One handed fighting with a two handed weapon

[blackbow]

Oh yes...I got a response from Stephen on the authenticity of a wrap shot.

Dear David,

The wrap shot has been discussed at various Western Martial Art events.
Probably the best people to talk about it are veteran SCAers like Bob
Charron and Brian Price who have done it and now don't. There is no
historical evidence for anything like a wrap. I believe that it's most
often
done in sword and shield. I once had an SCA chap try one on me. I just
opened my shield a little and allowed him to run face first onto my
shield
rim (whereupon he fell over). The problem for me is not whether it
would do
damage (which it may or may not - I haven't really looked at it) but
that it
requires you to be closer than you have any right to be against a half
way
competent opponent. All historical masters talked about the different
distances of the fight. Attacks should be launched from wide distance,
that
is you should have to step to deliver an attack. In the SCA fighting
I've
seen, the combatants seem to allow each other into close distance where
attacks can be launched without a step and where attacks like the wrap
are
possible. Attacks are launched by first moving the body and then the
weapon.
Both the distance and timing I've seen used in the SCA are the opposite
of
what historical masters taught. The hand moves so quickly in distance
that
you cannot guarantee being safe at that distance and a threat should
always
precede a target in attack.

Hence, it is very unusual to get to a position in which a wrap would be
possible if you are following the instructions of the historical
masters
(who after all were the chaps who did this for real). There are
instances in
sword and buckler where both combatants advance and it's impossible to
quickly retreat, where a wrap would be possible. In these instances,
the
masters invariably thrust.

Cheers
Stephen Hand
Stoccata School of Defence
www.stoccata.org
Chivalry Bookshelf
www.chivalrybookshelf.com


So tell ya what... I'll stop advocating an axe punch when the SCA stops using wrap shots.

Regards,

Jonathan Blackbow

[Hedinn]

Re-read my statements and dont put words in my mouth. I never said you cant use it. I simply questioned this:

"stipulated that this says the user gripped the haft directly behind the head for planing or shaving wood...it's a fairly short step from that to punching somebody with it. "

as documentation for it.

Of couse if you held a hammer and chisel differently it would work, a shoe could be deadly use used right. However holding it as you would for carving, renders it all but useles in combat.

[blackbow]

I apologize if you thought I was putting words in your mouth. Let me try it a different way: I'm unconcerned as to the validity of the technique. It works in SCA combat just fine, unless it's going to be banned. Nor is it any odder in combat than a wrap shot, as quoted above. Therefore the historical accuracy of the technique matters little to me as far as whether it should work or not.

Regards,

Jonathan Blackbow

Re-read my statements and dont put words in my mouth. I never said you cant use it. I simply questioned this:

"stipulated that this says the user gripped the haft directly behind the head for planing or shaving wood...it's a fairly short step from that to punching somebody with it. "

as documentation for it.

Of couse if you held a hammer and chisel differently it would work, a shoe could be deadly use used right. However holding it as you would for carving, renders it all but useles in combat.

[dukelogan]

jonathan here is the problem with your argument.

comparing historic technique to sca sport combat is nothing more than an interesting study since sca sport combat is its own form of martial art. stephan hands assertion that in "real" combat a wrap shot is folly is a weak support when taking in the context of sca sport combat. in sca sport combat a wrap does, in fact, work. stephans one time experience with an sca fighter attempting a wrap is hardly solid evidence against its effectiveness especially considering the apparent lack of stability of his opponent.

the problem with the punch to the grille with a hand axe that many people have is that it goes against the spirit of our combat form. unless, and until, we move forward and go to full force face thrusts there will always be that issue. we deliver and expect full force thrusts to the body but so much less to the face. this leads to potentially sloppy and cheap technique and makes certain actions, while "legal", present themselves as magic bullets (like nuclear arrows).

now whether or not a punch to the face with a hand axe would end a contest at arms is one that cant really be answered. i would put money on that it wouldnt.

regards
logan

[blackbow]

My [possibly unclear] point about the wrap shot wasn't that it didn't work in SCA combat but that it DID work in SCA combat in spite of the fact that it has no historical basis. The argument against the axe punch was that it had no historical basis, at least as far as I read it. If we wanted to get into an argument about whether an axe punch would work in real combat vs. whether a wrap shot would work in real combat, we can, but my contention remains that it is silly to be against an axe punch (or whatever ahistorical practice you disfavor) because it has no historical basis, and yet be in favor of a wrap shot (or whatever ahistorical practice you favor) in spite of its lack of historical basis. The SCA should either categorically allow stuff that works in SCA combat regardless of its historical accuracy, or categorically deny anything in SCA combat that has no historical accuracy. Supporting one ahistorical aspect and condemning another merely because (editorial you) don't like it is an untenable position to take. I can understand why Alaric doesn't personally like the greatsword being held upside down, but since I know he throws wrap shots, I don't have a whole lot of sympathy.

For instance, personally I think unpadded polearms are a blight on the face of the SCA because they have no historical relation to their supposed ancestors. They move too fast for the effect they have due to the lack of mass at the end of the polearm, and yet they are fast gaining popularity. Do I like them? Not for their historical value, no. I like them for their potential tactical value but Atlantia doesn't use them. Do I find them historically inaccurate? Yes. But do I therefore go out and crusade against them because of their historical inaccuracy? No. Somebody besides me decided that they work within the context of the SCA, and I have to live with it or find something else to do.

And for those of you who are clever enough to read this and say "well, he favors something that has no historical value, and disfavors something that has no historical value, so where does that leave him?" The answer is: pretty much in the middle of the SCA. But I don't go out and try to get rid of a thing I don't like. I leave it alone and let time decide whether it's a good thing or a bad thing. If it's a bad thing there will be ample evidence in short order. If not, it obviously wasn't worth crusading against to begin with.

As for worrying about whether the axe punch would land hard enough in a tourney to the face OR the body - I'm willing to find out. If it simply isn't effective, it will die a quick death.

JB

jonathan here is the problem with your argument.

comparing historic technique to sca sport combat is nothing more than an interesting study since sca sport combat is its own form of martial art. stephan hands assertion that in "real" combat a wrap shot is folly is a weak support when taking in the context of sca sport combat. in sca sport combat a wrap does, in fact, work. stephans one time experience with an sca fighter attempting a wrap is hardly solid evidence against its effectiveness especially considering the apparent lack of stability of his opponent.

the problem with the punch to the grille with a hand axe that many people have is that it goes against the spirit of our combat form. unless, and until, we move forward and go to full force face thrusts there will always be that issue. we deliver and expect full force thrusts to the body but so much less to the face. this leads to potentially sloppy and cheap technique and makes certain actions, while "legal", present themselves as magic bullets (like nuclear arrows).

now whether or not a punch to the face with a hand axe would end a contest at arms is one that cant really be answered. i would put money on that it wouldnt.

regards
logan

[dukelogan]

ok, but my argument against it is based mostly on how i feel it robs the spirit of our combat system and takes advantage of the rule requiring a lighter thrust to the grille. the argument on effectiveness is easy. i have no doubt that i can seriously injure someone with a wrap from a steel sword. none. i dont think i can do that with a punch from an axe to the body (and ive been told i can punch fairly hard). a punch to the face might be a bad thing but real damage? higher possibility than a body shot but im not convinced.

the argument about what was done in period contests is certainly one that we can examine but you, i, and everyone else in the sca knows that what we do isnt medieval combat. its a modern sport with medieval flair. i would like to see it become more medieval but that is a long long process.


unpadded polearms suck, just oh by the way, because they dont even look like a medieval weapon. they have no more success against me than a proper looking polearm so my dislike of them has nothing to do with being hit by them. they just look like a peasants stick used to knock nuts out of trees.

regards
logan

My [possibly unclear] point about the wrap shot wasn't that it didn't work in SCA combat but that it DID work in SCA combat in spite of the fact that it has no historical basis. The argument against the axe punch was that it had no historical basis, at least as far as I read it. If we wanted to get into an argument about whether an axe punch would work in real combat vs. whether a wrap shot would work in real combat, we can, but my contention remains that it is silly to be against an axe punch (or whatever ahistorical practice you disfavor) because it has no historical basis, and yet be in favor of a wrap shot (or whatever ahistorical practice you favor) in spite of its lack of historical basis. The SCA should either categorically allow stuff that works in SCA combat regardless of its historical accuracy, or categorically deny anything in SCA combat that has no historical accuracy. Supporting one ahistorical aspect and condemning another merely because (editorial you) don't like it is an untenable position to take. I can understand why Alaric doesn't personally like the greatsword being held upside down, but since I know he throws wrap shots, I don't have a whole lot of sympathy.

For instance, personally I think unpadded polearms are a blight on the face of the SCA because they have no historical relation to their supposed ancestors. They move too fast for the effect they have due to the lack of mass at the end of the polearm, and yet they are fast gaining popularity. Do I like them? Not for their historical value, no. I like them for their potential tactical value but Atlantia doesn't use them. Do I find them historically inaccurate? Yes. But do I therefore go out and crusade against them because of their historical inaccuracy? No. Somebody besides me decided that they work within the context of the SCA, and I have to live with it or find something else to do.

And for those of you who are clever enough to read this and say "well, he favors something that has no historical value, and disfavors something that has no historical value, so where does that leave him?" The answer is: pretty much in the middle of the SCA. But I don't go out and try to get rid of a thing I don't like. I leave it alone and let time decide whether it's a good thing or a bad thing. If it's a bad thing there will be ample evidence in short order. If not, it obviously wasn't worth crusading against to begin with.

As for worrying about whether the axe punch would land hard enough in a tourney to the face OR the body - I'm willing to find out. If it simply isn't effective, it will die a quick death.

JB

jonathan here is the problem with your argument.

comparing historic technique to sca sport combat is nothing more than an interesting study since sca sport combat is its own form of martial art. stephan hands assertion that in "real" combat a wrap shot is folly is a weak support when taking in the context of sca sport combat. in sca sport combat a wrap does, in fact, work. stephans one time experience with an sca fighter attempting a wrap is hardly solid evidence against its effectiveness especially considering the apparent lack of stability of his opponent.

the problem with the punch to the grille with a hand axe that many people have is that it goes against the spirit of our combat form. unless, and until, we move forward and go to full force face thrusts there will always be that issue. we deliver and expect full force thrusts to the body but so much less to the face. this leads to potentially sloppy and cheap technique and makes certain actions, while "legal", present themselves as magic bullets (like nuclear arrows).

now whether or not a punch to the face with a hand axe would end a contest at arms is one that cant really be answered. i would put money on that it wouldnt.

regards
logan

[blackbow]

See, that's the thing...without proof one way or the other it's all guesswork. I don't think you can injure somebody with a wrap to the torso or leg, provided they're wearing chainmail over padding. As you stated awhile back, the back of the neck is another critter. But if we start taking shots (or dictating what shots can be thrown, which is the same thing) based on what we THINK the result would be, we'll have an even bigger mess than we do now.

Edit: how does a wrap shot not rob the spirit of the combat system in the same way? I should be allowed to punch your shoulder with my shield, or any one of half a dozen other things, if you were to try a wrap shot.

Who wants to donate chainmail and an axe and etc? I'll buy the pork shoulder. Logan can cook it afterwards.

JB

ok, but my argument against it is based mostly on how i feel it robs the spirit of our combat system and takes advantage of the rule requiring a lighter thrust to the grille. the argument on effectiveness is easy. i have no doubt that i can seriously injure someone with a wrap from a steel sword. none. i dont think i can do that with a punch from an axe to the body (and ive been told i can punch fairly hard). a punch to the face might be a bad thing but real damage? higher possibility than a body shot but im not convinced.

the argument about what was done in period contests is certainly one that we can examine but you, i, and everyone else in the sca knows that what we do isnt medieval combat. its a modern sport with medieval flair. i would like to see it become more medieval but that is a long long process.


unpadded polearms suck, just oh by the way, because they dont even look like a medieval weapon. they have no more success against me than a proper looking polearm so my dislike of them has nothing to do with being hit by them. they just look like a peasants stick used to knock nuts out of trees.

regards
logan

My [possibly unclear] point about the wrap shot wasn't that it didn't work in SCA combat but that it DID work in SCA combat in spite of the fact that it has no historical basis. The argument against the axe punch was that it had no historical basis, at least as far as I read it. If we wanted to get into an argument about whether an axe punch would work in real combat vs. whether a wrap shot would work in real combat, we can, but my contention remains that it is silly to be against an axe punch (or whatever ahistorical practice you disfavor) because it has no historical basis, and yet be in favor of a wrap shot (or whatever ahistorical practice you favor) in spite of its lack of historical basis. The SCA should either categorically allow stuff that works in SCA combat regardless of its historical accuracy, or categorically deny anything in SCA combat that has no historical accuracy. Supporting one ahistorical aspect and condemning another merely because (editorial you) don't like it is an untenable position to take. I can understand why Alaric doesn't personally like the greatsword being held upside down, but since I know he throws wrap shots, I don't have a whole lot of sympathy.

For instance, personally I think unpadded polearms are a blight on the face of the SCA because they have no historical relation to their supposed ancestors. They move too fast for the effect they have due to the lack of mass at the end of the polearm, and yet they are fast gaining popularity. Do I like them? Not for their historical value, no. I like them for their potential tactical value but Atlantia doesn't use them. Do I find them historically inaccurate? Yes. But do I therefore go out and crusade against them because of their historical inaccuracy? No. Somebody besides me decided that they work within the context of the SCA, and I have to live with it or find something else to do.

And for those of you who are clever enough to read this and say "well, he favors something that has no historical value, and disfavors something that has no historical value, so where does that leave him?" The answer is: pretty much in the middle of the SCA. But I don't go out and try to get rid of a thing I don't like. I leave it alone and let time decide whether it's a good thing or a bad thing. If it's a bad thing there will be ample evidence in short order. If not, it obviously wasn't worth crusading against to begin with.

As for worrying about whether the axe punch would land hard enough in a tourney to the face OR the body - I'm willing to find out. If it simply isn't effective, it will die a quick death.

JB

jonathan here is the problem with your argument.

comparing historic technique to sca sport combat is nothing more than an interesting study since sca sport combat is its own form of martial art. stephan hands assertion that in "real" combat a wrap shot is folly is a weak support when taking in the context of sca sport combat. in sca sport combat a wrap does, in fact, work. stephans one time experience with an sca fighter attempting a wrap is hardly solid evidence against its effectiveness especially considering the apparent lack of stability of his opponent.

the problem with the punch to the grille with a hand axe that many people have is that it goes against the spirit of our combat form. unless, and until, we move forward and go to full force face thrusts there will always be that issue. we deliver and expect full force thrusts to the body but so much less to the face. this leads to potentially sloppy and cheap technique and makes certain actions, while "legal", present themselves as magic bullets (like nuclear arrows).

now whether or not a punch to the face with a hand axe would end a contest at arms is one that cant really be answered. i would put money on that it wouldnt.

regards
logan

[dukelogan]

sorry, i thought i had responded to this but received another request for an explaination. so here goes:

i take a 2" leather strap and place it 1/8" over the edge of the spear haft. i then drill four small holes throught the leather, then one wall of the spear haft, then through the other wall. now i stitch sinew through the holes to secure the leather to the haft.

i then fill the end of the spear haft (about an inch) with hot glue to encase the sinew. i use hot glue to secure the leather to itself as i wrap it around the end of the spear haft to the minimum thickness of the head and cut the leather. so, now you have a 2" tall leather blocki wrapped, and glued, around the end of the spear haft. i then glue a plastic cap from a 5 gallon canola oil container to the top of the leather like it would be screwed down (flat side faces enemy).

now i add my padding disks (i think its four) and these too are glued lightly together. i make a a basic asterisk out of double fold bias tape * and place it over the padding and pull it gently down. i then tape around the ends of the bias tape locking them in place on the sides of the leather.

to finish it off i take some red garment weight leather and basically make a sock out of it that i slip over the asterisk and foam. this is taped down with black duct tape and the haft spray painted black (im one of those black and red kinda guys ). the red leather gives me my marked striking surface as well as giving the head some grip on the target and some extra protection. the spear is light enough that i can hold it one handed from the very end and fight with it. its still in great overall shape 10 years later but is, technically, illegal because i didnt put a plastic cap on the end.

the plastic cap, by the way, has a much greater chance of pushing through the foam padding used than the system i employ. the plastic cap i use cant shatter (like pvc does) and its way too thick to ever consider pushing the haft through. the haft is essentially a solid 3" wide head anyway.

hope that makes sense.

logan

on the same token my spear head construction isnt legal since it doesnt incorporate a pvc cap on the end of the shaft. mine is far superior to that design but the fact that it doesnt have the required pvc cap makes it illegal. mine is safer, stronger, less prone to failure, and transfers all of the wieght of the shaft evenly unlike the small diameter pvc cap. that is one rule that should be rewritten to allow better safer technology without making that technology illegal because of strict perameters.

regards
logan

How do you make yours? I'm very curious.

JP

[Skutai]

ok, but my argument against it is based mostly on how i feel it robs the spirit of our combat system and takes advantage of the rule requiring a lighter thrust to the grille.

Maybe I missed something re: punching with an axe, but it's not technically a thrust, is it? The rules for combat demand a different level of telling blow for thrusts, but also have specific requirements for thrusting tips. The edge of an axe is the same as the edge of a sword.

[blackbow]

Personally I never thought of it as a thrust. 2 of the kills I got with it last Crown were body blows, and 1 kill was a face by simple virtue of the fact that it was open. But none of the kill shots were what I'd consider light.

That said, I can see why Logan would worry that people would take it as a thrust and deliver it as a thrust (i.e. the equivalent of "tag"), simply because it's padded, and not a normal striking surface as we're used to seeing it. But that's an education thing, not a rules thing.

JB

ok, but my argument against it is based mostly on how i feel it robs the spirit of our combat system and takes advantage of the rule requiring a lighter thrust to the grille.

Maybe I missed something re: punching with an axe, but it's not technically a thrust, is it? The rules for combat demand a different level of telling blow for thrusts, but also have specific requirements for thrusting tips. The edge of an axe is the same as the edge of a sword.

[dukelogan]

huh. i think youre right and it shouldnt be considered a thrust. i guess i was only thinking of what would happen if i were to punch someone in the grille with one of these things....... hard.

that would certainly increase my renoun as a baby eating typical atlantian thug duke. (an even greater evil than odo and his baby eating recipie book)

in that context though i would worry about the amount of force delivered. most of us fighter types are big goons. a properly thrown punch has almost no give. unlike hitting someone to the grill with a full, hard, swing of a polearm or greatsword the is little area for the force to go but straight through a punch (jab). i dont mind the risk of injury myself.

so, i guess i dont have as much of an issue with the technique as long as it is delivered with great intent.



regards
logan

ok, but my argument against it is based mostly on how i feel it robs the spirit of our combat system and takes advantage of the rule requiring a lighter thrust to the grille.

Maybe I missed something re: punching with an axe, but it's not technically a thrust, is it? The rules for combat demand a different level of telling blow for thrusts, but also have specific requirements for thrusting tips. The edge of an axe is the same as the edge of a sword.

[justus]

The blade of an axe is a BLADE, not a thrusting tip.

Body shots with the blade of an axe, whether swung or punched, must impact with the same force as a sword blow.

There is a deceptive thing about punching with the axe to the body. When I lay into someone’s shoulder with the blade of my axe on the punch, they do something that they do not do when I strike them with a sword, they move backward.

“Surely that was a good blow, they actually moved backward!â€Â

[justus]

That is what I get for taking too long in a post. Logan, Your post came in while I was writing...


-Justus

[Skutai]

Presumably the axe has some give, if it adheres to the mass weapon rules. Of course, if the hand that is holding the axe prevents it from compressing somehow then you've got a problem.

[justus]

The ½ inch of progressive give required on the striking surface of a weapon is a non issue here.
The punch is a low velocity, high movement strike where the danger is the distance the target, (your head) moves when I hit and follow through with my 2 foot long arm.

The foam is there to take a little off of the hard impact delivered by a heavier mass weapon, and presmably prevent pole arms from breaking collar bones and forearms.

Whether it is effective, or even a good idea is another thread.

-Justus

[Duke Gunnar]

When I consider the amount of damage that can be caused by a set of brass knuckles, or even a roll of quarters held in the fist, I have to conclude that a punch to the face with an ax blade would end a fight. It may or may not actually kill someone, but I think there is ample evidence to suggest there is a very good chance of incapacitating an opponent. There was in infamous buffet incident in Trimaris some years ago in which a punch to the face cracked the orbit of the eye, and sent the new knight to the hospital, I hate to think what would have happened if the punch had been delivered with the weight of an ax head held in the hand.

[St. George]

Supporting one ahistorical aspect and condemning another merely because (editorial you) don't like it is an untenable position to take. I can understand why Alaric doesn't personally like the greatsword being held upside down, but since I know he throws wrap shots, I don't have a whole lot of sympathy.

JB,

You are making the supposition that I think that the "swords" that we use are swords, which I don't believe for an instant. They are clubs. I consider SCA fighting to be a behourd constest, and not a sword fight. This is also consistent with why I don't feel that we should "fall down dead" as we don't (at least we shouldn't) die in such contests.

I believe that our techniques are very solid for clubs, and would likely also work for maces, which is what I would actually carry if I were suddenly forced into real combat, and I would hazard a guess I would be able to work very well with.

I don't like greatswords beig held upside down for several reasons, the biggest probably being that it just looks goofy.

The second being that I think that the way we judge thrusts, in comparison to strikes, is very different. With or without padding on the "thrusting tip" I think that a lot of thrusts are much weaker than the other strikes that we take as telling blows. When I get hit with what I think is clearly a good thrust I gladly accept it, but I hate getting whined at by someone who touches me in the leg with a thrust and complains that I didn't take it.

Because of our current rule set, we have different levels of "good" for thrusts. I feel that because many people have gotten used to a light face thrust, that many of them (not all) have a reaction that expects a lighter thrust to be good to other target areas. This may not be their intention, but I think it happens. Because of this, I think that these sorts of thrusts weaken the game in several areas.

I also think that the measure of the game is in matched weapons forms, and when possible I try to compare myself in this fashion to my foes. In Crown, when going for the overall win, I bring my best weapons form to the field, so even if I don't enjoy it, I understand if someone wants to bring out two weapon or pole against my sword and shield. In other tournaments, and practices, when I am there to compare myself to my opponents in each individual fight, I match weapons if possible, and if not suggest we wait until a later date when we can.

So that is part of why I don't like these weapons.

Alaric

[blackbow]

Alaric:

very well put. ...behourd is just a fancy word for "sport" btw.

I will (hopefully!) close out my thoughts on the whole thing with this:

1. I promise I'll never whine if you don't take my thrust. I won't even whine if you don't take an axe punch.
1a. I've stopped listening to (and trying to please) whiners. You should too. You might not live longer but you'll have a whole lot more fun along the way.

2. Greatsword upside down may look goofy to you (me too!) but there is at least an appreciable fraction of the society that is able to be effective with it that way.

3. I would therefore suggest that if you run into somebody that you want to match weapons with and they have an upside down greatsword, you bring the combination of two weapons that you best believe fits the situation (2 swords, sword/dagger, sword/short spear, whatever), and not worry about whether your two weapons exactly matches his two weapons. I do it all the time. Otherwise you'll go nuts. Same thing with a greatsword fight - if my opponent brings a 6' greatsword and I don't have one, I'll try to find a middle ground, or borrow somebody else's 6' greatsword, but if it's a 3-man barrier tourney and I have a spear, and you don't, well, you shoulda brought a spear. I'll match the weapons FORM with my opponent in any one-on-one competition if they want me to (i.e., great weapon, polearm, 2 weapon), but I won't try to EXACTLY match their form unless I happen to have it handy. But I draw the line at matching in melee; it's not my job to match weapons in melee, it's my job to win.

JB

Supporting one ahistorical aspect and condemning another merely because (editorial you) don't like it is an untenable position to take. I can understand why Alaric doesn't personally like the greatsword being held upside down, but since I know he throws wrap shots, I don't have a whole lot of sympathy.

JB,

You are making the supposition that I think that the "swords" that we use are swords, which I don't believe for an instant. They are clubs. I consider SCA fighting to be a behourd constest, and not a sword fight. This is also consistent with why I don't feel that we should "fall down dead" as we don't (at least we shouldn't) die in such contests.

I believe that our techniques are very solid for clubs, and would likely also work for maces, which is what I would actually carry if I were suddenly forced into real combat, and I would hazard a guess I would be able to work very well with.

I don't like greatswords beig held upside down for several reasons, the biggest probably being that it just looks goofy.

The second being that I think that the way we judge thrusts, in comparison to strikes, is very different. With or without padding on the "thrusting tip" I think that a lot of thrusts are much weaker than the other strikes that we take as telling blows. When I get hit with what I think is clearly a good thrust I gladly accept it, but I hate getting whined at by someone who touches me in the leg with a thrust and complains that I didn't take it.

Because of our current rule set, we have different levels of "good" for thrusts. I feel that because many people have gotten used to a light face thrust, that many of them (not all) have a reaction that expects a lighter thrust to be good to other target areas. This may not be their intention, but I think it happens. Because of this, I think that these sorts of thrusts weaken the game in several areas.

I also think that the measure of the game is in matched weapons forms, and when possible I try to compare myself in this fashion to my foes. In Crown, when going for the overall win, I bring my best weapons form to the field, so even if I don't enjoy it, I understand if someone wants to bring out two weapon or pole against my sword and shield. In other tournaments, and practices, when I am there to compare myself to my opponents in each individual fight, I match weapons if possible, and if not suggest we wait until a later date when we can.

So that is part of why I don't like these weapons.

Alaric

[blackbow]

Justus: BTW If you can track him down (you live near the RTP area right?) Daniel bought a viking bearded axe at the Ren Faire (don't take the source into consideration when you see it) that would end your theoretically allowing anybody to punch you in the chest with it. It's about the same size as your SCA version. If I can get him to loan it to somebody who's bringing it to ToC or Crown I'll arrange it. Having held it and etc I can safely say without a shred of doubt that if anybody were to punch somebody in the chest with it, it would at the very least crack ribs. It MIGHT not do much to the softer body cavity area; I'm truthfully not sure. Anything with bone in it, though, is toast.

Regards,

Jonathan Blackbow

[quote="justus"] Effectiveness against real armor? Honestly that is another topic all together, and would cast doubt on many of the shots we throw. But I can tell you this, I have a chain hauberk, and an axe, I would let you hit me in the chest with a punch, but I would never let you hit me in the face with that same axe, “Light chain drapeâ€Â