It has been a while since I've word-vomited into this blog. Let's fix that, shall we?
I really want to work on my 37-inch-rapier game. It's a pet peeve of mine, that so many of the "high-level" rapier fighters use long reach. I want to prove that my skill and success aren't solely due to the fact that I use long reach. And since I can't size-down my body parts without drastic surgical intervention, I can only change my weapon.
*****
Over the past while, I've been working on my Thibault-with-a-tip-heavy-37-inch-rapier. It's an elegant art that forces me to slow down. The requirements for technique execution are very high, for Thibault. This is because there are a number of elegant "shortcuts", when compared to standard Destreza. These shortcuts are necessary, because using the Thibault grip it is disadvantageous to do certain standard Destreza actions.
Unfortunately, my work has led me to believe that there are a very small list of situations for which the length of blade specified by Thibault is necessary, rather than just suggested. I would use a 41-inch or 42-inch rapier, if I were being completely true to Thibault's text.
There are two principles that apply to this situation.
*****
The first principle is that, if your opponent's sword is off-line and you are entering their lunge measure, you should use your quillons to defend against its most obvious line of ingress.
The easiest way to do this, if your opponent's sword is significantly off-line and their elbow is straight, is to extend your arm toward your opponent's blade and lightly touch it, such that one edge of your blade is touching their blade. This should mean your quillons are as "wide" as they can be, from the perspective of their blade. Rotating your blade at all should make them less "wide". So if your opponent's blade is down very low, your quillons would be horizontal. If their blade is far to the left or right, your quillons would be vertical. Note that the important part here is the quillon orientation, not the blade contact. You can do this with your blade in a completely different direction, so long as your quillons are still forming a shield.
The second principle is that, if your opponent's sword is "cocked back" in any fashion, the appropriate response is to constrain their blade by making contact with it, and if it is close to the diameter, pushing it away from the diameter.
So if your opponent has their elbow straight and their sword low, you would just make contact with it, making note to apply the first principle as well. If their sword is "cocked back" by bending their elbow, but it's still pointing at your chest, you want to push against a weak part of their blade with the middle of your blade. This will make the area that they can attack through smaller, thus meaning you can respond to all of their possible single-tempo counter-actions with one action, rather than needing to guess and hope you guess correctly.
*****
The particular stance that I have trouble with is one in which my opponent, who is an inch or two taller than me and is using a 42-inch rapier, has their elbow somewhat-but-not-completely straight, and their rapier in front of and just above their right hip. Their tip is then raised high - just a bit above the line connecting our shoulders. In this particular example, he was using a dagger as well, which further complicated matters.
As far as I can tell, Thibault's counter here is to essentially perform a lunge with your quillons horizontal, which lowers your head and raises your quillons while stabbing them at about shoulder height. If their tip is lower, then you engage in the action I outlined above in the second principle - carrying their tip off-line and then taking advantage of the restricted movement there.
The problem comes when I have a sword that is slightly too short. I can't reach their blade at the distance which they can disengage and stab me literally anywhere, by using a wrist-centered disengage. Their dagger adds to their defense, but the dagger isn't the problem. Even without the dagger, it is likely that this would end in a double-kill, which is Bad and Wrong according to the moral precepts of Destreza.
If I were shorter and their stance were exactly the same, I would be able to advance in and safely perform the lunge with opposition through their blade. In order to create the same difficulty, they would need to lower their tip from their wrist, which would mean that it's farther out and thus I would be able to reach it in order to move it from the diameter line.
If their blade were longer, it would reach farther out and I could move it more easily.
If their blade were shorter, they wouldn't be able to attack me from the same range and I could get better opposition on their blade before worrying about being attacked.
If my blade were exactly right, I could do one of the actions I want to do.
If my blade were longer than correct, they would be able to apply opposition to my sword more effectively than I can apply it to theirs, earlier.
It's a difficult situation.
...and in the process of writing this up, I might have come up with a solution?
I can simulate shortness by leaning forward at my hips. This lowers my head and reduces the vertical target area available to my opponent. This is similar to Fabris's stances, and perhaps a thing I could do to fix my Thibault. It would over-balance me forward some, and I would need to work with that to see if that would cause problems. I could likely compensate for it with my footwork.
Hm.
*****
(Next section requires some reference to this post, because that language is what I use to refer to my interpretation of the foundations of True Destreza. In particular, the part in which I define what "High Clockwise" or "Left Counter-Clockwise" means in terms of stance.)
This same situation, in my more-standard-Destreza, is much easier to deal with because of the grip I have on my sword. Against that position, I push slightly against their sword using principles similar to the above two, then transition to either a shallow High CW or a shallow Left CCW position. The High CW position, though awkward, would completely refuse a disengage and lead into a very predictable true-edge left-to-right cut. The Left CCW position could be transitioned easily into the counter-clockwise blade spiral, a moulinet-type movement of conclusion, or a safe thrust to the face if they let you get too close without responding.
This is far more possible to do, because in this case you are more able to bring opposition to bear from your hand position. The standard Destreza grip involves the middle finger hooked around the cross, which allows for strong true-edge opposition from a very shallow angle of gain. It might be possible to do this with the Thibault grip, but I don't think that it would transition to the maneuvers that flow from this play very effectively. The lean I talk about above might be an effective technique, but more likely the correct choice would be to use a weapon suited to my height.
*****
So, that's what I've been working on. I guess I can probably do what I want to using a modified Thibault, but it's possible that using a correct-length weapon would make other things easier in ways that I haven't figured out yet.
For more traditional Destreza, a shorter weapon is completely appropriate. This makes my life easier, and means I don't have to compensate in the same ways. It does mean I don't have quite the same degree of reference material that Thibault provides. There have been a number of times where I have found inspiration or a correct maneuver in his manual, when I was stuck. There aren't really other Destreza manuals available in English that set things out in as thorough a way as Thibault.
SWORDS.
No comments:
Post a Comment