วีดีโอ

based tenebris sword

This has become my new hema channel to watch

HELICOPTER HELICOPTER

Excellent video!! I was always confused by this.

You let americans get close to a noble art of sword. Next thing, there are stupid tutorials about defence against something called “zwerch copter”.

Great stuff. Love the Avi outtake.

You're using very literal from the words used interpretation, but seem to not consider that this is a translation (and therefore itself a interpretation), what does the German say here and does it agree?

❤

Is there a good reason not to bodycheck / crosscheck? Honest question, I do kendo so I don't know.

See this is why I usually spar without any armor at all. You literally fight differently with armor on versus without armor on. When you fight without armor you really have to control yourself more, move more, and just honestly it is harder, but duh right? I like it more. I understand the odds of you running into a random attacker with a sword is low but I feel like training unarmored better trains you to engage in real fights. You never know what can happen out there, but if you are training with armor you won't fight correctly when the time calls for it (hopefully never! but you never know!)

What are those gloves? They look like brigandine, pretty snazzy!

the bear in the back is in freeze, cause he knows how dangerous a sword is ;)

Imo it takes at least two years of fencing or lots of training to start getting past doubles. Even when you get more experience it still happens

Feels like 2005 hema… cmon guys, do more research we dont need to do the same mistakes over and over again

So another potential reason for the sheer amount of doubles: We dont typically train to recognise when and why they happen. We learn parries, attacks and counter attacks. But do we train when to recognise when its time to defend and when its safe to attack? Right of way systems will typically have rules based on experience. E.g. one rule will say something like 'if the opponent is moving forwards they have priority'. This isnt just an arbitrary rule. If your opponent is moving forwards they are planning to attack you, otherwise they wouldnt be moving forwards, so you need to prioritise your defence in that moment. Other rules: if they have their sword extended pointing at you, they have priority. Of course they do, if you attack and impale yourself on their sword, thats on you! If they voluntarily gain your blade, they are preparing to attack you. If they voluntarily disengage from your blade, they are preparing to attak you. I led a training session where we used right of way rules to quickly analyse why a double occured. At the end of the session there was great fencing going on and few to no doubles. I doubt that has been sustained, though. Needs to be trained again and again. Fighting with a sword is not intuitive. We cant expect people to keep safe without training.

Double hits occur in hema because they are rewarded in tournaments. Or more specifically, because hits are rewarded in tournaments. Also, because we (wrongfully) try and discourage them by punishing people who do them. This goes against virtually all the developmental studies which observe that humans respond more strongly towards rewards than they avoid penalties. So, if you want to reduce double hits - incentivise the behaviour which avoids double hits; reward fencers for their defensive actions such as parries etc. Can confirm, it works.

I don't necessarily think it's the equipment at all. It's just how people ignore your weapon's threat to them and rush in like a bull. I had a guy throw right to left oberhaus so I thought a good response to that would be a zwerch, except he just ignored it and continued to combo the cut to the opposite side and proceeded to shove his face in my sword's point. Mind that this was with padded swords and no equipment, plus we're not allowed to thrust for safety's sake but that just made people think that having the point in their face meant no threat because you can't intentionally thrust.I really don't want to hurt my opponents but constantly worrying about them not impaling themselves impedes my own fencing ability too. I think it's a lot more complex than just gear making you feel safer, as it happens even without any gear.

I disagree with this analysis. People that got in duels back in the day cared way more about honor and reputation than personal safety, which is why they dueled each in the first place. Also it was fairly common for both people in a duel to be injured in the early modern period

Wonderful vid! Very helpful

Cool video. There are only two or three people i would ever trust for fencing without gloves or a mask tho.

One incident is enough to ban sparring without masks. For those who don’t know: in one of the clubs, a coach demonstrated a technique with a long sword on a student, which ultimately ended by real death.

1:15 By"traditional bloßfechten armour"do you mean what was traditionally worn in the past or what is traditionally worn in modern HEMA? I'm asking because most fencing jackets we use today are much, and I mean much thicker than most arming dublets and even gambesons of the past. Most of the treaties showing bloßfechten that I know don't even show fencers wearing anything that could be considered actual textile armour. Just regular clothing. It could offer some protection for sure, but it was not intended as armour. But otherwise, I definitely see your point. Modern equipment changes how people fence. I guess the next step after doing so free play without fencing masks is to try to do it in period-accurate clothing.

I see your point, but i can't discard my protection, too many youngsters just like to swing wide arcs and feel cool, and sometimes they just can't stop their momentum. It is as all gamers say, the highest requirement for game is a friend. (just replace game with fencing)

Looks to be much closer to how historical fencing would have been practiced. Much closer to the sources. Good way to practice control and technique.

Awesome! 👏 Nice to see ppl think outside the mask 😅

cool looking gloves, are they good protection for longsword? Where can I get those?

I don’t know how Google will translate my words from Russian, but I would also like to leave a couple of remarks on this topic. Much respect to the author for drawing attention to the problem of lack of fear, but it seems to me that this is not the main reason for double hits at all. For reasons of creating educational and training conditions for historical fencing, sports swords for sparring were introduced almost from the very beginning, in which the main striking zone was significantly lighter. There’s not even anything to argue about here, because training injections requires bending a spring. This leads to the fact that average sports blades are overwhelmingly less rigid along the axis, and are not heavy enough for the natural physical condition of the owners. They can rather be considered standardized. The swords themselves may be close in overall weight to historical prototypes, but the weight distribution of sporting models makes the striking part lighter for safer stabbing. As a result, the comparison of maximum loads excludes real forces, which, due to the higher rigidity of the blade against bending and more individual values ​​of the mass of the chopping part of the blade, would lead to an expansion of the range of different forms of force. As the range of maximum and minimum forces for slashing increases to historical differences, fencers are forced to consider not just the chance of hitting an opponent, but also the energy value of such an attack. Here it is no longer a matter of fear of a threat, but of consolidating the skills of reacting to different types of efforts to have an effect on the target. For example, a fighter may be aware of the difference between deflecting after a sword hits a sword, or a halberd hits a sword. He will understand this as a gradation of his work efforts. In some cases, one sword can strike another sword with a force close to that of a halberd. A situation of higher variety of effort types leads to a shift in the value of all fencing skills, and a change in priorities in the need to hit the enemy only taking into account the speed factor. If the sword has little spring when it hits a person, then it can even disrupt his position in space, displacing his entire body, or not just the enemy’s sword, but completely both of his hands that hold the weapon. It is no longer possible to safely train with a weapon of such physical properties, but one can understand how, with a simultaneous hit, one of the blows will be less significant. I believe that such logic did not contradict the requirement to train the basic popular techniques during the Renaissance, when spring federschwerts already existed. The value of learning to combine cuts and thrusts still remains, even if the sparring weapons differ from the more variable individual combat weapons of this historical time. But when the fencers of the long-past Middle Ages saw different types of swords of their time existing simultaneously, they could automatically imitate the manner of fighting with some type of forceful technical action, learning from each other what is the logic of simulating some kind of fighting technique. Now this approach is practically impossible, because modern users by default perceive the parameters of weapons as equal, as if this sports equalization should have total prevalence. If there were now a mechanism for taking into account the energy value of cutting, and how many percent of the mutual action of attack forces the quality of the influence of each of the damaging factors is taken away - fencers would have a way to adapt their techniques to predict the result of mutual hits (and corrections). Simply fear of a threat is not enough for the ability to calculate the comparative percentage of the benefit of defeat. We need to continue to look for ways to simulate fencing situations, and probably create sensors for the physical force of defeat. Otherwise, for a long time there will not exist a model of instantaneous reliable assessment to which both fencers can more quickly adapt their skills (in comparison with trying to solve problems of gain while simultaneously losing at the expense of personal imagination). By and large, in reality, there are no equivalent double hits; the situation can rather be explained as the lack of evaluation systems based on the maximum number of all factors. During a fight, a fencer is not able to maintain a multi-factor system for assessing simultaneous defeats, and this should not be expected.

Amazing work, it's a rare thing to see bloßfechten, though when you do the fencers tend to be clearly very skilled :) At 9:34 the fencer in blue briefly switches his grip by reversing the rearhand. what are the advantages of this grip and where to find it in the manuals?

This is excellent, thank you so much

I enjoy a milder form of Blossfechten with synthetic nylon swords + impact protection work gloves/safety glasses + 70% speed. Allows for full contact but still enough risk/threat/pain to engage proper self-preservation drive.

Thsnk you for demonstrating

Very cool to see the idea of Bloßfechten spread in the community. We in Bremen at Klopffechters Erben and also the guys at Guildam Gladiatorum only know our fencing like that.

the albion tho 🔥🔥🔥

I allways discus this with the comunity here in south America and I put this from the perspective of The theory of risk compensation, also known as the risk homeostasis theory, suggests that people adjust their behavior in response to the perceived level of risk. When safety measures are introduced, individuals may feel more secure and consequently engage in riskier behavior to maintain a constant level of perceived risk. This concept has been explored in various contexts, including automobile safety, sports, and public health interventions. Key Concepts of Risk Compensation Theory: Perceived Risk and Behavior Adjustment: Individuals have a target level of risk they are willing to accept. When safety improvements reduce the perceived risk, people may compensate by taking greater risks. Offsetting Behavior: Safety measures can lead to unintended consequences where the benefits of reduced risk per incident are partially or wholly offset by riskier behavior. For example, mandatory seat belt laws may lead drivers to drive faster or less cautiously because they feel more protected. Homeostasis: The idea that people maintain a balance or homeostasis in their level of risk. When external factors alter their safety, they adjust their behavior to bring their level of risk back to a preferred equilibrium. Applications of Risk Compensation Theory: Automobile Safety: Peltzman Effect: Named after economist Sam Peltzman, who found that increased safety regulations (like seat belts and airbags) resulted in riskier driving behaviors. This effect suggested that the overall safety benefits might be less than expected due to compensatory behaviors. Studies and Evidence: Research has shown mixed results, with some studies confirming compensatory behaviors and others finding limited or no evidence of significant offsetting effects. Sports: Protective Gear: Athletes using protective gear (helmets, pads) may engage in more aggressive play, believing they are less likely to get injured. This is observed in sports like American football, hockey, and even martial arts. Example in HEMA: Practitioners of Historical European Martial Arts (HEMA) wearing full protective gear might engage in more aggressive and riskier combat techniques, feeling more secure against injuries. Complex Interactions: The interplay between risk perception, behavior, and external safety measures is complex, and not all safety interventions lead to compensatory behavior. The theory of risk compensation can be correlated with the practice of HEMA (Historical European Martial Arts) when practitioners use full protective gear. This theory suggests that people tend to adjust their behavior based on their perceived level of risk: the higher the perception of safety, the more willing they are to take risks. In the context of HEMA, this could mean that practitioners who use full protective gear (such as helmets, gloves, body protection) might feel safer and thus behave more aggressively or take more risks during combat. Specific Possible Correlations: Increase in Aggressiveness: Theory: With full protective gear, practitioners may feel better protected against injuries. Practice: This could lead them to adopt a more aggressive attitude in combat, making faster and more powerful attacks, relying on the gear to minimize the damage of any received blows. Reduction in Caution: Theory: The perception of safety provided by the gear can reduce the need to be cautious. Practice: Practitioners might pay less attention to technique and proper defense, relying on the gear to prevent injuries. Increase in Frequency of Combat: Theory: Feeling safe, practitioners might be willing to engage in more combats or longer combats. Practice: This could increase exposure to risky situations, although the protection of the gear mitigates the impact of each individual incident. Change in Training Dynamics: Theory: Instructors might design more intense training sessions, trusting in the effectiveness of the protective gear. Practice: This can lead to higher overall intensity in practice sessions, changing the approach to techniques and tactics. Specific Examples in HEMA: More Intense Combats: With full protections, it is common to see more intense combats in tournaments and practices. Participants might be more willing to try risky techniques or to close the distance quickly, actions that might be less common without protection. Less Attention to Technical Precision: Confidence in the gear can lead to less attention to technical precision and defense, as practitioners might rely on the gear to absorb the impact of errors. Best regards from Freifechter Mendoza from Argentina! great video!

The Goliath image at 1:29 may not be the best image to use... Do note that the sword from the guy in yellow is going *through* the leg of the guy in striped pants. It's a stab through the thigh. Good stuff otherwise! :P

very cool!

You say very interesting things! In the Russian community, the fashion for HEMA conveys similar advanced ideas a little later. And as a result, people seriously continue to believe that super-sharp swords do not become dull during fencing, after the sharp edge has passed through the steel of another sword several times. Thick quilted fencing jackets are perceived as an abstraction that does not contribute to the quality of cut resistance. All these small features now make Russian HEMA happily and optimistically fencing with ultra-short cuts. At the same time, it completely ignores how people actually performed techniques that take longer than the reaction to super-fast cuts. Everyone believes that in fencing there was no resistance at all to the materials of military clothing and the dulling of the sword in battle. How do you feel about the fact that the range of cutting techniques should include mastery of both short and amplitude types of trajectories, due to the resistance of clothing materials and the quality of sharpening of the blade? With respect from Russia!

woot!!

The reason this dumbest if dumb techniques is so popular is that people aren't reading the sources. Your Nachreisen is a "Oberer Schnitt" btw, which is the sources go to counter to an opponent doing this.

👍👍👍

Great Video! Does Shane have a Replica of the Witchking's sword?!

Good presentation. I love the options. But I have had much better success with a nachrissen that ends in a hanging high Shielhau planted at the chest. This physically stops the opponent hands from rotating to the other side and covers their line of attack with your blade. Plus the judges can see your point planted much easier than a push cut to the lower arms.

The main thing is not to be afraid, it seems to me. thanks for the video

главное, не бояться, как мне кажется. спасибо за ролик

I feel called out by the phrase "Zwerch Copter".

Good video gentlemen, thank you for sharing.

Anakin vs Obiwan reenactment moment

What is the distinction you make between "quick viper strikes" and what is seen in the treatises? Is it speed, force, target?

So you are basically encouraging fencers to go for the head with zero care for their lower openings. The sources don't tell you to ignore cuts to your lower openings, but not PARRY them. Also, there is no guarantee that someone wouldn't cut to the torso even if they didn't have a mask.

Watched a few of your videos. They're informative! What blunts are you guys using? Do you use them just for drills, or do you actually spar with them?