Future of SCA fighting

[Aaron]

My daughter has more strength than some authorized heavy fighters. If an adult can break something, more than likely she can. And that's from experience seeing her break things.

-Aaron

[co10Broek]

The argument which was put forward to me was that most youth under the age of 12 did have have enough muscular development to handle the heavier blades. In fact in some kingdoms what I consider a regression has actually occurred the kids use plastic foils. I cringe every time I see those.

J-M

[Maeryk]

The argument which was put forward to me was that most youth under the age of 12 did have have enough muscular development to handle the heavier blades. In fact in some kingdoms what I consider a regression has actually occurred the kids use plastic foils. I cringe every time I see those.

J-M

BUT! It's for the CHILDREN man!

[Aaron]

The argument which was put forward to me was that most youth under the age of 12 did have have enough muscular development to handle the heavier blades. In fact in some kingdoms what I consider a regression has actually occurred the kids use plastic foils. I cringe every time I see those.

J-M

BUT! It's for the CHILDREN man!

Maeryk! Stop ruining the SCA!

[Amanda M]

Isabella, are the foils and epees still legal for youth rapier in Atenveldt?

Atlantia went to heavy rapier before I joined. Rather than outlawing foils and epees, Atlantia went to heavy rapier "default." That meant, I gather from old posts on the Atlantian rapier e-list, that if two opponents in a tournament were both authorized in heavy rapier, then they were required to fight their bout with heavy rapiers. Heavy rapiers were eventually made the "standard" for melees. Epees have been phased out as adult training weapons; new adult fencers, like my husband, are trained directly on heavy rapiers. When I authorized 3 years ago, I authorized in epee as well as heavy rapier because I was told that an epee authorization might be useful at some out-of-kingdom events. However, since epees aren't being used at any of the events I attend in my kingdom, I donated my epee to the youth fencing program, and I won't renew the epee authorization when my card expires next year.

Epees and foils are still legal (and required) for Atlantian youth rapier. Youth fencers may not use a heavy rapier until they're old enough to train as adults (I believe).

I am not familiar with the youth rules enough to say with authority however I have sparred with a number of youth fighters ranging from the age of ten to their teens and I have never seen a 'light' rapier on the field, ever, in Atenveldt and I've been playing for almost ten years now. They always used the same kinds of blades the adults did.

[Amanda M]

So you want something that some people enjoy to be eliminated? Interesting.

Fwiw I was just trying to be informative.

[Dante di Pietro]

Some places give kids under 16 epees or foils because the weight of heavier blades can be too much for them and there's a concern about tendinitis, muscle growth, etc..

AFAIK, anywhere that has banned light rapier has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with authenticity and appearance. Heavy rapiers are *safer* in regards to breaks, but it doesn't make epees *unsafe*. Epees are, however, not at all like swords, and so we've left them behind.

[Count Johnathan]

Awesome. I like seeing the rapier fighters contradict one another LOL.

Please continue.

[AaronCarter]

Notice how we can contradict eachother, hva a discussion, disagree, and still not degrade to name calling and chalenges to fight it out.

I guess it comes with refinement.

[MJBlazek]

or control

[Baron Alcyoneus]

(And the marriage to an outsider should be banned too. It seems to drag people away in huge numbers )

GrimR

Mixed marriages are bad.

[Baron Alcyoneus]

The argument which was put forward to me was that most youth under the age of 12 did have have enough muscular development to handle the heavier blades. In fact in some kingdoms what I consider a regression has actually occurred the kids use plastic foils. I cringe every time I see those.

J-M

Can they handle baseball bats?

[Count Johnathan]

Lack of aggression.

[LOGOS]

I apologize for the misquote. I was thinking about melee and how C&T melee would let you simulate some of the big city brawls and feuds. You could have longswords, sideswords, rapiers, bucklers, rotellas, crossbows....It would be righteous fun.

Good luck with that....

[Maeryk]

The argument which was put forward to me was that most youth under the age of 12 did have have enough muscular development to handle the heavier blades. In fact in some kingdoms what I consider a regression has actually occurred the kids use plastic foils. I cringe every time I see those.

J-M

Can they handle baseball bats?

Sure.. three swings, and then run, or sit. Not half an hour of holding it straight out with tip control.

[Finnacan]

Lack of aggression.

Well, yeah, for good reason. Rattan levels of aggression can get you dead real quick in C&T and rapier.

Now drive, that is another matter. Drive is steady; unrelenting, but steady.

Aggression often leads to a lack of control, which is anathema to all involved. Aggression has to be tempered.


You mention once picking up a rapier and no one wanting to fight you except another heavy,... I wouldn't be surprised to learn it was because you were seen as dangerous and too flippant about the sport. I'm not saying that happened, I wasn't there, I'm just saying I wouldn't be surprised... because I have seen it before.

I have a friend, a Knight here in Ansteorra, who was far too aggressive with the rapier when he started, and the few who did face him killed him real quick, usually while breaking their wrists and backing up for fear of skewering the guy and having their blades bent to failure.
He was, in his own words, like a chimp with a loaded gun.
After a few sessions, he came to realize that he was being unsafe and that raging at the opponent opened him up to all sorts of attacks.
He also learned he was perceived as disrespective of the sport. That one troubled him, because he admitted he had approached rapier with a grin and a roll of the eyes, yet he despised that sort of disregard when he saw it on the heavy list.
He told me he learned three things; how to read opponents better on both fields, to approach all things with the humility his belt required and that rapier bruises go deep and last a long time.

[Count Johnathan]

I fully agree that aggression was a factor when they saw me fight. However I was very much in control and very aware of the force levels needed or lack thereof so that I didn't skewer my friend. I also had the utmost of confidence in my opponent and knew that he also was not attempting to stick the blade through me.

Aggression does not mean lack of control or finesse. Both are required in order for a "fight" to be competative.

Much of the rapier fighting I have witnessed in the SCA looks a lot like slow and gentle practice. It does not look like fighting to me. Certainly there are some great fencers who dominate and are exciting to watch but for the most part it has been lacking in that department. That's why I don't do it and do not intend to. C&T also suffers from this issue. Rattan allows me to fight full speed and full force which CANNOT be done with blades without some very protective armor.

[St. George]

You knowing or feeling that you are in control is different from other people, especially those not used to seeing a controlled devastating attack, knowing the difference.

The divide that exists in heavy fighting, with some people playing a very hard game, and others wanting to play light, also exists in rapier, it is just that the numbers are skewed in the opposite way.

g-

[Count Johnathan]

I agree.

[Dauyd]

From your description, it sounds like you showed up for the event, saw there were no other heavy fighters, and wanted to fight rapier.

If so, might the issue have been that you weren't authorized? There are rules about that kind of stuff.

[Tibbie Croser]

I've been authorized in rapier for just a little over 3 years in Atlantia. When I've asked the senior fencers about calibration/force levels, the answer I've always heard is that the opponents in a bout negotiate the force levels. If two people agree to play hard, that's fine. If one person wants to play hard and one person wants to play light, it's OK to adjust the force down to the lower level. It's always OK to ask someone to dial down the force level in rapier. It is considered good manners to apologize spontaneously for a "gack," that is, an overly hard hit. It is considered good manners for the other person to accept that apology with goodwill. In Atlantia, we have a number of dukes, counts, and knights who enjoy themselves in both the heavy and rapier lists and don't seem to mind the difference in force levels between the two.

[St. George]

I've been authorized in rapier for just a little over 3 years in Atlantia. When I've asked the senior fencers about calibration/force levels, the answer I've always heard is that the opponents in a bout negotiate the force levels. If two people agree to play hard, that's fine. If one person wants to play hard and one person wants to play light, it's OK to adjust the force down to the lower level. It's always OK to ask someone to dial down the force level in rapier. It is considered good manners to apologize spontaneously for a "gack," that is, an overly hard hit. It is considered good manners for the other person to accept that apology with goodwill. In Atlantia, we have a number of dukes, counts, and knights who enjoy themselves in both the heavy and rapier lists and don't seem to mind the difference in force levels between the two.

Here's my problem with fencing summed up in this paragraph.

It isn't that I may hit too hard it is that the level of calibration fluctuates so much from combatant to combatant one's 6 is another's 10. Where the power level in heavy combat seems to be relatively consistent, it remains (at least in my experience) inconsistent in rapier.

Just as importantly, the "sorry" apparently doesn't matter in rapier. It has been my experience that if someone says, "Too hard", you are immediately swarmed over by marshalls and blamed for hitting too hard, and warned.

In my experience, I can go from hitting one person at a 10 in one round, and then with a 5 in the next and the person I hit with a 5 will cry. I don't mean be upset, I mean literally cry, tell me I am evil, and I hit them way too hard.

This simply doesn't happen in heavy.

And let me point this out too, almost every time there has ever been an issue of that sort that I have seen or been a part of it has been with a woman. I simply think that they have a different level of expectation both for how to play the game, and what a "hit" is.

g-

[Maeryk]

I fully agree that aggression was a factor when they saw me fight. However I was very much in control and very aware of the force levels needed or lack thereof so that I didn't skewer my friend. I also had the utmost of confidence in my opponent and knew that he also was not attempting to stick the blade through me.

Aggression does not mean lack of control or finesse. Both are required in order for a "fight" to be competative.

Much of the rapier fighting I have witnessed in the SCA looks a lot like slow and gentle practice. It does not look like fighting to me. Certainly there are some great fencers who dominate and are exciting to watch but for the most part it has been lacking in that department. That's why I don't do it and do not intend to. C&T also suffers from this issue. Rattan allows me to fight full speed and full force which CANNOT be done with blades without some very protective armor.

That's because when you can actually stab the shit out of someone, they tend not to come flying in balls out.

It's a different style of fighting, as Rattan has eliminated all cuts and basically all stabs and only made percussive force the rule of the day. (yeah, I know, we can thrust.. but with mushroom tips and skipping.. it's not a huge part of the form).

when you have to worry about EVERY part of the other guys sword, it's an entirely different game.

[Baron Alcyoneus]

The primary difference is due to type of combat being approximated. Armored or unarmored? In armored, we are pretending to defeat the armor, although we likely wouldn't be. BUT if we were doing unarmored combat with our rattan, with the blows we deliver it would look like a medieval manuscript painted by monks with body parts laying, and flying all over the place. Our opponent would suffer "catastrophic failure" of systems and immediately cease to be any sort of threat, except to our footing as he leaked slippery blood all over the place.

In "fencing" they are simulating unarmored combat, and it simply doesn't take that much to end the fight. Take a look at this video:

http://www.youtube.com/user/janchodkiew ... MkGF3EqUjU

He doesn't use much of what we call "proper body mechanics" (his heel almost remains on the ground! ), just a little snap, not even a really fast one, and he cuts through the gambeson, the skin, the muscle, and into the bone.

When it takes that little, you start playing a lot more conservative in your movements.

[Finnacan]

So it is what many have long suspected.

The primary motive behind those that deride steel play?
It is simply the love of bashing and wrapping, snapping and banging and disregarding everything else as inferior, weaker, less manly, wimpy, what have you... with knighthood to add weight to the sense of superiority, history be damned.

There are plenty who play rattan and some who play both that don't feel this superior and dismissive attitude, but those who do seem to boil every argument down to pain tolerance or badassery.


To be brutally honest, I think rattan is an excellent battle simulator, and steel is an excellent format for historic swordplay. Neither is perfect yet, but each field improves every year.

I should think that rattan will always have a place for this very reason - full speed engagement at high calibration. Charging towards hundreds across a battlefield will always be seriously cool.

I should think that steel will always have a place for this very reason - it provides the history buff a tactile chance at medieval and renaissance swordwork. Taking a sidestep and knowing you put a blade through the eyesocket of an armed opponent will always be seriously cool.

Newcomers see steel and many say it looks more real to them - so you can see how some might conclude it is superior.
I don't know if that is altogether true.

But how does one look at rattan and decide it is far more important? More fun, okay, personal taste wins out but important?

I can't help but wonder if this is motivated not by a love of rattan, (seriously, who watched Conan, Highlander or Excaliber and dreamt of rattan?) but by the tattered remnant of a much younger and naive game that said knighthood, chivalry and royalty were the children of rattan, and wasn't wise enough to consider the future now bearing down on it?

[Count Johnathan]

I never said fighting with steel was weaker, less manly, wimpy, what have you.

It is in the performance of the wielder that makes it so (if that is the case) not the use of steel. This is also the same as far as superiority is concerned.

Nor did I say history be damned. I accept that rattan combat is its own beast and has some vast differences from actual medieval combat as well as modern combat with steel weaponry.

Rattan is its own game and has been the base of our organizations structure from very early on. It is what we use to determine our rank and structure. It's what makes the SCA unique. That is why it is and always shall remain important to those of us who find such joy in it.

[St. George]

So it is what many have long suspected.

The primary motive behind those that deride steel play?
It is simply the love of bashing and wrapping, snapping and banging and disregarding everything else as inferior, weaker, less manly, wimpy, what have you... with knighthood to add weight to the sense of superiority, history be damned.

There are plenty who play rattan and some who play both that don't feel this superior and dismissive attitude, but those who do seem to boil every argument down to pain tolerance or badassery.


To be brutally honest, I think rattan is an excellent battle simulator, and steel is an excellent format for historic swordplay. Neither is perfect yet, but each field improves every year.

I should think that rattan will always have a place for this very reason - full speed engagement at high calibration. Charging towards hundreds across a battlefield will always be seriously cool.

I should think that steel will always have a place for this very reason - it provides the history buff a tactile chance at medieval and renaissance swordwork. Taking a sidestep and knowing you put a blade through the eyesocket of an armed opponent will always be seriously cool.

Newcomers see steel and many say it looks more real to them - so you can see how some might conclude it is superior.
I don't know if that is altogether true.

But how does one look at rattan and decide it is far more important? More fun, okay, personal taste wins out but important?

I can't help but wonder if this is motivated not by a love of rattan, (seriously, who watched Conan, Highlander or Excaliber and dreamt of rattan?) but by the tattered remnant of a much younger and naive game that said knighthood, chivalry and royalty were the children of rattan, and wasn't wise enough to consider the future now bearing down on it?

"F" no, that is about the dumbest thing I ever heard.

I don't play steel because I don't think that at the speed I want to play it isn't safe withe the gear that is available to most of us. Frankly I don't know that I would ever feel safe playing it.

Rattan offers me a safe simulator and a fun sport. That's what I accept it to be and I have a lot of fun doing it. At the same time, after 20 years of doing it, I know that if push came to shove, I would be able to handle myself reasonably well in a real combat, especially if I were in harness.

Steel, at least to the trained eye, looks just as BS as rattan does. When steel players play at full speed, and throwing one another around because they have the intent to kill one another (which will never happen) it is just another variation on a SPORT.

It is a sport played with different gear but just as fake. There are some differences which make it more real in some ways than the other fake sports have, but none are real examples of what really happened. They are all simulations, and in that respect they all fall short.

I won't be playing steel anytime soon, simply because I don't feel safe with it.

I don't feel safe with shafted combat archery either.

Notice I have a safety issue... If I feel something isn't safe I don't play it. Same reason I stopped playing football in college, I knew at some point I'd lose a knee or something.

And BTW don't ever think that I can't take that same sidestep with rattan and put someone's head into the ground. Oh wait, I've done that, and with a rattan simulator, and we had to help the guy off the field. Seems the technique worked.

g-

[raito]

George, I agree with you on fluctuating force levels. It is forbidden to use excessive force. And further, excessive force is defined (as hitting hard enough to make someone stop, even briefly). So how come these people who have been hit 'excessively' don't stop and have enough energy to yell and scream? (The odd thing here is that the C&T people are supposed to be using the same levels of force, but don't).

As for the plastic foils, they were made for (modern) 8 year olds. In that role, they're fine.

[Count Johnathan]

BTW I am currently and have been authorized for rapier in the sca for nearly as long as I have been fighting with rattan.

Just because I don't do it doesn't mean I don't know how.

Rapier and C&T do not allow me to fight the way I want to fight. Rattan allows me to use crippling and even deadly force with a very low risk of serious injury. If I struck a man with no helmet on the same way I strike my opponents in armor they would be severely incapacitated and very possibly dead. It's kind of sick I guess but I like that game.

[Finnacan]

Your Grace, I was stating I considered both to be "seriously cool" in their own way and that both had a real validity, in my opinion.

I was wondering how one could arrive at the conclusion that one was more important than the other.

I said I did not think it was absolutely true when some newer players state that they think steel is more real. It is a sport, a simulator currently being formed for historic sword styles.

I also concluded that status and rank potential were the only reason I could think that someone would decide rattan was more important. Plenty think it is more fun, but a few put it on a pedestal above all other things because it offers the chance of status.
Rattan is important, to me at least, it is the 'more' part that I'm having difficulty with.
I'm okay being wrong with that, but currently it appears that way to me.

And I've said WAY dumber things, so don't go thinkin' it can't get any worse.

And BTW don't ever think that I can't take that same sidestep with rattan and put someone's head into the ground. Oh wait, I've done that, and with a rattan simulator, and we had to help the guy off the field. Seems the technique worked.

g-

I won't think that. I was just describing a cool moment for many rapier fighters. I didn't say it didn't happen in rattan.

As for having to help the guy off the field, well, uh, good form. That'll show him.
You can't help it with the badassery, can you? It just sort of spills out while you type.

Just to be clear, I don't mind, just find it fascinating.

As for your concerns about safety, I believe they should be welcomed as a part of the entire process, no matter what the SCA does. I hold that sort of thinking in high regard.



Johnathan - Understood, and nah, I don't think it is sick. I'm well aware of how therapeutic it is to whale on a guy after a long work week, especially if he says "Good Bout!" afterwards.

[Dante di Pietro]

Here's my problem with fencing summed up in this paragraph

Based on ten years of very active fencing participation, I'm pretty sure that your experiences are not the norm. Calibration within kingdoms is very consistent, though it can vary between kingdoms. "Sorry" always works, except in rare, rare cases, and in those cases either the other person is being unreasonable and is often told as much, or the other person truly did something dangerous. "I'm sorry" is not adequate when the shot breaks someone's ribs, for example, which I have seen happen (and the woman with the broken ribs didn't cry, by the way).

Fencing has just as many goobs as armored: no more, and no less. Our goobs may be a different kind, but it's not a matter of which style has more or less crap to deal with, just which kind of crap is personally preferable. It's the same thing with the rules: I'm willing to make the tradeoff of lighter hits in exchange for full body targeting and steel weapons, whereas others aren't.

[Broadway]

Here's my problem with fencing summed up in this paragraph

Based on ten years of very active fencing participation, I'm pretty sure that your experiences are not the norm.

Based on my on again, off again fencing participation for the last 19 years, I'm pretty sure his experiences are completely and utterly the norm. So the norm its damn rediculous.

[St. George]

Based on ten years of very active fencing participation, I'm pretty sure that your experiences are not the norm.

I can assure you that it has been my regular experience in the 20 odd years I have been around fencing, including since it was an experimental form in Atlantia called SWASH (late 80's). It has actually been more accentuated since I have been a Knight, which has been a little over 12 years now.

"Sorry" always works, except in rare, rare cases, and in those cases either the other person is being unreasonable and is often told as much, or the other person truly did something dangerous. "I'm sorry" is not adequate when the shot breaks someone's ribs, for example, which I have seen happen (and the woman with the broken ribs didn't cry, by the way).

Sorry but no it doesn't. If someone is already pre-disposed towards a certain reaction, i.e. heavy fighters are mean, and then, after that person in a fencing melee chooses to advance in a line with others and then literally jumps on your sword as you thrust at them, the sword then hits harder than they are used to and they are startled by the blow, it is your BIG fault- and especially your big fault because you are a monster heavy fighter who just destroyed their innocent land o' fencing. There is no amount of sorry that you can give because you just proved that you are every bit the force of evil that they believed and told everyone you would be before the fight started (why are we letting the heavies play with us).

Fencing has just as many goobs as armored: no more, and no less. Our goobs may be a different kind, but it's not a matter of which style has more or less crap to deal with, just which kind of crap is personally preferable. It's the same thing with the rules: I'm willing to make the tradeoff of lighter hits in exchange for full body targeting and steel weapons, whereas others aren't.

You are right in some ways. I see a major problem in that there is a different expectation level in fencing from heavy akin to the difference between playing tackle and touch football. In tackle, you know you are going to get hit, sometimes lot harder than usual, but you know you are going to get hit. In two hand touch, people don't expect to get hit. Sometimes, they do though, and they get pissed simply because of the hit. Their expectation that "touch is safe, and I won't get hurt." So when they get shoved down, skin a knee, whatever, they are upset because their expectation is broken.

The difference in expectation is what causes the issues.

Some fencers don't expect to be "hit" at all- even though it is a combat sport (this boggles me), so when they do, they get upset

g-

[St. George]

As for having to help the guy off the field, well, uh, good form. That'll show him.
You can't help it with the badassery, can you? It just sort of spills out while you type.

Just to be clear, I don't mind, just find it fascinating.

As for your concerns about safety, I believe they should be welcomed as a part of the entire process, no matter what the SCA does. I hold that sort of thinking in high regard.

Badassery? That's funny.

I just wanted to make it clear for everyone who says that rattan is a bad simulator, or that proper technique can't be used in SCA combat that it isn't true.

g-

[Dante di Pietro]

There is no amount of sorry that you can give because you just proved that you are every bit the force of evil that they believed and told everyone you would be before the fight started (why are we letting the heavies play with us).

Ah, okay. Sure, I can see that being an issue. I don't see that mindset being all that prevalent but it probably stands out when it happens. There are probably as many people like this as there are armored fighters who cross over and do actually have calibration problems. Like I said, we have goobs on both sides.

You are right in some ways. I see a major problem in that there is a different expectation level in fencing from heavy akin to the difference between playing tackle and touch football. In tackle, you know you are going to get hit, sometimes lot harder than usual, but you know you are going to get hit. In two hand touch, people don't expect to get hit. Sometimes, they do though, and they get pissed simply because of the hit. Their expectation that "touch is safe, and I won't get hurt." So when they get shoved down, skin a knee, whatever, they are upset because their expectation is broken.

I would say it's more in the expectation of what *kinds* of hits will happen. A hockey player expects to get hit, as does a soccer player. A hockey player doesn't expect to get hit below the knees much, but a soccer player expects almost all of his hits to be there. I've had some bad bruises, chunks of skin ripped off, sliced open, etc., all in the normal course of things, and I accept that. I even got hit with a croquet mallet once (gently, thankfully!). I consider those to be more or less par for the course (minus the mallet).

The only issues I have ever had with armored crossovers have been one of two varieties, and these things are in no way limited to armored crossovers by any means. First, they have bad technique and punch with their sword to thrust. This ramps up power and simultaneously eliminates the ability to control the blow. Second, if they don't make the mental switch in calibration and ignore hits to the hands and knees because those aren't normal for them, or throw shots with a sword in their guts because they're expecting different sensory input.

I'd likely have similar problems if I fought in armor. Assuming I trained enough to learn decent technique and adequate power generation, I would probably have a hard time remembering at first not to target hands or knees, that I couldn't grab your weapon or shield if the situation allowed or do corps-a-corps, that I couldn't have 10 people attack 1, or that I'm supposed to get eye contact or something before I attack you in a melee. I would be a huge goob until I spent enough time doing it to retrain my habits.

Would you consider wrestling and judo to be a fair analogy? They both have similar goals and a lot of concepts in common, and judoka would likely make a decent wrestler right away, and vice versa, but a wrestler might not react well if the judoka went for an RNC instead of a half-nelson. Conversely, a wrestler at a judo practice might not understand why they're so mad that he keeps crossfacing them.