It's interesting that most folks who make the argument that weapon sparring is pointless because it doesn't perfectly capture real armed combat also seem to overlook the parallel that modern MMA sparring doesn't capture real unarmed combat. The whole point of sparring is to train as closely to real combat as possible but with minimal chance of you and/or your sparring partners suffering injury or death. Sparring is a safe space for play fighting. As a HEMA practitioner and long-time MMA student, and as a person who has had the misfortune to be in two incidents of actual unarmed fighting with hostile strangers in the real world, I can definitively say that neither form of sparring - armed or unarmed - is really analogous to the experience of potentially suffering real bodily harm. However, reflecting on those moments, do I think all my sparring experience was useless? Fuck no! I can't imagine facing the potential of real combat without having sparred in armed and unarmed martial arts. It would be so much more terrifying, and the potential for devastating harm and emotional trauma would be so much higher. No, sparring is not the same as real combat (obviously), but it also isn't useless by any stretch of the imagination.
I find it ironic that Ramsey makes this argument when he repeatedly says he isn't a self defense instructor. I get the point that he has often made that self defense is a legal theory and you aren't learning it if you only focus on the martial arts part, but I think he forgets sometimes about another point he himself has made, that the streets if anything makes you worse at fighting because you aren't ready for the adrenaline, shock, and surprise that comes from being attacked by a stranger. That's no different from the idea that you don't really know how a person will react to being injured by a weapon (unless they lose a limb). Clearly, thought, just as an MMA fighter is more prepared for the stress of not the shock, then a sword fighter whose training has focused on survival and defense first, attack second, would be more likely to walk away from a sword fight alive and with all their blood in their body. Getting hung up on the well known ambiguity of stopping power and how to score hits misses the context of what most historical swordsmen were really training themselves and others for -- not dying. Winning a fight with weapons should always be seen as a secondary goal.
Yeah, I don't get why Ramsey has made this point before, and then uses this criticism. Arguably, all sparring actually is pointless. Most people won't ever be in a fight, period. We're all just exploring things, right?
Completely agreed, my fellow weapons martial artist. I have been in numerous self-defense situations with violent criminals and my training in Eskrima saved my life against an armed attacker. I do MMA as well, and guys like Ramsey Dewey are just pseudo-intellectual hypocrites who like to dismiss weapon training because they think training BJJ and rolling around on the ground is the ultimate self-defense method lol
My favorite thing is that most people doing striking sparring aren't going full blast gym wars like back in the day, so the argument he made against HEMA applies here.
I remember making a comment on his page about how different angled strikes in empty hand techniques translate to weapon combat and how those odd angled and traveling strikes were useful. He didn't agree which is fine as he doesn't have to but it blew my mind that he thought those techniques were useless. Funny story time. A Chinese martial arts buddy of mine went to go practice boxing as he like it but wasn't aware of the rules. In sparring one day his opponent was slipping his punches so he launched a punch then turned it into a backfist and hit the guy. Weird or awkward techniques derived from fencing, calligraphy, etc work as we have to do our best to expect the unexpected.
Modern combat sports enthusiasts may claim to be scientific, but be so darn closed minded and conservative its hard to have these conversations with them. Literally, the kind of people who say "if its not used in MMA uts useless" have to be reminded how they themselves claimed that karate kicks, head movement and judo were useless 25 years ago....until Machida, Fedor and Anderson Silva shut their mouths.
Hey Ramsey! I live about an hour outside Shanghai, and I would love to hang out sometime! I can teach you a few things about kung fu that I am sure you haven't seen or heard of before. Let me know if you are interested.
@@fireislow7270Put down your phone and go and see if you can learn what the word "literally" really means. It's possible to realise something or to not realise something. It is not possible to "literally" realise something. If you don't understand that statement then it confirms that you are not intelligent enough to understand the concept of something being "literal".
I'm torn; I liked many of his videos, but unsubscribed when he made a video to "disprove" the feasibility of a global vegan society that was based on a math error on his side, which I pointed out to him. He replied, but never acknowledged his mistake or even posted a correction. :(
Looking at the comments and response on Ramsey's video, he seems to assume that training for premodern war has purely been a matter of mass drilling formations (debatable), but forgets that people also trained in the use of weapons for dueling and self defense, and engaged in many forms of weapon sparring to train these skills.
Asia is a big continent, and there are all kinds of people who have all kinds of reasons for doing MA. Frankly, he doesn't seem like a guy who reads a lot of books, and as the old saying goes, "学书不成，去学剑有不成".
@@GermanSausagesAreTheWurst i mean he's alright personally, ive interacted with him alot and discussed many things. he does have some weird takes on some things tho for sure lol. Although being that he's an MMA coach and has never trained with weapons or even for real unarmed combat I wouldn't take his opinion on such things too seriously lol.
Whether it is modern militaries or weapons manuals, real world experienced combattants often develop training systems to share their knowledge. Training isn't combat, but it does matter. If you train in MMA for ten years before competing and you compete against a person whose only experience is they competed once with no training, who has the advantage?
Weapon sparring is fun; therefore, it is not pointless. Also, when someone moves against you with the intent of attack, you will move-faster than you thought you could. It is great exercise. The same goes for any kind of sparring. It is a great way to polish your technique, without which you will have less of a chance to survive until you have real combat experience if it ever gets to that.
As a martial artist who has been involved in martial arts for almost 4 decades now, these arguments always make me giggle. Normies think traditional martial artists are magical and combat athletes as brutes. Combat athletes and self defense specialists think traditional martial artists are delusional. Self defense specialists think that combat athletes are useless in a street fight. Traditional martial artists think that combat athletes and self defense specialists are unenlightened. Then there is the east vs. west arguments on martial arts. It’s all silly. Because a lot of the time it’s people arguing against a made-up argument or assumed belief without any actual discussion or agreements made on where the argument starts, what is the intended goal, is there anything that we can actually agree on? Is this just an attempt at one party to be clever or put down the other? Ramsey’s argument for example… you do a decent job defending, but his same argument can be flipped around. A sport combat match has as much to do with a real world fight to the death as much as much as training with blunted “safe” weapons. It’s just such a pointless argument to make. Anyone who trains with steel weapons (not even live mind you) has no illusions that what they are doing is the same as getting into a fight with real weapons and intent to kill. Probably only a handful of weapons based martial artists world wide even know what it feels like to have their weapon in their hands go through living tissue with intent to do harm. This just isn’t a valid argument and comes across more as arrogance. Rant over. By the way, first time watching your videos, you got my sub.
I want to say also, as crazy as it sounds, there even are some HEMA practitioners that have experimented with controlled drilling and sparring with sharp blades (Roland Warzecha, the instructors at Blood and Iron, etc), as it can teach things about the feeling of binding that blunts cannot. The irony, though, is that the more realistic the weapon simulator, the more controlled and light you have to go, and when the simulator is replaced by an actual weapon you have a paradox: you can only set up the attack, but never follow through with it! Obviously this is something only the most advanced practitioners should attempt.
Yeah you are absolutely correct that there is still a disconnect from unarmed fighting as it is done in gyms and as it happens in the outside world. That gap is smaller than with weapons of course, but it still exists. Thanks so much for the sub! It really means a lot!
@@formlessone8246 Yes, I also see the value in this practice, but I hesitate to encourage it too much because I think many beginners could end up hurting themselves.
With my experience, all martial-art practices require three components: 1.Forms. Basic move-set practices to drill down the body movements, angle of attack, tempo, etc. 2.Target hitting tests. It is used to understand the effect of your action, and iron out the small flaws within the movement that can negatively affect the result. 3. Sparring. Pressure test the skills you've learned with active, resisting opponents. Do remember it is not only about how many scores you can get, but also how well you can perform the skills you've learned under stress.
Very well thought out! Great discussion Keith, and it's a topic that absolutely needs more discussion. There was a recent discussion between Nathaniel and Nathan on the "Sportification" of Asian fencing systems, and HEMA constantly struggles with how to keep the swordsmanship faithful to the past, safe, vibrant, and yet not devolve into some re-invented Olympic fencing. Would love to see a discourse between you and coach!
I don't think anybody can fully prepare for a truly violent confrontation, armed or not. That being said, there are some HEMA clubs that do practice (very carefully) with sharps.
As we've done this activity with several types of dissimilar weapons, I think you and I proved that it IS useful to spar against one or multiple armed opponents. Weapons practitioners have better hands than the guys who just practice "hands".
Put down your phone and your weapons and go and see if you can learn what the word "literally" really means. It's possible to do an activity or to not do an activity. It is not possible to "literally" do an activity. If you don't understand that statement then it confirms that you are not intelligent enough to understand the concept of something being "literal".
Also... think about this... we have the better capacity to simulate and train armed combat NOW than ANYONE did in the centuries before this. Sparring with wooden swords may have been comparable, but the weight changed combat a lot. For many, many soldiers of ancient armies it would have been THEIR FIRST TIME stress testing their training IN COMBAT. As someone who has been in combat and fights I can tell you, there is no way to effectively simulate combat. Simunition rounds have gotten us close, but there is nothing akin to the idea of "If I mess up, I die" and what that psychological state does to people.
Some of what you're saying about modern military training is the sort of assumed paradigm, by those who haven't been in the military. In boot camp, when they would tell me to put on my "war face" and scream, I knew it was fake and I was just acting the part. They never broke me down and built me back up, or any crap like that. I'm sure that happened with some folks, but I would honestly say it was the minority. But we were a band of brothers, and we had each others' backs. Now in actual combat, when our lives were at risk, to be honest, some of the guys would break down. One guy (big, tall, muscular guy - the kind that back in the states would get all the ladies) was so freaked out when were were over in Kuwait, that he almost shot me, spazzing out and thinking I was one of the enemy. He was so jittery and nervous. Pretty interesting - a guy normally super confident in the civilian world. For me, the answer to surviving combat, surviving war, wasn't so romantic. It was simply turning off all emotions, becoming a robot, and doing my job. Now there is training, and simulation, and then there is TRAINING. We could sit and calmly shoot on the firing range. Or we could have night time drills with real explosions blowing dirt and mud all over the place, flares in the sky, the smell of smoke, crawling through mud, crawling under barbed wire, etc. Whatever you do, you want to get as close as you safely can get to it in training.
I can tell you definitely know your stuff sir. Being confident and tough in peacetime is often not representative of how we would behave in real life and death situations. I cannot imagine how nerve wrecking to be in ukraine right now for either side, when one side does not necessarily have superior firepower, and the possibility of dying from one engagement is as real as it gets...
I used to enjoy Ramsey’s content but I quickly realized as a martial artist myself and former soldier that he is close minded and arrogant. While I enjoyed his early takes on bullshido self defense it seems that he thinks everything that he is not doing is bullshido.
In many ways that’s kind of the popular strain of martial arts discourse online, unfortunately. “My narrow perception and training focus is clearly correct. Everything outside my experience and/or training is either fundamentally flawed or completely fake.” Or so the narrative goes. It’s a really bizarre thing, imo, for a field that likes to depict itself as very empirical and scientific, yet falls into a lot of the petty tribalism that other arts do. (Cooks complaining about other cooks’ “authenticity” or the supposed flaw in genres of painting… it’s all just kind of subjective takes for the sake of having them).
i felt that too some years back, that's when i stopped watching his videos. it might be fine if he does it entertainingly, like trolling, but he's too dry and unfunny for that.
I agree 100%. I can only speak from my limited HEMA view of things but I've seen more and more emphasis put on training different aspects and contexts of fencing within the community. I've seen people increasingly utilise different tools like scenarios with an almost role play-like character (but with a clear focus on the fencing itself), formation combat outside of the 1v1 context, different materials for weapon simulators for different purposes etc. This is the way.
Two points about people living in times where swords and spears were primary weapons that I almost never hear discussed is one that they typically did a lot more cutting things with sharp blades in their daily lives than modern people, and two they were typically much more comfortable around killing, with many more individuals than today regularly slaughtering their own animals and many people attending public executions of one form or another. If you're used to cutting and used to killing that will make you more dangerous with a blade.
I mean potentially, but it's sort of, more nuanced depending on what historical period you're looking at. I don't know about public executions in, say, the medieval era, or whatever. I do know that duels were somewhat common, or at least, the accusation of people of having committed a crime, the punishment for which, was a duel, and so was declaring people witches on the basis that local lords could inherit their land, based on that false accusation. I also know that roman executions tended not to be as common as we might think, at least, on the idea that people were killed in gladiatorial combat very often, since it pays more to hype up a gladiator with kayfabe and keep them alive so you can keep making money off the public. I don't know about public executions from those periods in terms of people getting their heads chopped off or iron eagled or whatever. I would suspect those punishments would mostly arise from wartime, rather than being a very common thing. I think it was more common to throw people in the stocks or whatever for a couple days, and then let them out, public humiliation, mostly, as a punishment.
You put it well about the training. Motive is key. Me personally, I've never trusted a word out of Ramsey Dewey's mouth. He thinks just because he's a professional fighter and lives in China that he knows about Kung Fu. He has very little understanding, and frankly, very little respect for the tradition.
I kind of like the guy, but I stopped watching his videos for exactly that reason. It's kind of weird that his Chinese students also have little respect for Kung Fu.
He seems to have very little understanding about anything actually. Sometimes he has a point but he misses all the other points and does not understand context or different situations. I don't know if he is just ignorant or trying to get views but I don't really watch him. He is not entertaining or educational.
He may be a good bjj instructer i dont know, but his striking is just a basic slow awkward type of mma striking that most basic cage fighters use.I don't see his appeal as someone you should listen to when it comes to any striking art, weapons or empty hands.
(Commenting from a mostly unarmed combat sports background myself) A thing with warriors of the past is that they most likely couldn't completely prepare for a deadly fight before experiencing it, either. The old days would have had a minority who actually used their skills and lived to tell the tale, but most soldiers, militiamen and such would have just had training to simulate it as best they could with their low tech equipment. Obviously their training methods weren't perfect, but if they trained (sparring with their primitive equipment, or hitting the pell, test cutting etc), they'd be more likely to survive those first lethal encounters and gain experience. Where sparring probably goes wrong is that you'll get so good at the rule set that you can lose sight of the mentality and the goals behind what they were doing back then. This is a problem we grapple with in modern combat sports (and self defense practices). Our sparring is relatively consequence-free and so it tends to be slower and more dragged out than the frantic surprise attack and sprint/flurry that a street fight or knife attack would be. then we look outside the rules for specific self defense practices (sucker punch, knife defense etc), and often end up training them in a completely compliant and slowed down rote repetition style that we wouldn't take seriously if we were preparing for something like a boxing match. I look at HEMA treatises and I think that divide might apply to weapon practices - how do you simulate and train for a fight that breaks out in three seconds and potentially kills someone in two hits? (or a fight where the combatants, if possible, needed to disarm and restrain an individual rather than chop him up. remember that the treatises have disarms.) How would you interpret say, Fiore's plays when the real thing is a dagger assault where the guy is stabbing furiously while posting against you with his free hand for control? And in scenarios like that we could choose to take a more cautious duelist-like approach or something more like a rage state, because real humans span that whole spectrum when they fight for real. I think in making weapon fighting practical you'd want to look at modern knife/sword/machete violence, cross reference to historical accounts and battlefield archaeology, take clues as to what not necessarily the martial arts with weapons looked like but the violence of the practitioners would have looked like. Force on force scenario based training could then be used to somewhat simulate the experience, but obviously not to the degree that a combatant experienced with live blades.
I have tried explaining that to him but I get crickets. He doesn't seem interested in the true depths of training your mind, body and Soul. Have a great day!! 🙏🏼
Drills improve skills. You develop muscle memory so that things that might be two or three things feel like one movement. Your combinations become smoother and faster. Sparring, especially full contact sparring makes you a lot better than untrained fighters. Like a lot. This probably applies to weapons training too.
If you can never actually simulate real weapons fighting in sparring, you can never actually simulate real unarmed fighting in sparring. Something I'm sure the likes of Ramsey Dewey would take issue with.
I think this was a theme that a lot of MMA practitioners started jumping on the band wagon when Hard2Hurt did his thing against HEMA as well. Meh I chalk it up to the macho version of Hoplonphobia (Fear of weapons).... And sometimes I think it's a psyop for ruling classes to propagandize people to reject effective weapons while THEY and their private security/armies do have em. You can today order a black powder blunderbuss and Amazon a recurve bow to your home because it is not as effective as cartridge firearms...best you believe once military/police/security for politicians develop laser rifles you will be able to order center fire guns to your home and the Brady campaign will be talking about the dangers of scary black laser guns. It's not about safety it is about control. So I think EVERYONE should be proficient in firearms, melee weapons, and empty hands. Shaming a person for learning a weapon skill in lieu of unarmed fighting sounds sus and is absolutely low T by trying to act High T behavior.
Martial Arts is about the Arts. It is not just about realistic killings. In the real world of the past candidates wanting to be high ranking officers in the army can take official tests or competition. Some developed pride after gaining a title to be king of something, and get humbled when they loss in competition under different set of rules. There is a saying in Chinese that one develops victory by presenting something strange. So, for that reason alone, there are lots of strange weapons and application in Chinese Martial Arts.
I think that we have to decide what our main focus is: 1 - do we want to be able win historical fencing competitions? 2 - do we want to recreate the fighting style that we THINK we identify from treatises and historical documents? 3 - do we want to be maximally competent in a real swordfight? Or street fight? The practice for these 3 objectives is not identical. I like to try to be an all-rounder on all 3, but this means I get a deficit in all 3. For ex in HEMA we rarely spar against different weapons, we tend to have a sort fo underlying sparring ruleset, even when not counting points, and we rarely practice some really important and practical stuff like: how to defend against multiple opponents or how to defend against a surprise dagger attack with a sheathed longsword (it's a Fiore technique, but I never even practiced it...). These missing practices would be very problematic if the objective was number 3. And in part Number 2.
Yes, the goal will certainly always inform the training. Personally I am mostly interested in number 2, and a little in number 1. For number 3, I think that non sword arts are more important if we are planning for real violence which may happen in our life.
@@thescholar-general5975 Although, I did see someone talking about whcih swords would have been most suited to self-defense today. And it was interesting. If you have a sword then you are much more likely to go against someone with a knife, club, etc. even then usually drawing the sword or using it as more than a club is going to get you sent to jail for awhile too. The goals matter a bit, A short stabbing sword like a gladius is probably one of the best and most feasible options. Or alternatively a cane-sword. Rapiers would be terrifying but generally aren't really concealable and are mostly hyper-lethal. Stabs in general are more deadly than slices. So if you want to focus on slices you want to really be good at, Making the Machete solid, but there is still quite a bit of room to be better in a similar or smaller form factor with similar reach. knife on knife is likely to happen, but if you have sword, most like the closest thing to a sword they might have is a stick. In many ways a stick is a more practical and lethal weapon than a sword anyways though, definitely not as lethal though. But if you really want to kill someone why not just go for a gun unless you can't get one. If you have to fight and it is clear you have to strike to preserve your life then going for a well aimed stab is likely to put them down probably. (in theory.) I have actually thought about doing some 3. training. But that is mainly because I mostly did hema for fun and have been getting more into unarmed martial arts. but knife fights are really really ugly, and I would prefer not to carry a gun. But sword on knife is a lot less fair. But having a sword that is either concealable enough or not noticeable while still being long enough to make no longer fundamentally a knife fight where everyone gets really sliced up and probably both people die. I don't really want to kill someone if I don't have to but having a good viable option to "knife" is important, After a bit of thought, I realized something like a well weighted stick, baseball bat, etc. Or something is probably a better fit than a sword. 1. is a great cool goal, and for that how "historical" it is only matters so much as the judges care I guess. formal stick fighting training might be better, but I started sword-fighting for fun with sticks as a kid, The size and weight and length has an effect, and the balance is a bit difference having cross guards and such, The same weight is going to be thicker, but it isn't too different outside the extremes.
Because it got deleted, I just think the CTE from Ramsey getting beaten up a lot in his youth and during mma/muay thai/boxing matches is just catching up. The same way he spars lightly in mma, same way to do in weapons.
Ramsey Dewey doesn’t understand actual combat or real fighting nor does he have any experience in using weapons. His opinion is utterly meaningless and more of a troll than anything else. He isnt even very good at his sport
I don't understand people getting upset with others for "stepping out of their wheel house". whatever happened to just having a conversation? Solid video, good to see you again. I personally don't agree with the going through a blend of styles. Yes training can become stagnate and not properly build fundamentals or properly pressure test. I personally view martial arts with or without weapons as best when you focus on building core skills: movement timing distancing responsiveness getting really good at what you do and learning to apply it, is where its at in my opinion. This applies to unarmed just as much as sword work. Personally I view you as a swordsmen. There will always be someone better but there are many things that make someone a swordsmen and we have all seen you skill. I have no idea how you would do in full gear sparring in competition, I also don't know how you would react if you where in a real sword fight (hypothetical), but I do see how you move with a blade, your comfortable level, how fluid you are and smooth your cutting is. Those are all skills of a swordsmen in my personal opinion. I wouldn't sell yourself short. I kinda think that with sword play, the ability to dual another with a sword is vastly different then wielding one on the battle field. Its also different if someone broke into your house and the sword was the closest thing to you. So what are you trying to build (general question for anyone studying the sword)? Are you building those skills? Great, then who cares how you compare to others. I think someone wishing to be a swordsmen or just have comfort with a sword should do the following: spar in full gear (safety first) free flow movements in the air cut (bottles, bamboo, mats, anything really) use a real sword (blunted unless in a safe place and comfortable to swing a real sword) then they can build body mechanics, power generation, movement, foot work and the sword starts feeling like an extension of the body. Anyway, long winded but just my two cents.
Yeah you know sparring with giant pompons on is just like being in a real fight where you can go for the eyes and kick people in the balls. Which changes the results of fights quite a bit as anyone watching ufc will know. Ramsey is having himself a nice episode of Dunnig Kruger.
Combat sports youtube seems to thrive off of inflammatory rhetoric and pandering to "self defense" crowds. Which is understandable, youtube is actively working against them, you gotta play the game to win. I love Ramsey, but he lives in the world of sports as a coach and trainer, which always makes it interesting when he steps out of his lane to comment on street fights or traditional martial arts. He just doesn't have the perspective to make a good faith comment on the subject in my opinion.
Ramsey's video was silly, like saying there's no point in boxing because MMA exists. And there's no point in MMA because eye gouging and groin strikes exist. Any sparing will never be the same as a real fight.
And yes, Historical sources come in a variety of forms /mediums and yes the archaeological record as well as preserve folkloric activities become a veritable way to give credence to the sources....they compliment them, and maybe even contradict themselves and even by this they shed new light or at least open new discussions that may lead or not to discoveries.
Yea I also thought Ramsey's video was nonsensical. Like you said, people back then when there was actual armed melee combat had the same problem, in fact we have it better thanks to the progress of technology and all of the New materials that allow us to make safe weapons and safety gear. What we really lack as you pointed out is actual experience killing each other with melee weapons. But other than that is the same logic than unarmed fighting. If you EVER had to face an armed situation ¿how would you fare better? ¿having sunk hundred of hours in solo practice, sparring and drilling? ¿or doing only solo practice and very controlled drilling? The last one sounds like the standard practices of Mc.Dojos to me. I also wholeheartedly agree with your opinion in sources, and I would add that you should not marry with any type of source. HEMA usually has this problem of treating the combat treatises like the bible, if you learn how to use an european weapon in a different yet effective way than what the sources suggest, some people inside the HEMA community will tell you that you are using the weapon wrong and that you are not doing real HEMA. Since we lack the actual experience of fighting to the death with melee weapons, our fencing should be the result of gathering every bit of knowledge we can muster from all the sources available. Historical accounts, period art and depictions, surviving fighting treatises, living styles and traditions, archeological findings, your own experience gained through training and experimentation, etc. I could go on but the point is that as long as you are striving to get better every day, whether more knowledgeable or more skilled, whathever the means to it are, you'll be in the right path as a martial artist, doesn't matter if it's armed or unarmed.
If it's ahistorical, meaning there's no source showing the method existing in history, then it by definition is not HEMA. It's not wrong per se, it just doesn't fit the acronym. As for treating the source like the bible, it depends on your goals. If you want to interpret and "resurrect" a historical system, then that source should be your bible. If you want to learn to win tournaments or use a sword in general, then the sources arent as primary. Both are valid, just contrast at times because of different goals.
@therecalcitrantseditionist3613 I see your point about reviving a "system", but HEMA means historical european martial arts ¿What is to say that techniques that don't appear in the treatises weren't used by people back then? ¿Everybody fought like it's shown in the manuals? ¿In the same style? I severely doubt it. Besides, martial arts change and evolve, the goal of the masters behind the treatises was to be as good as a fighter as they could, not confine themselves to the state of knowledge they had at that time. If they could have written down more versions of their treatises I'm sure we would see their style evolve as they picked up new things. People often miss the point when they refer to old martial arts masters and traditions. We should be not only trying to imitate them, but also seeking what they sought.
Some "German" longsword practitioners in HEMA called that distinction Schulefechten(school fencing/fighting) and Ernstfechting( fighting in ernest). There is also interesting accounts when it comes to Guild fencing.
You have to understand that what you are doing isn't going to look the same when implemented in practice. What you should he doing in training is building the physical fundamentals and muscle memory required to be successful, sp that when things get messy you can let your body go through the motions and not overthink the situation.
I commented this one Ramsey's video as well, but I think drilling techniques would be better, or sparring drills, rather than unfocused sparring for points or to win. The real experience comes from war, and the survivors of the wars become valuable veterans. Casualties are to be expected. The techniques weren't originally made for dueling afaik, they were made for large scale feudal warfare. In modern armies, there is lots of drilling, hence the title of the DRILL sergeant. You drill the techniques until they become second nature, so in the heat of combat you are more likely to pull them off. If you die, you die, but the ones that survive are now battle tested.
Whether a system is for war or for dueling depends entirely on the source in question. Many of the European sources are explicitly for dueling or for street self defense, not war. In fact, probably most of them that we learn from are dueling manuals, which is given away by the relative lack of armored combat instructions. While many of the Chinese manuals are military manuals, the living traditions may not be given the amount of information they contain on weapons that are unorthodox for a military purpose; something like nunchuks (which yes, are a Chinese weapon) only make sense as a concealed weapon (and there are others in China like loaded sleeves that prove concealment was a concern in Chinese culture). The primary military sword of Chine was the Dao, so most forms for the jian are almost certainly for civilian (aristocratic) life, not the military. I could go on, but the point is you have to be careful about over generalizing what the sources are intended to teach. There are at least five major combative contexts (war, sport, dueling, law enforcement, and self defense) and all five have existed for most of history. We should expect all five to be represented in the sources.
Apparently weapons sparring is not pointless, the United States Marines still do it. I've seen videos where they use trainning knives with edges that give a sharp shock to simulate cuts. They have drills where combatants will wear protective gear and simulate bayonet against club battles. It gets extremely realistic l can assure you. They say they do this because you never know when you will have to kill someone with out your rifle. I would have to agree. Even in this modern era, you might have to work with a bat or a blade instead of having a gunfight. And shouldn't a well rounded Martial Artist know how to use just about anything within arms reach? My whole point is that it can be done and done realistically and well. And apparently without too many casualties. The professional still do it all of the time. Great video.
While training with live blades can be informative, there is still a world of difference in the level of intensity and contact between sparring with live blades vs more safe training tools.
As an art form theres nothing wrong with doing no sparring, but you should have no say in the effectiveness of your martial arts in a combat scenario. Simple as
This is why I watch and Listen to my Professor at Vee AJ Jitsu as oppose to Ramsey Dewey. Street Self Defence is more practical than training for a one on one fight. Ramsey lives in China where you can imprisoned for saying the wrong thing, I assume Violent Drunks being free to roam isn't something he has to deal with on the regular. Plus fighting 1 on 1 on a ring with rules isn't the same as being surronded by 3-6 violent drunk punks looking for trouble.
Right but they do train without them sometimes, and they don't shoot each other with live rounds. A real war is very different to army training. This does not mean the army training is useless.
I think it's pretty simple to learn how to cut a sword you had a stick you hit with a stick now you get a sword and all you need to know is which side is the sharp side and you hit with that side and you cut
I wouldn't take that "competition" seriously. Ramsey has talked about the behind the scenes BS that happened, and other people have gotten into arguments in the comments section of Martial Arts Journey with the gym owner that organized the event that show him to be terrible at taking criticism. At least some of the things Ramsey said about the behind the scenes drama is confirmed on camera in the videos themselves despite the Reality TV style editing, and complaints about the scoring and inconsistent instructions are mirrored by Seth and Mike. The instant someone had to say "I would kick you off that ladder if this were real" you know that the organizers had no idea what they were doing. That was insanely unsafe, and Mike likewise said that the refs should have stepped in and made a ruling in favor of the guy who had the high ground. In truth, it shouldn't have happened at all. Just like the guy on the ceiling should have known better. Ramsey has every right to be mad that the guy broke his knee. That could have ended even worse for not just Ramsey, but Mike as well if he had landed on him instead. Seth says he nearly quit after the bus thing because the guys coming on the bus concussed him. You're organizing a competition, the safety of the competitors is the organizer's responsibility. And consider this: after all the badmouthing of sports the organizer did, he was still forced to give the belt to the active MMA fighter. What does that say about self defense to you?
@@formlessone8246 He made some good points, fair. But instead of having a constructive dialogue that would help the next season be even better, he chose to act like a surly child because he didn't win. Of course things could have been better. The first UFC was a shit show, but they kept at it until they got the right formula. Ramsey's entire critique is that if it's not in the cage it's not real, mma is the ultimate martial art, self defense is only a male power fantasy. I love mma, just joined a class, but it's not the be-all-end-all of martial arts. It's the best possible base you can have, but there's so much more you need to know for self defense, like situational awareness, knowledge of weapons use and defense, facing multiple opponents, to name a few. Take krav maga, it's more about tactics than technique. For the most part, a typical KM fighter that never trained in anything else will be garbage. But if that person trained in mma, judo, boxing, they will be dangerous. Many times Ramsey will argue in his comments how it's BS, only mma is any good. He even had a very public beef with Master Wong, accused him of teaching bad techniques, to be specific a bad rear choke, even though the same choke is taught in BJJ. Wong replied, said a bunch of crap, but after that let it go. Ramsey kept mentioning it the next two years. My point is this, he's a great coach, has a lot of knowledge about mma, and that's great. Doesn't mean he knows everything, and he certainly doesn't have enough knowledge to declare weapons sparring is bad. That's just pure arrogance. I used to follow him, but he's lost his way. He should get away from the internet for a while and work on himself.
@@jackreacher4488 if you think that his criticism comes from a place of disappointment in losing, then I think you are projecting a motive on him that is not in evidence. He said right from the start that he didn't go there to win, but simply to have fun. His fun was ruined because someone broke his knee, and he put fault on the organizer. Pretty simple. And it isn't like he thinks that there was nothing of value from the experience or in the videos (particularly the knife stuff, which he feels validated his opinions on knife defense as pointless). But he has a right to complain about getting hurt and to frame it unconstrucively when everyone who has talked to the organizer has noticed the same pattern of stubborn refusal to take criticism or change how they do things. You might have not noticed that Ramsey never said anything disrespectful of Rokas, likely because Ramsey does think Rokas can learn and change, that's why they remain friends. At a certain point, constructive criticism is pointless. Which is also why Ramsey has said he no longer wants to talk about it. He has made all the points he wanted to make, and given his memory issues, has probably told all the stories about it he can properly remember or wishes to share.
@@jackreacher4488 I don't think it's because he didn't win, I think it's because he tweaked his knee, I think injured his eye more, and will probably be reminded of the shittiness of the competition every time he goes for a walk in the park. I'd be fuckin pissed off too, if that were the case.
It's all a game. If worried about the streets then you would pick the game that closely resembles the streets. If not worried about the streets play whatever is fun and go out into the community to make the streets a better place.
He never, at any point, said Weapons Sparring is pointless. Even you agree with that. Why the video title? You know that the people commenting will not bother to see Ramsey's video and will comment and interact strictly based off your video's title. Which they have. Same with Skallagrim's response.
The title of his video is “Weapon Sparring Kinda Sucks”, this begs the question of whether or not it is pointless. At the end of his video, he says that weapons sparring is “lightyears” apart from weapon use, and he never concedes that training with weapons is better preparation than not training with weapons. If we simply take his video at face value, it would mean that modern militaries would have no reason in training solders how to shoot or position themselves in firefights. I agree that it is impossible to actual simulate weapon combat especially the psychological aspects of it, but I clearly disagree with him about the transferability of weapons sparring to combat. I was also somewhat surprised by the amount of negative comments and haters. Though, I doubt that changing the title of my video would change their mind. If anything they may double down and post even more.
@@thescholar-general5975 do they make knives? Just asking because I actually had this really strange but cool pocket knife with that name on it. Never been able to find another one that style tho.
Yes, I know, but if weapons training does suck, it kind of begs the question as to why it should be done. I technically agree with the problem that he points out. My video is really about what we can do to mitigate the problem.
This guy is so uninformed about arms armament and training. Armies of the world for thousands of years have used sparing drills to learn how to use there personal weapons. Its also used to train units in movement on mass ,field tactics, study how weapons and militaries evolved.
@@thescholar-general5975 Yup I keep practicing with whomever have the guts to do Basic longsword class on my yard...I am also in cahoots with the two HEMA groups back in Puerto Rico . Eric got kick out of the church but now they are practicing on a nifty place on a mall....the Classic fencing and Schola St George groups are almost dead and the SHFG moved from the Oakgrove community center and they join this armoured combat game conglomerate(they mostly play with boffers) on a new local. Joplin got a new group but de Db that started it is using the same day and hours of the older group(Drew s group, he is a really nice guy)...so let s see how that goes.
@@thescholar-general5975 I m currently recovering from an MCL sprain, nothing serious or at least I hope so lol. I m still working at the Allergy and Immunology clinic and I m trying to build the budget and train fro SoCal 2025.....the largest HEMA event in the US and probably globally. There are HEMA groups now in Taiwan, Hong Kong and other parts of Mainland China, Hanoi, Filipinas , Korea and Japan...it s crazy.
Always a treat when you post, SG. I like Ramsey, but I stopped watching him because he is too opinionated. I'm opinionated too, but I have different opinions. These sport fighters think they are only ones who do "real" martial arts, but it's a sport, not an art. Sport fighting can helpful to a martial artist, but it's no substitute. I know a guy who paints murals on vans. He's good and he's fast and he makes money, but he's no Salvador Dali. Painting murals on vans can be helpful to an artist, but a van will never be in the art museum.
Thanks for watching! I have been working on the manual, but it is not quite ready to share yet. I have a different big project that should be done sometime in the near future.
having opinions is not a bad thing. stubborn about it, maybe not a bad thing too, as it may show consistency and being principled. when one is being arrogant and mocks others who have different opinions. that's when it goes bad. or worse, when one is forcing his/her opinions unto others.
FlashMan; known for using that media program to make those questionable cartoons that were uploaded to the Internet. What do you mean it's not thatkind of flash?! oh...XD
But the only bladed weapons see nowadays is a knife swords are not useful anymore so it'd be a better idea to practice knife defense and knife fighting then sword defense and sword fighting
I think the subscribers of your channel and skallagrims channel, thinkg you guys disagree with ramsey dewey MORE than you guys actually do. Kinda weird, i guess people don't pay to much attention to the words being said in the video, and just get the general idea of "This is an anti ramsey dewey video! i need to be anti ramsey dewey now!"
Yeah, I don’t disagree with the idea that you can’t really spar with lethal weapons in a realistic way, I just think that Dewey kind of left out some nuance and a broader conversation on the topic.
Weapon sparring is as useful as the ruleset and how heavily it’s enforced during training. Otherwise it just becomes a bash fest followed by “ACKUTALLY I would have killed you if it were a REAL weapon.”
The thing is do you really have to simulate real weapons fighting in sparring. The purpose of sparring is to test actual moves in pressure testing not only the moves but yourself. Your reactions to an opponent and be prepared to get hurt from bruises to cuts. Really you are trying build a responsive system that will react due to repeated sparring instinctively to various attacks. It's also why you drill moves repeatedly when it becomes a habit you have to think less and it becomes a response . Sorry not much good in explaining things. Just like if you are fighting multiple opponents you won't be using wide fancy moves. You would use short moves aimed arms or legs. You would try to make them get in the way of each other and not get surrounded and of course find a place to retreat. Sorry people winning in this case is to be able to escape from them with survivable injuries and ending someplace that can protect you. This isn't a fantasy book where one person can defeat multiple people numbers do matter. I will note that you could possibly defeat them but at the cost of your life.
All sparring is or atleast Should be "weapons sparring " . Basically every empty handed form of combat is derived from a form of weapons combat. Not to mention weapons are also trained for physical development , tai chi swords, the long pole etc. and last but not least, when it comes to martial arts sparring isn't even the most important aspect anyway.
@@tillburr6799 yup, the funny thing is that the modern MMA refrain that if you don't know how to grapple you don't know how to fight (words taken straight out of Ramsey's mouth) are mirrored in Medieval sources like Fiore who say that all combat ultimately derives from wrestling. A weapon can always be taken away from you or you might fail to draw it in time to stop a surprise attack, then what are you going to do? The answer is whatever you have trained to do with your hands.
@@formlessone8246 wrestling is even important now. For guns. “B-b-but i would just shoot u” not up close. You need to clear a gap before or ill just snatch it. Unless you can wrestle, because then it doesn’t matter if i grasp it, you can take control of me and the situation and can safely pull from ANY distance
@@tillburr6799 no this is absolutely correct. It's entirely impractical to train someone to fight one way Empty handed then a completely different way with a weapon. Fpr example the "cross guard" you see in boxing is an empty handed application from a knife fighting system
I wouldn't concern myself with ramsay, a 3rd rate ex fighter who doesnt even train good fighters. He is just spewing some popular viewpoints for the views.
My response to Ramsey's video: "Until you watch Kadochnikov system where they train with sharp blades and live rounds. Of course it isn't hard sparring because they'd all be dead, but there is always "pressure" because a slip or mistake causes injury. Training real blades or other weapons is a whole galaxy removed from sparring with fists and feet, but it's being done, and is much more pressure than punching and kicking with pads on."
I train with live weapons, its fuckin awesome. I prefer heavy blunt weapons and great axes. My brother likes the sword and board, and polarms. If you got armour (AS THEY WOULD'VE IRL) it's really not that bad, you might get a minor injury now and again, but so far, we haven't died.
No, it is not pointless. These mma guys think theyre the shit, but if they went up against us in our soort, they die. If they start shit in the street, they die, cause guns.....or knives tbh. MMA is dumb.
