No Cant?

[K O'N]

Well modern boxing stance is really tailored to defend against gloves... not sure I would want to tuck into my forearms the same if fists were hitting them.

No. The technique changed to defend *with* the gloves, not against them. You can use gloves to cover up with in a way that you can't with ungloved hands. With gloves on you can stay close and defend your head. Without gloves you can't. When gloves came in the distance in boxing had to be completely rethought. And of course with gloves it's safer to hit the head, too. You won't break your hand on someone's head nearly as often if you have big gloves on.

Even today, the lighter the gloves the more the older leaning back stance makes sense. Some MMA fighters in very light gloves look more like a boxer from a hundred years ago than they do a modern boxer.

K O'N

[Wetmelon]

Ha saw something funny at the tourney this weekend. One fencer had a severely laterally canted saber blade and was trying to say that it was legal. Hahahaha... It must have been a good 30-40 degrees, and was only canted about 2/3 of the way down the blade. If my blade looked like that, I would have said "Crap, I kinked my blade" and straightened it

[WGH]

No. The technique changed to defend *with* the gloves, not against them. You can use gloves to cover up with in a way that you can't with ungloved hands. With gloves on you can stay close and defend your head. Without gloves you can't. When gloves came in the distance in boxing had to be completely rethought. And of course with gloves it's safer to hit the head, too. You won't break your hand on someone's head nearly as often if you have big gloves on.

Even today, the lighter the gloves the more the older leaning back stance makes sense. Some MMA fighters in very light gloves look more like a boxer from a hundred years ago than they do a modern boxer.

K O'N

This is a case of pointless semantics as both parts are true. The stance is tailored to defense with and against gloves. This is true in MMA, boxing and muay thai (I only have experience in the last two, but have seen enough of the first to comment).

The more padded the glove, the more you can rely on using your arms as a shield. The thick glove protects your fact while your unpadded forearms/elbows protect the torso. If someone punches at my face, it is better for me to absorb the blow by putting my glove directly on my face and move -into- it to use the cushion of both gloves and avoid allowing the punch to reach full velocity. This would be a horrible idea without gloves gloves.. as would be blocking an uppercut by providing my forearms as a substitute.

The drawing of the arms parallel to the body is a logical adaptation to being attacked by gloves since they don't do nearly the damage to tucked in arms that bare flesh does. A proper wrist wrap (and using proper punches) makes punching someone in the face nearly as safe as using a glove and way more effective. Pretty much every martial art pulls their arms back a bit when gloves are introduced. Though elbow blocks are still important in kickboxing against *legs* gloves or no. For the same reason you wouldn't use your forearms to block unpadded punches... it hurts to be hit in the shin/ankle! Even when conditioned.

Though the guy in the provided picture does have his guard a bit low, so I can see how you might think he plans on blocking with his face instead of distance or parries.

End of thread drift?

[telkanuru]

Ha saw something funny at the tourney this weekend. One fencer had a severely laterally canted saber blade and was trying to say that it was legal. Hahahaha... It must have been a good 30-40 degrees, and was only canted about 2/3 of the way down the blade. If my blade looked like that, I would have said "Crap, I kinked my blade" and straightened it

That's not a cant.

[Inquartata]

Apparently you do, since whatever you did, it wasn't what I suggested.

Go ahead, keep banging your head against that wall. Meanwhile I recommend that everyone just try it for themselves. They'll reach the same conclusion: You do NOT have to cant your blade on a French weapon or bend your wrist in order to have the point on target.

[telkanuru]

Go ahead, keep banging your head against that wall. Meanwhile I recommend that everyone just try it for themselves. They'll reach the same conclusion: You do NOT have to cant your blade on a French weapon or bend your wrist in order to have the point on target.

That's true, you can turn your arm in instead.

[fatfencer]

No. The technique changed to defend *with* the gloves, not against them. You can use gloves to cover up with in a way that you can't with ungloved hands. With gloves on you can stay close and defend your head. Without gloves you can't. When gloves came in the distance in boxing had to be completely rethought. And of course with gloves it's safer to hit the head, too. You won't break your hand on someone's head nearly as often if you have big gloves on.

Even today, the lighter the gloves the more the older leaning back stance makes sense. Some MMA fighters in very light gloves look more like a boxer from a hundred years ago than they do a modern boxer.

K O'N

I bolded that last part. Today's MMA fighters are poorly trained in boxing... I suspect THAT has more to do with their form than the size of their gloves. Still its easy to see that glove size effects boxing offense in a positive way.. and even the defense can be proactive.

FF

[Inquartata]

That's true, you can turn your arm in instead.

Or...you know...use your fingers, the way you're supposed to do with a French grip...

What an obsolete concept!

[WGH]

Or...you know...use your fingers, the way you're supposed to do with a French grip...

What an obsolete concept!

Controlling it with your fingers? You cad!

[piste off]

Or...you know...use your fingers, the way you're supposed to do with a French grip...

What an obsolete concept!

I am sure Telk is using two fingers after reading this post, one on each hand.

R-

[epeelion]

Why is Inq. talking about pointy things? Or french grips?

[Inquartata]

Why is Inq. talking about pointy things? Or french grips?

Why not? :P

[telkanuru]

Or...you know...use your fingers, the way you're supposed to do with a French grip...

What an obsolete concept!

Yes! Exactly! You have to manipulate the grip to get it on target, unlike with a canted grip, which is the POINT.

[Superscribe]

Everybody back off Inq. People are obviously going to start trying out uncanted blades, and they'll love them and they'll love french grips too. It's the wave of the future. You guys are all idiots.

The only reason we still have pistol grips and canted weapons are because beginners aren't allowed to start off with uncanted weapons in the first place. We have canted blades because armorers LIKE putting in extra work, and fencers ENJOY having to mess around withe angle of the tang to get it how they like it.

And i mean, obviously NOBODY with any understanding of biomechanics or physical fitness degrees from sports universities around the worlld have even THOUGHT about the implications of cants. Certainly not to the level of detail as the astute forum contributors we have here.

Further, pistol grips are just a fashion trend. The only reason they completely dominate foil and have such a presence in epee is because there weren't ANY fencer masters trained in the superior French and Italian grips at the time, so nobody had a chance to see the TRUE POTENTIAL of these older straighter grips. The Uhlmann marketing machine just FLOODED the fencing populationg with fancy colors and sexy woman, causing people to mindlessly flock to pistol grips.

/sarcasm

[counterattack]

Like... the sort of deformity that would lead one to use their left hand instead of their right?

I sought old-thread advice when I was purchasing my first weapon, and saw some comments to the effect that a blade canted for same-handed fencers will hinder one's ability to fence opposite-handed fencers. As a leftie, I fence far more of the latter than the former, so I didn't request any canting.

Can any lefties weigh in on the subject? I have been thinking about putting in a slight downward cant.

I am a lefty, an epeeist, and a pistol grip user. I have done a lot of fooling with cant. I have decided to have a medium large down and right cant (I'd guess 15-20 degrees each). I have tried larger right cant and find it makes it too hard to do anything from 4. Too much down cant hurts my counter attacks underneath the hand/wrist. You can learn to aim with any cant, but what you want is the cant that makes it most natural to hit the targets you try most often while still using good form. This depends a lot on what targets you like, but in epee you ought to mostly be going deep to the upper body/upper arm (maybe trying to visit the hand en route), and some cant will help a lot versus right handers if you are big on 6 (I am), but maybe if 4 is your bag (and you are a lefty) then you should not cant? I come from 4 only on people who keep their en guard way out in 6, but I am forced to supinate (and even flick a little) because of my cant. With practice I can often do this without breaking form so badly that if I miss I am screwed.

I don't recommend a cant less than 10 degrees each way until you know what you are doing (or your coach says), or a cant more than 25 degrees pretty much ever (but once you know what you are doing you can try for yourself).

My usual advice to everyone is "do what the good people do until you are pretty good" or until your coach says otherwise. You should have all your time taken up working on other things and not fiddling with things like cant and funny grips. If you find yourself in the garage and bored, do footwork and put down the canting pipe (and the italian grip and the upward bends while you're at it)


-philip

[telkanuru]

The standard I've seen for a pistol grip is 1/4" deviation down and 1/4" deviation in (depending on handedness), measuring from the horizontal and vertical planes to the end of the tang, if that makes sense. It's harder to tell for my French tangs. Those of you who know what you have to do to tangs to get a Reith grip on there know what I mean.

[Inquartata]

You have to manipulate the grip to get it on target

Or just make the angle of your elbow a bit more obtuse...you know, like you are being.

And you say "manipulate the grip" like it's a bad thing. What the devil has become of fencers today? Are you all so lazy that you expect mechanical tricks to do all your work for you?

Never mind, no need to answer that. Of course you do...

[Inquartata]

You guys are all idiots.

I have boiled your long post down to its essence.

You might want to add yourself to the "you guys".

obviously NOBODY with any understanding of biomechanics or physical fitness degrees from sports universities around the worlld have even THOUGHT about the implications of cants. Certainly not to the level of detail as the astute forum contributors we have here.

OK. Enlighten us, oh mighty biomechanician! Which people are these? Which studies have addressed this vital issue of our times?

I suspect that you have none, unless they be ones pulled out of your...er...astute.

[erooMynohtnA]

You don't see an underlying flaw in the argument that moving something with your fingers is the same biomechanically as having it already in place?

[Inquartata]

I might, if that was my argument...

We're on page 3, so let me refresh everyone's memory about Telk's position:

"Whatever grip you have, if you have an uncanted blade and you extend your arm without bending your wrist, etc, your point will always be aimed away from your (same handed) opponent's target, usually to some place in the air next to their back ear. The same exercise with a canted blade should point directly at their shoulder."

And MY position is:

(1) No, it won't, unless you assume a doctrinaire attitude about what your arm and finger positions simply must be in guard ( eg before "you extend your arm" ).

2) Even if it were true, so the heck what?