230781 Bullies, 5365 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 11 to 20 of 23
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 12 3 LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. willaume is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    windsor UK
    Posts
    344

    Posted On:
    9/08/2009 8:46am


     Style: aikido, medieval fencing

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimnir69 View Post
    Phil, I am not entirely sure that we interpret Langenort the same either.

    The way I see it, it should be done with the arms FULLY extended as from a thrust, order to keep your opponent as far away from you as possible.

    Moving your hands back, down, up or to the sides gets you closer to extended versions of Hengen or Eisenport in my opinion and is usually necessary to be able to attack from Langenort, apart from a simple durchwechsel and letting the opponent run into the point.

    And when you mentioned a normal bind, I would rather say that they are normal, "too short" binds, since the theoretical, preceding strikes are too short to reach their targets. Thus you have to depend on a secondary attack; a thrust, duplieren, abschneiden etc.

    Would you please also describe your interpretation of duplieren? It appears to be quite different from ours and looks more like a winden/thrust in the videos.

    The way we do it from bind is like this. (The key here is the pommel motion which describes the letter D and moving your hands and body to the left side):

    While remaining in the bind, push the pommel forwards in order to wind the binding point towards your opponent's "weak" and load your strike with more force.

    At the same time push your hands towards the left with a passing step to the left and push the pommel to the right. (Make sure not to push your hands downwards or you may force his blade onto your leg)

    Strike down with the long edge to the opponent's upper openings, the shoulder, neck or head while pulling the pommel back as with any strike.

    Everything should, as usual, be done in one single and continuous motion.
    Hello
    Hello
    Dupliren & mutieren
    Basically for me duplieren/muteiren do not describe a technique, it describe a method to attack the same opening or change the opening.
    According to the situation you find yourself you will use the appropriate strike.

    (My understanding is bind or no bind attack or defence you will strike with the 5 strikes only (and their piece of course and in defence you will have the two abzetens though we could say they are particular application of the zwerch and the shiel)).

    It is hard on internet but from what I understand you winding on toward his weak. And uncle Sigmund (I think he is the only one to say that) states that dupliren is done against his strong.).
    Regardless fro me everything you do in the bind is going to be either a mutieren or a duplieren.

    No since we are on the topic and mutieren and duplieren really depends upon what we understands by opening, I have to say that the usual way the 4 opening are represented do not really makes sense. I.e. the left and right side being separated by the noze-sternum-cock line
    I think that it should be understood in the context of when someone is facing you to fence.
    I.e. left and right becomes omote/ura or inside/outside.

    What do you think?

    phil
  2. willaume is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    windsor UK
    Posts
    344

    Posted On:
    9/08/2009 9:25am


     Style: aikido, medieval fencing

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimnir69 View Post
    Hm, I think I begin to understand the root of the slight difference in interpretations.

    First of all, it seems as if you have a similar interpretation to that of Hugh Knight regarding the Zornhau as a cut to the sword and not to the head, which means it has to be followed by a winden/thrust or duplieren.

    I see the strike to the head as the primary attack, just as the zwerchhau or the schielhau and the zornort thrust as a secondary attack if the strike doesn't land properly.
    hello
    Nope I am like you I think the Zorn is a cut to the upper opening, and we trust only if he parries but we put ourself in the case where we hit him, well there is no need for the rest.
    That being said since the zhorn does not break any guard, I mainly used it a counter when the attack erly in my Zufecheen basically for me it is a way to protect you entry.

    I think the description of the zornh as you describe (ie the way you though i did) fits Von Dantzig description but the way the gags are set up is slightly different in VD

    phil
    Last edited by willaume; 9/08/2009 9:30am at .
  3. willaume is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    windsor UK
    Posts
    344

    Posted On:
    9/08/2009 9:48am


     Style: aikido, medieval fencing

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly216 View Post
    Agreed, the guards are not passive, they are begin, end or transitory, but not passive waiting postures.

    And they come and go.

    I also see them a bit as reference points.

    Grizzly216
    I don't know if you are right but i agree with you...

    My understanding of Ringeckís system is that our opponent may or may be static but we are not. So we need too break static guard and dynamic guard. (I think that the 4 guards + langen ort covers all the possible guards so we have means to attack even guard that we have never seen before)

    Ringeckís never explicitly mention attacking from a guard.
    VD and the other authors that have based their work on his (juden Lew, Von speyer and goliath) the take von tag as you get into range with the Zu-fechten
    (I need to check what VD is saying about the long point)

    But guards do not have any meaning until you are in fighting range. At that stage they just are final position for one of the five strikes you have executed.
  4. Grimnir69 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    131

    Posted On:
    9/08/2009 10:03am


     Style: HEMA

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by willaume View Post
    Hello
    Hello
    Dupliren & mutieren
    Basically for me duplieren/muteiren do not describe a technique, it describe a method to attack the same opening or change the opening.
    According to the situation you find yourself you will use the appropriate strike.

    (My understanding is bind or no bind attack or defence you will strike with the 5 strikes only (and their piece of course and in defence you will have the two abzetens though we could say they are particular application of the zwerch and the shiel)).

    It is hard on internet but from what I understand you winding on toward his weak. And uncle Sigmund (I think he is the only one to say that) states that dupliren is done against his strong.).
    Regardless fro me everything you do in the bind is going to be either a mutieren or a duplieren.

    No since we are on the topic and mutieren and duplieren really depends upon what we understands by opening, I have to say that the usual way the 4 opening are represented do not really makes sense. I.e. the left and right side being separated by the noze-sternum-cock line
    I think that it should be understood in the context of when someone is facing you to fence.
    I.e. left and right becomes omote/ura or inside/outside.

    What do you think?

    phil
    Actually I think I agree with most of what you say here. :)

    However, I wouldn't count a winden followed by a thrust as mutieren/duplieren. I am not sure if you do.

    Regarding our interpretation of duplieren and the "D-rotation" of the pommel, you still push against the opponent's strong. It is just that the pommel motion lets you gain a little advantage by shortly pushing your strong towards his weak, before sliding towards his strong again, with a cut. With a bind from a righthanded oberhau, you move to his right, strong side though.

    Also, my understanding of duplieren and mutieren connects strikes to the former and thrusts to the latter, in general. The duplieren, the way I see it, is a "doubled" cut that is done directly after your strike has been parried, and is performed straight from the bind. The parried strike can of course be just about any oberhau.

    You bring up so many interesting points that it is hard to respond properly without becoming extremely longwinding. I'll try to respond better later, when I have more time. Thanks for taking the time to explain your views!
    Last edited by Grimnir69; 9/08/2009 10:35am at .
  5. Grimnir69 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    131

    Posted On:
    9/08/2009 10:23am


     Style: HEMA

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by willaume View Post
    hello
    Nope I am like you I think the Zorn is a cut to the upper opening, and we trust only if he parries but we put ourself in the case where we hit him, well there is no need for the rest.
    That being said since the zhorn does not break any guard, I mainly used it a counter when the attack erly in my Zufecheen basically for me it is a way to protect you entry.

    I think the description of the zornh as you describe (ie the way you though i did) fits Von Dantzig description but the way the gags are set up is slightly different in VD

    phil
    I am not sure that I fully agree on the "zornhau not breaking any guards"-bit. Although it doesn't break any guards per se, your opponent rarely remains in a guard when you attack. Instead, he is often in a secondary guard when you bind, for instance zornort, langenort or hengen or even kron or schrankhut, or "in transit" towards these with some form of attack.

    Just as you, he will try to win the line and there are many situations in which a zornhau will work perfectly as a "shielded" cut against any of the other master cuts. It simply depends on how you choose to work. The quickest would be to move the pommel upwards and let the blade strike the upper openings, the head, chest or arms.

    To me, the whole point of a master cut is rather that they protect you well from the basic actions that can be performed from any given guard. Together with good footwork even the zornhau leaves you in a very good spot.

    Also, if the opponent remains in Vom Tag, a zornhau works quite well as a master cut and keeps you quite safe, provided you let it end near langenort with your hands held relatively high.

    This is of course very basic and you know all this. I know you have studied this extensively and I am certainly no expert. I am just clarifying my views on the zornhau/mastercut topic and find it interesting to hear your views!

    It seems as we have basically the same interpretations, but a slightly different perspective on how to connect things. :)
  6. Grimnir69 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    131

    Posted On:
    9/08/2009 12:01pm


     Style: HEMA

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Rereading your posts, I now think that you are saying something similar with "I mainly used it a counter when the attack erly in my Zufecheen basically for me it is a way to protect you entry."

    I was a bit confused about what you meant. :)

    From what I understand now, you find zornhau useful to enter into krieg-distance and use various winding techniques. That makes sense.

    I do get the impression that you are a bit more thrust-focused though. Do you agree? In sparring many of us tend to use the thrust very little and perhaps this is something I ought to take into consideration. Although we certainly do winden techniques to some extent, and practice even more, many choose to leave the bind for a strike to another opening, when sparring.
  7. Grimnir69 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    131

    Posted On:
    9/09/2009 3:33am


     Style: HEMA

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Phil, another concept you mentioned is the division of the targets/openings. This is tricky indeed, although at first glance it seems simple enough. This is especially true when you look at polearms like the quarterstaff or the spear, which I have been studying quite intensively for some time.

    With the spear, I would say that it is better with mirrored stances, i.e. that I lead with my left foot, when you lead with your right. This is strongly related to the inside/outside of your guards and where I expose you the best, while protecting myself the best.

    The centre line of my opponent's body is less relevant than attacking on the inside of my opponent's weapon. Likewise, in defense I need to manipulate my opponent onto my outside by various winden techniques and absetzen. It is basically a constant battle for the inside.

    My confusion regarding this lies in the fact that different masters use the terms inside/outside differently, although I do believe that they are basically saying the same thing.

    I am trying to figure out how this may affect my longsword strategies...
    Last edited by Grimnir69; 9/09/2009 3:50am at .
  8. willaume is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    windsor UK
    Posts
    344

    Posted On:
    9/16/2009 7:50pm


     Style: aikido, medieval fencing

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Hello
    Sorry for the delay in my replies, I had to actually produce some work…

    I just have been doing that for 10 years, so I am not really an expert either. You are spot on we are just two guys comparing notes.

    I really think that how you see it, understand and express it is very dependant on what is your primary source.
    So if you follow mainly the “dobringer” yes the zhorn breaks everything, we could even say that is te case for the 5 magic strike.
    But if you follow ringeck that is the case.
    It seems contradictory but it makes sense if you see the 5 strikes only as being a different way of finish a strike that is always beginning the same way.

    On the guard bit well, when you finish a Zwerch you are in an ox and really I do not think guard/position are any thing more.
    I think you can not really make senses of the guard in medieval senses if you try to understand them with the modern meaning of guard. The guard do not makes sense in zu fechteten
    For me Zu fechten= coming into the distance where I will strike in the vor. We only care of the position he is in when we reach that position. If he attacks earlier, he will always be out of distance. So even if he strikes properly in Silver true time (sword body and foot/feet) you will have to deal with a strike not a “guard/position” in the medieval German sense”

    For me the “guards/position” represents the only 5 way you can hold a sword. Where the sword is pointing only matters when we (as German fencer) are taking one of those 5 position. i.e.
    hands high and back,
    hands high and in front,
    hand in the middle
    hand low and behind
    and Hands low and in front

    the corresponding German gard are just holding the sword in a way that enables a direct attack vi trust, strike or schnitt
    I mean what do we do if a geezer takes posta di dona, ask him to fence like a man and take a proper guard?

    Posta di dona is for all intend and purpose, and way to take von tag.
    Any guard that has the hands high and behind the nose-cok line is to be treated like von tag regardless where the sword is pointing.
    If you deliver a Zwerch, it will work all the time

    Hand high and in front is to be treated like ox.
    No try to break posta di dona with a krump and he will get you all the time, even though some version of the posta di dona look like an ox held behind the head.

    Phil
    Ps you do not happen to be in Sweden by any chance, I will be there tomorrow.
  9. willaume is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    windsor UK
    Posts
    344

    Posted On:
    9/16/2009 8:01pm


     Style: aikido, medieval fencing

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimnir69 View Post

    I do get the impression that you are a bit more thrust-focused though. Do you agree? In sparring many of us tend to use the thrust very little and perhaps this is something I ought to take into consideration. Although we certainly do winden techniques to some extent, and practice even more, many choose to leave the bind for a strike to another opening, when sparring.
    hello
    Well it is hard to say.
    I see the initial attack as something that should be successful.
    You will get into bind only if he parries.
    Now of course, I trust when he thrust, strike when he strike and shnitt or wrestle when he close in.

    For me if your initial strike is in the vor (either directly or via fullen) he canít escape the bind.
    If they detach and strike somewhere else, the counter to abnemehn (detachment) should work.

    For me the key point is that for you to attack, you need to be at a distance where he must parry and can not void.
    phil
  10. Grimnir69 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    131

    Posted On:
    9/16/2009 11:48pm


     Style: HEMA

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by willaume View Post
    Hello
    Ps you do not happen to be in Sweden by any chance, I will be there tomorrow.
    Phil, I will make a longer reply later, but yes, I am in Sweden, in Gothenburg. I'd be happy to show you around and perhaps practice a bit, if you are reasonably nearby. :)

    I practice with GHFS so I will also be attending and working at Swordfish.
    Last edited by Grimnir69; 9/17/2009 12:06am at .
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 12 3 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.