Training with unskilled fencers

S

Shane Smith

Guest
George Silver in his" Paradoxes of Defence", circa 1599, tells us that no man may be judged a perfectly good master of defence until he can stand unharmed after bouting in turn against three masters of defence, three valiant yet untrained men and three determined men half-drunk. This seems to me a pretty darn insightful test and one that is valid in the extreme(especially in period) if not practical for legal and other reasons.

Still we can learn much from the unskilled yet aggressive guys that show up to train with us all from time to time. These guys embody the buffel that the source texts warn us against as well as instruct us in overcoming by superior skill of art. These kinds of men with their generally good athleticism and their audacity make for excellent training tools and gut-check devices on occasion. Quite simply, throwing a big commited zorn at an unskilled yet valiant man will often result in a double hit as he will launch when you do with the one thought of landing his blow as well. This is not so likely against another skilled fencer who will often seek to bind to save his skin and steal the initiative. He knows what to do and is therefore safer to engage with audacity. A non-fencer will do the most unexpected and irrational things and therefore they must be faced much more cautiously in some cases. You must move them from their place of protection either by coming in under your own surest cover or defend their buffalo strike with a displacement or a void with counter. You simply have no idea what he may do beyond the limits any mans skeletal/muscular structure place on his actions. That is a true test of nerve and skill.

Non skilled yet aggressive fighters are excellent tests of skill in my opinion along with the normal fare of skilled opposition and my own experiences leads me to side with Master Silver 100 percent. What are you guys' experiences and thoughts in this regard?
 

Christopher Umbs

Yellow Belt
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
49
Reaction score
4
Location
Summit, NJ USA
Isn't that the best reason for fencing the SCA? :)

Seriously... I think it's always important to do after you have the basics of the style down. In my classes, I teach how to fence against a skilled opponent first and then give special training on how to defeat the unorthodox. In some respects it depends on the weapon... even a master at rapier might have trouble fencing athletic naturals all day, but would have an easier time with smallsword or dueling sabre.

For later weapons, Bazencourt and Barbasetti both have some good advice about fencing the unskilled (or 'hurlers of steel' as Barbasetti calls them at times). In both cases though, it's the job of the better fencer to make sure that there's only one hit. For the unskilled fencer, the double hit may be the best option so they should refuse engagement and and blade contact that will grat the advantage to the skilled fencer. As long as the unskilled one can make it a game of speed and distance rather than blade technique - they have a chance.

Chris
 
OP
S

Shane Smith

Guest
Christopher Umbs said:
Isn't that the best reason for fencing the SCA? :)

As long as the unskilled one can make it a game of speed and distance rather than blade technique - they have a chance.

Chris
Good point. I think Silver covers this nicely however by stressing the importance of fighting in the time of the hand why our opponent must fight in the time of the foot. If we maintain proper distance, this requires that the athletic yet less skilled man close with a pass or step on the advance to offend while we may or may not slip back a step while covering ourselves in the time of the movement of the hand with a counter. As our time is the shorter, we can fight in reasonable safety in theory.I do fall short on occasion however.

In earlier longsword forms, the distance is similar and the concepts as well, but the longsword allows a nearly single time displace and counter. If the strong fighter passes in to attack, I can actually traverse in a bit, yet offline and simultaneously re-direct his blade offline while mine glides down his blade and into his hands or head. Once again, distance and a sure cover tend to carry the bout in my experience.
 

arnisador

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 28, 2001
Messages
44,573
Reaction score
456
Location
Terre Haute, IN
Shane Smith said:
Non skilled yet aggressive fighters are excellent tests of skill in my opinion
We had a discussion along these lines this past weekend w.r.t. Filipino stick-fighting. We tend to forget how hard the untrained fighter may hit, and we so often train for 'smarter' fighters who don't leave themselves so open, or don't commit so deeply...then are sometimes "too prepared" for someone who comes in with a 'suicidal' swing that will see both players getting tagged.
 
OP
K

Keith Jennings

Guest
Yep, once again Silver’s words ring with universal truth.

My old Korean instructor used to say about beginners that, it’s not that beginners won’t use control when they spar, it’s that they can’t. In my TKD days, the most brutal sparring matches were between two blue belts. They knew just enough to actually do some damage, but weren’t experienced enough have any control. What resulted looked more like a car wreck rather than martial arts.

Obviously, I can’t recommend sparring while drunk, :rolleyes: but you can learn just as much fighting an athletic and aggressive beginner as you can against a senior practitioner. I would also add to that the need to spar those outside of your own system/school. It’s easy to fight against that which you know, but things change drastically when you face the unknown.

 

lklawson

Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 3, 2005
Messages
5,036
Reaction score
1,680
Location
Huber Heights, OH
Shane Smith said:
Quite simply, throwing a big commited zorn at an unskilled yet valiant man will often result in a double hit as he will launch when you do with the one thought of landing his blow as well. This is not so likely against another skilled fencer who will often seek to bind to save his skin and steal the initiative. He knows what to do and is therefore safer to engage with audacity. A non-fencer will do the most unexpected and irrational things and therefore they must be faced much more cautiously in some cases. You must move them from their place of protection either by coming in under your own surest cover or defend their buffalo strike with a displacement or a void with counter. You simply have no idea what he may do beyond the limits any mans skeletal/muscular structure place on his actions. That is a true test of nerve and skill.

Non skilled yet aggressive fighters are excellent tests of skill in my opinion along with the normal fare of skilled opposition and my own experiences leads me to side with Master Silver 100 percent. What are you guys' experiences and thoughts in this regard?
Now trade in those nice safe swrods (ha!) for a knife! The smaller the blades, the scarier it is. Blocking, Parrying, Beating, Engaging, etc. all become darn near impossible with a small knife (6 or 8 inches) when faced with a committed yet unskilled opponent. When his only thought is to plant his blade in you, double death runs rampant.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 
OP
S

Shane Smith

Guest
lklawson said:
Now trade in those nice safe swrods (ha!) for a knife! The smaller the blades, the scarier it is. Blocking, Parrying, Beating, Engaging, etc. all become darn near impossible with a small knife (6 or 8 inches) when faced with a committed yet unskilled opponent. When his only thought is to plant his blade in you, double death runs rampant.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
Daggers are indeed a dangerous thing.Good points above. The WMA tradition in dagger is alive and well be it those working with the manual of Italian Master Fiore or one of the many German works(Gladiatoria, Codex Wallerstein etc). Our daggers tend to have about 12+ inch blades though and in all sincerity, knife fighting does indeed make me much more nervous than swordplay. I feel quite secure with my 4' longsword due to the increased reaction time that proper distance/measure allows with that weapon. Success with a dagger lies on a knifes edge of perfect timing in the close fight. A smaller blade would definitely thwart many historically-accurate dagger methods as you suggest.
 

Latest Discussions

Top