Low-line attacks in sabre

[Asterix]

A sabre question:

Do you use low-line attacks and if so, how often during a bout?

[Peach]

Yes. How often? That depends on my opponent and on whether the referee recognizes that a low-line attack is an attack.

[Teme]

I used to do them a lot, but the new timings making stop-cuts so prevalent I now prefer having steel between my wrist and opponent's blade as long as possible into attack.

[Purple Fencer]

Dependes on the opponent...if you're facing someone who's never seen one, go for it...chances are he'll try a bad four parry and you'll catch his arm.

[KD5MDK]

I do them a lot, mostly as slower attacks. I can often catch people on the bottom of the wrist that way.

[OleMissFencer]

Originally Posted by Peach

Yes. How often? That depends on my opponent and on whether the referee recognizes that a low-line attack is an attack.

I agree with this. Really depends on your ref at the time. Sometimes it's just too subtle for some of them.

[SamIam]

Yes, but as previously mentioned you need to teach most referees that they are indeed attacks and not counterattacks. I find that they can be very effective against flag waivers.

[Inquartata]

But how do you do this? Most refs are not very amenable to being "taught" by fencers, I have found.

Anyway, Peach nailed it: depends on the opponent and the referee, particularly the latter. Some will simply not call a low-line attack an attack. ( "It's not an extension toward valid target, it's an extension toward the ground!" Don't laugh, I've heard this very rationale, and from a World Cup level sabre fencer. ) If they do recognize it, I use the low line quite a lot.

[nahouw]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Anyway, Peach nailed it: depends on the opponent and the referee, particularly the latter. Some will simply not call a low-line attack an attack. ( "It's not an extension toward valid target, it's an extension toward the ground!" Don't laugh, I've heard this very rationale, and from a World Cup level sabre fencer. ) If they do recognize it, I use the low line quite a lot.

Actually, since the rule book specifies that in sabre the blade needs to be presented at a 135 degree angle to be considered an attack.... that is a valid comment.

What I don't like is when I once had a bout with an opponent who was coached by a high level coach and would start a low line attack. I would recognize this, take the blade and the cut, only to be told by the referee that it was her attack. I then went to talk to this high level coach (while not knowing at the time that she was his student) and asked him if a pris de fer doesn't get me R-O-W, what do I need to do??

[sabreur]

We talked about this before, I know.

It is one thing to attack in the low line where your arm is at least somewhat extended toward your opponent.

However, there was a fad in sabre a couple of years ago to extend the arm essentially straight down, with the blade horizontal, and claim that you should get the attack. The fencer would execute a pursuing attack with the blade well out of reach of the opponent, and sort of flick the blade in from the wrist when the other guy ran out of strip or patience and counter-attacked. For a while, referees recognized this action (basically, sort of the sabre equivalent of the Sabine Bau chickenwing march), but they don't anymore. Today, you could prepare with a low-line threat, but you'd better extend the hand forward in your final action.

Good riddance, IMNSHO. By the way, I do attack in the low line fairly often.

MR

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by nahouw

Actually, since the rule book specifies that in sabre the blade needs to be presented at a 135 degree angle to be considered an attack.... that is a valid comment.

What does the 135 degree rule have to do with arm extension? It's not as though the two are mutually exclusive. They're two separate components of a valid attack.

What I don't like is when I once had a bout with an opponent who was coached by a high level coach and would start a low line attack. I would recognize this, take the blade and the cut, only to be told by the referee that it was her attack.

I sometimes get the opposite side of the coin. My opponent attacks in the low line, I beat it---downward, perforce---and then cut. Half the time the call will be that I attacked and was parried. Which is decidely perplexing inasmuch as my opponent was chasing me at the time, and there's no target to be attacked 2 feet out in front of his hand and down near the floor in any case...

[KD5MDK]

However, the rulebook only states the 135deg rule in feint attacks. I suppose interpretation may apply that to all of them.

In any event, it does not specify 135deg from where. So I would say a low line attack clearly threatening the opponent's weapon arm could qualify under the 135 rule anyway.

[Teme]

I think the 135º rule is there to clarify that the feint has to really threaten target, and if you hold either your hand or blade back you're preparing, not making a compound attack.

The 135º is the angle between the blade and the arm, so definitely low line attacks fit the definition.

[sabreur]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

I sometimes get the opposite side of the coin. My opponent attacks in the low line, I beat it---downward, perforce---and then cut. Half the time the call will be that I attacked and was parried. Which is decidely perplexing inasmuch as my opponent was chasing me at the time, and there's no target to be attacked 2 feet out in front of his hand and down near the floor in any case...

This is one of the cases where an extended counter-four back-edge or counter-prime strike beat that contacts your opponent's blade and slides up over the tip can help the referee see what actually happened. Because your blade is clearly moving backward (towards you) in the beat action, it is harder for the ref to mistake the action for a stop-cut.

MR