Chinese weapon competition

[.Q.]

Don't know much about weapons but seems a little too flashy. Pretty interesting though.

[Bhassler]

This is to weapons use what tappy-tap point sparring is to MMA.

Really, weapons just don't work well in a competitive format. By the time you childproof the weapons, the physics are changed. When you further add rules for scoring, safe targeting, etc., what you end up with is pretty much the opposite of actual weapons practice. I feel much the same about HEMA, kendo, and pretty much any CMA weapons work I've seen on the intertubes. As much as empty hand gongfu is dying, weapons work is even worse.

[Trick]

“Safe targeting” what/where is that ?

[Finny]

“Safe targeting” what/where is that ?

It is what it says. In kendo, the practitioner scores a point when they hit safe (armoured) targets - the top of the wrist, the top of the head and the middle of the ribcage. If one were fighting in armour, these would not be ideal targets. I agree with Bhassler re the op

[MaartenSFS]

None of the people in that video have ever done martial arts. The lack of real martial knowledge and the ruleset makes it a joke. Not all weapons fighting looks like that.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EB-taTbMx2M&t=616s
Skip to 6:10 for fencing.

Weapons fencing can be done fairly realistically if realism is reflected in the ruleset and the weapons aren't too light. I handle all kinds of swords of different weights, shapes and balance and it doesn't make that big of a difference. Proper structure and mechanics are much more important than exactly what you are holding. This is more true of two-handed weapons.

[Trick]

“Safe targeting” what/where is that ?

It is what it says. In kendo, the practitioner scores a point when they hit safe (armoured) targets - the top of the wrist, the top of the head and the middle of the ribcage. If one were fighting in armour, these would not be ideal targets. I agree with Bhassler re the op

Ah i thought it was to be “visualized” as non armored fencing....isn’t the throat also an legit target in Kendo, thrustin the Shinai toward the opponent throat?

[Bhassler]

Weapons fencing can be done fairly realistically if realism is reflected in the ruleset and the weapons aren't too light.

Depends on what you mean by realism. The kind of sword fighting you show might work in the context of an unarmored duel-- which is perfectly legit, as there were long swaths in history where that was a real thing. But to add in traditional Japanese swordsmanship, for example, doesn't make much sense. Japanese swordsmanship was developed in a very specific historical and cultural context, and the arts themselves don't make a lot of sense in the above context. Same is true of different schools of CMA. Fighting in a melee against soldiers or bandits (which, realistically, were often the same thing) with horses, armor, military weapons, etc. is something very different. Just grabbing random moves out of an old sword manual doesn't end up with much of historical or practical significance. I don't know what your lineage is or the context it's meant to function in, but I can say that in my opinion it doesn't show much that's relevant to something like Chen taiji. Maybe more relevant to Yang style, or any of the other, later derivatives. I would expect that Xinyi would have more battlefield type sword work. I'm not sure about Xingyi, as I believe that's a later iteration, even though the mother art is quite old.

If you did want to go the unarmored dueling route, squaring off against a skilled opponent with rapier or one of the more modern European sabre arts might prove a stiffer test than someone trying to shoehorn a battlefield art into a dueling format.

Aside from historical context, simply tapping or hitting someone with a sword doesn't mean they're debilitated or are going to stop. People have been known to fight on for quite a while with fatal injuries-- long enough to kill an unwary opponent, for sure.

And, of course, the physics of steel are just different than the physics of wood, plastic, or foam (or some combination of the three).

[MaartenSFS]

Weapons fencing can be done fairly realistically if realism is reflected in the ruleset and the weapons aren't too light.

Depends on what you mean by realism. The kind of sword fighting you show might work in the context of an unarmored duel-- which is perfectly legit, as there were long swaths in history where that was a real thing. But to add in traditional Japanese swordsmanship, for example, doesn't make much sense. Japanese swordsmanship was developed in a very specific historical and cultural context, and the arts themselves don't make a lot of sense in the above context. Same is true of different schools of CMA. Fighting in a melee against soldiers or bandits (which, realistically, were often the same thing) with horses, armor, military weapons, etc. is something very different. Just grabbing random moves out of an old sword manual doesn't end up with much of historical or practical significance. I don't know what your lineage is or the context it's meant to function in, but I can say that in my opinion it doesn't show much that's relevant to something like Chen taiji. Maybe more relevant to Yang style, or any of the other, later derivatives. I would expect that Xinyi would have more battlefield type sword work. I'm not sure about Xingyi, as I believe that's a later iteration, even though the mother art is quite old.

If you did want to go the unarmored dueling route, squaring off against a skilled opponent with rapier or one of the more modern European sabre arts might prove a stiffer test than someone trying to shoehorn a battlefield art into a dueling format.

Aside from historical context, simply tapping or hitting someone with a sword doesn't mean they're debilitated or are going to stop. People have been known to fight on for quite a while with fatal injuries-- long enough to kill an unwary opponent, for sure.

And, of course, the physics of steel are just different than the physics of wood, plastic, or foam (or some combination of the three).

I think that you make some good points. There is no way to make any martial art sparring or fencing completely realistic. I try to get as close as I can. The swordsmanship that my Master taught me is indeed not related to Taijiquan. Since my Master learned from so many masters, there is no exact lineage, but the unarmed styles that seemed to have influenced his fighting the most are Baguazhang, Xinyiliuhequan and Tongbeiquan. As I'm sure that you know, weapons were often styles of their own, not associated with any particular unarmed style. The unique thing about what my Master taught me is that it is a functioning weapons art with A LOT of depth and nuance that can only be learned by getting your arse kicked every day (not by cobbling it together from books) and power generating methods. His unarmed and weapons arts share most of the same techniques, power generating methods and strategies.

As to the context in which it was meant to be used, that is quite an important detail. When I fence I do so under the assumption that neither I or any of my opponents are wearing any sort of meaningful armour. I train with a real sword as well to ensure that my cuts and thrusts would do damage in reality. I also train against multiple opponents and in teams, when I can get enough people. I agree that not every cut or thrust would have been debilitating, BUT that is why my ruleset punishes trading blows and the goal is to always hit one's opponent without being hit in return. One solid thrust to the face/throat or cut to the head is enough to end a match. Both people can "die". It's about as perfect as its going to get and well worth training. It is impossible to gain any skill in wielding a weapon without fencing. The goal in my fencing matches is to survive the fucking onslaught.

I disagree about the difference between the materials, though. For one-handed swords it is more of an issue, but most of my two-handed swordsmanship can equally apply to a cricket bat. Proper body structure (including edge alignment), proper mechanics including power generation), distancing, timing, strategy etc. are much, much more important than any minor difference in weight, balance or materials. The closer your training weapon is to the real thing, the better, but I trained five hours a day, five days a week for almost a year with a tapered stick with an oblong handle and the first real sword that I picked up was a katana. I instantly and instinctively sliced through the targets better than an Iaidoka that had been doing it for years. When I later picked up my first Dadao it was the same, despite these being vastly different blades.

Using slightly lighter materials means that one can wear less protective equipment and be more mobile. Using steel or synthetic blades that more closely resemble the real thing means that the weapon is more realistic, but it also forces one to wear so much padding that everything slows down and people can't feel the hits. I feel like training with realistic weapons and fencing with slightly lighter training weapons offers a good balance and doesn't break the bank, but I'd love to do some fencing with realistic training weapons at some point as well.

Swordsmanship is not something that is very difficult to understand. Anyone can pick up a sword and be effective. The difference between that person and me is that I do it more methodically and more efficiently and have a lot of fencing experience. I'm a cunning bastard. Still, as in all fights, there is no guaranteed outcome. A lot of people that train swordsmanship but never did any sort of fencing thought that their years of partner drilling would serve them well when they tried fencing me and were proven wrong. Any art without fencing or sparring is not a martial art.

[Finny]

Swordsmanship is not something that is very difficult to understand...

Nothing is very difficult to understand if you make it up yourself.

[MaartenSFS]

Swordsmanship is not something that is very difficult to understand...

Nothing is very difficult to understand if you make it up yourself.

I absolutely agree. One must make the art their own. It may be challenging for those that spend all of their time learning etiquette and worshipping the weapon rather than using it, but getting an arse-kicking is sure to show them the light...

[Finny]

I absolutely agree. One must make the art their own.

. Art? What art? The fine art of wafting foam sticks at each other's legs like 5 year olds?

It may be challenging for those that spend all of their time learning etiquette and worshipping the weapon rather than using it, but getting an arse-kicking is sure to show them the light...

I don't really know what you're talking about, but if that's your definition of an 'arse-kicking' I don't see it showing anyone anything.

[Trick]

Swordsmanship is not something that is very difficult to understand...

Nothing is very difficult to understand if you make it up yourself.

I absolutely agree. One must make the art their own. It may be challenging for those that spend all of their time learning etiquette and worshipping the weapon rather than using it, but getting an arse-kicking is sure to show them the light...

. The secret of steel has always carried with it a mystery. You must learn its riddle, Conan. You must learn its discipline. For no one - no one in this world can you trust. Not men, not women, not beasts..." [Points to sword] "This you can trust./Daddy

[MaartenSFS]

I absolutely agree. One must make the art their own.

. Art? What art? The fine art of wafting foam sticks at each other's legs like 5 year olds?

It may be challenging for those that spend all of their time learning etiquette and worshipping the weapon rather than using it, but getting an arse-kicking is sure to show them the light...

I don't really know what you're talking about, but if that's your definition of an 'arse-kicking' I don't see it showing anyone anything.

The fencing swords that I use are made of fibre glass and would injure or kill someone without a fencing mask. They weigh double as much as shinai.

It's easy to make excuses. I suppose that you also believe that it's possible to learn swimming on dry land.. Anyways, enjoy your game of dress up...