Distance is the space between two fencers measured along the fencing line. If the fencers can reach each other with a lunge they are said to be in middle or lunge distance. If one person is taller or has longer legs then they can usually reach further with their lunge. It is important to know that in lunge distance the attacker can reach the target in one movement. This is important to consider if the attacker is already one movement ahead during the preparation.
The easiest way to understand this it to look at the distance. If one fencer completes an advance before the other on reacts with an equally spaced retreat the initial fencer has literally gained a step. This means the initiating fencer has gained one movement or one fencing tempo. Lets say the initiating fencer who started from far distance steals one tempo by advancing into lunge distance before the follower can retreat. Now the fencer who has advanced can also initiate an attack and the other fencer is still one tempo behind. If the attacker starts from a good position and is extending their weapon into an open line it is almost impossible for the defender to protect himself.
All of this can be avoided by keeping in step with your fencing partner. If one fencer advances the other retreats, etc… But equally important is to keep in step with the leader as soon as they initiate movement. Any delay or lagging will allow the leading fencer to gain time on the follower. The fencer who can maintain distance with better precision will always have a greater timing advantage. A good exercise is to engage swords and allow one fencer to lead. The following fencer attempts to maintain distance so perfectly that no sliding occurs between blades. It is as if a single bead of welding attaches both swords.
Regardless of who starts movement lets take a closer look at what happens at lunge distance. If the leading fencer advances into lunge distance but does not attack the follower has an opportunity to strike. The following fencer ‘allowed’ the initiating person to close the distance by refusing to step back. Thus opening a face off where one or the other might choose to attack. But closing the distance aggressively or passively allowing an opponent to draw near is something a fencer does when he knows he can score a touch. He might possess an element of surprise, have his button directed at an open line, or in fact have superior point control that makes closing the distance to his advantage.
All of this is good when things work out. There are many tactics that teach how to steal the distance but learning to keep correct distance and make subtle changes in preparation is important. It is the pre-game before fencers engage in a phrase to score a touch.
As mentioned, the superior fencer almost always has better precision maintaining distance. They can stay just outside of their opponent’s lunge to a tighter degree and because of this are able to dial in at an opportune time to attack. The less skilled person has to make corrective moves and begins to lose tempo.
Whether a fencer is leading or following the footwork it is important for him to keep the distance exactly. Risks are taken when changing the distance because this is like asking the other fencer a question, who knows how they will respond? This is especially a bad thing if the opponent has a timing advantage or if they are close enough to strike.
A common question asks, “What do I do if the other fencer keeps closing? If I keep the distance I will eventually be run off the strip!” Although there are many answers to stopping a closing fencer the fact remains that distance must be kept exactly until a strike is made. The more exactly the distance is kept the better positioned the fencer will be to touch. A closing fencer should have the advantage of timing, tactics, and position. What is meant by position is having an open line to attack into. The instant the advantage has ended the fencer should return to maintaining correct distance and continue feeling out how the other person responds.

The Concept of Momentum in Sports                             By: Richard Radgoski

NOUN:
pl. mo·men·ta (-t) KEY or mo·men·tums

Symbol p Physics. A measure of the motion of a body equal to the product of its mass and velocity. Also called linear momentum.

A. Impetus of a physical object in motion.
B. Impetus of a nonphysical process, such as an idea or a course of events: The soaring rise in interest rates finally appeared to be losing momentum.
The online American Heritage Dictionary momentum focuses on the definition involving physics. While this remains important in sports, it may not be as important as momentum as a concept during game play. Definition 2b, above, gives us a first look at this concept. This definition, however, is dry and doesn’t capture the spirit of the word that is so important in sports.
Picture a pine wood derby car sitting on the table. It doesn’t move until someone pushes it, or it’s placed on a sloped track and let go. As it rushes down the track, it picks up speed until it reaches its top speed and then comes to the bottom of the track. This is an example of the ‘physics’ of momentum. The car picks up speed and uses that speed and its weight to keep gaining more speed until it reaches its maximum speed. We say ‘it gained momentum as it went down the track. There is something real behind the physics definition, and this time it’s the presence of gravity and its effects on an object on wheels sitting on a slope.
There is no such easy physical phenomenon behind ‘Momentum’ as it relates to sporting events, but you can see it in almost every game you watch. I recently watched the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton Pioneers arena football game and saw a brilliant example of ‘momentum’ in sports. The game was closely contested with the score 10-7 in favor of the Pioneers with 50 seconds to go in the first half. The opposing team scored to take the lead and then kicked off. A Pioneer fumble on the kickoff led to another touchdown for the opposition and in the space of 20 seconds, the Pioneers were losing 21-10. The momentum of the game had shifted and the Pioneers were in danger of letting the game get out of hand.
In this example, events within the game create momentum. A team is excited about scoring or doing something well, and they use that excitement to their advantage. With a little luck and extra effort built from the previous success, a team can create more advantageous positions and thus continue to gain momentum toward winning the game.
The momentum of a game can be disrupted, and this is where you find stunning upsets or amazing comebacks. In the Pioneer’s game mentioned above, most of the fans thought the Pioneers were going to lose even when there was an entire half of football still to be played. With the momentum their opposition had gained, that might have been true if they continued playing. It was half time, however, and the Pioneers were going to get the ball first. It appeared that the momentum was still against them when they were forced to go for a field goal. A lucky bounce and seconds later they had scored a touchdown. Kicking off, the Pioneers used their luck and heightened excitement to press an advantage on defense and they sacked the opposing QB three times in a row. Several plays later, they scored again and the momentum of the game had officially shifted to the Pioneers and an eventual win.
Some would call this luck or circumstance. Others would attribute it to strategy and conditioning. All of these elements are important and make up the concept of momentum. Momentum in sports can be summarized by using whatever advantage you have, whether you are more agile, smarter, luckier or stronger, and using it to gain the upper hand toward winning. Keeping the advantage by staying one step in front of your opponent, whether by changing your strategy or using your opponents low morale against them, is keeping the momentum in the game.
It doesn’t matter if you play football, baseball, basketball, or you fence. Momentum plays a part of every contest between two individuals or two teams of people. The challenge is to identify your advantages and use them to seize that momentum. Good Luck!

A few thoughts on becoming a champion: A lot of sports focus on winning. It was interesting to hear that some of the Tour De France racers wished they could take a real tour through France and enjoy the sights rather than racing over 2000 miles and not see anything. The Tour De France racers felt happy with the thought of touring through France for their own health and interests rather than killing themselves as competitors. Of course they wouldn’t be paid...
But many benefits exist for the recreational fencer. Much is gained when goals are set according to the amount of time put into them. It might be important to simply direct attention on learning and excelling in something that intrests you. Such as understanding the theory or psychology of fencing. It is always more enjoyable to participate when you understand what is happening. Trying out different weapons or focusing on achieving skills in one aspect such as technique or tactics give plenty of things to work on.. Even free fencing can have a theme, you might be working on one parry or improving on your health by the time and intensity that is applied.
Editing your fencing might lead to executing a particular disengage attack. A lot of thought can be put into setting this up and performing the movement well. The same can be said for excelling at any technique. Practicing with specific styles such as classic French, Italian, or modern tactical fencing are three structured approaches. Mark Pitely is known for training very specifically with a method of fencing expressed by Aldo Nadi.
Fencers should also keep in mind what other people are doing. Often people are working on certain goals, or they might even be fencing seriously for touches. Keeping in mind what others are doing and finding balance with these efforts is polite and goes a long ways in being appreciated by everyone involved. It is part of the plan.
If health is important fencing can always use better methods to moving in a body friendly way. Lately several people have been using yoga as basic theory for gentle motion.. Both mental and physical expression are learned through passive movement. Others cut to the chase. Competitors can do a lot for themselves by learning how to base train fundamental conditioning and then peak for important competitions.
And what is wrong with simply engaging others in a mindless and carefree way? Taking time to enjoy activity with play is very important. For those who play seriously saber fencing has many areas of mindlessness that echo zen training. Establishing good rhythm in saber takes a certain distal mindset yet the rhythmic patterns are specific.
The point is there is more to offer than just setting a goal on becoming a champion. For those who are given the right circumstances and desire turning into a top fencer is not out of the question. But even this has goals. A champion of what

The Italian school structures modern fencing theory. It is like a table of fencing elements but does not go into every combination what those elements can do. It emphasizes defensive cover with offensive and counter offensive movements. Everything from technique to tactics is measured exactly. Also; here is the golden nugget of the school, all of its applications are placed into a definitive hierarchy. It is excellent for the beginner learning to work with a specific set of tools and very good for the advanced fencer seeking to achieve a better understanding of how the movements relate, and how they are refined into simple and expedient directions.
Like math the system is clear because all the rules are present but as in math all of the rules have to be remembered.
The Italian school uses what is most efficient and throws out anything that is superfluous and considered dangerous. The blade work and distance are precise and one set of defense covers another. By no means does the school cover everything that is possible in fencing. In fact it eliminates what is not necessary.
The style of Italian fencing visually falls between foil and epee. Because the target area is deep and right of way is enforced it resembles foil but because the guard position and range of movements emphasize offence and counter offence there are also similarities to epee.
There is no question about how the technique is applied to tactical circumstances. For instance there are a specific set of attacks that correspond to a specific set of defensive positions and vice versa. There are also particular formulas for ripostes, feint attacks, actions on the blade and counter attacks. What becomes dynamic is how one set of laws corresponds to another. The student learns to infer how one activity completes another. Because there is such a wide arsenal of movements a bit of creativity is necessary to discover the right solutions.
The Italian method builds up a high processing speed in the intellect of the user. The word intellect is used because the answers cannot be pulled out of a hat. Like a code certain questions beg particular answers. The movements are so logical they almost feel like natural intuition but as a precaution reason asks that practice take one step outside of intuition. So intellect chooses which tools are going to be used. The fencer is asked not only to remember these ingredients but also the order which they are used.
When confronted with a fencing problem the student observes his opponent and thinks, “According to my opponent’s action I reason the correct course of reaction would be to…” Everything is very logical. This is great for beginners because they are forced to operate under closed parameters. This is also good for higher level fencers and scholars who are looking for firm ground to tread on when testing out ideas or looking to reference basic theory.
Probably most challenging is teaching Italian fencing. Simple formulas become complicated possibilities and the effort of remembering what can and cannot be done makes executing movements slow. Perhaps this is not a bad thing. It is the responsibility of the teacher to break things down into chewable bits and this is something a teacher should be able to do anyway, no matter what method is being used. It is nice teaching this school because everything is objective and each segment can be dissected into manageable drills with predictable outcomes. Students are conditioned into applying a limited scope of movements until they are able to direct and blend tactics with quick analyses. This gives the student a sense of self confidence about his own abilities. It is like being able to build your own house by mixing the tools and blueprints already given.
The French school is considerably more subjective. It does have its own set of distinct traits, especially with emphasis on deep guards and absence of blade contact. The soft movements are fluid and refined. The French method is subtle and uses misdirected attacks mixed with sneaky invitations. The fencer uses an impressionistic brush to paint a picture of blending colors and shadow. The Italian school sketches things as they are. One might say the French school lacks substance and leaves the fencer with nothing firm to hold onto. But there is something left to the imagination. Strategy is emphasized, one action might correspond with many others and this subjective view leads to different approaches with a variety of planning. It allows for interpretation. The Italian school has no interpretation. Actions are codified to order the combatant through the dark and confusing corridors of war.
Italian fencing is a great learning tool. It literally separates one compartment of the mind from another and gives the user full control over what is normally a laborious process; reasoning at high speed. The intellect directs the body and movements are learned until they become pressed into the nervous system. Eventually the natural reactions are indistinguishable from learned ones. Except each decision is made one step outside of pure instinct. If the fencer wants to choose actions through his intellect then this school puts his mind into control with expedience.

A few weeks ago Carlo Savo, one of our teachers at the FEX asked his brother Joseph and John Proctor to go on a challenging hike with him. John suggested inviting some others to go but Carlo cautioned the hike was rugged in nature and was going to be very difficult. He was right. We hiked along a little known path near the park of Ricketts Glen. Some of the well known trails that run along the multiple waterfalls of Ricketts Glen are extremely challenging. Many of the mountain goat type of paths skim precariously along rocky gorges. This one was no different except the trails were hardly used and to get a direct view of the hidden waterfalls there was no trail at all.
I felt like this 8 mile hike was worth the effort. I participate in many strenuous activities such as racing or touring by snow shoe, cross country ski, running, canoe, bicycle and of course the multiple fencing tournaments. I have also grown up among some of the deepest backwoods of Pennsylvania and have hiked through them so often it doesn’t seem out of the ordinary. But one thing I have avoided are deep forays directly up stream beds since they are among the most difficult and impenetrable paths. It is almost impossible to cover any large tracts of ground quickly around the edges of the stream beds because they are strewn with deadfalls and thick brush. Going strait up them is usually equally difficult due to slippery and uneven footing and of course, water. So as forest paths the direct route along the creeks are no good.
This was no exception. In fact it was no exception on a grand scale. Carlo and Joseph have taken many adventurous trips up the cricks in our backwoods of PA. They can more or less skip along from rock to rock, especially Carlo who is extremely agile and coordinated. Joseph weighs about 220 pounds and is in good shape so he did remarkably well for his size with his experience. I was extremely tired that day and always took the path of least resistance, going straight through the water when necessary. The only person with sticky rubber on their boots that was well suited for creeks and slippery rocks was Carlo. I had a pair of worthless army boots on with hard rubber and Joseph had some Acme generic brand on his feet. So we suffered considerably with this footwear. Carlo and Joseph had a mindset for such places while I usually avoided them so this helped them psychologically.
The first two and a half miles was directly up an awfully rocky gorge interspersed with three waterfalls that ended in a canyon like cul de sac. Climbing through the gorge took considerable concentration and closely observing of the easiest path. It was important to get into the rhythm of moving along the crick. The cul de sacs at the base of the waterfalls presented another problem since there was no direct path up them. We had to trace downstream a little ways to find the most imperceptible goats path to go around. These were strenuous and slippery climbs with unsure footing, but each time with care and close scrutiny a path was imagined or found to get around the falls.
Naturally the scenery was exotically beautiful and dangerous. To twist an ankle or break a leg inside these remote gorges would present some serious extraction problems, it was no place to fool around in. Having an escape route always in mind and knowing where we were according to the map was important.
After the third waterfall we actually got onto a fairly steep gradient trail. This route that may as well have been a deer path was like a paved highway compared to the crick. The gradient climbed for almost two miles and seemed to go on forever. Joseph suffered the most since he had to carry his own weight and was also carrying a 30 pound pack on his shoulders. So he got a serious workout. Once out of the gorge we found ourselves scrabbling along a scrub brush and woods plateau and here the trail disintegrated completely among massive deadfalls. Deadfalls are where huge swaths of trees get blown down in storms. They are formidable and nigh impassable obstacles. We had been following orange spray painted blazes on the trunks of trees but our trail markers disappeared into these deadfalls and we had to carefully pick our way around these natural catastrophes. Finding the trail again was time consuming and very discouraging. Usually it did not start right up after passing the deadfall. Instead the deadfall went on and on or it gradually cleared itself up. All three of us would spread out and target the locations, leaving an anchor to scout where the trail ended so we didn’t get completely lost. The mental strain taxed our fortitude, as there is only so much time to successfully find the trail anew. The sun does eventually drop. Here I was more comfortable as I am always lost and have rarely followed established paths. So eventually our combined efforts found the trails connections.
I found this part to be the most fun, if fun can be used as a word because it took planning and strategy to go around the deadfalls and find the trail. There was less danger here, unlike the treacherous gorges with its water, rocks, and cliffs. For me hassles could be overcome so long as they weren’t dangerous. The deadfalls were so confusing it was comically ludicrous.
The rest of the hike was all downhill. Once off the plateau with its tangled mazes we headed four or five miles down clear paths beside the stream beds to the car. Carlo and I opted to go directly down even more rugged streams for explorations sake but Joseph warned against us splitting up and besides; we had enough physical rigor for that day. He was right and we had a very nice jaunt on the way back. We did stop at one 40 foot waterfall that had a clear path leading to it and enjoyed this scenic area for a little while.
Our trip was about 8 miles over rugged terrain. Carlo found this hike in a book called, “Hiking the Endless Mountains.” It was listed as the most difficult of all the hikes in the book. But in taking the hike we learned something about the more obscure nooks in the backwoods of PA and the nature of its terrain. It was challenging to orient along a challenging trail and took a lot of cerebral effort and planning to follow, but was within easy driving distance to start. Most of the fun was in finding the trail in all its different stages. This had a good and aggressive feeling to it, although much of the aggression was found in being patient and very carefully thinking things through.
The kind of strength, stamina and agility differed considerably from a marathon or triathlon. The mental wits that are required are considerably different than a race or tour with clear routes and open paths, or roads planned out in advance. So Carlo’s idea was worth the effort.



 

Classic French fencing explains theory but does not build in a closed mechanical system. For instance if your adversary invited in 7th guard you might attack to the low outside, or do a feint direct to the low outside, or try something that isn’t mechanically logical, but based on psychology statistical analysis, or roll of the dice. You might feint into the closed line of the adversary, right into their 7th guard! There might be a general idea to make your actions into the most open lines but this school doesn’t demand this. Instead it just explains what an attack and a feint are. Different French schools do adhere to some kind of logical system, especially the Military School, but they do not follow the same rigorous, orthodox pap of the Southern Italian School. Nor is the French system as homogeneous. Instead theory is carefully explained and the movements are taught, but the tactical application is left open ended.
The southern, most classic Italian school is mechanical in nature. For every action there is a reaction and everything is put into a sequence of events. Nothing is left to chance, specific moves ask for specific answers. For instance if your adversary invited in 7th guard you would attack to their low outside line with opposition to the right. If you performed a feint direct it would be to the low outside, your opponent would respond with a parry of 8, then you would reply with disengagement clockwise to the high line. Everything is reduced to the most direct movement according to the alignment of blades.
The French school originated around 1650, during the heyday of French power under King Louis the XVI. This baroque era had many changing ideas, technology and fashion. Although the French learned much of their fencing technique from the Italians they took it on themselves to shorten blade length and simplify the handle into a straight piece without the complicated crossbars and swept hilt of the rapier. It is hard to say what prompted these changes but perhaps being the center of culture and fashion allowed the French to do whatever they pleased. It would be an interesting paper if someone would write about reasons for changing fashion during the baroque era.
The Italian rapier had a long blade that was anywhere from 38-52” inches in length. Because the blade was so long it was hard to do any wide, evasive movements. The front forefinger and middle finger or just the single forefinger was wrapped around the crossbar hidden underneath the intricate swept hilt of the guard. The guards were mostly long established threats like a point in line. Blade contact and domination was common since the threatening line had to be removed. Because of these factors attacks and counter attacks were emphasized. Most evasive movements to free the defending blade from the attacker’s bind were counter offensive in nature and many of these were done with an extended arm.
The shorter French blade with its simple open handle freed the hand for wider evasive movements. It also allowed for deeper guard positions. An attack called the cut over, the coupe, was a novel way to go around the adversary’s blade. This required pulling the blade back and cutting over the adversary’s tip. The coupe is often wider than the disengagement. The disengagement maintains a point threat and travels around the adversary’s blade near the guard rather than over the tip.
The French sword also allowed the guard positions to be held closer to the body and defended with parries rather than counterattacks. The defenders parries are then immediately answered with ripostes, sometimes the riposte even travels to the target without blade contact! It might seem absurd to attack without opposing the opponent’s sword but the small French blade was so fast, these movements were possible. Be aware these changes happened slowly and were only tendencies in a school that gave way to general theory and strayed from specific counterattacking movements.
The French school can be summed up into these characteristics. 1) Breakdown of movements into general theory as opposed to an ordered sequence. 2) Broader range of strategic preparation as opposed to tactical reaction. 3) Shorter blade of about 28-32” inches that almost exclusively emphasized thrust attacks. 4) Lighter sword that changed the timing and rhythm of play. 5) Simple straight handle with a simple guard. This freed hand movement, forced correct finger placement, and allowed visualization of finger placement. 6) Deeper guard position. 7) Preparations and attacks with less blade contact. 8) Attacks with coupe. 9) The counter disengage. 10) Attacks with multiple feints. 11) The riposte. 12) Less emphasis on counter attacks. 13) Fluid and refined movement. This found advantage through subtlety rather than speed and power.
The simple handle makes it almost impossible to attack the opponent’s blade with the same vigor as the Italian handle with its finger wrapping crossbars. The French style uses wider deceptive movements, the coupe and deep guards creates a game of attacks and parries in contrast to the Italian game of counter offense.
Since counter attacking lines are not automatically set up with extended weapons, the French school makes more complicated offensive preparations into the opponent’s defensive preparation. Italian theory would call this making an action in time, IE: into the opponent’s preparation.
Despite these differences the basic positions of the guards and the attacking and defending lines are derived from the Italian school. The early French teachers learned considerably from the Italians. Most striking is how French theory is applied. It is like having a number of random Leggo pieces without a blueprint to build them into a certain shape. This gives greater possibilities for strategic planning since there are more ways to combine the movements. The French system is more abstract but it is also more flexible. It is user friendly because it does not demand that movements be put into a specific order, so long as the general rules of right of way are followed.
Each school believes that good technique and style comes first. That tactics are derived from what is possible through technique. This emphasis in control goes back to the days when duelists did not want to leave anything to chance. It was critical they were able to defend themselves and stop their adversary flat. Unlike sport fencing duelists could not afford to take any hits in order to predict what the other fencer was going to do.
Of course there are exceptions, even during the most classic days of fencing. Both good and bad fencers exist at all times and there have even been bad looking fencers who were quite good. People will break the rules to see if something better will work and this is good. There were classic French fencers who did not fit the bill of what was expected of the French style but they still managed to embellish, or combine their movements with a high degree of efficiency.

A point d’ arret is a small triangular button affixed to the end of an epee. It has three sharp crowns that stick out about 14/16 of an inch. These sharp points are then wrapped with wax thread so only the three sharp tips stick out. Before electric epee fencing the point d’ arret was used to make the touch clear. Point d’ arret means to arrest, or stop the button with the point. It grabs onto the fencing jacket.
Four selected fencers participated in a point d’ arret competition on sand last fall. The points were left without the wax thread for sharper results. The first pool was played for 5 touches in 5 minutes and the second pool played for 5 touches in 3 minutes. The direct elimination was for 15 touches in three rounds of three minutes with a one minute break between the first two rounds.
The result of this long and intense effort was one glove and arm sleeve ripped to shreds. A pair of pants was slashed in two places with superficial cuts to the skin. These could have easily led to stitches. Several square shots to the torso on each player with needle point punctures and bruising.
It was immediately clear that risky uncontrolled movement was extremely dangerous for the fencer who dared foolish action. Emotionally and logically it was very hard to do anything but develop preparations with the blade that effectively covered the attacker from harm. Attacks had to be done with protection on mind for one could not risk a double hit. Not because the touch was lost, but because there was extreme motivation not to get hit at all. Even if one fencer was down 1-4 touches there was little incentive to rack up points at any cost. All efforts were directed at stopping the opponent with five touches so they were no longer a threat and to avoid being touched. It was important that dangerous attacks were stopped with good parries, so a strong defense formed an offensive backbone, there was no choice in the matter. Derobements and the coupe were used, especially with the French weapon but it was hard to discern whether the French or Italian swords gained the advantage. They certainly were used differently. The French epee made it hard to predict where the blade and point would be and it effectively stopped attacks with deep parries. It was possible to run out the clock when up in touches. This could be done with heavy counter threats or gaining a complete offensive advantage. Each case fulfilled the same objective, don’t get hit.
In short risky movement and tactical “guess work” was non-existent. One could not afford to get hit to learn how the opponent acted. Although the rules gave a point to the fencer who touched first making a counter attack into an attack that was going to arrive, although late, was almost impossible. Extremely good technique backed by a strong determination with an impenetrable defense was very important.. Touches scored with attacks, counter attacks, ripostes and remises were seized with total commitment. The moment was not wasted but given strong emotional commitment. But only when the defender was completely out of position could a touch be scored.
The sand curbed athletic footwork. Avoiding unnecessary small shifts of weight and making an effort to keep rock solid balance was emphasized. Very small changes of distance and its consequence was immediately noticed and; if anything, a super awareness of distance was present. Mistakes could not be made up through a strong recovery in the legs. Losing a tempo when the attacker seized critical lunge distance, usually small, spelled disaster for the defender.
The hot sun and open air were exhausting and everyone had muscle aches and high fatigue afterwards. This fighting under duress wore out the nerves and clearly brought out character traits in each fencer.
This was a great exercise of intensity and extreme emphasis on defensive/offensive movement but limited strategic opportunity. We had a great opportunity for a focused experience but not something to be done often.

The tactical wheel is like a game of rock, paper and scissors in the way one object outmaneuvers another. It might be said the wheel directs the user into progressive attacking actions but the same is true in capturing position during the preparation. One type of movement, if correctly executed, defeats another. Tactics make up one part of defensive technique, but also timing, speed, rhythm, cadence, correct distance, strength, balance, flexibility, degree of reaction, point control, recognition of lines, just to name a few, all play an important part. Knowing which parts are most relevant in a given situation, relative to what the fencer is capable of producing is something else altogether. Still a good tactician can make a lot out of very little and pull off some remarkable feats with tactics alone.
The wheel does have some different interpretations and it is doubtful anyone really understands the essence of tactics but the views are all similar. Modern models are flexible but at the expense of being messy in organization. The classic Italian formula has ten stages of counter attacks, all of them governed by a logical order of cause and effects. The French have subjectively managed to blur everything into an easily comprehensible but sometimes vague system. Then movements like point in line and second intention exist but these don’t seem to fit neatly anywhere along the wheel. What in the world are they?
Below is a picture of the wheel as modeled by Maestro Beguinet of Duke University.






At the top of the wheel are simple attacks. Moving clockwise a well executed simple attack is best defended with a parry and a riposte. In turn the parry can be faked out with a feint and all feints are grouped into compound attacks. The wheel shows how compound attacks follow the parry and riposte. So a feint draws the parry and then the parry is avoided with an indirect attack. More subtly feinting might draw a hesitation on part of the defender and this is just as good as a parry, the attacker can then follow through while the defender is frozen.
Onto the next stage. As Cappo Ferro once said, “When he feints I attack.” Compound attacks, especially those done with multiple movements are subject to being stopped with a counter attack. This type of counter attack hits while the opponent is feinting; it is known as the stop hit in time.
Now things get interesting and a little complicated. The next cog on the wheel is called countertime. Countertime defeats the stop hit in time. This is done as a feint specifically to draw the counter attack. When the counter attack is launched counter time performs a counter attack into the counter attack. A better term is a counter action. This counter action might be defensive, as a parry and riposte, or counter offensive, as a counter attack into the counter attack. Blade opposition and body feints are all possibilities. It is important to note that counter time is a feint intended to draw a counter attack while compound attacks draw parries so they can be avoided. The feint does not have to be with the blade, it could be done with body language or footwork and it can even act as a feint with subtle timing changes and pauses to which most intents and purpose look like invitations. As mentioned at the beginning these tactics do not have to actually create a fencing phrase, countertime could be employed purely in preparation with the objective of seizing a stronger position. The logic is the same. But for clarities sake we will imagine all feints done with a point threat from the blade and all tactics leading up to a touche.
Continuing clockwise movement around the wheel is the feint into time. The feint into time is a compound counter attack that purposefully draws countertime and then stops it with its own counter action. So the fencer who produces counter time by feinting in turn is met with his opponent’s counter feint. Enough said.
Finally after having turned almost full circle it is easy to conclude any counter feint is defeated by a simple attack. The French would end it here with justification. Yet Italian theory finds one more counter attacking possibility and they call it an arrest into countertime. Basically a stop hit in time into the feint in time. The arrest into countertime stops the feint in time by touching on the feint. Just like a stop hit in time. A keen mind would question, “What makes this different than a simple attack that drills into a counter feint?” The difference is the arrest into countertime begins as a feint and then counters whatever action the opponent’s feint into time takes. It takes into account all the counter movements that lead up to its final execution. It takes the precaution of anticipating the final movement of the feint into time.
This could be called compound countertime but the term is redundant.

Tempo indicates the passage of time. It can mean the pace, or rate at which an event passes, but it can also count the number of steps needed to accomplish a certain goal. Tempo becomes very noticeable when time is limited and something repetitious has to be accomplished quickly. When a step is missed and time is running out, the maximum number of daisy’s plucked, dishes washed, and wood chips chipped, thoughts lead to wondering what could have been done to do the job quicker.
A chess game makes tempo evident, especially when you are behind in moves and cannot launch an offense. Many thoughts rack the brain asking how to develop an attack in the fewest possible moves. Of course complicated offensive preparations are possible so long as the opposing player is kept on the defensive or at least held at bay while a good position is captured. Sometimes great effort and many tactical battles are fought just to secure a strong position when the enemy king cannot be taken directly.
Even a beginner knows when they are behind. They feel claustrophobic, cut off, interrupted and pushed around. Precious space shrinks up. It feels like a game of catch up is always being played with the opponent. It seems like ground is always being lost and the opponent dictates the tune rather than the defender getting to direct where the fight will go.
Something not so obvious is that time passes even when fencers are not moving. For instance if one person stands still while another moves three times, either the person standing still has lost three movements, or the person moving has made three unnecessary moves. Determining what is necessary and what isn’t takes a discriminating eye. This becomes critical when one fencer seizes lunge distance. At this moment who ever thrusts first has a time advantage so long as point control and technique are accurate. In other words getting the drop in the quick draw has deadly consequences. While one stands still an attacker moves. It is dangerous for the defender to allow an attacker to seize lunge distance without the defender immediately retreating, thus maintaining safe distance and synchronous movement, or the defender should attack himself before the opponent. In fact lunge distance should not be seized unless an attack will be launched.
More subtly any move should gain advantage whether it is an attack or preparation. Two fencers standing statically at lunge distance are at fault. The only time this is done is when a feint is produced to invite an attack. Call it a feint by standing still to draw an attack. But even this should be done for no more than a single tempo, or the time it takes to make a single move relative to the faster speed of two fencers. Multiple feints at lunge distance that do not put the opponent on the defensive are suicide. When at lunge distance attack or get out of there.
If an attack cannot be developed it is possible to gain time by making the adversary chase false moves with feints, changing the distance, attacks on the blade and anything that will make them waste movements.