Clawing attacks in Ringen and in other HEMA ?

[Vagelis Baltatzis]

Not only in the hundreds years war......

In almost wars of ancient Europe was guerilla-warfare a very effective tactic.

Show for example the gallic war (Romans vs Gallics) or in the Cantabrian wars (Celtiberian wars) ...

Later as the Romans tried to conquer the Germanics (Magna Germania) the base tactic of the Germanics was guerilla-tactics ....

The guerilla tactics of the Germanics were the main reason that the Romans could not conquered ''Germania''..

In the medieval times was the small war between castles very often used... Great open field battles were very rare....

As you see in many ancient tribal societies is the guerilla war (raids, ambush etc.) the base of the warfare ....


I think the theory of a ''open field battle'' comes first with a more advanced culture niveau ....

But I think it is better to speak about the main theme of the topic. If one has more informations about the soft techniques of Ringen, please post them ..

Best regards

[Sripol Asanasavest]

I thought it was because the Germanic tribes outnumbered the Romans and they had the home field advantage... I never knew that guerilla tactics that we knew of were used in ancient Europeans.... ...At least not as sophisticated as the tactics they were using and using in Southeast Asia. I knew that the native Americans also use this kind of tactics....

And, I thought the reason the French beat English later was because they started using the crossbows.... They could arm more men with them and they weren't as hard to use as the longbows.

[Sripol Asanasavest]

I'll be frank with you! I'm not denying that western civilization has achieved some of the greatest achievements, maybe ever, and influenced and modernized the globe.... But, all I'm saying is: is the ancient art of fighting during the Renaissance period and middle ages any good compared to styles like Muay Thai and BBJ in a real fight.

[Sal Bertucci]

Short answer: yes.

I'd like to encourage other readers not to enter the pointless circular argument presented here.

[Joshua Cook]

Sripol, it's obvious that you know very little about the sophistication of Western Fighting Arts. If you're willing to expand your knowledge, I'm more than happy to oblige, but if you're going to try a circular argument like that, then I am unwilling to engage in it.

And actually, modern tests have shown that the longbow had a longer range, more penetrating power, and more rapid rate of fire than the crossbow. What gave the English so much trouble were the guerilla tactics pioneered at the time by the Marshal of France, whose name escapes me at the present moment.

And finally, to return to the topic of this thread. I vaguely remember, Vag, a pressure point on the inside of the elbow described by Fiore to force your opponent to relax his grip.

[Sal Bertucci]

I imagine that the "murder strokes" don't count as "soft techniques".

[Sripol Asanasavest]

I'm just saying for the sake of your claim....and arguments. I don't mean to tuck on anyone strings, but if you are going to claim that it is what it is, then it's natural that some people might object to it...especially when nobody hasn't even heard of it or going up against a really good fighter who can really hurt you.

For example, the U.S. makes the best fighter jets in the world... I think it's the F-15 tomcat and newer model which could escape detection from radar...I can't remember what it is called. Anyhow, in the beginning the first line of fighter jets that they ever used and saw action in a war was in Vietnam. The Phantoms went up against the north Vietnamese Mics and lost! The Phantom wasn't as manuverable as the Mics, and it was overpowered and too fast, in fact it would run out of fuel in the middle of dogfights. It was also over-gunned... So, they went back to the drawing boards and designed the F-15 Tomcat which is the greatest jet ever created. All I'm saying is: no one knows everything and anticipates everything that is going to happen.

[Sal Bertucci]

Yes, but your question is an entirely bogus one.

Whether or not any martial art is good in a fight is less a matter the efficacy of the particular martial art and is more a showing of the individual practitioner. Which is actually what happened in Vietnam. Despite having superior jets, the individual dog fighting skills of American pilots had declined.

So to cut to the quick: Renaissance Martial Arts (RMA) is a complete system of MAIMING and KILLING people from the back alley to the battle field, and is holistic in nature. So when comparing that to someone who ONLY fights modern Muai Thai or BJJ then I would consider it advantageous. If someone fought with BOTH Muai Thai AND BJJ the advantage would be small b/c both specialties cover the weaknesses of the other system.

However, since (As far as I understand correctly) Muai Thai has degenerated into only fist/foot fighting (Though formidable I admit), and BJJ has close up counters to knife attacks etc. I still believe that RMA has the advantage over those systems b/c it teaches you to fight ANYWHERE with ANYTHING. Which is much more advantageous in a real fight.

You're free to disagree, but try to come back with something of substance.

[Sripol Asanasavest]

Yes, but your question is an entirely bogus one.

Whether or not any martial art is good in a fight is less a matter the efficacy of the particular martial art and is more a showing of the individual practitioner. Which is actually what happened in Vietnam. Despite having superior jets, the individual dog fighting skills of American pilots had declined.

Actually, because they had the most skillful pilots in the world, a lot of American pilots' lives were saved....

[Joshua Welsh]

I have to agree with Sal here.

Additionally, this has nothing to do with Vietnam or Aerial Combat. It's off topic, and not a suitable analogy to close combat between humans. Let's get back on track, thanks!

[Webmaster]

A little off topic is no big deal, but since this thread now seems to be hopelessly off topic, I'm locking it. Move along folks, nothing else to see here.