The Armour Archive

Middle Saturday Aug 6th
10am
Tourney List Area

Once again, I will be hosting the Known World Novice Tourney on behalf of my late husband Count Sarnac Ba'adur. It was his baby and he requested I ensure it happen every year.

Details:
This is a tourney for Novice fighters. The format will be a Shark Pool style: small groups fighting round robin - previous years were groups of 8 so every fighter has a minimum of 7 fights. Some of the top fighters moving on to further rounds. Details will be determined on the day of the Tourney depending on the number of fighters that show up.

For the purposes of this tourney, Novice is classified as:
-Any authorized fighter whose PRIMARY RATTAN authorization date falls within two years to the day of the Tourney, INCLUDING time spent authorized in Youth Combat.
-Is not a member of the Chivalry
-Is not a Peer by right of Arms by their own hand

Tourney victories or positions held on Pennsic teams has NO bearing on qualifying for this event.

**You must be Pennsic inspected to participate and will be required to show helmet sticker to sign in.

Help needed:
-fighters (can't happen without you)
-fighter cheering squats and support (can happen, but not as much fun)
-Ladies of the Rose there will be opportunity to publicly recognize (and grant tokens) to favorite combatants

**Most of all I need members of the Chivalry to help run/constable the list fields. Every year I find myself batting eyelashes at Knights and Masters that find themselves near the field. I am happy to say they have never turned away, but I am disappointed that this has become necessary every year.

Even if you didn't know Sarnac, please come out. Do it for the fighters and for a lady trying to fulfill a promise.

I've also set up a page on Facebook with all of the same info.
It's a public "event" so anyone on FB can go there and comment etc. no invite needed.

https://www.facebook.com/#!/event.php?eid=175573332501834

bump!

I'll be there Your Excellency, as usual.

Sorry to take so long in reporting, but here are the details from this year.
68 fighters entered

John the Breeder Davies of the East and Darian of the Wood from Ãelthelmearc met in the finals, with Darian being the victor.

Again, I wish to thank all of the Chivalry and non-Chiv. who came out to help in various capacities.
Specifically Sir Baldric for becoming my marshal in charge, HerRM Rustique for running the list table (again) and my hubby Guillaume for pulling the cart of stuff to the top of the hill, set-up and a full day of 'daddy duty' so I was left free to play hostess.

I was impressed with most of the fighting and the grand show of support from non-entrants.

Now onto the non-fun bits, I mention being impressed with MOST of the fighting. During my introduction/welcome speech I re-enforced that this tourney was not about the win, but meeting others of common bearing and level in a fun and challenging setting. I promised to not hesitate to address (and possibly pull from the field) those that didn't subscribe to this concept. I failed in this promise, and for that I humbly apologize to all combatants and spectators.

An issue of a fighter using legal but un-chivalrous tactics (some gaining victories) was brought to my attention and I didn't go speak to them to ensure they were aware of the issue, and remind them the goal for the day or to find out if they realized what they were doing. This fighter didn't advance to the next round, but that shouldn't matter and I should have made a point of speaking to them. I failed the other 67 fighters on the field.

As novices, many fighters can loose sight of things in the heat of combat and/or with admiring parents (some Peers in their own right) watching on and let their 'bar' drop with a win in their sights. This is sad. Unfortunately, I find myself reviewing the regulations I set for the tourney. I allow fighters to work things out between themselves, using only basic Pennsic/SCA fighting conventions as a guide and marshals to constable and keep records. I may decided to enter a few specifics of my own next year to ensure the combat is kept at the level I require for this tourney.

Don't like that your chivalric virtues may be guided or 'policed'? Don't enter. It shouldn't be an issue if you walk what I consider the minimum level of courtesy.

Ok my ramble is done. This has been weighing on me for weeks now, good to get out.

Be more specific. What were these "unchivalrous" tactics?

I am curious about this as well. I had a few guys in this tourney and if one of mine was the individual in question I would like the opportunity to defend him or counsel him appropriately.

Regards,
Andreas

I'm curious as well.

What was considered chivalrous and fair to our ancestors, in movies, and to us are three different things.

Vitus von Atzinger wrote:Be more specific. What were these "unchivalrous" tactics?

Cupshots to multiple opponents - enough that after one victory NOT from a cup shot, the defeated fighter said something like "at least it wasn't a cup shot". (first round was round robin of 8-9 fighters, so small pool watching each other)

My head marshal pointed out the ongoing tactic, but left it in my hands to decide what to do. I left it to Karma (and said as much to MiC), but now feel that I took the easy road. If it part of the tourney was a learning experience, I could have contributed to that, but didn't.

This may turn this discussion into a "cupshots - legal but should they be used?" discussion. Which I guess I'm ok with. I feel a fighter shouldn't resort to it as so many can win without using it. Never mind how it can affect subsequent bouts in the same tourney as some can't recover fast from them. Keep in mind I'm a female, so don't have true knowledge as to the affect I was authorized for heavy, but never felt that I had to "resort" to such a tactic to enjoy the fight - even when doing my best to win.

I guess some would say it's more "un-courteous" rather than "unchivalrous" - I say unncessary - if you need to do it to win, I don't want you in Sarnac's tourney - I feel confident he'd say the same.

I guess it's about the intent. Accidents happen, 3 accidents in a row?? well that's something else.

Once may be an accident,

Twice might be coincidence,

Three times is intentional action.

On the matter of cup shots.... I was in a tourney earlier in the summer and made my way to the quater-finals. In the QFs, I very unintentionally cup shot(ted) my opponent. This win would have sent me to the semis. I could not allow the win to stand, even though the shot was legal and certainly not thrown with intent. I insisted the bout be refought. I lost the bout, but felt that I kept my own honor in tact.

Point is, legal or not, a cup shot does not give a chivalous victory...or defeat.

I guess part of my worry is that this is something he was taught and will continue to use.

Kenwrec Wulfe wrote:On the matter of cup shots.... I was in a tourney earlier in the summer and made my way to the quater-finals. In the QFs, I very unintentionally cup shot(ted) my opponent. This win would have sent me to the semis. I could not allow the win to stand, even though the shot was legal and certainly not thrown with intent. I insisted the bout be refought. I lost the bout, but felt that I kept my own honor in tact.

Point is, legal or not, a cup shot does not give a chivalous victory...or defeat.

sigh...
thank you!!
exactly how I feel and glad to hear those who act on it and risk the loss

It certainly let's you know the type of person you are dealing with. It is a legal target, and therefore striking it is not against the rules of the lists. The Law of Arms was never written down, but was basically enforced by the old code of Honor- what other people thought of your actions.

Whoever does this type of thing is subject to the opinions of everyone who witnessed it. If the majority of the people consider it churlish, then it is churlish.

Modern people "enjoy" a type of personal independence never thought of in the Middle Ages; the web of interdependence was so powerful that it was basically unthinkable for a person of higher status to go against the tide of public opinion.

The Law of Arms existed within the hearts and minds of ALL classes of people.

I am curious which Coast this fighter was from. I know Midwest and East Coast, frown on intentional cupshots. I want to say, and this is very old info, that those on the West Coast, though some might not like them, its not something necessarily frowned on out there. Like I said though, thats old info, and it might of changed. I just remember my old knight coming back from Estrella one year, and that was something he mentioned was an interesting difference, that guys were actually targetting that area while fighting. But that was easily over 10 years ago.

Finn O'Shannon wrote:I am curious which Coast this fighter was from.

Midwest.
Side note: second gen. fighter in SCA

Now I'm curious, not that many 2nd gen that I'm aware of.

Who? Renown and infamy do not function in darkness.

Baron Eirik wrote:Now I'm curious, not that many 2nd gen that I'm aware of.

crap...kinda wish I hadn't put that then, trying to keep fighter identity out of it, but keep information there for perspective.

This discussion was about my actions - or lack there of - and evolving into discussion on what is considered courteous/chivalrous on the SCA fighting field. Not a finger pointing activity of this particular incident. Name doesn't matter - I'm sure there are fighters out there that feel cup shot is perfectly ok to use because the rules don't prohibit them and are willing to take chance of what may become of their reputation if they use the shot intentionally in order to win. I don't agree, but am happy to have a discussion about it.

I won't post their name.

I wrote the "2nd gen" info. to give some insight of background that they have close/related experienced person to guide them, so may be getting led down a darker path - although any fighter does take their own steps.

Well, hopefully someone else saw his actions and will speak to him.

Baron Eirik wrote:Well, hopefully someone else saw his actions and will speak to him.

which is part of my regret - maybe I could have helped him learn from this in such a wide arena as pennsic

I don't think I have a cup shot in my arsenal with a single-handed weapon. I will sometimes spear a guy's cup while aiming for his belly or thigh.

Animal Weretiger convinced me to never intentionally spear a person in their squishy parts.

Vitus von Atzinger wrote:Animal Weretiger convinced me to never intentionally spear a person in their squishy parts.

Didn't he used to be mostly squishy parts? Didn't that give him an unfair advantage?

Baron Eirik wrote:Three times is intentional action.

Or, perhaps, intentional INaction... in terms of having a problem which is either intentionally NOT perceived (e.g., denial) or that is intentionally not REMEDIED -- either by the fighter themselves or those who train and advise them.

Perhaps splitting nits a bit, but I believe it does make a difference as to the extent of the ethical/Chivalry violation and the appropriate ways to redress the issue.

Max Von Halstern

joleicia wrote:

Kenwrec Wulfe wrote:On the matter of cup shots.... I was in a tourney earlier in the summer and made my way to the quater-finals. In the QFs, I very unintentionally cup shot(ted) my opponent. This win would have sent me to the semis. I could not allow the win to stand, even though the shot was legal and certainly not thrown with intent. I insisted the bout be refought. I lost the bout, but felt that I kept my own honor in tact.

Point is, legal or not, a cup shot does not give a chivalous victory...or defeat.

sigh...
thank you!!
exactly how I feel and glad to hear those who act on it and risk the loss

While I share the sentiment, I would caution that this creates a sort of "trap" from which even an honorable and renowned fighter like Kenwrec feels that he must extricate, even if he did not do anything intentionally.

Perhaps the issue of intent is what separates the legality from the desirability of this type of blow.

My approach is that being located in the center mass of a fighter's target, sooner or later even the most well intended and chivalrous fighter will land a hit on the cup of his opponent. The issue is whether it was intended to go there and used as a technique, or whether it landed there by accident. If the former I would reconsider my opinion of the fighter, if the latter, the blow was meant goodly and landled poorly and being legal it should count. As Baron Eirik properly indicates, frequency of this type of blow by the same fighter will tell the story.

One wonders whether the cup shot should be either made fully illegal, and therefore end the issue, or efforts should be made to remove any stigma attached to viewing it as a legitimate target. If the purpose of our fighting is an honorable match, the dual quality of the target area creates an artificial pitfall where even honorable fighters can fall. I for one, would suggest making the area fully illegal, like the calf, and any shots to the area formally invalid.
Kill the dog, kill the rabies.

Glaukos

Glaukos the Athenian wrote: Perhaps the issue of intent is what separates the legality from the desirability of this type of blow.

My approach is that being located in the center mass of a fighter's target, sooner or later even the most well intended and chivalrous fighter will land a hit on the cup of his opponent. The issue is whether it was intended to go there and used as a technique, or whether it landed there by accident. If the former I would reconsider my opinion of the fighter, if the latter, the blow was meant goodly and landled poorly and being legal it should count. As Baron Eirik properly indicates, frequency of this type of blow by the same fighter will tell the story.

One wonders whether the cup shot should be either made fully illegal, and therefore end the issue, or efforts should be made to remove any stigma attached to viewing it as a legitimate target. If the purpose of our fighting is an honorable match, the dual quality of the target area creates an artificial pitfall where even honorable fighters can fall. I for one, would suggest making the area fully illegal, like the calf, and any shots to the area formally invalid.
Kill the dog, kill the rabies.

Glaukos

While I would not argue against removing it from the list of legal targets, I also would not lobby for its removal.
I view the groin the same as bare skin. It's legal to strike, but not "right" to target. If i were to catch someone in the cup I'd apologize, make sure they were OK, then accept my victory and move on. The exact same thing I'd do if I hit someone in say, a bare upper arm.

In an off-handed fight a fairly straightforward leg blow can go badly wrong pretty easily. A lefty novice mostly training with more advanced opponents who take their left-handedness into account might not have experience with the results of their leg blows on someone who didn't adjust accordingly. I'm not trying to condone this behavior, just suggest a possible innocent reason for it.

Glaukos:

That's why I suggested one need also consider intentional INACTION -- three in a row could be a clear indicator that the person is dropping the arm as they thrust, and therefore needs to be trained in appropriate thrusting.

It might thusly not be intentionally aiming there thricely, but instead more understandably intentionally not fixing a targeting or technique issues (whether one is aware of the issues or in denial in that regard). These two seem quite different from an ethical/Chivalry perspective.

If you arent wearing proper armor in that area you need to re-think. Thats a legal target.

Glaukos: a good perspective on the concept. I've seen a fighter so upset that their accidental calf shot has caused a temporary limp in their opponent and conceded the fight. I know that is a little different as it's a non-legal zone, but it shows the concept of one way of showing an honest concern for another person when you give up advancement as a way of apology or even seen as self punishment.

As a consort, I would have difficulty being fought for if control could not be maintained in a courteous and chivalric manner and/or amends made at a high level in way of recompense for accidents. I recall a Crown tourney when a fighter hit more than one opponent below the knee over the course of the tourney. Both were considered accidents, but hard enough to necessitate the fighter to "walk it off" before continuing. I can only assume that nothing was done by the marshalling staff as the instances were spread appart in the tourney and stated as accident, appologies made and accepted.

My immediate thought after the 2nd/3rd (don't recall which) was: if that was my man, I'd tell him to concede and leave the field, I won't have him injuring others in my name and return when control is can be maintained - no matter the tourney.

But that's just me...and I'm happy I've never had to make the call.

There is a certain level of noble brutality that is expected of those who chase the ghost of Knighthood.

This is the knife edge we walk. When you screw up make amends immediately, and if somebody needs to yell at you...you let them do it.

The reward for this particular display of prowess is the bad renown that came with it.

No bad renown came from it. We don't know who did it.

ah, the life of walking a fine line
so true so true

The witnesses saw it. They will talk. It can't be stopped.