Carlos Negredo wrote: Emphasizing Zufechten with strikes avoiding Binden (Causa Libre):
Carlos Negredo wrote:DRILL ALONE 1:
looks like all the other videos, albeit maybe a tad faster/witha tad mor force. is this meant to proove somethincauase if yes I am missing it.
generally I see al lot of/incessant daumengriff (thumbing) und umschalgen from inwendig to auswendig (and vice versa), done most of the time under circumstances that would actually not allow for this. a fencer who applies sport fencing mechanics, theory and training will very quickly do away with that
also huuuuge telegraphing with the flat resting on the shoulder etc.
Carlos Negredo wrote:
DRILL ALONE 1:
I’m totally not getting the footwork shown in the video. All that footwork and yet you are still in the same place.
The primary goal of footwork is to move your body through space but in the video you stay in one spot.
You also have a foot movement in which a foot is moved inward and then outward without serving any real purpose.
Also, at 0:08 in the video your lower leg becomes almost horizontal to the ground, which is a common mistake often seen.
Besides being unstable a horizontal lower leg position is never shown in the historical sources.
Carlos Negredo wrote:It seems you want something to be proved…
I am not going to enter into this ground right now, It is very hard to me to explain some things in English (and even more if you don’t understand Destreza). I just want to say that if you develop your fencing thinking in some sort of sport fencing mechanics, then you are definitely wrong…
Yes, I have to admit it…cuts from Zufechten have the inherent potential to be telegraphed (they are predictable). This is the reason they are dangerous to execute them with too much intend in the first intention.
It seems that you guys prefer not to fight at 'cutting distance' and prefer to keep your fight in binding distance or a closer distance than the initial cut would happen.
Is that correct, and is there a reason for not spending much time worrying about a fight at cutting distance?
To expand on the footwork question, do you guys allow any type of grappling or wrestling? The reason I would question your footwork is it leaves you unstable if someone were to get inside your blades distance and wish to grapple with you, and thus weak in a grapple. That is the reason I would look at it like a mistake but I am not familiar with what type of fight you guys are emphasizing. I would not call it wrong until I understand what it is you are doing. We work with a lot of grappling and thus we have a lot of time working with very ‘stable’ footwork.
Carlos Negredo wrote:we began to refine and interpret some forgotten basic concepts about fencing with longsword, forgotten just because they are not written in the sources.
Carlos Negredo wrote:It seems that you guys prefer not to fight at 'cutting distance' and prefer to keep your fight in binding distance or a closer distance than the initial cut would happen.
I have to disagree; the cutting distance is a closer distance than Zufechten, unless your opponent is a beginner.
Ran Pleasant wrote:
What historical sources is the above swordsmenship based? I ask because outside of the use of a longsword what I see in the video seems to have very little relationship to the the swordmenship taught by historical masters such Fiore, Liechtenauer, etc.
Cutlery Penguin wrote:Carlos Negredo wrote:we began to refine and interpret some forgotten basic concepts about fencing with longsword, forgotten just because they are not written in the sources.
Then how do you know that they are indeed basic concepts about fencing with longsword that were forgotten? Surely they are more likely to be concepts that seem perfectly logical to you based on your experience?
It seems to be stretching the bounds of credibility to make stuff up and then claim it is right even though it isn't documented just because you think it should be.
Carlos Negredo wrote:We are not saying our system is historical
admin wrote:Carlos Negredo wrote:We are not saying our system is historical
This says it all really.
Let's call a spade a spade - it is a modern system of longsword fencing inspired by Spanish rapier manuals. It is not historical fencing, per se.
admin wrote:I guess only time and competition may tell whether it works or not. I can say this though, I have fenced someone trying to use something like this style in Dijon and I knocked him out of the competition with 3 arm cuts in the same place each time. You guys look like you have really great ability at the bind, but for your own sakes I encourage you to practice more attacking and defending from open guards outside the bind.
Carlos Negredo wrote:And, as said before, we are not inspired by Spanish rapier manuals
First, if you want to know if a system is well developed, I will advise you to not go to a tournament to test it
Second, I can say you I have fenced people like you and I knocked him out with some clear thrusts, but it would be disrespectful I think.
Users browsing this forum: Winterberry and 1 guest