Early history of the modern fencing: sabre, ...

Open to public view.

Re: Early history of the modern fencing: sabre, ...

Postby John H » 03 May 2012 03:51

Chris Holzman wrote: I think it's also all relative to prior experience, as 'delicate' may have been a real thumping by today's standards.
Chris



Gordon L wrote:You're attempting to make, in effect, a devastating paper cut through the soft tissue.


I’d say both these statements are correct. “A light hand and force sufficient to wound” makes a lot of sense to me. The hits I’ve taken that were ‘light’ when only wearing a t-shirt or no shirt, left good marks and I’m confident with a sharp light blade would have laid open the flesh.
John H
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 402
Joined: 23 Jul 2010 20:18

Re: Early history of the modern fencing: sabre, ...

Postby Gordon L » 03 May 2012 06:46

Chris Holzman wrote: I think it's also all relative to prior experience, as 'delicate' may have been a real thumping by today's standards.
Chris


In this sort of issue, I'm content to go with lore, as my teacher's teacher taught under Leon Bertrand.

The Leon Bertrand we've been talking about, was the first President of the BAF, and remained President until 1961. And previous posts on this list indicate how far back Bertrand's instructing career extends.

Prof. Bob Anderson was the head of the National Training Scheme under Prof. Bertrand that entire time, barring a brief period at the beginning when Prof. Crosnier was writing the National Training Method, and training him up to take over.

Prof. Roger Crosnier, who first became a fencing instructor in 1923, was the founding coach of the BAF. He was taught by his dad, a fencing instructor who ran his own salle.

Bob was the next President until the mid-70s, by which time the next generation, like Prof. Bracewell, had been trained up, let loose in the world, and then had themselves trained up more coaches.

So in the UK we have first-hand, living testimony to the teachers that covers us back to before 1923. Does anyone feel that there was a major change prior to that?
Gordon L
Sergeant
 
Posts: 123
Joined: 16 Mar 2012 20:40

Re: Early history of the modern fencing: sabre, ...

Postby Chris Holzman » 03 May 2012 06:59

There is definitely a paradigm shift from 'sufficient force to remove the enemy from combat' with chambered cuts or large circle molinelli, that Radaelli contemplated in his school years earlier, to the more modern 'its a wounding action'. As I've mentioned, my background is ultimately through Santelli - and while brutalizing someone wasn't on the menu, a good solid cut with good technique, striking through the target was largely expected. From a sporting perspective though, moving the cut toward the tip and away from the center of percussion certainly helps take the bite out of it, and spares your opponent/classmate some of the ouch factor (though cuts with the very tip at good speed, even lightly made will of course sting like nothing else).

So when Vince starts talking about reaching past the target, tapping lightly, and then pulling, I'm quickly getting much less impressed. I certainly wasn't ever taught to affect a cut - we cut, and slicing happened as the result of the direction of travel of the blade v. the angle of impact wit the target, and the natural arc of the sabre reaching out, striking, hitting the apex of its arc, and then crossing the target as the swing of the sabre receded/returned toward the guard position.

The fact of the matter is, I think we all sort of love a nice natural linear progression in things, because it makes understanding how we got from point A to point B easy. Unfortunately I don't think it's ever quite that easy in fencing. Not when you've got various different masters of differing amounts of influence and differing viewpoints all expressing those viewpoints. The Italian sources are all generally on the same page, post 1885 (once you ignore Parise's 1885 sabre section of his book), but in the details there are definitely significant differences amongst the various authors - sometimes a class of action omitted, other times a difference in a parry position, etc. Then we get a little farther out, to Bertrand, who is really tuning the system for sport, but keeping largely Radaellian positions in regard to the guards/parries of 3rd /4th being at shoulder height and very extended, but also largely discounting the molinelli, or making them at the wrist. Costello and Vince change the positions a bit more, but Costello keeps the elbow molinelli, as do Barbasetti and Santelli (in the living tradition - since Santelli never wrote a book). Meanwhile, Pavese is basically teaching Parise's sabre, in the USA, while Cass (or her sons) are teaching derivative Radaellian sabre filtered through Bertrand, who was really filtered more through Masiello than Radaelli...

Its a lively, ever changing sort of mess. Fun to dig up what we can though.

I can't speak to the UK - not my thing at all. From the Italian perspective though, there were massive changes between 1868 and 192x. The rise of Radaellian sabre, the absorption of Enrichetti's school by it, the fierce opposition from the the Roman-Neapolitan school, with its own political maneuvering and different techniques, Masiello's counter opposition on the late Radaelli's behalf, while at the same time modifying the system a fair bit and spreading its influence. Meanwhile, in 1910, Pecoraro-Pessina take over from Parise after his death, and re-overhaul, at least officially, the sabre system, making it far more Radaellian at Scuola Magistrale (formalizing the already existing situation - given that they were hired by Parise as his assistants when he took over Scuola Magistrale in 1885). Then you've also got Santelli and Barbasetti leaving Scuola Magistrale in the 1890s and taking the compromise system of the Parise/Pecoraro/Pessina and spreading it through Austro-Hungary... All different takes on the same basic system as taught by Scuola Magistrale in one iteration or another.


(edited to expand and clarify)
--
Chris Holzman
Moniteur D' Armes
"[T]he calm spirit is the only force that can defeat instinct, and render us the masters of all our strengths." -Capt. Settimo Del Frate, 1876.
Author of "The Art of the Dueling Sabre".
Chris Holzman
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 220
Joined: 17 Mar 2006 20:44

Postby Ulrich von L...n » 03 May 2012 08:19

Chris Holzman wrote:So a light blade, razor sharp, with a light hand, against a shirtless torso, is probably going to be capable of making an ugly looking surface cut that is going to bleed like mad and take a bunch of stitches, but hopefully not land you in prison for homicide.

Yes, those duelling sabres were usually light.
A shirtless torso, yes.
On a light hand I'm not so sure. Actually I have never read anything specific on the amount of force one should use during a duel.

On razor sharp blade: Gerentser in his book (finished after his death in 1942 by his disciples & published in 1944) wrote that duelling sabres must not be too sharp, most definitely not razor sharp. He said that such a weapon is only for cowards, because even a light touch would cause a more or less serious wound, and could mean that the whole duel was over in seconds, rather than minutes. So he recommended ground, but not sharpened sabres, with a 1-mm-thick cutting edge. According to his experience such a blade would inflict serious wounding only when correctly aligned (cutting with the edge) and when sufficient force is applied.
Emil Barta
Nullo modo, amice.
User avatar
Ulrich von L...n
Colonel
 
Posts: 1466
Joined: 24 Nov 2011 13:05
Location: Hungary

Postby Ulrich von L...n » 03 May 2012 08:30

Chris,
You use many times the term chambered cut. Can you describe it? From the context it is clear that a chambered cut differs from a molinello cut.
Emil Barta
Nullo modo, amice.
User avatar
Ulrich von L...n
Colonel
 
Posts: 1466
Joined: 24 Nov 2011 13:05
Location: Hungary

Postby Ulrich von L...n » 03 May 2012 08:51

Gordon L wrote:I suspect it's just because Hutton's contribution is just so obvious. Don't we have ruleset contributions documented for the 1908 rules from both Cook and Hutton?

To me Hutton's contribution isn't so obvious.

I will double-check it again, but at the moment the facts are as follows:

In the official report of 1908 Games Hutton is indeed mentioned as a member of the Council of the British Olympic Association (Capt. A. Hutton, F.S.A., President, Amateur Fencing Association). Next his name can be found on p454:
"Measurements of Weapons
June 15, 1908. For the Committee: Alfred Hutton, Theodore A. Cook
New sabres from Paris have hilts too large. The shell should measure as shown in the diagramm..."

This is basically a clarification of the 150mm x 140mm rule.

As I said I will check it again, but from the above information is definitely hard to assess how much Hutton contributed to the development of fencing rules, either in 1908 or earlier. I would love to know more about this.
Emil Barta
Nullo modo, amice.
User avatar
Ulrich von L...n
Colonel
 
Posts: 1466
Joined: 24 Nov 2011 13:05
Location: Hungary

Re:

Postby Chris Holzman » 03 May 2012 19:19

Ulrich von L...n wrote:Chris,
You use many times the term chambered cut. Can you describe it? From the context it is clear that a chambered cut differs from a molinello cut.


According to Capt. Del Frate's textbook for Maestro Radaelli's fencing masters school, there were two types of cuts in sabre - ones made by a molinello, and all other cuts which were not made by molinello. Those cuts, he simple calls coupe', in the general meaning of the word, rather than the foil fencing specific meaning, of a cutover (he does use it in that way, in the foil section of the book, however. His "coupe'", however, is to be made by chambering (my word) the sabre by drawing it up and back to the height of ones temple, to the left or right of your head (typically to the right), with the blade above and behind your head (not pointing downward), and then the cut is made from the elbow, "like the blow of a hammer". Chambering is simply a shorthand word that I picked up somewhere along the way, describing the action of cocking the sabre back. The parries in Del Frate's book (and Rossi's in 1885) all move the hand and sword backwards toward the body somewhat from the guard position, and this suffices to allow power generation in a cutting riposte not made with molinello. Barbasetti says much the same about direct cuts, but is less blunt about it, and smaller in scope. Terrone also has one chamber the sabre for direct cuts - at least in practice. Masiello as I recall does less, and takes his parries with the arm nearly fully extended in all cases. Bertrand simply cuts direct to target from the same parries as Masiello, and apparently isn't concerned about generating power.

Frankly, from the 1870s in Italy to the 1930s wherever, people seem to be all over the map on how to cut.
--
Chris Holzman
Moniteur D' Armes
"[T]he calm spirit is the only force that can defeat instinct, and render us the masters of all our strengths." -Capt. Settimo Del Frate, 1876.
Author of "The Art of the Dueling Sabre".
Chris Holzman
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 220
Joined: 17 Mar 2006 20:44

Postby Ulrich von L...n » 04 May 2012 09:48

So a chambered cut
Chris Holzman wrote:is to be made by chambering (my word) the sabre by drawing it up and back to the height of ones temple, to the left or right of your head (typically to the right), with the blade above and behind your head (not pointing downward), and then the cut is made from the elbow, "like the blow of a hammer".
Chambering is simply a shorthand word that I picked up somewhere along the way, describing the action of cocking the sabre back.

Thanks.

Chris Holzman wrote:Bertrand simply cuts direct to target from the same parries as Masiello, and apparently isn't concerned about generating power.

Basically a sport cut, without unnecessary power (good for your training partners).
Emil Barta
Nullo modo, amice.
User avatar
Ulrich von L...n
Colonel
 
Posts: 1466
Joined: 24 Nov 2011 13:05
Location: Hungary

Postby Ulrich von L...n » 04 May 2012 10:05

Well, then we have a least four different cuts:

- molinello cut (*),
- chambered cut (*),
- punching cut (*),
admin wrote:Generally speaking it depends on how extended you hold the sword in guard positions - if you have the point more towards the opponent then you are obliged to 'charge' the blow, either with a back and forwards motion or a moulinette. However, if you keep the elbow closer to your body and/or the point further from the opponent, then you can cut powerfully with a direct punching motion. I use both.

and finally modern sport cut, basically a light tap, if performed correctly.

To make the whole even more interesting you could push your cut, draw it (drawing cut, for example with a razor sharp tulwar or kattana), could hit your target exactly with CoP. All this, when you have an intent to seriously harm your opponent.

(*) = can be used with martial intent.
Emil Barta
Nullo modo, amice.
User avatar
Ulrich von L...n
Colonel
 
Posts: 1466
Joined: 24 Nov 2011 13:05
Location: Hungary

Re:

Postby Chris Holzman » 04 May 2012 16:26

Ulrich von L...n wrote:
Chris Holzman wrote:So a light blade, razor sharp, with a light hand, against a shirtless torso, is probably going to be capable of making an ugly looking surface cut that is going to bleed like mad and take a bunch of stitches, but hopefully not land you in prison for homicide.

Yes, those duelling sabres were usually light.
A shirtless torso, yes.
On a light hand I'm not so sure. Actually I have never read anything specific on the amount of force one should use during a duel.

On razor sharp blade: Gerentser in his book (finished after his death in 1942 by his disciples & published in 1944) wrote that duelling sabres must not be too sharp, most definitely not razor sharp. He said that such a weapon is only for cowards, because even a light touch would cause a more or less serious wound, and could mean that the whole duel was over in seconds, rather than minutes. So he recommended ground, but not sharpened sabres, with a 1-mm-thick cutting edge. According to his experience such a blade would inflict serious wounding only when correctly aligned (cutting with the edge) and when sufficient force is applied.


Can you cut with a 1mm edge? well - sure. I've certainly cut cardboard shipping boxes with my antique like that. It's not efficient though. G. Santelli, in an interview from the 1970s, talked about a duel in hungary between a film producer and an actor, or somesuch, and mentions that he and his father secretly blunted the blades to keep anyone from being disfigured, the guys hacked at each other for some time, raising welts and eventually the doctors managed to squeeze a drop of blood out of one of them, and they called it a day. A far cry from Angelini's code's requirement. Simply put, people were doubtless all over the map as to what they thought was necessary in a given situation. Angelini makes a point of saying that you need new blades, well sharpened.. Costello says razor sharp. Gerentser seems to fall on the other end of that. The 19th century antique that I have, which had been broken and had the tip re rounded (about 30" of blade left) was sharp enough to easily slice printer paper pulled over the edge of the blade with a little bit of force. It easily cut cardboard boxes - though it had been somewhat blunted, it had clearly been profesionally sharpened back in the day - the patina was clearly the same over the whole blade, and clearly hadn't been cleaned in quite a while.

As to the amount of force, well, one uses the amount of force necessary to achieve the desired result. Del Frate says that coupe' cuts are delivered 'like the blow of a hammer' and also says that every cut should have sufficient force to remove the enemy from combat.

As I've said previously, I don't think there is one clear answer that is right for all places, times, or situations.
--
Chris Holzman
Moniteur D' Armes
"[T]he calm spirit is the only force that can defeat instinct, and render us the masters of all our strengths." -Capt. Settimo Del Frate, 1876.
Author of "The Art of the Dueling Sabre".
Chris Holzman
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 220
Joined: 17 Mar 2006 20:44

Re:

Postby John H » 04 May 2012 17:42

Ulrich von L...n wrote:Well, then we have a least four different cuts:

- molinello cut (*),
- chambered cut (*),
- punching cut (*),



Here’s a point that may be worth clarification. If I understand Chris correctly a chambered cut can be the result of being half way through a moulinelli, but does not always have to be.

From the English prospective, a mouilinet is a circular cut generally starting from point forward, and many times can incorporate a parry in the midst of it. From the Italian prospective, perhaps simplifying it too much, a moulinelli seems to be the combination of parry-riposte which in a process creates more power in the cut. If I parry with inside hanging guard then make cut seven we see the first moulinelli, the power is generated from the transition from inside hanging guard to cut seven, again perhaps oversimplifying. If I parry inside guard and make cut six the position of inside guard ‘chambers’ the cut, and Chris please correct me if I am wrong.

If I understand the Italian side correctly I like the way they explain it better. A quick punching cut will be the fastest action if you intend to initiate the strike. But once you parry, if your parry brings your blade back closer to your body with the parry, then the power generation comes from the transition from the parry to the strike. When you parry with the point well forward you then need to ‘do something’ to add power, be it a full 360 degree cut or throwing their blade off, which can then leave yours in a position to generate power before the impact, i.e. the sforz (again if I understand the sforzi righti).
John H
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 402
Joined: 23 Jul 2010 20:18

Re: Re:

Postby Chris Holzman » 04 May 2012 21:18

John H wrote:
Ulrich von L...n wrote:Well, then we have a least four different cuts:

- molinello cut (*),
- chambered cut (*),
- punching cut (*),



Here’s a point that may be worth clarification. If I understand Chris correctly a chambered cut can be the result of being half way through a moulinelli, but does not always have to be.

From the English prospective, a mouilinet is a circular cut generally starting from point forward, and many times can incorporate a parry in the midst of it. From the Italian prospective, perhaps simplifying it too much, a moulinelli seems to be the combination of parry-riposte which in a process creates more power in the cut. If I parry with inside hanging guard then make cut seven we see the first moulinelli, the power is generated from the transition from inside hanging guard to cut seven, again perhaps oversimplifying. If I parry inside guard and make cut six the position of inside guard ‘chambers’ the cut, and Chris please correct me if I am wrong.

If I understand the Italian side correctly I like the way they explain it better. A quick punching cut will be the fastest action if you intend to initiate the strike. But once you parry, if your parry brings your blade back closer to your body with the parry, then the power generation comes from the transition from the parry to the strike. When you parry with the point well forward you then need to ‘do something’ to add power, be it a full 360 degree cut or throwing their blade off, which can then leave yours in a position to generate power before the impact, i.e. the sforz (again if I understand the sforzi righti).


John,

A molinello, from the Italian perspective is any cut that is made more or less circularly. I say more or less, because sometimes its really not a whole circle in the same 'line'.

For example, from the guard of 2nd, 3rd, or 4th (which in Radaellian sabre, and that of Rossi, Masiello, Barbasetti, Wright, and Pecoraro-Pessina, amongst others) the point is either in line in 2nd, or pretty much almost in line in 3rd or 4th, the 6 basic molinelli are big circles made from the elbow as an attack or a feint. I can carefully time them as a flying parry-riposte - but this is risky and requires really having a good idea of what your opponent is going to do. It sucks massively to try this, only to discover he was making a feint.

However, I can also make a discrete due tempi parry and riposte. This is by far more common. If I make a parry of 1st, I can then riposte with a thrust, a direct cut to the flank, or a molinello to the external cheek, head, internal cheek, chest, or abdomen, or even to the top-inside of the arm. If I parry 5th, I can riposte below by a thrust or direct cut to the flank. or by molinello to the head, internal cheek/chest/abdomen or top-inside arm (external cheek is also possible, but is more difficult - and if I want it I probably am better to shed the blade through 1st after the parry of 5th. Parries 3 and 4 allow ripostes by molinello to the opposite cheek, or to abdomen or flank respectively, or a thrust, or various direct cut ripostes.

And yeah - the chambered cut could be the result of stopping a molinello before committing to the final action of the cut, with the guard up by my temple. because eithter I changed my mind, or simply forgot what I wanted to do. Otherwise, I may simply not feel like exposing myself via molinello given the relative positions of our blades, and so choose to make a chambered cut aka coupe' instead.

Capt. Del Frate's terminology is murky (as is Rossi's at times, where he mirrors Del Frate):
If I make a parry, and riposte not by a non molinello cut, it's still just a coupe'. and Del Frate never really gives specific examples, but you can see them when examining Rossi's synoptic tables. The chambering action is simply subsumed and reduced by the act of making the parry, since the hand moves backward from either the position of guard, or from the finished position of some cut or thrust. It obviously wouldn't be a good idea to parry 3rd, then chamber the hand overhead, and then cut. That is simply going to get a person hit by a renewed attack.

Masiello, Barbasetti, Pecoraro-Pessina change the terminology to be a little more clear, and there we find the definition of the coupe' fitting the classic 'cut over from one side of the opponent's blade to the other' as we see in foil fencing, and then they also discuss 'direct' cuts as ripostes and also as attacks, in addition to the usual discussion of molinelli attacks and ripostes.

As far as sforzi go - in Radaellian sabre anyway, the sforzi are the same size as the coupe' in theory anyway, except you're striking the blade instead of the opponent. Its a long grazing beat/disarm, and generally has a massive effect on the opponent's blade, giving you plenty of time to make a small molinello, chamber the cut a little bit, or just thrust. Most of the books that discuss the sforzi spend time on the sforzo itself, and then say 'hit any open target'.

The 'punching cut' or push/push-pull cut made with nothing but arm extension prior to the lunge *only* exists in Radaellian sabre as a direct cut riposte - since guards of 3rd/4th/2nd are all made with the arm at almost full extension with the point directed toward the face in 3rd/4th or the chest/flank in 2nd. Obviously, given those guard positions (and the stated preference of a guard in 2nd for bouting), punching cuts are useless from guard, in Radaellian sabre - thus the chambering action. On the other hand, in Parise's system, although he states a preference for guard of 2nd, if one uses his 3rd guard (it is formed with the blade pretty vertical, the elbow near the hip, and the forearm parallel to the floor) then the punching type cut has enough arm movement before the lunge is launched in order to gain some power.
--
Chris Holzman
Moniteur D' Armes
"[T]he calm spirit is the only force that can defeat instinct, and render us the masters of all our strengths." -Capt. Settimo Del Frate, 1876.
Author of "The Art of the Dueling Sabre".
Chris Holzman
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 220
Joined: 17 Mar 2006 20:44

Postby Ulrich von L...n » 05 May 2012 15:45

It would be interesting and instructive to perform some target cutting with different cut types. At present I would be interested in seeing the difference between damage caused by an average chambered cut and a average punching cut.
Emil Barta
Nullo modo, amice.
User avatar
Ulrich von L...n
Colonel
 
Posts: 1466
Joined: 24 Nov 2011 13:05
Location: Hungary

Postby Ulrich von L...n » 05 May 2012 15:53

A superb catalogue - with stunning photos - from a fencing exhibition in Turin, during 2006 World Fencing Championships:
(mentioned by Chris in another topic)

http://www.provincia.torino.it/speciali ... mostra.pdf

A lot of swords, antique fencing equipment! It is rather enjoyable to examine how sabre fencing gear changed from circa 1850 till the first decades of the 20th century.
Emil Barta
Nullo modo, amice.
User avatar
Ulrich von L...n
Colonel
 
Posts: 1466
Joined: 24 Nov 2011 13:05
Location: Hungary

Re:

Postby Chris Holzman » 05 May 2012 16:44

Ulrich von L...n wrote:It would be interesting and instructive to perform some target cutting with different cut types. At present I would be interested in seeing the difference between damage caused by an average chambered cut and a average punching cut.



I've no video of it, but I have done some cutting with an antique US M1860 (bought as a bare blade and mounted as a shashka for ambidexterity purposes), and against 1.5 to 2 inch green bamboo, molinelli and chambered cuts work splendidly, and you don't even really feel the target slow the sword. The modern fencing extend and snap type push cuts were nearly worthless, unless you chambered the cut by rocking the blade back at the wrist and opening the fingers, then firing the cut with the fingers and wrist. The sort of 'reach past the target, tap, and pull' type cuts were absolutely hopeless.

This is a blade sharp enough to easily slice standard copy paper pulled across the edge.
--
Chris Holzman
Moniteur D' Armes
"[T]he calm spirit is the only force that can defeat instinct, and render us the masters of all our strengths." -Capt. Settimo Del Frate, 1876.
Author of "The Art of the Dueling Sabre".
Chris Holzman
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 220
Joined: 17 Mar 2006 20:44

Re: Early history of the modern fencing: sabre, ...

Postby John H » 05 May 2012 22:20

I’d agree some testing would be fun. On my side I’ve done a few punching cut tests one big factor is the PoB of the blade. The blades that are point heavy are the best for this type of cut and as Chris said the best way to perform them is have the blade pulled back, open your fingers, punch and close the fingers. The cuts would not be as disabling as a chambered one or moulinetesque cut but they would lay open a neck quite easily. I can also punch them into a thrust perfectly fine if the PoB isn’t too far forward. I tend to recommend them to ‘get things started’ while still targeting a soft spot. Once you start parry/riposte your transition from riposte to parry will give you that power you need.

As far as I’ve observed the punching cut is appropriate for systems that hold the blade almost vertical and close to your body as opposed to point forward and extended. The blades you would logically do this with are also more ‘point heavy’ and you would have trouble keeping a point forward guard on them anyways. This would look more like the “Polish” stuff out there although I have no info on typical weighting of Polish blades.

The elderly gentleman who drops by occasionally mentioned that this was a favored cut in some eastern European areas. The blade would be excessively point heavy and would crash through people’s guards. I’ll try to get more details if he drops by again but I fear he’s not long for this world.
John H
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 402
Joined: 23 Jul 2010 20:18

Re: Early history of the modern fencing: sabre, ...

Postby Ulrich von L...n » 06 May 2012 08:27

John H wrote:As far as I’ve observed the punching cut is appropriate for systems that hold the blade almost vertical and close to your body as opposed to point forward and extended.

In Hungarian sport sabre fencing the recommended position of your elbow is approx. one palm-length (around 11-13cm) from your hip joint (measured horizontally), in 3rd guard. So you could start with more extended 3rd, withdraw your fist till you touch your torso, thus perform a horizontal chambering movement, somewhere around 20-25cm. I would like to test this type of chambered cut with a cheap machete (440g, blade: 50.5cm, PoB: 14.5cm) during my next hiking in the wood, because cutting tree branches with a machete in an urban area could draw unwanted attention.
Emil Barta
Nullo modo, amice.
User avatar
Ulrich von L...n
Colonel
 
Posts: 1466
Joined: 24 Nov 2011 13:05
Location: Hungary

Postby Ulrich von L...n » 06 May 2012 08:44

Chris Holzman wrote:The modern fencing extend and snap type push cuts were nearly worthless...

Well, I'm not so sure that I would like to receive such a snapping cut on my naked wrist or forearm, even with a dull machete. I saw some very unpleasant punching "cuts" made with the forte of a sport sabre through rather think and sturdy homemade hand & forearm protection. So I would assume that a snapping cut with a machete, messer etc could break your thumb, seriously damage wrist without actually cutting too much tendons, muscles.

Let's say in judo terminology: a molinello cut or a solid chambered cut = ippon, a less powerful chambered cut = waza-ari, a strong punching cut = yuko, a snapping cut = koka (not used currently).
Emil Barta
Nullo modo, amice.
User avatar
Ulrich von L...n
Colonel
 
Posts: 1466
Joined: 24 Nov 2011 13:05
Location: Hungary

Re:

Postby Chris Holzman » 06 May 2012 16:44

Ulrich von L...n wrote:
Chris Holzman wrote:The modern fencing extend and snap type push cuts were nearly worthless...

Well, I'm not so sure that I would like to receive such a snapping cut on my naked wrist or forearm, even with a dull machete. I saw some very unpleasant punching "cuts" made with the forte of a sport sabre through rather think and sturdy homemade hand & forearm protection. So I would assume that a snapping cut with a machete, messer etc could break your thumb, seriously damage wrist without actually cutting too much tendons, muscles.

Let's say in judo terminology: a molinello cut or a solid chambered cut = ippon, a less powerful chambered cut = waza-ari, a strong punching cut = yuko, a snapping cut = koka (not used currently).


I wouldn't want to get hit with it either - don't get me wrong. That said, green bamboo of that size is not a 'soft target' at all. That said, those cuts were not particularly effective, typically only scoring the bamboo lightly. Still wouldn't want to get hit by it, but its most likely not 'sufficient to remove the enemy from combat' Sclicing the skin of a bare torso or forehead, it should do just fine.

Once I started rocking the blade a bit, it started cutting - but it still wasn't particularly consistent.
--
Chris Holzman
Moniteur D' Armes
"[T]he calm spirit is the only force that can defeat instinct, and render us the masters of all our strengths." -Capt. Settimo Del Frate, 1876.
Author of "The Art of the Dueling Sabre".
Chris Holzman
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 220
Joined: 17 Mar 2006 20:44

Re:

Postby Chris Holzman » 06 May 2012 16:44

Ulrich von L...n wrote:
Chris Holzman wrote:The modern fencing extend and snap type push cuts were nearly worthless...

Well, I'm not so sure that I would like to receive such a snapping cut on my naked wrist or forearm, even with a dull machete. I saw some very unpleasant punching "cuts" made with the forte of a sport sabre through rather think and sturdy homemade hand & forearm protection. So I would assume that a snapping cut with a machete, messer etc could break your thumb, seriously damage wrist without actually cutting too much tendons, muscles.

Let's say in judo terminology: a molinello cut or a solid chambered cut = ippon, a less powerful chambered cut = waza-ari, a strong punching cut = yuko, a snapping cut = koka (not used currently).


I wouldn't want to get hit with it either - don't get me wrong. That said, green bamboo of that size is not a 'soft target' at all. That said, those cuts were not particularly effective, typically only scoring the bamboo lightly. Still wouldn't want to get hit by it, but its most likely not 'sufficient to remove the enemy from combat' Sclicing the skin of a bare torso or forehead, it should do just fine.

Once I started rocking the blade a bit, it started cutting - but it still wasn't particularly consistent.
--
Chris Holzman
Moniteur D' Armes
"[T]he calm spirit is the only force that can defeat instinct, and render us the masters of all our strengths." -Capt. Settimo Del Frate, 1876.
Author of "The Art of the Dueling Sabre".
Chris Holzman
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 220
Joined: 17 Mar 2006 20:44

PreviousNext

Return to General Historical Martial Arts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 57 guests