The zufechten interpretation is really interesting. It may be an explanation why Leckuchner thrust from right boar is a lunge (or lean, but knee bent suggests lunge) with left leg, even thou messer is still in right. I found that paying attention to who *comes in zufechten* (you or the opponent) in technique description can be very benefitial for interpretation. I had interpretation that zu fechten is an act of coming into distance of single footwork motion strike, and that this coming is done with left passing step, placing you with left foot forward. It is interesting to interpret techniques via lense of your zufechten interpretation, thank you!
No real idea about Messer, but I am pretty sure some of the things he suggests are timing-related (including the lengths of different steps). Please let me know if you gain any new insights in your training!
Regarding smallsword fencing, one of the ways to make a riposte really safe IS to use blade contact during the riposte, which the French system calls prise du fer. The positive pressure prevents a parry or disengage. I don't see a lot of smallsword fencers on the west coast of U.S. use them, But I do, and its a great tool to have.
Good point, I remember wanting to include that in the footnotes. As far as I know, the German Kreussler tradition works with keeping the bind, too, and I think even one German-French sabre system works with it in order to "secure" a riposte. Thanks for reminding me of this!
I really have to say thank you, great work. Since a few months I had the problem that on some day my fencing was fine and on others it was shit. Put I could not figure out the problem. After watching your videos and reflecting on the content as well as my own behaviour in fencing I figured out it was my use of "tempo". On some days I was relaxed and patient and on some I rushed in disregard of my opponent's action. Since the few weeks I try to stay relaxed and fence in short tempi, my fencing quality has definitely done a huge step. It is more consistent with far less double-hits. Furthermore, I can apply the binding-heavy style with the roundshield against reenactors who rush/or flee the bind and snipe. Thank you for that valuable input. Hours well spend. Although you cut have cut it at some points. :D
Thanks a lot and great to hear that you were able to see more structure in your fighting. Perhaps the video could have been shorter, but there are still so many thoughts in it (or in the remaining three episodes) that some people tell me they have to watch it multiple times because they cannot absorb all of the arguments at once.
Thank you very much for this video series, they have been enlightening. I just found out about the concept of "proceeding with resolution" here. I do a very similar thing when facing an oponent with a longer weapon (i.e. great axe against spear). My thought process was that if the opponent has the reach, I can only win if I control the timing. And I can control the timing by controlling the measure. By advancing I can predict quite accurately the instant when my oponent will attack, so it's much easier to defend. And being already in motion allows me to hit him in the next tempo. If I stand and wait for his attack, I have a very short time window to react and defend, and by the time I start moving my feet, the spear has already recovered and is ready to attack again. One of the things I love about HEMA (in the broad sense) is finding these similarities in weapons separated by centuries.
Regarding the motion vs stillness, in this case a steady advance allows me to react independently with my weapon as soon as I see the attack, regardless of where my feet are in that instant. I would say there is a stillness of weapon and mind.
The approach you describe actually sounds plausible to me. Perhaps I would phrase things a little differently (you always have to be in control of timing, regardless of measure, and I wouldn't say that simply through an advantageous position in space can one do things correctly timing-wise, as one can always mess up things here), but advancing on an opponent whose point you have to overtake at a certain moment probably makes a lot of sense if you proceed with resolution. What kind of steps do you take there? Fabris advises to always keep one foot in the air, which results in this peculiar way of walking (which, if done in a somewhat relaxed fashion, looks a bit "natural" indeed, as he calls it).
@@Stefan.von.Bischhoffshausen To some extend you can simply walk smoothly and will be able to react at any time, especially if that reaction requires a weapon movement and your weapon was still while you advanced, but Fabris, in my opinion, does work with deliberately-made short tempi. So I think he intentionally synchronises a weapon action with the next short passing step, having stillness only between these short movements (and, of course, stillness of mind, but that's something different, albeit important). In the German/Heinricht von und zum Velde tradition of Fabrisian fencing, they even address keeping your weapon still while the feet move and vice versa, probably to keep the chance of being able to react high. I think I mention that in the video...
@@DimicatorSchola I agree with those observations. I'd add that by advancing I "force" the opponent to attack at a time of my choosing (or at least force him to retreat, which may give me a longer tempo to work with), because I know his reach, and I know when I'm going to be at that distance.
@@DimicatorSchola I think I haven't refined the steps to a point I could differentiate them from any other regular advancing step. But I know at which step I will have to defend, so I can make an early decision just before that step, i.e: if I see the oponent hasn't moved or otherwise changed the measure, I know I'll have to sweep his point in the next step and then lunge. I'll record a few examples in my next training session.
![Timing in HEMA on 3 Levels of Difficulty: #1 The ‘Right Moment’ (EASY) [dt. Untertitel]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JbW1-3s_xJI/mqdefault.jpg)
The zufechten interpretation is really interesting. It may be an explanation why Leckuchner thrust from right boar is a lunge (or lean, but knee bent suggests lunge) with left leg, even thou messer is still in right. I found that paying attention to who *comes in zufechten* (you or the opponent) in technique description can be very benefitial for interpretation. I had interpretation that zu fechten is an act of coming into distance of single footwork motion strike, and that this coming is done with left passing step, placing you with left foot forward. It is interesting to interpret techniques via lense of your zufechten interpretation, thank you!
No real idea about Messer, but I am pretty sure some of the things he suggests are timing-related (including the lengths of different steps). Please let me know if you gain any new insights in your training!
Regarding smallsword fencing, one of the ways to make a riposte really safe IS to use blade contact during the riposte, which the French system calls prise du fer. The positive pressure prevents a parry or disengage. I don't see a lot of smallsword fencers on the west coast of U.S. use them, But I do, and its a great tool to have.
Good point, I remember wanting to include that in the footnotes. As far as I know, the German Kreussler tradition works with keeping the bind, too, and I think even one German-French sabre system works with it in order to "secure" a riposte. Thanks for reminding me of this!
I really have to say thank you, great work. Since a few months I had the problem that on some day my fencing was fine and on others it was shit. Put I could not figure out the problem. After watching your videos and reflecting on the content as well as my own behaviour in fencing I figured out it was my use of "tempo". On some days I was relaxed and patient and on some I rushed in disregard of my opponent's action.
Since the few weeks I try to stay relaxed and fence in short tempi, my fencing quality has definitely done a huge step. It is more consistent with far less double-hits. Furthermore, I can apply the binding-heavy style with the roundshield against reenactors who rush/or flee the bind and snipe. Thank you for that valuable input. Hours well spend. Although you cut have cut it at some points. :D
Thanks a lot and great to hear that you were able to see more structure in your fighting. Perhaps the video could have been shorter, but there are still so many thoughts in it (or in the remaining three episodes) that some people tell me they have to watch it multiple times because they cannot absorb all of the arguments at once.
Oh boi, one hour 😅
Ich musste was loswerden. 😕
Thank you very much for this video series, they have been enlightening.
I just found out about the concept of "proceeding with resolution" here. I do a very similar thing when facing an oponent with a longer weapon (i.e. great axe against spear). My thought process was that if the opponent has the reach, I can only win if I control the timing. And I can control the timing by controlling the measure. By advancing I can predict quite accurately the instant when my oponent will attack, so it's much easier to defend. And being already in motion allows me to hit him in the next tempo.
If I stand and wait for his attack, I have a very short time window to react and defend, and by the time I start moving my feet, the spear has already recovered and is ready to attack again.
One of the things I love about HEMA (in the broad sense) is finding these similarities in weapons separated by centuries.
Regarding the motion vs stillness, in this case a steady advance allows me to react independently with my weapon as soon as I see the attack, regardless of where my feet are in that instant. I would say there is a stillness of weapon and mind.
The approach you describe actually sounds plausible to me. Perhaps I would phrase things a little differently (you always have to be in control of timing, regardless of measure, and I wouldn't say that simply through an advantageous position in space can one do things correctly timing-wise, as one can always mess up things here), but advancing on an opponent whose point you have to overtake at a certain moment probably makes a lot of sense if you proceed with resolution. What kind of steps do you take there? Fabris advises to always keep one foot in the air, which results in this peculiar way of walking (which, if done in a somewhat relaxed fashion, looks a bit "natural" indeed, as he calls it).
@@Stefan.von.Bischhoffshausen To some extend you can simply walk smoothly and will be able to react at any time, especially if that reaction requires a weapon movement and your weapon was still while you advanced, but Fabris, in my opinion, does work with deliberately-made short tempi. So I think he intentionally synchronises a weapon action with the next short passing step, having stillness only between these short movements (and, of course, stillness of mind, but that's something different, albeit important). In the German/Heinricht von und zum Velde tradition of Fabrisian fencing, they even address keeping your weapon still while the feet move and vice versa, probably to keep the chance of being able to react high. I think I mention that in the video...
@@DimicatorSchola I agree with those observations. I'd add that by advancing I "force" the opponent to attack at a time of my choosing (or at least force him to retreat, which may give me a longer tempo to work with), because I know his reach, and I know when I'm going to be at that distance.
@@DimicatorSchola I think I haven't refined the steps to a point I could differentiate them from any other regular advancing step. But I know at which step I will have to defend, so I can make an early decision just before that step, i.e: if I see the oponent hasn't moved or otherwise changed the measure, I know I'll have to sweep his point in the next step and then lunge.
I'll record a few examples in my next training session.
These videos are great. I will have to watch them a few times each so as to not miss anything. Thank you.
Timing 👍 bin gespannt!