Plateaus

It happens to all of us: we keep getting better and better until all of a sudden, we just can't get any better. This doesn't mean we don't have anything more to learn, just that we've learned as much as we can by what we're doing. We've plateaued. And the sad fact is that this isn't something that happens once, but over and over again.

Usually, the first plateau happens fairly early in your career: you've learned the basics and have started doing pretty well for yourself locally, but then Bam! Your death becomes a common, oft-repeated part of fighter's practice and you begin feeling like the shire pin-cushion. The cause of this first plateau is that your fellow local fencers have learned all your tricks, all your patterns, and can counter them without even thinking about it.

For this first plateau, the solution is to travel. Go to other group's fighter's practices. Do pick-up fights when you go to events. And if you see someone do something really effective, ask them about it. This will expand your knowledge base and teach you new tricks that maybe didn't work for the other local fighters, haven't made their way to your local group, or maybe have been forgotten by your other local fighters.

This will get you going again and you'll start doing better and better at tourneys, maybe winning a few but definitely making a good showing for yourself. You're right on the edge of greatness, then Bam! Another plateau. You're still doing well, but you just can't get your head around those Gold Scarves. So, what do you do now?

You start teaching. You help out at fighter's practice with the brand new fencers, showing them the basics of footwork, parries and attacks. This slows you down and forces you to think about what you're doing and how. And it also starts to teach you how to watch other fighters and take apart their style. And after a while, you begin to make progress against those Gold Scarves who'd been your bane for the past few months.

And things are going great until the same thing happens again. This is when many fencers will begin doing research, either on period techniques or other martial arts, trying to find that certain something missing from their style. They'll start focusing on the why of fencing moves and begin adapting other arts to their needs.

And again, as you get deeper into your research, your skill will begin improving until you're the equal of all but the very best Gold Scarves, but then you hit another plateau. And it's time to change things up again. It's time to start "hunting Dons." You should be taking every chance you can get to fight with the White Scarves, both in tourneys and in practices. Ask them questions. Ask for their advice. Pump them for as much knowledge as you can: after all, many of them have forgotten more about fencing than most of us know.

And just like before, you'll start improving again. And, like before, you'll hit that plateau again. And this time it's back to teaching - but not focusing on the beginners. This time you're focusing on the intermediate or advanced fighters, teaching them your tricks and helping them through their plateaus.

But even after you get past this plateau (and hopefully earned your White Scarf), you're still not done. Every so often, you'll hit another plateau. And the fix for that plateau will always be to learn more or to teach.

As for myself, I've taught beginners, I've traveled, I've done research, and I'm definitely at a plateau. I guess that means I should start hunting Dons.

Old Dogs Can Learn New Tricks

I went over to Bronzehelm for Schola this last weekend and was pleased to find a good chunk of time set aside for fighter's practice. It was wonderful to have a chance to play around with new people and it gave me a great opportunity to try out what I've been learning with my saber. I was even a good boy and warned them that I was trying out news stuff and apologized in advance for any oopses I might make.

And I apologized each time I made an oops.

And I apologized afterwards for all of the oopses.

You see, they style I'm studying with my saber is almost all sweeping tip cuts. And when they work, they work great, but when I'm off, it's a lot of hacks and hard slaps. And let me tell you, my control with the style is nowhere near ready for prime-time. And no, I didn't use they style during the serious fencing. After all, if I can't control it in practice, there's no way I can control it when the adrenaline is flowing.

The good part (for me, at least) was that after watching for a while, Don Adam took me aside and worked with me one-on-one to try and figure out a way to help take the force out of my attacks. And he came up with a couple of ideas that look very promising. The first is no more two-handing for a while: it just adds too much power to my swings. The second idea was to strike with the flat of the blade initially and then turn it edge-on for the draw. This not only spreads out the force over a broader area, but also uses the flexibility of the blade to absorb the force of the blow. And it worked great in practice, even with my current control level. I definitely still need to work on it, so it'll be a while until I can bring it out in a tournament, but at least I have a direction to go.

Did I mention it was a great event?

My Perfect Army

I've talked about the mixes of weapon styles as well as using RBG in melees and thought it might be a good idea to talk some about my favorite formations too.

The first is for a Star: a 3 person combat team. Ideally, you'll have 2 bucklers and 1 case in the group with the bucklers in front. Below is a basic diagram:

3 Fighter Formation

B B C

As you can see, the case fighter is stationed between and behind the two other fighters. This allows them to replace either of the front fighters or protect the sides in case they are flanked. I'm not using any gunners because 3-on-3 is really too small for their use.

That changes when you double your troops. You can see from the diagram below that I've added a gunner in front of the formation. Now, the gunner only stays in front of the formation until they approach to firing range of their opponents. When they're in range to fire, they stop and the rest of the formation flows around them.

6 Fighter Formation:
Initial: G B B B C C		Start of Pass: B G B B C C		End of Pass: B B B C G C		Final: B B B C G C

As you can see, the gunners wind up behind the line where they can still snipe the opposing forces or fill in as a reserve, if necessary.

When we double our troops again, you can see daggers being used for the first time. They aren't reserves, the same as the case fighters, but rather shock troops. Their job is to watch the battle, direct troops, repel any flanking attacks and take advantage of any weaknesses in the enemy formation.

12 Fighter Formation:
Initial:		Final:
G G B B B B B C C C C D		B B B B B C G C C G C D

Our final doubling brings us up to 24 fighters. And you may notice that while the reserves (the case fighters) have doubled each time, they are the only group that does. The front line of bucklers nearly does, but is always 1 less than double the previous size. And the shock troops have quadrupled in number while the gunners only increase by 1 each time. This is because I prefer a more conservative - a more defensive - formation. An example of this is when you compare my 24 fighter formation to the typical 24 fighter formation most people would use given the same mix of weapons:

Initial:

Mine

G G G B B B B B B B B B C C C C C C C C D D D D

Theirs

C B C B C B C B C B C B C D G D B B G B D G D C

Final:

Mine

B B B B B B B B B C C G C C G C C G C C D D D D

Their

C B C B C B C B C B C B C D G D B B G B D G D C

Head to Head

Mine

D D D D C C G C C G C C G C C B B B B B B B B B

C B C B C B C B C B C B C D G D B B G B D G D C

Theirs

As you can see, their line is wider than mine (12 to 9). This isn't as big of a problem as it might seem for a couple of reasons. The first is that the gunners in my formation will have hopefully thinned out their front ranks some, forcing them to drain some of their reserves to fill the holes in the line. The other reason is that while they have the troops to attempt a flank, my formation has the shock troops already in position to deal with them.

Unfortunately, I don't foresee the the chance to actually use the 24-fighter formation, or even the 12-fighter formation very often because of the sheer rarity of getting that many fencers on the melee field up here (let alone that many fencers willing to fight with bucklers), but I can always hope. And if anyone does get the chance to try these out, I'd love to hear how it goes.

Gunning for Melees

Ever since RBGs were first introduced, fencers have been trying to figure out the best way to use them. The probelm with determining the best use has always been the limitations placed on them. In many melees, RBGs are either not allowed or are limited in number of weapons or number of rounds (at Estrella War this past year, sides were limited to a total of 1 round for every 10 opponents). I can see why they do this: they're trying to keep the melees from being straight gun-battles.

And in our period, gun use was limited. Compared to swords, guns were expensive and slow to produce. In addition, they had a long list of disadvantages: theycouldn't match the accuracy of a crossbow or a longbow, they were incapable of firing in the rain (the Battle of Villalar was won because the rebel's arquebus' would not work in the rain), they were prone to blow up in the user's hand, and the amount of smoke they produced made it hard to even see the enemy after a few salvos. Of course, they did have a few advantages: they were easier to learn than the longbow, they were faster to reload than a crossbow, and a soldier could carry more ammunition than with either a longbow or a crossbow.

It was these advantages that did bring firearms to the field, but the severity of the limitations kept them from occupying a large percentage of the armies of the times arsenals.

I have to say that in the SCA, I do like the idea of limiting the number of guns (and the 1 in 10 ratio from Estrella works quite well), but I'm not so sure about limiting the number of rounds. The reality of a soldier is that he/she will carry as much ammo as they can (the standard load for a U.S. Army soldier is 210 rounds, but most carry more into combat). For myself, I try to carry at least five rounds for my RBG when I bring it on the melee field.

Of course, this still leaves the question of how to use our RBGs to their greatest effect in melees. Which means we have to look at the various types of melees we do.

Probably the most common type of melee we do is the open field battle. Currently we normally line up our gunmen behind the line in open field battles with instruction to shoot commanders and other high-value targets (HVTs). And this does work, but it has some weeknesses. The first is that it doesn't take full advantage of the RBG's range. A gunner can only reach the front line shortly before his/her own line can and can't reach behind the lines until the front lines engage. The other weakness is that going after HVTs doesn't generally do anything to relieve the pressure of the front line. Most HVTs (commanders, White Scarves, etc.) hang out behind the lines so that even if you do get them, your front line is still fully engaged.

The Swiss didn't use their gunmen this way. In fact, they did the exact opposite. Their gunmen were placed in front of the main line. Once the opposing army came into range, they would stop and begin firing at the enemy's front line, poking holes in it and taking away its momentum. As they'd fire, their own lines would pass through, engaging the enemy before they could reach the gunners. The Swiss infantry would then be facing a stalled, weakened line and the now-protected gunners could switch from volley-fire to the more traditional (for us) role of sniping and supporting.

We actually do pretty well in bridge battles. Our standard tactic is to set up the gunmen to the sides of the bridge where they can harry the enemy forces. We still focus too much on HVTs for my taste, but at least we've figured out how to give our gunners a good depth of range without interfering with our own lines.

Ressurection battles are probably the easiest to figure out: in all but a few situations, RBGs are useless. Because of the length of resurrection battles and their never-ending supply of reinforcements, it is pointless to waste ammo on thinning out the lines or eliminating HVTs: they'll just be back in 30 seconds or so. Their only use is in a capture-the-flag scenario to remove defenders from the objective from a distance or to kill an opponent who has captured your flag. Anything beyond that is a waste.

Keep battles are the opposite of the ressurection battle when it comes to RBGs: gunners are so useful and the field is so limited that it's hard to screw it up. A perfect example is the Defend the Baroness battle from this last Uprising. Even aside from the canon, the defenders did everything right. They had gunners in the door, punching holes in the attackers line, and gunners on the wall, draining their reserves. That was about as textbook as you could get. And with only the single point of contact and the limited number of visible targets, its hard for the attackers not to use their gunners effectively: if you've only got one or two gunners, have them snipe the kill pocket and if you've got four or five, a volley-fire can wipe out an entire rank of defenders.

Yes, I suppose RBGs take away from the fun of melees (at least for those who are shot), but when you think about it, so does getting legged and left. So I figure if we're going to use them, let's see what happens when we use them right.

Excessive Blows

Recently the problem of hitting with excessive force once again reared its ugly head. This, like day-glo Converse and decaffinated coffee is a problem that should never come up. Okay, I realize that there will always be the occasional train wreck, but short of that, there is no reason why hitting too hard should be a problem. As I see it, there are only two causes for hard hits: lack of training and blatant stupidity. And since we can't get rid of stupidity, we are forced to rely on training to minimize the problem. The training's even relatively easy: pracitce regularly, and when you practice, hit as light as possible, and take even the lightest hits.

Okay, hitting light can take some practice, but the basics are easy. To get a light hit requires three things: force, balance and range. Of these, force is the easiest to practice. Remember those tennis ball drills you hated so much? Well, if you can consistently hit a tennis ball on a string without causing it to swing more than six inches, you're hitting about right. Of course I realize hitting a tennis ball at speed is difficult, so try a kick ball, or even a piece of paper. Once you can do that at speed with a normal attack, move out a few inches at a time until your lunge barely moves the ball (or paper).

And balance is even easier to work on. In fact it's real easy. Don't lean. When you lean forward, you add your body's momentum to the attack which means - you guessed it - more force. And when you lean back, you take away both your mobility and your body's elasticity. In short, if you lean back to avoid a hit and it still lands, it's going to hit with more perceived force.

Which leads us to range. Hopefully, all those tennis ball drills will have taught you your range. So all you have to do now is only attack when your opponent is in range. If they're too far out, take a step forward. Likewise, if they're too close, take a step back (or if you really want to mess with their heads, take a step to the side).

Now, as with most fencing drills, it's best to start out slow and gradually build up to speed, but with practice it shouldn't be too hard to hit as light as you want. And believe it or not, your goal is to consistantly hit too light in practices. If your opponent at practice has to ask if you got anything, that's an ideal hit.

Why? Because there's this little thing called adrenaline that tends to kick in at tourneys and (especially) melees. And what adrenaline does is lessen your control. No matter how hard you try, you'll hit at least a little harder. That's why I say to train light: so that when you're in a furball and hitting twice as hard as normal, that just means your hitting like a grasshopper instead of a fly. Adrenaline also makes you less sensitive to hits you receive. So again, if your sensitivity is halved, your opponent won't have to leave marks for you to call it good.

That still leaves blatant stupidity to worry about, but if you train regularly, and train well, it lessens the chances of that as well.

We're Not That Different

One thing that I've noticed over my many years of fencing within the Society is the segregation of the fencers and the armored fighters. It isn't at all uncommon for fencers to think of their armored counterparts as big, dumb stickjocks, just as there are a fair share of armored fighters who see us as nothing more than wire weenies. Now, it's not as bad as it used to be: we're getting more armored fighters doing fencing as well as more fencers trying their hand at armored fighting, but the problem is still there. Especially among the newer fighters.

I wish I could say that our opinion was a reaction to the armored community's view of us ("They don't like us? Well, to heck with them!"), but no. Historically, it's the other way around. In the early days of fencing, we (yes, I'm including myself) looked at the differences between fencers and armored fighters. We saw that they wore metal and fought with sticks while we wore cloth and fought with steel. They were whack-heavy while we focused on the thrust. They were heavy, while we were light. And we saw that these things made fencing more difficult - after all, armored fighters don't have to dial down their hits to where their opponents barely feel it, they just bash each other as hard as they can.

Here's the thing: fighting's fighting. It doesn't matter what style you do, the basics are the same. You don't believe me? Let me tell you a story. Back when I was with the 163d, we were heading off to do a Combatives (hand-to-hand) class and to motivate us, our sergeant said that whoever did the worst would have to go clean weapons afterwards. He then began going through our section, weighing the odds for each of us. Now, even though S1 and S4 are usually considered REMFs, we weren't exactly the paper-pushers you might think. Out of the 7 of us, we had 3 11B , an 11C, and a scout. Leaving me as one of only two members of the group not in combat arms. Needless to say, odds were pretty good that I'd be the one cleaning weapons. When the sergeant mentioned that, I replied, "But I fence!"

I'm sure you can imagine the results: everyone started laughing. Well, we got to the class (my first Level II class), and I found myself helping the other members of my section. It wasn't because I was an expert in Combatives. It wasn't even because of some belt I earned (I know just enough Aikido to fall without killing myself). It was my fencing. You see, footwork is footwork. And what's a punch but a thrust without a sword?

Like I said: fighting's fighting. You want to know the difference between armored fighting and fencing? Armored fighters learn to put power into their attacks and fencers learn to take power out of theirs. The difference between a good armored shot and a tip cut? Six inches and power. Between a heavy hit and a draw cut? The power. That's it. Oh sure, there are some conventions that are different: they allow body contact, and their forearms and lower legs are off-limits, but the basics are the same.

So back when fencing started getting a toe-hold in Artemisia, we fencers were doing our best to shoot ourselves in the foot. It was bad enough that our failing to see the similarities kept us from going to the armored fighters for help, but our putting ourselves above them did an incredible job of alienating them. I mean, think about it: it's only within the last few years that we've started to see any real sort of crossover between the two fighting styles.

We're finally starting to get beyond the playground games which hampered our attempts to legitimize fencing, but we're not out of the woods yet. Armored fighting has been around in Artemisia for a lot longer than fencing. We need to learn to recognized not only the traditions of armored fighters, but also the immense wealth of knowledge stored in that great body. Yes, their ways are different, but we can still adapt them to our needs.