Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Karl C. Hunting-Tuazon" <lopus@********.COM.PH>
Subject: 2 Weapon Combat (very long with story)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 00:07:05 GMT
Greetings!

I've just been able to read the entire 2 weapon thread to date and I've got
a few thoughts I'd like to share. I've studied a bit of Escrima and Arnis
(Philippine Stick Fighting) which are distantly related EXCEPT for two
little details.

1.) Arnis has rules, Escrima doesn't.

2.) Arnis only uses paired identical weapons (sticks) whereas Escrima uses
anything you can lay your hands on. (My old teacher once got into a fight
in a red-light district bar in Ermita and was using a beer bottle and the
metal (aluminum?) leg of a chair. He used the longer weapon (chair leg
about one and a half feet long) to block blows and to trip people and the
smaller one (a beer bottle built like the Corona bottle) to hit people on
the head with. After the bottle broke nobody wanted to get near him.) You
see Escrima is NOT a form of martial arts, because it isn't art. Like I was
taught, it is a way to get rid of your opponent as fast as possible, any way
possible.

Now as I see it, people are debating whether you parry with the edge or the
flat of the blade. In Kendo (2 years worth of study ... threw it out the
window after taking Escrima) you divert (parry) his blade by using the flat
of your blade against the flat of the opponent's blade. In Escrima you use
one weapon (it doesn't matter which one, whichever you are more comfortable
with) to *smack* his weapon (any kind from baseball bats (very hard) to
knives (much easier)) aside while hitting him with the other.

Of course taking this to the extreme would be the example that happened to
myself and a few other friends two years ago.

We (five guys including our instructor) were getting good and plastered in a
cheap bar in the area when a bunch of goons (nine guys w/ baseball bats)
came up to whack one of the group. (Seems he was caught with another guy's
girl) now as much as my friend was the ASSHOLE, he was OUR ASSHOLE so we had
to help him. We got into them with beer bottles flying (trick #7: Hurl
something into their faces and rush them while they flinch!) and started
grabbing baseball bats while kicking them in the family jewels (trick #2:
The enemy will not be thinking while he holds his crushed crotch with both
hands!). Our instructor actually got 2 baseball bats (nice wooden ones) and
started whacking around with it which quickly led to all the other 4 of us
backing out before we got nailed. You should have seen him, left baseball
bat blocks one blow, right baseball bat blocks another blow, right foot goes
between the legs of another opponent and then whips around with both bats to
the arms of a fourth. He was really going to town with those guys ... 35
seconds tops. Of course afterwards he had a long "conversation" with his
erring student ... but that is a different story.)

So you see it doesn't matter if it's the longer or shorter weapon that
blocks (albiet it is easier to block with the shorter one ... it faster to
react with it.) It's just a matter of making sure that nothing hits you
while you are dealing the maximum damage possible.

Hmmmm ... you know what I just finished re-reading the FOF rules for two
weapon combat and it sucks, but so does the rules of most game systems I
know (check out the AD&D and L5R versions). Maybe the reason it's very hard
for most game systems to accomodate 2 weapon combat is because melee combat
of today (barring street fights) are so ritualized that it isn't actually
the same as the "real" thing. Fencing has "hit zones" and
"no-hit zones"
which give the fencers a trained reflex to only hit the legal targets.
Kendo and Kenjutsu sort of gives you the trained reflex to "pull" your blows
because the REALLY can break bones EVEN with the padding. I haven't tried
using broadswords and short swords yet, but I can't help thinking that any
10th or 11th century warrior would cut up most fencers today because they
are trained to kill rather than score points. They don't have many fancy
moves, but they are direct to the point. Escrima was fun for the six-odd
years I've practiced it, but I had to stop since my doctor doesn't think
that breaking one or more bones every four or five months is healthy for me
*BIG GRIN* Yes, we don't wear padding and we use full force, and no there
are no illegal moves. This is not martial arts, it is a way to kill!

Lopus
LOPUS:

!!!A DOG WITH AN ATTITUDE!!!
Message no. 2
From: Rune Fostervoll <runefo@***.UIO.NO>
Subject: Re: 2 Weapon Combat (very long with story)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 16:47:46 GMT
>Greetings!
>
>I've just been able to read the entire 2 weapon thread to date and I've got
>a few thoughts I'd like to share. I've studied a bit of Escrima and Arnis
>(Philippine Stick Fighting) which are distantly related EXCEPT for two
>little details.
*BiG sNiP*

I have a twofold impression of what you say. Mostly, there's not so much on
two weapon fighting but more on the difference between martial arts as an art
compared to martial arts as a fighting tool. I have a few observations to make.

Last night I read in TC's NetForce. Here, also, was the argument that
'civilized' martial arts has become an art for stylized combat between
opponents with a similar approach to the combat. The amount of rules regulating
combat could be considered a gauge on how 'sanitized' the martial art is.

That is one way to look at it.

An obvious interpretation is that the rules represents safety precautions
during training, while the martial art would, presumably, operate without
these rules outside training or stylized (non-lethal) combat. It can be
argued that training different than how you fight makes the m.a. inferior
in a fight, and at first look it has a good case, but neither is that all the
truth.

It could be said that the assumption that martial arts are 'sanitized' can
be readiy supported by evidence, and that it represents a lessening of the arts
applicability. The works of german 12th century fencing masters described a
'full' combat training - all aspects of combat rather than just the sword,
practical combat rather than swordplay. These works, while inspiring italian
fencing masters, were considered 'crude' at court, and was forgotten in favor
of works on swordplay alone. Thus it was no longer used by the military, but
by the nobility. This is, at least, almost certainly true.

It could be said that it is an argument by those practicing unregulated
martial arts to support that they've got 'bigger dicks' than regulated martial
styles, the length of which is a common discussion subject between martial
artist schools, but neither is that all the truth.

It could be said that training to kill and to kill alone is not a good thing in
an ordered society, but neither is that all the truth.


Any conclusion to this?
No.. the truth is out there!

;)

Regards,
Fade

--

ADVICE, n. The smallest current coin.
-Ambrose Bierce
Message no. 3
From: "Karl C. Hunting-Tuazon" <lopus@********.COM.PH>
Subject: Re: 2 Weapon Combat (very long with story)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 01:05:43 GMT
At 04:47 PM 11/23/98 GMT, Fade wrote:
*Lop of my own words as well as a healthy dollop of Fades'*

>That is one way to look at it.
>
>An obvious interpretation is that the rules represents safety precautions
>during training, while the martial art would, presumably, operate without
>these rules outside training or stylized (non-lethal) combat. It can be
>argued that training different than how you fight makes the m.a. inferior
>in a fight, and at first look it has a good case, but neither is that all the
>truth.

I never claimed that martial arts is inferior, I've seen a really good
Aikido black belter take out my teacher without really breaking into too
much sweat. All I'm saying is that the "Full Contact" combat forms train
you differently from regulated martial arts forms. Of course all three
times I came up against this JKD guy in no-holds barred combat resulted in
multiple broken bones for both of us (I was in a full body cast for four
months and he had both legs and his right arm in a cast for over a year on
the last occasion.)

>It could be said that the assumption that martial arts are 'sanitized' can
>be readiy supported by evidence, and that it represents a lessening of the arts
>applicability. The works of german 12th century fencing masters described a
>'full' combat training - all aspects of combat rather than just the sword,
>practical combat rather than swordplay. These works, while inspiring italian
>fencing masters, were considered 'crude' at court, and was forgotten in favor
>of works on swordplay alone. Thus it was no longer used by the military, but
>by the nobility. This is, at least, almost certainly true.
>
>It could be said that it is an argument by those practicing unregulated
>martial arts to support that they've got 'bigger dicks' than regulated martial
>styles, the length of which is a common discussion subject between martial
>artist schools, but neither is that all the truth.
>
>It could be said that training to kill and to kill alone is not a good thing in
>an ordered society, but neither is that all the truth.

Actually having spent so much time in the hospital, I know the value of
regulations. I'm all for it, except when I get into a streetfight
(thankfully those days are over ... now.) But everytime I get into a fight
and I see that the other guy goes into one stance or another, I thank all
the gods that Escrima takes portions of a whole bunch of martial arts into
itself and adapts it. TKD tip, be careful if the guy rushes you with both
arms ready to take the pounding from your kicks, he's probably got a dirty
trick in mind.

Lopus
LOPUS:

!!!A DOG WITH AN ATTITUDE!!!
Message no. 4
From: "Ratinac, Rand (NSW)" <RRatinac@*****.REDCROSS.ORG.AU>
Subject: Re: 2 Weapon Combat (very long with story)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 09:53:53 +1000
> *Lop of my own words as well as a healthy dollop of Fades'*
>
> >That is one way to look at it.
> >
> >An obvious interpretation is that the rules represents safety
> precautions
> >during training, while the martial art would, presumably, operate
> without
> >these rules outside training or stylized (non-lethal) combat. It can
> be
> >argued that training different than how you fight makes the m.a.
> inferior
> >in a fight, and at first look it has a good case, but neither is that
> all the
> >truth.
>
> I never claimed that martial arts is inferior, I've seen a really good
> Aikido black belter take out my teacher without really breaking into
> too much sweat. All I'm saying is that the "Full Contact" combat
> forms train you differently from regulated martial arts forms. Of
> course all three times I came up against this JKD guy in no-holds
> barred combat resulted in multiple broken bones for both of us (I was
> in a full body cast for four months and he had both legs and his right
> arm in a cast for over a year on the last occasion.)
>
*Homer Simpson voice...*

"You're crazy..."

8-)

*Doc's Low Pain Threshold flaw causes him to flinch at the mere idea of
multiple broken bones...*

Doc'

.sig Sauer
Message no. 5
From: "Karl C. Hunting-Tuazon" <lopus@********.COM.PH>
Subject: Re: 2 Weapon Combat (very long with story)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 12:50:46 GMT
At 09:53 AM 11/24/98 +1000, Doc wrote:
>*Homer Simpson voice...*
>
>"You're crazy..."

I was a lot younger and it seemed like a good idea at the time.

;-))

>8-)
>
>*Doc's Low Pain Threshold flaw causes him to flinch at the mere idea of
>multiple broken bones...*
>
>Doc'
>
>.sig Sauer

Lopus
LOPUS:

!!!A DOG WITH AN ATTITUDE!!!

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about 2 Weapon Combat (very long with story), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.