Sporting vs. Lethal HEMA (split from disarms in sparring)

[bigdummy]

A new home for the debate, on whether steel only is ok or if shinai or nylon or padded wasters can be used, and whether fencing in a sport context is historical and can exist in parallel to fencing to kill.

My $.02 on the latter: I think sport combat has existed side-by-side with the lethal martial arts going back to early tribal times. There are many specific examples some of which have already been pointed out, I could site more maybe in another thread.

But I think it's clear from history that people always engaged in sparring or free play or whatever you prefer to call it, because you really can't learn to fight without testing it out. And training schools, neighborhoods, communities, tribes, counties, burroughs, monastaries, gangs, fiefdoms and etc. used to test each other with a wide variety of competitions.

It is I would like to point out that the historical reality from roughly the 16th century on back, and increasingly so the further you go backward in time, is that most of the sporting combat was a little rougher than we are used to engaging in today, or probably could engage in legally in most of our countries (can't fight bouts until the first guys scalp is split for example) I suspect there is a good reason why they were that rough, and it was to minimize the amount of rules so that sporting combat didn't seperate out into an actual sport.

Also IMO if you can't beat a "thug" who is strong and fast and has quick reflexes but no knowledge of historical techniques, then either YOUR techniques are incorrect or your own ability as a fighter are too feeble to be able to really become a serious martial artist. Technique may not completely trump physical ability and strength etc., but with proper training it does leverage what physical ability you have by several orders of magnitude.

In the old days of my stick fighting club we used to practice in a parking lot near a popular public basketball court in a pretty rough part of town. To keep good community relations, we used to let anyone who wanted to try sparring step up and try it out. It was a good test, aggressive guys with very good reflexes and speed are very challenging, but if you have learned timing and reach and measure, which is what realistic sparring teaches you, your technique will win out.

Which is why I highly reccomend trying out sparring with people from other Martial Arts and with fit, aggressive "thuggish" people from off the street and not just within the emerging fraternity of HEMAteers if you really want to test your 'Art'.


BD

[admin]

Matt Galas found this:

Here is an excerpt from a letter from the famous Sir Philip Sidney to his younger brother, Robert. The letter is dated 18 October 1580. In it, he gives advice to his brother on fencing practice. Sir Phillip was aged 26 at the time; he died 6 years later, fighting the Spanish in the Netherlands.
Here is a link to an painting, said to be of Sir Philip Sidney:
http://www.luminarium.org/renlit/psidney.jpg

Excerpt:

"When you play at weapons, I would have you get thick caps and brasers, and play out your play lustily, for indeed ticks and dalliances are nothing in earnest, for the time of the one and of the other greatly differs; and use as well the blow as the thrust; it is good in itself, and besides exerciseth your breath and strength, and will make you a strong man at the tourney and barriers. First in any case practise the single sword, and then with the dagger; let no day pass without an hour or two of such exercise: the rest study, or confer diligently, and so shall you come home to my comfort and credit.

Lord ! how I have babbled: once again farewell, dearest brother.
Your most loving and careful brother,

Philip Sidney.
At Leicester House, this 18th of October, 1580."

Source: Shakespeare's England: An Account of the Life & Manners of His Age; ed. Walter Alexander Raleigh, Sidney Lee, Charles Talbut Onions Vol. 2, p. 395 (London, Clarendon Press, 1962)

Full text at this link:
http://books.google.be/books?id=5BoEAAA ... #PPA199,M1

[Jose SP]

A new home for the debate, on whether steel only is ok or if shinai or nylon or padded wasters can be used, and whether fencing in a sport context is historical and can exist in parallel to fencing to kill.

My $.02 on the latter: I think sport combat has existed side-by-side with the lethal martial arts going back to early tribal times. There are many specific examples some of which have already been pointed out, I could site more maybe in another thread.

But I think it's clear from history that people always engaged in sparring or free play or whatever you prefer to call it, because you really can't learn to fight without testing it out. And training schools, neighborhoods, communities, tribes, counties, burroughs, monastaries, gangs, fiefdoms and etc. used to test each other with a wide variety of competitions.

It is I would like to point out that the historical reality from roughly the 16th century on back, and increasingly so the further you go backward in time, is that most of the sporting combat was a little rougher than we are used to engaging in today, or probably could engage in legally in most of our countries (can't fight bouts until the first guys scalp is split for example) I suspect there is a good reason why they were that rough, and it was to minimize the amount of rules so that sporting combat didn't seperate out into an actual sport.

Also IMO if you can't beat a "thug" who is strong and fast and has quick reflexes but no knowledge of historical techniques, then either YOUR techniques are incorrect or your own ability as a fighter are too feeble to be able to really become a serious martial artist. Technique may not completely trump physical ability and strength etc., but with proper training it does leverage what physical ability you have by several orders of magnitude.

In the old days of my stick fighting club we used to practice in a parking lot near a popular public basketball court in a pretty rough part of town. To keep good community relations, we used to let anyone who wanted to try sparring step up and try it out. It was a good test, aggressive guys with very good reflexes and speed are very challenging, but if you have learned timing and reach and measure, which is what realistic sparring teaches you, your technique will win out.

Which is why I highly reccomend trying out sparring with people from other Martial Arts and with fit, aggressive "thuggish" people from off the street and not just within the emerging fraternity of HEMAteers if you really want to test your 'Art'.


BD

I agree with all that and just would like to add; a good amount of aggressiveness is great, if you can control it without letting you become reckless. It's like top ranked MMA fighters, they can be incredibly agressive during a match and then laugh and chat with their opponent / the other crew just after the match. If you can handle your emotions well enough, agressiveness can be an asset.

[bigdummy]

I agree completely. I would almost say it's a vital part of being able to fight. Then again, I have a theory that so is a sense of humor... as you say you notice that the best MMA fighters seem to have a good balance of this.

[David A Teague]

Hi BD,

I'm in agreement that fighting to "kill" and in "fun" was know throughout time.

I'm under the impression the the real question from the prior thread is:

Under what type of rules should a modern longsword bout be fought?

Should a bout look only like the illustrations of the 14th-15th-16th century fight books we study or should it be more of a free form fight that counts blows over historic style?

While I favor approaching freeplay in all the forms I study as fighting with a "sharp" regardless of the tool used, I do understand not all here wish to train, freeplay, or compete under my "rules". Furthermore I also understand just because this is the concept that my group does it's freeplay under doesn't make me or my students better swordsmen that those who train hard and fight under the modern Tourney rules.

By default, when we don't eye gouge or break joints, we are using the milder techniques set out by the masters "for play" vs to kill.

Cheers,

DT

P.S. We are putting some vids together for you with some of our longsword freeplay. I'll post em when they are done.

D

[Paul B]

I'm under the impression the the real question from the prior thread is:

Under what type of rules should a modern longsword bout be fought?


D

Should there be one set of perfect rules? In my opinion, no. I vary rules quite a lot in order to use sparring as a training tool, and to make it more interesting.

[admin]

I agree - in fact I'd go as far as to say that the one great bastion protecting a competitive martial art from becoming purely a sport is to keep changing rules for competition (or have lots of different rules).

[Dean]

I believe the main corrupting influence in sport has been the desire to make it entertaining.

Possible examples are the use of muffles in boxing, the epee in fencing. Both of these were training devices that made there way into the sport to prolong the fight for better entertainment.
The shinai is one possible training device that should not make its way into sport simply because it does not behave like the weapon it is espousing to emulate. The most obvious is in the engage and the bind, and also beating.

[bigdummy]

I agree - in fact I'd go as far as to say that the one great bastion protecting a competitive martial art from becoming purely a sport is to keep changing rules for competition (or have lots of different rules).

I agree with that too it's a very important point.

BD

[admin]

The shinai is one possible training device that should not make its way into sport simply because it does not behave like the weapon it is espousing to emulate. The most obvious is in the engage and the bind, and also beating.

This is for a different (and often repeated) thread. But you cannot rightly have a sport with sharp swords either.

[Dean]

This is for a different (and often repeated) thread. But you cannot rightly have a sport with sharp swords either.

Ageed,
Although I seem to remember a case in medieval horse back fighting using live spears. It appears the spear slipped between the curas and the gourget and killed the gentleman. It was ruled the offender should do penances the rest of his life. (If my memory serves me correctly)
It is going to be difficult to find a suitable substitute that can emulate a weapon properly.

[admin]

Indeed, hence:

http://www.fioredeiliberi.org/topics/tr ... index.html

[AdamR]

FWIW - I think WMA/HEMA has the advantage now of being small. Most people practice their bouts with a consideration of intent. The sporting element becomes a problem when winning by points becomes the priority and the techniques shift to reflect rules rather than seeking application of technique. Like Matt said - changing rules is good for that.

[swordflasher]

Well, on the original question, I guess very little gun practice is firing live rounds at criminals, but that doesn't make firing ranges unmartial.

[scholadays]

Stillwell, you threaten us with the First Law.

[Richard Strey]

Well, on the original question, I guess very little gun practice is firing live rounds at criminals, but that doesn't make firing ranges unmartial.

But standing still like on a firing range while shooting your gun in a combat/self defense situation won't get you the best possible results, either. Just as faulty sparring rules do, practicing *only* at the range will not get you the full picture.

[bigdummy]

And actually the army invented laser tag for kmore realistic training and both the army and police use paintball...

[Fab]

Or simunition.

[swordflasher]

Stillwell, you threaten us with the First Law.

I meant archery.

[scholadays]

Never barnstorm with the First Law.