Hopping Footwork

[achilleus]

I have heard this said before. But logically, given the approximate minimum human reaction time of 3/10ths of a second, if the opponent cannot "time" your bounce so as to catch you at a certain point, neither can you while bouncing react at a certain time. The perceptual rules constrain you both. You cannot in truth choose "any instant" in your bounce to move. This is why distance is so critical in fencing: if you are too close you can be hit before your brain registers a threat and tells your body to do something about it. If the opponent, by design or by chance, attacks when you are at the apogee of your bounce, even if your feet are still in contact with the ground you'll have less traction than if they were firmly planted, less purchase for your leg muscles to use to take you out of harm's way--or to take advantage of an opening. If you are a good fencer you may still escape unscathed and riposte, due to your distance, superior bladework, or whatever; but you have very slightly lessened your ability to do this by being "up in the air".

At least that's the way I see it. Is there a flaw in that analysis?

You do not have any instant to react. You are correct.

However, this is why the bouncing takes place in epee more so than any other weapon.

The fencers are out of distance for that surprise attack, and need to be constantly ready to move, or constantly be moving to confuse their opponent and obfuscate their own actions.

If one were to constantly bounce in sabre, one would get hit rather quickly due to the attack or defend nature of sabre.

This is why epee fencers vary the way the bounce, depending on distance, and when close, often switch to tiny classic advances and retreats.The bounce also allows fencers to gain more speed in their attacks, and attack from farther away.

[Inquartata]

I accept that logic, but I still have to wonder whether any advantage thus gained is not offset by the DISadvantage of spending a substantial portion of your time in less-than-ideal contact with the strip...there's still the traction issue.

There's also still the energy issue. It's all very well to say "Oh, bouncing isn't tiring, in fact it's invigorating", but at bottom a moving person expends more ergs or calories or whatever than one at rest, regardless of whether he "feels" that he is doing so or not. I often hear epeeists talk of how exhausting a tournament is, of husbanding their energy for DE's and medal rounds, and so forth. I seldom hear this from sabre fencers. I wonder whether the two observations are entirely unrelated?

[dunastor]

I seldom hear this from sabre fencers.

That's because sabre fencers are hard as stone with unlimited stamina....

[Inquartata]

If only people would realize....

[Victor]

... if your feet are still in contact with the ground you'll have less traction than if they were firmly planted ...

... by being "up in the air". ...

At least that's the way I see it. Is there a flaw in that analysis?

Yes. Based on your belief that being "firmly planted" is a good thing, and that being light on your feet somehow leaves you hanging in the air. Static positioning is bad bad bad. Also realize that we're talking about approximately a quarter of an inch difference (if that much) in how far off the floor your heel is in the bounce. In either the "down" or "up" position, you can still make a very nice advance/retreat/parry/counter-attack/whatever without having to first plant your foot on the floor. Small actions. Very small and controlled, not wild hopping.

As Ach noted (and as I said in my initial post), bouncing changes depending on what the fencer needs at any particular moment. If you train well enough, you're going to unconsciously time it correctly yourself. It's all in the training and practice.

You seem to really want bouncing to not work. Why is that? What's your personal ego investment in arguing against something that obviously works for so many people?

[wflaschka]

I have heard this said before. But logically, given the approximate minimum human reaction time of 3/10ths of a second, ... apogee ... but you have very slightly lessened your ability to do this by being "up in the air". ... At least that's the way I see it. Is there a flaw in that analysis?

I just glanced at some high level epee -- St Maur 2003, Flessel-Colovic vs Toth. Some things may mitigate the concerns raised in your analysis: the fencers bounce highest while waiting out of distance but 'dig in' when the distance gets important; during bouncing the feet only sometimes leave the floor, it's more a constant shuffle with flexing thighs; bouncing in general is used when it's needed and not used when it's not needed, sometimes in the same action. In short, it's adjustable, and, counter-intuitive or not, the fencers don't seem hampered by it.

If it's a question of being stuck at "apogee" or losing traction at the lagrange point, well, orbital mechanics affect both fencers, so it averages out.

[Inquartata]

Yes. Based on your belief that being "firmly planted" is a good thing, and that being light on your feet somehow leaves you hanging in the air. Static positioning is bad bad bad. Also realize that we're talking about approximately a quarter of an inch difference (if that much) in how far off the floor your heel is in the bounce. In either the "down" or "up" position, you can still make a very nice advance/retreat/parry/counter-attack/whatever without having to first plant your foot on the floor. Small actions. Very small and controlled, not wild hopping.

What will "very small" do against a fleche, though? Or a very strong bind attack?

Are you saying that traction makes no difference to the ability to push off in one direction or another? Or that the amount of weight pushing down has no effect on traction?

You seem to really want bouncing to not work. Why is that? What's your personal ego investment in arguing against something that obviously works for so many people?

None. I'm "invested" in knowing whether something is a real-world phenomenon or only a cherished belief; whether it "works" or is only believed to work. Which thus far seems to be the prevailing justification from most people: it works because it "obviously" works. No further curiosity required, take on faith...

As I say, bouncing seems to be an epee phenomenon, and I don't fence epee, so I am indifferent as to whether it works or not. But I am a firm believer in empirical bases for methods, and an inveterate asker of "Why?" Sorry if that makes me Martin Luther or something...

[achilleus]

I accept that logic, but I still have to wonder whether any advantage thus gained is not offset by the DISadvantage of spending a substantial portion of your time in less-than-ideal contact with the strip...there's still the traction issue.

The mobility gained far outweighs any disadvantage.

There's also still the energy issue. It's all very well to say "Oh, bouncing isn't tiring, in fact it's invigorating", but at bottom a moving person expends more ergs or calories or whatever than one at rest, regardless of whether he "feels" that he is doing so or not. I often hear epeeists talk of how exhausting a tournament is, of husbanding their energy for DE's and medal rounds, and so forth. I seldom hear this from sabre fencers. I wonder whether the two observations are entirely unrelated?

Epee is much more fatiguing than sabre because the bouts last longer than 30 seconds.

And bouncing is not all about conserving energy, but allowing mobility, and keeping the legs ready and relaxed. Trying to keep the feet constantly moving in tiny little advances and retreats is far mor tiring than bouncing.

Also, I mentioned earlier that bouncing also depends on age and energy levels.

[Victor]

I'm "invested" in knowing whether something is a real-world phenomenon or only a cherished belief; whether it "works" or is only believed to work. Which thus far seems to be the prevailing justification from most people: it works because it "obviously" works. ...

As I say, bouncing seems to be an epee phenomenon, and I don't fence epee, so I am indifferent as to whether it works or not.

OK.

Well then. Whether you're indifferent or actually do want to know, here's the deal:

It does help. Because my personal experience shows it has helped my fencing, obviously, I'm able to believe it. (Call me nutso, but it's hard to not believe in something I've experienced. ... And I suppose that might even make it sort of a "cherished belief," depending on what you mean.)

[achilleus]

As I say, bouncing seems to be an epee phenomenon, and I don't fence epee, so I am indifferent as to whether it works or not.

That's funny. I was pretty sure you had an epee rating at one time. Or perhaps my information is out of date. Or perhaps I had you confused with someone else...

[Grasshopper]

As I say, bouncing seems to be an epee phenomenon, and I don't fence epee, so I am indifferent as to whether it works or not. But I am a firm believer in empirical bases for methods, and an inveterate asker of "Why?" Sorry if that makes me Martin Luther or something...

Inquartata, I have a feeling that if I handed you hard data on a 10,000 double-blind controlled "Bouncing in Epee" experiments with conclusive results that bouncing has a positive effect on epee fencing, you would ask me to prove that the paper it is written on really exists, or that I exist. Wake up and smell the Gatorade, dude. This is sports, you "prove" things on the strip : think, effort, reflect, think, effort, reflect. Philosophical rambling will get you knocked out in the first round every time.

[Hamley]

Hopping dose help my epee game.

But its just another thing added to the game. One more thing for your oponet to thing about. Also it helps you keep loose. Which is real good in epee.

[Inquartata]

The mobility gained far outweighs any disadvantage.

And once more, we know this because....?

Epee is much more fatiguing than sabre because the bouts last longer than 30 seconds.

I don't know that duration trumps intensity. 30 seconds of sabre includes more violent exertion than 9 minutes of most epee bouts. ( There are exceptions in both weapons, of course. )

And bouncing is not all about conserving energy, but allowing mobility, and keeping the legs ready and relaxed. Trying to keep the feet constantly moving in tiny little advances and retreats is far mor tiring than bouncing.

OK, I'll buy that...though early on in the thread it was said that "Actually (bouncing) hopping can provide a relief when your legs become fatigued from more static footwork. " The question is still why, given the premise that epee can be so tiring, would one actually exacerbate the process by increasing energy output?

If indeed it's benefits to mobility do outweigh its costs in energy, that might indicate its use for a given important bout. But all the time? Even in pools?

[Inquartata]

It does help. Because my personal experience shows it has helped my fencing

Can you elaborate a bit more? Ie how did you determine that it was that specific technique that helped, instead of another or instead of simple general improvement happening at the same time you adopted the practice? If you can tell for sure that it was bouncing and nothing else, how did it help you exactly and how much? ( I know such things are difficult to quantify, but you must have some idea. )

[Inquartata]

That's funny. I was pretty sure you had an epee rating at one time. Or perhaps my information is out of date. Or perhaps I had you confused with someone else...

Well, I had a E once. The result of fencing epee as a lark in a tournament where no other sabre fencers showed up to fence. It's long since expired, though, and I haven't done epee since then...

The whole of my "technique", BTW, was to use the guard as a little tiny buckler, and let the sabre footwork do the rest...

[Inquartata]

Wake up and smell the Gatorade, dude. This is sports, you "prove" things on the strip : think, effort, reflect, think, effort, reflect. Philosophical rambling will get you knocked out in the first round every time.

Heh, and you've been fencing for HOW many decades, again?

[achilleus]

And once more, we know this because....?

Because I win more often when I bounce than when I don't.

I don't know that duration trumps intensity. 30 seconds of sabre includes more violent exertion than 9 minutes of most epee bouts. ( There are exceptions in both weapons, of course. )

It doesn't trump it. But it's different.

OK, I'll buy that...though early on in the thread it was said that "Actually (bouncing) hopping can provide a relief when your legs become fatigued from more static footwork. " The question is still why, given the premise that epee can be so tiring, would one actually exacerbate the process by increasing energy output?

Yes it does provide relief, not neccessarily from more static footwork, but from more traditional footwork.

It works the muscles differently, and helps relax the body.

This is only done from out of distance.

If indeed it's benefits to mobility do outweigh its costs in energy, that might indicate its use for a given important bout. But all the time? Even in pools?

Depends what you consider an important bout. When I show at local events, and am in the pools, I don't really bounce. I don't really scream either.

At world cups however, I'm bouncing almost every bout, and hopefully screaming.

Also, the ones that bounce often, are in shape, and their last worry is getting tired. The older fencer's manage their energy much more efficiently than the younger ones out of necessity.

[achilleus]

Well, I had a E once. The result of fencing epee as a lark in a tournament where no other sabre fencers showed up to fence. It's long since expired, though, and I haven't done epee since then...

Ah, then you are who I think you are...

[jBirch]

And once more, we know this because....?





I don't know that duration trumps intensity. 30 seconds of sabre includes more violent exertion than 9 minutes of most epee bouts. ( There are exceptions in both weapons, of course. )



OK, I'll buy that...though early on in the thread it was said that "Actually (bouncing) hopping can provide a relief when your legs become fatigued from more static footwork. " The question is still why, given the premise that epee can be so tiring, would one actually exacerbate the process by increasing energy output?

If indeed it's benefits to mobility do outweigh its costs in energy, that might indicate its use for a given important bout. But all the time? Even in pools?

The issue that seems to be lost here is the unique nature of reaction in Epee. In sabre (and to a lessor extent in foil) the game is about action. The person defending is usually at a huge disadvantage. Not so in Epee where the counter-attack rules. The purpose of bouncing is to keep your ability to instantly react at a flash.

In sabre, you move, forward or back, quickly to follow up the attack and so are almost constantly in motion: turning the corner is important, but reacting is disasterous. You need to act, and out manouvre your opponent and cause them to react.

In epee, you act to create opportunity to react. Because you react to your opponent initiating the action you need to keep yourself accellerating away from the ground so you don't lose that ability if you blink at the wrong time. When you bounce, you don't lose any mobility because in the time it takes you to perceive the threat, the bounce has carried you in a favourable direction and you've already got the momentum to continue it. When moving up, you can retreat, when moving down, you can dig in and go forward. You can drop and stay on an upward spike, or raise your arm and go up on your tiptoes for a downward shot. But if you have to start your movement from resting, you've lost an opportunity (especially as the targets are fleeting and tiny).

Hope this helps.

[Grasshopper]

The whole of my "technique", BTW, was to use the guard as a little tiny buckler, and let the sabre footwork do the rest...

If this is your technique, you might be better suited to SCA.