Little fish

Last spring, I bought myself a mandolin. Why a mandolin? Years back, I had a guitar and I wasn't bad at it, but I wasn't particularly good, either. So, last spring, when I was thinking about getting an instrument again, I thought about getting a guitar, but, I know several really good guitar players. How good? Albion falls about in the middle of the pack. Anyway, there we were in Piccolo's Music [blatant commercial plug] and they had a mandolin hanging on the wall, and I thought, "how many mandolin players do you run in to?" So I picked myself up one and (slowly) started teaching myself how to play.

I've had it for a little over nine months now and I've got about a half-dozen songs I can fumble my way through without sheet music, and about the same with. I'm no good at chords and haven't figured out how to inentionally play more than one note at a time, but I've reached the point where I'll actually bring it to events and doodle around during the day.

The first such outing was Twelfth night in Bronzehelm. After the fighting finished, I screwed up my courage and broke out the mandolin. After about fifteen minutes of doodling, what should walk in but a local folk band with not just one, but two mandolin players. What are the odds? In all my years in the SCA, I don't think I've ever encountered another mandolin player, and here was two of them. I continued to doodle until they were done setting up and then politely put away my instrument.

Undaunted, I tried again at the Feast of Saint Valentines, in Silver Keep. And lo and behold, not another mandolin in sight. A really cool ukulele and Albion and his guitar, but no mandolins. I've got to say this about Albion: he is an incredible supporter of new musicians. His experience as a music teacher shines through, but he can be a bit daunting. I was showing off my still quite thin music book and he starts sight-reading the music (that he'd never seen before) better than I can play it after practicing for several months.

Like I said, daunting.

But! I know he's been playing music longer than I've been alive (and I'm not exactly a spring chicken) and while his exhibitions of skill might be a little humbling, they're not really that unexpected. I mean, with as long as he's been playing, he should be better than me. And maybe, given time and a lot of practice, I may approach his level.

A hit's a hit, isn't it?

A while back, I talked a little bit about the changes to the Society Rapier manual, so I thought I'd do a little delving and see what they really say. I figure I'll start off with the applicable rules and then go through them.
From Section 2: Behavior on the field:
D. Striking an opponent with excessive force, or with deliberate intent to injure, is forbidden.
F. Conduct obstructive of normal rapier combat, such as consistent ignoring of blows, deliberate misuse of the rules (such as calling HOLD whenever pressed), or the like, is forbidden.

From Section 3: Use of weapons and parrying devices:

A. Valid blows are struck by: thrusting with the point of the blade (thrust) or sliding the edge of the blade by drawing (draw cut).

i. Kingdoms have the option of including sliding the edge of the blade by pushing (push cut) and/or placing the tip of the blade upon and then drawing it across an opponent (tip cut) as valid blows.

ii. Cut and thrust rapier also includes the use of percussive cuts as a valid blow. Percussive cuts must always be delivered with sufficient control so as not to injure the opponent while still delivering the necessary impact for a valid cut.

B. Chopping or hacking blows are not permitted in light or heavy rapier combat. For cut and thrust rapier, they still must be delivered with sufficient control. Fast circular movements (such as moulinets) may be used to place a blade for allowable cuts in all three categories of rapier combat.

D. Striking an opponent with any part of a weapon or parrying device not approved for that purpose is prohibited.

From Section 4: Acknowledgement of blows:

C. In rapier combat, blows will be counted as though they were struck with a real blade, extremely sharp on point and edge. Any blow that would have penetrated the skin shall be counted a good blow. Any blow that strikes a mask, helm or gorget shall be counted as though it struck flesh. Kingdoms shall not alter this standard.

D. A valid blow to the:

• head,
• neck,
• torso,
• inner groin (to the fighter's hand width down the inner limb), or
• armpit (to the fighter's inner hand width down the limb)

shall be judged incapacitating, rendering the fighter incapable of further combat.

E. A valid blow to the arm will disable the arm. A valid blow to the hand shall render the hand useless; Kingdoms may decide whether the arm above the incapacitated hand may be used to parry.

F. A valid blow to the foot or leg will disable the leg.

i. For light rapier and heavy rapier, the fighter must then fight kneeling, sitting, or standing on one leg.

ii. For cut and thrust rapier, valid blows to the leg or foot are considered incapacitating, rendering the fighter incapable of further combat.

G. Parries may be performed with weapons, parrying devices, the gloved hand or any other part of the body. Though the gloved hand may be used to parry, it shall not be used to grasp or strike an opponent. Fleeting contact between opponents is allowed, as long as no grappling, deliberate striking or other unsafe behavior occurs.

H. In heavy rapier and cut and thrust rapier, fighters may choose to grasp blades, rather than parry them. If the blade that is grasped moves or twists in the grasping hand, that hand is deemed disabled. Grasping techniques shall be used only to immobilize a blade, not to bend it or wrest it from the opponent's grip. Prolonged wrestling over a grasped blade is sufficient grounds for calling a ‘hold” and forcing a release of the blade.

I. If an effective blow is thrown before, or on, the same moment as an event that would stop a fight (a "HOLD" being called, the fighter being "killed" himself, etc.), the blow shall count.

And from Marshalling concerns in rapier:

5. EXCESSIVE IMPACT: Combat in the Society poses risks to the participant. This recognition, however, does not excuse fighters from exercising control of their techniques. If a fighter throws blows which force their opponent to retire from the field, from a real injury (even one which only causes brief incapacitation), the marshal responsible for the field shall take such steps as are appropriate to stop the problem from recurring.

That's a lot of words. Let's start from the beginning: "Striking an opponent with excessive force, or with deliberate intent to injure, is forbidden." Okay, so what is excessive force? "If a fighter throws blows which force their opponent to retire from the field, from a real injury (even one which only causes brief incapacitation), the marshal responsible for the field shall take such steps as are appropriate to stop the problem from recurring." So, if it doesn't send your opponent off the field, it's not excessive.

Okay, so what makes up a good shot? "Valid blows are struck by: thrusting with the point of the blade (thrust) or sliding the edge of the blade by drawing (draw cut)." and "Kingdoms [such as Artemisia] have the option of including sliding the edge of the blade by pushing (push cut) and/or placing the tip of the blade upon and then drawing it across an opponent (tip cut) as valid blows."

So we can use thrusts, draw cuts, push cuts, and tip cuts, but what sort of force are we talking about? "In rapier combat, blows will be counted as though they were struck with a real blade, extremely sharp on point and edge. Any blow that would have penetrated the skin shall be counted a good blow. Any blow that strikes a mask, helm or gorget shall be counted as though it struck flesh. Kingdoms shall not alter this standard." But there is a caviat: "Chopping or hacking blows are not permitted in light or heavy rapier combat. For cut and thrust rapier, they still must be delivered with sufficient control. Fast circular movements (such as moulinets) may be used to place a blade for allowable cuts in all three categories of rapier combat."

So we've got to hit them hard enough that a real blade would have punctured the skin, but we can't club them like a seal. And, by the rules, percussive hits are allowed only in Cut and Thrust.

Okay, but what does all this mean?

1. Any thrust that is felt, but does not send your opponent off the field is valid.
2. Any cut (push, draw, or tip) that is felt, but does not land with enough force to cause pain (a good general definition of hacking or clubbing) is valid.

You may have noticed that there is no longer any length requirement for cuts, other than the rather vague "any blow that would have penetrated the skin shall be counted a good blow." So, in that regard, it is still on your honor on what constitutes a good cut.

I can't say I'm entirely thrilled by the changes to the rules, but I am glad that they kept the wording against chopping or hacking.

Bump

Everything goes in cycles. Standards will go from very lax to very strict, and enforcement will do the same. That's what's going on with the fencing rulebook right now - we've gone from rather specific, fairly strict rules governing everything from how hard you should hit to what constitutes a draw cut to a far broader set of rules. Most of these changes are geared towards how we play, as opposed to what we use to play.

And Yet...

At the tournament this last weekend, we had two people (that I know of) out of the nine entrants that were bounced for armor failures. One for a hole in their glove that you could drive a (small) car through, and the other for insufficient armor on their torso and the back of their head. The thing is, the one who failed because of insufficient armor had been passed many times using the exact same setup.

So what was going on?

Remember how I said that the new rules loosened up on hit calibration? Well, it used to be that you didn't have to accept an overly-forceful shot? That part's gone. Yes the rules still say, "Striking an opponent with excessive force, or with deliberate intent to injure, is forbidden," but it then defines excessive force as, "If a fighter throws blows which force their opponent to retire from the field, from a real injury (even one which only causes brief incapacitation), the marshal responsible for the field shall take such steps as are appropriate to stop the problem from recurring." So, in short, it's not excessive unless it forces you off the field. And did you notice that there's no mention of the shot not being good? Just that the marshal can pull the person's card.

Okay, but what does this have to do with people's armor getting bounced? Well, without that top end to what constitutes a good blow, you are going to get hit harder. And when you combine that with the tendency in recent years for marshals in Artemisia to be a little more lax - a little more understanding, the odds of someone getting injured is going up.

What do I mean by lax? Currently, the effective requirement for the back of the head in this kingdom is a covering of some sort. Many of the drops in use are a single or double layer of light cloth. They're supposed to be the same as the torso - puncture resistant. This is partly to protect from punctures (well, duh), but it's also to minimize the effects of chops or percussive hits. Likewise, I've started to see a disturbing trend in fencers viewing underarm protection as a suggestion, rather than a requirement.

And too often, the excuse they use when it is brought up is that they are working on new armor. That excuse may work for a month or two, but when the marshal's been hearing it for years, it's time to call bullshit.

Yes, this laxness is the fault of the marshals. For too long, we've thought that if you're stupid enough to wear sub-standard armor, it's your own damn fault, but with the increase in hit force we're starting to see, the armor requirements really have become the minimum you need.

On advice and mentors

Everybody's been there: you're at a fighter's practice or a tourney and someone walks up to you and says, "That last pass was great, but you need to work on..." and proceed to tell you what you did wrong. It can be frustrating, I know. It can even be downright humorous at times. But you have to remember that nine times out of ten, the person offering the advice is trying to make you a better fighter.

With these unsolicited pieces of advice, you have a few choices of what to do. The first is to blow it off and keep doing what you're doing . But if the person in question is wearing white - say a belt, scarf or collar, that might not be the best option. Another option is to try out what they suggest, and if it works, keep it, if it doesn't, file it away for later. The third option is to take the advice to heart and use it all the time.

My recommendation is to use the second option: listen, try and decide. I say this because there is no "One True" fencing style that works for everyone, against everyone. You have to find what works for you.

Now, when you go up to someone after a fight and ask them what you need to work on, you have the same three choices, but remember: if you're just going to ignore what they say, why did you ask them in the first place? So again: listen, try, and decide.

And then there's the exception to the rule: if you have approached someone and said "teach me, please," or been taken as a cadet or provost. Oh, sure, you can still ignore what your mentor tells you, but you may soon find yourself unattached, as it were. A good mentor may (may!) let you get away with listen, try and decide, but you'd better be able to explain and/or demonstrate why something doesn't work for you. That being said, they still may want you to do it their way. (Here's a hint: sometimes instructors build upon previous lessons and aren't able to teach you their super-secret, kill-em every time move until you get the more basic parry or thrust down.)

And for goodness sake, if your mentor gives you homework, do it. (See parenthetical statement above.)

Here's why:

If nothing else, ignoring the mentor that you chose, or that you agreed to be your teacher is just rude.

I have a reputation as a teacher. As such, I have been approached both by people who want me to teach them, and by people who want me to be their teacher. Generally, the people who want me to teach them aren't a problem: I try to give freely of my skills and knowledge. I tell them what I see and what I think, and very rarely do I say, "You need to..." or "I want you to...". I expect those who ask me to teach them to use my own preferred listen, try and decide because, as my son will gladly tell you, I don't know everything.

A person asking me to be their teacher is a whole different ball of wax. In all honesty, while I have said many times, "I will teach you," I have never said, "I will be your teacher." I know the difference is subtle, but it's important. By agreeing to simply teach someone, I set myself as one of many responsible for a fencer's education. If I agree to be someone's teacher, I am directly linking myself to that person. As I said, I have a reputation not only as a fencer, but as a teacher. I have built that reputation by making sure my students are good fencers. Which also means that I want the people who go around saying, "Matheus is (or was) my teacher," to be good fencers.

So, when someone asks me to be their teacher, I agree to teach them and give them little tests as I go along, usually in the form of homework. One of my favorites for new fencers it point drills. More advanced fighters might get footwork drills, or even suggestions that they improve their gear. And if they choose not to do the homework, I can see that their drive isn't there. I'll still teach them, and I'll still give them homework, but until they start doing their homework and I know that they'll do the homework when I give it, I won't even consider calling them my student.

Strangely enough, considering my lack of students over the years, I've only had a few who failed my tests. The rest were snatched up by White Scarves.

And even more oddly, a few of those fencers have graced me with the title of "Teacher."

A short thought problem

Let me ask you a question: you're in a tourney where there's no barrier around the list field, just lines on the ground, and the Marshal in Charge says that anyone who goes outside the lines loses - do you try to force people out of the list field, or is that dishonorable?

Does honor require you to beat your opponent with skill alone?

But isn't footwork and situational awareness part of a fencer's skill?

Is it honorable to win based on a mere technicality?

Aren't all rules "mere technicalities"?

Is it honorable to basically win through intimidation?

Isn't the psychological game 90% of fencing?

What are some other arguments for or against winning by forcing your opponent off the field?

Sheeped

So I got sheeped last weekend.

For those of you who are not familiar with the term (which is probably most of you, since it's my own term), being sheeped is when you win another group's champion's tourney where only a member of the local group can be named champion. The origin of the term goes back about fifteen years to an odd off-hand tourney in Sentinel's Keep. They had such things as a harp, a lute, a mug and, yes, a sheep. Each round you'd roll a die for your off-hand and I kept getting the sheep.

And I kept winning.

Truth be told, Albion won the tournament and I think I took second, but since I'd done so well with the sheep, I was presented it in court. Well, the same thing happened again this last weekend, only I actually won the tournament and this time it was an oven mitt, but their reasoning was the same: I was the most effective with the odd off hand.

Which ties into a conversation I've had with Master Cormack several times over the years. For any of you who hasn't had the pleasure of fighting against him, he is probably the ultimate specialist. He is a killer with sword and scabbard. He also does well with single point, but not nearly so well with the other forms. His view on the subject is that it works for him, so why change it?

I, on the other hand, am quite possibly the ultimate generalist. My goal is that no matter what you hand me, I can use it, and use it well. While the reality falls short of the goal, I have made great strides in that direction: hand me a weapon or weapon combination and while I may not always win, I can guarantee that I won't embarrass myself while dying.

A more concrete example can be seen comparing me and Cormack's weapons cases. Cormack has one sword, a dagger, I think, and his scabbard. That's it. My case is a little more crowded. Not counting the pair of Rawlings I pack around as training aids, I have 7 swords, both straight and curved, with blades ranging from 28" to 43", 2 daggers, 2 bucklers, 2 cloaks and a baton. For some reason, I'm one of the first ones people go to when they need to borrow equipment.

This is another one of those cases where neither philosophy is better, but they each have their strengths and weaknesses. A specialist is actually more likely to be the better technical fighter: give them their preferred style and nine times out of ten, they'll come out on top. But, throw in a wrinkle or two - required style, limited or increased fighting space, broken or unusual ground, and so on - and while the generalist still may not be the best fighter on the field, but their more varied bag of tricks allows them to adapt quicker.

Of course, that's not the real reason I won with the oven mitt. The truth is that I just fought it like single point.

Hmmm...

Maybe I do have a specialty. Maybe the reason I have all those blades is to add a little variety to my life...

Is black the new white?

With the closing of the White Scarves and the birth of the Papillon in Artemisia, there's discussion about whether Papillon are the same rank as White Scarves. As I see it, the answer is yes, sort of.

Both orders are grant-level awards for fencing, but the purpose of the two are different. The White Scarf was seen by many (and given out as) the ultimate fencing award. As a result, members of the order were viewed as the personification of fencing within the kingdom.

The Papillon, however, is seen as a stepping stone towards the Master of Defense. It's that last, final step to weed out the merely great fencers from the true peers of the fencing community.

Looking around at my fellow first Papillons, I see a group who has the prowess or the teaching ability or even those graces that define a peer. In fact, odds are that they possess two of the traits, but not all three. At least not yet.

And it's that potential for growth - that acknowledgement of imperfection - that is the difference between the White Scarves and the Papillions.

We are not White Scarves. We will never be. We are a new order. Still young. Still finding ourselves. And, like our order, still growing.

It's been a while

So it's been a while since I posted anything here and, to be quite honest, I don't know if I'll ever really become an active blogger again, but we'll see.

In the (several) years since I last posted anything, life has gone on, as it is want. Here, in Artemisia, the Order of the White Scarves was officially closed this last spring. This was done to recognize that the White Scarf was viewed by most people as the terminal award for fencing and with the new peerage, this would no longer be the case.

In it's place, the kingdom created a new grant-level award called Defenseurs de l'Ordre du Papillon (Defenders of the Papillon), of which I have the honor of being the third fourth recipient.

In fact, this past year I've received more official recognition than I did my previous 25 years in the Society. I was awarded my Golden Pillar of Artemisia at Talon and Crescent War last February, and then this October I received both my Order of Vigiance and my Papillon.

That's right, ladies and gentlemen: I'm a ship now!

And, in even funner news, my eldest boy was authorized at last Uprising and is showing pretty good progress for as little practice as we're able to get in.

But I think this is going to do it for right now. I've got some ideas of things to talk about and we'll see if any of them happen.

In Service,

Different

I tried Olympic fencing for the first time in better than fifteen years last night. My oldest by is 11 and wants so bad to fence, but as we all know, the magic age in the SCA is 14. So when we saw that the local YMCA offered beginning fencing, we thought we'd give it a try.

We had fun, but let me tell you: after fifteen years of trying to cut the Olympic style out of my fencing, I actually had a hard time with some of it. I cannot do a beat-parry to save my life. Every time I tried, I wound up using a parry 4. And while I managed to avoid using angles, I did more than my fair share of tip-cuts.

The one thing I did right was that I didn't go in bragging about how great of a fencer I am. Yes, I am rather good when it comes to SCA fencing, but like I said, it's been over fifteen years since I did any Olympic fencing.

And last night reaffirmed that SCA and Olympic fencing are two completely different beasts. There are things that work in Olympic that don't in the SCA, and vice versa. I used to think that the biggest difference was the movement. Olympic movement is designed specifically for a 1.5m x 14.5m strip. There is no circling, just back and forth. Now, after reexperiencing Olympic, I think the biggest difference is the attacks. Leaving saber aside (easily done, since it most resembles armored fighting), there is one attack in Olympic: the thrust. That's it. Now, while we still have the thrust in the SCA, we also have draw cuts, push cuts, and (depending on the kingdom) tip cuts. That gives us a fudge factor that isn't present in Olympic.

Actually, now that I think about it, it's the fudge factor that's the biggest difference. Okay, maybe we should call it variety instead of fudge factor. In Olympic, you are fencing on a strip that is always the same size, on the same terrain against an opponent with the same length sword who can only thrust. Compare that to the SCA, where you are fencing in a list that can vary in size, on terrain that can vary, against an opponent whose weapons can vary in shape, number, and size, and who can attack with at least three different types of attacks.

It's that variety - and the generalization in style that it requires - that is the difference between Olympic and SCA fencing. One's not better than the other, they're just different.

I'm Done

For the past few years, I've been on a quest to earn my White Scarf, but no more. I've realized that in my quest, I'd become someone I don't particularly like and - even worse - I'd stopped having fun.

I was trying to ingratiate myself with people I didn't particularly like. I was refusing to help people I call friends. And I found myself hating friends for the recognitions they'd earned. In short, trying to become a White Scarf turned me into an asshole.

Don't get me wrong, this is nothing against the White Scarves, this is about me. This is about my personal greed. And the realization that if I'd continued down that path, I'd never truly be a White Scarf, no matter what honors or recognitions I earned.

So I'm done with my quest. It's time to go back to what I loved about fencing in the first place: the fencing. And nurturing our younger fencers. And watching them grow until they exceed their teachers.

I do still hope to someday be offered the White Scarf, but if I'm not, I'm not. I have to be true to myself, and I have to be true to my honor. Anything else is just window dressing.

And since this blog was conceived as a tool to help me achieve my White Scarf, I think it's time to retire it. Perhaps someday I'll revisit it with purer motivation, perhaps not. I just hope that this little experiment has done more good than harm.

So for now, I'll leave you.

In Service to the Dream,

Gebeider Matheus de Petyn, Order of the Gold Scarf
Castelleone Nuovo, Artemisia

Honor War

I want to say thank you to the College of Lyonsmarche for a wonderful event this last weekend. I would also like to thank the fine fencers there for allowing me to use my curved blades in the fighting.

The wonderful thing about out of kingdom events (especially when you're the only one from your kingdom) is that you don't have to worry about anything. You're not a threat. Since you're a foreigner, the other fencers aren't going to spend all of their time sizing you up and trying to tear apart your style so they can defeat you at the next tournament. What they are going to do (especially if you have any sort of scarf or are fighting with some oddball weapon) is try you out. This makes for a wonderful chance for you to fight against brand new, skilled fighters. And I discovered that, in An Tir, a Gold Scarf means you're a former kingdom champion. Which pretty much guaranteed that they were giving me their best fights.

It was wonderful. I spent at least three hours doing pick-ups, working with my short curved against a myriad of skill levels and styles. And I discovered something: my short curved was the equal of any long blade out there. Okay, maybe not the equal. It took some work to get inside their range, but I was able to do it. And I was able to do it in a way that I didn't have to worry about anyone figuring out my moves before the next tourney.

And that was before the tourney or the melees. I switched back to case for the tourney, so I didn't really learn too much, but when it came time for the melees, I switched back to short and dagger and that was a learning experience.

Boy was it. For starters, if you're in a battle that's eight guns to two, you want to be on the side with eight. The other thing was that my short is a lousy primary for open field battles, but it works pretty darn well in keep battles. The last thing I learned was that An Tiran fencers really aren't very good a melees. My guess is that they focus more on the tourney side of things.

All in all, it was a wonderful event. And, with a showing in the tourney of somewhere between 17 wins, 8 losses and 20 wins, 5 losses (with a 26-person round robin, it's kind of hard to keep track), I think I did our kingdom proud.

Well Hell

I got talked into going to Honor War this weekend. It wasn't that hard, really. New people to play with and a chance to blow the cobwebs off my melee skills? Oh, yeah. So I started getting my stuff together and figured I'd better check out the good old blade types list to make sure I was good to go. It's a good thing I did, too.

As you know, I've been working for the past couple of years with curved blades. About the only time I've used any of my straight blades in the last year was in warm-ups, and that was just so my opponents won't figure out my curved swords. Anyway, I'd planned on using my short curved this weekend just so I could work out the bugs with it but, when I looked at the blade types list for An Tir, they're not legal.

Okay, maybe it's not so bad. I know at a lot of the larger wars, out-of-kingdom visitors have to meet the weapon requirements for their own kingdom. So I go and check An Tir's rules. Nope. All visitors are expected to meet An Tir's weapon requirements.

I really wanted to play with my curved, but I figured it was okay. I still had 3 straight swords I could use. And then I read further. An Tir limits quillons to no more than 12 inches. I know my main straight sword meets that requirements, but my 40 for sure is more than 12 inches across and my back-up 36 is a bit on the long side too.

So I've got one sword I can definitely use. I'm still going to bring my curved swords, but I'm not holding much hope for that. At least on the plus-side, the sword I can use, I've been using for 10 years now.

We'll just have to see how the weekend goes.

What will I do?

As part of his ongoing project to prepare me for becoming a White Scarf, my knight has gotten me thinking about what I would require of my cadets if and when I am in a position to take some. After years of thinking about what to look for in a White Scarf, it's forcing me to think about what a White Scarf should look for in a cadet.

Some of the stuff still applies, though. I'd want someone who lives fairly close so I could stay in touch with them. I'd want someone whose sense of honor is compatible with mine. And I'd want someone who I respected, otherwise I'd wouldn't give them the attention they deserved. But beyond that?

I think I'd have to look at their goals. What do they want out of being a cadet, or is that their ultimate goal? I don't think I'd want someone as a cadet whose entire goal is to become a cadet. I'd want someone who is striving for more: someone who wants to be a White Scarf, or even just the best fencer they could possibly be. My goal as far as my students are concerned has always been for them to be the best they can be.

I'd also have to look at their persona. Not in that I'd only take 16th Century Lowlanders or 14th Century Highlanders, but rather that I want to be able to at least have an idea of when or where someone comes from by their garb. And this one isn't really a deal breaker, more a goal that I would set for my students: if they're a 10th Century Norman, I want them to look like a 10th Century Norman, both off and on the field.

And I think I'd also look at their blades. Is their sword what their persona would use? Do they think they're Duncan McLeoud and fight with a Katana, even though their persona is from Edinburough? Again like with the garb, this would be more of a process than a requirement. I'd want them to do the research and put together a blade that was appropriate for their persona, both in style and balance. Notice I said put together: I'd want them to actually start with a bare blade and either build or buy the hardware to give them a truly custom sword.

These are just my initial thoughts so far, and I'd be curious to know what the White Scarves out there are looking for in a prospective cadet.

Any thoughts?

An Interesting Dilemma

One of the rounds in the tournament at Sentinel's Keep this last weekend brought up an interesting dilemma. In the round, each fighter was given a point for each wounding or killing blow they landed on their opponent, with a maximum of three points possible per fighter. After a fighter had earned the three points, they had the option of either continuing with the fight until someone was dead or withdrawing and calling the fight over. And that's where the dilemma comes in: if you've earned your three points and your opponent still has an offensive capability, do you withdraw, or do you go for the kill?

In the tournament in question, if you went for the kill, you couldn't earn any more points and risked the chance of your opponent earning more points by hitting or killing you, but your own points were safe whether you lived or not. And if you withdrew, you denied your opponent from earning any more points while again leaving your points safe. So what to do?

If you were thinking strategically, you'd withdraw and assure the smallest number of points for your opponent. But does that strategy fulfill the requirements of your honor? There's the rub. And like most questions of honor, I cannot answer it for you. All I can do is tell you what my choice was in the tournament: I chose option C. I made sure my third blow was a killing one so that I wasn't faced with the choice.

Sometimes the best way to keep your honor untarnished is to avoid situations that will force you to ask what honor demands of you.

A Challenge

An open letter was posted to the Aerie today about the continuing problem of excessive hits. My first though on it (and not knowing the details of the incident that brought about the letter) was that at least we were doing better up North here. After all, I only came home from Spring Feast with a single interesting bruise, and only a few other people at the event complained of hard hits. Not bad for a two-hour long tournament.

But...

It might not have been bad, but it wasn't as good as it should have been. After all, the ideal is that we can go through an entire tournament (or melee) without a single hard hit, no matter how long the fighting lasts. And I've talked in the past about how to train away the tendency to hit hard, but I think that the problem isn't just one of training: I think it's a problem of positive reinforcement. Even though the rules state that fencers are not required to take excessive hits, in all my twenty years of fencing, I have never seen a fencer do so. So even if you do clock a guy, you're still given the win. Sure, you may get a talking to, and you might have to apologize, but you still win. So for some people, the choice comes down to fighting beyond their skill level and having to say they're sorry or possibly losing. And, as the old saying goes, sometimes it's easier to beg forgiveness than ask permission.

And that's where the challenge comes in: over the next year, if you throw a shot and you think it's too hard - or your worthy opponent thinks it's too hard - take it back. We are fencers. We are supposed to be grace and elegance personified. We should not need to muscle our way through a tournament. We should be able to hit our opponents precisely where we intended with precisely the right force - no more, no less - for the attack to count. Many of us already call back shots that are too light, let's start calling back shots that are too hard.

I accept my own challenge. For the next year, I will call back any and all blows I land that either I or someone else feels is too hard. Will you?

Yes, but...

I've had my Alchem curved Safeflex blade for better than two years now and I have to say I don't have a complaint about it. Well, maybe one: aesthetically, it falls under the 10-foot rule. That is, it looks period when viewed from 10 feet or farther away. Other than that, it's a great sword.

Alchem's Safeflex blades appear to be made from stamped steel (as opposed to forged blades in the more traditional schlagers) with rounded edges and fluting running lengthwise through the strong of the blade. The blades are then pressed and epoxied into the tang assembly.

The weight on it is good. While it is heavier than my other 40" (a Triplette), it is far from unwieldy and its tapered blade allows it to approach the weight and balance of period blades without an excessively heavy pommel. The blade also manages to be reasonably flexible while not being whippy. However, due to the fluting down the strong of the blade, it will not flex as far as a traditional schlager blade.

Due to the wider design of the blade and the fluting of the strong, Alchem does not need to use as hard of a steel for their blades as is found in a traditional schlager. This does lead to an increased tendency for the blade to get nicks, but not prohibitively so. Now don't get me wrong: you will not get the 15+ years of service you see out of the old WKC blades, but they should last at least as well as your average Zen Warrior or Hanwei.

Overall, I am very impressed with the quality of the Safeflex blades - they are a good blade for the budget-minded - but there is one issue that keeps me from recommending Alchem to people sword hunting: their order turnaround time. My first Alchem blade I ordered in September and received in December. My most recent batch of blades (2 bare blades, 1 complete sword) was ordered in early November. It is now March and I am still waiting for them to show up. When I've talked to other fencers who have ordered blades from Alchem, they've told me similar stories. This, combined with the fact that all but their curved sword blades are considered experimental in Artemisia means that I cannot, in good conscious, recommend Alchem Armory to fencers looking for a new sword.

But, if you are looking for a curved sword, your only choices are between Alchem and the more expensive Darkwood Armory. So if you must order from Alchem, do it at the end of tourney season: with a little luck, you'll have your sword before the next one starts.

Killing is for the unimaginative

Another discussion has come up on Artemisia Militaris on the propriety of "sniping." Is it honorable? Is it showboating or a display of skill? Is it robbing your opponent of a good fight? Does a person's tendency to snipe change depending on the level of the tournament or melee? Is it embarrassing for your opponent?

For those who don't know, sniping in SCA fencing is the taking primarily of hands, although sometimes it can refer to feet. The question of whether sniping is honorable or not is, of course, up to each individual to decide, but I see no valid argument for sniping to be inherently dishonorable. To me, sniping is no different than taking an arm or a leg: it is a way to remove a weapon or defense from your opponent. And, if you manage to take both of your opponent's arms, you have defeated them without having to kill them.

Okay, so is sniping showboating or a display of skill? Yes. Just as advanced enough technology is indistinguishable from magic, a truly skilled fencer will come across as showboating. As fencers, we pride ourselves on our gracefulness. We strive for the apparent effortless fluidity that turns a bout into a dance. We strive for that perfect shot. And sniping the hand comes very close to that perfect shot: you're trying to hit a 3"x3" target that's almost completely protected. That'd be the equivalent of an archer hitting a target behind a tree: no small feat.

What about the idea that you're robbing your opponent of a good fight by sniping? Well, I suppose it depends on your opponent's definition of a good fight. Personally, I'd rather be sniped than one-shotted, but then again, I am ambidextrous and enjoy challenging fights.

Does my tendency to snipe change depending on the level of the tournament or melee? Not really. It actually depends more on the level of my opponent: the better they are, the more likely I am to snipe them. And in melees, I don't snipe at all. Sniping is precision work while melees are quick and dirty affairs.

And lastly, is being sniped embarrassing for your opponent or is it an opportunity for learning? I can't speak for others, but I don't find it embarrassing. To me, it is an opportunity for learning, especially when I get into instructor mode. It's one of those bad habits I picked up from my teacher way back when: if your guard slips into neutral, I'll tag you on the outside of your forearm. Guard too high? I'll tag you in the Ulna. Likewise, if I can see your hand, odds are, I can hit it.

The short of it is: if you don't like sniping, don't do it and if you don't want to be sniped, get a better guard. In theory, you only need a 3/4" x 3/4" opening in a guard to snipe a hand. More realistically, any opening less than about 1 1/2" x 1 1/2" is probably safe from sniping. Zen Warrior's R13, although pretty, is made for being sniped. Likewise, Hanwei's SH1032 has an opening you could drive a truck through. Instead, get yourself one of their SH2206N, or one of Alchem's Swept Hilts. And move your hand every once in a while: it's harder to hit a moving target than a stationary one.

How deep a hole am I digging for myself?

A few posts ago, I talked about the idea of holding a Prize to celebrate my 20th anniversary of fencing in the SCA. Well, I've decided to go ahead with the idea but I've run into a few snags from a direction I didn't expect: my friends.

Their concern is that I will offend the White Scarves by presuming to host a Prize at other than the crown's direction or that my Prize will be taken as a parody of a White Scarf's Prize. These are both valid points, and I must admit that these points never crossed my mind. Now I don't want to offend anyone with this Prize, so I'm glad my friends brought up their concerns.

I really want to do this Prize, but I also don't want to shoot myself in the foot. My first thought was that I should ask the White Scarves of Artemisia for permission to hold the Prize, but I really don't want to do this. Yes, it is their responsibility to ensure that their order is upheld to the proper standards, but I'm a little leery of the precedence I might set if I ask their permission to hold the Prize. My personal belief is that Prizes should not be limited to only those earning their White Scarves, but should be open for other occasions, too.

The compromise I've decided on is to contact them beforehand with my proposal to fight my Prize and ask them if there are any changes to the format that I should make: basically ask what I should have in the Prize, and what I should leave out of it. My hope is that, by including them in the initial planning, I can avoid any unforeseen consequences.

So now I just have to track down all their contact information.

Putting together swords on the cheap

Ever since Artemisia made the move away from epees, the biggest problem for beginning fencers in the SCA has been putting together a sword. For the most part, new fencers tend to be younger than and not as secure financially as their elder counter-parts. They don't have the $250 to spend on a ready-built Alchem, let alone the $300 - $400 to drop on a Darkwood. Which leaves the question of how to put together a sword when you're a starving college student?

You do have a few options. The first is to set your sights a little lower and buy a mass-produced complete sword. Zen Warrior has ready-made rapiers starting at right around $100, and their best (the R9) runs for under $200. The problem here is (to put it in car terms) that Zen Warrior is the Kia of rapiers. They're inexpensive and functional, but they're not exactly high-quality. They have some quality control issues with their blades and the majority of their guards have some serious design flaws. Likewise, Hanwei offers several complete rapiers for under $200. These are probably the Chevrolets of the Rapier world. Better than the Zen Warriors, but still not top of the line. Their guards are more period and much prettier, but you still run into the occasional quality control issue with the blades.

The next option is to buy a used sword from another fencer. This gives you the opportunity to test drive the sword first and, more often than not, you will be getting a better sword than if you were to spend the same amount on a new one. But just like with buying a used car, you need to have it checked out first. Look for soft spots in the blade, excessive bends, cracks, rust and so on. Find out how old the sword is. If a blade is old but still in good shape, then you know the metallurgy on it is good. If you keep it rust-free, odds are it'll outlast you.

Your third option is to make a sword from parts. Buy a blade you like and then either buy, barter for or build the rest yourself. This is how I put together all of my swords. This is probably the most cost effective method of putting together a sword, especially if you can find a deal on a used bare blade. Even if you don't, you can still save a ton of money. For example, my most expensive sword cost a total of $150.35: $75 for the blade (a Solingen), $75 for the guard (a Zen Warrior R9), a home-made horn handle, the pommel weight off of an old foil and a 35-cent copper pipe union. My least expensive? $86: $75 for the blade (a KC), $11 for the pommel and the rest made from scraps (steel bar stock left from a heavy helm for the guard and scrap wood for the handle). Even the Hockey Stick from Heck was made this way. I spent $70 for the bare Alchem blade and then $50 for a wall-hanger that I stole the hardware from.

Yes, building your own sword requires more effort than buying a pre-made sword, but it gives you a sword that is truly yours.

Armor?

I've been hit with some questions lately about what's legal for torso armor, and let me tell you, they run the gamut. Some people are saying Under Armour is legal by itself while others are saying that stretch fencing jackets aren't. Talk about a spread.

So let's tackle Under Armour first. For anyone who doesn't know, Under Armour is a brand of athletic apparel designed to help regulate your body temperature by wicking sweat away from your body. It's great stuff and has been a part of my kit for better than 5 years now, but I never thought of it as armor. But the people who claim it counts as all that's required for torso protection cite the fact that it passes the Society's drop test. Which, while it is a nice piece of trivia, is completely irrelevant. You see, under the definition of abrasion-resistant materials, it specifically lists lycra/spandex mix materials and, well, I hate to break the news to proponents of Under Armour, it is a lycra/spandex mix. So, until the Society's Rapier Handbook is updated to say otherwise, Under Armour is not legal torso protection by itself.

Which leads us to whether stretch fencing jackets are legal or not? The argument against these jackets is that the backs are a stretch nylon that does not meet the Newton requirements set forward in the Society Rapier Handbook. The thing is, just like with the Under Armour, it doesn't matter. The rules state that commercial fencing clothing rated at 550 Newtons is puncture resistant. So whether or not a jacket has stretch panels or not, if the maker rates the jacket at 550 Newtons, it is legal. Of course, the hard part there is finding a stretch jacket that is rated at 550 Newtons. FIE stretch jackets are rated for 800N, but most of the club stretch jackets are only rated for 350N. But if you're willing to put out the extra money for an FIE jacket, you can wear it.

So, for you marshals out there who have fencers trying to buffalo their way through either allowing Under Armour or saying no to stretch jackets, just remember pages 6 and 7 of the S.C.A. Rapier Marshal's Handbook holds all of the answers. And with the jackets, unless the jacket itself says otherwise, assume it meets the standard, but recommend they upgrade to period armor.