[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]

Re: padded vs. unpadded polearms

Poster: David KUIJT <kuijt@umiacs.umd.edu>

On Thu, 31 Jul 1997, Jeffrey Sussman wrote:

> Ignoring the erudite physics discussion, empirical evidence shows that a
> seven foot unpadded pole arm hits significantly lighter than a six foot
> padded pole arm.  More noise less force.  I believe that this applies to
> ribs and legs just as much as heads.

I disagree completely.  Padded polearm hits on limbs are, in my
experience, never very painful.

Unpadded polearm hits on limbs are almost certainly comparable to
greatsword hits -- they can cause very painful bruises if you are hit on
an unarmoured part.  The worst injuries I've seen with one-handed swords
(broken forearm 3 times, shoulder joint tendon inflammation) can easily be
imagined as unpadded polearm injuries (we don't swing lighter with two
hands than with one), but my experience is that _padded_ polearms do not
cause that sort of injury.

Anyone who tells you they would rather be hit with a greatsword in the
unprotected shoulder joint than by a padded polearm is a fool and a


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