How do you change application/practice when using a blade?

[OULobo]

I am just wondering how much all the FMA guys here chnage their technique or the application of techinque when considering a long blade instead of a stick. While the principles are the same, there are advantages to each that can only be fully realized if the technique, application or method are changed. The easiest example is use of the "bladed" part of the stick for locking application. A more subtle example would be draw cutting or using evasive light slashes, instead of the hacking strike that is best with a stick or cudgel. Essentially I'm trying to see how many FMA guys here vary their technique and how they vary technique to accomodate the advantages of a blade.

The transfer of technique, from empty hand to stick to blade short or long, is often touted as a strong point of the FMAs, but I notice that the best swordsmen change their application, method and even body motion to maximize the advantage of the blade, basically changing all the things that are first trained with the stick.

 

[Cruentus]

Even though it is "all the same" in modern arnis, there are some glaring differences in strategy with a blade that will effect your body mechanics, timing, and the way you execute the technique.

Some differences in what I do are:

Footwork - Stances a bit wider then shoulder length, and more dynamic as with the blade you dealing with more of a medio-largo range.

Check hand - danger of getting cut, so used much more conservatively with a blade then without.

striking surface - generally hit with the middle or belly of the blade and drag accrossed target, rather then hitting with the very end as I do with an impact weapon. Seemes like a suttle difference, but it requires a completely different set of body mechanics to execute correctly.

Great topic!

:asian:

 

[OULobo]

My personal differances are similar.

Keeping with your pattern:

I don't use much of a checking hand. You're right, too easy to get it in the way, even of your own blade.

My stance changes in that I never stand with the blade angled to pass into my leg on any downward strikes. With a stick, the strike is already exhausted in power and I'm not worried about bouncing it off my thigh, but a long blade is heavier and cuts.

My biggest change is in the mechanics of the strike. I tend to use a lot of quick and short draw cuts. Making use of the blade's primary advantage, cutting ability even at slow velocity.

I also tend to jab more with the tip from a distance. Stick jabs to the body seem to be weak at best, but a sword's puncture is a most deadly wound.

I also tend to stand either at an extreme distance, whether extremely close to bind up the strikes or extremely far to gain reaction time.

One thing I think about often is reinforcment of blocks and strikes, and protection from recoil. Most of the time with sticks the arm is used as a buffer, but with a blade the arm becomes both a target of consequence and opportunity.

 

[Cruentus]

I concure.

Stabbing is much more useful with a sword then with a stick.

 

[arnisador]

The current issue of Black Belt has an article on this.

 

[Black Grass]

The book The Secrets of Kalis Ilustrisimo does a good job of showing the subtle difference stick and blade (at least for the Ilustrisimo system).

The sword its self determines how I would deploy it (ie. which technique I would use). A barong and field bolo call for different use than a kris, itak or pinute.


Tulisan said :
"striking surface - generally hit with the middle or belly of the blade and drag accrossed target, rather then hitting with the very end as I do with an impact weapon. Seemes like a suttle difference, but it requires a completely different set of body mechanics to execute correctly."

OULobo
"My biggest change is in the mechanics of the strike. I tend to use a lot of quick and short draw cuts. Making use of the blade's primary advantage, cutting ability even at slow velocity."


This really depends on the weapon and the wound you want to inflict. A weapon like a barong which i consider a hacker, I would attack with the belly (as there is where its cuting power is) and push and pull the weapon through the target. A weapon like a kris I would deploy more similar to how Tulisan describes. A weapon like an an espada I would use more with the tip as OULobo describes.


Regrards,
Black Grass

 

[OULobo]

I agree, weapon choice will call for even more subtle changes. I generally think in terms of a pinuti/espata, long and has a sharp point, allowing for slight cuts to the limbs from a distance and various effective thrusts.

I have heard that traditionally the barong and Phil. kris are interchangable. I view them the same. They seem to be relatively short hackers with the sideline option of a stab, though not really designed for it. I see the barong as a little different in that it is pretty heavy and has a curve handle grip slightly changing my mechanics. The Phil. kris (wavy or straight sundang) I generally use more of the draw cut techniques also, taking advantage of the waves or the longer (than the barong) straight cutting surface. Also the kris has the feature of being double-sided blade.

I look at the various bolo types, military machetes and panabas as straight one-sided hackers, with no frills and somewhat the same mentality of an axe.

Another topic to tack on is where the kampilan fits. I would call it separate in that it is a longer heavy hacker. I don't think stabbing would be a great option. This weapon is one of the few that I haven't trained with and so I am curious as to how others interpret it.