HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ctrbdo@iapa.uucp%mailhost.ecn.uoknor.edu (bryan d oakley)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
Subject: Re: A few questions and observations
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:25:59 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: FAA / Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center

>>>>> Regarding Re: A few questions and observations; norvell@csri.toronto.edu (Theo Norvell) adds:

Theo> By the way, something I learned recently:  The derobement gives you the
Theo> "right of attack", but it is up to you to exercise that right.  If
Theo> you do a derobement from a line, don't just reestablish the line, lunge,
Theo> even if you don't have to.

Yeah, but how many directors do you know that can see a derobement
even when it is followed by an advance or lunge?  It was always a
favorite of mine when fencing neophites who telegraph attacks on the
blade a mile away.  It's been a while since I competed at a national
tournament so I don't know what the prevailing attitudes are, but from
my experience a lot of directors miss it favoring the more obvious
'attack' into your derobement.  Moral victories don't always get you
into the final.
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Instrument Approach Procedures Automation              DOT/FAA/AMI-230
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryan D. Oakley                    ctrbdo%iapa@mailhost.ecn.uoknor.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
From: svoboda@rtsg.mot.com (David Svoboda)
Subject: Re: Cleaning the uncleanable:
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 23:28:29 GMT

In article <1gberfINN3lq@smurf.sti.com> alaric@sti.com (Alaric Tekiahyn) writes:
|In article <10DEC199216242161@rosie.uh.edu>, mece25r@rosie.uh.edu (Palit, Suman) writes:
|] 
|] Anybody out there know how to clean leather gloves

|In a word (OK, three words):
|
|	Try saddle soap.
|
|(Trust me.  I'm a saddler, among other things.)

Good idea.  (Trust me, I'm a leather-clad biker, among other things. :-)

|For the gloves, my recommended technique is:
|	(1)	Put the gloves on.
|	(2)	Wearing the gloves, wash your hands with saddle soap.
|		(Use warm water, but NOT hot.)
|	(3)	Keep the gloves on until they're completely dry.

If you use just saddle soap on soft leather, you will rob the leather
of a lot of it's oils, and it will dry out.  Dry leather in a sweaty
environment will quickly destroy it.  To dress the leather (replace
the oils), use Mink Oil or Neats Foot Oil.  Rub the oil in once the 
leather is dry after cleaning, and let it sit for a day or two.  The 
leather will feel slightly oily to the touch for a short while, but 
not slippery, and the persperation salt will not destroy the leather 
so easily.

Oh, don't use anything with Silicon in it.  That will seal the leather
against water intrusion, but it will also lock in any latent moisture
(like humidity) and the leather will rot most unpleasantly.

			Dave Svoboda
From: jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
Subject: Re: Broadsword fencing - StageFighting (Longish?)
Date: 16 Dec 92 06:10:08 GMT
Reply-To: jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA

alaric@sti.com (Alaric Tekiahyn) writes:
>candidate for Florentine work.  You have made the discovery that many
>really *good* swordsmen make - that after a certain point, a shield
>just becomes an awkward burden.  With the exception of thrown and missile
>weapons, you can parry just about anything with a sword that you can block
>with a shield.

	Please add "spears" to the list of exceptions.  In a melee, spears
are _far_ easier to block with shields.  Of course, florentine fighters are
rarely silly enough to try to fight in a shield-wall...  They're better
working as flankers (also they can then move faster than most shieldsmen).

-- 
To be or not to be = 0xff
-
Randell Jesup, Jack-of-quite-a-few-trades, Commodore Engineering.
{uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!jesup, jesup@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com  BIX: rjesup  
Disclaimer: Nothing I say is anything other than my personal opinion.
From: mish@zariba.macc.wisc.edu (Tom Mish)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
Subject: Re: Left vs Right Handness
Date: 14 Dec 92 22:02:46 GMT
Reply-To: mish@zariba.macc.wisc.edu
Organization: MACC - UW-Madison

In article 15159@rock.concert.net, penfold@rock.concert.net (Patricia A White -- Oxford University Press -- MIS) writes:
>In article <13901@ecs.soton.ac.uk> ajl@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Lewis AJ) writes:
>re: switching hands
>>The only problem is
>>that you need two sets of equipment (expensive), and the bother of changing
>>between bouts if your jackets & britches are handed ones.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Andy
>
>Don't take this the wrong way but...
>Was this a typo or are you serious?  Britches being designed for
>lefties?  Or righties?  C'mon, I thought knickers were knickers (were
>britches were pants). 

Speaking as a Left-Hander, I assure you that there are such things as "handed"
knickers. The "lead" leg can be more protected and most importantly, the pocket 
for stashing your cord when not hooked up is put where you can reach it...

On a more anecdotal note, I once knew a right-hander who, when faced by a left-handed
fencer would switch to fencing left-handedly. This was done on the grounds that
left-handers so rarely faced other left-handers that he was at no disadvantage while
the left-hander was put at a disadvantage. It he was fairly successful at this... :-)

-TM
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
From: scasterg@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stuart M Castergine)
Subject: Re: Broadsword fencing - StageFighting (Longish?)
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 08:23:15 GMT

In article <Bz97HF.GEL@watdragon.uwaterloo.ca> badorion@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (Brian A. Dorion) writes:
>In article <1992Dec14.062209.27721@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> scasterg@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stuart M Castergine) writes:
>>I've been sport fencing for years and years, but only tried SCA
>>broadsword fighting a couple times. And I found one thing horribly
>>frustrating.
>>
>>I am left-handed.
>>
>>The stupid shield.
>>
>>It was on the wrong side.
>>
>ACKKKKKK!!!!!
>
>>Really. I ended up blocking 90 percent of the blows with my sword,
>>while my shield basically just served to deprive me of an arm and
>>obstruct my vision. Ah, how I longed to have a weapon in that hand!
>>
>As a local marshal in the SCA, I have to say that one of my first questions for
>someone interested in trying SCA fighting is to ask; "Are you right handed or
>left?".  A righty fights with his shield on the left arm and a lefty fights 
>with it on his right arm.  A lefty can have quite an advantage in fighting
>a righty who isn't familiar with left handers.  Putting the shield on the   
>correct arm probably would of made things feel more comfortable for you.
>However getting use to carrying and using a shield can take some time.

No, you mis understand, the shield was on the correct arm -- the right
one, weapon in my left hand. the problem was that the other people
have their weapons in their right hands, and most of their blows came
in on my weapons side, meaning I had to do a lot of parries and giving
me less to do with the shield.

>>>
>Florentine can be very effective (especially in Kingdoms with shield size
>restrictions).  It does take quite a bit of skill to use effectively.  It 
>tends to be a very aggressive style, most people learning it have quite 
>a problem with their defense.  
>

I have very good defense (in fencing anyway), and what I appreciated
about the florentine syle was teh greater utility of the off-hand and
the greater visibility.

>I've seen some devastatingly effective left handed sword and shield fighters,
>sword in left hand shield in right.  Their ability to throw shots into a 
>rightee's ribs around a shield can often win them the fight.  It is ammusing
>to watch two left handed fighters fight each other (something not all leftee's
>get practice at).  Suddenly there is shield in the middle of their prime 
>target area and they are not quite sure how to get around it.
>

Happens in fencing, too, but experienced fencers aren't taken in by
it. I'm afraid that once I lost the unfamiliarity advantage, there
wouldn't be much else -- except that the *other* guy's shield is also
on the wrong side (meaning it won't be in the way of my blade). :-)



-- 
scasterg@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu -- Stuart M. Castergine
Fiver: "Oh, Hazel, look! The field! It's covered with blood!"
Hazel: "Don't be silly, it's only the light of the sunset." -- Watership Down
From: jane@soave.swdc.stratus.com (Jane Beckman)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
Subject: Re: fencing or fighting?
Date: 18 Dec 92 01:39:01 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc., San Jose, CA

>    a) How many competitive fencers don't want to see SCA related
>       discussions, 
>
How many ex-fencers are interested in other topics?  I am.

>    b) How many SCA'ists don't want to see competitive fencing related
>       discussion, 

How many ex-SCA fighters are interested in fencing?  Or SCA
fencing?  I am.

>    c) how many want both to continue in the same group.

How many would like to see discussions of kendo or other sword
arts?  How many are interested in stunt fencing?  How many are
interested in live steel work?  I say yes, to all of these.

>... or has all this already been hashed out before I got here?  As for
>my opinion, I would prefer to see two separate groups, such as
>r.s.f.competitive and r.s.f.sca, or some other similar naming scheme.

You obviously missed the charter, which mentioned all kinds of
sword arts.  Although I might like to divide it into 
  rec.sport.competitive.electric.fencing
  rec.sport.all.other.sword.combat.arts

Some of the competitive electric fencing crowd seem to dislike 
those of us who are interested in things other than their
interest.  I, for one, am interested in all aspects, so I
would feel short-changed without the competitive fencers (I
used to be one), but if those of us with other interests
really piss folks off, maybe we should go where we don't annoy
them.

Personally, I believe that if you don't like a topic, it's
easy enough to just add it to your kill file.
--
  Jilara   [jane@swdc.stratus.com]

"The field of pseudo-science hasn't progressed much in ten
years, except to gain access to the net." --from ca.earthquakes
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
From: burdickd@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Dakin Burdick)
Subject: Re: Single Stick
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 17:35:16 GMT

Singlestick, as I recall (without looking at my notes) was essentially
the same as German Schaelger play.  The single sticks were basically
practice swords (wooden) used to practice slashing attacks to the
head, similar to the ones the students at Heidelberg used to get
facial scars.  Theodore Roosevelt lost some of his sight in one
eye during one of his singlestick practice sessions with Gen. 
Leonard Wood.  There's a common book from the 1890s out there.
The author is Allanson-Winn, I believe.  I'll look up the
reference if this conversation continues past my finals!

Dakin
burdickd@silver.ucs.indiana.edu

PS:  Singlestick play also resulted in a lot of bloody heads, from
what I can remember.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
From: fxlof@camelot.acf-lab.alaska.edu (Liam O Forbes)
Subject: Re: New Groups was Re: fencing or fighting?
Reply-To: fxlof@camelot.acf-lab.alaska.edu
Organization: University of Alaska Computer Network
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 19:45:40 GMT

In article <18DEC199213134646@zeus.tamu.edu> wma6617@zeus.tamu.edu (ASHE,  
WILLIAM MONROE) writes:
> To sum up, this group ain't broke, so don't fix it
> Just my 2 cents worth... now with inflation about a penny and some 
> pocket lint
> Bill

Amen to that.  If I ask a question not directed towards a specific  
discussion topic (or maybe then too) I would like answers from a whole  
range of people working with different ideas.  That's how I learn  
something new or how I see where my own ideas may be faulty.  If you start  
breaking it all down, you limit whose ideas are where and so everybody  
loses.  Why cut off one of the best discussion groups I have found on the  
Net. It's not necessary and hey, you might learn something new.
-Liam
From: ben@shark.smartstar.com (Benjamin Ellsworth)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
Subject: Finding Fencing in Santa Barbara area
Keywords: help
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:30:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: smartsta.1992Dec16.183018.25476
Organization: SmartStar/Signal Technology

Hi,

Does anyone have recommendations for a reasonably athletic neophyte in
the Santa Barbara, CA area?

Is there a FAQ for this group?  Failing that, what is the net.wisdom
for someone taking up the sport (things to watch out for, bad habits to
avoid, etc)?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Benjamin Ellsworth                            E-MAIL  ben@smartstar.com
SmartStar Corp.            
120 Cremona Dr.                                   VOICE  (805) 685-8000
Santa Barbara, CA 93117                           FAX    (805) 562-1111
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
                   All possible disclaimers apply.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
From: sabaker@icaen.uiowa.edu (Sarah Anne Baker)
Subject: Re: historical perspective
Organization: Iowa Computer Aided Engineering Network, University of Iowa
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 15:17:36 GMT

penfold@rock.concert.net (Patricia A White -- Oxford University Press -- MIS) writes:

>I got into fencing about a year or two before I got into European
>history but there are some interesting stories out there.

>I had a professor who was intrigued by the duelling clubs that existed
>(and are supposedly reappearing) in Central Europe.  The premise is
>basically the same as fencing but WITHOUT A MASK.  The object is to
>get a scar to prove your manhood and your class background.  My prof
>said the corresponding equivalent was an English school tie... and
>he'd much prefer to wear a tie!

True they are reappearing, I have talked to a couple of people who have
verified it.  One person liked it, liked the thrill of the risk, but
others have considered it unwise.  I think it is mostly the thrill that
draws.

>In 1936, the woman most favored to win the gold medal was a Jew who
>had left Germany for the U.S.  Hitler wanted to prove to the world how
>great his country was and, since he wanted that gold medal to be
>tallied up for Deutschland, this woman fenced for Germany.  She won,
>too.  I believe she then went back to the States.  (Although this
>should be easy to verify in any book w/ Olympic stats, I haven't
>checked it out.  I just thought it was an amusing supposedly-true
>anecdote.)

Yes, I beleive her name was Helen Mayer (i think the last name may be
wrong).  She was a very courageous person.  There is quite a bit of 
information on her if a person were to look.
 

>And with more WWII trivia...  Himmler's protege, Reinhard Heydrich
>(you know, the guy who came up with the Final Solution) was a sabre
>fencer.  He was in a competition one day and was so PO'ed at the
>director's call, he broke his weapon and was disqualified.  (Uh oh,
>did I do something taboo by saying something nice about a director?)

Yeah for the director!

>That's all I can think of off-hand. 

>-Patricia
> penfold@rock.concert.net
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>"Those who know that they are profound strive for clarity.  Those who would
>like to seem profound to the crowd strive for obscurity."  --Nietzsche

Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
From: comptec92024@camins.camosun.bc.ca
Subject: Re: Duelling vs. "Swordfighting" (was: french grips)
Organization: Camosun College
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 09:36:44 GMT

In article <1gm09pINNmjr@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca>, morgan@sitka.triumf.ca (Morgan Burke) writes:
> WARNING:  This post contains a lengthly religious discussion of modern
> versus medieval sword fighting techniques, and is a continuation of the
> discussion of french vs. pistol grips.  If the topic bores you, skip it.
> 
> If you are mildly interested, my main point is that weapons are
> optimized for a specific purpose and period.  Comparisons of
> weapons from different contexts are meaningless and contrived.
> Given that modern fencing weapons are closely related to actual
> duelling swords, the latter would have benefited from modern
> developments such as pistol grips.  Heavy cutting weapons from the
> medieval period, as has been unnecessarily pointed out, would not.
(Stuff deleated)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I like your article and although I do not agree with some of the details I
compleatly agree with your premis that a comparison of the two weapons is
meaningless.This is becouse the weapons were designed to solve different
problems.The sword of war was designed to kill a man in armor and the duelling
sword to kill a man out of armor. The only way we could find out which is
better is to take a large enought sample of combatants and count the bodies
afterwards. This is not likely to happen.

Note: Althought I am happy to see the weight of long swords dropping from the
eight pounds in that article on stagefighting to a mear five pounds here I
would suggest that it still has a little dieting to do to get to the real
figure of about three pounds.

I hope you get your dicusion on dueling and pistol grips.


Mackenzie
From: jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
Subject: Re: fencing or fighting?
Date: 18 Dec 92 03:44:43 GMT
Reply-To: jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup)
Distribution: world
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA

alaric@sti.com (Alaric Tekiahyn) writes:
> I don't see anything stupid about wondering what
>the outcome of an encounter between an Olympic-class fencer and a Kendo
>master, for example, might be.  (If you could come up with a workable set
>of common rules.)

	BTW, such a match has been fought.  A report on it was published in
the Bujin many years ago (some kendoists and fencers practiced in the same
park).  They switched protective headgear (for obvious reasons), and went to
it (sabre fencer, I think).  Pretty even, from the sound of the report.
Both kept getting hit in areas they didn't normally have to defend (on the
elbows of the kendoist, for example).

	I suspect that both walked away from it thinking they had "won".  :-)

-- 
To be or not to be = 0xff
-
Randell Jesup, Jack-of-quite-a-few-trades, Commodore Engineering.
{uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!jesup, jesup@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com  BIX: rjesup  
Disclaimer: Nothing I say is anything other than my personal opinion.
From: ga@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Greg Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
Subject: Re: fencing or fighting?
Keywords: KEYWORDS
Date: 18 Dec 92 17:22:55 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh

Although I'm a "classical" fencer (in a rather loose sense) with no
intention of doing any SCAing, I think it would be detrimental to the
newsgroup to banish SCA articles. It would be great though, if I could
quickly choose which articles to read in any one session (sometimes I
just want non-SCA news) so I'm very much in favour of Mark Kampe's
suggestion namely the adoption of Keywords as follows:

	COMP		competition
	STYLE		style and technique
	TECH		technical/electronic/metalurgical information
	RULES		discussions of rules and recent and proposed changes
	HIST		historical discussions
	EQUIP		equipment reviews and questions
	CLUBS		information about clubs
	SALE		information about equipment for sale or desired
	KENDO		discussions of shinnai/bokken fencing
	SCA		discussions of SCA fencing

So, what's the general concensus?

Greg
-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Anderson				Email : ga@dcs.ed.ac.uk
E.U. Department of Computer Science	Tel   : 031-447 5554
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I do not love thee! yet thy speaking eyes, with their deep, bright, and most expressive blue,
Between me and the midnight heaven arise, oftener than any eyes I ever knew.
                                                     - C.E.S. Norton
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
From: ctrbdo@iapa.uucp%mailhost.ecn.uoknor.edu (bryan d oakley)
Subject: Re: concession, flames, discussion (re: fencing or fighting?)
Organization: FAA / Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 14:29:25 GMT

>>>>> Regarding Re: concession, flames, discussion (re: fencing or fighting?); rgd3729@tamsun.tamu.edu (Greg Dilworth) adds:
In article <1gpg0jINNihv@tamsun.tamu.edu> rgd3729@tamsun.tamu.edu (Greg Dilworth) writes:

Greg> It depends...  Was fencer A's foot ever behind the plane of the strip?
Greg> The fencing strip is to be considered to extend infinitely in all
Greg> directions in which it does not have boundaries (i.e. up).  Thus if
Greg> fencer A's foot ever left the strip (i.e. while it was in the air it
Greg> broke the plane of the rear limit of the strip) the action ends
Greg> IMMEDIATELY.  No attack can be called.  Nothing occurred at all from
Greg> his/her direction after the breaking of the plane.

>  b) Fencer A wins because the attack was valid since both feet
>     were not off the strip.

Greg> This is accurate if the above was not true.  If fencer A never left
Greg> the strip with both feet.  In other words if his/her foot never broke
Greg> the plane, then the attack initiated would land and this person would
Greg> win the bout.

Greg> So, now that you have my interpretation what is the answer to the
Greg> above question and who won the bout?

Greg> Greg

Ah, now there's the rub.  If I remember the discussion at the time,
the question was "what is 'off the strip".  Ie: Is 'off the strip'
when both feet are off, or when both feet are 'not on'.  One argument
says that fencer A was off the strip because his lead foot did indeed
pass beyond the rear limit.  The other argument is that at no time
were both feet off the strip (well, on non-strip territory).

The plot thickens!  I know we're starting to split fine hairs, but
what the hey.



-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Instrument Approach Procedures Automation              DOT/FAA/AMI-230
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryan D. Oakley                    ctrbdo%iapa@mailhost.ecn.uoknor.edu
From: morgan@sitka.triumf.ca (Morgan Burke)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
Subject: Re: A few questions and observations
Date: 18 Dec 1992 21:35:54 GMT
Organization: TRIUMF, Vancouver BC
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: sitka.triumf.ca

In article <1992Dec18.165647.126@rtsg.mot.com>, svoboda@rtsg.mot.com (David Svoboda) writes:
|> No.  My fencing gear is not a weapon in the sense of defense against
|> criminals.
[...]
|> That's because a sabre is not a fighting weapon, it is a fencing weapon.

This reminds me of a case involving one of the fencers at UBC.  She was
an engineering student, which means that she was in occasional danger of
getting "tanked" (tossed in the fountain by a mob of her peers--a common
punishment for transgressions among UBC 'geers).  Sure enough, they
descended on her one day, intending to subdue her and haul her off to 
the fountain.  Unfortunately for them, she happened to be carrying her
fencing bag, from which she produced a sabre and fought (more likely
frightened) them all off.

Of course, I doubt the reason she had practised fencing for the last 10 
years was to prepare for that moment.  :-)

.......................................... Morgan Burke
                                           morgan@sitka.triumf.ca