Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Anyone know why two of the Div1 NACs next season are in the DC/VA area and stacked pretty close both location and time-wise to ROCs in the region? Or is this just an artifact of it being the first time I've ever really looked at the NAC schedule?

e: vvv That's really cool.

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 21:37 on Apr 16, 2015

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


IM_DA_DECIDER posted:

That link about the duel led me to this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmS2nSm5n2Q

It's funny how they're passing off some unarmed dude doing distance parries (nice ones admittedly) as somehow very impressive.
Now, some of those are very nice and I'd love to be able to do that, but the epeeist is also seemingly not going for body touches most of the time. Eh.

On another note, mensur is insane.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Verisimilidude posted:

I'm curious, but why are fencing blades so easily breakable? Speaking with people who fence smallsword, rapier, or french foil, their weapons don't seem to break anywhere near as often as sport fencers. I mean, they're paying between $200 to $300, so there's that. Longswords can break from time to time, but it's mostly due to defect, problems with heat treatment, or using way too much force to begin with.
I want them to bend and I want them to be as light as possible. Those two aren't compatible with durability. My high-end epee blades cost ~$150 and last me a little over three years of practice and competition. They also last that long because the international fencing body mandates a few things that lead to a slightly heavier and slightly less whippy blade than the USFA does. A cheap blade costs ~$75 and lasts about a year.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


I need those uhlmann tips oh my god.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Do you not have any epeeists where you are or something? Barefoot toe touches seem ugly.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Crazy Achmed posted:

What's so bad about reffing epee? I'd have thought that fretting over the minutiae of priority rules would be worse.
Its loving boring as poo poo and as soon as you stop concentrating, someone will go for a toe touch right next to the edge of the piste (or its ungrounded) while the other person is stepping off the side and then you have to make the only call of the match that's actually interesting and you blew it because even as a pretty decent epee fencer a day of reffing it sounds like hell. Especially if the quality of the bout is lower.

e: Like, I'll watch high-level epee bouts for fun and the idea of reffing epee all day makes me cringe.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Verisimilidude posted:

What do y'all do to train in your free time? I'm hitting a bit of a plateau this week and I want to improve or add to my personal training.
Climbing and more footwork at home.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Also, her partners need to suck it up and fence her normally regardless.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


10 Beers posted:

I have, yeah. There are 3 in my area. One practices in a large park's baseball diamond on Sundays, one literally practices in the grassy area in one of the member's apartment complex, and one is called the Arcane Combat Society and they do large re-enactments.

And on the topic of regular fencing, is a $500 annual membership fee and $150 a month for 2 weekly classes around the norm for pricing?
Olympic? You're not too far off, though it varies. What kind of classes are you getting? Individual or group? Its been a long while, but I payed ~$30 for a 20m individual lesson and ~30 for an hour group, which covered floor fees and open bouting as well, but both were with some good coaches in an expensive area. There was also a membership fee that I don't recall because I was there for about 6 weeks and they pro-rated it for me.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


dupersaurus posted:

Two classes a week isn't really a competitive track. Two nights a week is me just barely clinging to my C. The competitive track is probably more like three classes plus one or two private lessons a week.
Yeah. I got an A (in epee, which seems more prone to sudden bursts of ranking higher with a good match-up/streak) with 4-5 2hr practices a week, but sans professional coaching (minus the six weeks I talked about re: pricing). Now that I'm only able to go to 1/week, again without coaching (and took a multi-year break) I'm down to a B and barely holding that at tournaments. I'm hoping this year to see where I end up after a few NACs/ROCs, but I really don't expect anything more than to hold my B at best. To get better, you'll need 3+ classes and some good coaching.

e: vvv I hope 1/week and decent cross-training/home footwork is enough.

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 17:09 on Jul 31, 2015

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Crazy Achmed posted:

That sounds pretty expensive to me, but I guess it depends on what level you're wanting to take it to, and the quality of training you're paying for.
Also, I'm a casual scrub who generally fences at university clubs, which are dirt cheap in comparison - it works out at a few hundred dollars per year, but the level of coaching and gear is pretty basic, and sessions amount to about 5-6 hours per week.

Actually, how do prices compare for all of you guys? I wouldn't know what to expect at higher levels since I'm from New Zealand and we don't give a poo poo about anything other than rugby here
Well, you heard my prices for professional coaching. My college club consisted of $40/year and coaching was basically done by older student fencers, which ranged from anywhere to an A or B in epee, to a C in foil, to an E in sabre. I think their current coaching "staff" is basically all E's/U's, but that's about what they were when we made those A's/B's, so... We also got to borrow jackets, lames, masks, and weapons from the club I guess, and had 2-3 working electric strips.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Crazy Achmed posted:

So what do you guys like to do against absence-of-blade attacks? I really hate those.
Attacks? Retreat. An absence-of-blade general fencer? Control the distance and play footwork games with several feinted attacks until they're slightly off their guard, then fleche.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


BirdOfPlay posted:

Does any of this involve bouncing? I have it on good authority bouncing is bad.
Considering what I described could be summed up as "fence epee", uh...not sure what good authority told you that. Bouncing just to bounce is bad, though.

And toe touches are really iffy for me against absence fencers because they're often posting and are all-in on the counter. You're really likely to get tagged on the way in, IMO. And I love toe touches.

E: and yeah, I was describing epee advice, sorry if I wasn't clear.

E2: you could also bait the counter and take the blade, probably into a fleche.

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 22:32 on Aug 19, 2015

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


From my very brief longsword ages ago, I used to do a 16 (?) cut drill that included a one-handed leaping attack where you basically let the sword slide out and grab it again near the pommel before the moment of impact. IIRC, it was called "springen" but a quick look through Google isn't turning up where that came from. It's been a while, and there weren't that many resources.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Hit him in the air a lot until he figures out that that's not helping him. Or just retreat out of distance constantly with tells like that.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


dupersaurus posted:

Black carding all epee fencers: great idea or best idea ever?
Worst, I fence epee.

Black card half the field at random so NACs stop fencing rounds of 256 after the cutoff.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


I did not. Uh. Huh. Well, that's dumb as gently caress.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


I'm bad at preregistration deadlines. Got the NAC, missed the ROC in the same city and I'm sure as hell not paying $225 for an A2 ROC.

And yeah, going straight to the priority minute is far better than black cards. Anything is better than black cards.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


dupersaurus posted:

There's nothing wrong with epee
I mean, that 1-0 bout would have taken a little under 3 minutes total (possibly less if they'd kept that 15s w/ no blade contact rule) and its an outlier even by epee standards.

So yeah, there's nothing wrong with epee! tt

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Crazy Achmed posted:

Seriously though, aren't there some relatively catch-all clauses in the rules about refusal to fence your opponent and general unsportsmanlike behaviour? Or are they too strictly interpreted to apply in this sort of case?
Too strictly interpreted, and the penalty is seen as too harsh. Though if they do end up black-carding both people, that's about the same level, so... But because of how epee works, there may actually be a fair bit of fencing in those low scoring periods. Both fencers aiming for shallow flicks to the wrist/light touches and moving for positioning, but never feeling quite good enough to move in on. A low epee score is essentially a bout between two people who completely have absorbed the "don't attack unless you are 100% sure it is going to be your point only" idea and are acting on it, not two fencers staring at each other over the tips of their blades. I honestly don't see those kinds of matches often enough to be an issue, because epee is becoming faster and more aggressive. Usually. Old fencers who don't move at all just get beaten, because I'm pretty sure the match BirdofPlay was referencing was either a vet event or well below a ROC level. Changing the rules because new fencers are bad is silly, just like saying "well, 10yo foilist b got 5 off-targets in a row, have a delay of match penalty" would be silly.

The IOC doesn't bitch about soccer matches spending 90 minutes to end 1-0, and its because there are chances in there. The same thing applies to epee.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Epee is saved! The spectre of non-combativity can loom over us for a few more years at least!

Sabreurs get some weirdass test changes to start lines though, plus 170ms lockouts up from 120s.

Efb, and with more info to boot. I'm calling it a simul and awarding no points because I screamed louder while posting. :

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 17:11 on Nov 23, 2015

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


dupersaurus posted:

Yeah I can't see myself calling that without judges or replay.
Pinning the covering hand to the target area with your tip seems to be the only way you're ever going to see that call, and that's not ever going to happen with anyone who can move their feet.

If she's flinching a lot, have another student practice lunging at her repeatedly. Being hit with a foil is a pretty benign experience and being repeatedly lunged at might get her used to it.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Verisimilidude posted:

If you're gonna run a demo, have your best fighters fight. People with at least good posture and well-kept gear.
My local university olympic club keeps trying to have their semi-skilled fencers do the demos instead of their decent people because they don't want to scare the newbies away. I don't understand, beginner epee looks awful. Two higher-rated people going at it looks goddamn awesome if they're good, and the dichotomy gets even worse with other weapons. They've got access to two people going to Div 1A NACs, and they insist on putting up Es and Ds. It just doesn't look good, but the A's can be good enough to know to just loosen up and go for some showy, fun, awesome touches because they're not worried about the basics. Maybe next year.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Hazzard posted:

Right now we only have broadswords and quarterstaves, so mixed weapon fighting doesn't work. An experienced spearman will beat a swordsman, at least in our club, every time. Getting past the point is not easy. As soon as the spearman knows that thrusting with one hand is a bad idea, they've won.
Doesn't even need to be an experienced spearman, really. When we first tries spear/sword sparring we'd all been doing sword for at least a year or two and we could not figure out how to get past that point. I ended up moving away from the area before we tried spear vs shield/sword unfortunately.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


dupersaurus posted:

I think the idea is that it makes the call simpler and less controversial; it's easier for the ref to make a call about someone not off the line quick enough than to call someone for a small "mistake" in their preparation. Thus makes the "go for simul, hope for an error" tactic less appealing. I suppose it could also make slow/no attacks off the line more viable since you won't be conceding an advance or two of momentum to your opponent.
As a mediocre ref, it was a ton easier to call simuls off the line like this instead of at the normal en garde lines, and I saw fewer attempts to do so, too.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


dupersaurus posted:

This is essentially a distance problem. Digging in and taking the parry isn't a problem in itself, the problem is that you're letting your opponent get close enough so that when they attack all you can do is panic parry and hope that they screw up. Keep the distance longer from the start, and do lots and lots of drills where parrying isn't an option so you have to beat the attack by distance alone. One drill that comes to mind (and there are many) is the advance lunge drill: two fencers, each with a weapon (bonus points for having pool noodles), no parrying, and you can only hit with an advance lunge. Repeat until your legs fall off then bump it up to double advance lunge.

Also make sure that you keep your weight over your legs and your knees bent. If your hips or your balance is getting off, then it's going to seriously hamper your ability to get away in the first place.
This will also teach you that going as fast as you can forward on the advance lunge won't do poo poo. You need to vary your timing to catch anyone.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


IM_DA_DECIDER posted:

That doesn't really make sense to me unless you're talking about real life swordfights. In the latter case, either my opponent fearlessly attacks me and gets parry riposted, which is good, or he doesn't attack me at all, which is also good because nobody is getting stabbed. Also I can probably run faster than some dude carrying a sword.
Ok, so I do epee, so nothing but sport-fencing, but if a dude won't attack and relies only on counters (and epee is counter-heavy) I'll be really confident in my ability to win. Without the ability to attack, you can't control distance. But here's my take on Fiore. People attack pretty easily and instinctively. Give someone a longsword and they'll do a passable zornhau without too much work, but parries are hard. Counters, too, require work and take way more practice. So yeah, drill parries and counters, because attacks come easy once your very basic form is taken care of.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


curious lump posted:

It's certainly more about distance than anything else, but I'm going to 'fear' someone with a strong parry and riposte more than someone with strong blade control or lunges, because when you attack into someone, regardless of whether or not you are controlling distance or setting up for a second attack, you are exposing yourself dangerously by leaving your position of strength and losing your leverage and measure to bring yourself into an enemy. The second someone can control your incoming blade and counter attack, you are most likely hosed without recovering extremely quickly. (which you won't if you were trying to bring your blade into a second attack)
This is definitely the epee speaking, but someone with a good parry/riposte, or someone basing their tactics around that, is begging for either snipes at the wrist, a disengage, or a counter-parry. If I don't have to worry about them attacking me while I'm setting up, so much the better. There's a fencer in the circuit here who has pretty decent parries but no attack whatsoever. He gives some people trouble, sure, but he's piss easy to throw a ton of attacks/feints out and then punish when he overcommits to a parry. I'm not sure why everyone is ignoring counter-parries, disengages, or coupes here. And yes, the blade dynamics of epee are very different from a longsword/historical fencing weapon, but if you're unable to set up a counter-parry, you're over-lunging in my opinion. Most of my points in epee are scored on the attack: not necessarily the initial lunge, but on a planned counter-parry, disengage, or a by baiting out their attack.

If you're controlling distance, you're not exposing yourself because you, by definition, have the distance and the timing because you're the one choosing to initiate the action. You control both. Can you still be parried? Of course, but that's your mistake for attacking when you did. Set up your attack better. And since your opponent is focusing so much on the parry, you should be able to set it up well.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Crazy Achmed posted:

Foil is the obvious choice for pro-tier play, gotta keep your equip weight down so you can get that fast roll
Its counter bonus is non-existent though, so you'll get murdered trying to trade.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Siivola posted:

I should point out that in kendo, an important part of a quality hit is running away from your opponent while screaming as hard as you can. If that's missing, the actual touch doesn't matter.
Huh. Sounds worse than epee.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Siivola posted:

I think what draws a lot of people to HEMA is the promise of "real swordfighting" and for some reason we tend to take that to mean "killing dudes". And then we look at sabre fencing and post "this so wouldn't work on the street " in comments all over the internet while writing articles about how HEMA peeps should dress ~professionally~ because we're all sick of getting confused with SCA nerds.

Also I'm jealous of all you fit people doing real sports.

But on the upside, I enrolled on a foil beginners' course and I'm really looking forward to it.
Yeah it's this. One of my sport fencing clubs has a big HEMA group and most of them are chill and hang out with us or suit up for a bout if they're bored (and invite us to try rapier) but a few will stand around and loudly announce how the epee is ridiculous and would be useless if we were ever attacked. Yeah guys, I really thought my epee was a self-defense weapon. You showed me.

E:. Have fun with the foil! It's great.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Ok.

FIrst. Sport fencing is "real" fencing, so Easton can gently caress off with that. Second, if Easton want to turn epee into literally nothing but wrist-touches and the most defensive fencing you've ever seen, then we should implement the afterblow rule. It may be interesting to fence as a practice exercise or for fun, but it would be much less interesting to watch, not more. Every bout, especially those that added the "doubles = point lost" penalty, would end 1-0. Every one. Third. Epee is already the easiest to watch and understand as a spectator, and doubles are pretty rare at the higher level until one fencer is using them tactically because they're significantly up, and that's a very easy concept to show and explain to casual viewers. (The reason that making afterblows a penalty is loving stupid is that the fencer that is down would use them tactically to bring the score down to 0-0, btw). Fifth, you and Easton are basically describing how confusing sabre and foil are to newcomers (and they are) and then using it to suggest a change to epee, which is weird. Sixth, if we're going for "realism" as if its, for some reason better, why even put a time or score limit? gently caress it, first person to get a touch wins. If there's an afterblow, the competitors are both eliminated from the tournament. Finally, why did we even decide that the point is to emulate the very rare duels to the death? Like, poo poo, why is this even assumed to be a good goal? Are we trying to make it more interesting to watch? Then afterblow in epee would be a horrendous failure. What are we trying to do here? Because if you want to make a sport that will somehow produce duels like people see on TV, I don't see it ending well at all.

Here's video of one of the last duels. Its boring as poo poo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e68nuAcSuWQ
Here's video from the 1960 Olympic epee, so roughly contemporary. Its irritatingly edited, but it personally looks more interesting to watch than the above. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYNNxYZ8tT8

I know I've heard of there being a comparison video showing the same person doing sport fencing and duel fencing at a very high level, but I can't find it. I'll let you know.

edit: Went and made it clear when I'm talking about Easton.

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 14:37 on Aug 27, 2016

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


KyloWinter posted:

I never said it wasn't.


I don't want to turn epee into anything.


I never proposed the penalty. And never said Matt Easton's proposal was perfect or should be implemented. Only that afterblows should be thought about.


I'd say they are all equally confusing, but fair point.


Sure. Good things to think about.


I never said it was meant to emulate a duel to the death. I'm pretty sure foil is meant to emulate first blood drawn from the torso though. I may be mistaken however.

Thanks for the videos but I can't really see what's going on in the first one.


Never said it was any more real.

I also think people are making some pretty big assumptions about what I am saying and jumping to conclusions about opinions I hold. This thread seems pretty anti-HEMA despite me not ever comparing the two.
You linked a video and said "something to think about". I responded to the video and gave my thoughts, which included "gently caress this guy for deciding that sport fencing wasn't "real" fencing, and also, that I thought about afterblows and think his proposal would be awful. And you are mistaken, foil literally arose from a training tool. Epee was meant to be fairly close to first blood, sort of. Its why the pressure required to activate the light is 750grams-force, which is roughly the amount of pressure it takes to draw blood (surface area accounts for the lack of epeeists everywhere cutting each other). Its why the first person to get the light gets the point, but the rules also acknowledge that simultaneous attacks are a thing. Its why the target area is the entire body. Foil comes from, very loosely, a training weapon for 18th century duelists, where people apparently did duel to the death. The "fleuret" or "foil" is a cap put on the tips of smallswords to blunt them for safer practice use. And at the time, the issue in duels was that people were both stabbing each other and both people were dying, and that's no good. So, you need to practice not just simultaneously killing each other. So the rules for foil require that you defend yourself if attacked first. They actually emphasize, in theory, that the person who is being attacked must deal with the oncoming attack before launching their own attack and acknowledge that counter-attacking into an attack, in a duel, is pretty drat dumb because you're going to get impaled. Which is why, if you do, the other person gets the point. Because its a practice weapon to help teach you how to parry-riposte or get out of distance, so that you don't die in a duel.

What works in a duel, what works in practice for a duel, and what works in practice are different things. (See immediately how the sport fencers in the thread thought about how they'd abuse the "afterblows penalize both fencers rule" in a bout, because while I see where he's coming from, that rule doesn't work in the context of sport). Oh, and by the way, what works in a duel to first blood and what works in a duel to the death are different things too, and Matt Easton somehow keeps conflating those two, too. And I'm sure there were people sneering at people dueling to first blood about how that wasn't real, either. So epee can't be an effective training tool for duelists, because the emphasis on "first touch" means that a sport epeeist will happily flick to the wrist while diving chest-first onto a point because they'll win-by-lockout-timer. In a duel, that's, uh, dumb. And in practice, same thing: the consequences aren't there as much, so things like "there's a sword point in my face" aren't actually scary because its practice. Incidentally, this is why Point-in-Line gives you priority in foil and sabre: because if your opponent puts a sword tip in your face, you should probably do something about it. So, in summary. Sport fencing arose because trying to safely practice for duels results in strange quirks because practice isn't "real", and then people decided the practice itself was cool so sportified that. See it? Duel to death with smallswords needs practice and everyone keeps mutually killing each other => lets emphasize a practice ruleset that forces you to deal with danger => hey this is fun => modern foil, eventually. Duels to first blood need to be practiced, so people practiced going to first blood, which was fun, so sport epee happened. Sabre, really briefly, had a similar progression to foil in that it went cavalry weapon > practice > sportified practice. I think. Sabre is weird.

If you've done HEMA, you've got to know that a newbie flailing away with no thought for defending themselves is going to have a pretty good chance at hitting you. People do that a lot in beginning sport fencing, too. Epee's a mess low-level, because defending is harder than attacking. Watch two new fencers in epee: they'll basically always counter-attack into an oncoming attack without even trying to close the line and a lot of bouts are decided based on who misses fewer of those simultaneous attacks. The most common action in a bout between two fencers of ~1 year is probably "attack with a disengage" with the other fencer "circle parries into a counter-attack without waiting to see if they picked up the blade on their parry". In effect, this looks like two fencers swirling their blades around each other once and then both attacking to the near shoulder/chest. So, if you want people to not do that, you put them on foil, which forces them to practice defending themselves rather than using defense-by-offense. Like, sure, at this point foil's morphed a lot from that because what constitutes a parry doesn't actually require you to effectively keep your opponent's line closed, but that's okay too: that means your opponent has to always be practicing "what happens if I am parried and will shortly be stabbed in the chest". Which is why foilists are much faster on the recovery and much, much less interested in remising that epeeists.

In practice, I've set artificial rules to try to encourage behavior that will be beneficial for winning bouts as skill improves, even if the optimal behavior for winning now won't be changed. One of my favorite practice bout rulesets for epee is to let my opponent ban a certain type of action (either for both of us or for one of us, I change my mind on this) every few touches. That is, lets say I get three touches on my opponent. He can now say "alright, you're not allowed to score points off of a fleche". For the rest of the bout, any lights I get off of a fleche are ignored (yes, this does mean that I can halt the action with a fleche if I time him out, for the sport-fencers immediately looking to game the system). So then I get three more touches, and now I am not allowed to get points off of wrist touches or a fleche. The idea here is to force yourself to practice using techniques you aren't good at. For example: I'm pretty drat good at foot touches. Its epee, so they can't be used regularly or they'll get punished, but they are 100% my go-to for momentum-changing. If I've lost or gained a few points in quick succession, I'm going to seriously think about setting up a foot touch. So, what do I do against someone who I know is absolutely fantastic at punishing foot touches? Hell if I know, but a drill like the one I described lets me practice not having a tool available to me, which is a good skill to practice. As I hinted at, if you turned this drill into a sport, the rule that works for a drill would immediately be abused in a sport context, just like priority is so divorced from its original intent of "don't get killed because you're too dumb to parry Tybalt's attack."

If you wanted to make a sport be more like an "actual" duel to first blood, I'd say you should do something like give a point for a touch anywhere on the body. Three points win the bout, but a fencer can withdraw from a bout early voluntarily, which enters them into some kind of repechage round, maybe double-elimination. Use epees with foil lockout timers. A touch on foil target area eliminates you from the tournament directly, as does losing a bout outright. I'm not sure what the penalty for hitting your opponent on the torso should be, but there should be one, because its kind of rude to kill your opponent in a duel to first blood. And, if we're trying to sportify duels to the death, why are we starting from fencing instead of something else in the first place?

And on that note: HEMA folks who want to make HEMA a sport. Any rule you make will get stretched to the breaking point, and the more you make it a sport, and the more you practice trying to win in that sport, the less you'll be trying to study historical martial arts. You'll be practicing to win the sport based on historical martial arts, and this will necessarily be reflected in your technique. And you know what? That's cool. There's nothing wrong with that. But you will never, ever be able to make a sport that will result in identical techniques as described by Fiore or Lichtenauer or whichever text you're looking at. You might be able to get close, but my impression is that the closer your ruleset gets to that, the more it will rely on judges. Which is okay, but then you have all the bias of "well, I think my attack was executed with full intent and was controlled enough to count as a hit, but the judge disagreed, this is bullshit" (see BirdOfPlay getting grumpy at people not understanding that the rules of priority are very well defined and are very consistent across the world).

Now that I have talked way too much, what are you saying? Because its apparently "well, think about this rule I am not suggesting be implemented, but you should think about it for reasons I won't say." This thread talks about HEMA more than sport fencing, most of the time. It might be a little more skewed towards sport because, well, the Olympics just happened. You've got a weird chip on your shoulder about this, but if it makes you feel better, I'll go back and clarify when I'm responding to you, KyloWinter, specifically, and when I'm responding to Matt Easton said in the video that you, KyloWinter, linked. And, if you're wondering why sometimes there's antagonism, well, just keep reading, because this guy basically shows up and starts preaching that sport fencing isn't fencing and isn't real. Which is kind of condescending and kind of pointless, respectively. As was your attitude. Also, I never mentioned HEMA either, you brought it up in your response to me. I was responding to you posting a video about a guy who decided he didn't like my sport and wanted to change it for reasons that he assumed were self-evident and they are not. I like most of the HEMA guys at my club, like I said earlier. I like HEMA. poo poo, I used to do HEMA before I really got into epee, and if there's no epee happening I've suited up for rapier and dagger with them because its fun and they're not condescendingly sneering about how I'm just "playing a game, not like us 'real' fencers". And I don't tell them how they should change their sport to suit what I think real fencing is because they're just silly nerds playing with swords unlike me, the real athlete. Unlike, say, this guy below.


Verisimilidude posted:

I disagree with your statement that all fencing is artificial. Tournaments are artificial. Fencing for points is artificial. Training isn't, and what you train for isn't, unless you are training specifically to get points or to win tournaments. Otherwise the same argument could be made that all martial arts are artificial unless you are in the middle of a street fight.
Uh, yeah bro, I train to win tournaments. Because I am a fencer. Who fences. In sport fencing. Which is fencing. I guess you could be saying something dumb like "but you train to get better at fencing, which helps you win tournaments!" which is a distinction without a purpose. And in that case, I train to get better at sport fencing, which is fencing. And yes, martial arts are all artificial unless you're in the middle of a street fight, which is literally the point that dupersaurus was making.

Verisimilidude posted:

As for hitting each other in the hands...what makes that boring? poo poo, make getting a hit in the face or torso worth more than a hit to the hands/legs. That would be rad. I personally find sport fencing to be incredibly boring to watch. I think it's mainly in the way it's presented, but even when it's explained to me it looks like flailing and then both fencers get hit and someone gets the point. At the bar recently while watching the olympics, patrons were straight up asking "wait, why did that person get the point when the other person hit him". Some really cool stuff happens from time to time, but the majority of what happens looks indecipherable. The sport has already become artificial, so why not add more artificiality in a direction of verisimilitude?

I'm not saying they should change the rules of the game. People like it for what it is, but it's moving further and further away from what "real" fencing is and was. It's a fencing game at this point, just like a HEMA tournament or kendo or gekken tournaments or whatever.
Is? Was? What are you talking about? Sport fencing is real fencing, because fencing has been a sport for centuries. Its not moving away from anything. And sure, its boring to watch if you have no idea what's going on. So's boxing. poo poo, two guys punched each other a lot and one person got declared the winner. Why'd Mayweather win against Pacquiao when he just ran away? gently caress if I know or care, but I'm sure boxers do. Most sports are going to be boring to the uninitiated. Gymnastics looks cool, but I doubt most people could tell you who won without actually having points displayed because most of it is "holy poo poo that looks both cool and hard!" If fencing had the same amount of time devoted to it in the Olympics, we'd have super slow-motion shots of each touch with lines drawn all over and multiple commentators clearly saying why the point was scored, and maybe people would get it, because I sure did. Hell, I complained about it in the fencing olympics thread, because the few replays we got often started after the attack was in progress. That's insane if you're trying to show why one foilist got the point in an attack/counter situation because which fencer started first gets priority!

Are we trying to go back to some platonic ideal? Maybe you should define it first instead of believing that we all agree with you. Are we trying to make it look cool to a complete layman? Should a fencer get bonus points based on how much like Errol Flynn or a Jedi they can look like? What do you even want?

And with that.

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 14:24 on Aug 27, 2016

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Verisimilidude posted:

I wasn't making the argument that because it's boring to watch it should be changed. You or someone else made the point that it would look boring if the rules were changed, all I was saying is it already does look boring.

I get that you're very defensive about your sport, but sport fencing is already far removed from its roots, and you should acknowledge that. And that's all that I'm saying. Is it "real" fencing? Ehh. It has elements of "real" fencing. It has timing, distance management, and you're using a sword-like object, but once you start implementing tactics to take advantage of rules or electronic registration of hits you're removing yourself from what "real" fencing is. Saying "sport fencing is fencing" is inherently wrong. Sport fencing is just sport fencing. It is the artificial sport of a simulated fencing game.
I do, constantly, because fencing is so far from its roots that its essentially divorced from them and is its own entity at this point. That's why it is a sport! Like, I roll my eyes at the HEMA people who try to tell me that I'm not doing real swordfighting because its so inherently obvious that I'm not doing real swordfighting that even having to say it is stupid. Why you've decided that your own weird definition of fencing is exclusionary and essentially "swordfighting", I'm not sure, but that's really not the definition most people would use. If you said you were a fencer, I'd probably ask which weapon and not think longsword, but I'm not going to say that longsword isn't a real sport so they can't be fencers. And most people probably don't think "longsword" when they hear "fencer" either. Because both wikipedia and Myrian-Webster (like, sure I know neither are definitive, but they are good for defining colloquial terms) for the entry for "fencing" describe "a sport in which two competitors fight using 'Rapier-style' swords, winning points by making contact with their opponent" and "the art or practice of attack and defense with the foil, épée, or saber". So yeah, that's why its so weird to have people tell me that I'm not doing real swordfighting. I'm not, because I am fencing.

Why don't you define what "real" fencing is, then, since you're apparently using a different definition from the rest of the world.

edit: Guys, marathon runners aren't real marathon runners because we didn't make all the participants fight a battle against spear-carrying Persians first, and when they cross the finish line they don't have to yell "nenikekamen" before dying. I'm just saying that so-called "marathon" runners should accept that they've divorced from their roots and are just doing a "sport".

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 15:00 on Aug 27, 2016

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Verisimilidude posted:

I never said anything about "sword fighting". I'm sorry so many HEMA people have tried to make that argument against you and sport fencing.

In my eyes the art of fencing is the art of defending yourself with a weapon (not necessarily a sword) against someone else with a weapon. Hit and don't get hit. Realism and intent play a part in that, which is why I'm not saying "sport fencing is definitely not at all fencing". I'm saying sport fencing is its own distinct entity that exists perhaps alongside fencing. There's fencing, and there's sport fencing.
I tried to change wording and use "swordfighting" to be what it seemed like your definition of "fencing" was, and used "fencing" to describe what the rest of the world defines as fencing. Sorry for any confusion. And yes, if you're saying "fencing" is distinct from "real fencing" you're...saying that sport fencing is not fencing, or at the very least implying some sort of weird superiority about what "real" fencing is when the rest of the world would call "Olympic fencing" "real fencing". If you're trying to say that fencing is a very broad term that encompasses Olympic fencing, sport fencing, and the various subgroups of HEMA that I'm less familiar with, then you're doing a very bad job of it because then you need to say that all of them are all types of fencing. Which, by the way, is closer to my position and why its so irritating that HEMA people to keep whining about the the sport people when its (a very few) EMA people who are being weirdly judgmental and exclusionary.

Your definition is either so broad as to include Olympic fencing and sport fencing as "fencing", or you're making assumptions about other words, or you haven't defined it enough. "Weapon" for instance. Olypmpic blades certainly aren't weapons, because I'm not trying to hurt someone with them, nor are they designed for it, though I could. Which means if I and another person decided to take epees and try to actually kill/hurt each other with them, we'd be fencing I guess? Using feders, similarly, probably mean that you're not "fencing", because they are not designed to injure. Guns are, but I don't think you're trying to say that two people shooting each other are "fencing," even though they are both defending themselves with weapons, trying to hit the other, and trying not to get hit. Two people smashing each other with clubs is fencing? Are fists "weapons?" Intent "plays a part", but what is it when one person trying to kill the other, the other person trying to count coup before running? What if one person is trying to kill the other, and the second person is desperately trying not to hit their opponent? Fencing or not? Could you describe a time you have "fenced" under your definition?

Can we justdescribe your personal definition of fencing as "artisanal fencing" from here on out, maybe?

edit:

HEY GAL posted:

we may not fight like they fought, but what's preventing you from training like they trained? that's what hema is, in my opinion
Good news! Depending on who you mean by "they", they trained with foil and epee before foil and epee got spun off into their own thing. But joking aside, that's one of the things I liked about HEMA. People in my group would look through translations and then try to figure out what they meant through drill, practice, and sparring. That was cool. Like, I do remember when choosing to generally prefer vom tag to pflug (iirc, its been over 10 years) suddenly clicked for me thanks to some sparring, because at first glance, pflug just seems so, so much safer. Neat little transition.

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 15:53 on Aug 27, 2016

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


KyloWinter posted:

Maybe because I didn't link it.
poo poo. You're right. I'm sorry about that.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Neat. Is that why the longsword seems to focus on unarmored combat?

e: vvvv Yeah, I meant most of the fechtbuch stuff I remember looking at ages ago.

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 20:08 on Aug 27, 2016

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


dupersaurus posted:

Out of town for the week, so went to stab the locals. Bunch of epeeists, but it was still fun. If you find yourself in Nashville and want to fence, Music City FC is a good visit.

Good epee in Nashville? Sweet! I might be going to school that direction soon.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


BirdOfPlay posted:

"Attack arrives, touch left."
"No parry?"
"Mal parre" "En garde."
Please, the attack clearly starts from the right. Or yeah, a double-touch in epee. Goddamn tall people.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Afaik, 5 is still a completely pointless guard in modern foil. It closes nothing better than any guard and is worse in various ways. What advantages does he claim he gets from starting in it?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply