cross style bouts

[Guest]

Hi everyone, recently I had the opportunity to bout against C&T, rapier, sabre, backsword guys using English backsword style of 1700. While we used no rapiers in bouts in which I was involved, C&T, backsword and sabre were used. With some guys I got more hits and with some I got less, but this was due to the level of skill, the style itself seemed to show no real weakness and the single best fencer was an English backsword player (not me). I even wittnessed an interesting bout between a rapier user and a spadroon player, the latter holding it's own very well. Our 19th century sabre player did very well too.
So, frankly, I have to be against the idea that renaissance styles are so much more effective than later ones, in fact I do not feel compelled to believe they are in any way, as long as unarmored single sword is used. Cuts from the half arm proved quite powerful when properly executed, the later style also proved to be simpler.
Respectfully
Carlo

[JeffGentry]

Well i think some of it has to do with the intent, some of the duelist of the 18-1900 were very effective with the cavalry sabre but the intent was to kill or maim the opponent after all it was a duel.

and the skill of the swordsmen will be a factor also in a cross style bout as well. he intent is what make's alot of the difference in any fight if your intent is to put on a good show and your opponent's intent is to win at any cost then you will most likely lose and put on a good show doing so and your opponent will "kill" you and put on a good show doing that.

The intent of ARMA is to train realisticly as the "knight's" of old did in that we wish to learn what they knew and how they fought in real life and death situation's there are few who sport fence with with a life and death intent, we do not believe we or what we are practising is any better than anyone else it is just not what most people think it is because most of what we do is no longer taught and it is perverted in Hollywood.


so don't be deceived by the fact that we are teaching our selve's and there are some incredibly good fencer in the traditional sport fencing world and in ARMA or in any other form of fencing in there own right, Our intent is totaly diffrent then there's, just take what we do for what it is and read what ARMA is about.

[JeanryChandler]

I would like to make two points in respone. First of all, the 19th century single sword techniques are a lot better understood and have been a lot more carefully analyzed and tested by a lot more people than the rennaissance techniques, which despite the best efforts of our friends at ARMA and other groups, remain substantialy cryptic. In most cases, the latter are still in their first or second generation of interpretation. With time and increased participation I'd bet that you may see superiority of Renaissance techniques after all, simply because it was a period in which swords were more important in combat than say, the 19th century.

Also, I guess I have a different interpretation of a cross-style bout. When I spar with someone from a different style, my rule is simple: I get to use any weapon I want (so long as it is safe enough to spar with) and they have the same right. Full force, full contact.

So in the case you cited, if I was up against an english style saber fencer, I would use a longsword or a sword and shield. I would particularly enjoy this if he was actually english. Similarly, I would not attempt to fight a modern sport fencer with an epee or a kendo fencer with a kendo sword.

I think you will find if you are reasonably skilled with an appropriately balanced wieghted longsword you will have little trouble facing a singlesword opponent. I've fought against single sticks, rapiers and flexi-foils with the longsword and found it is quite effective.

DB