HIT HARD TAKE LIGHT

[Count Johnathan]

I have seen some question as to how hard we should be striking and what should we be accepting as good blows. To me the take light part means accept blow at what most would consider to be a level 5 or better on a 1 to 10 power scale.

The hit hard part means never throwing less than a 7, preferably a 9 or 10. Beyond that 1 to 10 scale an 11 would be what most consider to be excessive. I feel most people are capable of an 11 or 12 so a 9 or 10 is a damn fine blow and shows skill in technique as well as control to keep it from being excessive.

The point of the hit hard take light theory is all about being honorable and accepting an average blow that may or may not have actually harmed you if our weapons were real. It's about skill both offensively and defensively. I feel that if an opponent is able to place their weapon on a legal target area on my body with a level 5 power or greater I have failed defensivly and my opponent has bested me.

Hitting hard...

I was trained to strike with authority. Doing so is the only way to ensure that your opponent is left with no question about their defeat. All fighters should be trained to do this. It is not a lovey dovey stick tag game when done properly. It is a serious martial art that when performed well is truly deadly. My offensive fighting style has been called by some who are close to me "skilled butchering". Yes I play a game with a stick but I use that stick as if it were a steel bladed weapon. Yes it takes a lot of force to cause damage with a sword against maile and plate renders a sword nearly completely useless. That's why I think the armour as worn standard would be bull$#@%. If plate is proof then the game is over. Nobody wins we all stop playing. Our sport is played with the idea of maile and leather. In the Maile and leather standard when I strike I a limb I aim to remove it. When I hit the head or torso I strike with the intent to maim or kill. If you have to question a blow that I dealt you, it is because I didn't do it right! Our armor standards are designed to protect us from serious injury using that theory yet I do advocate and suggest to everyone I meet, additional protective gear above and beyond what is required by rule according to SCA standards. Some kingdoms will vary.

What I suggest in addition always is a full breast and backplate. If properly fitted they do not restrict you as some people might complain. Broken ribs are very bad. It effects you for quite some time as it heals although it only hurts when you breath. <-- The new explosion of the increasingly popular lamellar out there seems to be very effective as well so that is enough IMO if not a full rigid breastplate.

Rigid forearm protection. Leather is for the most part not enough. Metal is best. Arms can be broken easily in this game. Some people will go for years with no problem wearing nothing at all but it only takes that one blow to snap the arm like a twig. When that blow is received the opinion that forearms don't need that much protection quickly changes.

Full rigid material WITH padding for upper thighs. Is it likely that I will break your femur? No but deep tissue bruises are bad. Muscle and tendons can be torn and destroyd through impact. Also pain is bad. I don't play this game because I am a masochist. If you are then wear nothing there. That is your choice.

Using the hit hard take light theory does three things. Improves skill, reduces the "rhino" factor, and ensures that you are not "that guy" who wins through questionable calibration.

If you set the bar for yourself to accept defeat as though you were fighting nearly naked you will push yourself to improve your defensive abilities. The goal isn't to avoid getting hit "that hard". The goal is to not get hit AT ALL. The goal when striking with authority is to hit them "that hard" so that they always know they have been bested.

Just my opinion on SCA calibration and how I feel it should be done.

Your thoughts?

edit for spelling

[Sigifrith Hauknefr]

I have some minor quibbles.
First off, I prefer a more probabilistic scale. "What most people consider a 5" to me is very hard to determine. I like to call a '5' a shot which is called good 50% of the time (in your local calibration area) And a 10 is called good ~100% of the time. So now we could have a nice linear scale between 5 and 10, where, for example, a "7" is called good 70% of the time.

I suppose one could have a more geometric scale like
5 - 50%
6 - 75%
7 - 83%
8 - 91%
9 - 96%
10 - 98%
11+ - excessive (100%)
I actually like that much better. I bet 90% of folks couldn't consistently rate the difference between a 9 and a 10 anyway.

I prefer something probabilistic because there is just so much variance day-to-day and person to person (and sword to sword, and armor to armor) on what a good shot is.

So in the scale above, I suspect your '5' is more like a '6' (which does not change your point at all). A 5 is really just quite a marginal shot. "Taken 50% of the time - means that if I hit you with a 5, I have some expectation that that shot will NOT count, and would not think twice or hold it against you. Note that if I hit you with an 8, and you do not count it... I start to wonder what's wrong)

On to "Hit Hard Take Light". This is a very admirable goal and training technique. It is, in some ways, the "perfect" training goal of calibration.

However I feel that it can lead to "issues" in many fighters. These issues are generally due to the simple fact that not everyone subscribes to this system and furthermore, even those that do won't execute the same way you do.

One issue is due to simply the fact that you are taking lighter than you are giving. As long as you pretty much always win (like you are a Count or Duke or something) and as long as your shots are pretty much always taken (i.e, you really do consistently throw a 8 or so) then hey no problem. You are probably happy to take a 5 because it means you might actually be learning something. And besides your 8s are taken 90+% of the time, so you can't complain.

The problem comes in with 2 skilled fighters who are throwing in the range of 4-9 sporadically, and aren't really sure what the difference is. One "hit hard take light" person is fighting someone who is training to "hit hard take hard" and wanting that ideal "8". (we get many folks out here in the West like that). In this case, the guy who is taking lighter is going to get annoyed.

The second issue is that by taking '5's and '6's you are training people to THROW 5s' and 6s' - even unconsciously. Because, after all, they are easier to throw and you are taking them. When a fighter (at practice), say, throws a bad shot and it actually hits the second fighter, they BOTH have screwed up. One messed up his attack body mechanics, and the other missed the block. So by "counting" this shot you "train the defense but not the offense" and by not counting it, it's the other way round. Usually what I do (in practice) is to acknowledge the shot, and say that it probably should have been harder.

None of the above is meant to imply that one SHOULD NOT "Hit Hard and Take Light" - just pointing out that it can open other cans of worms.

I would assume that there are similar issues with places who play 'throw and take just enough"... but I don't fight those guys very much (maybe I even made it up).

[DELETEMYACCOUNT]

Why shouldnt my opponent have to hit me as hard as I hit them? I learned a long time ago that taking a light shot doesnt make me or my opponent a better fighter. To my opinion, fighti8ng well is hitting hard and sticking your shot. I dont take light slop and I dont expect my opponents to either. Now, it may be a matter of semantics, in which case I'm not just trying to argue, but I really feel pretty strongly about this sort of thing.

[Kilkenny]

Why shouldnt my opponent have to hit me as hard as I hit them? I learned a long time ago that taking a light shot doesnt make me or my opponent a better fighter. To my opinion, fighti8ng well is hitting hard and sticking your shot. I dont take light slop and I dont expect my opponents to either. Now, it may be a matter of semantics, in which case I'm not just trying to argue, but I really feel pretty strongly about this sort of thing.

It's not about taking crap shots. The shot that just is not good still is not good.

If you throw shots at a level where the vast majority of people have no problem deciding that your blow was "good" when you connect, that's a fine thing.

If you take shots at a level where a substantial percentage of people have no complaints about your acknowledgment level, that is also a fine thing.

The chances are reasonably good that the second level is not actually as hard as the first, with the result "throw hard, take light(er)".

I've hit myself once. I don't need to be hit that hard

[benz72]

I've got the steel cuirass and I need to get rid of it (unless I can use it for armor as worn tournaments). It works really well, and if people start throwing shots that feel "good" through that then when they miss and hit my arm it's going to break. Right now I have to take anything I can observe, hear or intuit as a hit weather it skips, was wimpy or wasn't even a weapon. I'm not saying that I don't love my armor, it's just that there is absolutely no way I can calibrate my opponent's shots through it. I'm not a big fan of this situation, because it means that all my parries and dodges have to be completely successful instead of just taking out enough of the force to avoid being bested.

As to the calibration, as hard as I try to maintain a constant level, I find myself socially referenceing the 'right strength' of blows. It changes when I travel, when some speceific tournaments are in the offing and sometimes for reasons I cannot identify. Maybe it is just me?

[Whitewolf Sr.]

"Hard, Fast & Repeatedly" X 1
X 2
X 3
X 4......to X 10

With Honor X 10 constant....

[Count Johnathan]

I agree with almost all your thoughts Sig. Thank you for the reply.

"...by taking '5's and '6's you are training people to THROW 5s' and 6s' - even unconsciously..."

I would agree if there was no explanation when fighting my opponents. If they are throwing 8s consistantly then it's all good and I just accept it. If they are throwing 5s I do accept it because I am there to outskill my opponent but I do explain that they need to hit harder regardless of my acceptance of the blow just as training advice.

I prefer this method of blow acceptance which, like the rest is learned as you go. It is extremely important to be consistant in calibration or people do raise an eyebrow and wonder "hmmm he took that yesterday. What's different about today? Something on the line perhaps?" Our armor guidelines really don't suggest this sort of calibration mind you. I do feel that much of what we accept is thrown considerably lighter than what would be required to incapacitate or kill. The point of it is the contest though. I prefer to let my skills keep me in the win column instead of counting on my armour to save me from a loss. If the contest and getting good at the martial art is what is important to a fighter this is a good model to go buy.

[Count Johnathan]

I've got the steel cuirass and I need to get rid of it (unless I can use it for armor as worn tournaments). It works really well, and if people start throwing shots that feel "good" through that then when they miss and hit my arm it's going to break. Right now I have to take anything I can observe, hear or intuit as a hit weather it skips, was wimpy or wasn't even a weapon. I'm not saying that I don't love my armor, it's just that there is absolutely no way I can calibrate my opponent's shots through it. I'm not a big fan of this situation, because it means that all my parries and dodges have to be completely successful instead of just taking out enough of the force to avoid being bested.

As to the calibration, as hard as I try to maintain a constant level, I find myself socially referenceing the 'right strength' of blows. It changes when I travel, when some speceific tournaments are in the offing and sometimes for reasons I cannot identify. Maybe it is just me?

I wear the full steel and like I just mentioned it is a learn as you go process. Anytime I change a piece of armor or anything I tell people whose power levels I am familiar with to give me some good whacks so I know what to go by and I feel perfectly comfortable asking a fellow what they just hit me with and how hard. These are training partners that I am very comfortable with so they know it is an honest question and their answer will be accepted. I do that so that when I fight others I don't have to think twice about what an opponent hits me with. I just know and I accept the loss if the shot is fair or ignore and continue if it was really just pathetic. I assume that when someone throws a pathetic shot they are normally aware of it's crappyness. It just feels different when you hit with a good clean blow. In tourney I prefer not to speak about it as I see it as bad form. In practice I will tell any fighter that touches me what it was and if it needed improvement or not.

I can tell you an 8 is generally accepted anywhere but a 9 or a 10 is rarely going to be questioned no matter where you are. A ten IMO is any blow that stuns you but does not break anything. A 5 is any shot hard enough to make me think about it. If I'm thinking about it it's because they hit me.

[Count Johnathan]

"Hard, Fast & Repeatedly" X 1
X 2
X 3
X 4......to X 10

With Honor X 10 constant....

It's Funny to me that my dad fits in with a slightly different mentality truly. Don't let him fool you though. I learned to be this way by following the examples of those around me. Obviously my father included. He's nicer than he lets on.

Well he used to be anyway....a little....

[Caspar]

I prefer this method of blow acceptance which, like the rest is learned as you go. It is extremely important to be consistant in calibration or people do raise an eyebrow and wonder "hmmm he took that yesterday. What's different about today? Something on the line perhaps?" Our armor guidelines really don't suggest this sort of calibration mind you. I do feel that much of what we accept is thrown considerably lighter than what would be required to incapacitate or kill. The point of it is the contest though. I prefer to let my skills keep me in the win column instead of counting on my armour to save me from a loss. If the contest and getting good at the martial art is what is important to a fighter this is a good model to go buy.

This

[Eirik]

I'm told by my Knight, Sir Madoc, of a Knight of the East he fought once at Lillies... or Pennsic, he misremembers sometimes. This Knight had gained great reknown, for he calls shots which barely touch him, and yet his blows land with easily enough power to be unquestioned. I am told I should strive to be as honorable and skilled as this Knight.

So to me, this is throw hard, call light.

[Aaron]

Treat others as you would like to be treated. I prefer a hard shot but I've met some who seem incapable of throwing good, and I'll accept lighter. If I suspect someone is political I'll take lighter and leave quickly. When sport and politics mix, ethics often suffers and ego throws shots at honor.

Better to enjoy a pickup fight with a like-minded nobody than deal with ego and politics and see honor slighted.

[Diglach Mac Cein]

If you throw shots at a level where the vast majority of people have no problem deciding that your blow was "good" when you connect, that's a fine thing.

If you take shots at a level where a substantial percentage of people have no complaints about your acknowledgment level, that is also a fine thing.

The chances are reasonably good that the second level is not actually as hard as the first, with the result "throw hard, take light(er)".

What he said.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, SCA combat is as much a social thing as athletic. The levels of power we use to are determined at least in part by the people we fight, and the people they fight. If you are throwing hard enough that people don't enjoy fighting you, or well above the local norm, then there is a problem. Same if you throw well below the local norm.

Same for taking blows. If you only take blows well above the local norm, then there is a problem.

And it is the responsibility of the individual to consistently, conciously and continuously make sure they are in that "norm".


.


[/quote]

[herrhauptmann]

Having only fought for a year and a half, and only in practices, no events, my personal opinion is along these lines:
Hit solidly (my best is generally less than excessive to most fighters)
Accept light clean shots.
If I'm dumb enough to leave my arm hanging out, and my opponent at practice is able to reach out and tap it without me reacting, I'll accept that as a hit.
Afterall, it's practice, neither of us gains something if I need to get hurt to learn a lesson.
Occassionally that light shot comes in clean, but is light because my opponent was unable to generate the force needed for a solid hit (bad footing, or throwing with his arm only, whatever), I'll call "light clean". If my opponent is someone better than me who's training me, I'll probably accept it.
If my opponent is someone at my skill level, where we're training each other, I probably won't accept it. I'll say clean, to them know it hit nicely, but light to tell them they need something more still. I don't want the other newer fighters to get into a habit of throwing lightly. That also benefits no one.

No, the 'probably' is not an excuse for me to listen to my ego against another fighter. I may have an ego, but not for fighting. I'm not good enough for that yet.

[Benjamin de Hatfield]

Begging your pardon, but I've never agreed with the "hit hard, take light" philosophy. That phrase has been uttered to me in every fighting sport I have been in, rather it be boffer, SCA, or what have you.

The problem I see with that statement is that it seems to be used on new fighters to accustom them to calibration levels. As personal preference, however, I never use a teaching method on a newer fighter that I don't want to have that fighter continue doing for the entirety of their career.

Instead, when people use the phrase on me, I instead tell them, "Hit right, take right." No peer pressure or social meme should force you to take a shot that you considered "light." If it was light, then it wasn't a good shot.

I want the people I teach to learn to take correct shots in the beginning. Obviously this is only my opinion and is really only to be taken in the context of the statement when applied to training.

-Ramius/Elias

[Count Johnathan]

Your not alone in that feeling Ramius and it is not wrong. My intent when training a new fighter is to improve their abilities. I don't intend on reinforcing their ability to decide that a blow was not hard enough. Some folks may say accepting a light shot never made them a better fighter. I agree with that if your calibration has always been higher and so my thought is that taking lighter shots was not used for any great length of time.

My method in the long run does very much make you a better fighter if you continue to strive to improve. It is easier to explain by asking what you might think shows the higher quality skill.

A. Throwing a half block doing the very minimum to knock just enough steam off the blow so that the sword grazes off your shield before doinking you in the temple and you say "light" if you say anything at all?

or

B. Making a complete block and never getting touched?

Some opinions will vary on that even as some would say the fighter who barely blocks did just enough to render the shot innefective and wasted less energy and movement. Others like me feel that not getting touched at all is the true test of your defenses and should I get struck, even with a less than stellar blow I have failed and lose the fight. This helps me to strive to improve always. BTW I don't like getting hit by 10s all the time. Like I said the point is to not get hit.

[Jaymes]

While I like to take hard hitting blows, but If a shot that clearly hit me and was made of skill I would be glad to take it.

[Violen]

I need some more armor. getting hit n the back or the stomach knocks the fight, not the wind out of me
one wrap to the back and im done. i dont know why, it just turns me off.


Today i fought a great man, Raimond of Ipestone, a knight from the Barony of the Forgotten Sea (KC).

The level of power he used didnt matter.

When i knew i was bested i called it good. Its not about how hard. I am willing to admit he beat me. It didnt have to hurt, we both understood that he had met his terms, and passed my defenses.

I had trouble with power generation today. In such i didnt land a lot of solid blows, they were pretty mushy. This i must work on.

But when i hit him clean and fair, he took them just the same.


Its all i ask, that when i am bested i will give you my word, and for any of you to do the same.

[Scott]

"Light but clean" is still light.

- Scott

[Count Johnathan]

Your comments on the subject are inspiring Violen. Getting hit in the back or stomache sucks. It turns most folks off. A wooden batton be it rattan or otherwise is a very unfriendly tool.

According to wikipedia - "A truncheon or baton (also called a cosh, Paddy wacker, billystick, billy club, nightstick, sap, blackjack, stick) is essentially a stick of less than arm's length, usually made of wood, plastic, or metal, and carried by law-enforcement, corrections, security, and (less often) military personnel for less lethal self-defense, as well as control and to disperse combative and non-compliant subjects...."

SCA rattan fighting doesn't have to be so painful. Do wear more armor and play this game longer. Deep tissue bruises cracked ribs or huge welts with millions of smashed capillaries, fat and muscle underneath is aweful. Good Armor is awesome

You start to think on that level after getting smashed up for a while till more armor is applied. Just look at Nissan. You might have seen the pics of him wearing like knee pads, helmet, gloves, sword n' strapped round shield...30 something years ago. Now he is the epic Samurai tank of destruction. What does your helm weigh Nissan? 20+lbs or something like that? That's gnarly.

Edit add: I think Nissans view and my fathers view are pretty damn close. Both of them are like "Yeah I want to not be a douche so I take my shots but I'm here to kick someones ass." Oh yeah and "Lets shoot them too." More of the let's win this war mentality. It's all good I like that game too.

[Count Johnathan]

"Light but clean" is still light.

- Scott

Very true. I do not expect my opponents to accept 5s from me. Most people I know require about 7 out of me before considering it because they know how hard I normally strike them. When I fight new folks they generally accept 6 or above on my scale.

That's the thing. Everybody has slight variance on their personal 1 to 10 scale. I don't ask them to hit me and then ask for a level 5 power from them. I am willing to accept a blow that is delivered at what I would consider a 5 if I had thrown it. For me a 9 or 10 is decisive. A 5 is meh yeah I guess so. Hit harder but I'll take that. It's an average shot.

Using that calibration in 20 years I once had a guy in a bridge battle come up and tell me I had blown off several of his shots. I was pretty shocked by that so I said " I'm sorry you must be mistaken". It pretty much ended that conversation. That's the only time I ever had anyone accuse me of being a rhino. It was about 13 years ago. Turned out that dude had been spending some time with an ex of mine or something and was just kind of a douche anyway. I never saw him again after that.

[herrhauptmann]

"Light but clean" is still light.

- Scott

As I said, it was fight practice. You know that thing most of us try to go to once a week.
I don't need my arm or leg crushed as a reminder that my defense slipped. It's gotta be a more effective teaching method than turning my limbs into hamburger so badly I can't fight after 2 hours, or for the following week and a half.

[SirOlafr]

I frequently get told I hit hard so I guess I do. I don't ever really try to throw particularly hard, I just try to throw with good technique and then the shots turn out hard. I also think I take lighter than I generally throw. I was taught that if I have to think on it, then it wasn't good.

I like not playing a game of tag.

Olafr

[ThorvaldR Skegglauss]

I am sometimes of two minds on this topic. I like to give hard and take light in concept

but

Why are we engaged in Armoured Combat then? The purpose of armour is to protect us from shots that we can't/don't/partially block. So if the blow that actually hits us is inferior in power (technique is something else) then it should be called light.

I understand the idea of greater skill, but I do ascribe to what Duke Logan talks about how it takes much more skill to hit with power than it does just to "touch" your opponent. What I really prefer is to not have to think about it. However I tend to take a blow if I have been repeatedly hit "light" in the same manner.... I call it dieing of embarrassment.

[blackbow]

Nobody should ever have to browbeat you into taking a shot. The shot itself is the question.

*whap* = "was that hard enough?"
"no", "light", or no response = "no"

*WHAP* = "okay, was THAT hard enough?"
"no", "light", or no response = "no"

**WHAP** = "okay, was **THAT**?"

lather, rinse, repeat.

I have yet to run into anybody that this didn't work on. If I throw what I think is a **WHAP** and it's coming across as a *whap*, well, either I didn't do it right, or he got some block on it....


oh, and there are four ways to block a shot. block with weapon, block with shield, move in, or move out. (sideways ends up being an "in" or "out" in the end.) Anything you do will be categorized in one of those four.

For that rare individual for whom only a **WHAP** will do, well, that's doable. However, it is interesting to note that you generally know who those people are ahead of time. So when you start out with a **WHAP** it's unlikely anybody's going to complain on their behalf.

Edit: I sometimes wonder if the only real bone of contention left as far as acknowledgement isn't face thrusts, and whether it might not be a good idea to do away with the kingdom variations in it. That's about all I see left as any sort of real, definable contention.

Blackbow

[Kilkenny]

Begging your pardon, but I've never agreed with the "hit hard, take light" philosophy. That phrase has been uttered to me in every fighting sport I have been in, rather it be boffer, SCA, or what have you.

The problem I see with that statement is that it seems to be used on new fighters to accustom them to calibration levels. As personal preference, however, I never use a teaching method on a newer fighter that I don't want to have that fighter continue doing for the entirety of their career.

Instead, when people use the phrase on me, I instead tell them, "Hit right, take right." No peer pressure or social meme should force you to take a shot that you considered "light." If it was light, then it wasn't a good shot.

I want the people I teach to learn to take correct shots in the beginning. Obviously this is only my opinion and is really only to be taken in the context of the statement when applied to training.

-Ramius/Elias

As you phrase it Elias, I wouldn't argue with your point.

But - you're misinterpreting the "take light" part of the phrase. It does not mean accept blows that are not good. It means accept blows that are good, but do not demand that they be Very Good (ooof! Good milord).

The entire phrase comes down to meaning that you should throw blows the other person will not need to think about as to whether or not they were good, while yourself accepting as good any blow where you find yourself thinking about it more than a moment.

[Kilkenny]

"Light but clean" is still light.

- Scott

As I said, it was fight practice. You know that thing most of us try to go to once a week.
I don't need my arm or leg crushed as a reminder that my defense slipped. It's gotta be a more effective teaching method than turning my limbs into hamburger so badly I can't fight after 2 hours, or for the following week and a half.

When I started, fight practice was Thursday night, dance practice was Tuesday night. If I could dance, it had been a good fight practice.

There are different approaches to learning combat arts, and different people learn in different ways. I'm fond of the saying "pain is our friend. It teaches us not to do that." Not everyone benefits from that approach, but many do.

[Steve S.]

I wear a lot of armour. I wear braies, hosen, quilted cuisses, linen shirt, pourpoint, quilted arming coat, maille shirt, and coat of plates.

I called one shot light last weekend at Fools' War - a spear shot just kissed the top of my helm. But I hate calling shots light. I feel like with my armour I might be missing something, and I don't want to annoy anyone.

I like getting hit hard. I took one good shot to my bicep last weekend, the only shot that gave me a bruise. I like it. I like feeling it throughout the day as it makes me feel as if I actually engaged in something worthwhile, something manly and with peril. I like getting hit hard, and I wear enough amour that I can take it.

But I will take clean, light shots too.

Steve

[Gryffinclaw]

I view this topic a bit differently. I have enjoyed reading the differing view.

First let me say I hit with er um great authority. I am good size, active, Play sports for most of my years and I flow well so even if I keep the arm power out of my swing I still hit hard. Lighter stick just means faster and hard.

I have also heard the hit hard take light but I believe this statement has evolved from a basic concept...

If I have to think about then it is good. The fight is fast and fluid. This is not the same as taking light. Most people do not want to be a rhino so it is better to err with caution then to be a rhino because once the fight begins, adrenalin kicks in the concentration to kill the other most folks will likely need to be hit a bit harder to register.

I figure I am one of these guys so when in doubt I am out!

[Nissan Maxima]

If you have to think about it I will not let you take it. Please hit me hard enough so that I don't have to think about it either.

[Benjamin de Hatfield]

Begging your pardon, but I've never agreed with the "hit hard, take light" philosophy. That phrase has been uttered to me in every fighting sport I have been in, rather it be boffer, SCA, or what have you.

The problem I see with that statement is that it seems to be used on new fighters to accustom them to calibration levels. As personal preference, however, I never use a teaching method on a newer fighter that I don't want to have that fighter continue doing for the entirety of their career.

Instead, when people use the phrase on me, I instead tell them, "Hit right, take right." No peer pressure or social meme should force you to take a shot that you considered "light." If it was light, then it wasn't a good shot.

I want the people I teach to learn to take correct shots in the beginning. Obviously this is only my opinion and is really only to be taken in the context of the statement when applied to training.

-Ramius/Elias

As you phrase it Elias, I wouldn't argue with your point.

But - you're misinterpreting the "take light" part of the phrase. It does not mean accept blows that are not good. It means accept blows that are good, but do not demand that they be Very Good (ooof! Good milord).

The entire phrase comes down to meaning that you should throw blows the other person will not need to think about as to whether or not they were good, while yourself accepting as good any blow where you find yourself thinking about it more than a moment.

Intriguing. I guess I had always taken the phrase quite literally, but this brings a very different perspective.

It does make me wonder, however, how many people read it and interpret it like I do? Or rather, how many NEW people read it and interpret it how I do.

Thanks for the reply and the eye-opening perspective!

-Ramius/Elias

[Benjamin de Hatfield]

Your not alone in that feeling Ramius and it is not wrong. My intent when training a new fighter is to improve their abilities. I don't intend on reinforcing their ability to decide that a blow was not hard enough. Some folks may say accepting a light shot never made them a better fighter. I agree with that if your calibration has always been higher and so my thought is that taking lighter shots was not used for any great length of time.

My method in the long run does very much make you a better fighter if you continue to strive to improve. It is easier to explain by asking what you might think shows the higher quality skill.

A. Throwing a half block doing the very minimum to knock just enough steam off the blow so that the sword grazes off your shield before doinking you in the temple and you say "light" if you say anything at all?

or

B. Making a complete block and never getting touched?

Some opinions will vary on that even as some would say the fighter who barely blocks did just enough to render the shot innefective and wasted less energy and movement. Others like me feel that not getting touched at all is the true test of your defenses and should I get struck, even with a less than stellar blow I have failed and lose the fight. This helps me to strive to improve always. BTW I don't like getting hit by 10s all the time. Like I said the point is to not get hit.

Interesting as well. Does this method change depending on the fighter? Are there some fighters whom you feel would grasp the true message of the "hit hard, take light" statement and others who don't?

Seeing the different intents behind the statement (both yours and Duke Gavin's) makes for provoking discussion.

-Ramius/Elias

[Vitus von Atzinger]

It does take alot more skill to land shots correctly. I have to admit my definition of what a good blow is has significantly narrowed in the last few years. I have completely re-tuned my body based on new criteria.

This doesn't mean I can always throw the type of blow I now consider to be good. I am continually heard and seen insisting that a so-so blow I have just thrown not be taken, because my definition has become so highly tuned.

It can get heated really fast, because I must hold myself to the same standard that I am currently holding others to. If I didn't do this I could probably win Crown fairly easily because my opponents would be giving me a MUCH WIDER definition out of respect and courtesy.

It can cause problems. A guy can say "It's up to them to decide when they are defeated." and then allow a really wide variety of interpretation in their opponents.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to play really, really rough in the SCA, but you can't take hard and allow your pals to take sloppy crapola from YOU.

[Seaan O'Hagan]

If you have to think about it I will not let you take it. Please hit me hard enough so that I don't have to think about it either.

I agree!

[Kilkenny]

I view this topic a bit differently. I have enjoyed reading the differing view.

First let me say I hit with er um great authority. I am good size, active, Play sports for most of my years and I flow well so even if I keep the arm power out of my swing I still hit hard. Lighter stick just means faster and hard.

I have also heard the hit hard take light but I believe this statement has evolved from a basic concept...

If I have to think about then it is good. The fight is fast and fluid. This is not the same as taking light. Most people do not want to be a rhino so it is better to err with caution then to be a rhino because once the fight begins, adrenalin kicks in the concentration to kill the other most folks will likely need to be hit a bit harder to register.

I figure I am one of these guys so when in doubt I am out!

And here in is the semantic problem

Very few, if any, advocate accepting blows that are not of sufficient force to be good - i.e., taking "light" blows.

The whole point of "hit hard, take light" is to give yourself (and your opponents) a decision making aid.

I throw with authority, such that my opponents should not have to wonder whether or not the blow was good. They should *know* the blow was sufficient without having to ponder the matter.

I take - in a relative sense - "light" which in practice means if I find myself thinking "was that good ?" I accept it - unless the answer to my question is a quick - no, it glanced/tipped/pushed or whatever obvious explanation tells me why it was not good. If it was clean and sound, but not hard enough to be clearly Good and I'm thinking was it, wasn't it - then I ought to be falling down

So while I may rock your world with my shots, I'm not expecting you to do the same to me before I'll accept your blow as good. "hit hard - take light" as I interpret it

edited to add: Unless it's Nissan, of course. He only throws cheese....