Some energetic (more or less) sparring exchanges from a training spar (4-5 of them) during the week with Angel Chernaev ( / @angelchernaevhistoric... . Swords used: Sigi Concept, Standart Size Music: RIsk, StudioKolomna
Пікірлер: 23
@jimlikesswords Жыл бұрын
Angel had some lovely thrusts and zwerchhau actions - nice!
@AngelChernaevHistoricalFencing Жыл бұрын
Thanks, I am trying but a lot more work is needed.
@desdicadodog8452 Жыл бұрын
I love your videos :) good on you Angel and Bori!!!!
@noahwick3217 Жыл бұрын
fun sparring! that exchange at 2:16 was really sweet!
@AngelChernaevHistoricalFencing Жыл бұрын
Yes, it was a good one.
@BernasLL Жыл бұрын
Very fun to watch! So good.
@AniLeyo7 ай бұрын
What is the helmet wears that guy on the right side? Its not a standard fencing helmet. Any hint on it?
Those sword feel as light as the wind no ? What are they ?
@sdr3181810 ай бұрын
Nice quality - what camera do you use? 0:13 - Why no Abfechten against Angel? 0:17 - Ignoring Angels cut - without gear you'd have lost an ear. 0:23 - What is this? Reizer? Can't be, you didn't continue, Nehmer? No, because Angel was smart and waited until you ran into his stab. Treffer? Shurely not :D I wholeheartedly return your unfriendly and arrogant advise back, which you even weren't able to rely onto yourself: Go home, fence, get better, read AND understand the treatise of the old masters. God bless you.
@borislavkrustev890610 ай бұрын
You are not qualified to critisize my fencing, thanks. Nikon Z30.
@borislavkrustev890610 ай бұрын
I think you are confused who's who in the video, btw. At 0:13 Angel gets me in the hands after a quick parry. At 0:17 his sword doesn't go anywhere near my head. At 0:23 I deliver a thrust without any danger to myself.
@borislavkrustev890610 ай бұрын
Also, my focus is in Early KdF, so I have no idea what you call abfechten, reizer, or nehmer. Although I don't think those terms pop up in Meyer, either.
@sdr3181810 ай бұрын
@@borislavkrustev8906 since you start left and Angel right in picture it's needless to say who is who, since both of you have different gear. On the last example I mistook you as Angel, there you were correct and I was not. Sorry. My friend, you just confirmed what I said earlier: At 0:13 you got hit by the hand because there was no Abfechten! Let's keep going from here on :) At 0:17 You know english/subjunctive, right? -> Quote/I repeat: "[...]without out gear YOU WOULD HAVE LOST an ear." Maybe just the lack of grammer, syntax, ... which has let you fall into misunderstanding me, getting mad because your (hurt) ego is responding to my comments :/ ...
@sdr3181810 ай бұрын
@@borislavkrustev8906 Nevertheless, the core of basic fencing terms you should know as an athlete to describe what you do, right? Some facts no one can deny: Meyer (in all his books b.t.w.) describes and divides (a "piece"/"Stück") fencing into three parts. Let's take his third book, but the version he still edited himself before it was transformed: -'Zufechten' (mentioned 96 times). - 'Hand[t]arbeit' (mentioned 26 times, including the title of Chap. V, last section before Chap. VI, but(!!!) 11 full pages explaining this principle and dividing it into 28 techniques) and - 'Abfechen' (or Abziehen, Abfechten, zieh ab), which is mentioned 293(!) times in his third book, if you take all the early German and various synonyms together. Three more questions for you: 1. Do you think this most basic and important thing like "Abfechten" (not getting hurt/beaten during and/or near the end of a duel) is so unimportant? 2. Why, brother, would it be mentioned 293 times in his third book if it was not so important and why don't you use it? 3. ... and most importantly, why don't you know it by heart? And to be honest, I accept what you do, everything has its justification and its market, and the "practical execution" will dominate the market (Meyer, Chap. VII), because the egoists/stupids will be wiped away (Bruce Lee, "Paper Tiger") after people neither rely on no professional reading, nor respect the old masters (Meyer, opening speech). I have nothing personal against you. The only thing I consider not fruitful was your way of arguing in a dialogue that had nothing to do with you.