The Armour Archive

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D75OMiLVD0

read the commentary. The concept of "whoop ass" vs. actually hitting with authority will be discussed below.

Blackbow

Looks (yeah, I know) like good placement on the shots, but nuttin' on the impact.

All I could think of after seeing that, was this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqzvFiNt328

blackbow wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D75OMiLVD0

read the commentary. The concept of "whoop ass" vs. actually hitting with authority will be discussed below.

Blackbow

18 crappy shots does not equal one good shot.

The fighter in question is struck with a total of TWO good blows. One at the 30 second mark to his leg, the other at about 43 seconds. I can tell these were good because he called them. I can tell the rest weren't good because he didn't call them.

As for the alleged barrage of whoop ass, the Calontir dude is flicking his sword like a whip, and retracting the blow before it even lands to set up for the next one. Very little going on for power generation. So it doesn't come as a great surprise that the shots weren't good.

And the thrusts the guy under fire here was delivering? They looked like the weak pokes we were talking about on that thrusting tip thread, and no surprise those weren't good either.

The one throwing all the "crappy shots" is here on the archive. His name is Damien, maybe you should ask him if he feels they were good or not........he might agree, he might not.

JB,

And you assume to much by saying the shots are no good. Your not in his armor ether. Those two fighter get to say "yes, or, no" What you are doing is no better than the comments on youtube.

Not all power comes from the hips/torso.

Thor.

blackbow wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D75OMiLVD0

read the commentary. The concept of "whoop ass" vs. actually hitting with authority will be discussed below.

Blackbow

Are we talking about the Bloodguard guy getting "hit?" The dude who gets legged?

Funny, it was the thrust to the face from a spear at about 4 seconds in that got my attention.

Dietrich von Stroheim wrote:
18 crappy shots does not equal one good shot.

As I'm often known to say: "I don't care how many times you touch me with your sword...you aren't going to annoy me to death..."

Thorstenn wrote:JB,

And you assume to much by saying the shots are no good. Your not in his armor ether. Those two fighter get to say "yes, or, no" What you are doing is no better than the comments on youtube.

I disagree completely. One person and one person only can decide if the shots are good or not. That person repeatedly said that no, they were not. Blackbow isn't assuming anything, he is reporting an absolute fact. He is also supplying something for those who are disputing the fact and casting dispersions on the legged fighter's honor to think on allowing them to consider that maybe judging from the sidelines isn't always correct. YMMV.

Seriously are people complaining here because it looks like maybe a guy was shrugging shots or maybe a guy wasn't hitting hard enough? I mean really? In a video of a melee? Really? Come on man.

The only way to know for sure if the shots had sufficient power on them is if I was throwing them because I always hit with sufficient force.

If people don't take my shots it's because they are cheating. If they don't take other peoples shots it's because those guys aren't hitting hard enough.

I have no idea what you are completely disagreeing with? I said ONLY those two fighters can call the shot!!!
JB said they looked no good because he saw no body or hip.

"the guy throwing the "whoop ass" button is throwing with nothing but arm. You can stand there and watch his arm moving, and the sword hitting, but you can also see that while there's impact, there's no FORCE behind it. If I'd been hit with that sword like that I'd have done the same thing. And yes, I was there. -Jonathan Blackbow "

He is commenting on the commentary.

Thor.

Ingvarr wrote:

Thorstenn wrote:JB,

And you assume to much by saying the shots are no good. Your not in his armor ether. Those two fighter get to say "yes, or, no" What you are doing is no better than the comments on youtube.

I disagree completely. One person and one person only can decide if the shots are good or not. That person repeatedly said that no, they were not. Blackbow isn't assuming anything, he is reporting an absolute fact. He is also supplying something for those who are disputing the fact and casting dispersions on the legged fighter's honor to think on allowing them to consider that maybe judging from the sidelines isn't always correct. YMMV.

Most of those shots hit shield about the same time as they hit the helmet, but some didn't.

Count Johnathan wrote: If people don't take my shots it's because they are cheating. If they don't take other peoples shots it's because those guys aren't hitting hard enough.

LOL Jonathan. I mean its not like the guy was knocked to the ground with a shot and got back up ....which I've seen plenty of times...



I'd be more concerned about the "what do you expect, its X and they are always like that" kind of comments. There are units with that kind of reputation. I wouldn't want to be in one.

We would be mortified if the Company of St. Martin's was thought of that way and would take action to correct it.

sean of the chipendales wrote:The one throwing all the "crappy shots" is here on the archive. His name is Damien, maybe you should ask him if he feels they were good or not........he might agree, he might not.

Does not matter what he thinks. The only one that counts is the House Bloodguard member on his knees.


That said, having just watched that segment five times I saw little to no contact made and lots of flicking with no follow through.

FrauHirsch wrote:Funny, it was the thrust to the face from a spear at about 4 seconds in that got my attention.

I'm with Frau. That's the one I thought we ware talking about first, but clearly it was not enough to convince the recipient that he had been defeated, so there you go. Slain man tells if he be slain.

There were a whole lot of crappy shots that were blocked, and a couple of shots that got through - and were acknowledged.

And some commentary that generally falls under the heading of "whining"

Yeah, I had some weird stuff happen at Gulf Wars. Like the guy who was thrusting me in the back "as hard as he could" with a single handed sword. All he was hitting was a kidney belt (only body protection I had), and I didn't feel a thing. Or the guys who seem to think hitting your shield magically makes it a leg shot if the placement is right.

Francisco Lopez de Leon wrote:

FrauHirsch wrote:Funny, it was the thrust to the face from a spear at about 4 seconds in that got my attention.

I'm with Frau. That's the one I thought we ware talking about first, but clearly it was not enough to convince the recipient that he had been defeated, so there you go. Slain man tells if he be slain.

http://www.sca.org/officers/marshal/doc ... ndbook.pdf

b. The minimum effective thrusting blow to the face shall be a directed touch and the maximum shall be substantially lighter than to other parts of the body.

The spear thrust to the face ? The one where the target pulls his head back as the spear reaches him ? That wasn't his head being rocked by the spear.

I also noticed that with the volume up you can hear a difference in the blows called light and the ones that were accepted.

Alvar

Hence why the slain man tells if he's slain. We have no idea what was happening inside that helm.

The legged fighter is Oscad . He fought for years in the Midrealm and on the unbelted team as well.
He now fights for the East and aside from being on the unbelted team is quite a standup/chivalrous fighter.
What I saw was typical all arm shots.
Because I've fought Oscad in pickups and tournaments, I know that he is both fair and reasonable and wouldn't take crappy shots or blow off good stout blows.
Watching youtube footage and making decisions on it online is a shitty practice. You weren't there, you don't know the fighters involved and its not your fight. The only thing worse then active marshalling is shit talking a fighter online weeks after the fight is over online for the whole world to see.

It also looks like the thrust may have hit more towards the side of the helmet rather than the face.

So why are we discussing this guy's honour? He fought- he only thought two shots did the job- and he took those two.

Thorstenn wrote:I have no idea what you are completely disagreeing with? I said ONLY those two fighters can call the shot!!!

I am disagreeing with this

Thorstenn wrote:JB,
And you assume to much by saying the shots are no good.

He's not assuming anything. The shots were not taken so the shots were not good. No assumption required.

And this

Thorstenn wrote: Those two fighter get to say "yes, or, no"

Which I could have misread but didn't based on this

Thorstenn wrote:I said ONLY those two fighters can call the shot!!!

Only one of thos fighters can call the shot.

Two fighters CAN call a shot. I have told fighters to NOT take a shot I had supposedly landed because I felt it was no good. IMO, that is two fighters calling a blow.

JB, cannot tell if the shots were good or not, he is not wearing the armor, or being struck. That is his assumption

YMMV,
Thor.

Ingvarr wrote:

Thorstenn wrote:I have no idea what you are completely disagreeing with? I said ONLY those two fighters can call the shot!!!

I am disagreeing with this

Thorstenn wrote:JB,
And you assume to much by saying the shots are no good.

He's not assuming anything. The shots were not taken so the shots were not good. No assumption required.

And this

Thorstenn wrote: Those two fighter get to say "yes, or, no"

Which I could have misread but didn't based on this

Thorstenn wrote:I said ONLY those two fighters can call the shot!!!

Only one of thos fighters can call the shot.

It's still the fighter who received the blow who makes the final call on it. I have had people tell me not to take a blow because of X and I have thanked them and continued, I've also had people tell me about X and I mention Y which was the reason i felt it to be good regardless of X. I was intending what I said to be my honest opinion but how I said it to be tongue in cheek. Pretty obviously failed at the latter. It happens.

If it's any consolation Ingvarr I agree only one person gets to call the shot. There have been plenty of times where someone told me not to accept a blow before I explained to them that I felt it was quite good regardless and took it anyway. I have also told others not to accept a blow because it was not good for whatever reason and they decided to accept it anyway.

The fighter struck calls the blow. The fighter that delivers that blow can only offer their opponent the courtesy of acknowledging that they can if they desire, ignore the blow without loss of honor. That's it.

Still though if people decide on their own to ignore my shots they are dirty cheaters.

Thorstenn wrote:I have told fighters to NOT take a shot I had supposedly landed because I felt it was no good.

I don't want to derail this thread (though it did start out as something of a train wreck), but I do want to respond to His Majesty's comment.

IMnsHO, unless the blow is mechanically flawed (flat, pushing the opponent's sword into his own head, driving the shield edge into the leg, etc.), telling an opponent in tourney/melee NOT to take a shot that they felt was good is a disservice. Calling a blow on either side of the spectrum (good / not good) denies the fighter the honor of calling the blows he receives and yielding when he decides he has been bested. Certainly in training you want to provide this sort of input, but tournament is not about training, it is about doing -- and doing it for someone else, even with the best of intentions, serves neither fighters' chivalry.

Respectfully,

Alfred of Carlyle

"Milord, Don't take it, it struck your shield first"

"Yes, milord and then carried through into my face with sufficient force, milord."

I'm with His Excellency here.

acknowledgement is subjective. I wanted to put an evil smiley face after it but that's the absolute, god's truth. acknowledgement is subjective.

subjective to me, if I had been in that spot and been hit with I dunno how many subsequent shots, I might have died out of embarassment, but that doesn't make those shots good. It just means I died of embarassment. That would be the "it's not worth arguing about" death.

if I came from a group of people that fight that way and take that way, I'd have died to those shots. That would be the "this is the way we fight" death.

If I came from a group of people that didn't fight that way and didn't take those shots, I wouldn't have died to those shots, and I'd have said "nope" a lot. That would be the "that is not the way we fight" method.

None of those involve calling anybody a cheater. None of those involve telling anybody they're doing it wrong. All of those involve the SCA. Like it or not, the guy throwing the blows was perfectly within his rights to throw shots that other people might consider light, and like it or not, the guy getting the impact was perfectly within his rights to not take them.

Thorstenn: I know there are people that are capable of throwing what some people would consider a killing blow with just the arm. Obviously, I'm not of that group of people that believe that. Neither is the guy getting hit. When I see something like that, that's my first assumption, i.e., the guy throwing the shots is in the "that's the way we fight" school, and the guy getting the impacts is in the "that's not the way we fight" school.

The problem arises when the two try to interact. People throwing lots of shots that the "not" school consider light aren't going to get a lot of response out of people in the "not" school. Except possibly dying of embarassment. Which gets the result the "way we fight" school people want to see, i.e., throw lots of quick shots and have that count, vs the "not" school, who want some meat with their potatoes. So the opposite of this video is somebody in the "not" school delivering what he feels is a sufficient blow, and the "way we fight" school person getting hit proceeding to roll around on the ground and complain about getting hit by a tank.

Instead of people jumping to the conclusion that the "not" school guy is cheating, I would vastly prefer people simply jump to the conclusion that the guy on his knees is one of the "not" school, and, instead of throwing a bunch of shots that make the guy on his knees look bad, throw one decisive shot that the guy on his knees can easily say "oh yeah" to, and get off the field, and come back. If that's not possible, then the dying of embarassment will continue.

Interestingly enough, in that very same battle I had a conversation with a Calontir knight about how we die vs. how they die vs how they wish we would die, because they felt that I was disrupting their formation by walking out through the back. I pointed out that I could simply lie there on the ground and disrupt them more, but that we vastly prefer to get dead combatants out of the way as soon as possible, which means that the shortest, least disruptive path is through our own troops, and that we're okay with that. Calontir, however, felt that walking through their troops was disrupting their formations. I admitted that it was, but I also pointed out that nobody on our side was trying to take advantage of the resultant disruption by charging anywhere near our dead guys, and that if they ever did I'd cheerfully kill them myself, because that's tacky. We ended it on a handshake and a wave.

The automatic assumption on a lot of people's parts is that somebody MUST be cheating, just because they do it differently than we do.

That's sad.

Jonathan Blackbow

That was Sean's Last battle as an Unbelted Fighter.


Man that was a fun day.

I've had people not call my blows, and sometimes it made me hot enough that I had to go and sit down. Sometimes, I am sure enough that the issue has to be addressed, and when that happens, I bring it up right then (sometimes a mistake, but that's how I do it). Either way, it's over fifteen minutes later.

I go back on the field, and usually I fight somebody else, but one way or another I go back on the field. The (for want of a better term) the "calibration issues" are over. Nothing in this game is important enough to carry around a load of pissed off for an hour, or a month, or five years.

Posting a video of the moment to you tube makes that one short irritating moment live on, and on, and on and on.

That isn't fun for me.

f

I am still pretty new to this game and I might be saying something daft here but I am going to say it anyway.

I do not understand the problem. If you hit someone and they feel the blow was not good then they do not call it and you carry on fighting. If they receive a hundred blows which they feel were light then they do not call any of them good and you continue fighting.

If I see someone take a good blow and they do not call it good then, as far as I am concerned, that is conclusive proof that I was wrong about it being good. Nothing more.

Am I missing something?

Freiman: the video on youtube is a video of the ravine battle that was posted because it was a video of the ravine battle. Not so that people could whine about calibration/acknowledgement. If it was just a video whining about calibration/acknowledgement it would not have run for more than a few seconds past the situation.

Stefan: in short what it boils down to is that if you throw a blow that you consider to be telling, and I don't take it, and you throw it a lot and I don't take it, as I said earlier, "The automatic assumption on a lot of people's parts is that somebody MUST be cheating, just because they do it differently than we do. "

There are wars that don't happen any more because of this (Sea Wars, Atlantia vs. Trimaris). There are wars that were started because "they do it differently than we do." (Estrella v. GWW, and yes I know it wasn't entirely about that.)

Whatever "it" was at the time.

The SCA is an umbrella organization celebrating aspects of life around the world before the year 1600 that does its best to give its members a forum in which to geek about their particular chunk of that life, be it fighting, drinking, clothes, music, what have you. In the process of being an umbrella organization it inevitably has issues like this. The issues that result from armed combat are simply more visible. The tendency of people to assume the worst indicates that those people haven't evolved yet. Put all that together and you have the current discussion revolving around ten seconds of a three minute video.

Blackbow