:dunno: Thanks for telling me that. For a while I truly didn't know what had just happened. It's not a good feeling to get into an argument but don't even know what the argument subject is. I think people mis-understood what I was trying to say. I used "life and death situation" as an example to indicate that "special" techniques such as "fencing - how to use a sword" should be trained on one side only. This way, you can be twice as good compare to if you train both sides. I thought most people agree with me on "one side training" advantage. The following was my 1st post. Instead of saying "most sport train one side only", I just asked that question and let people to draw their own conclusion. This way, people will not say that I try to force my opinion on others. This was the 1st post toward my 1st post. I was asked if I have any experience in fencing. A "general" discussion suddently turned into "personal". I don't even know why the following post should be addressed to my 1st post in the 1st place. The more that I tried to find it out, the more that I got into more arguments (not just against one person but against many people). 孟子(Meng Zi) (372 BC～前289 BC) said, "I don't like to argue but sometime I just don't have choice". He then wrote several pages article to explain why he got into argument in the first place. I assume that I'm just repeating the same pattern here. Can someone help me to understand why my 1st post could generate Mitlov's 1st post on me?
When someone starts talking about training to do stuff with both hands in a thread about Olympic fencing, it's unusual. I wanted to know whether you were talking about Olympic fencing or whether you were going to start dropping personal experiences about an unrelated art/sport. I was trying to figure out what you were talking about, because you weren't talking about Olympic fencing. You confused just about everyone in the thread by taking the subject away from Olympic fencing. It confused people and they said so. You're not being persecuted.
Hopefully my last post can clear up all those confusion. Not trying to argue just want to make myself clear. Unfortunately when I'm saying that, I'm arguing.
General training one side with a weapon vs both sides (and how different schools/ styles approach this) might be an interesting thread on its own.........
Because your first post was completely unrelated, and came across as 'I do weapons therefore your question about sports fencing is irrelevant'. I've yet to train with any weapon where both sides are trained. Even in two-weapon (florentine for example) there's a very distinct on and off hand rather than any sort of switching.
Maybe its an TCMA thing, my sifu teaches us to us the sword in both hands, and the pole to, BUT this is normally in power issue training and agility drills, when actually doing forms or applications (and sparring) we tend to go with our dominate side only, the only difference would be when using double weapons such as two sticks or butterfly knifes for obvious reasons Anyway back to the thread topic (sort of) Oh, what I wouldn't give for a holocaust cloak.
Maybe if you lot stopped using toothpicks we might take your seriously. Right I'm off to iron my skirt er I mean hakama.
I hate the "I train for combat" stuff, that's what soldiers do not us lot in a Dojo. Personally I like to train to use the weapons as closely as possibly to how they were intended but we're always going to have limitations on our practice. Tail end of this is worth a read I think. http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117152
Or mayhap you are eating a sandwich with your right hand. 12 inch sub can need some mighty fine motor skills at times.
Though in the FIE certifications, there are seperate certifications for single, tow, and three weapon fencers and teachers. You also have seperate certification categories if you can teach them in both left and righ hands.
Do you mean a real Rapier or those toothpicks they use in sports? Seriously though I'd love to do some HEMA and sport Fencing.
Ah, you're referring to the foil, epee and sabre. No - I mean one of the proper, heavyweight, 50" death-dealing devices that get used in HEMA, alongside daggers, cloaks, a second rapier, grappling, punching and so on. I really need to find a new school.
My guess is one on one that rapier user would win, it's a longer weapon that can be used quickly, all you need is a nice jab to the torso to deliver a deadly blow. But against multiple attackers (i.e. like on a battlefield) the katana will be more useful, since you can cut and run, also the katana just looks like it can take more damage than a rapier. Plus stabbing is made redundant with armour, so heavier weapons that can deal blunt trauma as well as cutting potential are more suited. I imagine that this is why European battles of old were fought with the broadsword and not the rapier.
So a new question. What if a right handed person only learns how to fence left handed, so that he can have an advantage over right handed fencers? Would you think that he'll have a marked advantage, or do you think he's just setting himself up for failure?
Maybe, but I doubt it. You'd have to be a totally OCD practice monster. In my own experience, I decided to do messer (a one handed short sword) right handed, and trained it a lot. All my JSA stuff is of course right-handed. So I get into a tournament and start fighting right handed, and I wasn't doing that great. Mid bout, I switched it around and fought southpaw, having never really trained it... I ended up with Silver. -Mark
It's the fencer that matters, not so much the sword. The danger of the rapier is that those historically who trained with the katana would not have had much exposure to rapier fighting, whereas katana fencing is not much different than any form of European cutting sword styles, so the advantage historically would go to a rapierist... there's nothing a katana can do that he hasn't seen. On battlefields, the "classical" edgeless rapier is next to useless. The katana is a sidearm, still not ideal against armour but better than nothing. That's what polearms and maces are for. In Europe, stabbing was the ONLY way to deal with plate armour with a sword. You take your left hand off the grip and grab the blade like a short spear and go for the gaps in the armour (its articulations), or use it as a grappling lever. Swords are not used for blunt force trauma, cutting and conventional thrusting is used against non-armoured or very lightly armoured opponents, half-swording against armoured ones. Broadswords were not used untill well past the heyday of plate armour. Best regards, -Mark
