breaking the phlug

[philippewillaume]

Hi Phillippe.

What is your take on how the schiel breaks the pflug? I have yet to see a fully satisfactory theory or interpretation on this.

Jake
Sen. Free Scholar
An ARMA of ONE
(Sorry, I couldn't resist

Hello jack
I took the liberty to create a new thread for that. I hope it is not a bother.
I only recently came up with a view of the breaking of the guard that I am happy with.
That ties up with how I see absetzen and masterhaw used in the same function, the way of striking and the Zornhau being the “default” blow.

My problem was that the breaking dynamic guard is not too difficult; it is the static one that is a bugger. (By dynamic I mean that you take or leave the guard.)
So if we assume that the guard is static (which seems to be the case if we believe Ringeck, VD seems more dynamic).
The guy in the plugh can krump to our hands, the shiel handing up into an extend ox or plough (or between) but we will pass by and ox-ish position
On could say well the krump is supposed to break the ox so may be it is not against the manual teachings.
I do not agree with this view for the following reason. Why tell us that this blow breaks the guard and be weary of it, if you can break the blow in the first place?

I think this is possible because we leave the centerline when we start the blow. The Sheil is (according to my interpretation that that is) an ex-centered blow on the left side of our body.
So if our opponent in static guards is familiar with the lichtanauer school, he will be able to move his head and shoulder forward and provided that he starts his counter versy son after our attack. He will get us. The window to hit us is very narrow and require timing but it is there
I believe this is true for any of the guard breaking. It is more obvious with alber or Von tag

How ever the description of shield is when we use it as an abzetsen role, against a thrust from below or some striking with strength. This is by all account a very dynamic environment (our opponent is committed to an action and he reduces the distance for us)

Now if we strike by sending our hand forward before we move (we are going to move the body and the feet slightly after)
We reduce his ability to move forward since, we capture the centerline and that will create a timing difference between his counter which need to be quick and the position of our hands that will be behind where they should be if we had struck from the pass.

what do you think?

Phil

[Jake_Norwood]

I *think* I see what you're saying.

How does the schiel "look" when you perform this? How does it differ from a zwerch or zorn? At what point does it contact the opponent's blade, if at all? Walk me through, if you could.

Jake

[JeffGentry]

Hey Jake, Philippe

The way Philippe is describing it to break pflug sound's pretty much like what John C. showed us at our 1.0, I haven't realy tried it in sparring, it does seem to work in and of itself.

Just thought i would drop in my two 2 cent's worth.

Jeff

[philippewillaume]

Hello
The shiel in it self:
You can do it by turning the sword or just letting your front hand rotate so that you end up in the same grip as if you had physically rotated the sword.
All is really one movement, the description makes it look like we are taking langen ort and then we finish the schiel but it is not really the case.
It could be a good description but all happens at the same time

1 the BG stand in a plugh on his right side we stand in what ever on our right side (ie with the left foot forward)

2 without moving the feet punch with you hands on the centerline.
You tip is going to end up somewhat close to your opponent but out of range
You are controlling the center line (you have stolen it from him, since the point of the ox control the centreline)
In most of case you will be in contact with his sword
And that will make changing through or stepping aside and back to hit our hands much less likely.

3 instead of following as you would with the zorn. As you take the short edge you step with the right forward and you extend your arms to the left of your body.
Basically you are ex-centering your strike
I think that bit is quit important because that is enable you to either turn the sword/change the grip and not becoming weak and collapsible.
How much forward and how high depends of what he does.

The short edge grip is what makes that strike bio mechanically strong.
The wrist is the alignment of the arms and the arms are extended so we have aligned all the collapsible point of the arm in a stable balance system. (ie the forces applied to the system tend to make it more balanced

4 defacto you are doing a snow-plough action we collected his sword and then moved it on the side.

If he tries to counter trust our body structure and the shape of the blow will collapse/deflect his attempt.

it hope that helped

[Jared L. Cass]

Philippe, this is the same way I do it as well. You explain it much better that I do <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

Jake, you have about a bazzilion times more experience and skill than I, but still I'm not sure what you mean as far as this not meeting the criteria of the Lichten. tradition. It's proactive (the opponent is "waiting" in pflug, you grab the vor), it takes you "off line" (footwork), it's powerful (because of the passing footwork, torquing waist/wrist and by moving your blade to your left), and it threatens with the point (once the plow is broken your point is threatening the opponent).

Perhaps where/why it doesn't work for you is because you are fencing opponents of more skill than what the text says (Ringeck): "Note that the schiller is a strike that breaks the strike or thrust (at the end it mentiones using it against the plow) of the clumsy or unskilled fencer who relies only on strength".

Thoughts?

Jared L. Cass, ARMA Associate, Wisconsin

[David Craig]

Phillipe,

From what you have written it appears that your interpretation relies on precisely timed footwork. If I understand you correctly, you are saying to strike before you step. When exactly do you begin your step? I'm not sure I understand the reasoning behind this, and why you wouldn't step &amp; strike at the same time. It appears to me almost like you are describing a guard transition to left ochs, but one in which you step halfway through the movement.

Assuming the versetzen succeeds, what is your next action, a thrust?

David

[Jake_Norwood]

Flat out, honestly, this doesn't seem control his weapon, his angle, or his range. It doesn't cover any lines of attack. If he closes his eyes and stabs forward at my stomach, I die. I might hit him in the head in the process, but it failed to displace--and it is one of the "four displacements." Even if it did make contact with his weapon, because he thrust at your face or because he's pflug is "too high," then a simple durchwechseln would counter it effortlessly and immediately, because the range on the described schiel is not sufficient to threaten the opponent's upper openings.

Forgive me if I'm being hard-headed, but also believe me that I've been around this track a few times now. Conducting the schiller as one of the vier versetzen vexes me horribly. I have seen probably 4 or 5 interpretations at this point, and none of them is suitably simple and effective.

For example, looking at the other 4:
Krump breaks ochs. It also breaks all strikes that come from ochs (which is why it works). Although there is some discussion about how krump works, I think that there is a preponderance of evidence allready. It is frequently illustrated. The bottom line is that it covers possible lines of attack while either gaining the Vor or striking the opponent.

The Zwerch covers all strikes that come from above (including other zwerchs and mittelhauwen), and either gains the Vor (should it come to a bind) or strikes the opponent. You are able to "forget" what your opponent does because the attack is geometrically sound, as is the krump.

The Schaitelhau bothers me a bit, I must confess. It is said to break Alber, and clearly does so out of range (the whole right-triangle principle). It allows one to attack the head without fear of being struck in the foot. When combined with a triangle step it removes the alber-guy's ability to thrust into the belly or cut upwards to the hands. Thus my lines are protected while I strike.

But the schiller, in every permutation I've seen, fails to cover lines of attack while hitting the opponent or gaining the vor, regardless of his counter-action to your attack. But that's *not* what the masters say it does. They say that it counters pflug and buffalos. The buffalo part I got. Pflug, I don't.

Make sense?

Jake

[JeffGentry]

Hey Jake

Think in Meyer term's, What strike's can your opponent due from pflug?

Meyer say's "...right and left plough, and both will become for you nothing else than stab's outward from below", your opponent has to go to/thru another gaurd(Vom Tag) before he can actualy make any overstrike, all he can actualy do from plough is defend and stab.

So with that in mind you go from your right and do shiller with a step right and end in left plough you just closed the left opening's from his thrust(remember you want to push his point) and are ready to defend, If he tries to cut you can still thrust faster than he can come all the way from plough thru vom tag and around to hit you with any oberhau.

Think Dobringer "For you should strike or thrust in the shortest and nearest way possible. For in this righteous fencing do not make wide or ungainly parries or fence in large movements by which people restrict themselve's"

Jeff

[philippewillaume]

Hello jack,
Don&amp;#8217;t worry mate,
I do not think you are hard-headed or antagonistic. What you understood I explained does not work and you say so.
That what discussion between civilized people is,
Personally I think it is much better like that than writing ha yeah I see, and privately saying, that foggy is talking out of rectum because what he says does not work.
Beside I may very well have missed something that would not be the first time.

Written format is not the best to explain that type of thing, if we could show it to each other that would be over in minutes.

I do agree with the problems you mention, in fact it can even be said for the zwerch as well (or any breakings form alber and Von tag were the most obvious).
If your opponents take a Von Tag on with the quillons on his right shoulder, he can durchwelchen the zwerch all the time. Or just take a step back and crack a Zorh on our Zwerch (which is the official way to break it.)

From what I understood you describe (famous last word) I.e. the straight stab or the duchwelchen. I think I know where the communications break down is. Especially since it has been bugging me as well.

For me, if you do the masterhav as you would against a strike, to break the guard, there is always at least one way to counter it when you are standing in a static guard waiting for the blow. The reason for that is that you need to break an extra distance compared to breaking a strike.
So in the case of the plugh breaking you are spot on.
Which leaves us two options either the breaking of the guard is for dynamic guard or the blow that are coming from them. I a think that is what VD and speyer are saying

Or the breaking of the guard includes static guards and we need to deal with that extra range. And that is what I was trying to illustrate

If we take a step from the plough breaking, the shiel is a counter to forceful blow or thrust.
It works because as our structure (sword body movement) is much stronger that the structure we go against at that range and will have the effect jeff described

So if the opponenent is in a static guard there we need to do something that brings us in a range where we can reproduce the masterhaw as if we were struck by the opponent

To go back to what craigh wrote. What I was trying to explain isn&amp;#8217;t a two-step move and you never end up in a left plough
If I was to explain it in a two-phase movements (which it is not) I would say that you have a long point with the left leg forward and you finish in the plough/ox or in between.
Technically speaking you do not really pass by the long point the punching of the arms has the same effect.
May be you can try that, it is a bit of a cheat but hopefully you will see what I am getting at . Start in the long point and you opponent in the plough
From there you just have do the shiel as you would against one of his attack.
You control his centerline so he can not lean forward so he can only go over or below you sword or trust at your left side. Any of those the shiel will take care of.

The other thing that can throw us off is may be you plough is dobringer alber. It is not really a problem on the right side but it more obvious on the left.
The plough needs to have the hand over the back leg
If the hand are somewhat in front of the body. I think it is an alber with the point up or what Dobringer call the alber and the schiel can not break that.
As I said on the right side the hands need to be well in front and not so much on the left side

Philippe
I hope that did not muddle the subject any further&amp;#8230; <img src="/forum/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" />

[JeffGentry]

Hey Philippe

For me, if you do the masterhav as you would against a strike, to break the guard, there is always at least one way to counter it when you are standing in a static guard waiting for the blow. The reason for that is that you need to break an extra distance compared to breaking a strike.
So in the case of the plugh breaking you are spot on.
Which leaves us two options either the breaking of the guard is for dynamic guard or the blow that are coming from them. I a think that is what VD and speyer are saying

I think this is a very, very, important point when you try to break pflug with schil, in my opinion you have to close with them extremely quickly and very closely so that when they try to defend you can continue to attack from inside there sword, there is no guarantee the initial attck will drop them follow it up with a second attack at this point you are in a good position for a powerful thrust remember everything you do should set you to some advantage.



Jeff

[Jake_Norwood]

Hi Jeff.

Meyer say's...

Meyer doesn't say that Schiller breaks pflug. What's more is that the schiller he shows doesn't appear to be capable of it. Thus the ongoing theory that there are "two" schillers. Then again...

Phillippe,

I'll have to digest your post some. Work through it. I'll get back to you.

Jake

[Bill Welch]

Hey Jake,
In Goliath I found,

Page 65 [No. 33 recto]

Wie man den schiller hauen sol

Merck wan du mit dem zufechten zu im kumpst so stee mit dem linckn / vues vor und halt dein schwert an deiner rechtn achseln, haut er dir / denn obenn ein zu dem kopf so verwent dein schwert und hau gegn / seinem hau mit der kurtzen schneid lang aus geragkten armenn / oben uber sein schwert im zu dem kopf Ist er dan also geschaid unnd / verselt mit dem hau deins schwerts und wil unden durch wechseln / so las denn ort mit dem hau fursich lanckh einschissen so mag er undn / nicht durchwechseln

How one shall strike the glancer

Mark when you come to him in the pre-fencing to stand with the left foot forward and hold your sword on your right shoulder, if he strikes then to your head from above then twist your sword and strike long against his strike with your arms above and the short edge right over his sword to his head. If he is then unsuccessful and disabled on your sword and would then change through below, then let your point shoot far forward from yourself so he won't try to change through below.

Page 66 [No. 33 verso]

image

Page 67 [No. 34 recto]

Ein anders

Wann du gegenn im steest unnd beheldest dein schwert ann deiner rechtn / achseln steet er dan gegenn dir in der hut des pflugs und wil dir undn / zustechn so hau in mit dem schiller lanck oben ein unnd scheus im den / ort langk ein zu der prust so mag er dich unndn mit dem stich nit er / langenn

Another

When you stand against him and hold your sword on your right shoulder, if he then stands against you in the guard of the plough and would stab you from below, then strike him with the glancer to point high and long to his chest, thus he will not reach you with the stab from below.

It reads to me like you strike in the Vor, and simply outreach your opp.

[Jake_Norwood]

Hi Bill.

I've been working almost exclusviely with Goliath of late, so I'm glad you bring it up. The first section is no problem. It's just like what Meyer's doing, really, so no worries there.

The second part--breaking the plough--is what bugs me. How, given basic geometry, does this out-reach the long point, which is the full extention of a thrust from pflug? It can't, but it could cause a bind if you keep the point on the chest. Only now it's really a thrust, not a cut, which seems pretty clearly to be the case, but still problematic depending on how rigid we want to interpret "hau."

Hmmm...more to experiment with. I like this better, though. It sounds more like it works.

Jake

[david welch]

Hey Jake,

I was talking with Bill about this earlier.

I think it breaks plow because it just about forces him into thrusting straight up (into cron) to avoid it.

Then you unwind from the bind and stab him in the head, or you unwind and cut him on the other side of the head.

YMMV?

[Bill Welch]

I think that the idea is to break the plough by making your opp either bind or back-off. And I think(?) that you prevent the thrust to long point by beating them to the punch by both cutting, and stabbing at the same time.