We do a similar twirling drill to several of those shown, but its for warm-ups only and is just to get your wrists and elbows loose. It has absolutely no direct combative value.
It's really tough to tell much of anything from the videos without true sparring. Everything shown seems pretty demo-ie to me, and it seems like the players are very conscious of looking good, and do most things with lots of flourish. Going reverse grip with a long stick is just silly. It looks stylish for a demo, but if I'm sparring someone and they pull that, I'll ring their bell in a heartbeat.
With that being said, their demo stuff looks fine for demo, and some of our sister clubs do similar stuff. Guro Jon, the double stick feeder in this clip is a good example. He does some spin moves regularly in demonstrations. It looks cool. But when he fights, not so much.
What I find strange with the clips is the drastic emphasis on style, and incredible de-emphasis on power. Many of the blocks would absolutely cave in against a committed shot. I'm not sure if this is due to a blade-emphasis where power is not the emphasis? But against a weapon coming in with a lot of force, or even worse, force and mass, the blocks don't look to stout. They seem like very passive deflections with some evasion.
This can be fine for a simple strike, or in the case of a demo when you will be allowed a clean counter for the sake of choreography. But if someone is really coming at you with intent like a buzz-saw, you won't be able to keep backpedaling or leaning out. And your passive deflections will not stop the incoming threat.
I'd be intrigued to see some more combative application. If this is demo, that's fine. If it's just theory being presented as combative application, I'd like to know the context (blade representation?), because as an impact system I see flaws.
Modern canne fencing was originally developed as an "artistic sport", with no particular pretense towards real combat or self defense; the object is to execute difficult, aesthetically pleasing moves in a competitive environment. Thus, the rules are designed to ensure very elaborate moulinets (circular twirls), spectacular leaps and spins, etc.
It's not to be confused with the combat canne sometimes taught as a self defense system; they're approached as being different disciplines.
This is a clip of practiseners trying some sparring at assaut level in Canne De Combat/Canne De Défense after a 3 day seminar (so padded sticks and amateur level).
At "combat" level, the sticks aren't padded anymore.
If you compare it to single Canne De Combat/Canne De Sport you will see that some of the flowerish techniques have dissapaired.
Unfortunally Canne De Défense is way lesser practised compared to Canne De Sport (also modern Canne De Sport exists longer than modern Canne De Défense), so except a minority that is really good, the levels of competence are lower.
La Double Canne has just started (8 years ago created, 5 years ago codified by ASCA and only since this year codified by CNCBB) and exists at this moment only in "sport" version.
I expect that in the next years a "combat" version will appear.
This looks very much like Poi, a juggling art which is popular in France.
Originally Posted by Rene "Zendokan" Gysenbergs
Incidentally Poi with sticks is prohibited at many events as it can knock out bypassers.
This is a timely thread. I've had a growing interest in La Canne since I broke my leg.
The problem with most cane styles is that they assume you don't need the cane to walk or stand.
Originally Posted by Spungdeeper
Peace favor your sword,