Post originally by Luke Silburn at 2004-06-17 02:44:23
Converted from Phorums BB System

"Like I said above, generally speaking, on the various combat possible situations, strength is a factor to have in mind. It can also be the decisive one in some specific situations and there is nothing you can do about that..."

I don't want to put words in Oliver's mouth here but I think what he was reacting to was the assumption implicit in your original comment that parries are always or mainly a brute force thing - you know... two swords clashing together at right angles to each other, lots of grunting and sweating between two combatants struggling corps a corps... all that Hollywood stuff.

I think what he was driving at was that this stuff was the mark of an untrained fighter (and talked about in deprecating tones by the authors of period fencing manuals) and that when trained swordsmen talk about parries they are actually referring to much less 'obvious' techniques that are more akin to what is seen in eastern martial arts like Aikido - altering the line, voiding, counterblows etc.


As to my Rob Roy example, sure its a specific sort of encounter (a formal duel on good ground with plenty of space) but the techniques used by Roth's character, especially his use of distance and timing, seem much closer to the sort of thing I've seen as recommended style in my (admittedly limited) reading about historical fencing. A fencer is constantly advised by the manuals to seek and hold his correct range - specific circumstances might prevent this occurring of course (getting bushwhacked in a dark alleyway springs to mind) and require specific, exceptional, techniques (which are also discussed in these manuals) but the general principles that are constantly being repeated are all about distance, timing and rythm. That is, issues of skill and technique rather than innate strength or speed.

Regards
Luke