Testing SCA Stikes on Tatami Mats and Unrestricted Combat.

[LafayetteCCurtis]

There is also a mater that you fight like you train. If you always pull you cuts short or do touch kills, that is what you will learn to do.

Well, not necessarily--at least my local group runs into more trouble from strikes not being pulled enough than from judging ones that are pulled a bit too much. That's what we use test-cutting for: balancing the pulled-hit approach of free-play bouts with an appreciation of the power and precision needed to convincingly damage various cutting media.

[Bill Tsafa]

...nope sorry Bill, like I said I give you guys alot of credit for your effort, it's just been wasted in this regard.

I must respectfully disagree. I went there with the intention of testing 4 things.

1 - Can the techniques learned with a rattan sword be transferred to a blunt? (one popular opinion was that every one of my attacks would land flat)

2- Would my sword-hand be hopelessly vulnerable in my attacks?

3-Would my lower-legs be hopelessly vulnerable in my defense?

4-Would my ability to defend and attack be completely hindered when grappling is allowed?

The fact that I won the majority of the matches is not significant. Even if I had lost the question to ask is.... ???WHY???. What adjustments would I have to make... Would it just be something minor like better distance and timing??? Perhaps I might have needed to keep my hand behind the shield more??? When you start asking questions you might find more value in the experiment. Loosing the matches would not have been a bad thing for me. I would have more clearly seen areas that I can improve in.

[Will Adamson]

Here's another direction to think about regardless of the outcome of the bouts, but especially since you did so well, and were able to cut. Why do we not see much sword and large shield in the historical literature?

Just throwin' it out there.

[Stacy Clifford]

Bill,

I agree that because you are putting specific testing goals and parameters on your experiment, it is not wasted. Indeed, anything you can learn from isn't really wasted. My argument would be that your experiment is very far from complete due to small sample size. You've pitted one SCA fighter (yourself) against one RMA fighter, so the results are going to depend largely on individual skill levels. The individual you fought appears to have some basic skill, but not much tactical knowledge against the shield. Some lower level ARMA members probably wouldn't faire any better against you, and our craftiest fighters would probably pick you apart. To really learn what you seek to learn, you need to find more sparring partners of varying skill levels to test your theories against. If you can get more SCA fighters to participate with an open mind, even better. A bigger sample will be more likely to show real trends that you can associate with the training and not just the individuals involved. I applaud your open mindedness and willingness to put yourself out there and try stuff without getting your feelings hurt at the first sign of criticism, just understand that one test is just the beginning.

By the way, I agree with the comment above that sword & shield vs. longsword is a less useful test because it's as much about tactics as technique, if not more. Starting with evenly matched weapons will give you a better idea of the relative effectiveness of two styles, and then move on to more complex scenarios from there.

[Bill Tsafa]

Here's another direction to think about regardless of the outcome of the bouts, but especially since you did so well, and were able to cut. Why do we not see much sword and large shield in the historical literature?

Just throwin' it out there.

It is something I have wondered about and I suspect that perhaps it was simply too basic for people to bother to put to text. Kind of like finding a cookbook on frying eggs. I suspect that Sword and Shield is what the general army was taught and sent out to die on the front lines with. Longsword on the other hand was the "Noble Art".

Stacy, I agree that this is only one example. I support further experimentation and testing among the best people trained in these two forms. I support anything other then not further continuing to research and test.

[Stacy Clifford]

It is something I have wondered about and I suspect that perhaps it was simply too basic for people to bother to put to text. Kind of like finding a cookbook on frying eggs. I suspect that Sword and Shield is what the general army was taught and sent out to die on the front lines with. Longsword on the other hand was the "Noble Art".

I think it's more of a timing issue. About the time that written manuals became more common, armor was improving to the point that it was making the shield redundant. You definitely see less of it in the later Medieval artwork. If something is falling out of favor with armies that can afford professionals like Fiore, then he's less likely to waste valuable page space teaching it.

[Aaron Pynenberg]

That's cool Bill, I understand we are not going to agree...I appreciate your ability to take one on the chin..

here's the thing though that I can't seem to get you to realize: your entire process here is the problem..not your specific points of interest. There's plenty of reasons why the historical combatants didn't use certain weapon combos, skills etc..those resons are saturated not with just a bio-mechanical issues, but colored with cultural, professional and monetary reasons as well.

Since that era no longer exists, since we no longer actually fight to injure and kill, we could not hope to fully understand why they did all the things they did, we can only make informed guesses, and maybe that's the problem I have with some of your work, you tend to take an idea, do a few tests, (that are seriously flawed) and then snap to very rigid conclusions..

[Randall Pleasant]

Aaron

Very well stated!

[Will Adamson]

It is something I have wondered about and I suspect that perhaps it was simply too basic for people to bother to put to text. Kind of like finding a cookbook on frying eggs. I suspect that Sword and Shield is what the general army was taught and sent out to die on the front lines with. Longsword on the other hand was the "Noble Art".

Not exactly. Stacy just touched on it. The more you see plate, the less you see large shields. Having the off-hand free of the shield means it is now available to use on the sword, so they develop accordingly. Swords of the Crusader era already had grips that could accomodate the off-hand, so they must have been thinking along those lines.

Also, if you are assuming unarmored in your bouting, then you must drop the shield. Is there any evidence of the use of large shields without armor apart from perhaps some Vikings, who are not being studied in this instance? If you are assuming armored, then keep the shield, but now you cannot really count cuts.

I've only had one cup of coffee this morning, so I hope I'm making sense.

I'll also echo Aaron's sentiment on the kudos for putting yourself up for criticism and staying around in the discussion.

[Bill Tsafa]

I value very much the feedback I get from this community I appreciate your efforts to get your points across.

The terms of blosfsfechten were at Adams request. He wanted to keep the calibration of the hits to that level. He did not want me to ignore blows that I might ordinary consider too light. My particular period of interest is from the 9th to 13th century. This is an era of mail armor and little or no plate. The head armor would most likely be just a coif or a Norman Nasal helm. Greaves are also a possibility at the very end of that period. This is the period that SCA fighting covers. I don't mean to change the terms of the fight from blofsfecheten but we're just talking here.

Starting with the 5th century an through the 13 century, literacy was at an all time low. The peasants and the nobility were illiterate. The clergy was suppose to be literate but there are recorded cases were even they were not at the local level. In the 14th century we see rising literacy levels in the towns mainly due to the rise in commerce and trade. At this point the many Nobles realize that power can be gained from wealth and wealth can come from commerce and trade (rather then just war). The Nobles then become literate and it is onto this stage that Liechtenauer and Fiore come on to. So aside from my thoughts that shield fighting might have just been to common to write down there is also the issue of lack of literacy among the nobility.

[Jaron Bernstein]

Bill,

Once again, I do appreciate the effort you are putting into this. My suggestion has already been made by others here. I would be interested to see how it goes if you compare like weapons (especially ones we have historical manuals for) with a broader sample size.

[Bill Tsafa]

As requested for like weapons comparison. We are fighting longsword vs longsword. We are using RWS padded sword because Adam had not fully recovered from his bruises. This fight is two day after the shield vs longsword fight. Adam beat me with an estimated 80% of the kills in his favor vs 20% in mine.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziWa4eU8 ... 239&page=1


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYj10eRC ... 239&page=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E6SXpT ... 239&page=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuoV-gpH ... 239&page=1

There is also a side sword vs side sword fight that has not been posted by the person who hosted the event yet. I post a link when it becomes available.

[Sal Bertucci]

I'm sure the side sword is a bit more even, or even in you favor. As you mentioned earlier though, the longsword isn't your weapon. You did decently all things considered.

[Randall Pleasant]

Bill

At this point I have only watched the last video one time so I'm not claiming my following statements are based upon a detail analysis of your video.

You are getting absolutely no mileage from using the Lazy Vom Tag guard in which you hold the sword in front of your body with the weak of the blade against your shoulder and the hilt near your waist. Most, if not all, of your Oberhau cuts from the Lazy Vom Tag guard are short and weak. You do make hits on the other guy but it seems only because he comes within close range. A Zornhua is more than just throwing the point out. The only strong hits that I notice were the couple of Mittelhau cut throw into the other guys ribs. If you remember, your training instructor Michael Edelson talked this same problem on the MyArmoury Forum. Michael noticed that he was raising his hands up from the Lazy Vom Tag guard to about his shoulder during his cuts but couldn't figure out why. Well it is because you just can't cut good from Lazy Vom Tag! I suggest holding the Vom Tag guard over the shoulder and see if you don't start kicking more butt.

[Bill Tsafa]

You are correct Sal. The side sword was pretty even. I don't know if I mentioned it before, but rapier is what I have practiced the longest. I fight rapier in all forms. My favorite is case. Fighting sidesword was interesting in this respect because it was like a very short rapier that I was now allowed to cut with too. I had a bit of a hard time getting use to the difference in range vs what I am use to with rapier. I fight with a 40" rapier and a hand and half grip which I hold further back so I normally have 43" from hand to target.

Thank you for your suggestion Randall. Longsword is newer to me, but I am dedicated to learning it. I can only have one teacher at a time though, so what Michael says I must do. I can however appreciate that there can be more then one effective interpretations of historic text. Further more, I am always eager to listen alternate interpretations for future consideration.