Page 15 of 52 First ... 511121314151617181925 ... Last

Thread: SCA Combat

  1. #141
    Styygens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland
    Posts
    2,178
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I've been busy, and the YMAS/MABS threads on a particular paranoid bullshidoka distracted my attention when I was logged into the site, but I really like where this is going over the past page.

  2. #142

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    131
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Regarding collaborating with other styles, and for those of you who have Facebook. Here's a short 20s WMA clip by ARMA from an MMA event:

    http://www.facebook.com/video/video....3015201&ref=mf Too short, but pretty good.

  3. #143

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Dayton, OH
    Posts
    964
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimnir69 View Post
    I tried searching for it, but can't seem to find it. I ordered the De Gheyn book anyways. Would have been good to have a digital version though, and a translation. :)
    OK, I spend some of my Karma Points and dug it up on a lucky search. Turns out it was van Buren's drill manual, the Pike section.

    van Buren's Pike Drills

    Sorry it wasn't de Gheyn.

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
    Last edited by lklawson; 3/11/2010 10:50am at . Reason: correct link error

  4. #144

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    185
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by lklawson View Post
    OK, I spend some of my Karma Points and dug it up on a lucky search. Turns out it was van Buren's drill manual, the Pike section.

    van Buren's Pike Drills

    Sorry it wasn't de Gheyn.

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
    The link doesn't seem to go right to the page, but I dis spend some time looking at the avarious armor museums.

    New here's something I noticed, with regards to fighting with a certain SCA weapon:

    When I first picked up a polearm (just a couple of years ago, it's someting very new to me), I thought of it as a particularly long fencing blade; meaning, I would try to poke with it and tap people with the blade. I have a problem with committing my full body into a blow, so my cuts tended to land light (my single hand sword technique gives me plenty of power without using my body, but that technique does not translate to polearm). I then got the idea of looking up bayonet drills, so I could think of the polearm as a 17th-18th century musket (considering that you can only strike with one end, and can thrust with either end, there is a similarity). When I started fighting with that in mind (think of the movie "Zulu"), all of a sudden, my cuts were coming in a lot harder. It was like I was thinking of the "blade" of the polearm as a big smashing club rather than a light tapping weapon.

    So the question is, can anyone recommend some good bayonet drills for hand-to-hand combat that might apply to polearm fighting?

  5. #145

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    185
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimnir69 View Post
    Regarding collaborating with other styles, and for those of you who have Facebook. Here's a short 20s WMA clip by ARMA from an MMA event:

    http://www.facebook.com/video/video....3015201&ref=mf Too short, but pretty good.
    Hey, that's pretty cool! I wish the clips were longer, to see more of the fight in one viewing.

    Next, you really gotta work on your costuing. If noperiod garb or armor, at least something with some spandex, sequins, leather, or feathers ;)

    you know, if they ever invited SCA fighters to do a demo at a MMA show, about half of them would jump at the chance, and the other half would recoil in abhorrent terror. It would be much like what happened over the proposed show "Steel Wars." (ever see "Knightriders"?)

  6. #146

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    193
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by captainzorikh View Post

    So the question is, can anyone recommend some good bayonet drills for hand-to-hand combat that might apply to polearm fighting?
    My favorite drills was one they taught us in the USMC and it works with polearms and half-swording too.

    You start in the Pflug ward: Thrust with blade, bring butt up and strike like an uppercut to the chin, butt stock slam into the face, and then end it by slashing downward with the blade. This leaves you back in Pflug.

    The other one, which I don't remember quite as well...You start in Pflug: thrust towards the face, do a horizontal butt stock strike to one side, then slam it back the way you came, and bring it back into Pflug. You'll recognize this movement from the Fechtbuch plates detailing half-swording techniques that use the pommel to throw your enemy.

    We would do these drills for hours in the barracks, going from one end to the other end and back. You must do a pivoting step forward with each strike, as you build power by doing that and you also keep the initiative while driving the enemy backwards.

  7. #147

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Dayton, OH
    Posts
    964
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by captainzorikh View Post
    The link doesn't seem to go right to the page, but I dis spend some time looking at the avarious armor museums.
    Sorry. It's the link I found. I didn't actually check to see if it was still live. I'm pretty sure I downloaded it so I'll root around on my archive and see if I can dig it out for you.

    So the question is, can anyone recommend some good bayonet drills for hand-to-hand combat that might apply to polearm fighting?
    Civil War era Bayonet manuals and earlier (Kelton, etc.). The bayo manuals starting in WWI (copious though they are) are not as appropriate to your intended use.

    This is because of the length of the rifles. The Civil War and earlier era firearms is greater while the bolt-action rifles used in WWI and following are shorter. This changes the dynamic.

    It's not that the WWI and following bayo manuals have nothing to offer. Quite the opposite. However, the earlier bayo manuals are simply closer to what you're interested in.

    For a quick and dirty primer, look at Pete Kautz Civ. War bayo article set over on alliancemartialarts.

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk

  8. #148

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    17
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by lklawson View Post
    This is because of the length of the rifles. The Civil War and earlier era firearms is greater while the bolt-action rifles used in WWI and following are shorter. This changes the dynamic.

    It's not that the WWI and following bayo manuals have nothing to offer. Quite the opposite. However, the earlier bayo manuals are simply closer to what you're interested in.
    I remember reading that, at least in the British Army, the Hutton/Burton/etc styles of "scientific" bayonet fighting came about because the powers that be finally realised sometime in the 19th century that European-style linear warfare didn't work against people who didn't want to play by the same rules as you. So after encountering such peoples in the Empire (Zulus etc) the training focus shifted more to the individual fighting man.

  9. #149
    DdlR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    4,802
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by TheVigilante View Post
    I remember reading that, at least in the British Army, the Hutton/Burton/etc styles of "scientific" bayonet fighting came about because the powers that be finally realised sometime in the 19th century that European-style linear warfare didn't work against people who didn't want to play by the same rules as you. So after encountering such peoples in the Empire (Zulus etc) the training focus shifted more to the individual fighting man.
    That's my understanding of the situation. The early 19th century European concept of battle was "our chaps in a line on this side of the field, their chaps over there, mass cannon fire, advance until many dead". That model failed when they started taking on indigenous warriors like Africa, the Middle East and New Zealand, especially re. guerilla-style warfare in rough terrain. The fact that British soldiers kept losing to "natives" in one-on-one combat led people like Hutton to investigate antique forms of fencing towards greater realism in saber fighting, and also to the institution of the "Grand Assault at Arms" to encourage better individual combat skills.

  10. #150

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Dayton, OH
    Posts
    964
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by TheVigilante View Post
    I remember reading that, at least in the British Army, the Hutton/Burton/etc styles of "scientific" bayonet fighting came about because the powers that be finally realised sometime in the 19th century that European-style linear warfare didn't work against people who didn't want to play by the same rules as you. So after encountering such peoples in the Empire (Zulus etc) the training focus shifted more to the individual fighting man.
    Yeah. This is a commonly held position.

    Looking at some of the Civ. War era manuals, you can see some of them were more focused around actual 1-on-1 fighting (including Bayo vs Saber in a few cases) and some of them were more focused around "this is how you bayo thrust someone climbing your fortifications."

    And these were the "lucky" ones. There were, as you rightly remember, some Generals who's theory of bayonet training was "FIX BAYONETS! CHARGE!!!!"

    ahem...

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk

Page 15 of 52 First ... 511121314151617181925 ... Last

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
  •  

Log in

Log in
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO