The Armour Archive

Here's a fun log to throw on the fire. Why do some groups fight from the knees (or sitting) after a leg hit. Here's a great article that I 99% agree with:

http://www.thearma.org/essays/LegWounds.htm

They do it becase thats the rule

is it historically accrate?
No way

is it dumb looking?

Yup

"Why do some groups fight from the knees (or sitting) after a leg hit."

Because people would bitch at me if I didn't do it.

Just to be the Devil's Advocate (or, "Try to Agrue With This")
------------------------
2dLt JOHN P. BOBO
Medal of Honor
1967
3/9/3
Vietnam

The President of the United States in the name of The Congress takes pride in presenting the MEDAL OF HONOR posthumously to

SECOND LIEUTENANT JOHN P. BOBO
UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS


for service as set forth in the following

CITATION:

For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty as Weapons Platoon Commander, Company I, Third Battalion, Ninth Marines, Third Marine Division, in Quang Tri Province, Republic of Vietnam, on 30 March 1967. Company I was establishing night ambush sites when the command group was attacked by a reinforced North Vietnamese company supported by heavy automatic weapons and mortar fire. Lieutenant Bobo immediately organized a hasty defense and moved from position to position encouraging the outnumbered Marines despite the murderous enemy fire. Recovering a rocket launcher from among the friendly casualties, he organized a new launcher team and directed its fire into the enemy machine gun position. When an exploding enemy mortar round severed Lieutenant Bobo's right leg below the knee, he refused to be evacuated and insisted upon being placed in a firing position to cover the movement of the command group to a better location. With a web belt around his leg serving as tourniquet and with his leg jammed into the dirt to curtail the bleeding, he remained in this position and delivered devastating fire into the ranks of the enemy attempting to overrun the Marines. Lieutenant Bobo was mortally wounded while firing his weapon into the mainpoint of the enemy attack but his valiant spirit inspired his men to heroic efforts, and his tenacious stand enabled the command group to gain a protective position where it repulsed the enemy onslaught. Lieutenant Bobo's superb leadership, dauntless courage, and bold initiative reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and the Unites States Naval Service. He gallantly gave his life for his country.

/S/LYNDON B. JOHNSON

AllenJ

What 1% did you disagree with?

Guys, after this, I aint fighting from the knees, or from anything. Hot damn!

That's going to leave a mark.

What I find really dumb about fighting from the knees is that even if this is a tournament setting,to me that means that you have yielded. Now if it is a "to the death" scenario" then it always strikes me as very Monty Pythonish.
"It's only a flesh wound""


------------------
"As long as there are fanatics there will always be heretics"
http://www.caerdubh.com

It seems that the more that SCA people investigate manuals and WMA groups, the more they question the validity of some of the SCA fighting rules, especially the fighting-from-knees practice. Counted-blows makes a lot more sense (to me at least--obviously if everyone agreed the knee thing would be abolished tomorrow).

Which raises the question: why do people like this rule, or more importantly, why is the SCA resistant to changing it? It seems like the knee-question gets raised a lot on threads and in conversation, but maybe I am overestimating or projecting too much. Is it just a vocal minority complaining about this issue?

There are probably fighter who like that aspect, but alot of the ones I have talked to could not care less.
It boils down to tradition. What's wrong with fighting that way? We always have done it?
It would probably change alot quicker if the Marshallate just stopped having that as an option in tourneys.
I am mean for the most part, once you get gacked in a limb you are already at a disadvantage and you are toast.
(Note: In the times that I have been "legged" in SCA fencing I will more often then not, still end up killing my opponent. But there is a difference in my mind between heavy combat and fencing.

------------------
"As long as there are fanatics there will always be heretics"
http://www.caerdubh.com

honestly, i think it's a vocal minority (not small, but not a majority), not as much "complaigning" as much as protesting and illustrating the historical absurdities, oddities, and traditions of some aspects of scadian context. this is good and necessary.

anyway...
i prefer the knee-rule in the context of melee, absurdist warts and all.

it may not be historical, but it keeps things necessarilly simple, in an environment that can be rather complicated/chaotic.

in tourney format, counted blows work wonderfully, and create a much better visual perception...

it's moot for me, due to my knees, i take leg shots as killing blows, cuz it hurts to fight from my knees, and can injure me further.

bela


<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Madyn:
<B>

Which raises the question: why do people like this rule, or more importantly, why is the SCA resistant to changing it? It seems like the knee-question gets raised a lot on threads and in conversation, but maybe I am overestimating or projecting too much. Is it just a vocal minority complaining about this issue? </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Becuase it the the penalty in our SPORT that is applied when you fail to block a blow to the leg.

Like throwing 4 balls in baseball gives up a base. Like jumping offside costs you 5 yard penalty in football. Checking with you stick higher than your shoulder.

I know, counted blows - except A) No one watching the fighting from the sidelines (like our Consorts / inspirations - remember them?) can easily tell what is happening, and B) some guys out there can't always count to ONE.


Dilan

I have fought counted blows in a small tourney (like 5 people) in my local shire. The biggest problem we ran into was nobody knew what the hell was going on. We explained to the spectators the concept, but all they saw was a a bunch of strikes that hit, but were ignored.

ok, this brings up a point; how necessary is it for the combat to be intelligable to onlookers?

are we catering to the crowd, or are we focused on the combat?

bela

I think it's pretty silly, but that's the way the game is set up.

I think we should give the crowd more credit. Of course, the first couple of times the crowd may be confused as to what is going on. Its only natural since its "new". After that they will catch on, and I believe they will actually find counted blows fights more enjoyable.

After all, what happens now? Swing, swing, swing, leg is taken. Attacker backs off, the other drops to his knees, they might chat a bit to make sure each is ready, then they re engage. (Same goes for arm shots, especially if the target isn't wearing a gauntlet and no basket hilt is handy). The fights will be faster, and more exciting.

I have to agree with those who don't like it. I think it looks absolutely silly. A couple of times I have almost laughed out loud at the sight of some big fighter looming over someone on their knees.

To each their own, I guess, but I haven't really seen a valid reason *why* its done the way it currently is. It certainly isn't a safety issue.

YIS,

Edmund

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Irish:
Becuase it the the penalty in our [b]SPORT that is applied when you fail to block a blow to the leg.

Like throwing 4 balls in baseball gives up a base. Like jumping offside costs you 5 yard penalty in football. Checking with you stick higher than your shoulder.

I know, counted blows - except A) No one watching the fighting from the sidelines (like our Consorts / inspirations - remember them?) can easily tell what is happening, and B) some guys out there can't always count to ONE.


Dilan[/B]</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Irish,

Putting the aside the argument as to whether SCA combat is a sport or martial art, or somewhere in between, I think we are all at least aspiring to as realisitic a facimilie of fighting as is safe and reasonable.

Just because it is the penalty in our sport now, doesn't mean it should be.

Just my 2 cents.

Edmund

maybe reconsider the word "penalty", and use incapacitation or handicap in it's place. In a melee/war/brawl/behourd format, i think these infer the effect of of injury and chaos... once again, keeping in mind i'm discussing melee, not tourney.

ymmv,
bela

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by edmund_vnh:
<B>
Irish,

Putting the aside the argument as to whether SCA combat is a sport or martial art, or somewhere in between, I think we are all at least aspiring to as realisitic a facimilie of fighting as is safe and reasonable.

Just because it is the penalty in our sport now, doesn't mean it should be.

Just my 2 cents.

Edmund</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bela of kaffa:
<B>
maybe reconsider the word "penalty", and use incapacitation or handicap in it's place. In a melee/war/brawl/behourd format, i think these infer the effect of of injury and chaos... once again, keeping in mind i'm discussing melee, not tourney.

ymmv,
bela

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think you're right about the melee. It's chaotic enough as it is, and there are plenty of disputes over shrugged blows or calibration without introducing counting into the mix. Anything but acted wounds just wouldn't be feasible.

But for tourneys, I think the practice makes little sense. Yes, the crowd is important, and entertainment should be part of the experience (it is a spectator sport, even if it's not on ESPN). That said, I do think the crowds would adjust. After all, I doubt they had too much difficulty 700 years ago, so I'm sure they can manage now.

The practice obviously has little to support as a recreation of any type of foot combat pre 1600 whether in martial game, judicial/honor combat, or war. Even though the SCA purports to be an educational group focused on pre 1600 history, at least according to its governing documents, the marshallete has appeared to be very reluctant to adopt a historically focused outlook when evaluating current and proposed combat standards.

Counted blows is a good option in many cases, but I think more importantly we should be trying to tailor rules the help us recreate the particular pre 1600 combat scenario being presented at the time, and avoiding as much modern artifice as possible. For example the particular rules that do a good job at recreating a formal foot combat challenge in the 14th century in France: 5 counted blows received (to simulate being beaten to the point of not being able to continue) or until some receives a thrust to a disabling area (armpit, inner elbow, open face), would not be ideal for a recreation of a 10th raid by vikings on a irish village (assuming the vast majority wouldn’t be wearing armour) one good blow received anywhere. “Kneeingâ€

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Madyn:
Why is the SCA resistant to changing it? </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1. The comfort of tradition. For example, even though urine from a healthy person has been shown to be perfectly fine for consumption, Western Culture has a tradition of thinking that it is foul. Even though we could change the culture, it would be like drinking urine for most of the SCA -- while perfectly OK, more than somewhat nauseating due to the violation of tradition.

2. Those that fought they're way to the top under those rules will be naturally hesitant to change the rules to DISFAVOR their style.

3. We all really like Monty Python and the Holy Grail, so we like to re-enact it. [img]http://forums.armourarchive.org/ubb/wink.gif[/img]

Aaron

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Aaron:
<B> 1. The comfort of tradition. For example, even though urine from a healthy person has been shown to be perfectly fine for consumption, Western Culture has a tradition of thinking that it is foul. Even though we could change the culture, it would be like drinking urine for most of the SCA -- while perfectly OK, more than somewhat nauseating due to the violation of tradition.

2. Those that fought they're way to the top under those rules will be naturally hesitant to change the rules to DISFAVOR their style.

3. We all really like Monty Python and the Holy Grail, so we like to re-enact it. [img]http://forums.armourarchive.org/ubb/wink.gif[/img]

Aaron</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I won't say I totally agree with the second one. I have been in discussion with several Knights and Dukes who have supported the Pas and other formats more than others.

I think Irish hit the nail on the head. It is a way of establishing a form of punishment for poor defense. If we went straight to counted always the problem is you would probably weaken our fighting style. You would have guys that just throw leg shot after leg shot in hopes getting counted blows. I have seen that in several Pas where a fighter gets the most counted blows because he has a great leg shot and a decent defense. If you have no fear of loosing your arm or leg then you could easily just bull your way in throwing as you go hoping to hit something. I know that is the extreme example but it is more likely to happen in a counted blow system than in the current system.

Bela asked about the crowd. If you are there just for yourself or just to impress the Knights and other fighters then why are you there at all? The crowd and the atmosphere is why we fight. Renown comes from all of the populace, not just the heavy fighters. Sure, I like to compete and line up against other fighters, but I also think of the crowd and those watching. If the populace gets bored or does not fully understand the format then they will loose interest. I want them to enjoy the tourney as much as I do. We have lost that part in many peopels mind as we have geared more on individual success than on populace.

Noe, posted that his group played around with once struck on the leg you remained standing but could not move. I have heard of some who played around with dragging a leg when struck. Both are valid ideas, but I think the actually limit the wounded fighter more than the current system. I for one don't mind something new if it is a valid system. I, like others, think the current system is good for melees. Then we have to consider do we want two different systems for wound acknowledgement, one for tourney and one for melees. It could cause confusion for newer fighters if we did this.

Just my long winded 2 cents

Vebrand

Verband,

I agree that a counted blow system is flawed and might be subject to abuse, but that is no different than the current system (i.e, some fighters actually fight better once on their knees, as they have less to defend), or any system for that matter. So if we are going to play with an imperfect system, it might as well be one that approximates authentic tourney combat as closely as possible, and reduces the Python element (much as we love it).

I might be off on this (I am frequently off on things) but it seems to me that a counted blows system would eventually nudge fighters into defending better in the long run, once they adjusted to it. When leg=arm=head, a fighter has to prioritize all targets equally, and therefore defend all targets equally well, at least if he/she wants to remain competitive.

And as far as Duke McLegger having a distinct advantage in such a system, I imagine fighters would learn to defend those nasty leg shots with a bit more vigilance/skill, particularly if it is potential final blow in the bout.

Dunno. Maybe it's just my caffeine talking. What do others think?

(Edited because I need sleep and don't spell so good.)

[This message has been edited by Madyn (edited 01-23-2004).]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Madyn:
<B>AllenJ

What 1% did you disagree with? </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

nothing really- I just said 99% so I dont sound like a complete sheep [img]http://forums.armourarchive.org/ubb/wink.gif[/img]

Good arguments from everyone. My opinion obviously, is that it does not reflect accuracy- but in SCA sport, its not really supposed to. There are some parallels to Olympic sport fencing where a tiny little whip/flick is scored as a point. This obviously wouldnt kill, or unless perhaps in the eye, injure at all. But in the Olympic sport rules its counted as a hit. As far as the spectators are concered, I really dont have much sympathy for them. Ever taken a girl who dosent know anything about hockey to a game? You spend the entire game just trying to help them find the puck much less get them to understand icing! [img]http://forums.armourarchive.org/ubb/wink.gif[/img] Do the players stop and alter the game to accomodate them? No - It's part of the learning process. Same with sport fencing- Your first few bouts it's hard to see when someone even gets hit- much less where and what was the play that led up to it. I recognize the desire to help onlookers with whats going on. Explain it to them and then do you thing. Dont let the ignorant (I use that word in the kindest way possible) dictate how you train/play. But thats just me [img]http://forums.armourarchive.org/ubb/smile.gif[/img]

This same discussion has been going in progress on the knight's for Trimaris for several days.

It's kind of surprizing how many SCA knights (people you might think are most invested in the status quo) are opposed to fighting from the knees, though a lot of them resist thof trying to change it with the logic that we mess up our wars okingdoms in trimaris change our rule.

"We have to keep doing it because 'they' keep doing it" seems pretty weak to me.

I think the least raumatic way to remove knee fighting would be to go to a system where two limb blows equals a loss like one head or torso shot and has no other effect. This would change the balance the least methinks and not be overly complicated. Going toblows would mean that along with the people who can't hea fell or see, we would have to worry about the people who can't count.

This is the opinion of an SCA duke who has spent a lot of time learning to fight from his knees and is more than willing to flush all that effort down the toilet in order to have his hobby look less stupid.

------------------
Non Onme Quod Licet Honestum Est.

http://vieuxchamps.com/photo.html

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gaston de Vieuxchamps:
"We have to keep doing it because 'they' keep doing it" seems pretty weak to me.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Something to consider on that note is the East's 180 Engagement Rule. We experimented with being able to engage people as long as you were within the front 180 of their body. This was very easy to become accustumed to, habbit forming even. But when you went out of Kingdom, if you lapsed into the comfortable style you were used to - you ended up "Blindsiding" people. It tended NOT to make friends.

Other than the occasional "Odd Rules" tourneys, anything done re: List Rules should be on a consistient basis for continuity. One reason why the Tuchux have their own group.

[edited to conform with the rules of grammer, even if only slightly]


[This message has been edited by D. Sebastian (edited 01-24-2004).]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by D. Sebastian:
<B>

Other than the occasional "Odd Rules" tourneys, anything done re: List Rules should be on a consistient basis for continuity. One reason why the Tuchux have their own group.

[edited to conform with the rules of grammer, even if only slightly]


[This message has been edited by D. Sebastian (edited 01-24-2004).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I completely disagree with this sentiment. The homogeneity of our combat is weakness not a strength, and the SCA “tournamentâ€

Sorry, but if the Tuchux have their own group then why do they come to SCA events?
As far as knee-fighting. It's stupid.
But counted blows will not work in large melees...they won't work. People will lose count, or people who are cheating bastards will just find it easier to cheat.
There aren't alot of cheaters, but you can take ten of them and turn the tide of an entire battle. You can take twenty of them divided over two sides and make 1500 guys angry. Counted blows will make it much easier for a-holes to be a-holes, but will also make calibration differences between Kingdoms even more pronounced...
Keep the old system for battles- trash it for tournaments.

Vitus: “But counted blows will not work in large melees...they won't work. People will lose count, or people who are cheating bastards will just find it easier to cheat.â€

Better yet, "it's the advantage gained by your opponent for your lack of ability to protect your extremeties."

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bela of kaffa:
<B>
maybe reconsider the word "penalty", and use incapacitation or handicap in it's place. In a melee/war/brawl/behourd format, i think these infer the effect of of injury and chaos... once again, keeping in mind i'm discussing melee, not tourney.

ymmv,
bela

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> Except for questions of safety, our rules should not be concerned with catching out cheaters – our ethos should be sufficiently strong to attribute infamy where earned. [/B]</font>

LOL. Our Ethos SHOULD be that strong, but we have been consistently proving that it is not for over 30 years and I don't see any reason to expect a change now.

Vitus is very right. "Losing count" in a melee would likely be a serious problem.

About the midrealms experiements with altereted engaugement rules: How much effort went into informing other kingdoms that this war how your guys play? I'll bet people who know that you are not fighting under your native rules would be a lot more understanding. This is the first I have heard of this change.


------------------
Non Onme Quod Licet Honestum Est.

http://vieuxchamps.com/photo.html

Too tired to write. Just think they won't work. Ran some mid-sized melees with counted blows...problem people became even more infuriating, causing explosions of temper.

GdV: “Our Ethos SHOULD be that strong, but we have been consistently proving that it is not for over 30 years and I don't see any reason to expect a change now.â€

Wound fighting works for melees, but it is stupid, looks stupid, and hurts people (destroys knees) in single fighting.

Alaric

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by DukeAlaric:
<B>Wound fighting works for melees, but it is stupid, looks stupid, and hurts people (destroys knees) in single fighting.

Alaric</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is a third option. Why not keep one good blow to the head or torso and you are out but two blows to legs and/or arms also equals a "kill". seems to me the potential for additional abuse would be smaller but no one would be damaging their knees.

As to the "ethos" thread, what Caryle said applies to the vast majority of people but there will always be those few festering pustules that cannot be cured. Through some combination of self-delusion, weakness of character, and mutual support of other pocks these people gain both renoun and infamy simulataneously. Those who recognize them for what they are remain silent or are ignored or dissmissed as jealous or ignorant while a portion of the populous idolizes them for their limitless victories. All we can hope for is to miminize the number of occasions during which they screw up everone else's game on a grand scale. Any rules we have should not increase the number and severity of occasions.

------------------
Non Onme Quod Licet Honestum Est.

http://vieuxchamps.com/photo.html