“Self-Defence with a Bicycle” teaser video for the 2017 Dreynevent

A fun taste of the “Self-Defence with a Bicycle” class to be offered at the upcoming Dreynevent 2017 historical martial arts workshop in Vienna.

The video and class draw from Marcus Tindal’s highly eccentric article, “Self-Protection on a Cycle – How you may Best Defend Yourself when Attacked by Modern Highwaymen, Showing how you should Act when Menaced by Footpads, when Chased by another Cyclist, and when Attacked under various other Circumstances; showing, also, how the Cycle may be used as a Weapon”, which appeared alongside E.W. Barton-Wright’s Bartitsu articles in Pearson’s Magazine during 1901.

Frequently and incorrectly assumed by casual readers to be part of the Bartitsu curriculum, Tindal’s bicycle defence techniques were, in fact, probably inspired by this 1901 letter to the editor of the London Bicycle Club Gazette and have no direct connection to Bartitsu at all, apart from the coincidence of when and where they were first published.  Tindal’s article created a bit of a media stir at the time, and in turn inspired yet another article, complete with a different set of photographs, in a 1905 edition of the Italian journal La Sportiva Stampa.

“Self-Protection on a Cycle” also formed the basis of an amusing and educational seminar at the 2009 ISMAC historical martial arts event in Detroit, USA:

More Vigny-style sparring from the Gemeiner Academy

Some more fast, athletic sparring in the Vigny style from instructors at the Gemeiner Academy of Savate in Australia.  Chief instructor Craig Gemeiner was a pioneer in the reconstruction of Pierre Vigny’s unique method of stick fighting.

Note the rapid tactical shifts between front, rear and double-handed guards and also the use of ambidextrous striking.

“Should an assailant strike at your wind or heart with his right fist”: an anomalous canonical Bartitsu technique illustrated

new-art-header-2

In April of 2010 the Bartitsu Society discovered a “new” entry into canonical Bartitsu unarmed combat.  This self defence kata or sequence appeared as part of a reprint of E.W. Barton-Wright’s “New Art of Self Defence” article series in the June, 1899 American edition of Pearson’s Magazine.  Curiously, the sequence had not appeared in the original and better-known English edition and, also curiously, it was the only sequence in the American edition to be described in text but not illustrated with photographs.

Compounding the mystery is the fact that the sequence is titled “One of Many Means of Defence when a Man Strikes at You Low or Below the Belt”, which does not actually match Barton-Wright’s subsequent description of the techniques.  This may imply that the American Pearson’s editor confused two separate titles and descriptions, in which case there may be at least one more, as yet undiscovered, entry into the Bartitsu canon.

Here follows the sequence in question, as written by Barton-Wright and now illustrated for (possibly) the first time.  Note that the camera perspective reverses between numbers 2) and 3), to afford the viewer a better look at the techniques.

No. 1.—One of many Means of Defence when a Man Strikes at You Low or Below the Belt.

american-1

Should an assailant strike at your wind or heart with his right fist, step backward with your right foot, and in doing so place your right hand over your heart, with the palm outward, and grasp his wrist by placing your left hand over his wrist (the placing of the right hand over the heart is only a precautionary measure in case you miss catching his wrist when he leads off at your body).

american-2

As soon as you feel you have hold of his wrist, pull it towards you with a slight outward motion leftways, take a step forward with your right foot, placing it behind his right leg, and seize him by the throat, pressing your thumb into his tonsil or just under the back of the ear, which is extremely painful.

american-3

Then with a sharp leftward pull with the left hand, and a thrust or a push leftward with the right hand (keeping your right calf or the side of your knee tightly behind his right knee), you throw him on his back.

american-5
The photograph of this technique is modified from an essay on self defence in The Universal Book of Hobbies and Handicrafts (1935).

Retain your hold on his throat and ear, and dropping upon the right knee you pull his arm towards you so that his elbow is just across your thigh. With the slightest pressure you could break his arm. At the same time you extend your right arm vigorously and press your thumb well into the cavity under the ear, which will cause great pain, preventing him from getting up.

“Returning kicks with interest”: counter-kicks and stop-kicks in Bartitsu unarmed combat

untitled-5-copy

Another branch of Bartitsu is that in which the feet and hands are both employed, which is an adaptation of boxing and Savate (…) The use of the feet is also done quite differently from the French Savate. This latter … is quite useless as a means of self-defence when done in the way Frenchmen employ it.

– E.W. Barton-Wright, December 1900.

In his articles, interviews and lectures, Bartitsu founder Edward Barton-Wright consistently – and rather cryptically – distinguished the type of kicking taught at the Bartitsu Club from that of French savate, which he disparaged.

This essay offers an interpretation and synthesis of those comments, taking into account their historical, social and technical contexts.  If there was a meaningful adaptation or distinction, then what was it and how may it be translated into neo-Bartitsu practice?

Canonical kicks

It may be noted that – although Pierre Vigny was clearly the senior savateur at the Bartitsu Club – Barton-Wright spoke fluent French and had studied savate in its homeland during the 1880s, probably while he was studying at a French university.

The Bartitsu canon, as demonstrated by Barton-Wright and Vigny, however, holds only a very limited arsenal of kicking techniques. The most immediately apparent is a single technique in Barton-Wright’s article series on Self Defence with a Walking Stick:

3

Glossed as “How to Defend Yourself with a Stick against the most Dangerous Kick of an Expert Kicker”, the context for this technique is clearly that of the stick-wielding Bartitsu-trained defender countering a “foreign” ruffian’s stepping side kick. It’s very likely that Barton-Wright and Vigny had in mind the infamous Apache street gangsters of Paris, who were widely known to practice savate.

On this basis, while it can be reasonably inferred that Bartitsu students might train in such kicking techniques well enough to be able to “role play” as Apache savateurs for training purposes, the side kick doesn’t necessarily offer any context clues regarding how a Bartitsu practitioner might kick in self defence.

This article series also demonstrates a knee to the face attack, to be performed after the defender has hooked the attacker around the neck with the crook of his cane:

40

The only other photographic evidence of kicking techniques as part of the Bartitsu canon is this image of Bartitsu Club instructor Pierre Vigny demonstrating a mid-level front or crescent kick as he simultaneously blocks his opponent’s left lead punch and counters with his own left:

Vigny demonstrates savate in Bartitsu Club

 

A later article in the Pall Mall Gazette also mentioned that the kicking methods taught at the Bartitsu Club were “somewhat different from the accepted French method.”

But how, and why?

The kick felt round the world

For historical context, it’s worth bearing in mind that – on top of the traditional and deep-rooted Anglo-French rivalries – at the time Barton-Wright was introducing his novel concept of Bartitsu to the British public, their most recent impressions of savate had been decidedly negative.

During late 1898, just as Barton-Wright had arrived in London from Japan, the Alhambra music hall had hosted a savate exhibition by French instructor Georges D’armoric and his students. Despite the savateurs’ best efforts and intentions, the reactions of their London audience and critics ranged from grudging appreciation to cat-calling; kicking in combat sports was widely held to be “un-manly” and offensive to insular English sensibilities.

alhambra-savate-1
Above: a London newspaper artist’s impression of the Alhambra savate exhibition.

Then, during October of 1899, Charles Charlemont had won – under extremely controversial circumstances – a “savate vs. boxing” challenge match in Paris. His opponent had been Jerry Driscoll, a former British navy champion.  The British and international sporting press was outraged at the circumstances of that match, decrying the conduct of Charlemont, the referee, the French spectators and organisers and especially at the outcome, in which Charlemont was widely held to have won via an accidental but illegal groin kick.

In this environment, it’s likely that Barton-Wright deliberately de-emphasised the kicking content of Bartitsu and distanced it from the French method as a gesture towards nationalistic sentiment and social respectability. Similarly, he may have been attempting to score points by suggesting that the Bartitsu Club was promoting a “new, improved” (even an Anglicised) version of savate.

Compounding the issue was the fact that savate was, at that time, undergoing a bitter controversy between two factions in its country of origin.

The Academics vs. the Fighters

Although the ultimate cultural beginnings of savate remain obscure, researchers including Jean Francois Loudcher have traced the art to the working-class custom of “bare-knuckle honour duelling” during the early 19th century.  Over the best part of the next hundred years, it evolved in a largely haphazard fashion, played as a rough-and-tumble fighting game in back alleys and cafe cellars, with occasionally successful efforts at codification and systematisation.

By c1900 there was, on one side and in the majority, those who might be characterised as “the academics” – professional instructors, notably including Joseph and Charles Charlemont, who taught and advocated for a stylised, gymnastic form of the art, practiced at least as much as a method of physical culture and artistry as of self defence.

The aim of the academic faction was to firmly establish savate as a “respectable” activity that could be offered to French soldiers and the patrons of middle-class gymnasia, as part of organised physical culture curricula. Due to their influence, the most established and popular version of savate retained the duelling-based tradition of fighting “to the first touch”, translating into a very courteous, light contact combat sport.

It is highly likely that this was the version that Barton-Wright referred to as being “quite useless as a means of self-defence when done in the way Frenchmen employ it.”  Much the same thing had been noted by an experienced French observer of the Charlemont/Driscoll fight, who remarked that Charlemont was handicapped by his long experience of “kicking gently” in academic bouts.

The smaller, opposing faction were “the fighters”, represented by Julien Leclerc and others, who preferred an updated, hard-hitting and more pragmatic savate, influenced by the non-nonsense ethos of British and American boxing.  The “fighters” represented a counter-culture within the politicised world of fin-de-siecle savate, advocating for rule changes that would push the increasingly genteel art/sport back towards its rowdy, back-alley origins.

Also – and very controversially, at the time – many of the “fighters” were professionals, or at least wanted to have the chance to fight professionally.  This caused great indignation among the “academics”, who were largely teachers and proud amateurs and who were horrified by suggestion that their art should be marred by prize-fighting.

The Devil is in the Details

According to the December, 1900 article quoted earlier:

Mr. Barton-Wright does not profess to teach his pupils how to kick each other, but merely to know how to be able to return kicks with interest should one be attacked in this manner.

Interesting but, on the face of it, puzzling; how does one not teach people how to kick each other, but still teach them to return kicks with interest?

The strongest hint yet was given in a September, 1901 interview with the Pall Mall Gazette, in which Barton-Wright reiterated his general theme with the addition of some crucial technical and tactical details:

The fencing and boxing generally taught in schools-of-arms is too academic. Although it trains the eye to a certain extent, it is of little use except as a game played with persons who will observe the rules.

The amateur (boxer) is seldom taught how to hit really hard, which is what you must do in a row. Nor is he protected against the savate, which would certainly be used on him by foreign ruffians, or the cowardly kicks often given by the English Hooligan. A little knowledge of boxing is really rather a disadvantage to (the defender) if his assailant happens to be skilled at it, because (the assailant) will will know exactly how his victim is likely to hit and guard.

So we teach a savate not at all like the French savate, but much more deadly, and which, if properly used, will smash the opponent’s ankle or even his ribs. Even if it be not used, it is very useful in teaching the pupil to keep his feet, which are almost as important in a scrimmage as his head.

… and the interviewer was also given a demonstration of the difference between the savate of the Bartitsu Club and the “accepted French style”, i.e. the style practiced by the majority of French savateurs:

He has also a guard in boxing on which you will hurt your own arm without getting within his distance, while he can kick you on the chin, in the wind, or on the ankle.

As to the usual brutal kick of the London rough, his guard for it (not difficult to learn) will cause the rough to break his own leg, and the harder he kicks the worse it will be for him.

Thus, it’s clear that both Barton-Wright and Pierre Vigny were in the minority “fighters” camp, advocating for a pragmatic, combat-oriented reform of savate that would allow full contact matches and the possibility of knock-outs.

“Come an’ take him orf. I’ve bruk ‘is leg.”

The techniques alluded to include kicks to low, medium and high targets as well as a destructive leg-breaking guard against the “brutal kick of the London rough”, which is possibly cognate with Barton-Wright’s description of “smashing the opponent’s ankle”.

The most famous literary expression of this tactic is certainly the following fight scene from Rudyard Kipling’s In the Matter of a Private (1888), in which Private Simmons launches a vicious kicking attack at Corporal Slane:

Within striking distance, he kicked savagely at Slane’s stomach, but the weedy Corporal knew something of Simmons’s weakness, and knew, too, the deadly guard for that kick. Bowing forward and drawing up his right leg till the heel of the right foot was set some three inches above the inside of the left knee-cap, he met the blow standing on one leg —exactly as Gonds stand when they meditate —and ready for the fall that would follow.

There was an oath, the Corporal fell over to his own left as shinbone met shinbone, and the Private collapsed, his right leg broken an inch above the ankle.

“‘Pity you don’t know that guard, Sim,” said Slane, spitting out the dust as he rose. Then raising his voice—”Come an’ take him orf. I’ve bruk ‘is leg.” This was not strictly true, for the Private had accomplished his own downfall, since it is the special merit of that leg-guard that the harder the kick the greater the kicker’s discomfiture.

Synthesis

Barton-Wright clearly and concisely explained his overall tactical conception of Bartitsu unarmed combat in his February, 1901 lecture for the Japan Society of London:

In order to ensure as far as it was possible immunity against injury in cowardly attacks or quarrels, (one) must understand boxing in order to thoroughly appreciate the danger and rapidity of a well-directed blow, and the particular parts of the body which are scientifically attacked. The same, of course, applies to the use of the foot or the stick …

judo and jiujitsu are not designed as primary means of attack and defence against a boxer or a man who kicks you, but (are) only supposed to be used after coming to close quarters, and in order to get to close quarters, it is absolutely necessary to understand boxing and the use of the foot.

This statement underscores the specifically defensive value of boxing and savate “in order to get to close quarters” against the types of attacks that might be anticipated from a London Hooligan or other ruffian, with the intention of deploying jiujitsu as a type of “secret weapon”.  His comments on boxing, like those on kicking, notably emphasise the value of destructive guards that intercept and damage the aggressor’s attacking limbs.

In his article A Few Practical Hints on Self Defence (1900), Percy Longhurst offered a cognate technique, highly reminiscent of that described by Rudyard Kipling:

untitled-6-copy

The English rough can, and does kick, although it is usually after his victim is on the ground; his kicking is barbarous and unscientific. There is, however, one kick that he sometimes uses that is very dangerous, causing terrible internal injuries if not stopped, and it is difficult to avoid if one does not know the counter. It is the running kick at the abdomen.

The defense is to raise the right knee and bring the leg across so that the side of the heel is resting on your left thigh. Your shinbone will catch his leg as it rises at its weakest park, and will probably cause it to break.

As mentioned earlier, savateur Julien Leclerc was another advocate of the “fighters” perspective and, unlike Barton-Wright or Vigny, he left a detailed record of his approach to savate in the form of his book, La Boxe Pratique: Offensive & Defensive – Conseils pour la Combat de la Rue (1903). Leclerc’s manual provided the essential, basic savate kicks detailed in the first volume of the Bartitsu Compendium (2005).

Cross-referencing Barton-Wright’s comments and Vigny’s demonstrations with Leclerc’s manual yields a focus on les coups d’arrets, or “stopping blows”; kicking into kicks, as is shown below:

untitled-2-copy untitled-3-copy untitled-4-copy

Thus, the “adaptation” and “distinction” Barton-Wright referred to was, most likely, to hit harder than would be tolerated in the mainstream French salles de savate of his era, and to employ some of the kicks and counter-kicks of savate toward a Bartitsu-specific tactical goal.

The unarmed or disarmed Bartitsu practitioner should be prepared to counter kicks with hard coups d’arret, chopping into the opponent’s ankles or shins, as part of an aggressive defence strategy. While one might follow with boxing punches, atemi-waza strikes or further kicks as required by the needs of the moment, the tactical aim is to damage the opponent’s limbs and disrupt their balance en route to finishing the fight at close-quarters via jiujitsu – a legitimately “secret weapon” circa 1900, when the Bartitsu Club was the only school in the Western world where a student could study Japanese unarmed combat.

In this video, Bartitsu instructor Alex Kiermayer teaches a set of savate-based low kicks, evasions and stop-kicks:

 

The tactics of Bartitsu kickboxing

vigny-boxing
Above: Bartitsu Club instructor Pierre Vigny (left) demonstrates a simultaneous guard and counter technique.

E.W. Barton-Wright was fulsome in his praise of boxing, which was virtually synonymous with the idea of “self defence” in London at the turn of the 20th century. In introducing his radical cross-training concept of Bartitsu, however, he was also careful to point out that even “manly and efficacious” British fisticuffs might not be enough to cope with a determined street attacker who didn’t play by the rules:

If one gets into a row and plays the game in the recognised style of English fair play – with fists – the opponent will very likely rush in and close, in order to avoid a blow.

“Black and White Budget” magazine, December 1900

Circa 1900, many boxers still employed the so-called “milling” guard, as seen in this exhibition bout between champions Jim Jeffries and Bob Fitzsimmons:

The mill – referred to by pugilist and author R.G. Allanson-Winn as a “cycloidal action” – involved continually rotating the fists in vertical circles,  which served to keep the arms limber and to disguise the timing of the punch.

Barton-Wright continued:

Then comes the moment for wrestling in the secret Japanese way. Instantly the unwary one is caught and thrown so violently that he is placed hors de combat, without even sufficient strength left to retire unassisted from the field. – Ibid

Taken at face value, these comments suggest a specific tactic; that the forewarned but unarmed Bartitsu-trained defender would adopt a boxing guard and spar specifically in order to “sucker” their adversary into close quarters.  Once at close quarters, the defender would deploy jiujitsu as a sort of secret weapon – a reasonable proposition at a time when Barton-Wright’s Bartitsu Club was literally the only place in the Western world where a student could learn Japanese unarmed combat.

In fact, both of Barton-Wright’s “boxing” scenarios in the Black and White Budget article proposed that an unarmed fight might begin with fisticuffs, but would end with jiujitsu:

Again, should it happen that the assailant is a better boxer than oneself, the knowledge of Japanese wrestling will enable one to close and throw him without any risk of getting hurt oneself. – Ibid.

While acknowledging that kicking and countering kicks were important aspects of self defence training, he then asserted that:

Another branch of Bartitsu is that in which the feet and hands are both employed, which is an adaptation of boxing and Savate. The guards are done in a slightly different style from boxing, being much more numerous as well. The use of the feet is also done quite differently from the French Savate. This latter … is quite useless as a means of self-defence when done in the way Frenchmen employ it.– Ibid.

He followed with another revealing comment on the subject of kicking in self defence:

Mr. Barton-Wright does not profess to teach his pupils how to kick each other, but merely to know how to be able to return kicks with interest should one be attacked in this manner. – Ibid.

Later, an article in the Pall Mall Gazette also mentioned that the kicking methods taught at the Bartitsu Club were “somewhat different from the accepted French method.”

In considering Barton-Wright’s comments on savate, it’s worth recalling the traditional Anglo-French rivalry and the middle-class London cultural bias against kicking in self defence as being “un-English”.  This may have been an especially sore point in the wake of the infamous savate vs. boxing match between Charles Charlemont and Jerry Driscoll, which had taken place just as Barton-Wright arrived back in London from Japan.

It’s likely that B-W deliberately de-emphasised the kicking content of Bartitsu and distanced it from the French method in his articles and lectures as a gesture towards nationalistic sentiment and social respectability. Similarly, he may have been attempting to score points by suggesting that the Bartitsu Club was promoting a “new, improved” (even an Anglicised) version of savate.

In any case, it’s evident that neither Barton-Wright himself nor Bartitsu Club instructor Pierre Vigny had much time for the stylised, light-contact assaut style that had then become popular in French academies:

Several months later, in a lecture for the Japan Society of London, Barton-Wright explained that:

Under Bartitsu is included boxing, or the use of the fist as a hitting medium, the use of the feet both in an offensive and defensive sense, the use of the walking stick as a means of self-defence. Judo and jujitsu, which (are) secret styles of Japanese wrestling, (I) would call close play as applied to self-defence.

In order to ensure as far as it was possible immunity against injury in cowardly attacks or quarrels, (one) must understand boxing in order to thoroughly appreciate the danger and rapidity of a well-directed blow, and the particular parts of the body which were scientifically attacked. The same, of course, applied to the use of the foot or the stick … judo and jiujitsu are not designed as primary means of attack and defence against a boxer or a man who kicks you, but (are) only supposed to be used after coming to close quarters, and in order to get to close quarters, it is absolutely necessary to understand boxing and the use of the foot. – Barton-Wright, “Jiu jitsu and Judo: the Japanese Art of Self Defence from a British Athletic Point of View”, February 1901

This statement underscores the specifically defensive value of boxing and savate “in order to get to close quarters” against the types of attacks that might be anticipated from a London Hooligan.

Barton-Wright continued:

Directly one (sees) a man, one ought to know whether he (is) a man to go for at once, or whether he should be allowed to have first turn and afterwards come in one’s self. – Ibid

Finally, in a September, 1901 interview with the Pall Mall Gazette, Barton-Wright explained what he meant by “guards not at all like those taught in boxing schools”:

The fencing and boxing generally taught in schools-of-arms is too academic. Although it trains the eye to a certain extent, it is of little use except as a game played with persons who will observe the rules.

The amateur (boxer) is seldom taught how to hit really hard, which is what you must do in a row. Nor is he protected against the savate, which would certainly be used on him by foreign ruffians, or the cowardly kicks often given by the English Hooligan. A little knowledge of boxing is really rather a disadvantage to (the defender) if his assailant happens to be skilled at it, because (the assailant) will will know exactly how his victim is likely to hit and guard.

As to boxing, we have guards which are not at all like the guards taught in schools, and which will make the assailant hurt his own hand and arm very seriously.

In sum, the Bartitsu student must know how to hit really hard, how to counter kicks as well as punches and – significantly – how to fend off punches in such a way as to injure his opponent’s attacking limbs.  Percy Longhurst, in his book Jiujitsu and Other Methods of Self Defence, describes a version of this technique:

A man who makes wild round-arm swinging blows at your head may be severely checked by the point of your elbow, raised so that it catches him on the inside of his upper arm.

Barton-Wright continued:

So we teach a savate not at all like the French savate, but much more deadly, and which, if properly used, will smash the opponent’s ankle or even his ribs. Even if it be not used, it is very useful in teaching the pupil to keep his feet, which are almost as important in a scrimmage as his head.

The interviewer then described two of these unorthodox guards, as demonstrated by Pierre Vigny:

He has also a guard in boxing on which you will hurt your own arm without getting within his distance, while he can kick you on the chin, in the wind, or on the ankle.

As to the usual brutal kick of the London rough, his guard for it (not difficult to learn) will cause the rough to break his own leg, and the harder he kicks the worse it will be for him.

This is surely what was previously referred to as “returning kicks with interest”!

And, again, the Bartitsu practitioner would be expected to finish the fight with jiujitsu as a secret weapon or surprise attack:

My own experience is that the biggest man in a fight generally tries to close. By the grips or clutches I can teach, the biggest man can be seized and made powerless in a few seconds.

Mr. Barton-Wright himself shows you wrestling tricks, by which, by merely taking hold of a man’s hand, you have him at your mercy, and can throw him on the ground or lead him about as you wish, the principle being, apparently, that you set your muscles and joints against your opponent’s in such a way that the more he struggles, the more he hurts himself.

Thus emerges an overall strategy for the unarmed or disarmed Bartitsu practitioner, on the guiding theme of using the attacker’s force to his own detriment:

  1. Assume an orthodox c1900 boxing guard (upright stance, extended or milling guard with the fists)
  2. If the opponent attempts to break through your guard to grapple, admit them and counter with jiujitsu.
  3. If the opponent strikes, counter with limb destruction techniques; kick into their kicks or use your elbows and/or fists to strike into their punches, so that they harder they strike, the more they will be hurt.

Emerging from the mill, these “different and more numerous guards” employ the sharp, solid wedge of the elbow, rather than the gloves or forearms, to chop into or bar the attacking limb(s).  The defender might follow with boxing punches or atemi strikes as required, but these attacks would occur during a transition into the close quarters combat of jiujitsu.

The following video of Bartitsu training at the Chicago’s Forteza martial arts studio offers a selection of boxing drills, featuring the milling guard, destructive elbow blocks, closing to close quarters, light sparring and pad work:

“We don’t strictly train in Bartitsu – can we still enter the sparring video contest?”

sparring

Feedback in the wake of our announcement of the international Bartitsu sparring video contest has included this question, both from groups who practice their own forms of neo-Bartitsu and from groups who train in comparable styles of Filipino, French, Italian and other martial arts.

“We don’t strictly train in Bartitsu – can we still enter the sparring video contest?”

The objects of the contest are to pressure-test the sparring guidelines themselves and to generate sparring video footage of the “canonical” method described by E.W. Barton-Wright, circa 1900.

With that in mind:

  1. We’ve allowed a three-month period so that martial artists can train for their entry (or entries) if they wish.  We anticipate that many people who are already skilled in comparable styles will find that is plenty of time to adjust their regular practice towards the style suggested in the guidelines.
  2. The rules allow videos to be edited and note that a single video can include footage from multiple sparring matches.   “Highlights videos” are just as welcome as are unedited videos of single matches.  Therefore, if, in the heat of sparring, you perform techniques that are outside the style guidelines, you are welcome to edit those techniques out of your video.

If you have any further questions regarding the contest rules or sparring guidelines, feel free to ask in the comments below or by contacting tonywolf(at)gmail.com.

We look forward to seeing your videos!

 

“Engaging Toughs” – The Bartitsu Sparring Video Competition

… by engaging toughs I trained myself until I was satisfied in practical application.

–  E.W. Barton-Wright, 1950

bartitsu-training

Announcing the first international Bartitsu sparring video competition, for prizes of up to US$1000!  The contest is open to martial artists and combat athletes of any style(s) and its object is to help fulfil the Bartitsu Society’s mission: “to continue the legacy of martial arts pioneer E.W. Barton-Wright”.

The “New Art of Self Defence”

For a few years at the turn of the 20th century, Barton-Wright’s London “School of Arms and Physical Culture” was the site of the world’s first experiment in cross-training between Asian and European fighting styles:

Under Bartitsu is included boxing, or the use of the fist as a hitting medium, the use of the feet both in an offensive and defensive sense, the use of the walking stick as a means of self-defence. Judo and jujitsu, which are secret styles of Japanese wrestling, (I) would call close play as applied to self-defence.

–  E.W. Barton-Wright, 1901

Barton-Wright’s system was effectively abandoned as a work-in-progress during 1902.  It then remained in obscurity for a century (apart from a cryptic reference in a Sherlock Holmes story) before being revived as a collaborative, on-going project by members of the Bartitsu Society.

Towards that project, we’re now looking to pressure-test the following set of experimental sparring guidelines, which are designed to closely evoke the “Bartitsu style” in hard-fought matches.  These guidelines have been carefully designed to simulate the type of “all-in” fighting suggested by E.W. Barton-Wright’s original writings on Bartitsu, maintaining the spirit and detail of that system as it was evolving at the London Bartitsu Club circa 1901.

Bartitsu Sparring Guidelines

Above - sparring highlights footage from Bartitsu: The Lost Martial Art of Sherlock Holmes and the Bartitsu Club of Chicago.

1) There is no provision for counting points nor declaring winners.  The object of the sparring match is specifically to test and demonstrate the Bartitsu style in action.

2) Bouts may continue up to a nominated time limit and/or to submission, as you prefer.

3) Striking and thrusting with the stick, stick traps and disarms, unarmed striking, takedowns/throws and groundfighting to submission are all legal. Videos that show examples of most or all of these techniques will be favoured by the adjudicators.

4) Both fighters must wear fencing masks or similar protective face/headgear, hockey gloves or similar protective handgear and groin cups at minimum; more extensive protective equipment is optional.

Gi jackets and belts/sashes are optional (note that Bartitsu does not use belt ranks, so belts and sashes are purely utilitarian and may be of any colour).

5) Contact levels and targets must be commensurate with the type of protective equipment employed – “play hard, play fair, nobody hurt”.

6) Each fighter must begin the match armed with one, approx. 36″ long rattan sparring cane with a rubber ball handle or crook handle.  In the event of disarms, etc., the bout should continue seamlessly into unarmed combat.

Stick fighting guidelines:

1) Guard positions are generally high (the front, rear and double-handed guards as shown in Barton-Wright’s Self Defence with a Walking Stick articles), with lowered or widened variant guards serving as positions of invitation, i.e. “baiting” an attack to a particular target.

Fluid, deceptive ambidexterity of attack, defence and counter-attack from a dynamic range of tactical guards is encouraged.  For examples of stylistically accurate stick fighting guard positions, see this article.

2) There is no use of orthodox fencing-style weapon-to-weapon parries in positions 3 or 4, nor any other weapon-to-weapon parry or block in which the hand is lower than the point of impact between the sticks.  These are contrary to the basic premise of protecting the weapon hand and they significantly alter the fighting style if used in sparring.

red-and-green

Unarmed combat guidelines:

1) Fighters use the classical fisticuffs stance (erect or with a
slight backward lean) and the pugilistic mill (circling the fists vertically in deceptive patterns) and/or extended guard position.

2) Predominantly linear punches from the mill and linear, low
(predominantly knee/shin level) kicks.

3) The MMA-style doubleleg takedown, while very effective, was not a part of the eclectic “British jiujitsu” practiced at the Bartitsu Club, and so is not allowed in Bartitsu-style sparring.

Video Guidelines

You may enter as many videos as you wish.

Entries will be accepted at any time before midnight USA Central Time, February 1, 2017.

Videos may be either static or dynamic (moving) camera set-ups and may include edited and/or raw footage.  A single edited video may include footage from more than one sparring session.

When deciding on framing, editing choices, etc., however, please bear in mind that the object is to display the style clearly and to its best advantage.

Background music should not be used.

Videos must be issued under a Creative Commons licence and must be uploaded to YouTube and/or Vimeo. If you do not wish your video(s) to be publicly searchable on YouTube, we suggest setting the privacy to “Unlisted”.

Links to each video you are entering should be sent to tonywolf(at)gmail.com.

Adjudication and prizes

The adjudicators’ decisions will be based on the levels of historical/stylistic accuracy and martial intent apparent in each video.  Their decisions will be binding and final – no correspondence will be entered into.

If no videos achieve the requisite standards of historical/stylistic accuracy and martial intent, the adjudicators reserve the right to defer awarding any prizes.

The winning entry will receive a single prize of US$1000, sent by PayPal to the entrant’s nominated email address.

The second place winning entry will receive a single prize of US$500, sent by PayPal to the entrant’s nominated email address.

Prize-winning videos and a selection of runners-up will be announced and showcased on the Bartitsu Society website and via Bartitsu-related social media.  At the adjudicators’ discretion, highlights of the prize-winning and runner-up videos may also be re-edited and collated into other videos as exemplars of Bartitsu-style sparring.

 

“Attacked by a man with a stick in his hand”: an Interpretation of Captain Laing’s First Bartitsu Set-Play

Captain F.C. Laing’s 1902 article The ‘Bartitsu’ Method of Self Defence is an often-neglected resource for canonical Bartitsu stick training.

As with all choreographed set-plays, Laing’s “examples” are best approached as formalised representations of certain technical and tactical options.  It would be naive to assume that, for example, an active, aggressive opponent would allow any given action by the defender to take effect without attempting to defend and counter it, let alone that any set sequence of techniques could be relied upon in the chaos of a real fight.  Thus, Barton-Wright’s precept of adaptability should be taken into account in all set-play training:

It is quite unnecessary to try and get your opponent into any particular position, as this system embraces every possible eventuality and your defence and counter-attack must be based entirely upon the actions of your opponent.

Bearing that principle in mind, the practice of set-plays offers four significant advantages.

1) Given that Bartitsu was effectively abandoned as a work-in-progress during 1902 and that no complete traditional curriculum exists, preserving the canonical set-plays constitutes our strongest practical link back to the first generation of Bartitsu practitioners.

2) Mastery of the set-plays as formal exercises conveys many of the essential, fundamental technical and tactical elements of Bartitsu as a martial art.

3) The set-plays can be “brought to life” via the addition of Bartitsu Club lineage material, as detailed in the second volume of the Bartitsu Compendium, and via combat improvisation training.  Numerous failure drills and other exercises introducing progressive elements of spontaneity and active resistence may be applied to any set-play, offering a bridge between martial choreography and free sparring/fighting.

4) The canon of formal set-plays offer a “common language” for modern Bartitsu practitioners, which is especially useful when training with people from different clubs.

Here is an interpretation of Captain Laing’s “First Example” of Bartitsu stick fighting, which he described but did not illustrate in his article:

First.–We will suppose you are attacked by a man also with a
stick in his hand; in nine cases out of ten a man who doesn’t know “Bartitsu” will rush with stick uplifted to hit you over the head.

Assume “first position,” guard head, then, before he has time to recover himself, hit him rapidly on both sides of his face, disengaging between each blow as explained, the rapidity of these blows will generally be sufficient to disconcert him; the moment you see this; dash in and hit him in the throat with the butt end of your stick, jump back at once and as you jump hit him again over the head.

laing-1-1
The defender (right) assumes the “first position”, equivalent to the Front Guard described and illustrated in Barton-Wright’s articles but with the guard held wide to the defender’s right, inviting the attacker’s strike to the top of the defender’s head.
10
The attacker takes the bait and strikes to the top of the defender’s head.  The defender wards the attack, allowing it to “shed” past him.
laing-1-3
The defender immediately strikes a backhanded blow across the right side of the attacker’s face …
laing-1-4
… disengages …
laing-1-5
… and then strikes a forehanded blow across the left side of the attacker’s face.
The defender then jumps in and delivers a backhanded jab to the throat with the butt end of his cane …
laing-1-7
… and then jumps back again out of distance, finishing with a backhand strike with the ball handle of his cane to the top of the attacker’s head.