Me teaching

[Wing Woo Gar]

I have no skill in throwing knives but those look pointy!

It isn’t very difficult with a decent one. Same as hatchets. Get cheap ones at a swap meet. Get a round of softer wood and off to the races. You will be surprised at how well you can do in just a few throws.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I have no skill in throwing knives but those look pointy!

Train

- throw a knife.
- dodge throwing knife.
- plastic knife fight.
- jump off the roof top.
- jump out of a chest level hole.
- ...

Today, nobody wants to train those anymore. IMO, the previous generation may train "more complete MA" than today's generation does.

 

[Flying Crane]

I am no knife expert, but the body mechanics probably don’t change unless the length of blade is significantly different, but there is a reason most swords are cut OR thrust. Not many swords do both equally well. Someone with more HEMA experience should probably weigh in on this. I have read a lot on the topic but I don’t know much beyond historical accounts of weapon development based on successes and failures on the battlefields of antiquity.

I’m no HEMA expert, but I don’t think a sword needs to do both equally well. Its design probably means it does one better than the other, but the other can still be done effectively and that is what matters and adds versatility.

 

[Badhabits]

Knife games with a stick of chalk in a chalk holder is fun. Can definitely keep you humble.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

A: Why do you train kick/punch on a heavy bag?
B: I try to develop kick/punch power.
A Do you intend to hurt somebody?
B: ...

What's will be your answer if you are B?

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Train

- throw a knife.
- dodge throwing knife.
- plastic knife fight.
- jump off the roof top.
- jump out of a chest level hole.
- ...

Today, nobody wants to train those anymore. IMO, the previous generation may train "more complete MA" than today's generation does.

I did lots of rooftops as a kid. Hucked myself off all kinds of things on skateboards and snowboards too. Trying to keep my skeleton intact from here on out but Yang Jwingming Chin na class is pushing the limits of my joints.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

I’m no HEMA expert, but I don’t think a sword needs to do both equally well. Its design probably means it does one better than the other, but the other can still be done effectively and that is what matters and adds versatility.

So, in fencing, you have foil( thrust only ), epee (thrust only), or Sabre ( cut only). The design of most dictate the use. My point ( see what I did there) is that they aren’t all good at everything. Same as why I have 4 different kitchen knives. But I agree with you that versatility is most important. If I have to pick one that covers most bases I pick the paring knife because it’s easy to control and conceal in my hand. In a pinch, anything can work. I might have a hard time thrusting my cleaver, but I bet I could make it work somehow.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

I’m no HEMA expert, but I don’t think a sword needs to do both equally well. Its design probably means it does one better than the other, but the other can still be done effectively and that is what matters and adds versatility.

I have used a fork to great effect in a restaurant. Not joking even a little bit. Other diners were understandably upset by this, as well as the table, drinks, place settings, etc. Word to the wise, if I say keep your hand off my plate, I mean that.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

I’m no HEMA expert, but I don’t think a sword needs to do both equally well. Its design probably means it does one better than the other, but the other can still be done effectively and that is what matters and adds versatility.

I guess I should add that the fork thing was neither lethal nor fight stopping. It was a consequence and not intended as anything else. The victim was and is a close personal friend who is a habitual line stepper who used to misbehave after too many drinks. He never ever touches other peoples plates now.

 

[Buka]

That's true too. I don't know why I didn't think of that. So yeah Two most important things for slasher fighters footwork and checking and covering. I think the reason I said footwork is the scenario I was picturing in my head. I was thinking if this guy was going to go against more than 1 attacker(which is really almost the only legal way to use a blade in my state. We have a duty to retreat law) he would need excellent footwork. He would need to close in to slash then use his footwork to cut angles and zone in and out. A head on linear footwork would be very bad for that type of situation imo.

I believe footwork in arts of the knife are very important too. As for legality, one thing I like about an edged weapon is, once you’re proficient, it’s easier to cut just a little bit than it is to only shoot a little bit with a firearm.

 

[drop bear]

Maybe I am just too naïve... but I don't get the importance of using a "box cutter." Lets say I trained in the use of a knife, in whatever style is best or available or whatever... and the only weapon of opportunity I have is a box cutter.... wouldn't all my knife fighting training still apply? Let's say I trained in this system, to use a box cutter.... but when the bad guy comes, I have the opportunity to grab either a knife or a box cutter.... I would grab the knife because it has more reach and will do more damage.... and all my skill with the box cutter would also apply.... What am I missing?

Self defense legality is not really a thing to use to differentiate here. Either I can use lethal force or I cannot use lethal force. Both the box cutter and the knife would be considered lethal force... as would a gun or most other weapons. If I can legally use lethal force in a situation, then I can legally use either one. If I am letting the other guy know that I have a weapon.... now we get into the laws pertaining to threatening people and again, I don't see much difference between threatening with a box cutter verses a knife in a legal sense.

Sure, if your work requires you to have a box cutter on you, but not a knife, then you would most likely have the box cutter... But again, training with a real knife in a knife fighting system, would translate very well here. I think the quality of the training would be more important than the make of the blade you use. But thats me.... feel free to correct me where I am wrong.

The idea is called biometric cutting.

So in theory you cut the guy up so his limbs don't function. Rather than just pop him until he dies

So different kind of knife. Different kind of job.

The argument being that you look at knife murders and people can be stabbed a hundred times before they drop which is a long time in self defence terms.

(I also don't know how legit any of this argument is)

 

[drop bear]

If I were given a choice would actually prefer a 3 inch full tang kitchen paring knife that I can conceal in one hand, to a large or heavy knife.

It depends what you are doing.

I would prefer a small knife to exit the grapple. Because that is where I would be most at risk.

Once I have space I am looking for an exit and will probably just cut figure 8s at the air in front of you

 

[Flying Crane]

So, in fencing, you have foil( thrust only ), epee (thrust only), or Sabre ( cut only). The design of most dictate the use. My point ( see what I did there) is that they aren’t all good at everything. Same as why I have 4 different kitchen knives. But I agree with you that versatility is most important. If I have to pick one that covers most bases I pick the paring knife because it’s easy to control and conceal in my hand. In a pinch, anything can work. I might have a hard time thrusting my cleaver, but I bet I could make it work somehow.

Sure, but modern fencing weapons are designed for the sport, with a specific ruleset in place. That is an artificial segregation of technique, to fit within that ruleset, and fencing weapons are made to capitalize on that ruleset.

From what I have read, historical swords were often “cut-and-thrust” in design, meaning they were capable with both kinds of techniques, even if they still did one better than the other. My own collection of swords supports this notion. I wouldn’t want to be stabbed or cut with them. Either could be catastrophic to survival.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

The idea is called biometric cutting.

So in theory you cut the guy up so his limbs don't function. Rather than just pop him until he dies

So different kind of knife. Different kind of job.

The argument being that you look at knife murders and people can be stabbed a hundred times before they drop which is a long time in self defence terms.

(I also don't know how legit any of this argument is)

100%

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Sure, but modern fencing weapons are designed for the sport, with a specific ruleset in place. That is an artificial segregation of technique, to fit within that ruleset, and fencing weapons are made to capitalize on that ruleset.

From what I have read, historical swords were often “cut-and-thrust” in design, meaning they were capable with both kinds of techniques, even if they still did one better than the other. My own collection of swords supports this notion. I wouldn’t want to be stabbed or cut with them. Either could be catastrophic to survival.

Sure, it makes sense to have a sharp point on a cutting weapon. Rapier is a good example but the small sword is an even better example of utility.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

It depends what you are doing.

I would prefer a small knife to exit the grapple. Because that is where I would be most at risk.

Once I have space I am looking for an exit and will probably just cut figure 8s at the air in front of you

True, if I am going to split wood then I need a good sturdy knife I can baton.

 

[Flying Crane]

Sure, it makes sense to have a sharp point on a cutting weapon. Rapier is a good example but the small sword is an even better example of utility.

I’m not sure what the definition of a small sword is. I don’t know much about the rapier, but my understanding is that it was designed to excel with the thrust with a narrow blade, but still had a sharp cutting edge.

Pictures from some of my own. I put the hilts on all three of these.

The first is a fairly classic longsword, with a distinct point for the thrust coupled with a fairly wide blade for cutting.

The second is a saber that I modified from a taiji saber, cutting off the tang and mounting the hilt on the bottom portion of the blade. The end result is a shorter weapon. However, it still has a distinct curve which makes for a better cutting weapon, coupled with a point that is sharpened on the back edge as well, improving the thrust. The point lines up fairly well (not perfectly) with the grip, which improves its thrusting quality vs. a more radically curved saber or scimitar where the point does not line up with the grip.

The third is what might be called an arming sword in European terms, but is one that I use in my Chinese jian practice. It is a straight-bladed single-hand sword. The blade overall is more narrow than the longsword and tapers more sharply which probably makes it better on the thrust than the longsword (ignoring the greater power that can be generated with the longsword by using it with two hands on the longer hilt), but probably makes it less effective on the cut than the wider blade on the longsword, and again ignoring the greater power generated by the two-handed grip.

Like anything, there is no universally “best” design for a sword. Each design has inherent strengths and weaknesses and may function better under some circumstances, and less well under others. But they can be very versatile and be easily deadly, even if not taking advantage of their strongest traits.

Sword designs changed in response to armor, which (at least in Europe) was being constantly improved to defeat the weapons of the day. As armor became more complete and moved towards plate, sword blade designs tended to become more narrow and sharply pointed, with thickened points for ruggedness, to penetrate that tough armor. Cutting techniques were less effective against such armor so sword design changed. But designs often kept cutting abilities too, didn’t discard them entirely, as your rapier example shows (although the era of the rapier came after the heavy armor was mostly discarded due to the rise of firearms).

 

[drop bear]

Sure, but modern fencing weapons are designed for the sport, with a specific ruleset in place. That is an artificial segregation of technique, to fit within that ruleset, and fencing weapons are made to capitalize on that ruleset.

From what I have read, historical swords were often “cut-and-thrust” in design, meaning they were capable with both kinds of techniques, even if they still did one better than the other. My own collection of swords supports this notion. I wouldn’t want to be stabbed or cut with them. Either could be catastrophic to survival.

And on that note I will present the giant box cutter known as a seax.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

I’m not sure what the definition of a small sword is. I don’t know much about the rapier, but my understanding is that it was designed to excel with the thrust with a narrow blade, but still had a sharp cutting edge.

Pictures from some of my own. I put the hilts on all three of these.

The first is a fairly classic longsword, with a distinct point for the thrust coupled with a fairly wide blade for cutting.

The second is a saber that I modified from a taiji saber, cutting off the tang and mounting the hilt on the bottom portion of the blade. The end result is a shorter weapon. However, it still has a distinct curve which makes for a better cutting weapon, coupled with a point that is sharpened on the back edge as well, improving the thrust. The point lines up fairly well (not perfectly) with the grip, which improves its thrusting quality vs. a more radically curved saber or scimitar where the point does not line up with the grip.

The third is what might be called an arming sword in European terms, but is one that I use in my Chinese jian practice. It is a straight-bladed single-hand sword. The blade overall is more narrow than the longsword and tapers more sharply which probably makes it better on the thrust than the longsword (ignoring the greater power that can be generated with the longsword by using it with two hands on the longer hilt), but probably makes it less effective on the cut than the wider blade on the longsword, and again ignoring the greater power generated by the two-handed grip.

Like anything, there is no universally “best” design for a sword. Each design has inherent strengths and weaknesses and may function better under some circumstances, and less well under others. But they can be very versatile and be easily deadly, even if not taking advantage of their strongest traits.

Sword designs changed in response to armor, which (at least in Europe) was being constantly improved to defeat the weapons of the day. As armor became more complete and moved towards plate, sword blade designs tended to become more narrow and sharply pointed, with thickened points for ruggedness, to penetrate that tough armor. Cutting techniques were less effective against such armor so sword design changed. But designs often kept cutting abilities too, didn’t discard them entirely, as your rapier example shows (although the era of the rapier came after the heavy armor was mostly discarded due to the rise of firearms).

Small sword was a style of sword in Europe at one time. You obviously have a lot more knowledge and experience of the subject. I love all things historical but I have very little swordsmanship. I’m an armchair swordsman. I have only done much with the one sword I own which is a Sabre with a 32” blued blade. I’m in no way proficient with it. It’s just a fun thing for me. I appreciate the pictures, very nice collection. I had eyes on a collector sword at one time from Albion called the lady vivamus. It’s beautiful. I believe they only made 500 of them.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I am no knife expert, but the body mechanics probably don’t change unless the length of blade is significantly different, but there is a reason most swords are cut OR thrust. Not many swords do both equally well. Someone with more HEMA experience should probably weigh in on this. I have read a lot on the topic but I don’t know much beyond historical accounts of weapon development based on successes and failures on the battlefields of antiquity.

HEMA guy here. It's true that sword design has to compromise between optimizing for cutting vs thrusting. Historically sword design ranged all the way from cut-only to thrust-only, but the large majority were somewhere in the middle ground where they could deliver both cuts and thrusts which could be lethal or disabling. Some were squarely in the middle where they could do both easily, but weren't the absolute best at either, while others were optimized to do one better than the other.

So, in fencing, you have foil( thrust only ), epee (thrust only), or Sabre ( cut only).

Modern Olympic fencing weapons are mostly pretty different from historical swords, except that the foil and epee are derived from the small sword, which was an unusually specialized weapon.

I’m not sure what the definition of a small sword is.

The small sword was the closest functional analogue to the foil and epee used in modern Olympic fencing. A side arm for dueling, it was very light, easy to carry, allowed excellent point control, and typically had no cutting edge at all. (Even those designs which did include a cutting edge probably included it primarily to prevent the opponent from grabbing the blade rather than for offensive purposes.) It's one of the few sword designs I know of which is all the way over on the thrust end of the cut/thrust optimization continuum. Another would be the estoc, which was a very different design for a very different context.