I wanted to bring a new Traditional (classical) Fencing video to your attention. This is a video of a couple friends of mine their instructor caught on tape before or after regular practice. Just thought I would throw it up here for your consideration and out of curiosity to see what you think. The link is 'Video No 1' at:
http://www.kabalfencing.org/gallery.htm
it is a rather large file, just to forewarn you.
I await your comments.
"Si tu no sabes todas las acciones es como si un músico no supiera tocar todas las notas." - Fernando Chiriboga
"If you do not know all the actions it is like a musician who does not know all the notes."
Originally Posted by cfaustus
476MB is a huge file! it will take hours to down load! Any change of a compressed version?
Wanting to escape from the lab.
hmm... it took about an hour for me at home... a few minutes at work... unfortunately, I did not actually post the original so I have no control over its compression. I will see if I can compress what I downloaded later and maybe present a new link.
"Si tu no sabes todas las acciones es como si un músico no supiera tocar todas las notas." - Fernando Chiriboga
"If you do not know all the actions it is like a musician who does not know all the notes."
I enjoy the irony of discussing how to use 21st century technology to best transmit and render video images of 19th century-style fencing
Thank goodness for DSL...
"In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different."
Hate to be blunt, but from my own (admittedly non classical) standpoint, it looks like they don't really move much, the tempo is monotone, the distance way too close, and they're not even trying to hit. I saw several instances where one fencer attacked short (presumably to fient) but then just withdrew it when there was no reaction from the opponent. Also, very, VERY slow.
"If I were ever to challenge you to a duel, your best bet would be battle axes in a very dark basement." Misquoted from The Prisoner
"Technical excellence is the antecedant of tactical creativity." - Nat Goodhartz
But those things which belong neither to God nor to Caeser, feeleth free to writeth them off, for yea, they are deductable.
The video quality is good, the fencing is not. The fencing has multiple severe flaws:
- Footwork is almost non-existent. They look as if they're nailed to the floor. Distance is too short, lunges are shallow, no such thing as an advance lunge or balestra lunge. On both defensive and offensive side the footwork is inadequate.
- Tempo is slow and uniform. At least they don't have the problem in the video from Crown's school ("parry - pause - riposte"), but this is a metronome set to a slow pace. Fundamental aspects of tempo are missing
- Overuse of low line parries for high line attacks. If they sat down properly in on guard position they could use quarte and sixte instead of struggling to use septime and octave and failing to make riposte.
- Attacks are all along the blade and into closed lines. It is a misunderstanding of foil - even traditional foil - to think that all actions are done in opposition. Pris-de-fer (or presso di ferro if you prefer) , disengage, one-two are entirely classical actions. If one is going to extend in opposition, there should be sentiment du fer to detect opposing pressure and either disengage or retake the blade.
So, it's really hard to say positive things about this. Footwork, bladework, tempo, tactics are all weak. This has nothing to do with 'classical vs. sport' - this isn't authentic fencing of 100 years ago either.
"In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different."
Yes... how strange.
A video of "classical" ("traditional"? sounds like a new step in a PR game) fencing where it looks like crap.
Shocking, just shocking.
I'm sure they look a lot better when their Dungeon Master is on hand.
I'll try to start with a positive note. Good quality video! Use of a tripod and some decent resolution goes a long way.
I agree that the footwork was almost nonexistant. Not just that, way too linear for any kind of historical fencing. You arent stuck on a strip, move around!
I too agree it was quite passive and slow.
Missing entirely was the use of the off hand for parries, blade grabs and disarms. Since only the tip was sharp, you would be able to do all these things with ease.
Spend some time reading Domenico Angelo and his conteporaries and work from there rather than relying on sport fencing as a basis. Working backwards like that is like trying to build a catapult based on a howitzer cannon.
Angelo can be found here: http://www.amazon.com/School-Fencing...e=UTF8&s=books
What if their objective is not historical fencing?
"If I were ever to challenge you to a duel, your best bet would be battle axes in a very dark basement." Misquoted from The Prisoner
"Technical excellence is the antecedant of tactical creativity." - Nat Goodhartz
But those things which belong neither to God nor to Caeser, feeleth free to writeth them off, for yea, they are deductable.
They also didn't tackle eachother when the opportunity was present to use their awesome judo powers.
Man, after reading all the posts...I can't wait to get home so that I can see this for myself.
RebelFencer's Awesome Quote of the Week:
"Encouraging the average age of first intercourse to go below 16?"
-Army Fencer
After reading the posts I've decided not to download it at all.
Fencing is my only PvP.
Be careful not to let any work colleges see the video, as it take some time to explain to them that this is not the kind of fencing that you do. Comments such as I though fencing was a fast sport, and why are they standing still, etc etc…
Wanting to escape from the lab.
I doubt they stood still or fenced at half tempo in duels either.
I have no problem (other than possibility of confusion) of schools picking a decade or style of fencing and then calling it "classical" or "traditional". More power to them. What bothers me is bad fencing based on a particular stylistic convention portrayed as authentic or "more of a martial art" when it is neither.
"In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different."
Thank you for your comments. More or less what I expected. I'll try to tape some bouts at our practice tonight and post them on this thread when I get a chance...
"Si tu no sabes todas las acciones es como si un músico no supiera tocar todas las notas." - Fernando Chiriboga
"If you do not know all the actions it is like a musician who does not know all the notes."
Out of curiousity, what did YOU think of the fencing in that video?
"If I were ever to challenge you to a duel, your best bet would be battle axes in a very dark basement." Misquoted from The Prisoner
"Technical excellence is the antecedant of tactical creativity." - Nat Goodhartz
But those things which belong neither to God nor to Caeser, feeleth free to writeth them off, for yea, they are deductable.
I'm curious, then, why you posted it?
Allen
Thank you for displaying your ignorance of historical swordplay.They also didn't tackle eachother when the opportunity was present to use their awesome judo powers.
I assumed "traditional" was "historical". A style of fencing where the idea was as if the bout were with sharp smallswords/foils. If I am mistaken in this assumption, then yes, much of my comments would not matter.
Regarding cfaustus's opinion or reason for posting:
RITFencing: Good question!
AllenJ: For validation or refutation of expectation?
In either case, I'm interested in the answer
Regarding "traditional" vs. "historical" vs. "classical" - the terms are hopelessly overloaded and everyone has their own definition. It's pretty much impossible to infer specifics through the one-word label; even where there are partly agreed-upon terms, there's no guarantee that those definitions are being used
Last edited by jeff; 09-06-2006 at 01:09 PM.
"In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different."
Posting Permissions
