My god that was beautiful :D

Woah, that was almost exactly like you'd imagine fencing masters doing it in the old days. Beautiful exchange!

Nope. You are thinking of rapiers.

+Verithiell Hi, yes I did. The gloves were good, even though they were still prototypes they were promising.

+Ilkka Hartikainen Next time when you see somebody wearing them, please do the hema community a favor and only aim for the fingers xD I am of course joking, but seeing how they are used in a tournament fight, I can't help but think they indeed must be pretty promising.

+Ilkka Hartikainen What gloves do you use and how would you rate them?

??? Yes it is. I was expecting it to be a blurry exchange since you asked, but that is 100% clear. Two cuts to the head followed by an overhead parry, then an afterblow apparently to the leg that resulted in a deduction of points. But anyway, why is it important? Watch the video for what it is as a display of movement, fencing and a realization of the effort put into learning and creating something practical from the remains of a long lost craft.

@@ilkkaouto Thank you for replying, I didn't mean any offense. Just trying to train my eye for discerning quality hits. Thank you for the video! So apparently the first two cuts land, I would've thought them to be successful parries. 🙄🙂

Noticed that too. Best policy if you aren't certain is to cross your flags, "no decision".

+Master Tracker I am happy that you have watched this video with an analytical mind. This fight was in no way easy, the floor was slippery and we both were starting to get quite tired -- Axel had also just fenced his way to the finals of sword and dagger competition as well (earlier on, Axel knocked me out of that). The so called "after blow" at 6:40 is a superior hit within the rules, so it was the right thing to do, but of course the exchange would have been better had Axel parried it. On the other hand, within these rules, I should've hit the head instead of the chest and of course should have parried the subsequent strike. :) Thank you for the comments!

+Ilkka Hartikainen Thank you for your response my friend . " I should have hit the head instead of the chest " - I mean no disrespect , but were you reluctant to do a head strike ? . I have nowhere the experience or expertise which you have Ilkka , but have refrained from a head blow because head armor has its' limitations for protection . Another thing - Have you any experience with the Rondel dagger ? . What is your opinion please on a rondel dagger system in combination with a sword and perhaps a buckler ? My respect and best wishes to you . Your various contributions have a historical significance and are greatly appreciated . Lefty en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rondel_dagger

It's probably partly because of the sporting environment, partly because it's a fight between a top-tier HEMA fighter Axel Pettersson and probably the leading figure in the sidesword world, Ilkka Hartikainen.

Yes I know who they are, but I'm not sure what bearing that has in anything. If anything I'd have thought top tier Hema fighters would be more concerned at not getting double hits, given that in a historical context that was still a lose. But if the point is just to win a competition then you might throw that out of the window.

I'd say the ring is so small that there isn't enough space to cautiously circle around and wait for openings, so it's actually better to just go in. And also, don't you think that the double hits happen exactly because the two are so good at what they do, when one gets a hit, the other is already doing his strike?

I take your point about the size of the ring though.

Well, I see your point, and partially agree with it as I'd personally prefer to see fights that are more cautious and have more of a serious feel to them, but the rules used are such that it shouldn't be thought of as a single duel, but rather a series of duels fought over a few minutes, with the idea that repeated engagements remove the element of luck and chance. This approach, of course, also emphasizes gathering points and makes it easy and appealing to just charge in. However, if you have a system where you win the entire match by winning 1-3 duels without a time limit, you encourage the fighters to do nothing but turtling for ages and ages, until one of them gets bored and charges into a trap. It's a double-edged sword (lol)... I think this type of scoring system is fine for tournaments and competitions, but with these fighters, I'd have preferred to watch something more like an unofficial fight of 5 duels with no time limit or a ring, but a tournament final is all we got :P

Peter Regenyei sideswords.

+NYDA Well it can be unless you know it. I think the question is more about how to present it in a video so that it would be understandable. Something we are working on. :) The scoring system is based on few paragraphs written by Antonio Manciolino in the 16th century, and while this is most likely not the same system they were using it has generally produced the kind of fencing we enjoy to do and watch. The confusing part is probably the fact that, if there are two hits near simultaneously, they both are scored. Head stands for 3 points, leg under the knee for 2 and the rest for 1. If one fencers strikes the head but receives a near simultaneous strike to his or her leg below the knee, he or she only gets one point because the adversary's score is reduced. I hope this clears up some of your confusion.