Out of curiosity are there any inherent advantages or disadvantages in longsword techniques if one places the rear hand on the pommel (or not) for most strikes? I just realized that I have been sliding my hand back to slightly cover the front of the pommel due to a very small grip area.

Or is it a moot point and just depend on one's preference?

Doebringer recommends gripping above the pommel, to allow the pommel to act as a counter-weight and speed up strikes. Other masters clearly show the pommel being gripped. I find that gripping the pommel gives you a longer lever and allows you to generate more torque in a strike, which also allows faster striking. I don't think there's a single right answer.

Try out both.

There are different ways of stopping the blade, one is wringing a cloth -the other is just sheer force. holding hands appart gives more controll imo.

I have found it possible to both exert more force and retain better controll by gripping the pommel - So I often do this.

I do think that doebringer had a point for multipple fast actions, such as weed hacking.. It feels as if doing the smaller motion from holding my hands close toghether, gives a sligthly faster result.

so, it's all about preferences.. but what says you can't change gripp during a figth?

Here's my thinking:

A close grip gives you faster and slightly more powerful strikes, since your hands rotate little and create much point movement. However, you are weaker in the bind due to less leverage and have less point control with heavier weapons. Also you move the rotational point closer to the hilt, which changes the balance.

A wide grip gives you better strength in versetzen, absetzen and winding, but this might be negated by a slower and slightly weaker strike that causes you to lose the line and not displace enough. With a wide grip, the rotational point often is slightly further back.

Of course, it also depends on the length of the grip and what technique you are actually doing.

Like Magnus said, it depends on what you want to do and you can change depending on that. I usually use a wide grip, but I am trying to keep my hands tighter in general to gain a bit more speed.

And regarding the grip with the forehand, here are a few interesting images I have gathered. Disregard the I33 images and look at the rest.

http://www.hroarr.com/temp/swordgrips/

I use both hands on the grip and a wringing motion to stop strikes where I want them. In winding however my left hand quickly goes to the pommel as I'm manipulating the sword, to the point of ending up on the back of the pommel when it feels right.

I think you need one hand to basically stay where it is, but you can pick which one (and change it if you need to). The other can move at the right time, which is just something to learn from experience.

My grip pet peeve is seeing people waiting in guard gripping from both sides, so that you couldn't possibly start a good strike or even a good winding until the left hand rotates around to align with the right.

-andy

Everybody thanks for the insight, I am sure when I practice with a more proper sword with a longer grip it will all come together mentally, I have noticed the lever advantage before when I was handling one with a longer grip. I want to start off right and I just didn't want to have bad practice turn into a bad habit.

I'm pretty much in agreement with everyone else here although I would also add that the length of the grip also plays a role. The longer grips (such as Hanwei feders) provide different leverage than shorter grips (such as Albion Meyer).

I've also observed that many of the more proficient fencers tend to use both hands together but I would hardly say this means much. After all, those same fencers also tend to shift grips a lot.

You got the engineer in me thinking with these ones Roger; and I don't its as simple as that.
A single sword cut uses a whole chain of muscle movements involving wrists, forearms and shoulders both on the left and right arm (I'm intentionally leaving out hip or other body force generation for the moment). And these muscle groups are really important because they will define speed & impact strength specially at 2 very important moments in any attack:
a) The start of the attack (where the sword starts moving from say, a guard)
b) The onset or 'ending' of an attack (where the moving sword is about to strike or cut its target)

The start of the attack is where your sword starts its movement from its starting point (a guard like pflug or vomtag). To do that, you use the "big muscles" (a quick, linear, sniping shot from vomtag would only use forearms; a powerful, circular cut from pflug would start with the shoulders)
and its my experience that a wider grip helps to accelerate the sword at this stage easier than with a short grip, precisely because of the "rotational point" the wider grip gives you, keeps the sword at a fixed angle from your lever (in this case your arm) and the tip isn't left behind in the attack, making your movement more efficient.

Now at the onset of the attack is where the physics get complicated (because your attack comes in a complex curve, and at high speeds some materials start to bend; also at this point the force generated by hip and other body parts must be taken in consideration in total strike "speed" and impact).
But its at this stage that the wrists shine because of the important job they do (the wringing motion as if with a towel, Magnus & Andrew mentioned). And yes, a close grip with both hands tight together would get your (already-moving) sword accelerate even more than keeping the wide grip you started with.

Trying to sum it up, I guess the mechanics of chopping wood with a long-hafted axe would illustrate what I see.
You raise the axe (to vomtag!) effortlessly with a very wide grip, and bring it down quickly with a close grip.
In jargon:
Translational acceleration (where the sword always faces your body the same way even though the tip changes angle) is accomplished easier (with less effort spent) with a wide grip.
Rotational acceleration (where the sword changes angle AND face regarding your body) is easier with a close grip.

Which grip is best for speed and impact strength, will depend on the kind & angle of attack you wish to make (and also if you think you'll need to parry or attack again in a hurry).

Sorry for the mess!

Carlos, interesting analogy with he axe reference because bucking and limbing all these trees we lost over the winter is one of the exercises I am doing to get in shape it also helps with edge control but I don't know if that will transfer to swords. I will have to pay more attention to the effects of the different grips next time.

/D

Carlos, I agree with you. That is why I mentioned that it depends on what "technique" you are doing. The point speed (and force) also depends on if you are strong enough to use a close grip with the sword you use. A heavier sword can be difficult to accelerate fast enough from certain "positions" and a wide grip can then be faster. It also depends on where you let your weapon rotate; your lead or rear hand or inbetween with a push and pull motion.

Then again, there are a lot of other variables that are equally or more important.

Certainly both types of grips are well-documented in historical sources.

From my own personal experience, I have found my hands getting closer and closer together over the years. I follow Dobringer's advice, letting the pommel swing freely. Combined with Thomas Stoeppler's non-telegraphic technique, this gives me hard, very fast strikes.

In particular, I find Absetzen faster with my hands closer together, particularly winding from Ochs to Ochs on the other side. This seems confimed by the images from the VonDanzig fechtbuch showing the Vier Leger, with the exception of Alber.

But when it comes down to it, grip the sword the way you need to in order to perform the techniques. My preference is to let the pommel swing free, YMMV.

Best regards,

-Mark

Another thing that came to mind, is that with a wide grip some of my opponent's appear to miss more often when cutting to the hands and instead strike the grip inbetween the hands. Hands kept close together are a bigger target. Nothing to rely on and there are a lot better ways to keep your hands safe... But, nevertheless it's a little interesting.

I think my best bet is to wait until next week before I start changing anything, that way I can have my lack of techniques and holes in my game (umm,or lack of game) pointed out to me in excruciating detail.

Good points from all; the ones I understood , that is!

David

I want to second what Andrew said about winding. You see it in Tal 1467.



You can really drive in a thrust against opposition if you have your palm over the back of the pommel, pushing forward into the attack.

This has been a very constructive topic!

As it's has been pointed out, changing grip when the occasion allows it, can be a real advantage. But when you change grip you also change your wrists' alignment...

I'd like to know how wrist alignment affect the speed & power in your attacks.
For example:
When you place your thumb on the flat of your blade, your lead hand wrist's alignment change completely. How do your attacks change when you use the thumb vs. when you dont?
Another example:
How does letting go a Zornhau (a #1) from right vomtag (the over your shoulder version) feel vs. a left Zornhau from left vomtag (a #2)?

Roger adds in the HROARR site a quotation from Musashi (japanese swordsman) about live & dead hands, which I think indirectly points to these "hand on pommel", "wrists alignment" issues. An interesting read.


Good posts!

Regarding the Musashi quote, I am not clear on if he speaks of a two-handed grip or one-handed, since he was famous for using two swords.

However, there appears to have been a lot of variation in grip with the leading hand amongst certain masters like Talhoffer, as can be seen in the images I put up. The Talhoffer images pretty much echoes the words of Musashi.

They are a really interesting set of pictures in my opinion and I have seen little discussion on the topic, but I am still fairly new being on my second year of practice, and I may have missed early discussions.

Interesting discussion so far. Have some meander points to add.

It's my experience that what kind of sword you prefer (long/short grip included) is a very personal thing. Also, that most beginners' preferences alter drastically once they've gotten past the basics.

However, there's something interesting that I've noticed. As a women I've quickly realized that if I try to use strength I tend to get my backside handed to me because I'm usually sparring against men. They will always be stronger. Thus I tend to use a combination of good technique and smart levering so that I compete against any strength offered with power.

When teaching beginners, most of my male students go through a phase where they prefer a short grip where they have both hands together because they feel that they can "cut faster/harder". Though I respect personal choice in swords, this phrase always sets off warning bells for me. These guys are usually the ones that can't achieve their full reach because they don't relax their hands or shift their grip around on the handle at all. They also end up delivering short static cuts that are far more appropriate for chopping wood (apologies to those who do know correct chopping action) than swinging a sword. Unfortunately this view point never really disappears until after they realize they can't bulldoze through a sword fight against an experienced fighter.

My analysis of what's gone wrong here is the difference between strength and power. True power feels and should be effortless. It is generated through correct use of body mechanics, using the entire body, effective movement through space, and no superfluous energy. But because it is effortless one does feel like you're not really doing anything, so people (especially men) revert to brute strength.

So the closer your hands are, the less levering can be done, the more strength gets put in.

I'm not saying a short grip is bad; I've seen many guys do good technical work with a short grip. I just don't believe that a short grip can be more powerful or faster than a longer one. I think there's a reason that most longsword manuscripts do show a gap between the hands.

[NOTE 1: just to clarify, with "short grip" I tend to mean hands next to each other or extremely close together on the handle. "long grip" is roughly a hands space open between the hands.
NOTE 2: I do shift my hands closer together or farther apart depending on what I'm doing, but never right next to each other. And I often place my left hand on the pommel. My current training sword is a Cas Feder]

The fundamentals of the ryu are taught with a single longsword, and that's what is being referred to in his text.

Here is the grip as done by Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu (the school founded by Musashi):

http://www.hyoho.com/hyoho7.html

Best regards,

-Mark

I definitively agree with what you just said!
How many times have you heard complaining about bizarre "anti-natural" body postures in swordmanship (both western & eastern) for people to find out that that 'exotic crossing of wrists', or that funny-looking set of steps is just a very efficient way of doing a particular action?

Proper body mechanics lead to efficient power generation AND precision in movement; which in turn, allow for good speed & impact strength. Sheer juvenile agility & brute strength are limited in how much they can compensate for proper "technique".

Why, just last week I witnessed a 70-something kendo sensei (8th dan, Hanshi) beat younger, extra-aggressive warriors with proverbial "flicks of the wrists". (which in turn led me to think, HEMA/WMA will see a HUGE leap in its overall level of ability, when todays scholars/instructors grow to become ripe 60/70 year-olds. At that time, their style of fencing and teaching will consequently evolve to compensate for failing strength and agility).

Returning to my wrist question:
I just recalled tracing a study group partner difficulty in assuming a proper Ox ward. To do it, he had to twist elbows, torax and hips in a very unstabile way. It was all a wrist matter. When he softened a bit his grip, and aligned properly his wrists, he could do a far better Ox.

Well, the reason why I claim that a narrower grip means faster point speed is simple; it is a question of mechanics, leverage and motion. If you have a rotational point inbetween your hands and push with the lead while pulling with the rear you get a faster point than if you lock one hand and push or pull with the other. This is stating the obvious, I know.

Keeping your hands close to the rotational point means that they won't have to travel very far to make the point move a lot, while keeping a wide grip means that you have to move your hands more for the same effect, which takes a little bit more time. With a tight grip you can gain more speed and power in the same period of time.

But there are so many other variables involved here and these are very much simplifications. Like I said earlier, it relates to the situation and what you wish to do. Power and speed isn't everything and other things can be more important. All this is very subtle with a sword but very much something to consider with polearms.

Reading this thread might provide more information:
Hanko Döbringer - The Pommel

I think both ways have their advantages. Both make the same power available but in different ways, one favours force and the other speed (remember that power = force times speed).

A wide grip gives more leverage, which means that your arms have less work to do to provide the same torque. But your hands have to move faster for the same sword motion which is not always easy. So, this grip seems right for transmission of power at low speeds, for example anything involving pressure on the blades, slices, etc.

A narrow grip entices you to use a much more pendular motion, and the hands do not have to move as fast. This grip therefore allows unhindered transmission of power at high speeds, but is more demanding for the arms in case control is needed.

Regards,

I think some of it depends on your primary source too or rather the date of your primary source. The later German Ms's (like Meyer) seem to have longer grips while the earlier ones have shorter grips. I think this is borne out in surviving swords. For example doing Fiore I would prefer a slightly shorter grip that what I actually have.

Great topic.

I really believe that a "fluid" grip (live hands?) is a mark of someone well-practiced. And it extends past long-sword. There are times to hold a messer, for example, in a "saber grip" with the thumb aligned to the short edge, and other times to hold it with the thumb aligned to the flat, and possibly even times to hold it "hammer" style" like you would an arming sword. And you've got to be able to transition these grips from one to another without the aid of the left hand as an anchor.

Which makes me want to bend the conversation a little bit: what techniques/tricks/etc. do you all use to transition from one grip to another? When is the "best time" to do it?

For example, with both messer and longsword I find the end-of-blow position at the bottom (wechsel, etc.) is the easiest place to change grip from "saber" or "hammer" to "thumb-on-flat." It usually goes unobserved by the opponent, and is assisted with a simple squeeze/roll of the fingers and harnessing a little bit of the momentum from the previous blow.

From Vom Tag into a zwerch, a flick of the wrist has a similar effect mid-blow to help line up the short edge.

That kinda thing...

Jake

Honestly I don't even know. Either it feels good and I do it or it does not. Generally I use more grips in winding and only a couple of grips when not, the standard and the thumb, and it's easy to transition to the thumb at the start of the motion that requires it.

But the thing I really wanted to say is that maybe that first paragraph there shows something important. Moving your hands around significantly is I think not for the beginner. When you're starting out, you need to be able to hold a single decent grip at all before you think about transitioning from the various useful grips. The grip problem I see with beginners is that their hands are so live they practically crawl off somewhere, gripping from all sorts of inappropriate angles.

Glad to get some mileage out of this thread.

My concern was whether or not the hands needed to stay semi-fixed throughout exercises, I don't mean that mine are rigid in the grip but I could see where with a longer hilt or grip area I would tend to use the space that was available and comfortable instead of "fixing" my grip into a certain position if that was what was needed. It was just something I had noticed happening which led to me wondering about the hand on the pommel as I have seen in some illustrations in regards to thrusting. I wanted some feedback .... and I got it! Thanks all!