 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Oskar der Drachen
Location: Masterton
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2011 9:42 am |
 |
|
I was going to stay away from the conversation until I had something valid to talk about. Now I do, so here it goes!
| Quote: | Patch said:
1. No club in the universe is ever going to appreciate a bureau telling them how to run their own event. Having outside authorities forcing a club to fight in ways that it considers dangerous or tedious is a recipe for disaster. I anticipate that what would happen in that circumstance is exactly what has happened already; those that disagree will split off and form their own group and do things the way that they want to.
2. If you are going to compel the organiser of an encampment or display to fight under your rules you cannot then say that injuries occurred on the field because of your enforced rules are their responsibility. It will be your responsibility. |
This is correct. In the SCA, supposedly run by a unified ruleset, there are always disputes as to what is the correct way of doing things. The rules are unified enough though, so that when we get together as combined Kingdoms, we can fight without hurting each other. IN my mind this is largely due to the Honour system of blows. Not Marshall called, but taken in good grace, Marshalls for safety calls only.
| Quote: | Fungus said:
The people running events have alot of hard work to do and its not just turning up in kit as it is for the rest of us. ... So the organisers of an event can chose what rule set to go by and as there are a few different rule sets out there they have to run things the best they can and to what type of combat that most of the fighters they have use.
Patch said: This is not right, an organizer should not be dumped with all the responsibility of deciding what is safe and not and what rule "set" to use. Of course it is partly their responsibility and it is also ours! As a community participating in public displays/events it is vitally important to have a common standard so everyone is on the same page and the organizer can be advised by the community on how best to run a display and in what shape it should be. |
Both correct on either side of the same coin. To summarise and give an example: Unified events need to have a unified standard that people have either...
1. Trained for in advance.
2. Trained for on-site to a Safety-Marshal standard before going on List.
Example in point: I fought steel for the first time last night. Great fun! I had practiced drills before tonight to get the feel, but last night was the first full drill. Shadow fighting, or half-speed, specified targets, limited range of blows. This was to protect not *me* but my opponents. My SCA reflexes need to be retrained. All went well till I started to get tired, and started thinking with my brainstem and not the frontal lobes. My Lizard Brain took over and I put a respectable dent in the Helm of my opponent. Not the end of the world, and he was pleased with the shot, it had good form, and wasn't too hard..(subjective).. BUT I had promised not to hit him in the head. My muscle memory took over.
That is exactly the issue, mixing styles is educational, but is not always safe. I will make a good steel weapons fighter....as soon as I have cross trained enough to meet the standards the MUST be in place for a combined style fight.
In a nutshell then. Minimum armour requirements and a unified rule-set for combined events with Marshal run training previously, or on site to a *previously* agreed to standard.
Respectfully yours,
Oskar der Drachen |
|
|
 |
Oskar der Drachen
Location: Masterton
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:53 am |
|
|
And having said and quoted all that...
Armour Standard top to toes list:
Full helmet, front, back and sides. Face to be a grille, or full face. Face could be removable, but it must be judged to be safely attached to the helm by the SAFETY Marshal on the day.
eg. Must not move by gripping or pulling side to side, or by solid blow from a weapon from the side, top, or rising strike.
Neck front and rear to cover the top of the spine (join between neck and backbone), rigid material. If you can compress the gorget with your hand, it's not good enough.
Rigid covering for the joints, shoulders, elbows, knees, hands & wrists.
Cup for the Boys, Lady Equivalent plus rigid breast protection for Girls.
Kidney belt with rigid protection to cover the kidneys in back.
If you think about this rationally, this is *really* small armour. I have not seen kit yet that couldn't meet this standard witjh minimal modifications. The helmet is the biggest mod, but even these can be done creatively and with style. |
|
|
|
ChronicD
Sponsor
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:12 pm |
|
|
Afternoon thread followers,
| Quote: | Patch wrote:
1. No club in the universe is ever going to appreciate a bureau telling them how to run their own event. Having outside authorities forcing a club to fight in ways that it considers dangerous or tedious is a recipe for disaster. I anticipate that what would happen in that circumstance is exactly what has happened already; those that disagree will split off and form their own group and do things the way that they want to.
|
Alrighty so while i understand the premise for what you are saying, it need not be this way, the suggestion was not to tell clubs how to fight in a sporting manner but solely in a professional display manner i do see this as fundamentally different and what ever "display fighting regs" we create would be firstly subject to input and contribution from every club wishing to take part and also a review period where anyone could review and comment on them. It is a laborious process to go through and if we dont go through with it nothing will happen. We will be left with "people doing what they want to do" as patch put it.
| Quote: | | 2. If you are going to compel the organiser of an encampment or display to fight under your rules you cannot then say that injuries occurred on the field because of your enforced rules are their responsibility. It will be your responsibility. |
Again I understand what you are saying, though i never suggested you compel an organizer to do anything. rather that a representative of the said community would be available to advise leading up to the event and during. Legally responsibility for the safety at an event lies with an organizer, as for who is responsible on the day, it normally ultimately lies at the feat of the head marshal of any particular combat based scenario. This may not actually be true as the marshals are always honorable in this respect and see it as a failing on there part when something goes wrong. Lastly whether we formalize a system or not ultimately we are the community are responsible when someone gets hurt, as there may have been something we could do to prevent it. If there is nothing we could do then there is nothing we can do - and "accidents happen" two words i hear said far to often.
| Quote: | | Whatever measures are created have to be what people want or we’ll simply refuse. |
Yes and no. It does have to be what people want [url]and[/url] also be a balance against what the community wants. Here is what i am trying to suggest - that the community have a voice and no one group or member feel that they dont want to be a part of this new voice because its not what they want/do. At present everyone compromises on what they see as the ideal way when they participate in events and camps. Hence formalized community representation can only increase communication and understanding.
| Quote: | A note about period. The categories of light and heavy are not era dependent. Heavy armoured warriors have been around from the bronze age (Probably earlier but alas no one in NZ does caveman re-enactment).
Also I like to fight with the Romans, I don’t think it is sensible to demand that either they or I change in order to accommodate the others period. |
I was not really suggesting that you dont fight the Romans (maybe i was not clear) more i was suggesting that you only fight with certain weapons/styles against the Romans and vice versa. We already do this by not allowing spiked maces and such crushing weapons onto the field. The suggestion was to take a broader view and also look at combinations of armour and weapons (the weapon of the attacker versus the armour of the defender) in case there were also some combinations that might not be safe.
To clarify my suggestion on heavy and light combat, it could be done in any period. Yes and it should also be looked at as separate instances as the different periods had different weapons which had different styles... you know this stuff. The point is that you could then asses what would be safe for that period/style. I know we have mixed period events - i also know sometimes we have fixed period. eg therefor it is important to note that the face and head protection in earlier periods is not of the same level as later and therefor regulations/guidelines would help for people fighting in a period event and people in a mixed.
_________________
The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous.
Last edited by ChronicD on Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:26 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
ChronicD
Sponsor
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:23 pm |
|
|
| Quote: | That is exactly the issue, mixing styles is educational, but is not always safe. I will make a good steel weapons fighter....as soon as I have cross trained enough to meet the standards the MUST be in place for a combined style fight.
In a nutshell then. Minimum armour requirements and a unified rule-set for combined events with Marshal run training previously, or on site to a *previously* agreed to standard. |
Agreed. There has to a be level of standardization for every event and also i would add in a more general way - what i am now referring to as guidelines. [url]Communication is key and understanding what each other do is key[/url]
I can relate to your example of muscle memory taking over as it is the reason i will only fight with a spear in non head blow fighting as i have a voice in my arm saying "hit the head"
And yes we need to have a place for combined style fighting where participants must just except they may have to make compromises to join it, which as i have already said they already do. So the only "new" thing is a sort of standardized community body that represents our new multi disciplinary array of clubs and events.
all the best
dan
_________________
The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. |
|
|
|
Patch
Location: Auckland
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2011 10:44 pm |
|
|
| Quote: | "Armour Standard top to toes list: Full helmet... Neck front and rear... Rigid covering for the joints, shoulders, elbows, knees, hands & wrists... Cup... plus rigid breast protection for Girls. Kidney belt..."
|
Yup for heavy fighting that seems to be an elegant list,
Here is a question, in heavy should there be face thrusts and neck thrusts?
You would need mesh and mail for our thin swords but it would open up a world of extra and exciting targets, also automatically allow the fighters to be shot at with arrows.
You don't need any of that for light fighting of course. A helm for your head because heads are important and gloves for your hands because people occasionally punch swords; that's the protection you need to take the field and have a great time.
Although your opponents are often relieved if you also wear other clothes too.
-Patch. |
|
|
|
Oskar der Drachen
Location: Masterton
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2011 11:18 pm |
|
|
| Quote: | Patch Wrote:
Quote:
"Armour Standard top to toes list: Full helmet... Neck front and rear... Rigid covering for the joints, shoulders, elbows, knees, hands & wrists... Cup... plus rigid breast protection for Girls. Kidney belt..."
Yup for heavy fighting that seems to be an elegant list,
Here is a question, in heavy should there be face thrusts and neck thrusts?
You would need mesh and mail for our thin swords but it would open up a world of extra and exciting targets, also automatically allow the fighters to be shot at with arrows. |
Yes, I believe it should allow for those shots, they are accurate to fight of any time period, if you are wearing the appropriate and safe armour to take these kids of blows safely, than the blows should be allowed. Allowing of course for your own well-established practice of throwing shots appropriate to the weapons wielded. That's the last part of a unified strategy. You line up and calibrate...
What's "a good shot" You have a cadre who can throw one, who then demonstrate giving ant taking what that looks, and feels like to all appropriate body targets. A bit hairy in initial training and setup, but really simple in mass-application.
That is to say if you are not leading me into an elegant trap of words, whereby my own words lead me into a bottomless pit of never-escaping...
Face thrusting I admittedly don't have experience with in the steel weapons category, and would need guidance and training myself to be able to talk intelligently about it.  |
|
|
|
tank
Location: foxton
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2011 9:00 pm |
|
|
| Quote: | Yup for heavy fighting that seems to be an elegant list,
Here is a question, in heavy should there be face thrusts and neck thrusts?
You would need mesh and mail for our thin swords but it would open up a world of extra and exciting targets, also automatically allow the fighters to be shot at with arrows.
|
@patch
i personly dont like the idea of face thrusts at all seeing as i have a historicaly designed helmet with slits in its frontal face protection to alow vison + breathing, the swords we "play" with would on the right angle slide right thru these holes and into the wearers face, and i for one dont want to butcher a historical design with moden mesh just for safety reasons.
dont mean to be negitive or whatever but "historical" helmets all had said slits and holes for sight and venterlation. admitedly some were designed with very small holes that may stop this but most still had big anough eye holes to alow blades in.
then there is the argument that i could wear moden safty glasses underneath, true but not for long as they fog up realy easy when in a closed/swety enviroment such as a full face helm.
not tomention the glasses would still leave the rest of my face open for damage.
regards
tank
_________________
custom built plate armour |
|
|
|
Mad Jim
Location: Dunedin
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2011 9:23 pm |
|
|
I'd say unless it was tornament fighting and all involved were happy to have thrusts, then by all means have it even put in place the appropriate protection..like tipped swords, but for standard fights or even lesser armoured fights do away with thrusts to the head region. Sure some people will complain, but hey we arn't out to cause damage...if it got to out of hand it would just become SCA fighting..arghhhg! thats all I can say!
_________________
I like living.. |
|
|
|
ChronicD
Sponsor
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2011 9:52 pm |
|
|
Reply to Tank & Mad Jim
The essence of what you are both saying is that different types of fighting should involve different armour requirements - safety is always the highest goal and historical accuracy and martial ability follow next.
Fundamentally i see our community as having three distinct types of sparring;
1. Display sparring - Basically looking cool
2. Competitive sparring - testing your martial ability against another
3. A combination of the above - what a lot of the re-enactment community do.
Within each of these categories there are sub groups - but these are your basic three for nz
This blending needs to be more clearly defined so different persons do not end up in the wrong type/style/group of sparring where they are not trained in it and could be dangerous to themselves or others hypothetical persons.
The idea is to create an agreed upon system where all of these different styles could be listed and people interested in any one of them could then understand and grasp what it is about and decide to pursue it or not.
After you have such a communication system set up between all groups then Any competitive spar of any style must have a qualifying criteria that all participants must meet - primarily that you train in the said style and have achieved a level where you are not a danger to your fellows or your self.
Also note Display Sparring IS a style which needs to be qualified for.
With such steps we can minimize the chance of any further accidents.
Dan
ps : note Sparring instead of Fighting - i know its just a word but that is what we do.
_________________
The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. |
|
|
|
Patch
Location: Auckland
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 1:12 am |
|
|
| Quote: | | i personly dont like the idea of face thrusts at all seeing as i have a historicaly designed helmet with slits in its frontal face protection to alow vison + breathing, the swords we "play" with would on the right angle slide right thru these holes and into the wearers face, and i for one dont want to butcher a historical design with moden mesh just for safety reasons. |
Yup sure - I simply posed the question do you want the ability to play with arrows and face thrusts. There is always a accuracy vrs sport balancing act between what looks historical and right and what is practical for opening up targets and styles of fighting.
-Patch. |
|
|
|
Patch
Location: Auckland
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 1:15 am |
|
|
There are a lot of different fighting styles in NZ. Here some are the ones I have played with and found brilliant fun.
* SCA style. In my opinion the premier competitive heavy fighting style in NZ. Using rattan weapons and good solid armour. Should not be excluded from our discussions even though they have an utterly developed style. Brilliant fun smashing at each others armour, quite low learning requirements to enter but will take a decade to develop to the top competitive level.
* Sport style. Using inexpensive shinai (light weight split bamboo swords) and fencing masks, this style is magnificent fun and even raw beginners can happily and safely leap straight into the fray. It is also very quick fighting but most people find themselves burning out very quickly and it primarily a duelling style with less battlefield use.
* Heavy style. Using good solid armour and strong swords this style replicates more armoured battlefield recreation. Great joy in thumping each other’s plate bits. Very hot and exhausting fighting that does not generally use wide ranging terrain or mobility games. Does not require the same skill to start into but will need a lot of expensive gear.
* WMA. Have not played with these guys much – would love a write up from an aficionado of the style. Strong emphasis on historical fighting manuals and styles. Less requirement to wear medieval garb. Uses wooden training swords and steel and test cutting with live steel blades.
* LARP style. Foam weapons. No safety equipment necessary, surprisingly large skill component, used as a athletic framework for character interaction and free-form acting. Latest latex weapons and armour are stunningly visually correct and often cannot be determined to be not made of metal till you pick them up.
* Swordsman style. NAAMA fighting with or without head-blow or leg shots. Light and fast and highly mobile, you get to fight all day without exhausting yourself, require almost no expensive equipment, and don’t get too hot. This style requires the highest levels of basic control, battlefield awareness and weapon skill before you may safely take to the field inter-club.
Now the thing that I have to say is this. We have a huge variety of great options open to us, and all these styles and more that I have not had the pleasure to try out are excellent fun. All are relatively safe. All and none of them are going to feel comfortable with strangers to their style trying to impose guidelines or minimum equipment on them. People are sensible (mostly) and if a club has been fighting for a few years I guarantee that they have worked out ways to make what they do fun and as safe as they choose to be.
What we need to do, in my opinion is LEARN from them, not the other way around.
-Patch |
|
|
|
pmel018
Principal Sponsor
Location: Wokingham, near Reading, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 3:56 am |
|
|
I have experienced combat in WMA format while living here in the UK. As mentioned in other posts every group has their own rules and requirements for weapons and protective equipment. The best example is the tournament held each year at Fightcamp. Generally there are three divisions, 1: single sword, sword and buckler and longsword, the weapons are provided (Knights Shop nylon wasters), 2: sabre/backsword, again the weapons are provided(basket hilted shinai)and 3: Rapier/dagger/buckler/cloak,(also smallsword) in this competiion the weapons are the contestants own that have been vetted by the organisers and are exclusively steel. Each division is run by a sponsor group who specialise in that weapons system or style and their rules prevail. Each bout has three officials to control and score it. The protective equipment requirements are pretty much the same for each division, 1600nm fencing mask, fencing jacket or similar, additional throat protection, gloves; other items as desired, groin/breast protectors, forearms, shins etc. I have been involved in and watched many bouts and have seen very little ill discipline or injury.
Phil |
|
|
|
greenboy
Location: HASTINGS
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 11:03 pm |
|
|
| hae all iv full red all the coments ant have takin a day to think it all over so i do not say these words likly . so fristly if someone is runing an event an event then they have the right to pick wot hapins and the rules that are played by . but in saying that haveing that right means they have the responibelity to take the responibelity of what hapins at that event. next to wear armour is your own chose weather its full plate to play the big shiney night or the loney peasent hall as long as your wearing gloves and halment you can wode yoursalf all traditionall like but i dont think people will like that. But what im trying to say is that it is a persones chose to wear armore . witch leads me on to my next point is that to wear armore you have a responsibelity to me more awerar of yoursalf and take your hits if not it only encoriges your oponit to hit harder and wen that hapins you start losing controll and that is wen accidents hapins . so wot i am trying to say in short (sorey about the rant and the spelling ) is that the issue is not more armore it is more controll . because if a fighters in control of his weapon you shouldnt have to wear any armoure other the minimine . |
|
|
|
ChronicD
Sponsor
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:26 am |
|
|
| Quote: | Patch wrote
There is always a accuracy vrs sport balancing act between what looks historical and right and what is practical for opening up targets and styles of fighting. |
Well said man well said!
| Quote: | patch later wrote on styles of fighting
Now the thing that I have to say is this. We have a huge variety of great options open to us, and all these styles and more that I have not had the pleasure to try out are excellent fun. All are relatively safe. All and none of them are going to feel comfortable with strangers to their style trying to impose guidelines or minimum equipment on them. People are sensible (mostly) and if a club has been fighting for a few years I guarantee that they have worked out ways to make what they do fun and as safe as they choose to be.
What we need to do, in my opinion is LEARN from them, not the other way around. |
Several things come to mind when i read the above
| Quote: | | that all are relatively safe |
i agree with but would add that they are relatively safe when done solely by those that practice in that style. When you start mixing styles this level drops.
| Quote: | | All and none of them are going to feel comfortable with strangers to their style trying to impose guidelines or minimum equipment on them. |
I believe your trying to say that some people would react positively to the imposition of guidelines or minimum equipment and some wouldn't? correct me if i am wrong otherwise i absolutely agree that some people will scoff at the idea of others telling them what to do and how to do it. Others wont.
However this needn't be so black and white, just as NAAMA has a set of guidelines and minimum equipment for its own camp that are used by clubs as they see fit away.
A set of broader guidelines could be put together, one that accommodates the concept of inter style sparing. Whether this is just a evolution of the NAAMA regs or a completely new entity is really up to the community and as such a moot point. The cusp is that we are participating in mixed style sparing, tournaments, displays and archery combat and all this needs to be recognized, discussed and a agreement between all parties involved created. Like NAAMA regs this will be there for those who wish to use it and the main focus is not for use at your home club but rather when you are mixing things up a bit.
Hypothetically lets say i decided i wanted to grab a couple of clubs and some horses and run an event of foot vs horse. I know absolutely zilch about this mix and what is needed so i would delegate this responsibility to someone else whom i think does know what they are doing. But then what happens if the person then cant do it after a couple of years, i then need to find someone else who may have a completely different way of doing things - thats fine, but there is now a lack of the passing on of the knowledge of experience from the predecessor to the current event manager elect.
However if there were a set of guidelines for such an event that both the new event manager and the previous were contributors to (in some sort of annual critique) then they would be aware of the lessons and reasoning of each other and so the event gains a valuable asset in the shape of a reference document.
| Quote: | lastly patchwrote
People are sensible (mostly) and if a club has been fighting for a few years I guarantee that they have worked out ways to make what they do fun and as safe as they choose to be.
What we need to do, in my opinion is LEARN from them, not the other way around. |
As a concept your saying that people need to take the initiative to learn from others and that others should not take the initiative to teach. This i would say has been the model for years and that in the current climate with so many splinter styles this no longer works - there is to much to learn from all of them. A reference document comparing the different styles would allow for this style of learning to continue as people would have access to knowledge from a styles leader/propagator. This could then be complimented by annual meet ups for certain subjects where workshops and discussions could take place and the teachers come together to take an initiative in passing on there knowledge. Examples of this may include Marshalling, Display Sparing, Tournament Sparing, Event Co-ordination and Missile Combat.
I hope that all makes sense
Thanks for engaging in the subject mate
Dan[/list]
_________________
The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. |
|
|
|
ChronicD
Sponsor
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:40 am Reply to Phil |
|
|
| Quote: | | The protective equipment requirements are pretty much the same for each division, 1600nm fencing mask, fencing jacket or similar, additional throat protection, gloves; other items as desired, groin/breast protectors, forearms, shins etc. |
For Tournaments i believe this level of protection is a must as we are allowing people to be truly competitive. If as a community we want to keep this going we need to recognize that it is VERY dangerous and that appropriate standards MUST be enforced. This is no longer a style but a competition and all this talk of different clubs being unwilling to be told how to participate in this safely is just plain stupid and stubborn and i would say it to any ones face. Clubs don't practice competitive inter style sparing regularly and so have no grounds for objecting to safety standards set by tournament organizers.
However the responsibility lies with organizers to educate participants and make damn sure that everyone knows exactly what they are doing when they then participate.
Last thought: we need to look after each other - so suck it in and come to the table and say your piece. I am reading every post and taking what everyone is saying very seriously - as are many others.
All right, i bid thee all good night.
Dan
_________________
The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. |
|
|
|
|
|
Please read the terms of use