The Armour Archive

carlyle wrote:

Aaron wrote:The two trusting tips on the axe head can be very useful.

The top spike on the haft is sufficient. "Forking" with two points, especially given the already-comprimised dynamics of foam and rubber, only makes the weapon more unwieldy.

Aaron wrote:Once my pollaxe haft is on their weapon / arm, I just drive straight down into the ground and drive the thrusting tip into their arm. It should be effective. If I've extened beyond their head, I can yank back on my back arm and drive a thrust into the back of their head...hard to block, but so far I lack power doing it.

What you describe is exactly the "trick" I am trying to warn against. The lack of power may not be that you haven't grasped the technique, but that it is purely a "gumby" shot better suited to D&D adventures.

FWIW, Thrusting with the points of the bit are likely SCA-isms. I have found no evidence that this was ever done in history.

With regards... AoC

How do you figgure Carlyle, im not sure what weapon he is emulating but a weapon like an authentic Bec is covered with points, Hammer head, back spike, top spike, 2 side spikes and a but spike. These pointy bits are not just for decoration.
Mine is put togetehr to resemble a historical bec with all its available points.
Although i do not use spikes on the side of the head like some historical examples have.

Aaron wrote:Good Day Mr. Carlyle,

-Aaron

LOL.....

That would be Sir Alfred of Carlyle who I believe right now lives in England.

Next time we are debating something Alfred I will have to remember this...

I fight a 4.5ft Danish great Axe without the top thrust. I usually fight it against similar weapons (great swords, polearms, etc.) I have a little bit longer axe for wars and shields.

Many historical styles and tactics apply to SCA and some do not. The fact that the pole axe was a crushing weapon and there are several acts that you could do in period to out right hammer people does not mean you can do it in the SCA.

Vebrand

After looking at the tree photos....from my point of view your mechanics are all wrong. It appears to me that you have the wrong hand high on the polearm when you strike. Here is my 2 cents worth. Generally speaking when possible you want to have the same hip and shoulder forward when you strike..from the pictures it looks like you have the opposite hand high from the forward hip resulting in a cross wrist strike. Crossing your wrists is bad with a polearm for the same reason it's bad with a baseball bat (your hips work against you instead of with you) Assuming you are right handed, to generate power, stand right foot forward, left foot back and to the left. Keep your feet shoulder width apart. Grasp the polearm right hand on top about in a line with your jaw, and your left hand about even with your waist. When striking do not so much generate power from your arms as from your right hip. Your right arm does not need to fully extend when striking, as a result you can recover your polearm strike quicker then if you do it with yoru arms by simply snaping your hip and shoulder back. I fight pole arm from a box guard left foot forward, the pole arm straight up and down in a line with my left hip...(This is a defensive stance) One of the best strikes I know starts left foot forward, left hand down, right hand up (box guard). This effectivly makes a right hand flat snap imposible to land on you (other blows yes, a staight right hand flat snap no) To deliver a strike step forward diagonally with your right foot..putting you into the powerful right foot forward stance..then throw, using your hip, after you have completed the step and transfered your weight to your front right foot). This has the added advantage of changing the actual angle of your polearm strike and generating power into a now weaker leverage postion of your opponent. To recover after the strike, snap the right hip back. This keeps your polearm between you and your opponent to block, and allows you to re throw quickly as needed.

Axel

It appears to me that you have the wrong hand high on the polearm when you strike.

That’s oddly amusing. I’ve been training myself OUT of the old grip because it seemed ineffective. The old grip is certainly more comfortable and “naturalâ€Â

I was placing my left hand up, and my left leg back as a defensive and offensive measure.

With my left hand up, I’m throwing to their sword’s side rather than their shield side (if I’m facing a right-hander).

With your left hand high you expose your left forarm to the flat snap, that's why I keep it down and behind the haft

And, my left leg is not even close to being a target back there…and my right leg is covered by their shield.

Did that make sense? Sometimes my diction gets a bit muddled.

Yes it made sense..and puts you in the same stance I usually am except your axe head is on the left instead of the right.

To deliver a strike step forward diagonally with your right foot..putting you into the powerful right foot forward stance..then throw, using your hip, after you have completed the step and transfered your weight to your front right foot). This has the added advantage of changing the actual angle of your polearm strike and generating power into a now weaker leverage postion of your opponent. To recover after the strike, snap the right hip back. This keeps your polearm between you and your opponent to block, and allows you to re throw quickly as needed.

With the added step, don’t you telegraph quite a bit? I’ll have to think on this and try it out.

I don't find it so, additionally I have moved my weapon closer to him meaning the attack coming from my hips will be faster. I have killed many shieldmen from this position with a rising snap. Dropping the head of the glaive gets them to drop their shield especially if they are closing and then smack them in the head. Or cut their lead leg out from under them by shoulder feighting high, then hitting their lead leg.

Against a greatsword or polarm fighter this is especially effective as I have moved into a postion of power and leverage to power past their guard.

The advantage and leverage of this can be visually seen by standing left foot forward and right foot back in front of a pell then extend the polearm in front of you with the axe head the opponents shield side head as though you struck from this postion. While holding the polearm in that postion step diagonally forward with your right foot. You will see the impact point of the glave haft move from the side more towards the rear of the pell (or opponents great weapon haft) This radically changes the dynamics of the power transfer. Also you have moved your head about 6 to 8 inches to the right of where it was when you started the technique, so if they did throw at your head it's farther away form their planned impact point and if it lands could land light.

Additionally faking a butt spike before stepping in to freeze and or cause their shield to move down just prior to the attack will move their guard even more out of position.

Axel

Aaron wrote:

Alexander wrote:Which foot do you start off on? What I mean is, when you stand in your stance, is your left foot or your right foot forward?

Right foot forward now. I used to be left, but I'm trying to deprive my opponent of that target.

So I have my left hand up, right leg forward. Think of a left-handed baseball player.

-Aaron

Aaron !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
right foot forward, left hand leading on top is an invitation to turn every attack on the left leg or hip into a slam into your cup. In order to block you need to move your haft around your leading leg, and into a block faster than your opponent can slash
So - ancient knight (who loathes shields, and likes axes) speaking
For basic fighting against a right handed opponent, armed with sword and shield
Your right foot leads, your left foot is at a comfy angle (for me 45% with the heel of your left foot somewhat more than hip width behind your right foot, and about 3 inches to the left. knees bent at a comfy angle, not too deep or too high.
Figure out what a cubit is for you for me it is the distance from my closed fist (knuckles) to the point of my elbow. Your hands should almost never be more than one cubit apart, or you will start moving your arms like mr roboto slowing your attacks, and impeding your defense.
I generally like to hold hafted weapons with my leading hand at the midpoint of the haft, with my trailing hand about a cubit below. the haft is set to protect my left leg, hip, and lower torso. My leading hand generally comes to the center point of my chest slightly above the sternum.
If you are using a war hammer with a spike practice setting the weapon head at nose level on your opponent centered on his face, it gives you many usefull blocks, and will tend to keep his attention centered on what you are doing rather than on what he should do.
As has been mentioned already swing your hips into a blow when you're felling trees, or driving stakes. When you're fighting you should have your body positioned already to strike advance the weapon with your leading hand, guiding it onto your opponent. As late in the attack as is possible begin pulling back with your trailing hand, which will add a "snap" into the final impact your opponent receives

WMA wrote:… a weapon like an authentic Bec is covered with points, Hammer head, back spike, top spike, 2 side spikes and a but spike. These pointy bits are not just for decoration. Mine is put together to resemble a historical bec with all its available points. Although I do not use spikes on the side of the head like some historical examples have.

To my mind, weapon geometry alone is insufficient indication of how it might have been used. For example, if I understand the fechtbuchs at all, the kind of strike proposed would be countered by grappling long before the blow could be setup. This kind of speculation can be entertaining, but the combined evidence (or lack thereof) of iconographic or literary provenence (including the manuals extant), together with Aaron’s own experience of the strike's difficulty, appear to weigh against the theory that the bit was used in the fashion he describes.

As Vebrand implied, perhaps a more important consideration is that the simulated weapon inclusive of SCA legal thrusting tips on the points of the bit starts to work against you within the context of the sport. For example, the exaggerated blade requires a larger window for edge strikes. Also, in my experience, the points will not register a good cut, but they will tend to foul and snag on almost anything your opponent offers as a defense. I fought successfully with a single-bitted, two-handed “Danishâ€Â

carlyle wrote:

WMA wrote:… a weapon like an authentic Bec is covered with points, Hammer head, back spike, top spike, 2 side spikes and a but spike. These pointy bits are not just for decoration. Mine is put together to resemble a historical bec with all its available points. Although I do not use spikes on the side of the head like some historical examples have.

To my mind, weapon geometry alone is insufficient indication of how it might have been used. For example, if I understand the fechtbuchs at all, the kind of strike proposed would be countered by grappling long before the blow could be setup. This kind of speculation can be entertaining, but the combined evidence (or lack thereof) of iconographic or literary provenence (including the manuals extant), together with Aaron’s own experience of the strike's difficulty, appear to weigh against the theory that the bit was used in the fashion he describes.

As Vebrand implied, perhaps a more important consideration is that the simulated weapon inclusive of SCA legal thrusting tips on the points of the bit starts to work against you within the context of the sport. For example, the exaggerated blade requires a larger window for edge strikes. Also, in my experience, the points will not register a good cut, but they will tend to foul and snag on almost anything your opponent offers as a defense. I fought successfully with a single-bitted, two-handed “Danishâ€Â

mordreth wrote:As has been mentioned already swing your hips into a blow when you're felling trees, or driving stakes. When you're fighting you should have your body positioned already to strike advance the weapon with your leading hand, guiding it onto your opponent.

Now I'm lost. Everything I know about the best great weapon edge work is that the weapon is moved with the hip; it is merely "steered" with the hands. This applies almost univerally to bastard sword, maul, ax, greatsword, and glaive. The hands should never extend; the blow is executed by "closing" the arms into the body (keeping the elbows in). In my experience, the "chops" you appear to be describing are the slowest to recover, parry, or riposte out of ("circles beat lines; little circles beat bigger circles").

Is this just a limitation of the discussion group medium, or am I missing something (really, really) basic?

Alfred

Aaron what happens when you swing and miss?

I really didn't know.

So I just swung and missed (full power) to see what happens.

Left hand was up, left leg back.

The pollaxe head travels level through the plane where my opponent was (before they moved), the pollaxe head continues on, but automatically starts rising due to the presence of my left hand, and then it comes down really fast, straight down (with some amazing abdominal exposure on my part). I think the power adds as it swings.

Think of the same motion that you use with a sledgehammer driving a stake into the ground. If I miss, this is what happens -- it's the sledgehammer.

When I fought Great Sword that’s often what I did. Swing, miss deliberately and then use the momentum to just power down into their shield and drive them into the floor.

I also tried this with my longer pollaxes and I ended up smacking myself in the ribs with the butt spike (an embarrassing way to end a tournament…) or haft, and the return was incredibly slow.

But, with the short pollaxe, it seems to be a rather fast return, and that overhead shot could be sped up a lot, I think.

I will be inviting a friend who is a really good fighter over for the weekend and show him these postings and we’ll try everything out if he’s game. If so, I'll videotape it and either send out DVDs or ask someone on how to post video.

I’ll try all the suggestions.

I’m certain they all work, but comfort and personal body mechanics might play a part as well.

Thank you for your help,

-Aaron

mordreth wrote:Aaron !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
right foot forward, left hand leading on top is an invitation to turn every attack on the left leg or hip into a slam into your cup.

If it reaches there. The shot needs to travel nearly a foot further, while I hammer away at a strike a second...

I just figured moving the most popular target (my left leg) out of the way would help.

I admit I would rather avoid placing the family jewels there instead...but the plan is to have the weapon never reach there...

-Aaron

A friend pointed out that I've come across rather brash, rude and ignorant here.

Please accept my apologies for my boorish behavior. It was never my intention to offend.

I became wrapped up with defending my position when my original question was asking for advice on my position.

Questions like this shouldn’t be used for self-flattery, and I fell into the trap of pride.

Once again, please accept my apologies.

-Aaron

Aaron wrote:A friend pointed out that I've come across rather brash, rude and ignorant here.

Please accept my apologies for my boorish behavior. It was never my intention to offend.

I became wrapped up with defending my position when my original question was asking for advice on my position.

Questions like this shouldn’t be used for self-flattery, and I fell into the trap of pride.

Once again, please accept my apologies.

-Aaron

Rest assumred I did not find it so...especially here on the AA where stuff can easily desolve into name calling and flame wars...wait this isn't the off topic post is it

Axel

carlyle wrote:

mordreth wrote:As has been mentioned already swing your hips into a blow when you're felling trees, or driving stakes. When you're fighting you should have your body positioned already to strike advance the weapon with your leading hand, guiding it onto your opponent.

Now I'm lost. Everything I know about the best great weapon edge work is that the weapon is moved with the hip; it is merely "steered" with the hands. This applies almost univerally to bastard sword, maul, ax, greatsword, and glaive. The hands should never extend; the blow is executed by "closing" the arms into the body (keeping the elbows in). In my experience, the "chops" you appear to be describing are the slowest to recover, parry, or riposte out of ("circles beat lines; little circles beat bigger circles").

Is this just a limitation of the discussion group medium, or am I missing something (really, really) basic?

Alfred

Different strokes for different folks?
A lot of my style with pole arms comes from Mcclellans bayonet drill, and from a state defense manual showing proper form with the 1903-06 springfield with fixed bayonet
I operate on the theory that the arm is faster than the torso, so I will strike, and move rather than move nto my strike

Carlyle, i dont dare quote you as we will have quotes within quotes within quotes, my comment was in refrence to the weapon its self, its diff pointy bits, not about the pic of the fellow using it, I may have misunderstood you.
I thought you implied that butt spikes, and thrusting tips on items like becs were not functional, or more correctly lead to moves and attacks that were not authentic, but were more hollywood/conanesque

A simple illustration of how power comes from your hips and torso:

Hold your axe, greatsword, polearm (a broomstick will do) etc across the front of your body, arms completely relaxed and extended downward, left hand palm down on the haft, right hand palm up on the haft.

Now walk.

The natural movement of your stride (legs and hips) cause each end of your weapon to move forward with each step.

The progression from that to throwing effective and powerful shots will make itself apparant.

Left hand low also makes it much easier to block with the haft against your standard right handed shieldman. You can also more easily thrust around a shield using left hand low technique.

B

Aaron wrote:

mordreth wrote:Aaron !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
right foot forward, left hand leading on top is an invitation to turn every attack on the left leg or hip into a slam into your cup.

If it reaches there. The shot needs to travel nearly a foot further, while I hammer away at a strike a second...

I just figured moving the most popular target (my left leg) out of the way would help.

I admit I would rather avoid placing the family jewels there instead...but the plan is to have the weapon never reach there...

-Aaron

not a question of where your left leg is - I keep my left leg trailing most of the time, although not exclusively
The stance as you described it has your left leg trailing, left hand leading, with your weapon haft held on the exterior of your right leg, which leaves the arc from your left elbow to right knee open, and defended by either dipping the weapon head ( which for me throws the attack into my torso), shifting the haft across your body ( for me somewhat slow), or striking into your opponents weapon or right arm as they strike to foul the attack( which works well for me )

I operate on the theory that the arm is faster than the torso, so I will strike, and move rather than move nto my strike

I disagree.

I have found it is faster to throw and recover both single handed shots and 2 handed shots by using the hips instead of the arms because you do not need to withdraw your weapon to restrike. With a one handed weapon just turn your elbow as your hips come back or forward. With a two handed weapon you do not have to reel your arms back in after striking. All you need do is change the position of your arms/elbows here too as you shift your hips. Of course I tend to be in A range, or transitioning from B to A when I do this stuff. If you prefer to fight at farther distances you will need to extend your arms further as you strike thereby slowing the recovery and re-throw

Axel

With hafted, or polearms I tend to "break the stave about its quarters" and shift my hands from spot to spot rather than shifting my body around to move the weaopn head
Again a matter of personal prefernce and style

Aaron -- in a quarter century of SCA fighting, I've never had any trouble telling when I'd been hit by an axe. That might be different if I wore more rigid torso protection.

FWIW, Thrusting with the points of the bit are likely SCA-isms. I have found no evidence that this was ever done in history.

I was going to opine almost the opposite -- that those points on the top and bottom of the axe blade may have been quite useful in real life, but I don't think they work in SCA combat conventions.

That is: I don't think any SCA conventions recognize a "thrusting tip" that isn't mounted on the end of a stick of rattan (or a fiberglass spear). If you strike an SCA fighter with the blade or stab him with the thrusting tip on the end of the rattan, or with the buttspike, fine. But if you poke him with the "point" on top of the foam blade, or pull the lower "point" into him, I don't think there's anything in SCA combat conventions requiring him to call that as a thrust.

bedlam wrote:The natural movement of your stride (legs and hips) cause each end of your weapon to move forward with each step.

I can't quite tell if this is what Bedlam is intending to describe, but it is a common misconception among fighters that the power of a blow in motion comes from the side that is moving. The exercise he describes (if I understand it correctly) would appear to support this. As the fighter steps forward with his left foot, the left side of the weapon is pushed forward by the advancing hip -- and many have assumed that this is the natural end or side to strike from.

In reality, the power we draw from the hip to deliver a blow does not come from the advancing side, but from the "driving" side -- the foot that is not moving. For illustration, walk unencumbered while obseriving your natural arm swing. When your left foot advances, your right arm swings forward. Now, this has as much to do with balance as it does with power, but it is an indication of where the motive force for the step is actually coming from. It does not come from the moving foot, but from the still-planted foot pushing against the ground and rotating the hip opposite the side in motion (left foot advances, right hip twists forward driven by the planted right foot). It is this power we want to harness for the blow, since it is the greatest contributor to the overall force generated (body mass, arm/shoulder, and gravity being the remaining factors).

axel wrote:I have found it is faster to throw and recover both single handed shots and 2 handed shots by using the hips instead of the arms because you do not need to withdraw your weapon to restrike.

OK, it's not just me, then .

I agree that arm extension is required at greater range and when using the point, and the additional factors of weapon mass and the radius of the arc of attack start to play more heavily into the total available power. At the ranges Aaron would most likely find himself with the shorter weapon, however, I think the hips become the dominant determiner.

wma wrote:I thought you implied that butt spikes, and thrusting tips on items like becs were not functional, or more correctly lead to moves and attacks that were not authentic, but were more hollywood/conanesque

Not Conan, D&D. BIG difference !!

Seriously, I was commenting on Aaron's interpretation on the points of the bit. Butt spikes, back of the hammer, and thrusting spike are not only elements of the weapon geometery, but aside from the "natural" sensibility inherent in their use, they are also described in the existing manuals. The "points" that are the bit, or the ones you describe on the sides of the bec are much more circumspect. Not only are they unwieldy to introduce effectively in our play (and from personal experience, I know that the idea of overshooting the target to draw the low point into the back of the opponent is not a new idea ), but there are no manuals that describe these techniques, and there are no contemporary pictures or literary accounts supporting them. Experience has shown me that these kinds of investigations are fruitless and begin to exhibit the characteristics of "tricks" and fantasy that only work when playing "air sword".

With respect,

Alfred

Alfred:

I disagree. Even if one were not to move their feet and only turned their hips (sometimes referred to as a short stemmed blow) they generate power by the body's turning motion which impels the blow from right to left (assuming a left hand low grip).

An exageration of this is to watch a batter hit a baseball. For a righty, the left foot steps forward (or at an angle to direct the hit) to begin the motion of the body forward. The swing starts with a turn of the hips while bending slightly the right knee with the right foot firmly planted. This is where the true power is generated. As the batter completes the swing, the power is transferred from right through the center to the left. As the power diminishes at the end of the stroke the power is almost completely on the left. This is follow-through and is a critical part of technique.

The same can be said of throwing a punch.

B

Aaron wrote:If I've extened beyond their head, I can yank back on my back arm and drive a thrust into the back of their head...hard to block, but so far I lack power doing it.

-Aaron

Pardon me for asking but what (or which) kingdoms in the SCA allow this tactic?

In the East a head thrust is only legal to the face (eyebrows to chin, side-burn to sideburn) and is a positive touch callibration. Lack of power wouldn't be an issue but the location would.

Now hook thrusting to the shield side kidney or back of shield side leg might be an option but your opponents movement is likely to rob most of the power.

Just curious,
Sean

Bedlam -- Your analogy of the baseball bat swing is exactly what I am talking about. Assuming a right-handed hitter (right hand high), the left foot steps out while the -power- of the swing is generated by the driving -and stationary- right foot. The hip rotation is (looking down at the batter's feet) counter-clockwise, meaning the right hip is moving forard (driven by the grounded foot).

Translate this to weapons work, and a step forward with the left foot results in the right foot driving the right hip forward, so a right hand high grip with the blade oriented to the right of the fighter will yield the most powerful blow.

With respect... AoC

Alfred:

I think we are talking about the same thing then. In my initial post about walking, the right foot moving forward causes the right end of the stick to move forward.

Apologies for any confusion...

B

I disagree,

carlyle wrote:Bedlam -- Your analogy of the baseball bat swing is exactly what I am talking about. Assuming a right-handed hitter (right hand high), the left foot steps out while the -power- of the swing is generated by the driving -and stationary- right foot. The hip rotation is (looking down at the batter's feet) counter-clockwise, meaning the right hip is moving forard (driven by the grounded foot).

except that the point of impact is taking place a little past a horse stance, far short of where a two handed weapon's blade would impact. The result in the SCA would be much the same as swinging early and connecting while the ball is still in front of you

Translate this to weapons work, and a step forward with the left foot results in the right foot driving the right hip forward, so a right hand high grip with the blade oriented to the right of the fighter will yield the most powerful blow.

With respect... AoC

As I see it translating this to weapons work, stepping forward with the left foot would transfer the weight to much onto the left foot causing the weight transfer to go beyond the ability to push hard with your right foot and actually underpowering and off balancing you. If you are doing this, and this isn't happening I must be misreading your instructions.

Axel

sean wrote:Now hook thrusting to the shield side kidney or back of shield side leg might be an option but your opponents movement is likely to rob most of the power.

This is the "gumbiness" factor (for lack of a better word) that I referred to. Under all but the most optimal conditions (those that are usually only achievable during speculative, out-of-armor "air sword" demonstrations), the "hooking" action takes on aspects of a grapple, complete with all the awkward shoving and grunting that accompanies moments when opponents get bound up too close to effect a real attack.

Ever lock armor parts by accident or trap your sword behind your opponent's shield arm? Same thing... AoC

Axel:

Been a long time. Patuxent State Park in like '86 at a joint Markland/SCA event with swords prohibited. Hope things are well for you.

The movement of the left foot in a baseball swing is the beginning of the motion of the swing. Many Japanese batters actually lift their left leg - almost stork-like - to facilitate really leaning into the pitch as they step forward and transfer power from right to left.

I don't know how to translate the left foot motion of a batter to polearm other than to consider it a part of bringing the blow into range. In my stance my left foot is already forward, but in some melees I might very well step with my left to close the distance and add a little more speed/power. This would not work in tourney so much because you would be "telegraphing," IMO

B

Axel et al (I'm really enjoying this exchange), I'm writing fast so please excuse any grammatical errors --

As I see it translating this to weapons work, stepping forward with the left foot would transfer the weight to much onto the left foot causing the weight transfer to go beyond the ability to push hard with your right foot and actually underpowering and off balancing you. If you are doing this, and this isn't happening I must be misreading your instructions.

This is an endemic problem when fighters don't learn to move while throwing. Natural walking is usually characterized by a person literally lifting the trailing foot, and as they move it beyond the "center" or zero-point (adjacent to the stationary foot), "throwing" themselves at the ground by shifting their center of mass forward and over their center of balance to catch themselves at the last moment on the forward moving foot.

Moving in combat, however, is optimized by first shifting the center of mass and center of balance over the stationary foot and then placing the moving foot -without commitment- to it's intended position. Because they usually incorporate kicks, eastern martial arts describe an "inside" arc where the moving foot passes close to the stationary leg. Since we don't allow attacks with the foot, an "outside" arc is actually a better technique, because it provides a platform from which to attack or defend no matter where you stop your foot in the arc (as opposed to the very weak platform that results if you get stopped with both of your feet together).

Only after the moving foot is in position should you transfer any weight to it, all the while maintaining the center of balance somewhere between the two pillars of your platform. This limits the amount of ground you can cover in a single step, but it ensures that you are never caught in a situation where your mass is moving outside your center of balance -- an ideal time for your opponent to launch a strike, both because you are committed to the direction of the motion until you can regain your balance (thus "telegraphing" your intent), and because the linearity of the "thrown" weight is exceedingly weak when presented with an attack perpindicular to the direction of movement.

In the above scenario, the stationary foot has all of the mass as well as your balance, allowing you to both strike with power and at any target within reach (committing your mass to a fixed line by throwing it over your center limits your best targets to those only in the line of movement). This is not to say that you cannot use the forward motion of the mass to help power the blow; but there is no power available from the hip on the side of the moving foot until that foot plants.

This last, in fact, is what most trainers -do- (and is exactly what you describe happens by hitting the ball early in baseball), but they communicate it incorrectly, instructing the student to swing in the direction of the motion while the foot is still airborne; and it falls to the student to either correct the error through natural ability, or suffer with the flaw until the encounter a more knowledgable teacher. What I am describing, however, is a means to swing while the foot is not planted by using the remaining, planted foot to power the attack.

With appreciation,

Alfred

You have lost me totally Alfred, but thats ok, there are alot of discussions going on.
I guess what i understood from your comment was that hooks and buttspikes on historical weapons had no real use in actual combat.
Im not in any way referring to sca or larp, or someones foam version of an actual weapon.
My sca version of a bec has a striking head, a thrusting tip, a buttspike and a spike on the backside of the head, similar to historical weapons ive looked at. I have found all of these pointy bits usefull, but the actual striking head is what is used mostly.

carlyle wrote:Axel et al (I'm really enjoying this exchange), I'm writing fast so please excuse any grammatical errors --

As I see it translating this to weapons work, stepping forward with the left foot would transfer the weight to much onto the left foot causing the weight transfer to go beyond the ability to push hard with your right foot and actually underpowering and off balancing you. If you are doing this, and this isn't happening I must be misreading your instructions.

This is an endemic problem when fighters don't learn to move while throwing. Natural walking is usually characterized by a person literally lifting the trailing foot, and as they move it beyond the "center" or zero-point (adjacent to the stationary foot), "throwing" themselves at the ground by shifting their center of mass forward and over their center of balance to catch themselves at the last moment on the forward moving foot.

Moving in combat, however, is optimized by first shifting the center of mass and center of balance over the stationary foot and then placing the moving foot -without commitment- to it's intended position. Because they usually incorporate kicks, eastern martial arts describe an "inside" arc where the moving foot passes close to the stationary leg. Since we don't allow attacks with the foot, an "outside" arc is actually a better technique, because it provides a platform from which to attack or defend no matter where you stop your foot in the arc (as opposed to the very weak platform that results if you get stopped with both of your feet together).

Only after the moving foot is in position should you transfer any weight to it, all the while maintaining the center of balance somewhere between the two pillars of your platform. This limits the amount of ground you can cover in a single step, but it ensures that you are never caught in a situation where your mass is moving outside your center of balance -- an ideal time for your opponent to launch a strike, both because you are committed to the direction of the motion until you can regain your balance (thus "telegraphing" your intent), and because the linearity of the "thrown" weight is exceedingly weak when presented with an attack perpindicular to the direction of movement.

In the above scenario, the stationary foot has all of the mass as well as your balance, allowing you to both strike with power and at any target within reach (committing your mass to a fixed line by throwing it over your center limits your best targets to those only in the line of movement). This is not to say that you cannot use the forward motion of the mass to help power the blow; but there is no power available from the hip on the side of the moving foot until that foot plants.

This last, in fact, is what most trainers -do- (and is exactly what you describe happens by hitting the ball early in baseball), but they communicate it incorrectly, instructing the student to swing in the direction of the motion while the foot is still airborne; and it falls to the student to either correct the error through natural ability, or suffer with the flaw until the encounter a more knowledgable teacher. What I am describing, however, is a means to swing while the foot is not planted by using the remaining, planted foot to power the attack.

With appreciation,

Alfred

Interestingly enough I agree with everything you say about moving and is exactly what I do and teach....It's the Judoka in me. I am always on balance and grounded as I move and throw.

After sitting in my office here for the past 15 minutes throwing shots, I can see how it is possible to throw a powerful blow off the left hip, right hand high, left foot forward. Although I still don't see how a blow thrown from the right powered by the left hip with the left foot forward could be more powerful than a blow thrown from the right powered from the right hip with a right foot forward.

Axel

Bedlam wrote:Axel:

Been a long time. Patuxent State Park in like '86 at a joint Markland/SCA event with swords prohibited. Hope things are well for you.

The movement of the left foot in a baseball swing is the beginning of the motion of the swing. Many Japanese batters actually lift their left leg - almost stork-like - to facilitate really leaning into the pitch as they step forward and transfer power from right to left.

I don't know how to translate the left foot motion of a batter to polearm other than to consider it a part of bringing the blow into range. In my stance my left foot is already forward, but in some melees I might very well step with my left to close the distance and add a little more speed/power. This would not work in tourney so much because you would be "telegraphing," IMO

B

Yeah it has been a long time...don't get back up to the old stomping grounds much any more. The problem with translating the motion from a batter to polearm is that a batter is basically in a horse stance, and the hips lock at the same time the ball and bat meet still more or less in a horse stance, When fighing a polearm the hips don't lock at the moment od impacrt in the same place cause we're not in a horse stance..we're in more of a boxers stance or a left or right foot strong stance

Axel

Axel said:

When fighting a polearm the hips don't lock at the moment of impact in the same place cause we're not in a horse stance..we're in more of a boxers stance or a left or right foot strong stance

Interesting. When I fight polearm, I'm in a horse stance, and my hips lock as soon as I apply power to the weapon.

I also have my right hand high when I start with the right foot forward. My forward foot is always on the shield side of my opponent, so I fight right foot forward against a right hander, and completely reverse my stance against a left hander. I do this to keep the haft in place to protect the leg that is on the sword side of my opponent.

paulb wrote:Axel said:

When fighting a polearm the hips don't lock at the moment of impact in the same place cause we're not in a horse stance..we're in more of a boxers stance or a left or right foot strong stance

Interesting. When I fight polearm, I'm in a horse stance, and my hips lock as soon as I apply power to the weapon.

I also have my right hand high when I start with the right foot forward. My forward foot is always on the shield side of my opponent, so I fight right foot forward against a right hander, and completely reverse my stance against a left hander. I do this to keep the haft in place to protect the leg that is on the sword side of my opponent.

Your Grace,

I always thought of a horse stance as having the hips already locked between both shoulders (right hip under right shoulder, left under left). Is that how you are, or are you basically in a reverse of your L stance (your weapon and shield stance as I understand it) ? Most of my power polearm and greatsword strikes pretty much end in a horse cause thats where my hips lock.

If I can fight the way I want, I pretty much start left foot forward and step into the same stance you describe as part of the attack.

Axel

I'm going to have to spend some time this weekend editing down these posts into coherant, six-word-or-less theories...then put them to the test.



Thanks everyone! This has been a great discussion.

-Aaron