My first florysh attempt (Video) - comments?

[Eric White]

Feedback is essential to martial growth. So, in that vein I would appreciate any possible comments on the vid below.

Also, in an attempt to execute some counter-cutting techniques, I tossed in what I believe to be a zornhau from Vom Tag; it starts at 22 seconds. I'd really appreciate commentary on that.

I attempted to change wards regularly and to change direction as if facing multiple opponents. Thanks in advance for the help!

http://www.blogsandbooks.net/sword/florysh1-1.wmv
(1 min, 7.35MB, .WMV file)

[Sal Bertucci]

A few quick things:

1. THRUST! Swords have points for a reason. Throw a few thrusts in.

2. You're using what I would call "slicey" handwork. You keep your arms bent and pull the sword across. Lots of sword arts use that technique, and it works, but in my experience European Masters use more of a hewing motion with the arms fully extended.

3. Your VT/Zorn looks ok to me, but I'll let more capable people coment on that.

[Greg Coffman]

In addition to thrusts, integrate defensive coverings (like hangen and schrank-hut) into your flourishing.

What I saw that I really like:
With your zornhau at ~22 sec, you triangle step and your left foot comes to rest spaced very well from your right. Often I see people bring their left foor much to far to the right, in line or behind their right foot, and this is incorrect. Good job.

What I say that didn't look so good:
The rest of your footwork doesn't seem to line up with your cuts and guards. The guards are set us so usually when the sword is held on the right side of the body, the left foot is forward, and vice versa. Notice the vom tag that you adopt at ~25 sec. The right foot is forward but the sword is over the rght shoulder. Either move the sword directly overhead or to the left shoulder. Then you end up in a position at ~31 that is not quite pflug, or long point, or any of the German guards. It might be an Italian guard, but do yo do it because you've studied and trained with the Italian guards or is it from practicing high pflugs?

Continuing on, at ~33 you make three cuts none of which use proper footwork to integrate power or distance with your cuts. You are cutting from the shoulders but not throwing the rest of your body into the cuts. Notice the first is a left oberhau from a vom tag with left foot forward. Normally with the left foot forward you should cut from your right with a passing step. Or you can simple step with the left. Your left foot made a very small step before the cut. The next cut was an unterhau from the right. You stepped again with your left foot! That should have been a right passing step forward, or a left pass back. It just feels the whole time that your feet are out of sync and you don't have your legs integratd wit your cuts.

Work on shorter cutting excercises. Two zorns with two passing steps. Oberhau pass forward, unterhau pass back. Three or four cuts at a time with good footwork. Also, work stance transitions. Move your feet with full steps forward and back each time you move your sword. It also felt like you were perhaps deliberately limiting your movement in order to stay in picture with the camera. Don't let that influence your training. Zoom the camera out or get somebody to follow you.

You get props for putting yourself out there and for asking for critique. There is so much to learn in the beginning and to put all together. Good job so far and keep up the hard work.

[Eric White]

A few quick things:

1. THRUST! Swords have points for a reason. Throw a few thrusts in.

2. You're using what I would call "slicey" handwork. You keep your arms bent and pull the sword across. Lots of sword arts use that technique, and it works, but in my experience European Masters use more of a hewing motion with the arms fully extended.

3. Your VT/Zorn looks ok to me, but I'll let more capable people coment on that.

I'm going to start integrating thrusts this week. I'm going to have a host of questions concerning those.

The "slicey" handwork is most-likely due to my karate training (we cross trained with the bokken). I'm going to do some practice-cutting with my Albion blade to test out the difference between the slicey handwork and the "hewing motion" you mention. Thank you for the input.

In addition to thrusts, integrate defensive coverings (like hangen and schrank-hut) into your flourishing.

I would love to integrate the defensive coverings, but I haven't quite interpreted those yet. I ordered Lindholm's book on the longsword so I'm hoping that will help.

Thank you for the comment on the zorn. I've practiced that quite a lot, actually. I think I simply love the English translation of "zornhau"- "Strike of Wrath." What kind of swordsman would I be without a decent strike of wrath?

Now, with regards to the footwork: I don't think my muscle memory has kicked in yet, so thank you very much for pointing that out. I actually drill proper footwork with the sword in a ward on the right side and my left foot forward, and vice versa. However, when I go into a florysh, I try to put so much intent into the florysh that I "forget" my footwork. I think with more rigorous drilling my legs will be trained to do it correctly. I can't thank you enough for pointing that out.

Then you end up in a position at ~31 that is not quite pflug, or long point, or any of the German guards. It might be an Italian guard, but do yo do it because you've studied and trained with the Italian guards or is it from practicing high pflugs?

I actually had to watch my own video to see what you meant here. Funny enough, this is the "middle guard" set out by JC in Medieval Swordsmanship. I have read JC's ammendment on the guards set out in that book, but I've been dappling in medieval swordsmanship since 1999 when I bought that book and I've been doing the middle guard for so darn long that THAT'S burned into my muscle memory. I'm going to have to work extra hard to get rid of that bad habit.

You get props for putting yourself out there and for asking for critique. There is so much to learn in the beginning and to put all together. Good job so far and keep up the hard work.

I've had a passion for martial arts since I was 13 (I'm 29 now). I've studied Isshinryu Karate extensively and I know that the best moments of my study coincided with feedback from those who were better than me. I love fighting/sparring those who are much better than me--it's truly the only way to learn. In this regard, I can't thank all of you enough for giving me a moment of your time. Criticism is the only way to improve.

[Jonathan Newhall]

I might suggest that you are favoring horizontal strikes a bit too much. These are hard to get proper momentum behind as they rely on a torsional motion (e.g. only your torso and arms can really get behind it, the legs only really go front-back very well). More diagonal or vertical slices are easier to integrate with footwork.

[Eric White]

I might suggest that you are favoring horizontal strikes a bit too much. These are hard to get proper momentum behind as they rely on a torsional motion (e.g. only your torso and arms can really get behind it, the legs only really go front-back very well). More diagonal or vertical slices are easier to integrate with footwork.

Are you then suggesting that horizontal strikes should be integrated as a more advanced technique?

[Greg Coffman]

I might suggest that you are favoring horizontal strikes a bit too much. These are hard to get proper momentum behind as they rely on a torsional motion (e.g. only your torso and arms can really get behind it, the legs only really go front-back very well). More diagonal or vertical slices are easier to integrate with footwork.

Are you then suggesting that horizontal strikes should be integrated as a more advanced technique?

No, they are not a more advanced technique. Generally, when you counter cut you should want to make a cut at a 90 degree angle to your opponents cut. If they strike at a diagonal, you strike at a diagonal. If they strike straight down, you strike horizontal. If they strike horizontal, you strike straight down. This will put you in more advantageous binds. This is certainly not a hard and fast rule.

I would suggest that most of your horizontal strikes should be at the head & shoulder level, not the waist. If at any point in your fighting development you realize that you seem to rely on any one or two things, learn to adapt and break out of your patterns.

[Eric White]

No, they are not a more advanced technique. Generally, when you counter cut you should want to make a cut at a 90 degree angle to your opponents cut. If they strike at a diagonal, you strike at a diagonal. If they strike straight down, you strike horizontal. If they strike horizontal, you strike straight down. This will put you in more advantageous binds. This is certainly not a hard and fast rule.

Please excuse the question here, but I'm very much a novice. I don't understand binding all that well. I thought you counter-cut an oberhau with a zornhau, which is in actuality a type of oberhau? And, if you counter-cut, doesn't that avoid a binding situation? Or my false assumption here is that counter-cuts succeed every time. The bind would only occur if your counter-cut was in turn countered as well, correct?

When I think of a bind, I think of a technique that was more parried than counter-cut.

I would suggest that most of your horizontal strikes should be at the head & shoulder level, not the waist. If at any point in your fighting development you realize that you seem to rely on any one or two things, learn to adapt and break out of your patterns.

Breaking out of patterns is something I learned a long time ago with empty-hand sparring. I'll be sure to apply it here. Thanks!

[Greg Coffman]

Please excuse the question here, but I'm very much a novice. I don't understand binding all that well. I thought you counter-cut an oberhau with a zornhau, which is in actuality a type of oberhau? And, if you counter-cut, doesn't that avoid a binding situation? Or my false assumption here is that counter-cuts succeed every time. The bind would only occur if your counter-cut was in turn countered as well, correct?

When I think of a bind, I think of a technique that was more parried than counter-cut.

There are three genres of cuts, over hand cuts (oberhaus), under hand cuts (unterhaus), and horizontal cuts (mittlehaus). Zornhau is a particular cut and an oberhau.

A bind is anytime the two swords come together and usually means when they stay together because of how force is being applied. There are lots of ways to get to a bind, one of which is counter-cutting. A counter-cut is any time you cut when your opponent cuts.

Counter-cutting is not a "parry." We don't really like the word, "parry," or the idea it represents. We might talk about a static block with a follow up action, but we advise against it. We use the term "absetzen," which is German for "setting aside." Again, there are lots of ways to do this and one of the better ways is a bind.

Say you cut a zornhau at me. I cut a zornhau right back at you, at the same time (indes). That is a counter cut. But neither of us hit each other and instead, our blades connect. That is a bind. From the bind, I execute some technique. That is called a winding whether the technique is a cut, thrust or whatever. And you execute a winding as well.

The shortest distance between two points, two combatants, is a straight line. Both combatants are trying to occupy the space of that line between them with their swords. So naturally the swords will connect in that space and seek to push each other aside as the opponents seek to point point on flesh. Thus you hit your opponent and keep your opponent from hitting you.

Does all this make sense?

[Jonathan Newhall]

Eric - What I mean is that although mittelhaus (horizontal cuts) are recognized as a technique, they are also a very basic cut to the point that they are not even taught often in the manuals. This is because while you are expected to know how to do one, they are not generally the BEST kind of cut to make - this is reserved for the overhead cut. It is much harder to get proper momentum behind a horizontal baseball bat kind of cut because you are using your waist and arms, but not really your legs.

So, while you should do some, I think maybe your florysh was overemphasizing the importance of cuts to the middle. Most cuts to the middle should also begin as oberhaus (cuts from above) and flatten out a bit past diagonal, if you get my meaning, so that there is still some of that momentum from the legs being put into the cut. Also, keep in mind the other piece of advice given, which is that your horizontal cuts should be kept relatively high near the head, not the waist. Again the reason for this is to generate more power and to put your blade in a more advantageous position should it come to a bind.

[Eric White]

There are three genres of cuts, over hand cuts (oberhaus), under hand cuts (unterhaus), and horizontal cuts (mittlehaus). Zornhau is a particular cut and an oberhau.

A bind is anytime the two swords come together and usually means when they stay together because of how force is being applied. There are lots of ways to get to a bind, one of which is counter-cutting. A counter-cut is any time you cut when your opponent cuts.

Counter-cutting is not a "parry." We don't really like the word, "parry," or the idea it represents. We might talk about a static block with a follow up action, but we advise against it. We use the term "absetzen," which is German for "setting aside." Again, there are lots of ways to do this and one of the better ways is a bind.

Say you cut a zornhau at me. I cut a zornhau right back at you, at the same time (indes). That is a counter cut. But neither of us hit each other and instead, our blades connect. That is a bind. From the bind, I execute some technique. That is called a winding whether the technique is a cut, thrust or whatever. And you execute a winding as well.

The shortest distance between two points, two combatants, is a straight line. Both combatants are trying to occupy the space of that line between them with their swords. So naturally the swords will connect in that space and seek to push each other aside as the opponents seek to point point on flesh. Thus you hit your opponent and keep your opponent from hitting you.

Does all this make sense?

I believe so. My issue is easily my inexperience with "real" free-play. I've been envisioning a counter-cut as an absetzen that displaces your opponent's blade so much a target opens up, thus allowing your counter-cut to strike your opponent.

Here's essentially where I get this idea from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsGU5KI1 ... re=related

JC does a zornhau at 5 secs & 17 secs to counter an oberhau--at least, this is my understanding of what a zornhau is. Where's the bind? It seems JC's counter succeeds in striking his opponent (Aaron Pynenberg, I'm guessing). Are you saying that there are instances where your zornhau does not reach your opponent? How does this happen?

[Jonathan Hill]

There are many instances where your zornhau or other action does not reach your opponent. This is when your opponent has something to say about it.

If I may add a little to your conversation; This video looks more like a demonstration rather than freeplay, granted I was not involved in making it... Generally the way that works is you tell them what attack to give you. Since you know what attack is coming then you will be prepared with a response to that attack or for training you will be able to experiment on what to do when that attack is coming and discover first hand the results of each action. The attacker is committed to give a particular attack and (hopefully) will not change things or do something different. In this case the attacker also stopped after his action and did not react to what was happening. This is cooperative training or a good demonstration, this will rarely happen in freeplay/a fight. Watch the video again and look at every action where JC made more than one movement in the series, these were easily accomplished because his opponent did not resist or react to him. Good for training, and only good in a fight if you are the one who continued the movement while your opponent stopped.

Freeplay is more like uncooperative training when your opponent will not do the nice thing and just let you manhandle them, attack into your completely prepared guards, or stop after the first action and let you continue. You will not know for certian what attack is comming and thus you will not get the clean exchanges you see in the video. A bind is the natural progression of two people, who did not withdrawal after the first action, as they seek to make a kabob out of the other person.

[Vincent Le Chevalier]

I've been envisioning a counter-cut as an absetzen that displaces your opponent's blade so much a target opens up, thus allowing your counter-cut to strike your opponent.

I don't know Arma's official stance on the matter, but perhaps you should rather see it as just a cut combined with some other mean of protection.

Not all counter-cuts have to displace the attack. If you have time, it can be better to just make a cut combined with a void: the strike falls in the empty place you left as you moved to do your cut. For added safety, generally you choose a cut that closes off the line where the opponent's sword will lie at the end of his cut. Contact with his sword is only the result of him trying to follow you or trying to protect himself.

Of course, if the opponent is a bit faster, not as predictable, it can be wise to ensure your own safety first, and therefore not jump towards him but keep a safer distance. In this case you use the same cutting motion but with a slightly modified footwork, and you end up in a bind, maybe after displacing his sword. Your focus shifted from trying to cut him to trying to save your life (which is a priority ).

The beauty of the thing is that you can use more or less the same move to do different things depending on how much you master the initiative, from a preemptive strike to a counter-cut to a bind.

Regards,

[Greg Coffman]

I believe so. My issue is easily my inexperience with "real" free-play. I've been envisioning a counter-cut as an absetzen that displaces your opponent's blade so much a target opens up, thus allowing your counter-cut to strike your opponent.

Sometimes with a counter-cut or with any kind of displacement the blades do not engage in a bind and sometimes they only are in a bind for a brief moment. In which case, what you said is true. You see and then strike to an opening.

JC does a zornhau at 5 secs & 17 secs to counter an oberhau--at least, this is my understanding of what a zornhau is. Where's the bind? It seems JC's counter succeeds in striking his opponent (Aaron Pynenberg, I'm guessing). Are you saying that there are instances where your zornhau does not reach your opponent? How does this happen?

JC does a zornhau at 3 seconds, not 5. The cut at 5 secs is an unterhau. Notice that at 5 seconds, the swords stay in the bind and JC gets a thrust. But at other times JC displaces the cut with a cut and the swords only remain in contact for an instance. So the video demonstrates both concepts.

There are plenty of times that the zornhau or any counter-cut does not reach. We are all in process of developing senses of timing, distance, range, fulen (feeling), etc. Sometimes we miss. Back to the zornhau to zornhau example. I execute a zorn against your zorn such that I displace the cut that you made to my head. But as you see my cut coming, you adjust and bind against me even as I am binding against you. Thus we are locked in a bind, both trying to put our point in each others' face and keeping each other from putting the point in our own face. Range, distance, and timing was perfect. But it was perfect for both of us and a bind resulted. That is fighting. The fight continues but instead of along lines of timing and distance, we are adjusting according to fulen (feeling) which allows us to sense how are opponent is trying to leverage the swords and what we can do ourselves....It gets more and more complex to explain, but it is actually fairly straightforward. The difficulty comes in developing these senses of timing, distance, range, fulen, etc., and then learning the proper body mechanics with the sword to best execute techniques.

[Jonathan Newhall]

Hey, Greg, speaking of that situation (a mutual bind as opposed to an advantaged bind), I've been running into that situation a lot and what tends to happen is a bit of disorganized maneuvering of the blades and either an eventual disengage or it ends up with wrestling because it becomes too close. I know there are many techniques for dealing with binds (such as the Zornhau on Zornhau plays), but I'm having a hard time using them properly.

The thrust is insufficient because the bind is too close (we can't get the points around properly because they are too far forward), and sometimes one or the other of us can pull some angles properly and get in a duplieren or mutieren (I believe are the terms), or occasionally a good reversal cut, but there's just some issues with using actual established techniques based on what the opponent is doing. The real concern is what happens when the bind is too close to employ the Zornhau-Ort, but instead have to think of something else. Winding to ochs kind of works, but if he presses hard at the sword there's still no room to thrust, and I am not sure that a cut around the other side is permissable with that level of pressure on the blade because he may have time to reverse himself and cut me back (or at the very least reverse his sword and block/parry/set aside the other strike). The last point, of him being able to block the subsequent hit if I attempt to come at him from the other side with a cut, and ruling out the possibility of a thrust due to range, leaves me with very few options in this situation! Perhaps you could help with a suggestion?