>Dear Jeff and All,
"4 pounds seems awfully heavy for a rapier to me."
(Aleister)
Huh? I didn't say a thing?
But, As I did say in my last posting, I would give a final followup,
just to clarify where I'm coming from. If you want to skip an to the
next postings, I won't be a bit offended.
So: (bearing in mind my point was just to avoid repetitive strain
injury)
>The point I was making was that training barefoot on a spring floor
will often be better than working in "sneakers" on a concrete or
similar surface, but that the over-riding factor is technique. Also,
if there is the slightest flaw in your articulation when you are
wearing those "sneakers" they'll remember it in their wear-patterns
and these in turn will reinforce your faults, as will any shoe. I'm
not suggesting you should fence barefoot, just be aware that wearing
a "sneaker" in and of itself will not neccessarily do anything to
protect you, especially if that "sneaker" is not designed pecifically
for the training in hand.
(Aleister)
Lotta variables here. Certainly the spring floor is always better
than a harder surface. The spring floor gets is shock absorbing power
(usually) fron the natural flex of the floor planks. The planks flex
best when the force against 'em is perpendicular. In oterh words, if
you bounce up and down on them. So, Ironically, as your footwork gets
tighter, & less "up & down" you get less of a benefit from the floor.
Also, all floors are not alike, but you can find sneakers to suit you
for use on many diferent surfaces.
If there are the slightest flaws in your technique, it'll affect you
adversely in many ways, and this gets back to my point: eventually
(even good) technique will leave it's mark on your bones. At least
you can change your sneakers.
And as sneakers go, I was asked off-list about my preferences. This
is something that you have to discover through your own research
based on your own particular needs, and perhaps in consultation with
a sports-medicine doctor, to be absolutely sure. The kind of sneakers
that most sneaker-wearing fencers use tend to be the old
fashioned "running shoe" type. The common, "modern fencing" shoes are
usually made by Adidas. They have round heels, low soles, and,
actually, oddly slippery soles, supposedly made just for fencing on
electric strips. They are actually very similar to Adidas "Country"
running shoes, but the Countrys have a gum sole, which is better for
many indoor surfaces. Other companies make similar types, & I'm
currently fencing in Nikes (don't remember the model name) which I
really like.
--------------
>Elderly dancers are usually in excellent shape and rarely suffer the
kind of fractures that other folks in their age group get.'(jeff)
>No, they get different kinds of problems based on calcification and
"powdering". (Aleister)
There are types of repetitive stress injuries--Wearing down joints,
and the body's reaction to that wear. This is the stuff that I'm
trying to avoid.
--------------
Elizabethan confusion--I took for granted that you were refering
to "Elizabethan" as the refering to the period in time, not the
location. The vagaries of email, no?
>This is just arguing for the sake of it itsn't it? (Aleister)
I like to think of it as a passion for, uh, fencing with words. Get
it? Fencing with..ah, never mind. You get the point ;>0
--------------
>'From my understanding of yoga, the aproach to physical development
is through flexibility training and passive muscular development
(stances).' (Jeff)
>Yes, based around a correct skeletal alignment and everything else
I've just said, with a huge emphasis on breathing etc. Is your
understanding through doing it or seeing it? (Aleister)
My experience with yoga occured a few years ago, while I was
recovering from a walking fracture in my foot that i got from doing
balestra-lunges (on a spring floor, actually). I explored a few
styles, mostly variations on Hatha and "Kundalini." The reason I'm
drawing a distiction between fencing and yoga this way is that most
yoga stances and exercises deal with gravity--using it to facilitate
a stretch, or exerting force against it to develop strength. This is
very different, in my way of looking at it, from a martial art,
because it's all focused into the body, while in a martial art the
focus is on applying that force out of the bod--either against an
opponent (maybe through a weapon) on on moving the body against it's
environment (across a floor). Hence yoga's alignment could be purely
skeletal and passive, while the martial artist's is neccessarily
active, and includes muscular force and momentum.
-------------
>And the point I'm trying to make is that a good martial artist will,
through passivity, overcome the martial artist who seeks to exert
force against them. (Aleister)
Ooh. This is a can of worms I'll leave for better men. (I have seen
that passivity can be pretty durn'd active. Many of Aikido's
responses are.)
--------------
Anyway, the point of it all is--watch where you step!
Cheers,
J.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The CFML is sponsored in part by Purpleheart Armoury, now carrying rapier blunts and leather gorgets.
http://www.woodenswords.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
Linear Mode
