Sunday, November 1, 2015

"When you can snatch the pebble from my hand, it will be time for you to leave." OR Andre Paurenfeindt's "12 Rules for the Beginner Fencer," 1516 - Part 1 / 2

Having committed HEMA heresy by alluding to an eastern martial art show in the title of my post on historical European fencing, the famous scene from the 1972 TV series Kung Fu is fitting to think about when discussing the German master Andre Paurenfeindt. The scene in the TV show depicts an aged kung fu master instructing a new student on how the student will know when they've achieved a certain proficiency in the art. The line quoted in the title of this post underscores the various--and often enigmatic--martial concepts a student needs to hone in order to do the seemingly simple task of snatching a pebble from his master's hand. That, however, is a Hollywood construction.

By contrast, Andre Paurenfeindt's "12 Rules for the Beginner Fencer" establishes exactly what those often enigmatic skills are in a more specific and less whimsical way. I'll walk through each of the twelve rules and outline the major martial concepts that are espoused in each one. These are fantastic pieces of advice to keep in mind, no matter your skill level. (Note: I use the Michael Chidester and Eli Combs translation.)


Rule #1: "Whichever leg stands in front is bent / And the rear is extended to create a strong base."


A fighter's stance is the basis of all movement. The front leg is bent to allow for quick stepping while the back leg is stretched or extended (but not locked straight) to provide the structural strength needed when delivering a technique. This is reinforced by the third rule which stresses that your feet are to remain apart. The strong base is a concept across many martial arts and stresses the idea that your techniques are flawed or weakened if your base is structurally unsound.


Basic martial concept: stance is a basis for all techniques


Rule #2: "Fight high with extended body / Shoot to the openings powerfully with your reach."


It's said in both MS. 3227A and by Sigmund Ringeck that you are to mainly fight to the upper openings. This then not only focuses the attacks to remain at head level but also the resultant binds. To bind and wind safely, fully extend your reach and properly adjust your footwork to maintain that maximized sense of measure. I define measure simply as reach + footwork, and one of the best ways to zero in on one's own sense of measure is to hit a standing target, like a wooden pell. In class, I use the simple phrase "fight long" to embody Paurenfeindt's advice. This gets across the idea that, for example, you should not be making strikes with the tip of your blade if you are in wrestling range. If you do not make strikes or other techniques with an accurate understanding of measure, you can severely weaken the attack by connecting with the wrong portion of your blade, miss your target, put yourself in jeopardy, or some combination of all three.  Paurenfeindt is stating here that a fighter must develop an intuitive sense of their own measure in order to consistently hurt the opponent while simultaneously remaining protected.


Basic martial concept: targeting requires a comprehensive knowledge of measure


Rule #3: "Strike and step together / And set your feet against each other."


Constant motion is a major tenet of martial arts, and therefore it's important to coordinate your techniques with accurate stepping. To attack or defend successfully, your feet will often be opposed or set against each other. For example, one foot will be forward, the other backward, one foot will be turned towards the opponent, the other away (think of the die waage or horizontal stance), etc. This allows for a purposeful distribution of weight and coordinates with an attack or defense to create powerful and effective techniques. In other words, what you generally do not want is to have your feet together or to have one foot directly behind the other. If your feet are together they can be described as being with each other rather than "against each other" and do not provide the strong base that's described in rule #1. If you've ever experimented with the ways in which shifting your body weight can add or subtract pressure in a bind you will understand that necessity of having your feet apart rather than together.


Basic martial concept: constant motion includes coordinated attacks and footwork


Rule #4: "He who steps after striking / Will find no joy in his art."


It's hard to find joy when you're dead! A strike needs to be coordinated with the step in order to execute a technique at proper measure, as described in rule #2. If you strike without stepping, you'll end up at improper measure, and a whole host of issues can develop putting your safety in jeopardy. Remember, measure = reach + footwork, and measure is therefore a factor of not only your ability to physically reach your target but also your ability to accurately perceive the distance to your target. The difference here with rule #2 is that rule #2 connected measure with that of the high target. In rule #4, Paurenfeindt is recognizing that in general terms, one must coordinate the technique with footwork in order for there to be art in our movements (and through that art, joy, as in, "holy crap, the technique worked!").


Basic martial concept: proper measure MUST include footwork


Rule #5: Note what the flat is / Do not fence left if you are right-handed."


Getting in a twofer, Paurenfeindt stresses not only the importance of using the flat in both the parry and the attack but the importance of mainly fencing from the right if you're right-handed (and conversely of mainly fencing from the left if you're left-handed). Of course, Paurenfeindt isn't saying don't ever fence from the left if you're right-handed, he's simply recognizing that the most powerful strikes come from our dominant side. We have to keep in mind that his target audience is the "beginner fencer." Once a fencer becomes more skilled, attacking from both sides should be a focus in training.


Basic martial concept: All parts of the weapon can be used; attack most often from the side you're most coordinated and most powerful


Rule #6: "Search for the weak and the strong / Indes, note this word"


There are a couple of ways of understanding the admonishment to search for the weak and the strong. The first concerns the pressure in the bind, the second concerns the actual divisions of the sword. Here, given the fact that Paurenfeindt expresses the importance of the word "indes," I feel it's best to consider the rule as an expression of the importance of pressure and what to do with that pressure. In feeling the pressure in a bind or similar engagement (i.e. grabbing an arm, shirking an opponent's hold on your weapon, etc.), one must understand when the opponent is weak because they're transferring energy elsewhere--often in the middle of switching techniques or trying something else--or when the opponent is strong which is often because they are pushing through towards their target.

What's vital to keep in mind is that your opponent's pressure is indicative of the technique they are trying to execute. That pressure is also relative to the forces being applied by both combatants. For example, if I enter a bind with my opponent and go weak, I'm not going weak simply to do so. Going weak in and of itself is not a conscientious choice or strategy. What I'm actually doing is shifting my target--attempting to strike elsewhere or attempting to strike with a different part of my weapon--which is causing the weakness in the bind, precisely because my focus lies elsewhere. If my opponent were to focus elsewhere as well--go weak--then the bind would evaporate and our weapons would be freewheeling, the benefit of fuhlen lost.

Furthermore, the moment in which you feel what your opponent is doing and thereby act with that information in mind, is the gist of the idea of indes. Paurenfeindt asks us to note that word within the context of pressure, weak and strong. In energetic and earnest freeplay, the feeling and use of that pressure happens in a moment. As martial artists, this concept must be honed and refined.


Basic martial concept: utilize pressure to your advantage


Rules 7-12 will be discussed in the next post.


Tuesday, October 6, 2015

What Counters Ochs? Krump Pow! - Tournament Review

Walking up to my opponent, I held my Albion Liechtenauer while I breathed heavily through my mask. "Do you think your hit across my shoulder got in while I hit you on the forearm?" I said.

"Yeah, my sword deflected the arm hit," my opponent said, taking off his mask as we spoke in the middle of the ring.

"But I'm pretty sure that I cut your arm a tempo before you hit my shoulder," I countered.

"No, I'm pretty sure it was a double. We closed, grabbed, and both swung nearly at the same time."

"It was close," I said, "but I don't think it was a double. The grabs were pretty messy and we both started swinging. Look, how about we throw it out and try for something cleaner?" I offered.

"Yeah, that works," my opponent said as he turned and walked back to his corner, throwing his mask back over his head.

This is not a usual conversation during a tournament. The fact that there was a conversation already makes it unusual. The Krump Pow tournament held in Appleton, WI this past weekend was hosted by the Wisconsin Historical Fencing Association and led by Aaron Pynenberg. The tournament--according to their published rule set--"minimizes the use and roles of judges and maximizes the involvement of the participant." And that it certainly did!

Never before had I seen a tournament that didn't rely on a judge but instead asks the fighters to determine what happened after an exchange. The rules allow for fighters to throw out what was otherwise indeterminable or sloppy and give it another go. The sole head judge, however, is there to act as a check and balance, to ensure the conversations are productive and that clean techniques are not argued. This level of oversight is helpful in keeping the participants honest, but the culture that was quickly established by Friday night showed that the head judges were rarely leaned on to make the tough call. The grounds for this culture were clearly laid out Thursday, when the rule set was demonstrated at the pre-tournament briefing.

The effect of such a rule set was immediately noticeable. I quickly looked forward to the meetings in the center of the ring to discuss what had happened in an exchange, and was happy that meetings didn't even need to take place for the clean and obvious exchanges. As a result, one of the common themes people spoke of between their matches as they looked on was that they were simply having a good time. The martial intensity of a tournament was there (the prize table was insane--swords everywhere!), but so was something more--a collaborative energy that gave me the sense that the other competitors were there to test their skill and discuss learning; they were not simply trying to win.

Less is sometimes more, and this sentiment was certainly embodied in the Krump Pow tournament. Fewer rules, fewer judges, fewer bad calls. The experience that arose from the martial atmosphere became less about the tournament and more about the fighting. In other words, the tournament machine itself was stripped down, allowing fighting to fill that space. As an indication of this, if a registrant signed up for all three events--open steel longsword, mixed synthetics, and single stick--they were guaranteed 30 matches. 30!

As I quickly moved from match to match over a two day period, I kept thinking about how rapidly the tournament structure was throwing me into the ring again and again. It was a blast! Move out of the way, tournament. I have some fighting to do.

Visit the Krump Pow web site

Tuesday, September 15, 2015

HEMA - Art of Self Defense: A Novice's Overview

The master's are continually telling us that often the best defense is a good offense. We're told to obtain the vorschlag, or first strike, and to quickly follow up with the nachschlag, or after strike. The purpose of these hard and fast techniques is to overwhelm the opponent. Ringeck advises that if you are able to strike repeatedly, then the opponent will not be able to come to blows. This tactic makes perfect sense and is wrapped up in the idea that you are often safest if you have the initiative in the fight.

Initiative is a function of timing, and the Liechtenauer tradition recognizes three major moments of timing during a fight: vor, nach, and indes. You have either seized the initiative and are fighting in the vor by constantly threatening your opponent, or you are looking to weaken your opponent by taking away their options, often by striking their sword and so fight in the nach, or hope to regain the initiative once the opponent has already taken it and so threaten the opponent while simultaneously protecting yourself from their technique by striking indes. 

Given the three timings, it would seem then that a large portion of the Art of fencing deals with fencing not from the vor, where you can try to overwhelm your opponent, but rather from the nach or indes, where you work to stymie your opponent's techniques and threaten them with your own. It is a fight, after all, and not many opponents are going to allow themselves to be overwhelmed. A fight is not often so one-sided. The treatises on historical fencing would be short indeed if the entirety of the Art lay in the vor.

It's important to understand that the admonishment to constantly be on the attack is an ideal. If your opponent has a modicum of skill, they will work in earnest to prevent your ability to overwhelm them thus forcing you to parry and ward off their techniques.

This is where the entirety of the rest of the Art of fencing comes into play. The Liechtenauer tradition speaks of four displacements, the vier versetzen, which can be used to counter techniques from the guards ochs, alber, vom tag, and pflug. The underlying principle behind the vier versetzen is that your opponent has assumed one of the above guards and has initiated a technique from that guard. We're told by the masters that guards are nothing more than waypoints along the path of a technique, and so the four displacements are strong counters to the techniques that begin at the four guards.

What's important to note is that the four displacements take into account the two timings I spoke of earlier, nach and indes. Since your opponent has seized the initiative--the vor--your counters are thus relegated to those remaining two timings. Much of the fencing treatises deal with what you can do with these two timings. In order to highlight this fact, I'll use the vier versetzen as an example. The four displacements take advantage of both nach and indes.

The first displacement, the krumphau against a thrust from ochs, can utilize both the nach and indes timings depending on the target. If your krumphau strikes the opponent's sword, your technique was in the nach as you didn't threaten your opponent directly. After striking the opponent's sword, the opponent has a moment to act while you also move to attack them.Conversely, if you target the opponent's hands or arms with the krumphau then you have attacked indes, having immediately regained the initiative while protecting yourself.

The second displacement, the zwerchau against a cut from vom tag, is an indes action. You deflect while simultaneously striking the opponent in the head.

The third displacement, the schielhau against a thrust from pflug, is again an indes action by simultaneously deflecting and targeting your opponent's head or body.

The fourth displacement, the scheitelhau against a rising cut from alber, is most often committed in the nach being that you strike down at the opponent's sword, thus stifling their technique.

Interestingly, Joachim Meyer writes in his treatise of 1570 that there are essentially two types of parries. The first parry is the parry done out of fear. This is the straight parry, where you are most concerned with defending yourself without giving much thought to threatening your opponent. The second parry is the parry that is executed with a strike. Of the parries that are executed with a strike, Meyer notes two types: "The first is when you first put off your opponent's stroke or send it away with a cut, and then rush at his body with a cut, having taken his defense. The second way to parry is when you parry your opponent and hit him at the same time with a single stroke, which the combat masters of old especially praise as suitable." The first parry here is fighting in the nach, as you are targeting the opponent's sword by putting "off the stroke" and then finally targeting the opponent's body. The second parry is fighting indes, as you protect yourself and strike your opponent at the same time.

Furthermore, the strikes that are included in the vier versetzen are the strikes named the meisterhau, or master cuts. These cuts are named the master cuts because they take advantage of the defense timings, nach, and indes. The five master cuts deal with the intelligent, self-defense portion of a fight, and are to be learned so that your fight doesn't look like a "mindless peasant's brawl," as Joachim Meyer discouraged it from being.

Much of the entirety of the fencing treatises should be looked at from the perspective of a fighter who has not seized the vor, and is fighting in either the nach or indes. Techniques such as wrestling at the sword, following after, changing through, doubling, mutating, pommeling, etc. are responses to regaining the initiative. In other words, those techniques teach you how to defend yourself when you're attacked.