New article: "Fence with all your Strength..."

[John_Clements]

A new article is now up:
"Fence with all your Strength..."

[Guest]

Excellent!
This ties in so nicely with the "To Spar or Not to Spar" editorial.

This is what I feel real sword fighting is all about, and this is what needs to be ever present in your mind when you train and fight. You must train with this type of intensity to fully prepare yourself both physically and psychologically for the demands of real combat. Your body must do as you command, when you command it and it needs to be done in the time required. There are no second chances. You must be able withstand the onslaught of blows and thrust, no mater how great or small. And in return, give them something to fear. There must be “Presence” in your sword.

[Guest]

Is there anything in European fencing akin to the Chinese fencing concept of "fajing"? Is/was power
generated soley by a whole body coordination via stepping and/or weight shifting or are/were principles of
sequenced torque also known/used?

Was there any preferred sequence/weight/flexibility of weapons to learn to mold the combatant's
body structure towards increasing the ability to deliver power? For example, when learning how to deliver
a "jian" (Chinese straight sword) thrust with fajing (sequenced whole body torque), it is easier to use a
lighter sword with "some" flexibility so that the user can receive feedback about the torsion wave sent
into the sword. Later, practice is done with a "live" sword which has the proper weight and very little
flexibility.

In battlefield oriented Chinese systems, the "dao" (single edged curved blade with a broad surface)
would be learned first. This weapon taught the typical foot soldier how to develop a whole body strength
predominantly in arm/shoulder arcing motions. Even thrusts with this weapons involve arcs.

Assuming he survived battle, and having gained sufficient whole body skill, he might be handed a second
"dao", thus wielding two. To wield two "dao"s well, required a marked increase in strength and stamina,
as well as technical complexity. I have personally seen few modern folks that can handle two dao well.
Of course, combat is another question.

Or, the soldier might progress to the "jian" previously mentioned or spear. The jian requires more subtle
play including cuts and thrusts utilizing the whole arm, half arm and wrist as you might term it, however
still guided using the sequenced whole body torque strength or fajing. The spear generally has more body
turning in it. So, the emphasis is more on the torso, waist, legs as well as arm extension for striking,
as well as subtle half arm and wrist skills, and how to generate power therein.

The last weapon usually learned is the "da dao" (halberd - dao on a pole). The student learns in
stages using light ones first progressing to heavier ones. This has similar effects on the body as the
spear, except there is far more stress to it. The body has to be ready for this weapon.

Strength is developed in the soldier's body by being able to handle more and more stress on the body
in a progressive manner.

Grappling and striking were also taught in a similar vein.

I am particularly interested in any historical training regimens. Any thoughts or comments would be
appreciated.

[Guest]

I myself train in a traditional sense of a northern Chinese art. To train properly is to train hard with increasing intensity in both hand, weapon and heart. Training constitutes the forging of knowledge and will. Deep understanding must be obtained.

This applied to any art will breed excellence.

[Guest]

I think that successs of the cut is mainly matter of the speed - we use kinetic energy count for describe to students in which way effect is made. Strenght as other physical atributtes(weight, speed, reflexes, etc) is important think for every stly of fight , but imho not as much as technical skills a strategy thinkink. Good technical cut is quick enough to gathering energy, using her in proper way and going through enemy armor and flesh - strong man without cut training will be unsuccesfull. Sometime we have some cut competion and there these thinks are seen very clearly..
(I apologize for my bad english:)

[Guest]

Well said Stewart.
Strength is the embodiment of all things in your fight.

One more point - A sharp sword damn near cuts all by itself. As long as people have had time to work out the mechanics of the stroke before hand, a small amount of time spent with a sword in cutting practice will make most people acceptably proficient. Granted to get a perfect cut each and every stroke can and will take a lot of practice and time. But then, your target generally isn’t moving either, so is it really necessary to spend all that time trying to perfect it? I believe cutting practice primarily trains your focus during the course of a cut, and that is where the perfection lays. The technique is simple; the blade edge must precisely follow the arc of your arm(s).

[Guest]

I dont seem it too easy - how fight progress through years, there is lot of differrent types of cut, and perfect coordination of diferent parts of arm (wrist, elbow, shoulder) and good adding of speed of these parts have very influence on final effect of cut.

[Guest]

Simple does not mean easy. I agree that perfecting you cutting technique will take a long time and is a very noble mission in life, if you are trying to achieve perfection. If you are trying to achieve proficiency, and you have the mechanics down, that will not take you very long. Every solider or samurai was not a master, that position was reserved for those with exceptional ability. And you don’t need to be a master to be able to cut and kill with a sword. A sword in proficient hands is dangerous enough. Miyamoto Musashi made a statement in his book of 5 rings something to this effect (please forgive me because the book is not in front of me, so I can’t quote it directly),”don’t get hung up on the details, for that is not the true way. The true way of the sword is about killing a man”. I translate this to mean “If you spend too much time trying to perfect small details, you miss the big picture”. I have seen people with perfect technique, but they did not have a martial state of mind. To me, they have missed the big picture.

[Randall Pleasant]

It would be my guess that throughout history almost every Master level swordsman who was killed in battle by a sword died from a strong cut made by a much less skillful swordsman. <img src="/forum/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" />

[Shane Smith]

Now THAT'S going to be a toughie to prove in open debate! You're supposed to yell a warning to your buddies before you lob a grenade Ran <img src="/forum/images/icons/blush.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Randall Pleasant]

Indeed Shane! Just reusing a statement I heard in the Army that went something like "Elite soldiers are most often killed by poorly trained bottom-of-the-bucket soldiers". Quality does not always over-come quantity. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smirk.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/icons/cool.gif" alt="" />

[Guest]

It is surely the case if you put sabre for sword, I'm wondering if some late sources could be used to reconstruct battlefield fencing with sabres as in:
techniques of the manual + the strenght needed on the battlefield = what the sabre fencer trained in duelling techniques did with his issue weapon if he wished to stay alive in battle.
Which is: use the good and smart techniques he was taught with more strenght.
Who knows?

[Guest]

A modern citation from a noted knife instructor: "fighting is violence and violence will never be eliminated by the martial arts".
Now to the sabre related part, it would seem that some power of the cut was sacrified to the need not to discompose ones defence, yet with time and "civilisation" a cut became a bare red line on the skin which offended much more the ego of the recipient than the recipient <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />
Is the art of the sabre itself totally of this kind? Roworth insists in asserting powerful cuts can be delivered withot moving the shoulder. Actually some practice seems to indicate that he might have meant "without moving the shoulder off the line" that is "moving the shoulder not more than 20-30 degrees". Another factor is the grip, those who advocate the straight tumb hold are ispo facto advocating less strenght in the cut, yet there are those who do not advocate it and insist on the fist grip, which also permits the use of the hilt and pommel to strike. If Radaelli did half of what our war minister said he did, his work is worth looking into. Did Europeans loose the art of cutting at one point? Your examples seem to indicate it, but there were still people who got a fame for their fierce sabre use (Garibaldi, a national hero, was said to have trashed sabres badly in battles). So it might be a general trend but not a necessary trait of sabre fencer to be satisfied with a "red line on the skin".Does this mean we should select only those sources that sem to be martial when we go reconstructing WMA? I think so, etiquette based practices being just that. Of course in medieval and renaissance times martial spirit was not distorted by the etiquette, so one does only have to choose the style he prefers. Selection is needed for later periods, because some "martial arts" were trying to eliminate violence and "fighting is violence...".
This said, fencing with all ones strenght, in the manner prescribed by the style one uses, must, in my opinion be coupled with the certainty of control, so we do not go around with casts, bandaged fingers and people do not have fun of us...
Carlo