Makashi: Dulon

[Darth Nonymous]

Ok saberites! Here is our latest video in the Makashi formula. I hope you like it!

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYeXaSOJUA0" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYeXaSOJUA0</a>

[Hake Felflame]

It's not quite what I was expecting when thinking Makashi. You go with a lot of movement and circular motion away from the front of the body, which looks like it wouldn't fit within a saber-on-saber dueling style. What led you to interpret it this way?

[Darth Nonymous]

It's not quite what I was expecting when thinking Makashi. You go with a lot of movement and circular motion away from the front of the body, which looks like it wouldn't fit within a saber-on-saber dueling style. What led you to interpret it this way?

Other than the Full moon parries, when did it go off my center line? And you must use circular motion with a saber, being the type of machine it is.

Interesting that it looks so circular to you. These are the very techniques that come from the previous video. What were you expecting?

[Bazzard]

I think a lot of us (myself included, admittedly) are still kind of stuck looking at it from a "Makashi = Western Fencing" mentality.  Which is interesting, since when you break it down like you did in the earlier videos, the actual techniques are pretty similar; it's just that Eastern swordplay styles tend to look a little more......I dunno, 'dressed up'......when performing them.

That being said, I think a straight-up fencing-based Makashi dulon would look rather static by comparison.  I quite like your take on it, and have been trying to incorporate it into my own practice.

[Master Uilos]

I like it, in that it does beak away from European Fencing and adds a new concept. You've helped me see something I'd theorized about for a long time

[Darth Nonymous]

I think a lot of us (myself included, admittedly) are still kind of stuck looking at it from a "Makashi = Western Fencing" mentality.  Which is interesting, since when you break it down like you did in the earlier videos, the actual techniques are pretty similar; it's just that Eastern swordplay styles tend to look a little more......I dunno, 'dressed up'......when performing them.

That being said, I think a straight-up fencing-based Makashi dulon would look rather static by comparison.  I quite like your take on it, and have been trying to incorporate it into my own practice.

Yes, I would say that seems to be the case. I also think that many  don't know the difference between sport and historical fencing in WMA. They think of the rigid linear game played on the strip.

The reason Chinese forms tend to look more elaborate it is because they are. One of the things we do in forms is replicate the feeling of a fight. Perform moves in  along string with little to no break. In order to increase the feeling and fatigue to be close to real combat, some moves are done in large arcs or travel a long distance, to practice "hitting the line". That is where you have been brought off the line of attack by your opponent and need to return. Folks forget that in combat, the field is 3D and you opponent will not stay in front of you.

The differences are superficial. VorNach can attest there is no technical difference in the two uses of the sword. Hopefully Nero will chime in on this as well. It is the similarities that make this stuff possible. A single handed blade style isnot going to be apprciably different from another. If they are legitimate.

I understand that I might have overturned some apple carts as far as what Makashi dulon looks like. The basics will probably make more sense to people.

I like it, in that it does beak away from European Fencing and adds a new concept. You've helped me see something I'd theorized about for a long time

I am glad. It's good to know I pass the mustard. I would be curious to hear what you saw.

[Master Nero Attoru]

I have to say that I was quite mesmerized by this.  I recognized quite a few maneuvers which could easily fall under a western fencing style of swordsmanship, but these bits were tied together by the flowing elegance of Chinese martial arts.  Very nice!

It's not quite what I was expecting when thinking Makashi. You go with a lot of movement and circular motion away from the front of the body, which looks like it wouldn't fit within a saber-on-saber dueling style. What led you to interpret it this way?

It's a kind of consequence of his particular background, which is different stylistically from a fencing mentality.  However, if you look closely you can see MANY parallels, and the same basic concepts being addressed.  For instance, watch the overall movement - for the most part he retains the linear movement mentioned in the intro, only changing direction to address a different threat.  This is actually an important skill, in the event that the opponent passes you and strikes from the other side.  That kind of thing isn't seen much in sport fencing, since the action halts once the opponent passes.

The Form certainly looks a bit different when you look at my style, but I can see that the core of it is the same.  If you can pick out the function behind the techniques I think you'll see the same.  This kind of relationship is something I've just gotten used to seeing when going from fencing to various other martial arts - different look, same purpose.

[Darth Nonymous]

Thank you Master Nero! Obviously, this Makashi stuff is something you will have a great deal of experience with. And I am pleased that it caught your eye. It does present much differently than most would expect.

It's a kind of consequence of his particular background, which is different stylistically from a fencing mentality.  However, if you look closely you can see MANY parallels, and the same basic concepts being addressed.  For instance, watch the overall movement - for the most part he retains the linear movement mentioned in the intro, only changing direction to address a different threat.  This is actually an important skill, in the event that the opponent passes you and strikes from the other side.  That kind of thing isn't seen much in sport fencing, since the action halts once the opponent passes.

This is an important observation. Many combat based sports stop the game when a certain position of advantage is reached to keep it all moving and level the playing filed. This is where I bring up historical fencing as opposed to Olympic. In an unrestricted environment, the possibility that your opponent will pass you, knock you weapon off the line, or other wise set you up is much greater.

Also, even in sport fencing, the value of a quick recover is very high.

The Form certainly looks a bit different when you look at my style, but I can see that the core of it is the same.  If you can pick out the function behind the techniques I think you'll see the same.  This kind of relationship is something I've just gotten used to seeing when going from fencing to various other martial arts - different look, same purpose.

Very astute and concise explanation. Point! I would also put forward that my large frame and long limbs will tend to make certain moves look different than others.

[Master Nero Attoru]

Thank you Master Nero! Obviously, this Makashi stuff is something you will have a great deal of experience with. And I am pleased that it caught your eye. It does present much differently than most would expect.  

This is an important observation. Many combat based sports stop the game when a certain position of advantage is reached to keep it all moving and level the playing filed. This is where I bring up historical fencing as opposed to Olympic. In an unrestricted environment, the possibility that your opponent will pass you, knock you weapon off the line, or other wise set you up is much greater.

Also, even in sport fencing, the value of a quick recover is very high.
Very astute and concise explanation. Point! I would also put forward that my large frame and long limbs will tend to make certain moves look different than others.

I'm glad we're on the same page with this, because I think we're definitely taking the same path (even if we're using different footwork to get there lol)

I'll just add that there's a point behind the linear nature of the Form, and that's because this Form is built around a one on one, dueling confrontation.  Other styles like Soresu are supposed to take multiple opponents into account, especially blaster wielding ones, so you need the three dimensional capacity.  Makashi, however, is all blade on blade combat... which is why you see Dooku running like a sissy when the blaster fire breaks out lol

My point of view is one of balance - each Form has strengths and weaknesses, and when one door closes another opens.  Soresu is more versatile, but lacks the focused punch that Makashi provides.  Likewise, in its focused dueling approach Makashi foregoes effiectivness versus ranged attacks and multiple opponents.  The latter can be dealt with to a certain extent, but it does take a great deal of skill and maneuvering.

[Veldryne]

I must have watched it 10 times already, its very interesting, and i cant wait to work on some of the concepts and add it to my soresu base, getting away from the two handed shii cho, points for DN as usual.

[Darth Nonymous]

I'm glad we're on the same page with this, because I think we're definitely taking the same path (even if we're using different footwork to get there lol)

I'll just add that there's a point behind the linear nature of the Form, and that's because this Form is built around a one on one, dueling confrontation.  Other styles like Soresu are supposed to take multiple opponents into account, especially blaster wielding ones, so you need the three dimensional capacity.  Makashi, however, is all blade on blade combat... which is why you see Dooku running like a sissy when the blaster fire breaks out lol

My point of view is one of balance - each Form has strengths and weaknesses, and when one door closes another opens.  Soresu is more versatile, but lacks the focused punch that Makashi provides.  Likewise, in its focused dueling approach Makashi foregoes effiectivness versus ranged attacks and multiple opponents.  The latter can be dealt with to a certain extent, but it does take a great deal of skill and maneuvering.

Absolutely! This is where the rubber meets the road.

The fact that this style is based mostly or solely on fighting other sabers, the angular nature of it and the quickness is going to be a direct result of the weapon it' self. In this way, a clearer description of the multiple opponents thing is that Makashi can really only engage one opponent at a time. That means you can fight multiple opponents but you only attack and engage with one of them. This is where the small circles, changes or direction, and pivots come in to play.

You can also grab a second weapon ala, Ventress.

[Master Nero Attoru]

Also, I hope you don't mind if I repost your Shiim video here:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zWa16XYFew" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zWa16XYFew</a>

When your intro mentioned it I was tempted to revisit this one, and I feel that it's a VERY good guide to Makashi strikes.  These small and precise movements are where Makashi gets its effectiveness, so they should make up a good percentage of your attacks.  Smaller is quicker and allows for more precision, not to mention it enables you to set up more complex maneuvers using feints... and deception is a powerful ally in this Form.

[Darth Nonymous]

Nero, I am so stoked to finally get to sit down and jab in real time with you. You definitely have the mind for comparative martial arts. The Symposium I predict will be great!

And yes, the Shiim strike is definitely the preferred strike. It is Shiim that get changed into Shiak for a thrust. Staying with the Makashi idea of straight line attack, keeping the blade or lit somewhere on your center requires this type of movement.

Nice catch!

[Darth Nonymous]

Just to stoke the fires of debate for this weeks TPLA Live, Makashi mayhem, Here are som eof the other Master's showing their interpretations.
First up: Master Kane:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SS3Tkvgaus" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SS3Tkvgaus</a>

Master Attoru:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmEB3whKCFU" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmEB3whKCFU</a>

Dual Wield:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHXTmpj3l4U" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHXTmpj3l4U</a>

How about some combat: w/ Master Vindyl

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk8vsCD79hc" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk8vsCD79hc</a>

With VorNach:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCTlcnsZtHU" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCTlcnsZtHU</a>

Discuss!

[Thonolan]

Stoke the Fires indeed.

I see a lot of similarities between your Dulon and the free form videos of the other masters. Point of line and defensive preparedness, attack motions and foward arcs along the line as well.

The way the motions are controlled and the angle of it are different. Which is (to what I believe, though I may be proven wrong) the differences between your eastern and their western training. Your motions are more circular in nature (chinese fencing to a T. Reminded me of CT,HG) while the other Masters direct fencing training tends to lead to a lot of back and forth. Master Kane's video is good, but his motions are very deliberate and I would think that this was designed as a demo and not a Dulon.

All in all, everyone's skills far surpass mine at this stage and it is great to watch people that have actual training. All of my formal training, sadly, is weaponless. While I can understand how to interpret how a body is moving, and indeed how mine should move as well I often find myself that one step behind or I misjudge block/parry placement. (my first thought when someone is closing distance quickly is to pop a snap kick to their chin, or a teep to their chest. which isn't so nice in friendly training). In all of my time working with a Bokken, I never actually did Kata work, or practiced on my own. It was always just sparring with Xythoz to get it rocking. bruises and scar tissue aside, we work really well together and are actually doing a choreographed fight sequence for our comic con appearance in November. I would describe our combined style as Juyo/Makashi. We both fight almost brazenly whilst standing opposite, and our first mapping session went really well.

Anyways, I digress and don't want to derail any further. This will all come with time and practice. I know that everyone here will help, and that is the important thing.