second intention attack/counter-time

[drippingwet]

I won't see my coach until next week, but I've been interested in second intent and have something to discuss.

Second intention attacks:

Apparently some coaches don't think tempo needs teaching because it's all about the senses. Perhaps their reasoning is that you either have them or you don't. Other coaches however, may feel that a certain skill in tempo can be learned through lessons. It's a very important attribute. Some might be born with a sense of tempo, and others may not be so gifted with it. But it seems that good tempo is mainly essential for first intention actions. A sense of tempo can significantly compensate for lack of speed. However, it also appears that second intention will compensate for lack of speed AND lack of tempo (because it doesn't require tempo) for those that may not be so gifted/physically powerful. By the way, just because I'm writing this, I'm not trying to say I don't have tempo or speed and am looking for alternatives, it's just something I felt was interesting.

For 2nd intent, you have less to find the right tempo, but perhaps more to investigate how the enemy reacts to a given situation. In other words, the opponent may normally parry 4 in response to a certain action, but if that action is made in tempo, the opponent won't have chance to parry 4. Therefore (unless you aren't making you're 1st intention attacks in tempo, and are relying on other things for instance) it's possibly more important that you know about that parry 4 for 2nd intention than first intention. So probing is key for successful second intention, e.g. parry riposte/opposition renewal against anticipated riposte, or renewal against an expected delayed or compound riposte. So you use the opponent's response against them, whether that be an actual action or not.

If you're against a good fencer, and you attack first intention (without good tempo), good chance he gonna parry riposte without you having much chance of counter parry (talking high level fencers here). So how would you learn how opponent deals with PIL, straight attacks, direct ripostes etc, without sacrificing points?

What's the technique of second intention these days? Is it right to make the counter parry (don't mean circular parry) from the lunge position, with forearm perpendicular to ground and the point up at the ceiling, elbow at the knee, arm close to body, guard in front of face?

Do high level fencers always try to use tempo for first intention attacks? Is tempo important for compound attacks?

Would you advocate closing eyes when waiting for the riposte, so you can feel any parry, rather than perhaps being mislead by the eyes?

Counter-time:

Just a small thing about this... if you make parry riposte, then to be at right distance to riposte, you may need to take step back (which seems what you should do anyway - make attack fall short). But with counter-time, you can't step back if your front foot (or both feet if jumping) is up in the air. So flick riposte seems an easier option. What are thought's on this? Should you be taking a step back with counter-time?

[O_O]

wow, thats long... i read the title though, so i think im qualified to reply anyway.

counter-time is good!

[fencerontheline]

I hate to say it... but the troll brings up a very good point.

[SwordSoul]

hmm, I would say that it is a feeling, but just like getting a "feel" for distance and being able to attack with stealth, it's something that you can play with and get better the more you practice/try to apply it.

I've never formally been taught that stuff (If i'm understanding tempo and second intent. terminology) but it seems to me that it comes from having a sense of control over your opponent is a big key. sooo much stuff goes into this.. i think that the tactics wheel that's been presented on this website is probably good to look at when pondering how to apply second intention and tempo, y'know?

Try "throwing away" an attack to see what reaction it causes. For myself, I know that I can't always hit on the first intention, so throwing away an attack to draw the riposte and 'then' counter-riposte (stealing time? i don't know the terms well!) their open target is a great way to rack some points up. Of course this can make them cautious or they will catch on to your game--that's when it gets interesting to throw away a riposte to draw the counter riposte and THEN score the counter-counter on them. I think that having a good sense of second intention (strategy basically) will do wonders for someone who may not necessarily be fast or have good tempo.

To me, tempo is about making them fence your game. For example, having a slow marching attack can have the same effect as a point in line i.e. it may not be fierce but if they know they have to respect it or get hit, you can cause some serious damage to an anxious opponent, particularly if you have a sense of where they like to riposte.

I suppose that second intention is a big bluffing game. Not necessarily a feinting game, i.e. "4? 6? where'm i goin?" and more drawing them into your lair, or laying traps out.

For example: (again if i'm understanding the terms right ) I did a drill with my coach where i beat in line 4, extended and advanced, he would answer with a parry 4, and before he could begin to extend for the riposte i would immediately take the blade again and finish my attack. So i was essentially "drawing" the riposte and then stealing time. It's a pretty basic drill, and it works differently with different opponents.

sometimes the rapid taking back the blade frightens them into a huge parry because of the sudden break in time, so i simply disengage to hit. Often if i can work that, I do a blatant fake attack, and when they parry it to riposte, they are afraid of my parry, and involuntarily hesitate--attack into prep for me! It's an example of controlling their reaction--when you force them to choose, they are slow and unsure i.e. when you force the decision point and guess it correctly, second intention shines and the touch is much sweeter!

Practice situations where you would apply second intention and tempo. have your partner play along. Even if it seems goofy or awkward or slow, the slow practice will make for fast execution later on in a bout.


k, off my soap/coach box now

peace
matt

ps: anyone care to elaborate/correct me?

[drippingwet]

P.S. I'm not saying that you should do 2nd intent if first intention is working.

Originally Posted by fencerontheline

I hate to say it... but the troll brings up a very good point.

Who are you referring to?

Originally Posted by drippingwet

Would you advocate closing eyes when waiting for the riposte, so you can feel any parry

I meant when waiting for the parry.

[drippingwet]

Swordsoul, thanks for the reply. Didn't get this though:

"and before he could begin to extend for the riposte i would immediately take the blade again and finish my attack."

If he isn't extending his blade as you parry, then you would be parrying his parry. Maybe I misunderstand.

[drippingwet]

Originally Posted by drippingwet

Would you advocate closing eyes when waiting for the riposte, so you can feel any parry

I meant when when waiting for parry.

[sabreur]

I couldn't make heads or tails of your post, but you need to be clear on something.

Second intention is not always counter time.

Second intention actions fall into two categories:

1. An attack that is designed to allow the opponent to parry, so you can counter-parry his riposte (used when the opponent consistently ripostes from a parry in a particular line). Second intention in this sense is NOT counter time.

2. A preparation that is designed to draw a stop cut or a stop thrust, which is then parried. Second intention in this sense is counter time.

MR

[drippingwet]

Originally Posted by sabreur

I couldn't make heads or tails of your post, but you need to be clear on something.

Second intention is not always counter time.

Second intention actions fall into two categories:

1. An attack that is designed to allow the opponent to parry, so you can counter-parry his riposte (used when the opponent consistently ripostes from a parry in a particular line). Second intention in this sense is NOT counter time.

2. A preparation that is designed to draw a stop cut or a stop thrust, which is then parried. Second intention in this sense is counter time.

MR

I know this. That's why I wrote a section on second intention attacks, and a section on counter-time.

[SwordSoul]

Originally Posted by drippingwet

Swordsoul, thanks for the reply. Didn't get this though:

"and before he could begin to extend for the riposte i would immediately take the blade again and finish my attack."

If he isn't extending his blade as you parry, then you would be parrying his parry. Maybe I misunderstand.

ah, right... he parries, and i immediately beat the blade back. so: "i extend, he parries in time, as he ripostes I parry before he really gets to finish any kind of action (it's almost an answering beat i suppose) and then i finish." I guess I forgot to mention that part.
basically draw the riposte for a quick counter-riposte. I say second intention because my first attack was fake, i just wanted him to take the bait and riposte so i could "mess him all up wit ma mad count3r r1p0st3 sk1llz." just as an example

[drippingwet]

I suppose one of the most interesting parts of this for me right now is the whole tempo thing, and where it fits and how essential it is with other options around.

Tempo is about hitting them when they can't react, and second intention is about hitting them precisely because they do react. You can take your pick as to which option you decide on using, but I'm no expert and I don't know if tempo can be so easily disregarded in the face of second intention. If you have little ability/knowledge with tempo, then does that mean you generally shouldn't do first intention attacks against good fencers?

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by drippingwet

Tempo is about hitting them when they can't react, and second intention is about hitting them precisely because they do react. You can take your pick as to which option you decide on using, but I'm no expert and I don't know if tempo can be so easily disregarded in the face of second intention. If you have little ability/knowledge with tempo, then does that mean you generally shouldn't do first intention attacks against good fencers?

I don't think you should separate tempo and 2nd intentions. 2nd intentions are all about generating a predictable response from your opponent, but by no means is tempo not important. Tempo is still an important part of second intention actions (with bad tempo, you may generate the response you want, but they could succeed instead).

[drippingwet]

Originally Posted by prototoast

I don't think you should separate tempo and 2nd intentions. 2nd intentions are all about generating a predictable response from your opponent, but by no means is tempo not important. Tempo is still an important part of second intention actions (with bad tempo, you may generate the response you want, but they could succeed instead).

Hmm, any examples of 2nd intent failing because of a tempo issue?

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by drippingwet

Hmm, any examples of 2nd intent failing because of a tempo issue?

Okay, I plan to make a second intention attack (opponent parries, I try to counter parry), and my initial attack fails, but because of poor tempo my opponent's reposte lands.

Or, I plan on using counter-time. I attack with preparation, attempting to draw a couter-attack which I will parry and reposte... instead, I draw counter attack which hits. Everything in fencing needs good tempo to succeed.

[SwordSoul]

Originally Posted by prototoast

... I attack with preparation, attempting to draw a couter-attack which I will parry and reposte... instead, I draw counter attack which hits. Everything in fencing needs good tempo to succeed.

agreed. It's very easy to get into a "I use the move to counter this move" or "if this, then this" mentality. Timing is what makes your basic riposte work. It's no different for a first intention attack. You would think that the vast majority of straight first intention attacks into line 4 would be parried, no questions asked, but the fact is some hit even at the highest levels because the tempo/timing of the hit occured when the recipient couldn't move or parry fast enough. It's not necessarily that the lunge was at a blazing speed, but that the chosen time to hit was the right one.

Also, as long as we're being liberal with the use of the term "second intention" (at least I am) consider this: A thrust, a slow advance, and then a fast advance lunge--without bladework entering into the picture, the attack started slow (i.e. first intention) and then, judging the speed/distance-reaction of the opponent, speed it up (second intention, based on the decision to match your speed, slow down, counter attack, root, etc...). It adds a whole vast dimension to your game. Keep in mind, it all has to be timed well enough so that YOU don't miss! (i've had a few embarassing touches where I "turn it on" right into their blade and I whiff beautifully). IMHO, this is the part in the game to me where it becomes very apparent that footwork really is the most important part of the game. Especially the marching aspect.

matt ---)-------

[MikeHarm]

Last year when I qualified for Div II/III, I ran up against an opponent who was able to cut through all of my parry systems whenever he launched an attack, and he was able stop almost everything I threw at him with direct attacks, disengages, flicks, coupes, angulated actions etc and ripost and score against me.

So I gave up on trying to fight in that way and switched to using tempo and timing instead. There was this point we'd reach as we did our advances and retreats, with it being kind of like the rhythm to a song we were playing where I could see in the tempo that it would be a point just before he would launch an attack consistantly.

It was only a fraction of a second, but I just kept the footwork and tempo going and looked for that point and launched a direct attack whenever I saw it over and over. Sometimes I threw in a dodging motion to it if I could to maneuver as many of the actions as possible into one light actions.. Because he was focused on attacking in that moment he wasn't able to switch gears to stop my attack only follow through with the counterattack that the director recognized as such.

I switched to fighting on the tempo level when I was down like 7 to zero, with a whole crowd of folks from his club cheering for him on his side of the strip and came back to win like 15-12.

It was kind of a simplistic application of it true but I think it was a good example to me of how if you aren't winning a fight on one level you can switch to another and completely turn things around. And tempo and timing is definately one of the other levels to take the fight to.

I think tempo is the rhythms you're setting, and timing is more the decision of when you've found the right spot to break the tempo with an action or change it to your opponents disadvantage.

Countertime is where you stay one step ahead of your opponent. Like you decide you want them to reach for you so you give them an excuse for it pick it up and hit them. Countertime is all about forcing your opponent to do what you want them to do.

Second intention I think is where you do an action expecting it to fail but create an opening for you to do a later one. For example you launch a direct attack knowing what parry riposte they'll do and realizing that your counter-riposte has a much better chance of scoring than any direct action you could throw at them. I think second intention is more of a form of countertime, a subset if you will.

[SwordSoul]

btw, at the risk of sounding like a dunce, can you talk some more about your "parry systems?"

I always looked at something akin to a parry system as a bad thing, something someone does unconsciously and that it's my job to crack it in order to score. Therefore I've never "adopted" any parry system, but I have given sweeping counter-parries when i sense I'm losing tempo, ("clearing parries?") that kind of thing.

[MikeHarm]

My parry system right now consists of:

Detached Parries 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8
Spanking parries 4, 6, 7, 8 (4 is my favorite, I do that one as good as a lefty does so its fun playing their game against them as a righty)
Yielding parries for 4, 6, 7, 8
Opposition parries for 4 and 6
Contraction parries for 4 and 6
Counterparries 4, 6, 7 and 8
Vertical parries up and down for horizontal disengage attacks
False contraction parries that convert into sabre parries against angulated actions
Blocks for flick attacks in the standard sabre positions
I can also do the sweep in prime and second and have a really nice 2nd bind off the second parry.

I do them off a guard that shifts between different parry positions and uses invitations to try to draw people into doing attacks in a line I'm looking for.

I don't like fighting so much from having my point out of line or from the line so much, maybe when I get more skilled or have a coach to teach me how to do that better I'll use it more.

Usually when someone says a parry system they mean a standard system of parries that go off a particular guard. I'm using it in the context of a system of parries designed to stop a particular flavor of action someone is using against me not tied to which guard I'm in at the moment.

Example, if people like to use feint attack to draw a narrow parry then switch to angulated actions to score I'll use the false contraction parry to convince them their ploy is working and roll into a sabre parry that catches the angulated move.

[SwordSoul]

that's some awesome food for thought, thanks mate!

[MikeHarm]

No problem. Its kind of fun with the parry systems because once I stop something if it looks like the opponent's brain clicked and he's thinking a ha, thats what he'll do I have a setup for people trying to counter my counter to their action, and one for someone trying to counter my counter to their counter action so I've ended up going to third or fourth intention sometimes if people are obsessing with doing fencing phrases.

Usually that only happens with classical type fencers and vets.

Another of my things is I'll watch what coaches are ordering their fencers to do in response to different situations and make up traps for when their fencers follow their advice. If someone does exactly what their coach says and it works against them it can really rattle them and throw them off balance.

I haven't seen many other people taking advantage of the need for the opponent's coach to give advice during the minute break. Since I'm always going to tournaments without a coach, its my way of turning a disadvantage into an advantage tactically when I can.

I think when we were doing the personality profiles thread the subject of 'how would an int-j approach fencing' came up. I think I'm a pretty good example of it.