of show you how these can be so effective they do flow like most other thing's one into the other, you can go from a krump into a zwerchhau very easily then to left ochs r ochs and then the zornhau, try to flourysh and use the meisterrhau only a few time's see what it is like.

Aside note John Clement's is coming on tv the history channel modern marvels axes, sword's and knive's, lol, kind of ironic huh.

Jeff