How hard does one have to hit?

[philippewillaume]

Here is an example of how we in FL strike. Note the von tag at the shoulder and the power and speed that results. Please reserve the howls for the bad technique to private emails, okay?

http://arma-sfl.com/workshop/fall2006/jay-vs-mike1.wmv

can not see it,

bill stuff tells me te hserver is not availiable.

[Nathan Dexter]

I didnt mean to make it sound like I couldnt take a few bruises! but the original post kinda made it sound like the one guy was hitting harder than one would normally expect.

[Jay Vail]

Here is an example of how we in FL strike. Note the von tag at the shoulder and the power and speed that results. Please reserve the howls for the bad technique to private emails, okay?

http://arma-sfl.com/workshop/fall2006/jay-vs-mike1.wmv

can not see it,

bill stuff tells me te hserver is not availiable.

try again. it should play with windows media player.

[Lance Chan]

To give another example of sword hitting unarmored flesh and bone, I put up a video of my test cut where I used the brescia spadona against a big head, hitting the area full of bone with a moderate, well controlled strike. If one consider the amount of bone it has gone through, one would see that flesh takes no force to cut, and bone at the size of arms or legs takes only moderate force to cut through. The length of bone my cut had gone through would take off a thigh already.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9Hdj0J5yno

I would also like to stress that no matter one's hitting hard or not, it's important to perform an offense that also serve defense purpose. In fact, I think it's the essence in the German longsword that each move serves simultaneous offense and defense, thus I did not mention this in the original post / video. Some may assume that hitting light would not stop the opponent in track even if it hits the target, which could be true if the area that was hit was not of vital aspects. That's why I emphasized on a "well aimed", "refined" shot. Lighter hits only works in instant stoppage on certain areas but allow quick recovery and quick follow up strikes, which also allow one not to give up his defense in doing so. What I didn't mention is that in my fault, I assumed the attacker would have simultaneously defend himself with the strike, like placing the cross guard / forte to close the line of the opponent's attack, or have the tip of the sword ready for a follow up thrust. But turned out it was not universally understood.

Anyway, I agree that full arm strikes have their values and I practice this as well. The video is aimed to remind that rather than trying to force through an established defense by striking hard against the resistance, a bind and wind or hitting somewhere else would be a wiser choice perhaps. Beating the opponent's blade from the side where it wasn't well resisting, like from the "inside", would work very well too.

[Matt Bryant]

I like your test cutting videos and definitely see the point of the one addressing the over usage of power. While it is evident that flesh and bone are easy to cut, it should also be noted that these are under ideal conditions. In combat I would not trust to a lighter blow under the assumption that it would be incapacitating. I would make VERY certain that it would be as incapacitating as I was able to deliver. This of course is in light of the non-ideal conditions of combat: adrenaline, both people moving, the movement's possible affects on blade alignment, maybe he is one of those hard to kill freaks like many fellows to end up getting the medal of honor, etc...

I am not saying that you should baseball-bat the guy, my point is that you should fence with all your strength. Speed and full intend are naturally preceded by competence with the actions used. This in of itself insures a lack of telegraphing, just as much speed, accuracy of placement, proper blade alignment...

I think that a more intent filled way of fighting does by no means compromise defense, but rather goes further to insure success. Fast and forceful movements, closing quickly, balanced voiding, aggressive off-line movement... these things are paramount to success in my humble opinion. Also, not being able to bind or change your attack as necessary should not be a concern when fencing with more power. If you practice fencing in this way you will become used to it. Your Indes should be honed to operate at full speed and power.

Keep in mind that I am by no means fully competent in the above concepts, but that is what I am striving for. (Long way to go)

[Mike Cartier]

Well from the perspective of Meyer Longsword i would say the main reason not to strike lightly is that displacments are a common thing in longsword bouting and often the amount of pressure you strike with can be the determining factor in who wins the exchange when they clash at the displacment of the parry.

Remember the Wrath Guard and the Wrath Strike, Meyer warns in his book to guard yourself well against wrath. This is because putting this sort of pressure on your opponent exposes openings.

Not every strike must be powerful of course, Meyer has many other types of cuts, but generally in a flurry of cuts i make my intended finishing cut have some zip to it.

[Shane Smith]

I think one good argument for stout blows lies in the fact that even textiles can be good protection from wimpy cuts. If anyone doubts that, they've never cut at a target covered with a gambesson

[Jason Taylor]

I like your test cutting videos and definitely see the point of the one addressing the over usage of power. While it is evident that flesh and bone are easy to cut, it should also be noted that these are under ideal conditions. In combat I would not trust to a lighter blow under the assumption that it would be incapacitating. I would make VERY certain that it would be as incapacitating as I was able to deliver. This of course is in light of the non-ideal conditions of combat: adrenaline, both people moving, the movement's possible affects on blade alignment, maybe he is one of those hard to kill freaks like many fellows to end up getting the medal of honor, etc...

I am not saying that you should baseball-bat the guy, my point is that you should fence with all your strength. Speed and full intend are naturally preceded by competence with the actions used. This in of itself insures a lack of telegraphing, just as much speed, accuracy of placement, proper blade alignment...

I think that a more intent filled way of fighting does by no means compromise defense, but rather goes further to insure success. Fast and forceful movements, closing quickly, balanced voiding, aggressive off-line movement... these things are paramount to success in my humble opinion. Also, not being able to bind or change your attack as necessary should not be a concern when fencing with more power. If you practice fencing in this way you will become used to it. Your Indes should be honed to operate at full speed and power.

Keep in mind that I am by no means fully competent in the above concepts, but that is what I am striving for. (Long way to go)

This is kind of what I was referring to. I see a lot of people (look at some of the YouTube videos) who hit like they're swing a baseball bat or a woodsman's axe instead of a finely honed weapon. That works fine against novices, like I said. But a lot of people do over-use power instead of skill. I.e., they swing so hard that hits knock stuff out of the way, strike through defenses that have been established, or just plain scare the guy into making an opening. But the swings are wild, uncontrolled, and I'd say just plain dangerous in some cases (try taking shots with the flat of the padded at full power), and someone who actually knows what they're doing (I'm not one of those people, by the way) will take full advantage of the overcommitment and strike while the blade is recovering. This excessively heavy power use seems like another symptom of NOT fighting with full intent to me, actually--you wouldn't do something that leaves you suicidally open if the blades were sharp, even if you felt you probably wouldn't get hit. It's not worth the risk.

The video Jay posted is a good example of what I see as the right way. I imagine those shots stung a bit, but they seemed to be delivered from the CORRECT position, WITHOUT telegraphing windups or suicidal overswings, and WITH a decent amount of control. That's what I think all sparring should be like, actually. Proper technique leading to appropriate power, rather than maximum power used as a replacement for proper technique.

The damaged helmet there I see as just the result of appropriate power just hitting a fluky part of the helmet cage.

Thanks for the video, Jay. Very informative.

Jason

[Jay Vail]

Well from the perspective of Meyer Longsword i would say the main reason not to strike lightly is that displacments are a common thing in longsword bouting and often the amount of pressure you strike with can be the determining factor in who wins the exchange when they clash at the displacment of the parry.

Remember the Wrath Guard and the Wrath Strike, Meyer warns in his book to guard yourself well against wrath. This is because putting this sort of pressure on your opponent exposes openings.

Not every strike must be powerful of course, Meyer has many other types of cuts, but generally in a flurry of cuts i make my intended finishing cut have some zip to it.

And they do have zip, too. Quite a lot, in fact. I have got many bruises from Mike over the years.

[Jay Vail]

I think one good argument for stout blows lies in the fact that even textiles can be good protection from wimpy cuts. If anyone doubts that, they've never cut at a target covered with a gambesson

Curious, isn't it that Silver advises "downright blows"?

[philippewillaume]

Hello, gents

It seems to me that we are all having the same general idea here.
Strike as hard as you can without compromising your body structure and that structure of you blow. Too heavy blows are as detrimental as too light ones.
Basically we are all saying do not strike like a buffalo and don’t strike like a whippet either.

The strength used to deflect a blow is not directly proportional to the strength of the blow. So if our strike is too heavy we will compromise our body structure (we will not be able to react promptly as our opponent can deflect our strike with less commitment we have spent), if our blow is too light we will compromise the structure of the blow (it is easy to collapse our blow with more commitment as we have invested).

That being said we need to acknowledge that light blow are potentially damaging, even though this is not what we are after and may be it is not a good idea to disregard them according to where they land.

Jay
Sorry jay still not joy with the video…. (At home or at work)

About clothing protection
We have to 1470 text advocating that a Jacque of 25*-31 layer of linen was good enough to stop a sword cut. We could argue, it is more kampffechten that blossfechten, though I suspect that one could argue that in Ringeck lew. VDantzig and Vspeyer, the main targets are the head and the hands, which are not covered by the said protection.
I do not now if this is the gambeson that Shane is talking about but in anytime such protection was not worn commonly in Silver time.

In WWI and WWII, soldier on all side complained that winter clothing made almost impossible to cut the enemy with a knife, I think Shane idea is that you need to have solid blow to go through period clothing.
I mean even my arming double, witch is one layer of silk and one layer of fustian will protect against whippy cuts, but it will not against what I call a proper blow.

phil

[Jeffrey Hull]

I practice Hauen as if I am trying to completely cleave through the foe, as much as a given Hau lets me.
Similar with Stichen, trying to pierce completely through the foe.

Perhaps to some in the so-called "WMA Community" that is the way of a simpleton & brute. Perhaps in actuality it is needless. Or perhaps I am right.

Yet in sparring, one should not try to clobber and hurt one's training partner, I am not saying anything like that.

And admittedly, I reckon that the effort imagined by Doebringer as needed for a Zornhau must differ from that by Meyer for a Glitzhau.
So arguably various Hauen differ from each other as to just how much force must be used to properly drive each.

Just some thoughts.

[philippewillaume]

I practice Hauen as if I am trying to completely cleave through the foe, as much as a given Hau lets me.
Similar with Stichen, trying to pierce completely through the foe.

Perhaps to some in the so-called "WMA Community" that is the way of a simpleton & brute. Perhaps in actuality it is needless. Or perhaps I am right.

Yet in sparring, one should not try to clobber and hurt one's training partner, I am not saying anything like that.

And admittedly, I reckon that the effort imagined by Doebringer as needed for a Zornhau must differ from that by Meyer for a Glitzhau.
So arguably various Hauen differ from each other as to just how much force must be used to properly drive each.

Just some thoughts.

Hello, jeff
To be honest if people do not understand you are talking about cutting and not sparing, I really wonder if they should hold a sword in the first place..

I totally agree with you on each type of cut, has a different output.
When Ringek say and send him the tip to the hands or the shoulder, it is definitely different from the out put of a zornh of the same ringeck
As I am not sure that a fendente is the same output as the zornh.

I would not even put in terms of right and wrong,
Really striking as a buffalo is to imbue the teaching of the master with too much force .

You are saying
I practice Hauen as if I am trying to completely cleave through the foe, as much as a given Hau lets me.
And that is not that different from my
Strike as hard as you can without compromising your body structure and that structure of you blow.

If there is a difference between the way we strike, I would say it is more likely to be marginal than significant.
I mean I fully expect my Zwerch to take his head off or my Krupm to severe at least one hand or cut an arm.
I can not guaranty my zhorn will cut a man from on side of the neck to the other side of te body (like a great monk robe) but I am sure that if it lands, the target in not going to get up any time soon.

cheers
phil
ps I do agree with you on the thrust as well, I do them so that the point sticks out the other side.

phil

[Mike Sega]

To Lance's Original idea that to cut, full force is not always necessary, I think all have made good comments and I think we are all on the same side of the street. The issue with paddeds, is that at times some people do hit with a massive amount of force that is perhaps unnecessary. Done the same with steel, I think it would be more obvious, but for safety issues, we don't ever try. (Imagine striking with a full zornahau you have done with a padded yet doing so with a blunt or sharp. ) Since we do not want to actually kill our practice partner, this limitation is impossible to circumvent.

In my experience, the bulkier the padded weapon, the more likely I see power overcoming technique. But still, paddeds help us learn to apply "intent" in our sparring so that we can see that a block that works at half speed may be completely ignored by a good strike with follow through.

To take an example from golf, if you try to kill the ball, you will wind up missing or topping your ball and get poor results. If, however, you work on your technique and shoot for the fairway, distance will come.

Finese, with a good solid swing and follow through are perhaps better to focus on than "power". If we work on the follow through, perhaps the excess power use will be curtailed. Most of the light strikes are a pulling of the strike or a lack of follow through.

[Randall Pleasant]

Recently, some of my customers have reported that my sparring swords were broken under forceful sparring. Today I've seen it first handed that a foreign customer came over to spar and broke his new sparring sword in 75 rounds. Thus I've invited him to do some test with me with real swords and made a video to investigate how hard does one have to hit in sparring to inflict effective damage. The partner that held the katana for me to show the real sword clashing effect was the customer. He participated in test cutting afterwards and has since established a new understanding of swordsmanship. I wish to share this knowledge with the community and may everybody enjoy.

Lance

I see some major logic problems. You are attempting to use the point at which your padded swords break as an indicator of the upper limit of power someone should use when cutting with a sharp sword in combat. That does not make sense! Breaking a padded sword is completely unrelated to cutting with a sharp, it is apples and pineapples! The only thing that the breaking of your padded swords indicate is the point at which they will break. Consider the following questions: If in the furture you make your swords stronger are we to then modify how we cut, ie. we can cut stronger? If in the furture you make your swords weaker are we to then modify how we cut, ie. we have to cut weaker? If we are not breaking sharp steel swords, not losing control of our bodies and weapons, and are able to preform techniques as described by the masters, then how can it be said that we are cutting too hard?

I do not mean to offend, but somethings by their nature do have a hash tone.
The needs, observations, and requirements of your business cannot in any way what so ever be used as a strandard for the interpretations of historical swordsmenship.