If two people are fighting and one of them has longer arms than the other,

If two people are fighting and one of them has longer arms than the other, who will have the advantage? Depends on where the fight goes. If the fight stays at range (good luck), the long limbs will help. If the shorter limbed fighter gets in close (good luck) or the fight goes to the ground, then the fighter with the shorter limbs has an advantage. It isn’t so much about the reach, it is always how you use the tools you are given. Two swordsmen of equal skill, one left-handed and one right-handed, who would have the advantage? In a contest controlled by a computer, neither would have the advantage. The problems a left-hander presents to a right-hander are exactly the same as the problems a right-hander presents to a left-hander. From a physical or geometrical standpoint, the scenario is exactly symmetrical. In a contest fought by actual people who live on the actual earth, though, the left-hander will have an advantage most of the time, simply because he has been forced by circumstance to practice against right-handed people more. It isn’t that the right-hander hasn’t practiced against left-handed opponents, mind you. He probably has. The trouble is simply that only 10–50% of his available training partners and sparring opponents are left-handed, while 50–90% of the left-hander’s opponents are right-handed. Whether he likes it or not, the left-hander has had more practice solving this problem than the right-hander. Physically speaking, there is no difference. But training-wise, there almost always is. If two people are fighting and one of them has longer arms than the other, who will have the advantage? Two swordsmen of equal skill, one left-handed and one right-handed, who would have the advantage? In a contest controlled by a computer, neither would have the advantage. The problems a left-hander presents to a right-hander are exactly the same as the problems a right-hander presents to a left-hander. From a physical or geometrical standpoint, the scenario is exactly symmetrical. In a contest fought by actual people who live on the actual earth, though, the left-hander will have an advantage most of the time, simply because he has been forced by circumstance to practice against right-handed people more. It isn’t that the right-hander hasn’t practiced against left-handed opponents, mind you. He probably has. The trouble is simply that only 10–50% of his available training partners and sparring opponents are left-handed, while 50–90% of the left-hander’s opponents are right-handed. Whether he likes it or not, the left-hander has had more practice solving this problem than the right-hander. Physically speaking, there is no difference. But training-wise, there almost always is. Two swordsmen of equal skill, one left-handed and one right-handed, who would have the advantage? All else being equal, neither. But in the real world, not all is equal. I would posit that, generally speaking, the southpaw will have a slight advantage. Fighting left-handed people is not quite the same as fighting right-handed people. My club has an unusually large number of lefties, so I’ve had a lot of experience with lefties. It’s not difficult to adjust, but it does require a slightly different set of responses to deal with the mirrored actions of a leftie. Because lefties are far less common than righties, as a general rule the leftie will have much more experience fighting a rightie than the rightie will have fighting a leftie. And insofar as this matters, the leftie will have a slight advantage. As an illustrative anecdote, one of my best HEMA buddies is a leftie, and we used to spar all the time before we lost him to the circus. Prior to a particular tournament, I trained heavily with him. So much so that it was actually a bit weird to fight right-handed people. It wasn’t all that big a deal, but it required a noticeable re-calibration in my responses.