11-17-2009, 08:29 AM
Ok, I'm having some problems remembering all the bits.
1.Attack:Attacker attacks with a fendente mandritto, defender in tutta porta di ferro does noting.
2. Attack-remedy: Attacker attacks as above, defender covers in frontale, beating the attacker's sword to the side, followed by either a roverso cut to the attacker's head or laying the sword over the attacker's forearms, with a step out to his right.
3. Attack-remedy-counter remedy: The attacker attacks as above and as the defender makes the parry, the attacker changes the direction of his sword to bind on the defender's. If the swords end up more or less equally crossed in the middle, the attacker follows up by entering under cover with the hilt high and forward, controls the defender's elbow and pommel strikes.
4. Attack-remedy-counter remedy-counter-counter remedy. As the attacker enters under cover to pommel strike, the defender raises his own sword hilt high and covers and enters effecting his own pommel strike to the attacker's head, while controlling the elbow of his sword arm.
Is that it? It seems that the outcome of the initial bind done in step three has consequences which will affect how the drill continues. Whether it fails, neutralises the defender's parry, leaving the swords more or less equally crossed, or whether the attacker's bind is strong enough to drive the defender's parry out to the side.
For the sake of the drill, what is supposed to happen? Because if we have three possible scenarios as described above, it will affect the steps of the drill. Also since either player can do the same moves from an equal bind, depending on who acts first, a hesitant partner will get clobbered each time by the more active one, regardless of who is supposed to be the attacker or the defender.
I'm looking forward to seeing the videos of this drill!
1.Attack:Attacker attacks with a fendente mandritto, defender in tutta porta di ferro does noting.
2. Attack-remedy: Attacker attacks as above, defender covers in frontale, beating the attacker's sword to the side, followed by either a roverso cut to the attacker's head or laying the sword over the attacker's forearms, with a step out to his right.
3. Attack-remedy-counter remedy: The attacker attacks as above and as the defender makes the parry, the attacker changes the direction of his sword to bind on the defender's. If the swords end up more or less equally crossed in the middle, the attacker follows up by entering under cover with the hilt high and forward, controls the defender's elbow and pommel strikes.
4. Attack-remedy-counter remedy-counter-counter remedy. As the attacker enters under cover to pommel strike, the defender raises his own sword hilt high and covers and enters effecting his own pommel strike to the attacker's head, while controlling the elbow of his sword arm.
Is that it? It seems that the outcome of the initial bind done in step three has consequences which will affect how the drill continues. Whether it fails, neutralises the defender's parry, leaving the swords more or less equally crossed, or whether the attacker's bind is strong enough to drive the defender's parry out to the side.
For the sake of the drill, what is supposed to happen? Because if we have three possible scenarios as described above, it will affect the steps of the drill. Also since either player can do the same moves from an equal bind, depending on who acts first, a hesitant partner will get clobbered each time by the more active one, regardless of who is supposed to be the attacker or the defender.
I'm looking forward to seeing the videos of this drill!
Maybe a bit of encouragement towards documenting the seminars would be in order. It was not a long time ago, when we had most of the provosts scribbling away class notes furiously in the sidelines during every seminar. These days, less so.