Print

Print


I think this is far more important for us in the Stile community to start thinking about, and adjusting our equipment to preference real helmets. We are pretty good about policing force levels, at least in my experience, nor go for lots of swinging headshots. What we do tend to see excessive force (usually accidental) is thrusts, and face thrusts can be just as dangerous.

On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 9:01 AM Lis Schraer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Thanks, Logan. I watched this as someone who has a little bit of interest invested in a person who has been doing armored/rattan combat in the SCA for 40+ years now. :) I thought it was interesting that his conclusion seemed to be that rattan fighting probably posed less risk than what HEMA is doing. (Admittedly I know very little about HEMA.) The "perceived risk" metric was also interesting--I know the general perception out there is that armored combat in the SCA is more dangerous than steel combat, so by that metric it would seem armored fighters would tend to take fewer safety risks. I don't really know how our cut-and-thrust compares with what the organizations he was talking about do.

Elasait

On 6/23/2019 7:25 AM, Clayton Neff wrote:
An interesting talk on HEMA fighting and the potential for brain injuries.Even though he praises the SCA, there is more that we could be doing, I think. Especially regarding educating people on the perceived risks.

-- Logan --



-- Manage your subscription at https://LISTSERV.UNL.EDU

-- Manage your subscription at https://LISTSERV.UNL.EDU