[ Posted by Janka
Fri, 30 Oct 2009 19:56:00 GMT ]
And now for something completely different.
We often talk about a "fight or flight" reaction, but the truth is that instead of either, most people freeze when something sudden and threatening happens. There are a lot of reasons for why they freeze, and a lot of theories about what exactly goes on and why did evolution lead us to something that seems so borked a reaction, too, in case you are interested. This post is about my experiences in teaching people how to stop doing so in a particular situation.
Situation is this. In the computer game EVE Online, players often participate in player-vs-player combat against other players. While obviously not a real threat in the sense of someone actually risking getting injured or killed, it is nevertheless a fairly intense simulation of a threat -- enough to absolutely give you an adrenaline rush. (To be honest, most people who do that combat probably do it for the rush.) Part of that reality is that combat in EVE is far from consensual: you can be attacked without you signing up for player-versus-player action. Part of it is that losses actually hurt and set you back in the game. Part of it is that you more often than not function as a part of the group, and failing to perform is failing your team mates. Part of it is that in EVE, reputation is everything, and so every engagement threatens your status and your very identity as a player.
A lot of people who try player-vs-player combat freeze in their first fights. They learn all the wrong things from the experience: that they "cannot do pvp", "do not like the adrenaline", and "cannot think fast enough under pressure". The last one is true, but it is not a problem - no one can. The first two practically always turn out to be untrue.
For about a year, I ran a "combat rookie class" for players in my in-game organization, aimed at people who had done no or very little combat in the game. My hunch from those classes is that about 9 in 10 people freeze under a new, threatening situation even when the situation is not about life and death. In any case, about 90 percent of people freeze in EVE when shooting starts, and talking to the 1 in 10 that don't, they seemed to have similar experiences from real life. (In a situation actually about life and death, the percentage is probably higher, if not 100 percent.)
However, with very short amount of instruction, 8 out of those 9 perform perfectly adequately in a game fight. With just a couple of engagements behind them they actually start to clearly outperform the hotheads without the tendency to freeze. They also report loving "the rush". (Only about 2 out of 10 will become absolutely brilliant combatants -- but that's a matter for another post.)
How does this happen?
The first bit of instruction is to tell people that with only rare exceptions, everybody freezes. Freezing under threat is not a sign that you cannot deal with adrenaline, it is a sign that you belong to the human race. Some people freeze easier than others, but my guess is that any sane person freezes if the threat is real and sudden enough. Adrenaline is a double-edged sword. It can help you to execute a plan in a clearer, faster, more effective way. It can also completely stop your brain from working and completely remove that plan from your mind. One thing that makes all the difference in which it does for you is breathing.
When surprised and scared, the natural reaction for most people is to draw a sudden breath -- and then hold it. When you hold your breath, your brains get less oxygen, and your heart rate keeps on climbing, and your ability to act sensibly goes down fast. The first thing to do when about to panic is to take a deep breath, and then keep on breathing. Get that oxygen into your brain and muscles, and the adrenaline is much likelier to be your friend instead of your enemy. In games or sports, and in a real life situation where you can do so without anyone dying, it is a good idea to spend some time getting your breathing right before trying to do more. To begin with, count it if you have to: in-2-3-4, hold-2-3-4, out-2-3-4. With experience, the first deep breath will trigger the correct breathing.
The second crucial bit of instruction is that the human mind is simply not able to make up new plans for fast-evolving situations when the adrenaline is already pumping and the damage is coming in. (Not even when the damage is to an interweb spaceship - much less, I assume, when the damage is to your physical body.) We think too slow for that, and adrenaline tends to slower that sort of thinking even further. The people who look like they are thinking fast in a situation are actually simply executing an elaborate set of conditioned reflexes and premeditated rules of thumb.
You cannot take that elaborate set and hope to start executing it yourself without experience. Even if the people would be able to explicate it, which they in the vast majority of cases are not, and you would be able to memorize it, without experience you would not be able to recall it in the situation. You would simply freeze, having too many options.
The way to overcome this is something I call "Your Own Battleplan". I advice people to make a very, very simple plan before a combat operation for to execute in case of an engagement. Maximum three steps, each step consisting of one basic action. (For those in the know, I suggest something like "1) orbit the primary, 2) target the primary, 3) engage scrambler" for rookies in frigates.) When shooting starts, your job is to, first, remember to breath, and second, perform the first step of your battleplan. That's all. Don't even try and think further, to begin with.
Once you get that down, add the second step. Once you get that down, add the third. Once you manage all that in an actual engagament, revise your battleplan. At some point, add an "if this happens, I'll do this, otherwise I'll do that" condition there, see if you can pull that off. Add a get-the-fuck-out maneuver that you execute if you need to GTFO, and then see if you can switch plans from "fight" to "flee" with an adequate trigger. After each engagement, go through what happened, what you did, did it work, could you have been more efficient. Keep on adding rules of thumb and more complications (for those in the know: for example, guns, drones, e-war, transversal, switching ammo, etc -- these are all "complications"). Very soon you will be one of those guys the rookies believe can actually plan in a situation.
That's all there is to it, really. Remember to breath. Make plans beforehand, execute them on reflex. Teach people those two things, and they won't freeze anymore -- that is, until they end up in a new, surprising situation. Or take up a new role. Then, unfortunately, it all starts again. In my experience, the "when frozen, breath" reflex tends to transfer over - from EVE to swordsmanship, say. The battleplan, obviously, needs to be different for each context, and you pretty much need to start from the three-step trivial plan for each new one. (My current EVE one has at least a couple of tens of rules of thumb and if/elses. My fencing one is "when confused, attack". I am working up to "when confused, close the line and attack". Yay for complicated...)
So, why do these folks outperform the 1 in 10 who does not freeze? Because the people who freeze know on a very profound gut level that they have to think beforehand, or it will all be screwed. The people who do not freeze often believe that they can think in the situation, so they do not make simple plans. Instead they either execute the first thing that pops into their mind in a situation, or try to memorize complex battleplans and in the adrenaline rush get them wrong. Often they do this repeatedly, without accepting the fact that what they are doing is simply not working. They feel it "should have worked" and that "next time, they'll try something else". But when next time comes, the adrenaline again kicks in, and they cannot figure out what the "something else" should be, and either repeat the same stupid thing, or do another stupid thing.
How much of this would transfer to a situation of real life physical violence? I have no idea, and I hope I will never find out.
Posted in Plain English | Tags EVE online, training | 14 comments
[ Posted by Janka
Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:42:53 GMT ]
Roger Kay has put together Swanger and Wilson's translation and good quality copies of the original pictures into an absolutely stunning PDF.
This plate describes how to strike someone by ducking under their sword. He lists five ways, but basically it's just blah-de-blah for "get him to move and while you know where he is, duck low and strike him under the arm". The "get him to move" part varies, but in the end even that boils down to "show him an attack". So basically all this plate says is "hey, did you notice that if you duck low enough you can also strike under the sword, as long as you do it while he makes time for it by moving". Then again low actions were never my favorite so maybe I miss some crucial nuance.
Why this works, I suppose, is partially because the opponent is expecting a particular type of blade contact, and when it does not come, there is an ever so tiny wtf moment - long enough for you to pass his point.
I figured I'd put in some more words, anyway.
There are various ways to strike the opponent under his sword.
1) Beginning in terza, feint to a high quarta, keeping your point towards his left shoulder. If he comes forward to cover your sword in an oblique line, turn your hand into seconda while he is moving, and bend down and lower your body to strike him in the chest (as shown). You need to strike him during his movement.
2) If you are stingered on the outside, disengage and feint in quarta towards his face. If he tries to parry, turn your hand and duck and strike as above.
3) If you are stingered on the inside, you can disengage with a feint in terza to the face. If he tries to parry, you can turn to seconda, and again bending down strike him under his sword.
4) If you have him stringered on the inside, and he disengages to thrust, you can strike him in two ways. First, you can strike while he is approaching if you lower your body and keep your sword in terza. Also you can parry in terza with the point high and turn into seconda to strike(1).
5) If you have him stringered on the outside and he disengages to strike, you can similarly duck and strike him in terza under his sword.
(1) With slightly different terminology: parry in a low seconda and go to the high line to attack. Disregard that, it does not make sense. Thanks Topi.
Posted in Plain English | Tags paraphrasing Capo Ferro | 4 comments
[ Posted by Janka
Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:47:59 GMT ]
I am back at classes, which is great.
Plates 9 and 10 describe two actions where one party disengages to feint and then strikes when the other party "comes confidently forward". First is done with a thrust, second with a cut. Both include some fancy-ish foot and blade work, but don't let that deceive you: the point is not in what steps you take exactly or whether you parry with a cut or whatever, it is in feinting so that you can see where they are going and then either stopping them or not being there anymore, or both.
I think of a feint this way: every feint is a beginning of an attack. When you feint, your objective is to draw a defensive action from your opponent to a particular line, so that during that action you can attack on some other line instead. The point of "holding the body back a bit" is not to avoid making the feint a real attack - the point is merely to delay just a bit so that you can establish where exactly it is safe to attack. If they give you the defensive action, you divert to another line and attack. If they don't do anything, you just attack. In any case, you feint in order to attack. A feint is not a false attack, it is a delayed one.
There, that was pure JW. Now onwards to what CF has to say about these plates:
In this figure we see one party striking with a pass forward while the other party disengages to attack.
D has gained C's sword on the inside. C disengages to strike D in the face with a thrust. D turns to seconda and strikes, passing forward and placing his hand on the hilt of C's sword (shown) to further control it.
Had C been a sharper person, he would have disengaged and attacked with a feint, holding his body back a bit. When D then comes forward, confident that he can strike in seconda, C will disengage back under D's sword, and crossing his legs turn his body 90 degrees away from the line(1), striking D in the chest.
This picture shows a strike in quarta under the right arm in the chest, while the enemy disengages to strike.
Again, D has gained C's sword on the inside. C disengages to strike D with a descending cut to D's right side. During the turn to cut, D strikes in quarta, hitting C in the chest under his sword arm. D must take care to raise his hilt high enough and he must go forward, as shown.
Had C been a sharper person, instead of going for the riverso cut, he would have drawn his sword back as if to cut, and kept back a bit, lifting his sword so that the point faces towards D's left side. When D then comes forward in quarta, C would parry that with a half mandritto(2), and then attacked with a riverso to the face or a thrust to the chest(3).
(1) What we technically call a scanzo.
(2) Descending cut from your left to your right (his right to his left), this time done against the sword, and stopped before you go all the way down.
(3) Personally I find the idea of turning into a riverso if that parry succeeds a completely borked one - you have a clear open line for a very quick trust. But I guess technically if you like cuts you can do it.
Posted in Plain English | Tags paraphrasing Capo Ferro | no comments
[ Posted by Janka
Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:22:56 GMT ]
Yes yes, slacking off. I had a minor operation on Friday and being forbidden from playing PIRATE (how awesome is that?) at the salle and from doing anything else remotely resembling physical work for several days, I was cranky and had not much patience for reading about fun stuff either.
I was more or less painless this morning, so I did a couple of pushups and stuff. Now I am painless again after increasing my painkiller dosage and see if I won't be in class tomorrow.
Notice the blood in the pictures, it is quite nicely drawn.
This and the following pictures will show some ways of striking on the outside. We will always start from a situation where one guy stringeres(1) on the inside, and the other one disengages to strike.
For example in this first picture, D(2) has stringered on the inside. C has then disengaged in order to thrust D in the chest. D then strikes him with a counterattack thrust to the left eye (shown).
Had C been a sharper person, he would have disengaged to a feint, holding his body back a bit(3). When D then comes forward, confident that he can strike, C can easily parry the thrust to his outside and attack.
C can parry with false edge or true edge, and he can attack with a mandritto cut or a thrust. Retiring afterwards in low quarta, all these are safe.
This figure demonstrates how much reach you lose if you attack the legs.
Again, here, D has gained C's sword. C tries to respond by disengaging and turning a riverso cut to D's leg. D is obviously able to attack him during the turn of the cut, either to the arm or to his face (both shown), but this is not really the point here. The point is that, as demonstrated in the figure, D is actually able to strike C without coming forward and even pulling his right leg back, because C has to lean so far forward to strike.
Had C been a sharper person(4), instead of the leg he would have directed that riverso to the face of D, and then followed it with a rising mandritto, which would have been quite safe.
(1) I seriously need a word for stringere that is actual English and implies what it should imply.
(2) If you wonder why not "A" and "B", this seems to be because he tries to use letters that correspond to the starting positions of the figures as labeled on plates 2-4.
(3) I take this to mean, "until he sees what D will do".
(4) Yup, he will say that a lot. "Sharp" is my pun, as far as I know not in the original. Translations use "shrewd" or "clever".
Posted in Plain English | Tags paraphrasing Capo Ferro | no comments
[ Posted by Janka
Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:53:00 GMT ]
Look at the pretty picture!
This is actually a pretty long chapter, but as far as I can figure out he basically simply only says what I have rendered below, with ever so much more words. But I don't think most of this is actually rocket science, it's simply about maintaining the straight line of the sword as closely as possible and realizing that stringere works also vertically, not just horizontally.
Basically it seems that there's two ways to get closer to the opponent [on the inside(1)]. First with gaining the sword, in order to change the timing to your advantage while getting to measure. Second, simply getting to a striking distance of their body. These both work when on the straight line, but apply to two different situations.
When the adversary is in quarta in an oblique line, that is, their point towards your left side, and you are on their outside, you can easily disengage, stepping forward, and gain their sword on the inside on a straight line (see picture).
When the adversary is on the straight line, or his body is uncovered(2), it is enough to draw close without actually gaining the sword, keeping on the straight line, and then you can proceed to "strike according to their point".
To strike according to their point means simply this. Whenever their point is in your presence, you can safely strike them on the straight line, as long as you take about a palm's width of their debole against your forte. To achieve this on the straight line, you need to strike high if their point is high, and strike low, if their point is low(3).
The same principle of being safe as long as you have their debole to your forte also applies to disengaging. Whenever you disengage, the first thing you do after that should be to bring your forte to their debole. Some idiots, even masters, disengage to immediately strike, which brings their debole to the adversary's forte, which means they usually lose.
(1) Inside is implied by the topic. I can't see any reason why the same idea would not work from outside too, but I can't be arsed to think it through right now.
(2) I take this to mean "their point is off the target".
(3) It is easier maybe to understand this if you think of stringere as being above their sword, not "pushing it to the side".
Posted in Plain English | Tags paraphrasing Capo Ferro | no comments
[ Posted by Janka
Wed, 21 Oct 2009 12:28:06 GMT ]
Well, this one's an easy one, just a picture and some numberings.
I am actually using more words here than CF, which is the first.
This picture shows how to achieve the incredible length of the longest possible strike, showing which part of your body needs to be moved where.
Letters A to G show where the body was when on guard, the man in the picture and letters H through M show the body parts' advancing forward.
A is the location of the left shoulder on guard.
B is the location of the left knee on guard.
C is where the left foot is planted on guard.
The line D is the space between the feet when on guard, ending in E, which is where your right foot should be.
F shows the line your right leg should make.
G is where you should have your right hand.
Moving to strike:
Right hand moves to H, almost a full arm's length forward.
Right knee moves to I, almost a full length of the pace when on guard.
The space between the legs is increased by a little over than a foot, moving the right foot to K
The left foot turns to give a bit more length, designated as L(*).
The left knee moves to M, about a half-a-pace forward.
(*) You need to look really closely, but there is a letter L on the top of his left foot.
Posted in Plain English | Tags paraphrasing Capo Ferro | no comments
[ Posted by Janka
Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:51:14 GMT ]
The relevant pictures.
Note the figures are not in alphabetical order (probably because the author has wanted them to be facing each other in a remotely realistic manner), so you need to actually look at the little letters by them.
There are two positions depicted (the fifth and the sixth) that are not mentioned in the definitions. The translators' theory is that they depict "guards involving an auxiliary arm where the sword is low", but what strikes me most in the pictures is not the sword being low but being pulled back, the elbow of the sword arm practically touching the side of the body.
Another thing that strikes me as interesting here is the hand position in his third position, which looks to me almost a low seconda, and definitely is placed outside of the knee and not at all at the middle of the body like he suggested to be the best idea before.
Just like you need letters to write a beautiful composition, you need defined positions and movements of the body to fence. Therefore, here's six figures that show the basic positions.
A = first position (prima), B = second (seconda), C = third (terza), D = fourth (quarta), E = fifth (quinta), F = sixth (sesta)(*)
(*) You would think that it would actually have been easier to simply number the pictures.
Posted in Plain English | Tags paraphrasing Capo Ferro | no comments
[ Posted by Janka
Mon, 19 Oct 2009 10:16:08 GMT ]
He actually talks about how to draw the sword rather than about the grip as you might expect from the topic.
And yes, I have been sadly slacking off and playing with interweb spaceships when I should have been doing push-ups and writing about CF. Sue me. Interweb spaceships are about as useful for me as 17th C Italian fencing, all things considered.
Relevant picture is there. I might bother putting pictures here too properly at some point. Don't hold your breath.
Because customs differ, and sometimes are not respected much at all, it is useful to know how to draw the sword safely.
If you find yourself the right leg forward when you wish to draw, draw back said leg while pulling the sword into high prima.
If you find yourself left leg forward, you can draw the sword without changing pace.(1)
If you then wish to use a cape or a dagger in the other hand, step forward or pull your left leg back (depending on the range), going into quarta. Then you can easily keep them away from you while you wind your cape around your arm or draw the dagger.
There, I can't think of anything else to say about that.
(1) I find this bizarre; why would you prefer to place yourself left leg forward after drawing? This sentence is not very clear, and it is remotely possible that he means that if you start left leg forward, you should still draw the same way, and will have the advantage of ending right leg forward. However, the previous one seems crystal clear and he very clearly says to pull the right leg back. The next sentence also suggests that yes, you start with right leg back. So meh. Luckily I will in all likelihood never need to draw under threat, so who the hell cares.
Posted in Plain English | Tags paraphrasing Capo Ferro | no comments
[ Posted by Janka
Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:38:25 GMT ]
I admit to cheating here: I asked Guy to pick up a sword and read some of the following paragraphs out loud to me, while doing the appropriate motions. Many thanks also to Rami for kindly standing still and being repeatedly stabbed in the most technical and scholarly manner.
I find myself quite in the agreement with CF when (ok, if) he says that we don't need quite so many technical terms.
Guy also said something yesterday that means I should go through all of the previous entries, looking for words "wide" and "narrow", and see if a certain interpretation makes sense. I am not going to, not on this read-through - I have research I am actually paid for to do.
This is the final part of this chapter; tomorrow, my friends, we move on to some pictures.
15) Of striking. There's two kind of strikes: cuts, and thrusts.
I will first describe the types of cuts. There's four types of thrusts but I'll come to it later.
Cuts can begin from either your left or your right. Cuts that begin from the right are called mandritto, those that come from the left are called riverso.
We further divide true-edge cuts based on the direction of the cut.
The ordinary cut is a descending one, cutting in an oblique line from the adversary's shoulder (left for the mandritto, right for riverso) to the opposite knee.
Fendente is a descending vertical cut (in a straight line from up to down).
Tondo is horizontal (right to left, or left to right).
Mondante is an ascending oblique cut, starting low and exiting at the shoulder.
As additional terms, stramazzone is a cut done from the wrist, wheeling the sword around, and ridoppio is when you knock down the enemy's sword with a mandritto, and then go for their body with another.
Other than the stramazzone, these cuts should be done from the elbow, and if time and measure permit, even from the shoulder.
Falso is a cut with your false egde. You can do these against the enemy's sword, in order to parry, falso dritto when you brush it toward his right (to the outside), falso manco when you brush it towards his left. However, I do not recommend the falso dritto parry, because it makes you unable to thrust; it is better to parry with the true edge on that side, in quarta. (From a falso manco parry you can both cut and thrust, so it is ok.) When you parry with a falso, you parry with the debole, but when you parry with the true edge, you parry with the forte; this is crucial.
16) Of the cut(1). Cuts must slice, so that you use the full length of the debole, including the sharpest part of the sword. You must also go as far across his body as measure permits, instead of stopping half-way, so the cut does maximum damage.
17) Of the thrust. There are three types of thrusts.
Imbroccata comes from the prima, with the false edge down, goes in at the adversary's left shoulder down towards his right knee. You turn the true edge down in the middle of it, but only after the point lands and you need to turn the hand in order to bring it down.
Stoccata strikes on the line from from terza towards his right shoulder(2).
Punta riversa is when you start from quarta, but strike from outside of his arm, turning your hand inside so that you arrive to his breast going upwards, and end in a low guard.(3)
(1) Yes, indeed, after all the previous this is the chapter on cutting.
(2) I render this "on the line of", despite the translation saying it starts from terza; I do not think it matters much if you are in terza or seconda to begin with, what matters is the line.
(3) Which actually makes it sounds like the only actual difference between stoccata and punta riversa is whether you come in inside or outside... which again supports the idea that who the ever hell needs all these technical terms if you have the concepts of line and tempo.
Posted in Plain English | Tags paraphrasing Capo Ferro | no comments
[ Posted by Janka
Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:02:07 GMT ]
Just saw the trailer to Walt Disney's new version of Dickens's "A Christmas Carol".
Said trailer seems to consist mostly of falling, running, chases, explosions, and hitting people on the head with ghostly things, spiced here and there with abrupt glowing eyes, yells of terror, and witty one-liners.
Words fail me, so I will resort to the short and explosive expression of the new entertainment too: FFS. I'll just re-read the book.
Posted in Plain English | Tags elokuvat, yhteiskunta | 1 comment
