Fight Smart #3: Analysis Dąbrowski vs Kramarz BHC 2018 Gold

Black Horns Cup 2018, Poznań, Poland.
A gold-medal fight between Łukasz Dąbrowski, Fechtschule Gdańsk, and Konrad Kramarz, Mordschlag Łódź.
For a written commentary go to: / 21003042
If you like what you saw, consider supporting me on Patreon: / sprechfenster
or
like, share and/or comment.
Thanks for watching!

[@TheGeorgianOne]

Somehow I feel Kwiekpol is the real hero of this video :P Well done with the analysis and the video editing, pleasure to watch.

[@Sprechfenster]

Thanks a lot! And yeah - I can't help putting Kwiek wherever I can, since his fights are usually so awesome to watch ;)

[@TheGeorgianOne]

I think it is worth mentioning that the fight took place after a long and exhausting tournament day where both fighters competed in multiple weapon tournaments and had fought substantial amount of battles. This might have impacted the tactical decisions of both fighters and impede the 'explosiveness' of Konrad.

[@Sprechfenster]

Spot on!

[@xiezicong]

I enjoyed the analysis! I'm guessing there's so many doubles in the end because this is Gold, right? I figured otherwise they'd both get DQ'd. While I disapprove of gaming HEMA in general, I think at the highest level it's expected, so I don't hold it against either of them. I'm sure there was better fencing during the pools from both fencers. Can you confirm if that's the case?

[@Sprechfenster]

Yes, you're spot on. Especially Łukasz has a very clean fighting style and regularly scores the lowest number of double hits in tournaments he takes part in. Konrad has a more suicidal approach (in longsword, he is fights much cleaner in the sabre, which is his main weapon). In a fight like this, where two very different styles and high-level opponents meet, periods of doubling are to be expected in competitive environments. In fact, I discussed this very question in a bit more depth in the article accompaying the video, feel free to have a look: www.patreon.com/posts/21003042/

[@ondrejh571]

From 7:40 on I thought "Use the Uberlauffen, Luka!" If he would manage to avoid his hands out of the opponent's cuts and do something like Scheitelhau... but after the battle, everyone is a general.

[@Sprechfenster]

Well, I am sure Łukasz considered this, but in the previous fight between Kramarz and Kwiek (fragments are shown in the vid), Kwiek tried just that and Kramarz was able to dive under Kwiek's counterattacks when he tried to use Ueberlauffen and eventually score a clean hit. I bet that's the reason Łukasz opted for something different. Good observation though!

[@ondrejh571]

My bad - although I watch Falcon's cup unofficial video oftenly (as it's just awesome) and Konrad does this multiple times right there, yet I didn't realise this :D . You're right. And it paid off well for Lukasz.

[@wecysdeava4193]

This may be a bad exa mple of how HISTORICAL martial art goes.We should aware of trying to hit first with tapping or flat cut won't stop someone with anger and really willing to hit you hard.

[@Sprechfenster]

This is true. On the other hand, this is a tournament fight, bound by certain rules, and tournaments are poor simulations of actual violent combat. They can, however, help fencers develop certain skills and qualities that may be helpful in such confrontation. On top of that, note that both of the featured fighters adopt different fencing styles in different contexts and can show a more cautious way of fighting outside of competition.

[@Druid_Ignacy]

@@Sprechfenster the afterblow, or as it is called in Poland, long-double rule is pretty good compromise between quite ridiculous ,,continuous fencing" and much more ridiculous olympic setting. However, as I commented below the past episode, unfortunately in Poland this rule isn't as respected as in other countries, which I claim by watching different tournament fights.

[@Sprechfenster]

@@Druid_Ignacy Well, the opinions vary - many Poles think that the window for the 'long double' is much too long on some Western tournaments. What is certain is that different time for the afterblow encourages different behaviour. When you shorten the time, you emphasise the ability to make a well-controlled and well-prepared (=safe) single attack, whereas longer times promote longer, but somewhat more reckless exchanges, especially when combined with a weighed scoring system, like at Swordfish for instance.

[@Druid_Ignacy]

@@Sprechfenster Yes, exactly - lenght of double window do encourage certain behaviours, but I am suprised by what you're just writing - for me the longer window, the safer fencers are, they make less suicidal attacks, whereas the shorter window, the attacks become much more suicidal. I believe that is easy to notice that foreign fencers care about protecting themselves much more than polish ones (maybe even than slavic ones). Some viewers are pretty suprised that in Poland some judges score a hit, that they were sure was a double. Isn't the ,,long double" rule one of the most important that distinguishes HEMA fight from olympic fencing fight? A fight, in which fencer does not even have to protect himself till he is faster than his opponent?

[@Sprechfenster]

@@Druid_Ignacy Now I am surprised ;) But of course the difference between us may stem from differing definitions of "protection" or "double hit". Let us have a look at three examples: 1) at tournaments with weighed scoring (aka Nordic system), which means most Western events, hitting the opponent in the head while getting hit in the hands is counted as a clean hit for the fencer hitting the head (he gets a point), and the audience also sees it as a perfectly reasonable move - this tactics led Dennis Ljungqvist to victory at Swordfish 2017 (you may see it in an analysis of mine, btw). 2) The same move, that is hitting the head while sacrificing hands, is seen as a double hit at Polish events and considered bad fencing. 3) At Czech and Slovak events using a variant of the Right of Way interpretation would depend on the initiative. If we stop for a second to check what kind of winning strategies those approaches promote, we would see that: 1) the Nordic system is won by either waiting for the opponent to start an attack and then delivering an afterblow while covering the attacked target with a less valued one (e.g. protecting one's head with the hands) (e.g. Ljungqvist, Kool, Wilkie) or attacking with confidence and delivering a flurry of blows to the upper openings (=more valued targets) while protecting the head with the sword and the arms (e.g. Rensen, Fama, Linnard). This makes relying on the afterblow a valid strategy and means that protecting oneself is much less important than striking the opponent to the head or torso, even at the cost of getting hit first. At the same time, it means that one can be more confident while going for the head, which encourages using more spectacular fight book techniques and shortens the time needed for preparation of the attack - both things are very spectator-friendly. It aslo means that combinations (nachschlagen) are much more important than the first strike (vorschlag). 2) the Polish system can be won only by hitting without being hit at all *simultaneuously*. This puts emphasis on preparing the attack so that the opponent is busy doing somethig else when hit - for example, he was fooled by a feint to move the sword away, his sword was immobilised by an attack with opposition, or he was freezed by a surprising attack. Such approach produces fencers who can either make surprising but risky attacks which sometimes work and sometimes end in a double hit, or fencers who are very careful and can attack really cleanly. On the downside, this means that a margin for mistakes is really small, which makes using more spectacular or complicated techniques from the fight books problematic. In effect, fencers tend to focus on rather simple actions, often involving the point, pay much attention to distance-management and tempo, and tend to take longer time for preparation. 3) the Czecho-Slovak system can be won most easily either by attacking (in which case being hit with an afterblow does not matter) or parry-riposting (in which case being hit by a follow-up attack does not matter). This puts emphasis on controlling the initiative, tight defence and very solid first strike (vorschlag). In consequence, the fencers there tend to be light on their feet, dynamic, and usually do not spend much time on preparation. Now, perhaps I was imprecise when I wrote that different judging paradigms encourage different behviours. In fact, the way a particular fencer behaves is first and foremost a matter of his personal as well as his club's fencing culture (that is, what they understand as good fencing) and torunament rulesets usually have little influence on it, at least in the short run. However, the judging system has a big influence on which fencers make it to the finals. You may be interested to read this insightful piece by Martin Fabian: sermiari.sk/on-the-state-of-judging-in-hema-competitions/ If you took time to go through, say, semifinals and finals of a bunch of tournaments using the so-called Nordic system of judging (e.g. Swordfish, Dutch Lions Cup, Fightcamp) and those implementing the so-called Central-European system (e.g. W3, Black Horns Cup, Tyrnhaw) you would easily notice that the Western events are dominated by brave or even reckless fencers who are very confident with compound attacks (=feints and combinations) designed in such a way that they expose less valued targets (usually the legs and arms) to be able to hit more valuable ones (particularly the head) - see this exchange: kzbin.info/www/bejne/d3fJhp6He9GrhbM or the Swordfish 2016 final between Dall'Ollio and Rensen, or this fight: kzbin.info/www/bejne/i6PUkp-QrJh2h7s for particularly clear examples. At the same time, Polish or Slovak events are dominated by fencers who can land a clean hit without being hit simulateously at all. They achieve that either by being brave/reckless and surprising the opponent with risky attacks so that he or she is unable to respond in time (this would be the case of Konrad Kramarz from the above video), or by preparing their attacks very well and performing them safely - here Łukasz reperesented the latter type, but Konrad was able to nullify his efforts, simply because striking a double hit against an attacking fencer is *always* possible. For more convincing examples check out these fights: business.facebook.com/ireneusz.nowak/videos/2375483472493251/ or kzbin.info/www/bejne/bpXLeoR3qdederM or kzbin.info/www/bejne/hXipeKGJaMyci9U