Topic: half-poling
Started by: svenlein
Started on: 9/17/2002
Board: The Riddle of Steel
On 9/17/2002 at 1:05pm, svenlein wrote:
half-poling
Swords have 2 grips (in TROS): regular and half-swording,
Should Pole weapons (spears, staves, pole arms) also have more than one grip? Or are pole weapons only optimally effective at one length, and don't have a shorter grip for close in fighting?
I believe it has been said quarterstaves can be half sworded, but they don't get a +3 damage vs metal armour, would a half-swored spear get this bonus?
Are these ideas reflected in actual combat, or are they just impressions spawned from coreographed fighting in media?
Scott
On 9/17/2002 at 5:45pm, Shadeling wrote:
RE: half-poling
I don't think you can half-pole so to speak. I mean to use these weapons effectively requires 2 hands. Half-swording with a sword, in a sense makes its use like a pole-weapon-your grop being in a similar place.
Just my 2 Crowns.
On 9/19/2002 at 1:41pm, svenlein wrote:
RE: half-poling
could a short spear be used as a club?
could a spear be used as a quarter-staff?
could a long spear be used as a short staff?
OR
are they balanced differently, so much so that they can't be used that way?
Scott
On 9/19/2002 at 2:54pm, Wolfen wrote:
RE: half-poling
For the most part, polearms and spears aren't balanced at all. Some polearms may have a weight at the butt (I've not done any research on polearms, so this is mostly conjecture, with a sprinkling of experience thrown in) so that they will have some measure of balance, though.
Spears on the other hand are designed as thrusting weapons, and are best used as such. They normally have no balance whatsoever, with all of the weight being focused on the end of the weapon with the thrusting tip. If you get into closer ranged combat, it's probably wiser to default to another proficiency, drop your spear, and draw a sword, mace, or whatever you have hangin' at your hip.
On 9/19/2002 at 3:45pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: half-poling
Wolfen wrote: Spears on the other hand are designed as thrusting weapons, and are best used as such. They normally have no balance whatsoever, with all of the weight being focused on the end of the weapon with the thrusting tip.
I'd disagree. Yes polearms are unbalanced, and some spears might be designed this way. But a chinese spear is a staff with a pointy end, and used thusly.
So, for certain schools, I'd say that yes, you can learn to use that sort of spear as both spear and staff. Absolutely.
Also, see Naginata for a balanced polearm that would have its own style that would be somewhere inbetween. Definitely used in more of the staff mode, but with a cutting edge.
Mike
On 9/19/2002 at 5:41pm, svenlein wrote:
RE: half-poling
yes, that is exactly what I was thinking about, a friend of mine showed me his chinese spear fighting book, and it was almost exactly the same as a staff.
Scott
On 9/19/2002 at 6:14pm, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: half-poling
All the staff work I've learned is roughly identical to spear work. European staff work was not the middle-of-the-staff stuff you see in Robin Hood. Check out the manual plate from Joachim Meyer on p. 56 of TROS.
Jake
On 9/20/2002 at 12:22pm, svenlein wrote:
RE: half-poling
Ok, so then are these true statements
could a short spear be used as a club?
could a spear be used as a quarter-staff?
could a long spear be used as a short staff?
maybe with an activation cost to switch between the styles, or no cost if they are so close as Jake says?
Why does a spear have a worse defence than a staff?
Also I there any time when middle-of-the-staff-Robin-Hood-style would be useful? And what would the stats be if so?
Scott
On 9/20/2002 at 2:05pm, contracycle wrote:
RE: half-poling
... and just for completenes, an Assegai (the real name is "ilk'wha" after the sound it makes being removed from someone) is like a short sword-blade onna stick.
On 9/20/2002 at 4:13pm, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: half-poling
svenlein wrote: Ok, so then are these true statements
could a short spear be used as a club?
could a spear be used as a quarter-staff?
could a long spear be used as a short staff?
A short spear meaning 4' long? yeah. Otherwise, use a short staff.
A spear can definitely be used as a q-staff.
a long spear can be shortened by choking up on the haft, yeah, but it won't be as quick as the short staff.
maybe with an activation cost to switch between the styles, or no cost if they are so close as Jake says?
in most cases here you're referring to the "polearm" proficiency, so it's not like you'll have a separate combat pool. On the other hand, I'd impose a change-over cost similar to that on the half-sword if you're trying to do it mid-round.
Why does a spear have a worse defence than a staff?
I'm thinkin' it's due to the iron or steel head on the end, and/or the metal butt-end cap, both of which weigh the weapon down some and/or unbalance it somewhat. My opinions on the spear and q-staff from when I wrote that were more based on the words of George Silver and modern folks that do staff work, as I didn't start it myself until about 10 months ago. FREX, Silver speaks of the q-staff as being one of the best all-around weapons, but not the spear.
Also I there any time when middle-of-the-staff-Robin-Hood-style would be useful? And what would the stats be if so?
Scott
In my opinion...no. But there are several folks that would disagree, including some that practice staff. Using your staff RH-style shortens your reach tremendously, slows you down, and opens you up to several kinds of attack, not to mention that your attacks rely on circular momentum which has issues of its own. Better to use two short clubs (like escrima) than to RH your staff. I'm referring to the use of an 8' staff here, which is where I've spent most of my time. I believe, however, that the same applies at 6'. From what I've seen in manuals and historically, the staff was used RH style for sport-fighting and for armor fighting, where the staff is used more as an aid to wrestling (see Maximillian's Fechbuch).
Jake
On 9/20/2002 at 4:55pm, Thirsty Viking wrote:
RE: half-poling
ah some things to think about....
RH a staff might be usefull on an individual basis.... try to picture the mayhem in a formation fight! Totally unworkable then. better to close ranks and use it otherwise.
On 9/20/2002 at 6:07pm, svenlein wrote:
RE: half-poling
Jake Norwood wrote:
A short spear meaning 4' long? yeah. Otherwise, use a short staff.
A spear can definitely be used as a q-staff.
a long spear can be shortened by choking up on the haft, yeah, but it won't be as quick as the short staff.
In the tros book a "short staff" is about as long as a long spear, is this inaccurate.
Scott
On 9/20/2002 at 6:22pm, Thirsty Viking wrote:
RE: half-poling
anytime you choke up on a pole arm... keep in mind what's behind you.
On 9/20/2002 at 7:17pm, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: half-poling
svenlein wrote:Jake Norwood wrote:
A short spear meaning 4' long? yeah. Otherwise, use a short staff.
A spear can definitely be used as a q-staff.
a long spear can be shortened by choking up on the haft, yeah, but it won't be as quick as the short staff.
In the tros book a "short staff" is about as long as a long spear, is this inaccurate.
Scott
Heh, no, it's not innaccurate. The british "short staff" was about 8-9' long, as opposed to the "long staff" which was about 10' long. This time I meant a short staff by our general reckoning, being about 4-6 feet tops. Sorry 'bout that.
Jake
On 9/21/2002 at 11:24pm, contracycle wrote:
RE: half-poling
I think the staff RH-style is effective against unarmed opponents, in which it still gives a reach advantage. But then its not really a military weapon.
On 9/23/2002 at 2:34am, Thirsty Viking wrote:
RE: half-poling
this depends on what you mean by military....
A Staff RH style can be a martial weapon... However it is not a FORMATION weapon. The reason for this being the amount of room for usage. Just as the two handed sword isn't a formation weapon. Light troops could use these weapons to some effect... But not meadium and heavey tropps counting on shield walls, and neighbors for the advantagee of formation fighting.
On 9/23/2002 at 5:00am, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: half-poling
I'm going to disagree ENTIRELY on basis of opinion, not any real proof. RH style is not an acutal combat style. You can't kill anyone with it with even 1/3 the efficiency of other styles...therefore it's no good.
Jake
On 9/23/2002 at 6:41am, Thirsty Viking wrote:
RE: half-poling
an interesting view point jake.. ummm
Personally i don't want to let people hit me in the head with a quarterstaff used robin hood style. or any other style for that matter. I have never used a quarter staff... that being said i do remember some rather stunning lessons with padded pugel-sticks from the army... you can debate weather it was RH style or not... I was happy to have the PADDING and my HELMET.
Based soley on my opinion from that... I'd have to say angular momentum on a staff can be quite forceful. Now it might have relatively few kill level 5 hits compared to other weapons ... hyper extended joints, broken bones, and deformes armor are all a bitch though... and the loss of combat dice from all the mass weapon attacks does reduce your effectivness. I guess it all depends what you mean by RH Style.
I think non RH as using a Spear without a head. a pugel sticks has more range of attacks at a shorted range. (designed to simulate using a rifle (held at port arms as a club and a bayonet weapon at close quartes). I see standing with a rifle at port arms as having many similarities to RH stance with a Quarter Staff. Not the least of which is you have what is essentialy a blunt dopplehander in halfsword if you step forward with one foot. (disarm rules?) finally... walking staffs don't attract the attention that DEDICATED weapons do from the guard, although they are hard to hide, and almost always noticed. another advantage to RH a staff is that the DEFENDER should have a Harder TN because it has TWO striking ends... even if they do hit less hard than 1 dedicated might in a swing.
Finally, while in a swing, you don't get the windup power you might with a club. you pick up momentum with the striking head by moving your hands in opposing directions... how this balanced out in practice? I'd need to hit some sort of detecting equipment to judge. I think you'd be looking at CLUB level damage.
There may well be fallacies in this assessment by me.... It is purely sitting here thinking theoretically. Call it my OPINION
If your opinion RH a staff is spinning it like a majorettes twirling baton ... I'd not argue with you and you'd see from my post this isn't what I was refering to.
On 9/23/2002 at 1:08pm, Jaif wrote:
RE: half-poling
FWIW, while it hasn't come up yet in a fight, I would let my players 'half-sword' a staff or a spear. From a game perspective, all half-swording does is allow a combatant to choke-up on their weapon to thrust from a closer range. If a person can train to do that with a bladed weapon, where changing grips is complicated, then I have to believe a person can do it with a staff or spear, where sliding your grip is easy.
-Jeff[/code]
On 9/23/2002 at 3:34pm, Thirsty Viking wrote:
RE: half-poling
Jaif wrote: FWIW, while it hasn't come up yet in a fight, I would let my players 'half-sword' a staff or a spear. From a game perspective, all half-swording does is allow a combatant to choke-up on their weapon to thrust from a closer range. If a person can train to do that with a bladed weapon, where changing grips is complicated, then I have to believe a person can do it with a staff or spear, where sliding your grip is easy.
-Jeff[/code]
as for half poling... for many reasons it is far mor limited than half swording. Also if shield and spear is the case.... then it isn't so easy to shift grip one handed. possibly better to drop and draw a shortsword. As with all thing a healthy dose of common sence is required. some one holding a spear 3 foot behind the head on a 12 foot shaft is going to be very awkward in the usage.
On 9/24/2002 at 5:03am, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: half-poling
Thirsty Viking wrote: an interesting view point jake.. ummm
Personally i don't want to let people hit me in the head with a quarterstaff used robin hood style. or any other style for that matter. I have never used a quarter staff... that being said i do remember some rather stunning lessons with padded pugel-sticks from the army... you can debate weather it was RH style or not... I was happy to have the PADDING and my HELMET.
Remember, I didn't say it wasn't lethal...I said it was less than 1/3 as effective as other ways of using one.
Jake
And again, only in my opinion on this one.
On 9/24/2002 at 5:20am, Thirsty Viking wrote:
RE: half-poling
That was one reason i asked you what exactly you were defining as RH. and took pains to describe what i was picturing... incase there was confusion of definitions. As for tading off some of the offence for the ability to parry, you may be right.
wish we had some well trained people to show us the true effectivness, shrug. not that it particularly matters i guess.
On 9/24/2002 at 5:27am, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: half-poling
Thirsty Viking wrote: That was one reason i asked you what exactly you were defining as RH. and took pains to describe what i was picturing... incase there was confusion of definitions. As for tading off some of the offence for the ability to parry, you may be right.
wish we had some well trained people to show us the true effectivness, shrug. not that it particularly matters i guess.
I'm referring to what most people think of as a quarterstaff grip, with hands equal length from either end. As far as "a trained person," I know enough about range, leverage, and q-staff usage (both historical and hands-on) to say that not using it at length by holding it "in the middle" will get you whipped against a lesser opponent using it the "long way."
Hope that's clear. Again, see p. 56(?) of TROS to see the "proper" grip as I'm thinking of it.
Jake
On 9/24/2002 at 1:16pm, Thirsty Viking wrote:
RE: half-poling
oddly enough, it looks like two of the guys are using a middle grip for successful parries in that plate. And have closed to a closer range than the other two groups. Is that a historical plate?
On 9/24/2002 at 3:26pm, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: half-poling
Thirsty Viking wrote: oddly enough, it looks like two of the guys are using a middle grip for successful parries in that plate. And have closed to a closer range than the other two groups. Is that a historical plate?
Yes, it is, it's from Joachim Meyer, 1567 or thereabouts. The guy in the center pair on the left is holding in "robin-hood" fashion, although he's not using the staff in the whirling fashion that I was referring to. You'll also note that he's using a "very" short staff of about 6' in length, and is holding it that way to close. So yes, "RH" style has certain uses. Also note, however, that he has to close in order to hit his opponenent. Closing is a difficult thing to do against an advanced opponent. In other words, he's not parrying per se, but rather he's closing and using the staff to shield his body as he does so. The "RH" grip also alows him to strike with either side once he closes.
Remember that I said that in *my* opinion it wasn't a very valid way to fight, and that others with training may disagree. I'm a member of the "George Silver" school of thought--keep you opponent at a distance, generally, unless coming to grips gives you a definite advantage. The whole point of a staff is to keep the opponent away, IMO.
On a final note, this manual is from 1567...pretty late for most of the weapons pictured therein, and many scholars think that it contains a great deal of sport-advice instead of actual combat techniques. I don't know if that's true or not, but it's worth pointing out.
Good call pointing that out, either way.
Jake
On 9/24/2002 at 4:48pm, Wolfen wrote:
RE: half-poling
Having been taught the very basics of bo-staff, I've noted that the middle-hold technique is best used for defensive purposes. Both ends of the staff are available to block, and to strike if the opportunity presents itself. I would agree that holding it in the middle would definitely reduce the effective range of the weapon, but I think a lower DTN would be in order as well.
On 9/24/2002 at 5:06pm, Durgil wrote:
RE: half-poling
They may defend well against another staff or some other mostly wooded weapon, but how long will they probably last against an opponent with a sword, particularly one of those big ones? I know I'm going to hear about why would someone with a staff get into a fight with a guy using a greatsword, but sometimes you can't pick your battles and you just have to fight with what ever is at hand. Has anyone thought up some realist weapon breakage rules yet that might cover this situation?
On 9/24/2002 at 5:29pm, Nick Pagnucco wrote:
RE: half-poling
Durgil wrote: They may defend well against another staff or some other mostly wooded weapon, but how long will they probably last against an opponent with a sword, particularly one of those big ones? I know I'm going to hear about why would someone with a staff get into a fight with a guy using a greatsword, but sometimes you can't pick your battles and you just have to fight with what ever is at hand. Has anyone thought up some realist weapon breakage rules yet that might cover this situation?
For the makeshift weapon stuff, it wouldn't be hard: to try really hard to parry, he over-powers with more successes, I'd say that probably meant the defending weapon broke.
As for the very different situation of a guy proficient with a quarterstaff versus a guy with a big sword... well, thats REALLY different. First off, yes, I would say the guy with the sword has a weapon advantage (probably). I mean, its sharp and stuff :) However, things aren't hopeless for the guy with the stick. I don't have any experience with western martial arts, but I do have experience with aikido, which 'thinks' in terms of being unarmed, armed with a jo (4' long staff), armed with a katana.
I don't pretend to know a lot or be a master of anything, but I do know you can parry a sword with a wooden staff with out it automatically shattering. If you 'parried' the way people do in movies (basically whack the weapon coming at you really hard), then yeah, it'd break. However, that ISN'T how parries work. Parries (at least in aikido) are more about guiding the weapon away from you than whacking it back where it came from. So, lessay a blade is coming down at my head. A parry would involve stepping to oneside, ducking & leaning a bit, and putting the jo up at an angle so that if contact occurs, it won't be directly on the edge of the blade, and the sword with skip down it.
I offer this as an example of how to parry a sword with a stick. Its not western, but I'd imagine a western style would do something similar. The basic point is a parry guides an attacking weapon one way as you move another.
As I said, its not aan equal situation, but it isn't hopeless.
On 9/24/2002 at 9:26pm, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: half-poling
Durgil wrote: They may defend well against another staff or some other mostly wooded weapon, but how long will they probably last against an opponent with a sword, particularly one of those big ones? I know I'm going to hear about why would someone with a staff get into a fight with a guy using a greatsword, but sometimes you can't pick your battles and you just have to fight with what ever is at hand. Has anyone thought up some realist weapon breakage rules yet that might cover this situation?
Wow, this is going to shock a few folks, but Master George Silver claimed the staff as the best all-around weapon (as opposed to the welsh hook, his favorite, or the cut-and-thrust sword, which the great majority of his writing is on). He said (paraphrased) in "Paradoxes of Defense" that a single man with a "staff of convenient length" (TROS short staff...8' long) could take on two men of equal skill with swords and win easily. The staff is in many ways a superior weapon to the sword, depending on uses.
Likewise, as to staffs breaking...it just wasn't a common thing. I've got a 1.25" thick 8' long hickory staff, and I'm sure that I could deflect (read: parry) hundreds of sword strikes with it. It could probably hold up to several dozen blocks as well, if my technique was good.
If I had to enter a real fight against a sword, give me the big stick, regardless of whether I've trained for years with the sword and months with the staff.
Jake
On 9/24/2002 at 10:30pm, Thirsty Viking wrote:
RE: half-poling
jake wrote: Wow, this is going to shock a few folks, but Master George Silver claimed the staff as the best all-around weapon (as opposed to the welsh hook, his favorite, or the cut-and-thrust sword, which the great majority of his writing is on). He said (paraphrased) in "Paradoxes of Defense" that a single man with a "staff of convenient length" (TROS short staff...8' long) could take on two men of equal skill with swords and win easily. The staff is in many ways a superior weapon to the sword, depending on uses.
Likewise, as to staffs breaking...it just wasn't a common thing. I've got a 1.25" thick 8' long hickory staff, and I'm sure that I could deflect (read: parry) hundreds of sword strikes with it. It could probably hold up to several dozen blocks as well, if my technique was good.
If I had to enter a real fight against a sword, give me the big stick, regardless of whether I've trained for years with the sword and months with the staff.
Jake
I've heard these things before... Makes me believe that though the fight starts at extended length... it gets to a midle grip as the swordsmen, or the remaining swordsman closes in. I'd love to watch him beat the crap out of a couple of god swordmen to see how he does it though.
I just got back from reading his comments.... A most interesting piece of work. I highly recomend anyone looking at half-poling to read that link. It evens describes how he'd defeat 2 swordsmen without shields. You are right, he never even comments on a middle grip staff. weather this was unworthy of comment because it was included by default, or universally scoffed at is interesting to debate, but not conclusive. He does however state that having only a foot of staff behind the rear hand doesn't restict normal methods of use... this would be a good figure for half-poling in general I think.
Last item on the topic.... even if quarter staff fighting was only viewed as a sport using walking sticks... It wouldn't be the first time that peasants disguised martial training as recreational activity. This would give them an excuse to carry a weapon capeable of being used to defeat most swords of the time... according to the master... if thier staff was longer than the sword.. they'd have the vantage if they used it as a short staff.
Using it in a RH grip.. (not twirling) would be a typical starting hand position while walking (reflex role for 0 activation time) The twirling, if any, Could be a training excersize to strengthen your grip, and learn to shift it easily and surely on the staf. Anyway, an intriguing line of thought as to how it descended into our modern perceptions.
On 9/24/2002 at 10:31pm, Lyrax wrote:
RE: half-poling
Wolfen wrote: Having been taught the very basics of bo-staff, I've noted that the middle-hold technique is best used for defensive purposes. Both ends of the staff are available to block, and to strike if the opportunity presents itself. I would agree that holding it in the middle would definitely reduce the effective range of the weapon, but I think a lower DTN would be in order as well.
Not to be totally contrary to ya', but if you were fighting against me, and I had a sword, then I'd just cut off all your fingers. I doubt you'd be in a mood to hurt me, after that.
On 9/24/2002 at 11:22pm, Thirsty Viking wrote:
RE: half-poling
while the theory of that is good, you might find the implementation hard... especially against a short staff.
On 9/25/2002 at 5:59am, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: half-poling
Yeah, the Silver stuff is great. I took on two guys with sword and buckler today at the "short" staff with almost no difficulty. One of them is quite good, as well, and fast. I tried half-staffing (RH style) against a long staff (using the "parries" from the Meyer plate on p. 56(?)), and found the parry to be good, if a little unneccesary.
Jake
On 9/25/2002 at 6:29am, Wolfen wrote:
RE: half-poling
Y'know Lance... I've very, very little training with a staff, but I'd really like to take you on, staff-to-sword. I doubt that you'll hit my fingers even once, and I'll guarantee that I'll hit you several times before you hit me once. Admittedly that one hit with a blade is going to hurt more than several moderate whacks with a stick, but...
The staff is NOT a toy, despite how most roleplaying games try to portray it.
Not a real sword, of course.. Just to clarify, I don't want anyone chopping at me even to prove a point. ::winks::
On 9/25/2002 at 1:09pm, svenlein wrote:
RE: half-poling
Does Silver account for armor?
Would he suggest two swordmen in plate would lose to one "short" staffer in plate?
Scott
On 9/25/2002 at 6:31pm, Lyrax wrote:
RE: half-poling
Wolfen wrote: Y'know Lance... I've very, very little training with a staff, but I'd really like to take you on, staff-to-sword. I doubt that you'll hit my fingers even once, and I'll guarantee that I'll hit you several times before you hit me once. Admittedly that one hit with a blade is going to hurt more than several moderate whacks with a stick, but...
I've had a small amount of training myself, I'd kinda like that as well. Unless neither of us was wearing protection, that would just suck... but seriously, you have to think about this... if I miss your fingers, what will I hit? Your staff? Then I can just slide my sword along the staff and cut your fingers. Big improvement. Will I hit your chest? That's not much better, either. I'm going to hit something because the sword, like the staff, isn't a toy. It's not heavy, it's versatile, and it is anything but slow. Just like the staff (although I still, and probably always will, think that you're putting yourself at a very unnecessary disadvantage with the half-grip.)
On 9/25/2002 at 7:48pm, Wolfen wrote:
RE: half-poling
You'll hit the staff. If I stand there and let you slide your sword along the staff, then I deserve to lose my fingers. Whole issue is, the staff won't stop moving long enough for you to do that. You'll hit the staff, or the staff will hit your sword... It matters not. When it comes right down to it, the staff is a much faster weapon than the sword, because of the style of the grip and the fact that it can strike from both ends. I'm inclined to disagree with anyone who says that a center grip is a handicap, if you're on the defensive, and have even the least amount of training with that style of holding it.
On 9/25/2002 at 10:36pm, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: half-poling
Okay, I'm popping in here. Lances--cut it out.
Lyrax Lance--I could kick your trash any day with a staff vs. a sword. And you know it. See you at practice saturday.
Okay, enough of "Jake the Moderator." Sheesh I hate doing that.
On to a better question:
svenlein wrote: Does Silver account for armor?
Would he suggest two swordmen in plate would lose to one "short" staffer in plate?
Scott
Silver refers to his principles applying in armour and out, and often states that he is interested in men training for two reasons only: (1) to defend their own lives on the street, and (2) to defend their country against enemies. The second definitely includes armor. Silver does not, however, (that I'm aware) give any special instructions for armored fighting, and most of his advice seems to assume little or no armor.
In contrast, Maximillian, the old German (?) emporor, was quite the fighter. There is a decent sized section of his manual fighting with 6' staves and in armor. The bulk of the fight is "robin hood" style as we've been calling it. This is both understandable and advisable in armor, as the blow of a staff will do little against plate, but can be very useful for closing in and tangling up your opponent so that you can break limbs or kill with the knife.
I highly reccoment Dr. Sydny Anglo's "The Martial Arts of Rennaissance Europe" for more info on the staff and on both Silver and ol' Maximillian.
Jake
On 9/25/2002 at 11:33pm, Gordon C. Landis wrote:
RE: half-poling
This seems like as good a place as any to bring up this issue -
So, I studied Shotokan Karate for a bit, I know folks in the SCA, I know some fencers, I've sparred a bit, held a sword - but really, nothing that really means anything. I'm totally looking to the experts for information here.
But Silver - I've seen his book absolutely TRASHED by a number of supposed experts. I mean really, really dismissed as a piece of junk, useless as a meaningful reference on real weapon fighting back then. Likely written only to get more people to pay him money as an instructor.
I don't expect anyone can give a definitive answer on the legitimacy of Silver, but I'm curious - did something change recently that raised the reputation of this book? Or is it this one of those "folks just disagree" situations?
Gordon
On 9/26/2002 at 12:04am, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: half-poling
Gordon C. Landis wrote: This seems like as good a place as any to bring up this issue -
But Silver - I've seen his book absolutely TRASHED by a number of supposed experts. I mean really, really dismissed as a piece of junk, useless as a meaningful reference on real weapon fighting back then. Likely written only to get more people to pay him money as an instructor.
I don't expect anyone can give a definitive answer on the legitimacy of Silver, but I'm curious - did something change recently that raised the reputation of this book? Or is it this one of those "folks just disagree" situations?
Gordon
Honestly, I've never heard this about Silver, but then again, maybe I'm talking to different people.
First, who are these "experts?" Experts in what? If they're from there aforementioned groups, here are some *possible* explanations why they don't like Silver:
*SCA- I actually think that most SCA folks think highly of Silver, but they may have issues with him based on Collegiate Fencing, below...
*Collegiate/Olypic/Sport Fencers- Silver repeatedly trashes the rapier, and on good grounds, if he's a little over-opinionated about it. He advocates use of the cut not over the thrust, but as being as important, and actually seems to prefer it. He taught real fighting, esp. for war, and the type of training that Fencers do is a sport representation of an old training game derived from the small sword, a weapon descended from the rapier, which Silver hates.
*Laymen- Silver's terminology is admittedly very confusing in a number of places for academics that know little of actual swordplay and for "fighters" that know little of early modern English and Silver's lingo. Confusion leads to distrust of material.
The bottom line is that there is nothing in Silver that isn't martially sound, although his advice may not be to the preferences of some schools of thought. He rambles a great deal in his first book, Paradoxes of Defence, and makes some impressive (though not wild) claims. His second book, Brief Instructions on my Paradoxes of Defence is a bona-fide fighting manual and has oodles of excellent advice. He's not tremendously organized by today's standards, but likewise not less organized than other manuals I've seen (in many cases he's more organized--at least he attempted it). Either of Silver's books can be fount at www.thearma.org and/or at the aemma website, a link to which is somewhere on this thread, but I forget where (and I'm too lazy to check).
Hope that helps. As everything in any martial art, there's a lot of hot air and a lot of different and violent opinions.
Jake
On 9/26/2002 at 12:13am, Valamir wrote:
RE: half-poling
I've heard the same comments about Silver.
Universally they're from guys like Evangelista: Sport fencers and Stage Fencers. IIRC Evangelista was trained by the guy who trained Errol Flynn how to fence on stage.
These guys have the perception of a continuum:
Cut and Thrust ---> heavy rapier ---> lighter rapier --->small sword
as an evolution from inferior to superior. Since modern fencing is the sportified version of small sword fighting this bias is understandable, even if wrong.
Once I learned that the real reason for the adoption of the small sword had more to do with social convention than weapon effectiveness I realized that their assumption of: more recently employed must mean superior was way off.
I also suspect that Silver gets a bad rap because his duels would look more like a Tyson fight with head butting and biting than anything Dumas penned.
Silver's attitude can best be summed up as "If you want to look stylish and impress the ladies, learn the rapier. If you want to survive a mugging or a tavern brawl, learn to fight for real".
On 9/26/2002 at 4:21am, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: half-poling
Valamir wrote: I've heard the same comments about Silver.
Universally they're from guys like Evangelista: Sport fencers and Stage Fencers. IIRC Evangelista was trained by the guy who trained Errol Flynn how to fence on stage.
These guys have the perception of a continuum:
Cut and Thrust ---> heavy rapier ---> lighter rapier --->small sword
as an evolution from inferior to superior. Since modern fencing is the sportified version of small sword fighting this bias is understandable, even if wrong.
Once I learned that the real reason for the adoption of the small sword had more to do with social convention than weapon effectiveness I realized that their assumption of: more recently employed must mean superior was way off.
I also suspect that Silver gets a bad rap because his duels would look more like a Tyson fight with head butting and biting than anything Dumas penned.
Silver's attitude can best be summed up as "If you want to look stylish and impress the ladies, learn the rapier. If you want to survive a mugging or a tavern brawl, learn to fight for real".
Yup, I'll back you on that, Ralph.
Jake
On 9/26/2002 at 5:11pm, Lyrax wrote:
RE: half-poling
Jake Norwood wrote: Lyrax Lance--I could kick your trash any day with a staff vs. a sword. And you know it. See you at practice saturday.Yeah, but you don't go all RH on me, either. I'd honestly like to see you try to kick somebody's butt RH style, because I'm not sure that even you can do it.
And I can kick your trash with a staff vs. sword, too. That's easy. A RH staff vs. sword... then you've got an interesting fight.
On 9/26/2002 at 6:18pm, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: half-poling
Lyrax wrote:Jake Norwood wrote: Lyrax Lance--I could kick your trash any day with a staff vs. a sword. And you know it. See you at practice saturday.Yeah, but you don't go all RH on me, either. I'd honestly like to see you try to kick somebody's butt RH style, because I'm not sure that even you can do it.
And I can kick your trash with a staff vs. sword, too. That's easy. A RH staff vs. sword... then you've got an interesting fight.
Okay, I should exercise self-control here, but I'm not going to (yet). I could probably wipe you up "RH style," too, if I could to it full speed and safely (which I can't). However, it's useless making claims about what you could or could not do to a person with a weapon used in a certain style when there's no way to prove it (safely or otherwise). This is definitely the case with your "fight" with Wolfen, so put a sock in it or I will.
As to me RH-ing a staff against you with a sword, I'm sure I could win this one, but it wouldn't be due to the effectiveness of the style, IMO...I'm just a better trained, meaner bastard. Regardless, since we'll probably never know, I'm going to resume my position as moderator and say that while the thread and the topic are still quite open, this Lance vs. Lance buisness is over. Period.
Jake,
who's been training more with the staff lately thanks to this thread.
On 9/26/2002 at 6:45pm, svenlein wrote:
RE: half-poling
Jake Norwood wrote:
who's been training more with the staff lately thanks to this thread.
Yea, that's what I like to here.
Scott
On 9/26/2002 at 7:01pm, Gordon C. Landis wrote:
RE: half-poling
Thanks for the Silver info - as I recall, one of these Silver-trashings took place on the 7th Sea mailing list, no doubt by defenders of the (light) rapier. My skepticism is suitably engaged, and certainly everything folks have said about Silver's techniques makes sense to me.
Again, thanks -
Gordon
On 9/27/2002 at 4:20pm, Lyrax wrote:
RE: half-poling
I'm just a better trained, meaner bastard.True, tru 'dat.