Langenschwert,
Could you elaborate on this...
Matches between kendoka and HEMAists usually come out favouring the HEMA fencer.
I'm curious as to what you have seen in these matches.
Are the weapons comparative in length?
What about the experience level in the practitioners?
What struck you as to the reason the kendoka may have lost?
I'm not looking for criticism of the art or the practitioners, just looking at an analysis of why the matches turned out the way they did. I am a fan of both cultures sword arts and I'm curious about mixed matches between them...much like I was interested in the UFC when it first started and there wasn't the consolidation of techniques...when you had boxers vs. silat vs. karate vs. jiu jutsu...
This is a general response regarding fencers vs. kendoka.
I haven't seen tons of kendo vs. fencing videos, but in most of what I have seen, the kendoka comes up on the short end. That goes for historical western fencing and modern sport fencing as well. The reason is a combination of the speed of the weapons and the priorities of each sport.
Modern fencing weapons (sabre and epee; foil is not a weapon) all derive from turn of the century dueling weapons. Rapiers, smallswords, dueling sabres and the dueling swords (epee) were specifically developed for civilian dueling. Military swords were not advantageous against these weapons in a duel because they're heavier and slower. The advantages in a one on one duel that a skilled fencer with an epee enjoys over a broadsword, cavalry sabre, or a Scottish backsword are also enjoyed against a katana, and by extension, it's bamboo analogue, the shinai.
As for blade length, historical rapiers were not only faster than a Japanese sword, they were as long or in some cases, longer. The smallsword was "small" with a blade the same length as a katana because the rapiers of the day were often significantly longer, frequently by six inches or more.
This isn't a statement of superiority of one sword over another; each was developed in different cultures for a different environment. Against an armored opponent, a katana, broadsword, cavalry sabre, or a Scottish backsword is a more desirable sword. In a civilian duel with little or no meaningful body armor, the rapier, small sword, dueling sabre or the epee are the more desireable weapon.
That being said, the weapon doesn't win the fight, but the fencer does. A skilled kendoka who can control the match can certainly prevail against a fencer, particularly if they go for advance targets. And fencing weapons and rapiers are hardly well suited to parrying a shinai.
In western fencing, except for foil, advance targets are desireable because going for deep targets makes you more vulnerable. In kendo, deep targets are desireable for much the same reason that high kicks are prized in taekwondo: it's harder. Taking men (head) is much more challenging and considered braver than taking kote (the wrist). The kenshi going for men is exposing him/herself to greater danger in doing so.
Also, kendo has no rule of priority, while fencers are accustomed to fighting under it. In sabre and foil, if two blows land, the fencer with priority receives the point. This is true in classical fencing as well. In kendo, on the other hand, if two blows land, the one that is considered superior is scored. Men will also be more likely to be scored than do (waist) or kote. If scoring is being done in the idiom of western fencing (which it usually is), this puts a kendoka at a further disadvantage.
As others have pointed out, kendo is not kenjutsu and is certainly not a "samurai" art. Kendo is a "do" art and it's purpose is to strive for personal improvement and for that improvement to translate into contributions to culture and society. People didn't train to kill each other in an honor duel with kendo, and postwar kendo is even more removed from historical Japanese swordsmanship than kendo was prior to the war. Shiai (the competitive element of kendo) is ultimately a form of cane fencing. Although the bamboo cane is meant to represent a katana, it is neither the same length nor balanced in the same way as a katana. The blade is shaped differently and it does not accurately represent how a katana behaves.
On the flipside, western fencers would not do well under kendo rules. Only one weapon would be useful (dueling sabre), and as I mentioned earlier, it is not well suited to parrying a shinai. Also, with only one deep target available for a thrust (the throat), a fencer would need to be well within the kendoka's striking range in order to execute it. Not a good situation. Tsubazaria (corps a corps) is also a big part of kendo, and the shinai is much better suited to it than any of the fencing weapons. Not to mention that corps a corps is illegal in classical and modern fencing.
My final observation is that the skills and the way that a fencer is accustomed to fighting are going to be more useful against a broader range of sword styles than kendo will be, and the kendoka's lack of exposure to thrusting attacks are probably significant factors in why kendoka frequently end up on the short end of these matches.
While such videos are an amusement, and while I have sparred in kendo vs. fencing bouts, the weapons and styles of fighting are each well suited to their own environment and not well suited one another's environment.
.
