Re: padded vs. unpadded polearms

[bearslayer@juno.com (Christopher M Dawson)]

Poster: bearslayer@juno.com (Christopher M Dawson)

 >I know that Lord Alfredo is being humorous but he is also being 
     wrong.
     >I am more likely to knock someone unconcious or give them a 
     concussion
     >if I hit them on the head with a padded polearm than if I hit them
     >with a bare one. What does the brain damage is the brain bouncing
off
     >the sides of the skull when the head is accelerated. Bare rattan 
     tends
     >to bounce away from a hard surface such as a helmet while padded
     >rattan tends to stick and stay with the helmet. Therefor the head
is
     >more likely to be accelerated with the padded polearm.
     >
     >Broken bones and deep bruises are a different story. Here the
padding
     >helps protect the victim. So take your choices, do you prefer brain
     >damage or bone damage?
     >
     >          Malcolm MacMalcolm
     
Malcom is right here,  what are we trying to protect more? Personally I
vote for the body, my head is well protected as should all fighters.  But
until they require us all to wear late period field plate armor everyone
will have varying degrees of protection on the rest of the body.  That is
why I think a padded pole arm should be kept.

IMHO,
Nikolai
=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org