Zablocki belongs to the Polish school and assigns a lot of importance to the handle. This element, in his opinion, determines the style of usage.He says that the Eastern Arabian (he calls them Damascus) were influenced by Turkish and Persian sabers and are good for swinging cuts from the horseback. Moroccan sabers are also suitable for swinging cuts from the elbow and he loves the support for the little finger.
Here we have a problem: there were so many different blade types used in Arabia that each had its own advantages and problems. My guess (and it is a very personal view) that the obtuse angle of the Arabia-proper sabers would not provide enough support for the hand.
He also does not say anything about Tulwars because he analyzed only sabers that had potential influence on Polish ones. I would love to know what he thought about the ( in my opinion, awful) disc pommel.
Generally, he does not rate them in any order. In his opinion, the Hussar Polish saber is the best (and I agree) and the Shamshir is the worst. Everything else has its own pluses and minuses. However, as you know, the arm attached to the handle is rather important, too
BTW, where did you get the shashka drawings? What is the difference between the two styles of gripping the handle( fist vs. pistol-like)? Which one is correct? I would guess the upper one is good for true swordplay, whereas the lower one mainly for swinging cuts.