Charles Mahan
Purple Belt
MODERATOR NOTE:
THESE POSTS HAVE BEEN SPLIT OFF FROM ANOTHER THREAD SO THAT THE TOPIC OF SPARRING CAN CONTINUE. ALL MODERATOR WARNINGS ARE STILL ARE IN EFFECT.
Lisa Deneka
MartialTalk Super Moderator
Well... Chanbara doesn't use swords, and never has at a prior point in it's history. It uses padded weapons which don't perform much like the real thing, and from what little I've seen, doesn't really use them in a realistic way. To top it off it's named after the Japanese term for "cinematic" sword play. Not exactly a point in it's favor.
Don't get me wrong. It looks like a load of fun and fantastic exercise. But it bears little to no resemblance to the JSA world.
If you disagree with my assertion, think about it a bit, come back and lay out your case for why I am wrong. So far your justification of labeling it as a sword art revolves around it using a "representation of a sword" and it's being "combative". That's not a terribly strong arguement. The "representation of a sword" is not a terribly good substitute in terms of shape, weight, balance, performance, menace, and other general handling characteristics. Combative is in the eye of the beholder I suppose. You do hit people, but not with the intent to cause them harm. It's a point tagging system.
THESE POSTS HAVE BEEN SPLIT OFF FROM ANOTHER THREAD SO THAT THE TOPIC OF SPARRING CAN CONTINUE. ALL MODERATOR WARNINGS ARE STILL ARE IN EFFECT.
Lisa Deneka
MartialTalk Super Moderator
Well... Chanbara doesn't use swords, and never has at a prior point in it's history. It uses padded weapons which don't perform much like the real thing, and from what little I've seen, doesn't really use them in a realistic way. To top it off it's named after the Japanese term for "cinematic" sword play. Not exactly a point in it's favor.
Don't get me wrong. It looks like a load of fun and fantastic exercise. But it bears little to no resemblance to the JSA world.
If you disagree with my assertion, think about it a bit, come back and lay out your case for why I am wrong. So far your justification of labeling it as a sword art revolves around it using a "representation of a sword" and it's being "combative". That's not a terribly strong arguement. The "representation of a sword" is not a terribly good substitute in terms of shape, weight, balance, performance, menace, and other general handling characteristics. Combative is in the eye of the beholder I suppose. You do hit people, but not with the intent to cause them harm. It's a point tagging system.