foil withdrawing blade

[luv2fence]

I am an unrated foil fencer, analyzing club mates,
who I will soon be fencing. (Mostly rated fencers.)

One fencer's style is so different, that it perplexes me.
Mostly low line attacks, with the initial blade extension,
with lunge or advance, then blade pulled back,
and then blade re-extended with more advances.

Does this fencer loose ROW when the blade is pulled back?
My presumption is that even a "marching" director would call
this a loss of ROW if he noticed it. If this is so, I can attack,
with ROW when the fencer withdraws the blade.

Could (should) withdrawing the blade be considered a drobement,
if it accomplishes avoiding a parry?

Of course this fencer has other low line variations, but
this one stuck into my mind.

luv2fence

[keith]

Originally Posted by luv2fence

Does this fencer loose ROW when the blade is pulled back?
My presumption is that even a "marching" director would call this a loss of ROW if he noticed it. If this is so, I can attack, with ROW when the fencer withdraws the blade.

yes, withdrawing the arm ends the attack BUT the re-extension establishes a new attack. It is important to notice if a fencer simply arm pumps or mixes arm pumps with changes of line (using wrist fingers and not withdrawing the hand).

Originally Posted by luv2fence

Could (should) withdrawing the blade be considered a drobement,if it accomplishes avoiding a parry?

derobment is what you do with Line (as in PiL, but not the 80's band) - so no. It can be a valid disengage in the case of the coupe/cutover.

[jBirch]

Originally Posted by luv2fence

I am an unrated foil fencer, analyzing club mates,
who I will soon be fencing. (Mostly rated fencers.)

One fencer's style is so different, that it perplexes me.
Mostly low line attacks, with the initial blade extension,
with lunge or advance, then blade pulled back,
and then blade re-extended with more advances.

Does this fencer loose ROW when the blade is pulled back?
My presumption is that even a "marching" director would call
this a loss of ROW if he noticed it. If this is so, I can attack,
with ROW when the fencer withdraws the blade.

Could (should) withdrawing the blade be considered a drobement,
if it accomplishes avoiding a parry?

Of course this fencer has other low line variations, but
this one stuck into my mind.

luv2fence

A couple of comments here. If the blade is continuously threatening, then you can pump your arm till you're blue in the face. It's one of the essenses of the marching attack when coupled with flicks. If the blade is pulled back and at any time it doesn't threaten target (when you extend straight then recover the arm still attempting to hit with a straight thrust for example) then you lose ROW.

A derobement is a deception of an attempt to engage the blade. Searching, if you will. If an opponent searches for your blade, and does not find it because you've moved it, ROW rests with you.

James.

[Katman]

Originally Posted by jBirch

A derobement is a deception of an attempt to engage the blade. Searching, if you will. If an opponent searches for your blade, and does not find it because you've moved it, ROW rests with you.

James.

Nah. Just continue like you mean it and claim you disengaged.

[keith]

Originally Posted by Katman

Nah. Just continue like you mean it and claim you disengaged.

ah, the 'search' with extending arm.

I hated that action with such passion until I learned how to do it .

[luv2fence]

Kieth,
I meant "derobement" in the more general sense:
avoidance or deception of an attempt to take a
blade.
I forgot that some fencers apply this only to PIL,
so I did not qualify in the original post.

l2f

[cfaustus]

Now I may be wrong, because I am often befuddled by ROW based upon 'extending arm' and the lack of need for a sufficient parry, but I would say this is an excellent opportunity for a coupe d'arrette.. By pulling back the fencer is breaking the line and therefore loses ROW. If you can hit him before he begins extending again (i.e. perhaps best timed with the back pull of the arm) you should be able to get ROW and hit him with the coupe d'arrette. Personally, I would probably go for the coupe d'arrette even if I don't hit target. Hitting his arm will stop the action and prevent him from hitting you with his 'marching attack/poor excuse for blade control' and if you do manage to hit his target then bully for you! Someone might even pay you a compliment like 'you fence foil like epee'.

[keith]

Originally Posted by cfaustus

Now I may be wrong, because I am often befuddled by ROW based upon 'extending arm' and the lack of need for a sufficient parry, but I would say this is an excellent opportunity for a coupe d'arrette..

... the important point is that the aim of this action (when done well) is to draw the stop hit.

the withdrawl will often be on the movement of the back foot - so timed with the retreating fencers front foot movement. You will of course meet people you withraw on the front foot - enjoy.

But if the action is timed properly it is almost impossible for the retreating fencer to catch the attacker with the stop hit - since forward body movement goes with forward blade movement when in distance. You can of course use false footwork to draw them forward so you can reach in with the stop hit (attack in prep).

Originally Posted by cfaustus

Personally, I would probably go for the coupe d'arrette even if I don't hit target. Hitting his arm will stop the action and prevent him from hitting you with his 'marching attack/poor excuse for blade control' and if you do manage to hit his target then bully for you! Someone might even pay you a compliment like 'you fence foil like epee'.

now while this is terribly unsporting it is not a bad occasional strategy for trying to disrupt the opponents tempo. Just be aware that you can get wrapped up in an envelopment.

[cfaustus]

Originally Posted by keith

now while this is terribly unsporting it is not a bad occasional strategy for trying to disrupt the opponents tempo.

I don't wish to start a huge tangent, but I think it is interesting that you deem this to be unsporting. From my perspective, my job as a fencer is to stop the other guy from hitting me. Any hits I land on him are simply attempts to stop his attack; the old idea of 'hit without being hit'. I am curious why you think it unsporting?

[mrbiggs]

There are several fencers whom I fence often that do an action similar to this.

First, it is unlikely that a ref will call it your RoW. You can try it once, but odds are it will be called your opponent's attack. If the ref calls it yours, though, you're all set.

Otherwise, you have two main options. You can wait until he finishes, and parry, or you can hit him in preparation. One or the other should work pretty well.

Two other options are hitting him out of his distance if you're taller, and trying to parry his blade even though he brought it close to his body.

[jBirch]

Originally Posted by cfaustus

I don't wish to start a huge tangent, but I think it is interesting that you deem this to be unsporting. From my perspective, my job as a fencer is to stop the other guy from hitting me. Any hits I land on him are simply attempts to stop his attack; the old idea of 'hit without being hit'. I am curious why you think it unsporting?

Well, the deliberately targetting off-target to stop the attack, seems rather contrary to the rules, though hard to prove.

James.

[keith]

Originally Posted by cfaustus

I am curious why you think it unsporting?

well you are using a rule (the off target light) for a purpose other than it was designed. It is not cheating, as striking the floor, ref or some innocent bystander would be, but it is an action outside the spirit of the game. Now it is of course tempting when fencing a quick little bugger to keep tagging them on the hand as they push forward - but if you are doing that why not just fence epee?

It also gives you no long term benefit since it is a strategy that is easily countered.

[keith]

back on topic there as two things to keep in mind;

is the withdrawal occuring in a distance where I can hit on a simple extension (or in a dynamic scenario; if I stop and stick my arm out will I hit my opponent as they withdraw the blade)?

If not I either have to manufacture that situation using footwork or draw the final action and parry it.

when both fencers are moving the retreating fencer generally has to stop, extend and move forward in order for the referee to see the taking of RoW. Sticking your arm out as you run backwards is hardly ever going to get you awarded RoW, regardless of when in the arm pumping you stick your arm out.

[luv2fence]

jBirch,
You said:
"If the blade is continuously threatening, then you can pump your arm till you're blue in the face. "

Are you describing what directors will call or what they should call?

Considering what directors should call,
is there not an "extending" criterion
to establish and keep ROW?

All,
Are directors just going to miss (or ignore) the blade withdrawal?
I saw Bluecoats call this several times in Saber;
they even had a gesture, pulling their arm back.
My memory fails me as to whether they did this for foil.

Share your experiences and observations, please.

l2f

[keith]

Originally Posted by luv2fence

Are directors just going to miss (or ignore) the blade withdrawal?

If I am advancing and extend my arm as my opponent stays on guard I get RoW.

If my opponent steps back and I step forward and keep my arm out I maintain RoW.

If I then stop and do a quick jig and then rextend my arm I keep RoW if my opponent was stupid enough to stop and watch my little dance.

You must Take RoW either using blade contact or by acting in the moment your opponent surrenders it.

Foil refs tend to be more generous than sabre refs on the prep/attack distinction.

[jBirch]

Originally Posted by luv2fence

jBirch,
You said:
"If the blade is continuously threatening, then you can pump your arm till you're blue in the face. "

Are you describing what directors will call or what they should call?

Both. In foil, the coupe feint is actually more of a cut feint and actively threatens target with the threat to flick. So you can extend your arm in a direct attack threat to chest (say) and then pull it back to threaten with the flick. You can keep doing this until the end of the world comes.

Keith explains very well the other reason. Remember that this is particular to foil. In sabre its not the same.

Hope this helps.

James.

[akaiyuki]

I've seen a few fencers who use that kind of attack. Hitting in perparation works well especially if you can keep it as your one lighter. If not, it's quite likely to be called as your opponent's attack, and your counterattack. As said before, waiting for the finish and parry ripost works too. There's something else that my old coach taught me, and it works great. What I do is get the feel of when my opponent will withdraw, and as he withdraws, I do a sweeping eight parry motion (very linear instead of a circular parry), sweeping off his blade to the side while closing distance, and hit him on the side.

[cfaustus]

Originally Posted by keith

well you are using a rule (the off target light) for a purpose other than it was designed. It is not cheating, as striking the floor, ref or some innocent bystander would be, but it is an action outside the spirit of the game. Now it is of course tempting when fencing a quick little bugger to keep tagging them on the hand as they push forward - but if you are doing that why not just fence epee?

hmmm... the game....

Thank you much for your thoughts. I shall keep them in mind.

[edew]

Any attack into an opponent's compound attack (such as the pumping of the arm, withdrawing the blade, multiple flick actions) will count as long as the hit ARRIVES before the START of the last action in the compound attack.

Otherwise, it's a counter-attack into the attack. You would need to time your attack to arrive while the fencer is pulling the arm back. That's not going to happen too often. I'd suggest you make false actions to provoke your opponent to complete the attack and parry that (or evade by distance).

[keith]

Originally Posted by cfaustus

hmmm... the game....

*laughs*

game, encounter call it what you will.