our take on the krump

**blossfechter** · Posted On: 2/25/2010 8:11pm

Originally Posted by willaume

Here the original texts

When he strikes you at the opening from your right side with and ober or unter haw, so jump out of the strike with the right foot aginst him well onto his left side and strike him with ???? arms with the point onto his hands and that piece goes as well against him when he goes at you standing in eth guard/position of the ox.

I believe the ???? is *crossed*.

**Mordschlag** · Posted On: 3/03/2010 12:32am

Ok I've been holding off on replying further but I think I have the material I was looking for. Please don't take this as malicious in anyway just trying to help better explain my position. I think the problem here is that your crooked strike isn't very crooked, thus giving an appearance of a faulty Krump. The Krumphau is a crooked strike because your arms are crossed and thus is not a true diagonal cut, as with your arms crooked your hilt will be higher than your point. I believe in Codex Wallerstein it is even described at one point as being a "crooked\bent Zwerchau" and if you take this description as true, you cannot do it from the same position as you would a Zornhau (as in your video). Thus when you break the Ochs with a Krump, you are stepping to your target's flank and using this crooked strike to hit the arms (also works against the Zornhau). Or the other way to break the Ochs with a Krump is to Krump into the point of your enemy, thus moving their sword away and down from you as your point goes into the body. This is described in Ringeck and Liechtenauer.

**Polar Bear** · Posted On: 3/03/2010 3:02am

Originally Posted by willaume

Hello PB

Just to make sure I got you right, you are talking of something along the line of what @ 3 to 3:15 in YouTube- krumprcapII_0001.wmv
if that the case I totally agree with you.

No, one of the things Dobringer says its to bind flat to flat and press the sword. What you are doing there is deflecting the sword and cutting. The problem with this is that you lose contact with the opponents sword early and you have no control over what happens next. If you remain bound and pressing the sword while entering, you can see any openings that appear, either high or low and attack into them safely. Also your student is co-operating with your krump, you need to train them to me more resistant to what you want or they will start complying in freeplay also. I realise the shinai makes it harder to bind properly with the opponent so I'm not trying to be overly critical. If you do it with a steel weapon you'll get what I mean.

**willaume** · Posted On: 3/12/2010 1:57pm

Originally Posted by blossfechter

I believe the ???? is *crossed*.

Hello Bloss and Polar B
Sorry for the delay dead PSU and HDD.
you both have a valid opinion.

about the ???? being crossed, To be honest sometime I don't and sometime i do.

Anyway Von speyer text is quite clear and the pic in the goliath is as well.
http://www.schielhau.org/images/43.jpg
and that follows the description of the KRUMP

and again VD clearly says AUSS (out of)

"dobringer" does not say cross your hands he just say throw the point.

Now regardless of what I think the text are saying i do it sometime with crossed hands , it really depend what the other bloke is doing.
i fundamentally believe that the pieces are very precise example that demonstrate the tactical and technical fundamentals of what is described.

I think it is quite important to be precise and argue what would seem a moot point to other. Because we need that precision to understand what the example is all about. And without that you can no get the generic principle.

And I think a krump is a strike that curves. It can be a j or u or a n, with and without crossed arms, it does not matter as long as you step out and create distance/space. It is a Krump.

Phil

**willaume** · Posted On: 3/13/2010 5:42am

Originally Posted by Polar Bear

No, one of the things Dobringer says its to bind flat to flat and press the sword. What you are doing there is deflecting the sword and cutting. The problem with this is that you lose contact with the opponents sword early and you have no control over what happens next. If you remain bound and pressing the sword while entering, you can see any openings that appear, either high or low and attack into them safely. Also your student is co-operating with your krump, you need to train them to me more resistant to what you want or they will start complying in freeplay also. I realise the shinai makes it harder to bind properly with the opponent so I'm not trying to be overly critical. If you do it with a steel weapon you'll get what I mean.

PB & MS
Don’t worry, I asked for comments so yes I am interested in what you think and how you do things. Of course it would be better if we meet in person. But I am pretty booked this year and there is the 1st and probably last truly international jousting event and I will judge in a longsword event in Germ this year. So that is my holidays sorted. And I assume it is pretty tight for all of us anyway we will eventually meet in person.

PB
I think we are saying the same thing.
What I was trying to get across was that the krump deflection via shrankhut can work but it is not as reliable as the “krump against the master”.
It is not unsound per se but you need to understand the “gaps”.
In fact I think this is exactly what Ringeck tells us hence the two way of breaking it
Those two ways exploits exactly what you describe and the “krump against the master” does exactly what you advice.

The krump against the master it does not mater if he stays in the bind or tries to detach and you can change the final strike in any of the 5 master strikes. As well you never really send your point away from your opponent, which I think is a cardinal sin

But yet it is in the manual, and in the “ pieces that are good but not in the manual” we are told that you use the shrackhut to get close. So I believe it is there for a reason and there is a reason why we have the “krump against the master”.
There are times, especially sparing one vs several where it is what you need to protect your movement be it at the expense of retaliation

Regardless of student compliance, you only need a deflection when you opponent attacks you in the Zu fechten. when someone attacks from that range he is committed and can not change. He can fake commitment or shorten his steps but that’s about it.
Anything else he will to be at “fechten distance
If attacks when you are in that range you do not need any “separate” deflection, you just break his guard”.
I tend to make a bid difference between zu fechen and fechten when I explain things and sometimes it is getting in the way of ho I come accross
Another way to put it would be to say that the krump deflection with the shrank only works when the opponents commit when you are in effect “coming to fence” and you draw him out.
phil