I mean, that's the first test, so 🤷🏻‍♂

Thanks! I'm glad it helps!!

How is the HEMA going today a year later?

Two years later you still training?

Two years later you still training?

Thanks a lot , I'm glad it helps!!

About the pronouncation..... Nicht mal deutsche können so sprechen.😂

I'm happy you find them helpful! It's taking me a bit of time, but more vids are being planned. Expect a bunch later this year!

I'm glad it helps!

I'm glad it helps!

Thanks a lot!

Thanks!!

Thanks! I will!

Thanks! I'm glad it helps!

Thanks!!

I'm glad it helps!

Thanks! I'm glad it helps!

Dank!

You mean like explained at 4:08?

So similar. Only in our school we had to make sure, that we didn't move our right wrist down too far when we strike an Oberhau into the plowguard. We called this mistake the "broken wrist position.“ In the final position after the Oberhau, the angle of the wrist in relation to the forearm should not be more than max. 45 degrees. Pay attention to the position of the right wrist in the plow or long point. The wrist is never stretched too far forward. (It's only a minor thing, but your wrist will thank you in a long run)

Thanks!

You totally could! Then again; the second half of the pattern is basically from the 'left handed' perspective, so you'll be practising that anyways. (Personally I love training patterns like this with both hands, anyways, not just to get good with both hands, but to learn and see a fight in terms of lines, angles and principles...)

@@MauriceBooij Ah, of course, that's a great point, thank you!

Certainly! The principle of cutting around a defense remains the same, whenever it is a good idea to do so :)

Welcome to the very verbose world of 16th century 'Early New High German' 😄

@@MauriceBooij 😅

Longish answer: Defense is a major reason, indeed. And impact is a second thing to keep in mind. Going for a quick little nick with the short edge might not even have too much effect against someone wearing a linnen shirt, without pulling back a decent distance to work up some speed. 'Touching' is not the same as attacking (these are, after all, not lightsabers). But defense is the most important reason, in my mind: Coming in with a Streichen (the rising short edge cut) does not close off even the most direct line of potential attack; it puts nothing in between the idle blade of the opponent and your own body, basically offering up your head. So one might get a little nick in, but presenting a large vulnerable opening to a still largely unscathed opponent while doing so is no desirable trade off. It is not a weird thought, though. I have seen many newer fencers have the same tendency to prioritize speed and going for any opening they think they observe to be open, rather than prioritizing their safety through -for instance- positioning and keeping steel in between the source of danger and their own body. So often, in fact, that I've started calling it the Damocles Problem: many newer people often get so lost in the game of 'sword tag' trying to go for lower openings without using the necessary precautions, that they forget there is often literally a sword hanging above them, ready to come down. This is a huge cause of many preventable double hits and afterblows. I think Meyer's Four Opening's Drill is a great way to instill the 'best practise' of closing off the most obvious line of attack, while doing your thing. Gear can be a hinderance in the beginning, but you'll be amazed at how much one can get accustomed to it. If a gear problem persists (and it can't be fixed by adjusting distance and posture, which often goes a loooong way) then of course shopping around for gear that gets in the way a bit less is always a possible next step.

It is mostly because of the angle that it creates, creating a more useful line of attack, and with the blade covering the centre line; protecting the body that stays outside. In actual fights, this sideward footwork can become rather small, but since it's something we don't do on a daily basis (we walk in straight lines, usually), it pays to train it in exaggerated forms.

That's a different thing, so it gets a different drill. Though: the aim of the cuts in this cutting drill, as designed by Meyer in the 16th century, is to close off the opposing line of attack with your secondary strike. So as long as you do make sure that the line of attack gets closed properly with your own offensive actions, you can definitely incorporate thrusts. In fact; any time you find yourself slightly out of range; using the cutting motion to close off the line does perfectly set up a thrust with opposition.

What would you like to know?

@@MauriceBooij what’s the difference? Does it refer to which edge you’re striking with?

@@rackety7797 Exactly! The original medieval German sources tend to refer to the edges as the long edge and the short edge, but in modern English also the phrases 'true' and 'false' edge are used. The Long/True edge is the edge on the side of your fingers, if you were to stretch out your hand. The Short/False edge is the edge near your thumb/wrist. So any simple descending cut, for instance, will be done with a long edge strike. A useful mnemonic: In curved blades, such as sabres, this inside curve is indeed shorter than the outside curve.

@@MauriceBooij thank you! That’s what I was thinking I just wanted confirmation

If you have trouble remembering which is which, pretend your longsword is a pirate scimitar, a saber, a katana, or some other curved blade.

Thanks! Living next door to Germany helps 😁

Indeed! But Joachim Meyer has his own personal definitions of those strikes, that are not necessarily the same as in other, earlier manuals. Hence the choice in this video to use the generic terms, as used in manuscripts for roughly 100 years before Meyer started doing his own thing; to keep it simple for a broad audience :)

@@MauriceBooij thank you for the explanation im mostly familiar with meyers book so it hit my eye

Start outwards. 1, 2, 3, 4. Then next row inwards. 1, 2, 3, 4. Just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean it's useless.