Thank you for this video. I tend to fight in Refuse and have a lot of masters of defence and warders tell me that i shouldnt fight this style but find it super natural.
Thank you for this video. I like how this interacts well with the heeltap video you posted last time. I think that heeltap did not work for me because I was not in your squared off stance. It certainly seems to work better when you are standing in the stance you guys are showing here.
I'm not a swordsman but the basics are absolutely sound... Applies to all martial arts: Don't telegraph what you're going to do... don't over commit (to a stance or technique that limits your options)...timing is everything, and surprise your opponent with unexpected, quick and complete action.
Great video with excellent insights for someone who fights (and will continue to fight) sword forward. I have largely dedicated myself to the single sword, at least in Rapier, and will continue to do so and only bring in off hands for melees or specific tournaments.
I have a lot of respect for the presenters prowess which I know by reputation. And Tora who they mention, of course, has shown results consistently in tournaments for some time. I think it's fair to say there is definitely something to the style that's being presented here; I think there are a lot of good points about the strengths of the strategy being made here. But, I do feel the need to push back against the idea that high level fighters tend toward this style. It may be true in some areas where the teaching of this style is dominant, but I also know many people who have struggled with it, and even people who have gone more sword point forward in order to overcome a ceiling they've reached with refused guards. The video mentions Fabris who does spend a good amount of time with refused guards in his book ... but even Fabris says the the point forward is the safer guard in general. Again, I'm not making such a bold claim as to say refused guard can't be good. I do think it has it's strengths and weaknesses. A taste of that is that is Fabris plates 60, 61 where he mentions low guards similar to the guard shown here by Donnovan vs Remmy. You can see in this video that Remmy misses his reaction to the dagger gain by Donnovan. The reason Donnovan's play is good is partly because he can make such a short reaction with the dagger there. But if Remmy was intentionally trying to bait that dagger he absolutely could have thrust into the dagger arm. And further, if he'd have kept his own dagger down, then it would have been in perfect position to parry and sword might have gotten free. This is not to throw shade at either fencer here, they are both amazing (better than me for sure haha) but to highlight the possible interplay; and to bring it back to Fabris' plates which stress that the refused guard fighter must keep their sword free otherwise the guard doesn't work.
Oh, right! Who I am! Just in case anyone cared haha. With respect and a mutual passion for the game we all love: ~William David Drake of the SCA, David Carroll otherwise
It always comes across to me as such a stuck up mentality when I see people refer to themselves as "master" in the fencing community. I know it's an SCA and we don't have much of that in Europe, but I just can't take all that pomp with ranks seriously.
So, I have a question about your timing. You point this out a bit in your video, but I am curious how you drill this. You and Rowan, and Miguel all delay the commitment of your hand to a shot for as long as possible. How do you develop that timing so that your foot lunges, and then you commit the timing of the shot. As beginners, many of us are taught, rightly or wrongly, to lead with the sword so that we create a "safe place" for our shots. Do you start your beginners out with sword and something? Or is this a separate skill that they develop later?
I start my beginners with sword and foot going same time. I don't ask them to over think it too much, focusing on a good balanced stance first, then thinking about driving their sword forward in the most direct line to their opponent. I don't really have them think about if their foot is going first, second, or single time as I believe it over-complicates a simple action
Since this is pretty much the "meta" in the SCA what would theoretically be a reliable counter strategy? Perhaps fencing from 1st guard and having your sword up and away from the dagger while having your dagger in front of you?
Like we mentioned in the end of the video, a really good counter for our style is doing the same style. In the last fight nick is fighting me and he resorts to more of a refused guard in order to counter my refused guard.
Great video. I am a big fan of this particular stance and style. I've been fighting low guard for many years. Very similar to your stance. I've been fighting Black Tiger style for some time. I really enjoy the similarities. Great video for a refresh on starting squared, and what can be done with and against this form. Well done.
The counter is to stay and attack sword side. Avoid thier dagger side. Most thier defense is done with the dagger. If the dagger is some ones main form of defense then align your position where the dagger has the longest distance to travel to stop your attack. At our school we call it staying right eye alignemmt. Attack thier sword side sense they don't use it defensivly much and stay away from thier dagger.
Nice breakdown and explanation of your style. Rob Childs is a bit of an anomaly, but I think being flexible in your guard is the best approach. Being able to show different looks to your opponent, and having different systems and answers. Unrelated question, its hard to tell from the video, but do you not put your finger through your ricasso?
I don't recommend using different guards. It's better to perfect one, proven guard, and I don't see the top people making big changes to how they fight to address their opponent. We tend to point our pointer finger straight down the ricasso, rather than wrapped around.
@@millicentrowan capo ferro and giganti both speak to taking counter guards. A great example of a very high level fencer who has very dynamic guards and changes his approach exchange to exchange is David Pascal. @David_Pascal_historicalfencing
Excuse me, can anyone give me a short summary about this video? And why does my fencing coach scold me when my hand is the last one to move, even if I land a blow successfully? After all, it’s better to act unpredictably. So, for example, when you stretch out your hand, your opponent will already understand that you are exposed, but if you are just moving, you can “shoot” at any moment...
Because it's the fundamentals of fencing. Going late with the sword is basically a feint. This only works if your opponent excpects a sword coming. A good fencer will see the delayed thrust and just thrust on their own. The centerline hasn't been taken yet, so you can land a thrust on your own. Delaying and moving the body first means you enter range without beeing covered. It can work as a feint, but you are open to counterattacks. You rely on your opponent to be defense.
I fought enough black tigers to know your system is an unrefined take on tora/ Robert Childs. Eye alignment! Eye alignment in a fight seems to be the point your trying to make as your advantage.
@@george5483 Whatever, it's utter bullshit either way. Masters back in the day had fought in actual battles and duels, they were in life and death situations. Today fortunately we don't have those situations, "we are just playing".
@@gozer87 Yes it is obviously completely different, we do not fight for our lives with swords. How can someone be an actual master when they have never put their life on the line like the masters did back in the day. Like my instructor said "we are playing, some of us play seriously but we are all playing".
