The purpose of Italian tempo change

[drippingwet]

I'll try to get straight to the point:

1. Is the purpose of moving forwards at different speeds about suddenly coming into hitting distance with surprise and/or preventing the opponent from timing an attack on your preparation, or is it something else?

2. If I'm right, then shouldn't you always get into hitting distance slowly in order to prevent putting the opponent on alert of you're attack?

3. How is the short Italian lunge connected with Italian tempo?

4. Is it possible to combine all of this stuff with the Romankov stuttering clown march? If so, how? (it seems to offer a bit of extra safety to the preps and extra masking of the attack).

P.S. Wouldn't it be a better idea to change the tempo with each advance?

Believe me, I've read all sorts and still don't completely get this. These questions are the reason. Please help. As a student, some of this fencing stuff seems harder to get my head around than the nitty gritty of molecular analysis. Seriously! Perhaps this just prooves that fencing is more art than science. I think the answers here could be useful for a lot of people.

P.S. I've just ordered some 2003 World Cup bouts, so if you could mention anything to look out for, I would appreciate that too.

Thanks a lot.

[SOA9286]

Originally Posted by drippingwet

I'll try to get straight to the point:

1. Is the purpose of moving forwards at different speeds about suddenly coming into hitting distance and/or preventing the opponent from timing an attack on your preparation, or is it something else?

2. If I'm right, then shouldn't you always get into hitting distance slowly in order to prevent putting the opponent on alert of you're attack?

3. How is the short Italian lunge connected with Italian tempo?

4. Is it possible to combine all of this stuff with the Romankov stuttering clown march? If so, how? (it seems to offer a bit of extra safety to the preps and extra masking of the attack).

P.S. Wouldn't it be a better idea to change the tempo with each advance?

Believe me, I've read all sorts and still don't completely get this. These questions are the reason. Please help. As a student, some of this fencing stuff seems harder to get my head around than the nitty gritty of molecular analysis. Seriously! Perhaps this just prooves that fencing is more art than science. I think the answers here could be useful for a lot of people.

P.S. I've just ordered some 2003 World Cup bouts, so if you could mention anything to look out for, I would appreciate that too.

Thanks a lot.

Do you have any articles or any information on the details of the Italian Tempo style? I've read that one article that you discussed before, but are there any other articles or diagrams or anything that helps?

[drippingwet]

Nope. That's why I've posted this. I think grasshopper might be a good place to start if you have some questions that aren't here. Anything that I might know?

[SOA9286]

Well i'lljust briefly try to answer your question based upon what I've asked my coaches..

1. I think its a bit of both. If you work around someone slowly and make them adhere to your tempo, if you suddenly change that you should, 90% of the time, throw them off. Of course thats a great thing, if they are newer to fencing they will be even more perplexed!

2. I think you're correct to a point. You have to set up yourself, dictate the tempo of the bout. If you don't then you just giveaway your hand.

[drippingwet]

Clarity...

Originally Posted by drippingwet

1. Is the purpose of moving forwards at different speeds about suddenly coming into hitting distance with surprise and/or preventing the opponent from timing an attack on your preparation, or is it something else?

[SOA9286]

Originally Posted by drippingwet

Clarity...

Ok...hmm..to respond to that, I think it is moreso surprise. When you think about it, a lot of fencing can be done with surprise and when you attack with surprise, it usually works (well, if you're good at what you do). But I also wouldn't rule out the latter of your point, because if one is expecting the defensive tempo, then you'd want to somehow disrupt the train of thought.

My 2 cents.

[drippingwet]

SOA, I wasn't asking for clarity from you, I was claryfying my own question. Thanks anyway.

[SOA9286]

I know, I responded to what you said.

[Grasshopper]

Originally Posted by drippingwet

I'll try to get straight to the point:

1. Is the purpose of moving forwards at different speeds about suddenly coming into hitting distance with surprise and/or preventing the opponent from timing an attack on your preparation, or is it something else?

2. If I'm right, then shouldn't you always get into hitting distance slowly in order to prevent putting the opponent on alert of you're attack?

3. How is the short Italian lunge connected with Italian tempo?

4. Is it possible to combine all of this stuff with the Romankov stuttering clown march? If so, how? (it seems to offer a bit of extra safety to the preps and extra masking of the attack).

P.S. Wouldn't it be a better idea to change the tempo with each advance?

Believe me, I've read all sorts and still don't completely get this. These questions are the reason. Please help. As a student, some of this fencing stuff seems harder to get my head around than the nitty gritty of molecular analysis. Seriously! Perhaps this just prooves that fencing is more art than science. I think the answers here could be useful for a lot of people.

P.S. I've just ordered some 2003 World Cup bouts, so if you could mention anything to look out for, I would appreciate that too.

Thanks a lot.

1: Yes. But hitting distance does not mean "close enough to extend your arm to hit", it means "close enough to finish your attack, be it by step, lunge, step lunge, fleche, whatever."

2: No. If you always get into hitting distance slowly, your opponent will get used to that and be wary. The point is to get into various hitting distances at differing speeds, everytime if possible.

3: The short lunge is not directly related to tempo, but it is relevant to Italian style because it ensures that they don't over extend on their attack and open themselves up to being riposted on while off-balance. (You are much less vulnerable to opponent's defence when your lunge is not overextended.)
What is also relevant about the Italian lunge is the fact that the lunge is completed at very high speed. This causes their opponents to have to back up faster than usual, and makes it difficult to retake RoW. And since the action has probably already moved to their opponents end of the strip, this is also an advantage in itself.

4: Romankov is a fencing genius. Is there a connection between his fencing style and Italian tempo? I don't know. But I do know that his tempo was/is top-class, his lunge was not over-extended and had an explosive ending to his attacks.

PS. Yes

And yes, fencing is much harder than molecular analysis.

[drippingwet]

Anyone here?

[SOA9286]

Any diagrams/photos/video of the "italian" lunge, or perhaps a description?

[noodle]

http://www.fencing101.com/content/view/169/43/

[drippingwet]

So correct me if I'm wrong, but this is a big part of the Italian game: advancing with tempo change to avoid attacks on prep and to eventually find yourself in a surprise short lunge distance...hit?

Isn't this a sort of march?

[wflaschka]

Originally Posted by drippingwet

1. Is the purpose of moving forwards at different speeds about suddenly coming into hitting distance with surprise and/or preventing the opponent from timing an attack on your preparation, or is it something else?

Yep... frequently the goal is to prevent the opponent from attacking the prep. However, sometime's it's also to (1) force the opponent to commit to the wrong action, (2) to reveal their intentions early when you can still deal with it, or (3) to activate the opponent's defense system.

In order, If I make a quick advance, or make a sudden body-feint forward, the opponent might:
(1) Parry the air, in which case I can go for the newly opened line.
(2) Attack into my preparation -- but I'm still in decision point distance so I can parry riposte.
(3) Make a parry, and then I can lead their hand around with different feints until they're completely opened up.

Originally Posted by drippingwet

2. If I'm right, then shouldn't you always get into hitting distance slowly in order to prevent putting the opponent on alert of you're attack?

Sometimes it's useful to go fast-slow too. When you have a tense, high-strung opponent, or if the opponent respects and fears you -- you can get them to defend against an implied threat, and then deliver the real attack slowly. There are lots of colloquialisms for this sort of thing -- pulled-hand attacks, late-hand attacks, hesitation attacks.

In this website, there's a long 3-part article about Marching Attacks. In the article there's a discussion of the "Decision Point." It's basically a tactic that attackers can use for funneling the opponent's reactions into the precise moment when the attacker is most ready for it. The decision point is the only moment in your attack where the opponent can hurt you -- if they go earlier you're ready, if they go later you've already scored. So if you're attacking, make sure you're supremely ready at the decision point; you'll be able to handle anything the opponent gives you.

Originally Posted by drippingwet

3. How is the short Italian lunge connected with Italian tempo?

With the Italian approach it's important to be able to launch the lunge at the right time. It's not as important to launch the lunge when your feet are ready for it. The italians try to squeak touches into openings they see or imagine, and this means they're lunging whether or not they're balanced, their feet are on the ground, or they're in the middle of another foot action (e.g., advance or glide).

Other fencers have found ways to launch lunges at the right time, while still keeping balanced. But the Italians are exceptionally good at knowing the right time -- and they use it at the expense of a good lunge.

You know the feeling -- in a lesson, you're retreating or in the middle of the advance, and the coach signals a lunge. You can either make a mediocre lunge right away, or finish your step and make a better one.

I think Grasshopper's point about not the Italians not overcommitting during the attack is also very good.

Originally Posted by drippingwet

4. Is it possible to combine all of this stuff with the Romankov stuttering clown march? If so, how? (it seems to offer a bit of extra safety to the preps and extra masking of the attack).

I'm sure it's possible. The main difference between Romankov and the Italians is that R's stuff looks more rehearsed, and the Italians look improvised.

My last coach, a Russian, was a contemporary of Romankov's -- when we were doing long preparation attacks in our lessons, I had to follow a detailed "dance plan" of steps at certain tempos, stop-shorts, pauses, accellerations. Having an idea of what to do from step to step allowed for a very manageable long attack... I made some very nice touches with longish series of movements and bladework. If I'd been improvising, I couldn't have held it all together.

The benefit of having rehearsed combos to pick from is that, at a given moment in your action, your menu of choices is always very short and you can pick between them quickly. If you go in without any planning, you have a bazillion things to choose from.

So the Romankov stuttering clown attack -- crosses the strip, and has like 4 component actions (step, body-feint, appel x 3, lunge). The Italians -- step forward, stopping and starting, and launch a lunge at the right time. It's easier to improvise simple advances finished with a lunge.

FWIW, I'm really looking forward to the "next" fencer who can do rehearsed combos. Many of Romankov's attacks have a longevity that is just not seen today. Yet I think a 20-something Romankov could operate in (nay, dictate) today's foil. The field is open.

Originally Posted by drippingwet

P.S. Wouldn't it be a better idea to change the tempo with each advance?

Well, surprise comes from change. I'd say that you want to switch back and forth between predictability and unpredictability. If you're completely unpredictable in everything you do -- the opponent will soon be extremely careful, alert, and invested in the bout. That's exactly how you don't want them.

[drippingwet]

1. Do differing lengths to advances have a role to play in changing tempo attacks?

2. If the Italians make short lunges, how do they reach that short lunging distance?

3. So correct me if I'm wrong, but this is a big part of the Italian game: advancing with tempo change to avoid attacks on prep and to eventually find yourself in a surprise short lunge distance...hit?

4. Isn't this a sort of march?

[noodle]

Originally Posted by drippingwet

1. Do differing lengths to advances have a role to play in changing tempo attacks?

sometimes, in order to play some with the tempo, but when expecting an attack it is best to work with footwork that is as small as possible to help prevent attacks into your preparation.

Originally Posted by drippingwet

2. If the Italians make short lunges, how do they reach that short lunging distance?

they change speeds. if you're keeping distance with someone going along at average speed and suddnely they kick it up to 110% fast, the distance will collapse allowing for a shorter lunge to hit and also suprising the opponent thus helping to land the point

Originally Posted by drippingwet

3. So correct me if I'm wrong, but this is a big part of the Italian game: advancing with tempo change to avoid attacks on prep and to eventually find yourself in a surprise short lunge distance...hit?

eventually find yourself, no, not really. force yourself into one. this is more or less what they're known for nowadays, though it definitely is not the only element in their game.

Originally Posted by drippingwet

4. Isn't this a sort of march?

you've kind of evolved the question into describing the march, yes.

[Grasshopper]

Thanks Walter - you have a rare ability to describe with words what goes on on the piste. This really helps to crystallize some of the ideas I have been thinking/feeling.

I really like your description of lunging at right time with poor form vs. lunging at wrong time with "proper form". This is excellent and true of the Italians. Vezzali comes to mind first.

Regarding Mr. R, I totally agree, based on what I have seen on tapes, a 20's Romankov in today's sport would dominate. It is a shame that fencers of today have not seen footage of him from the 70's and early 80's. His form in the late 80's and 90's was much much different from his young buck days.

Gawd, just thinking about his attack in the early 80's makes me dizzy. It was so incredibly dynamic, powerful, long, controlled, classical. Why has there been no one like this in 25 years!!!!???

I think it was 1980 WC, in the gold medal bout he fenced the #1 Frenchman Petruchka(?). Petruchka had just finished whomping a young Phillipe Omnes and was facing Romankov for the gold. Romankov owned him 10-1!!!! 10-1 for gawd sake!!!! I couldn't beat my Mom 10-1! Romankov beat the 2nd best fencer in the world 10-1.

[SOA9286]

Originally Posted by Grasshopper

Thanks Walter - you have a rare ability to describe with words what goes on on the piste. This really helps to crystallize some of the ideas I have been thinking/feeling.

I really like your description of lunging at right time with poor form vs. lunging at wrong time with "proper form". This is excellent and true of the Italians. Vezzali comes to mind first.

Regarding Mr. R, I totally agree, based on what I have seen on tapes, a 20's Romankov in today's sport would dominate. It is a shame that fencers of today have not seen footage of him from the 70's and early 80's. His form in the late 80's and 90's was much much different from his young buck days.

Gawd, just thinking about his attack in the early 80's makes me dizzy. It was so incredibly dynamic, powerful, long, controlled, classical. Why has there been no one like this in 25 years!!!!???

I think it was 1980 WC, in the gold medal bout he fenced the #1 Frenchman Petruchka(?). Petruchka had just finished whomping a young Phillipe Omnes and was facing Romankov for the gold. Romankov owned him 10-1!!!! 10-1 for gawd sake!!!! I couldn't beat my Mom 10-1! Romankov beat the 2nd best fencer in the world 10-1.

What's the best footage of Mr. R and where can it be attained? Thanks!

[drippingwet]

1. What if the opponent just stops retreating and decides on parrying?

2. What if the opponent advances as you advance after the "allez"?

3. What if he just stands still and won't retreat after the "allez"?

[rjccj]

Originally Posted by drippingwet

1. What if the opponent just stops retreating and decides on parrying?

2. What if the opponent advances as you advance after the "allez"?

3. What if he just stands still and won't retreat after the "allez"?

1. If you stand still during the parry against a good fencer, then they will nail you every time.

2. The purpose of small steps, you can either attack together, or retreat, break distance and start again. My understanding of most Italians is they would say attack together as many times as possible.

3. Then nail them.