Martial Art vs Martial Sport

[SirAngus]

In my oppinion, you can study a martial art and you can participate in a martial sport.

The essence of the art can be purly martial and used to protect yourself on the battlefield/street/wherever...
When done in a friendly and competitive manner, it becomes a sport because of the rule restrictions and the non lethal intent.

One isnt better than the other, they are just different. Anyone who thinks there is no art to a martial sport doesnt understand it, but it is the rules structure and the intent that I feel make it a sport.

[InsaneIrish]

SCA fighting is both a Martial Art AND a sport. Just like Ti Kwan Do is a martial art AND a sport. Just like the art of fencing is a martial art AND olympic fencing is a sport. Just like Judo is a martial art AND a sport.

It is completely in the context of which the art is employed.

are SCA fighters training to kill? YES, take the rattan way and replace with a real sword. Hell, put an SCA fighter in a bar room brawl with a droken off end of a pole stick and see what happens.

Our tournaments and melees are training tools. Make no mistake about it, if an SCA fighter where to seriously harm someone or kill with a stick they would be charged with murder instead of involentary manslaughter even if it was self defense, because of their martial training with that stick.

There are a laundry list of WHY we fight in tournaments and melees, but it all boils down to the fact that when we "compete" we are invoking the sport aspect of our traininig and when we train or employ our skills in a real life situation we are invoking the Art side of our training.

[James B.]

Part of it is because i know how to fight. I don't really care what I am fighting with, the principles of body, mind and spirit exist equally in all challenges of arms. The purpose of that challenge is irrelevent. If you learn to swing a stick, then that is what you will know. If you train yourself to win a fight, that is what you will know. Rattan combat or any other form of sport=training=martial art is completely worthless if you are not improving yourself.

I agree with the above but I am willing to guess you have never tried using a real sword, it takes months to train how to use a sword properly, SCA combat does not teach that nor do many of it's moves work with a sword. Reason being a sword is a flat piece of metal with flex and rattan even with a shaved down surface is still a club that has no need for much finesse in striking.

I would love to demonstrate what I mean with the longsword with you after my new armor is complete in June. This is not a challenge it is a chance to see the flip side of the coin if you wish.

[SirAngus]

I think that there is a bit of an intent issue here.

I think that most SCA fighters train to win points. To do a good head shot or arm shot by our conventions. Even when they think about delivering a good killing blow, they are not throwing a shot with intent to kill, but to win thier sport. By our conventions, it's pretty much point fighting and a hell of a good time!

I feel it is the intent to kill/dissable that makes the difference. That being said, it is impossible for a martial art to train with that intent. The intent to kill and really injure must remain a CONCEPT in the students mind that they will hopefully never have to realise.

[Dagonet]

Part of it is because i know how to fight. I don't really care what I am fighting with, the principles of body, mind and spirit exist equally in all challenges of arms. The purpose of that challenge is irrelevent. If you learn to swing a stick, then that is what you will know. If you train yourself to win a fight, that is what you will know. Rattan combat or any other form of sport=training=martial art is completely worthless if you are not improving yourself.

I agree with the above but I am willing to guess you have never tried using a real sword, it takes months to train how to use a sword properly, SCA combat does not teach that nor do many of it's moves work with a sword. Reason being a sword is a flat piece of metal with flex and rattan even with a shaved down surface is still a club that has no need for much finesse in striking.

I would love to demonstrate what I mean with the longsword with you after my new armor is complete in June. This is not a challenge it is a chance to see the flip side of the coin if you wish.

I would love to...any time. I think it would be fun to play with a metal weapon.

I will comment on one portion of what you said though. "a sword is a flat piece of metal with flex and rattan even with a shaved down surface is still a club that has no need for much finesse in striking. " I believe you are in error here. At high levels of SCA combat the amounts of control and finesse are staggering. millimeters make the difference. It is foolish, IMO, to judge the validity of an activity by its "weekend warrior" types. Speak to any of the best knights that have been and i bet they would tell a similar story. Technique is a word used too infrequently...or practiced too infrequently...but it is there.

[James B.]

I would love to...any time. I think it would be fun to play with a metal weapon.

I will comment on one portion of what you said though. "a sword is a flat piece of metal with flex and rattan even with a shaved down surface is still a club that has no need for much finesse in striking. " I believe you are in error here. At high levels of SCA combat the amounts of control and finesse are staggering. millimeters make the difference. It is foolish, IMO, to judge the validity of an activity by its "weekend warrior" types. Speak to any of the best knights that have been and i bet they would tell a similar story. Technique is a word used too infrequently...or practiced too infrequently...but it is there.

Again I agree there is a finesse it's just different. SCA Knights are total experts in the aspects of SCA combat as it is under the rules, take away the rules and not everything you guys do is the same. The best guy to talk to about I could think of is Strykar being he is an expert in both SCA and HWMA.

If not before we could get together at Pennsic at play with blunts.

[JoeMick]

Sir Daniel

to respond to your post in the other thread
I think kendo is a sport. What little exposure I had to escrima makes me think it's an art.

To throw my nickel in this thread

I feel that a martial art *starts* with teaching you the fundamentals of self defense. I feel that a martial sport *starts* with teaching you how to safely compete within the rules of the game. I guess this puts me in the 'it's all about intent' camp, and from outside observation I don't think the SCA intends to be a martial art. Just my opinion

cheers

Joe

[Duncanthemonster]

Anything where the outcome is death.
The forms of fighting, whereever they come from, where ment to damage people. When you spar in any form...it's a game.



mmm.. no. (grin) As I read your reasoning here, there are no martial arts practised in the USA, at least not above ground, because to be a martial art you have to be actually, intentionally, maiming and killing people...

It seems to me you're applying an unreasonable definition. OTOH, I can see the point that there is a distinction to be made between a martial art and a martial sport.


ME>>
I would restate my first statement there as follows...
If the planned and trained for outcome was the ability to truley kill and/or maim. Or defend against the same. Not to score a touch/point/strike.
Is that more resonable ...I have to say I can see new ways to look at this now. I will take my POV under more thought with the new knoldege gleaned from this thread. And isn't that one of the points of the Archive in some way? To grow and reform our idea's through exposure to different POV's?
>>
Now, as an example of the differences, I might point to Kendo versus Aido, or Olympic Fencing versus various "historical" rapier styles. The one is clearly a sport, with strict rules, scoring methods and standards that relate not so much to practical use of the weapon as to a ritualized and stylized interpretation of combat - they are now sports, with a martial element to them. The other is a martial art - a system of training a person for combat and actually contain (or certainly should contain) an element of making the tudent understand that what they are learning involves violence and harm to other human beings.

I don't think you have to be *doing* actual harm for it to be a martial art - which is what I read in your posts. If I misunderstood, forgive me.

As to which SCA fighting is - it's a sport, with strong martial elements, but not really what I would call a martial art.

Gavin

[Sir Daniel]

I find it illuminating that the live steel crowd thinks that the SCA isn't a legitimate martial art even though we go full contact and they pull thier shots?

Martial Arts is as Martial Arts do.

And, as I've mentioned befroe, I've taken my live steel sword out and done all the pellwork with it. I've not noticed the difference to be too great, since I balance and weight my rattan to exactly match my real sword. With a shaved handle and clearly marked edge, the motions and moves seem to be nearly identical.

You all might be interested in EMP rules (done up by Sir Aveloc) that uses any three counted blows or one substantial hit to the head or body. This means you get hit twice in the arm and once in the head bifore you die or one 'bellringer' to the body is declared "Substantial" by the person recieving the blow.

I know Duke Gaston and Duke Baldur tried it last summer at Ragnarok. (not to mention the 'ring of fire' tourney which allows kicking grappling and punching besides the above normal rules. oh yeah, and it takes place in a 30 foot ring of fire )

There is no going to your knees, but we still don't target below the knee since few people (besides Duke G) had full greaves and sabatons.

Anyway. I'll keep training people to treat this as a martial art. I find the students truly respond better and learn faster when the information is presented in that manner.

[Sinister_Theo]

The SCA is a hobby.

SCA fighting is a recreational sport.

To say otherwise is delusional.


Martial Arts have been designed for centuries to defend oneself from physical harm that results from confrontation. The SCA's fighting is not designed as a self defense mechanism. It is designed so that people may safely participate in the recreational sport side of the SCA hobby.

Until the SCA adopts a philosophy of self defense in real world applications then it will remain a recreational sport.

The SCA was never designed for real world self defense. Grab a stick go have fun.

[SirAngus]

Sir Daniel, I think you are missing the point on intent. Is the action performed to win in a game or to save your life? Yes, I feel that the exact same shot can be done either way, but it is the reason why the shot was thrown that I see makeing the difference.

I believe that you can work on concepts or aspects of a martial art in a martial sport. Single time actions, double time actions, stepping off line, all concepts in a martial art that can be used in the martial sport, but it is the rules and the intention that make it a sport.

Dont let the steel crowd get you down. They do a martial sport too. Yes, they may train a martial art but practice a martial sport... Anyone who tells you otherwise is either deludeing themself or is an individual who is too dangerous to spar with!

Besides, until someone has a concrete definition of a martial art, this is just us voicing oppinions

[Jon Barber]

I find it illuminating that the live steel crowd thinks that the SCA isn't a legitimate martial art even though we go full contact and they pull thier shots?

Martial Arts is as Martial Arts do.

*smiles* There is that. But the more reputable HWMA practitioners/schools use a combination of different simulators and protection that allow them to both go at full speed, full contact and also to fight with rebated steel weapons. Otherwise you build in poor habits based on pulled blows, just as you stated. Some simulators work better for drilling, some for bouting full contact, and some for bouting with metal in harness. Test cutting with sharps is good too.

The full range of training is important. You need to learn correct form/technique, the concepts of tempo and measure, proper footwork, how to generate power properly, how to strike properly, how to strike at an uncooperative opponent with intent, how a proper weapon handles and how it changes things, and a host of other items. You can't do all of them with any single simulator or a training regime that doesn't recognize the pro's and con's of each way of doing it.

Is half-swording in armor with a blunt important? Sure. Is learning to strike *through* your target with proper power generation, edge alignment and technique? Absolutely. Is learning how to strike a resisting opponent with solid contact at speed? You bet. They're ALL part of it, and if you aren't doing them all your training may well be coming up short.

Depending on what you're training for, of course.

To stay on-topic - if I've trained in it to subdue, damage or kill an opponent (like most of my AMA training) and that is it's intended use it's a martial art. Sure, I can't actually do that in class (though I've had to a couple times out in the world) but that is the point to the training. When I have to adapt it substantially to use within the rules of a contest, it's a sport.

Jon Barber

[Sir Guy]

Duncan and Aaron,

No problems, in Aaron's case I was clearifying some things and in your case I was just saying I know about you were talking about. Aaron and I spoke last night at practice and I do hope to meet you as you live near two friends of mine- Alric and Brian.

Guy

[Gaston de Vieuxchamps]

I believe in a distinction between "martial art" and "martil sport" but it has nothing to do with leathality. I spent many years as a "traditional" martial artist and never heard anyone relate the distinction to leathality.

I agree that SCA fighting is generally a "martial sport"--like boxing, fencing, olympic TKD, sumo, or colligiate wrestling. What makes these "sports" rather than "arts" is not the absence of fights to the death (most all the above sports have had their share of fights to the death at various times and places). Nor is it the absence of kata (though arts tend to have kata, it is not a defining factor). It is the absence of subtext. The fact that the goal of a sport is nothing more than plating the game and winning while arts define success and advancement in more abstract terms. In an art the aesthetic, the ideal, the philosophy, or the spirit of the thing generally (not all the time) takes precidence over success within a structured competition.

If an SCA fighter studies historical texts and fights with an eye toward gaining deeper understanding of historical fighting rather than just a better understanding of fighting under SCA rules, then he is a martial artist. On the other hand if a fighter fights and advances the techniques of fighting as a way of developing his spirit, his body, and his wisdom with success or failure as a secondary effect, then he too is a martial artist.

A martial sport is not inferior to a martial art, and a martial artist is not supperior to a martial athelete. The goals and approach are simply different.

Stage fighting is an art. It is also martial. It is certainly not a sport. So it is a "martial art" even though it's intent is far from leathal. The goal is not athletic but aesthetic.

Judo is a sport, but traditional Judo as taught by Dr Kano is also an art. So judoka can be martial artists and/or martial atheletes depending on their goals and mode of practice.

So was a Roman gladiator a martial artist or a martial athelete? I say the later. Though his game was serious and quite leathal, his only goal was to win the game. He might be very dangerous and is certainly a fearsome foe in war (Spartacus anyone?) , he might also gain considerable insight into the nature of life and death and the human spirit, but that is not the essence of his training or his purpose.

Sure the definitions are limited by context. One could argue that Muhamed Ali was "an artist" and I would agree, but boxing is still a sport. "Art" has many meanings and can be both vague and ambiguous, but as martial artists define a "martial art" the meaning is very specific.

[Duncanthemonster]

Gaston,
Damn you.

You have explained to me, what I have been trying to say for a long time.
And done it better than I ever have been able to. Now I have to print your post and carry it with me...I could never have laid it out so clearly.
Well said Sir...well said indeed.

[James B.]

I find it illuminating that the live steel crowd thinks that the SCA isn't a legitimate martial art even though we go full contact and they pull thier shots?

Martial Arts is as Martial Arts do.

What does speed in the sport have to do with anything? HWMA studies with real swords in ways they were really used. The SCA creates moves based on its armour and weapons in other words its fighting style is strictly based off its rules set and not realism.

BTW some HWMA groups fight full speed with blunts in full armor.

Really it's no different in the TKD crowd. You have schools that are strictly for the martial sport, you have schools that are strictly for Martial art, and you have schools for both. A MA school will tell you kicking to the head was invented for point sparing not for street combat. Same goes with up close wraps to the back of the head; the SCA invented that because it works in its game.

Fencing is also a sport not a martial art. Just like the SCA rattan combat modern fencing has moves that are made up strictly for the game.

The difference in a martial art and a martial sport? One is based off real combat the other is about winning at a game. The SCA style of combat is little like real medieval combat or sword play, if it was spears and polearm would dominate the game and like the tourneys of the past people would get killed. Lets not forget our lack of horses and jousting.

[earnest carruthers]

A very interesting thread, whilst not an SCAer nor have I seen to my knowledge live or filmed SCA fighting action, but I have fought metal and very briefly (LARP, many years agao) I have found this illuminating.

A couple of other points, target archery is a sport that with a change of context becomes a martial art, as does target shooting with any projectile weapon.

However that cannot always be said to happen with play swords, either sticks or blunt metal. Reenactment fighting is purely to achieve certain target areas but to minimise the risks hence why so many different groups have different standards.

To then translate the old fashioned hockey stick pole weapon fighting of many UK reenactment groups to actual pole weapon fighting is a waste of time as the reenactment training in general is to simulate a faux fighting style which in some cases will be more dangerous to try in a 'real' environment as it doesn't teach to to react and defend in the appropriate way to a 'real' threat. An example would be the long telegraphed cuts which do not help against short sharp thrusts. But much metal fighting in reenactment is not about causing damage or even remotely looking like it.

This is the prime reason that over here there is an ongoing reluctance to use WMA techniques on a 'battlefield' because a lot of the average reenactors would more than likely get spooked by a well exceuted blow, lethal looking and controlled but very likely to provoke the wrong sort of response. Also 'battlefield' fighting may or may not resemble what actually happened, maybe they weren't as closely ranked as some groups portray this in turn means the fighting style is geared towards the event portrayal rather than actual representation. And if all you know is to telegraph blows or aim for weapons or soft non-painful parts of the body you will be in deep shit against an aggressive housewife with a rolling pin.

As for terminology call it what it you like, as long as your 'martial art' can deal with another's 'martial art' on equal terms you are ok, if not....



I will disagree with you james re piste fencing, yes the foil and its use is not a representation of any real weapon, but the target areas are clearly defined to get you the most lethal hits you can, so one aim of the game is to get people to actually aim (fake intent) to kill. I could quite easily use a stiff short sword or an umbrella as it happens and take someone out with the same lunge that i would use on the piste with a flexible foil, I might not pay attention to priority of blows etc. And of course Epee takes it further up that scale. A martial sport yes but very much still martial.

[James B.]

grimoire

Sure the targets are the same in foil fencing but the sword play has changed do to the rules and the game from what the fencing masters in the eras the rapier was a side arm used.

Also great points about the steel fighting groups. They are not to different from the SCA in the fact they have safety rules to prevent major injuries too. They infact also play a game.

(Note: I do not use the word game in a derogatory way; I mean it in the same way as a game of football or TKD as in a game of a sport)

[earnest carruthers]

Yes all I meant was that I could say use a beat and thrust to the eyes say or any other target because I would be used to doing it and at full force, elements are transferrable to a 'real' situation.

I don't think it is in total a 'combat' activity just in parts, I would prefer epee for that, or more precisely a rapier.

I think one of the things that reenactors do, especially fighting ones is attempt to elevate what they do to give it some cachet when it doesn't need it. To a 'proper' swordsman all of what we do is laughable, but we do not do real fighting, that as you say does not prevent one being good at it and convincing and safe. To me the epitome of a good reenactment fighter is the ability to make it look good and not hurt your mate, anything less is not worthy. How you do that is of course up to the customs and practice of your group. Also as has been discussed is the difference between one-to one and group fighting, there are just some things you can't do in a great big bunch of people.

It looks like SCA and metal fighting are not that dissimilar in intent, just a slight variation in execution, you wont find many face shots in UK metal fighting.

Part of the reason I now want to study WMA is to set the difference between 'battle' fighting and learn interesting moves and develop good control as much as anything and for the buzz of course.

[Kinoshita Takemitsu]

A martial art...

to figure what anything is you have to understand how you define the terms.

Martial- pretains to combat and warfare
art- basically a form of espression

so a martial art is anything that is the form of combat or warfare.

i think SCA fighting is a martial art... just as i believe that my style of fighting is a martial art. my 2 cents

[AllenJ]

I do not think I would come close to considering most steel groups as playing a type or game. (Granted there might be some that I'm not aware of). We dont "keep score" or count blows. It the execution of period techniques till someone is struck. Then its over and thats, that. No colored belts, no titles or silly names, no rankings or peerage. It's all about the research and propper technique.

[earnest carruthers]

"art- basically a form of espression "

that is not the meaning of art in a classical context, far from it, it is skill and ability.

The term art was applied to pretty much any activity that required skill and judgement and expertise, be it jewellery, smithing, calligraphy or fencing.

The term art for expression is a very modern notion and incompatible with medieval notions on art considering that freeform art was quite some hundreds of years away. Painting for example took a fair bit of time to change from notional simplistic imagery to realistic forms that was because the nature of art patronage had changed in the late 15th century* and beyond not because artists themselves made changes, certain exceptions being Dürer, even so he was still led by clients' wishes.


* a very brief and simplistic overview I understand.

[Sinister_Theo]

Saying that SCA fighting is a martial art is a serious insult to those that created such systems of self preservation from physical danger.

The early traditional martial arts as we tend to understand them originate from oriental culture. These early forms of martial arts were designed to fight in battles as well as to defend oneself, such as times during occupation where weapons were abolished by the conquerers. In either case life was on the line.

(Though less documentation is apparent, fighting systems quite obviously did exist through-out the world as well.)

The later forms are generically known as karate and kung-fu, comprise of several different arts. All of these arts have a foundation that originates several hundreds, to thousands, of years.

As time progressed many of these arts were refined as they splintered off, the founders of their varying arts were never forgotten. In modern times the need to defend oneself from near fatal situations as drastically decreased. With that and the popularity of guns, martial arts were not needed as much and eventually evolved into fitness programs and sport competition.

Jiu-Jutsu was an early form of grappling for self defense and preservation during feudal times. From it stemmed Jui-Jitsu. In 1914, a Japanese Jiu-Jitsu and Judo master named Mitsuyo Maeda came to Brazil and ended up teaching Traditional Jiu-Jitsu to Carlos Gracie. Carlos over time modified the form to what is known as Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. In the 80's and 90's the Gracie family challenged everyone to come 'play' with them, even Mike Tyson for a 2 million dollar purse but he refused. Now there are a few forms of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu.

There are other forms of Martial Arts that were not soley created as a fighting art, such as Pa-Qua. Pa-Qua was created by a Chinese general to keep his troops healthy and limber while going on long campaigns.

The SCA is a game that was created for fun. It is still a game. People can live in some fantasy world if they choose but the SCA fighting will never be a true martial art.

It does take great skill to become a top 'stick jock'. You can also learn about a code of ethics and abide by them if you so choose, while participating in the SCA. I have met and trained with some amazing stick-jox such as Duke Brannos and Duke Drake. People such as them, and others before them, are exceptions to a vast pool of people who induldge in the SCA hobby. Both of them along with others have spent countless hours and resources refining the fighting within the SCA and have created a very effective tourney fighting system.

The SCA is a hobby and will always be one. The SCA fighting has evolved into a sport which requires some skill, in large battles, and great skill, in tournies. It is a great sport and hobby but please do not insult true martial arts by calling the SCA a martial art. Their is a huge difference in sitting around trying to figure out how to get by Sir Soandso's flat snap and those who sat in a hut during occupational times trying to figure out how to survive against well armed troops, and succeeding at times.

[Edwin]

I think the difference between a martial art and a martial sport lies in what each activity trains for. By that, I'm not referring to the purpose of training. A stated purpose often inadequately describes what actually happens as a result of training.

What I mean is this: if the training precludes application of technique that causes, and is intended to cause, injury, then the system as a whole is better described as a martial sport. If the training includes the modification of a technique intended to cause injury, then it's a martial art.



How many Judo schools teach standing chokes? Or throwing an opponent who kicks & punches? How many train the thrower to drop a knee on vital targets immediately after the person being thrown hits the ground? How many judo school teach the modification of Tsuri Komi Goshi that's intended to break the opponent's neck? How many Judo schools include the atemi (striking) that Jiguro Kano included in his instruction when he founded Judo?

Those questions speak directly to the issue of martial art versus martial sport.

[rymic]

Why is the terribly misleading term "live steel" used to describe sparring with blunted swords. It seems the same as calling a blank bullet "live ammunition".
Metal swords transfer a lot more feeling to the hands then do wooden, padded and other forms of simulators. To think that you can go from wood or rattan and have the same success with steel is folly. Edge alignment and feeling in the bind i.e. whether your opponent is hard or soft in the bind are very important when sparring with steel or even aluminum. It takes time and experience to gain the ability to feel what your sword is telling you. I spar with steel and aluminum (and we use as much speed and power as would be necessary with real "live" steel)following the oldest written treatise on martial arts in the world (I.33) as well as the Liechtenauer tradition of longsword, grappling, armored combat, and spear, but would I feel as though I would do as well fighting with rattan and a heater shield....of course not. If I did I would just be arrogant and not appreciative of what others have spent alot of time working with.

[earnest carruthers]

"The early traditional martial arts as we tend to understand them originate from oriental culture."

Thanks to the term only being applied to eastern 'fighting' arts thanks to Bruce Lee etc. But the term is much wider but we are not used to it in a western context even though professional swordsmen were very much martial artists.

[St. George]

Some of us, like myself, choose to participate in SCA combat strictly because the possibilities, and limitations, it provides for sporting combat.

Although training with steel might be interesting, I don't care to do it. Likewise, I don't care to get hit in the shins, knees, or grapple. I also generally do not enjoy fighting anything other than sword and shield or "SCA bastard sword." Likewise, the least enjoyable fights I have are the ones in which my opponents are "fighting for real" or "fighting for their lives." These fights are not "fun," and although I win them most of the time, they are "work" not sport. I bet that if we had a tournament with an agreed upon ruleset, with 10 Dukes, 10 WMA/I.33/HACA master types, and 10 other stick/sword wielding martial artists the Dukes would come out near the top. If we limited this hypothetical tournament to the Dukes vs HACA/WMA/I.33 I bet the Dukes would end up winning (wraps and no grappling and all).

Does this mean that my skill with SCA weapons limits me in a one on one fight against another individual, even if they had trained WMA, HACA, or whatever other weapons form? Probably not. I might get surprised with a technique once or twice- just the same as anyone who is surprised by a technique in a fight. I would love to hit someone in the knee as they tried to kick me. Likewise, I am sure that some of my techniques would just as easily surprise some practioners of other martial arts, and have used them to good effect against others before.

SCA fighting is a martial art. It is also a martial sport. The techniques are solid. Any good practioner of any martial art/sport can defeat someone who is only mediocre at their chosen form, as there is no holy grail of martial arts (other than Shinanju).

Alaric

[Animal]

This post from Alaric illustrates very cleary what I have observed over the entire time I have interacted with the SCA in general. I have seen a consistent desire to limit the field and narrow the options so that one only needs a very certain very specified set of skills to excel. I'm not insulting that, just noting it. I also think that this attitude is at the very heart of why lsome SCA folk dont like our approach. We have a very wide approach, much more encompassing when it comes to fighting. Much more of a 360 degree thing. It tends to open one up to an entire world of vulnerability I'm sure they'd rather not contend with if they didnt have to. To be honest, when I'm fighting SCA people at their functions and not having to defense my knees and below it makes me a lot more confident in my approach to people. Especially long weapons. IMO it makes me lazy so I try and not slip into that midset.
Alaric I'd like to thank you for clarifying something that I have been observing for decades but had never quite congealed into such a definitive presentation. Well done.

[earnest carruthers]

"If we limited this hypothetical tournament to the Dukes vs HACA/WMA/I.33 I bet the Dukes would end up winning (wraps and no grappling and all). "

Then you are not actually comparing the two are you, you are restricting the actions of one to match your own.

Seeing as grappling is an important part of it, you can't possibly make the comparison by restricting it.

What you should be prepared to try is your style versus their style then you can see which is the most representative, it becomes a fair comparison then. Also some of the thrusts to face with steel weapons are somewhat deadly so again I take it you mean compare the two by stripping down the more lethal variant and also reducing it to using rattan?

A bit like comparing boxing to karate but not allowing kicks, pointless.

[St. George]

"If we limited this hypothetical tournament to the Dukes vs HACA/WMA/I.33 I bet the Dukes would end up winning (wraps and no grappling and all). "

Then you are not actually comparing the two are you, you are restricting the actions of one to match your own.

Grimoire-

Sorry you mis-read that- I am comparing the two. We would have to find an agreed upon set of circumstances for the fights to take place in/under- victory conditions, real wepons etc, but that goes for any arranged cross platform encounter.

I was in no way meaning to restrict the actions of one to match my/our own. My implication was that although SCA practioners might be restricted in comparison to historical practioners- they throw wraps which historical practioners think are non viable, they do not grapple, or throw at the lower leg- that the SCA combattants would be able to adapt quickly, and that they would still beat the historical prationers more often than not.

I would assume that for a full contact measure that not even the historical practioners would want to go up against a full force face thrust with steel- if you do, then put me on the list of people who never needs to try that crap (that is what you seem to imply here in this quote- "Also some of the thrusts to face with steel weapons are somewhat deadly so again I take it you mean compare the two by stripping down the more lethal variant and also reducing it to using rattan?"). My asumption is that even historical practioners are not stupid enough to be "practicing or competing" with these techniques. Likely they have to "strip something down" to be able to use these in any examinations/practice of full contact combat. I think we could find something agreeable- for some people it would be steel, others wood, and others rattan, that they are all comfortable with.

For me I choose not to fight with steel. I enjoy the safety factor that rattan affords me in full contact fighting. If historical practioners want to use steel to practice full contact face thrusts with, then have at and leave me your armor in your will


Animal-

The SCA is a sport/game, and it has a set of rules. These rules allow for guys my size (6'1" 170lbs)to be able to have a good time while engaging and competing in martial sport with guys Cuan's size (6'3" 240+), and all of us be able to walk away at the end of the day and have a beer. For those of use who are fighting several times a week, the SCA ruleset also allows us to be abel to hold down full time jobs, and not have to be on disability on a reguglar basis. I agree with you- in comparison to your ruleset, you might be able to be a little "lazier" in your approach when cometiing in the SCA. At the same time, though, I bet you don't get into that "lazy" mindset when you are fighting many of the knights or any of the duke you know. I'll bet your mindset is different (like you don't have to worry about gettign hit in the shins, or tackled or something), but I'll bet your fighting mentality level is raised all the way. You probably get the same rush fighting the good fight in the SCA as you do in your Tuchux set of rules, don't you?

I enjoy fighting sword and shield. I enjoy the combat form, and the thrill I have of having a good fight with someone else. I really don't care about fighting anyone who walks out with pole arm, two stick, or any funny weapons form- that isn't fun, and just becomes work. Sword and shield on sword and shield provides me with the challenge I enjoy. I don't care to make SCA fighting real, and frankly am glad that I don't have to go into battle for real taking other men's lives, or worrying about my own being taken. For some people, they need the rush of "real combat." Like I have said before, there are really only three fights I don't enjoy getting into in the SCA 1) the brand new fighter who is going to throw a completely unpredictible (often wrong or illegal) shot and hurt whomever they are fighting with, 2) off weapons people, 3) people who take the fight "for real"- I don't enjoy the energy of those fights, or the radically different approach I have to take in putting those people down, as it just isn't fun anymore.

Alaric

[earnest carruthers]

"Sorry you mis-read that- I am comparing the two. We would have to find an agreed upon set of circumstances for the fights to take place in/under- victory conditions, real wepons etc, but that goes for any arranged cross platform encounter. "

There is no need to apologise.

"We would have to find an agreed upon set of circumstances for the fights to take place in/under- victory conditions, real wepons etc, but that goes for any arranged cross platform encounter."

but that will automatically mean in this hypothetical situation that it favours your techniques and pretty much negates key parts of the 'real' methods.

For example you could put a kick boxer up against a karate practioner although they are different in aspect they have similar outcomes and risks and therefore similar inhibitions regarding certain actions, ie defence is real, offence is real just the challenge being how your karate blocks defend against a kickboxer's hits and vice versa.

Or say Airsoft against paintball? that would be good as neither would have to adapt their kit to try and hit the enemy except the paintballers would invariably have to close the range.

In both those cases the core skill set is not changed as a result of the contest, in your scenario it is.

[Animal]

Hi Alaric

"The SCA is a sport/game, and it has a set of rules. These rules allow for guys my size (6'1" 170lbs)to be able to have a good time while engaging and competing in martial sport with guys Cuan's size (6'3" 240+), and all of us be able to walk away at the end of the day and have a beer. For those of use who are fighting several times a week, the SCA ruleset also allows us to be abel to hold down full time jobs, and not have to be on disability on a reguglar basis. "
Sure. Ours is a sport/game too. We dont have rules. Yet guys from 5'6" 140lbs go up against guys 6'6" 375lbs and bigger. We target the entire body, we dont limit weapons by anything other than common sense, yet we all have our beers at the end of the day and generally stay off disability for the most part. I realize that the ratio of numbers is a lot different but still... it's not night and day here. Common sense does make a difference.

"I agree with you- in comparison to your ruleset, you might be able to be a little "lazier" in your approach when cometiing in the SCA. At the same time, though, I bet you don't get into that "lazy" mindset when you are fighting many of the knights or any of the duke you know. I'll bet your mindset is different (like you don't have to worry about gettign hit in the shins, or tackled or something), but I'll bet your fighting mentality level is raised all the way. You probably get the same rush fighting the good fight in the SCA as you do in your Tuchux set of rules, don't you?"

Honestly, I tend to have a great time fighting the knights and dukes I know. They tend to bring a higher quality game with more honor and less doubt than your average SCA fighter. Having said that, the 'average' SCA fighters I get to deal with are in fact pretty good. I dont have many in my area that I have actual problems with. But it's still different. If I know you cant hit my shins I'll walk right up on you and cover my thighs and up. With our group I cant do that. It makes me deal with that entire body target and that is a whole new ballgame. I do get a good rush from a good fight, I agree. But I gotta say it's a lot easier fighting when you only have to worry about certain things.
IMO an SCA fighter would be at a vast disadvantage when all of a sudden their attention has to suddenly focus in things they've never had to worry about before. I'm not being insulting here, I've seen it happen. I remember when Calontir came to our camp years ago at Pennsic to fight us our way. Big difference and not the results they thought they were gonna get.
Nothing wrong with liking what you like, but I seriously doubt SCA dukes or whoever would have such a huge advantage especially when faced with circumstances they just dont train for.

[St. George]

Grimoire,

Sounds like your system is a lot of BS. If you are training with killing blows then you can't actually be fighting for real. The only "real" part I am suggesting getting rid of death. If a sword thrust to the face results in someone dying, then lets not use it.

What is the bottom line you think you need for a fight that fairly evaluates your system and your fighter's abilities?

Right now it feels like you are setting up straw man defenses so that a cross cultural evaluation can't occur.

Where Animal and the Tuchux use a style which opens up some new avenues for attack and defense, the 2 things can be fairly well evaluated against one another, because some level of compromise is reached.

It seems that you are unwilling to play at any level below full force killing blows with steel in hand, as that is the only way, apparently from your posts, that such a system can be evaluated.

Right...

Alaric

[dukelogan]

i would be more than happy to compare our style of sca blunt stick fighting to any current game of edged steel fighting leaving the rules as they are for both organizations if it makes you happy grimoire. you grab your rebated steel sword and throw your typical shots and i will grab my rattan fishbat and throw what i can. you target what you normally do and i will target only sca legal targets. you decide to grapple and, well welcome to my backyard.

the major difference here is that sca sport combat is full force (except for those two kingdoms..... ) non choreographed contest and the rest are not. save the tuchux who have a really cool system of full body targeting, and some grappling. im sure there are others out there i simply do not know those.

anyway, coming from a real martial art (boxing) and evolving into another real martial art (nbh mma submission) i can tell you that none of this compares to anything realistic as far as real combat is concerned. so how bout we only deal with the reality that is our own specific combat system and let some of the wind out of our chests?

and please, dont anyone suggest im a sissy for that or anything. ill fight whatever you think is cool. no worries from me there. i just think that we all have our own ways of playing at combat and thats cool. comparing them is something that can be done. making them compete against one another is also possible. it makes no sense to do so though. no matter what you think your martial training is, ground and pound wins the day (unless you get knocked out on your way in, but thats why i started as a boxer )

overall i think the tuchux have the best combat system in place for our similar (although totally different) games. i think full body targeting and grappling is the way to go. as far as animal feeling lazy fighting sca fighters goes..... find some that can fight. but regardless, i admire their culture when it comes to sport fighting. the metal guys all pull shots and i cant get behind that. i understand the reason (fuck getting killed) for it but it is all play fighting at that point. so its not my cup of bruises.

regards
logan

"If we limited this hypothetical tournament to the Dukes vs HACA/WMA/I.33 I bet the Dukes would end up winning (wraps and no grappling and all). "

Then you are not actually comparing the two are you, you are restricting the actions of one to match your own.

Seeing as grappling is an important part of it, you can't possibly make the comparison by restricting it.

What you should be prepared to try is your style versus their style then you can see which is the most representative, it becomes a fair comparison then. Also some of the thrusts to face with steel weapons are somewhat deadly so again I take it you mean compare the two by stripping down the more lethal variant and also reducing it to using rattan?

A bit like comparing boxing to karate but not allowing kicks, pointless.

[Animal]

Instead of insulting the SCA fighters that I fight with, go back and reread what I said logan. I said that not having to block my lower legs makes me feel lazy. The SCA fighters that I deal with around here tend to be very good fighters. With skills and honor to match. Even the newer ones seem to be on track for the most part. It's a good time.