Epee footwork

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

In your opinion, what are the primary differences in epee footwork from foil/sabre footwork? Favorite epee footwork drills? Differences in strategical application?

[Gav]

Footwork is just footwork. Good footwork translates to all weapons. Don't over complicate matters for yourslf by worrying about it. The only difference is Sabre where there is no fleches - and that is it.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

Footwork is just footwork. Good footwork translates to all weapons. Don't over complicate matters for yourslf by worrying about it. The only difference is Sabre where there is no fleches - and that is it.

I'll consider it, but if you watch some high level fencing footage, you'll see that the good epeeists move differently.

[sabreur]

Footwork is just footwork. Good footwork translates to all weapons. Don't over complicate matters for yourslf by worrying about it. The only difference is Sabre where there is no fleches - and that is it.

Gav,

I really have to disagree. The basic steps are the same--advance, retreat, lunge, etc., but each of the weapons have very different footwork.

Sabre: Primarily very short, quick steps, with frequent variations in length and tempo, in preparation/when pressing an opponent. Very fast pursuing footwork when chasing an opponent who is trying to get out of distance. The jump back as a crucial tool in defense (distance parry). Very upright position in the lunge. Lots of sabreurs also use a check or slide step, which is basically a kind of jump forward with both feet moving at once.

Epee: A lot of preparation consists of back and forth hopping, generally short distance (even the hotly debated "bouncing" where the forward and backwards movement is imperceptible), but occasionally a longer jump forward to provoke the opponent or a longer jump backwards to get out of distance again. Attacks can either be relatively short, sharp lunges or quite explosive, long deep attacks (Laura Flessel's ballestra is the classic example).

Foil: Longer steps on the attack than sabre, because of the need to get deeper and the longer block-out times/definition of what constitutes an attack. Very long deep lunges.

[Gav]

I'll consider it, but if you watch some high level fencing footage, you'll see that the good epeeists move differently.

Bollocks.

You are confusing timing with footwork. It's true that one flows from the other, however the basics are exactly that - the basics. Learn good footwork and then apply it to score points at Epee. The manner of scoring points is different in each weapon. I know of several rather good [i.e. successful] foilists who have switched to Epee, and at least one very high level Foilist who succesfully swapped to Sabre. None of them had to fundamentally alter their footwork.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

Bollocks.

You are confusing timing with footwork. It's true that one flows from the other, however the basics are exactly that - the basics. Learn good footwork and then apply it to score points at Epee. The manner of scoring points is different in each weapon. I know of several rather good [i.e. successful] foilists who have switched to Epee, and at least one very high level Foilist who succesfully swapped to Sabre. None of them had to fundamentally alter their footwork.

Movement, is moreso what I'm talking about. Movement is a combination of timing and footwork. You're blind if you think the movements are applied the same throughout the weapons. So maybe it isnt the movement you should practice, but the weapon specific application of the movement.

[Gav]

Movement, is moreso what I'm talking about. Movement is a combination of timing and footwork. You're blind if you think the movements are applied the same throughout the weapons. So maybe it isnt the movement you should practice, but the weapon specific application of the movement.

No. You are still confusing the two. Practise the basics. Practise them until you are sick of them. Keep practising. If you can't do an advance or retreating step properly how can you do a fleche or or a step-lunge? Get the basics right and the rest is easier. You are asking if the fundamentals are different - I hold that they are not. You apply them differently, because the methods of scoring differ, but strip away the veneer and, in the end, they are the same. Learn a good base of technique and it will take you far - it is really no more difficult than that.

Perhaps we are talking about different things? You're young and I wouldn't like to see you running down some obscure path trying complicated footwork because you think 'it must be so'. If there is one thing I've learned, and was practising just the other night, is that the higher you go the more simple [yet correctly executed] footwork gets.

[jBirch]

I have to disagree Gav. Epee footwork is much different then sabre and foil footwork.

To start, the fact that the legs themselves are target lends to some considerations that are not taken in the other two. In sabre and foil, a deeper engarde is preferable while in epee a more upright posture is advantageous because of this fact. The epee lunge is also different then the foil and sabre lunge, generally in its shortness and the variety of target. A lunge to toe, for example, looks very different then a lunge to hand which looks different then a lunge to chest. This difference is not just in the hand, but in the entire body mechanic.

Now there is certainly a set of core basic epee footwork that is simple and highly effective. It is exactly the same set of footwork that you see in foil and sabre but executed with an epee specific accent. There is no magic epee movement that does not exist in foil and sabre.

You may be thinking that DFP is asking about different footwork technique entirely instead of just the different epee way of doing the same thing. If that's the case, then I retract my disagreement and, instead, agree with you. <grin> There is no set of footwork that only exists in the epee world.

James.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

No. You are still confusing the two. Practise the basics. Practise them until you are sick of them. Keep practising. If you can't do an advance or retreating step properly how can you do a fleche or or a step-lunge? Get the basics right and the rest is easier. You are asking if the fundamentals are different - I hold that they are not. You apply them differently, because the methods of scoring differ, but strip away the veneer and, in the end, they are the same. Learn a good base of technique and it will take you far - it is really no more difficult than that.

Perhaps we are talking about different things? You're young and I wouldn't like to see you running down some obscure path trying complicated footwork because you think 'it must be so'. If there is one thing I've learned, and was practising just the other night, is that the higher you go the more simple [yet correctly executed] footwork gets.

I never asked anywhere for different fundamentals. I know they're the same. Like literature, they have a fundamental of good grammar and composition, but different styles.

[keith]

I never asked anywhere for different fundamentals. I know they're the same. Like literature, they have a fundamental of good grammar and composition, but different styles.

.....and before you can improvise you have to learn how to play (to mix a musical with a literal metaphor).

[achilleus]

People,

You are agruing two sides of the same coin. And you all are correct to a point.

Footwork is footwork. An advance is an advance, a lunge is a lunge, and a flunge well, OK ya got me there ...

There is no difference in the technique, only the application of the technique. I got beat by my coach until I developed a pretty good footwork. Now, I can adjust it to what I need. I'm fencing an opponent who goes after my thigh? I take a shallow stance. I need to move a lot and explode on the attack? I take a deeper stance, etc...

That said, it's difficult to talk about footwork without touching on distance and timing. After all, those are necessary elements of good footwork. For example, would you say that someone who has great fundamental technique, but no concept of distance and timing has good footwork? I think not.

So, while the techniques are the same, the application of the techniques varies. That's where the question of how the footwork differs from one weapon to the next applicable.

[Inquartata]

Even on the most basic level, there ARE differences in footwork. The passe avant does not exist for good sabre fencers, for example. They are not taught it and they don't learn it; if they do it they are penalized. Those of us who fenced pre-electric were taught it, but this is no longer a part of the sabre coach's lexicon. ( And BTW I have seen some very good foil fencers do sabre and get called repeatedly for crossing over forward, so clearly there IS an adjustment to be made in their footwork. ) Same with the fleche---doesn't exist in sabre, to all intents and purposes. Meanwhile no one flunges in foil or epee, because they have a better alternative. And the bouncing doesn't happen anywhere except in epee, as far as I've ever seen. Certainly not in sabre. ( You may see a rhythmic back and forth jumping from time to time, but not bouncing...unless it's an epeeist doing sabre, and then they don't do it very long. ) The little reflexive withdrawal of the forward lower leg by cocking it up also isn't seen anywhere but in epee, because it's not needed in foil or sabre, where the foot is never attacked.

Most of these are matters of usage or timing. They are not footwork moves which exist in all weapons but are only used to differing degrees---some have NO place in one or more weapon. Some have a place ONLY in one.

Gav, sorry, but I just don't see what you're on about....

( Yes, there ARE also moves which can be used in all weapons but practically speaking aren't much seen in some. The demi-volte, for example. )

[achilleus]

Even on the most basic level, there ARE differences in footwork. The passe avant does not exist for good sabre fencers, for example. They are not taught it and they don't learn it; if they do it they are penalized. Those of us who fenced pre-electric were taught it, but this is no longer a part of the sabre coach's lexicon. ( And BTW I have seen some very good foil fencers do sabre and get called repeatedly for crossing over forward, so clearly there IS an adjustment to be made in their footwork. ) Same with the fleche---doesn't exist in sabre, to all intents and purposes. Meanwhile no one flunges in foil or epee, because they have a better alternative. And the bouncing doesn't happen anywhere except in epee, as far as I've ever seen. Certainly not in sabre. ( You may see a rhythmic back and forth jumping from time to time, but not bouncing...unless it's an epeeist doing sabre, and then they don't do it very long. ) The little reflexive withdrawal of the forward lower leg by cocking it up also isn't seen anywhere but in epee, because it's not needed in foil or sabre, where the foot is never attacked.

Most of these are matters of usage or timing. They are not footwork moves which exist in all weapons but are only used to differing degrees---some have NO place in one or more weapon. Some have a place ONLY in one.

Gav, sorry, but I just don't see what you're on about....

( Yes, there ARE also moves which can be used in all weapons but practically speaking aren't much seen in some. The demi-volte, for example. )

Differences on the most basic level? Well, the cross forward and fleche are banned, but beyond that, all classes I've seen teach the footwork actions the same way. Yes, the sabre fencers, that haven't done foil or epee, don't learn the cross forward, but the technique of doing the action is the same as in other weapons. Also, actions like the flunge, and what I call gaining on the the lunge/step are used heavily in sabre to make up for the lack of more traditional moves like the cross forward and the fleche. The advance, retreat, lunge, adv-lunge, jump lunge, etc... Are taught the same throughout the weapons. How one applies it in a bout (arm completely extended, slowly extending, the distance, etc...) is what varies.

As for bouncing, One sees it in foil bouts, but it's predominant in epee due to the lack of convention.

[gladius]

Both people who are new to fencing and experts pay attention to the footwork and legwork of a fencer. The public tends to watch the larger parts and the more mobile parts of the fencer -- legs and weapon arm. The experts know the importance of the arm-leg coordination and therefore they will pay close attention to it.

A large part of the fluidity in the movement and elegance of a good fencer comes from the legs play. The hand coordinates with the feet, but this is not a logical consequence, rather the result of a specific training. One cannot state that a good footwork is sufficient to make a good fencer, but the ability to get a good foothold on the strip, i.e., the combination -- among other things -- of equilibrium, sure footed in the footwork, speed in moving about -- therefore control of the measure -- are the preliminary and fundamental elements of fencing, and therefore they are prerequisites which must be strengthened in order to facilitate the learning curve of the other fencer techniques.

In essence, if one is not sure in his movement, he risks to find himself at the wrong measure and the hand will not be able to execute what the brain will ask him to do when facing a specific situation.

One should not forget however an intense training of the coordination arm-legs (both symmetric and asymmetric, i.e., right leg-right arm and left leg-right arm) which should be taught from the beginning when learning how to fence. This is why the young children should be trained first to walk in en garde position in a relaxed way, even without holding the foil in their hand. Unfortunately, today this is done less and less because kids get bored quickly. But if you learn how to properly move on the strip you will have a learning curve which may be a bit slower at the beginning, but you'll learn other techniques easier and quicker later on.

It is important to state that THE footwork does not exist, rather A footwork which is characteristic of each athlete (like handwriting is characteristic of each individual). Each fencer will interpret in his own very personal way the basic movements of the step forward, the lounge, the step backwards, and their combinations. Small variations of the center of gravity, of anticipation or delay in the movement of one foot vis-a-vis the other represent unique characteristics of each fencer which can be imitated if they appear to be successful, but which do not constitute THE footwork, only one of its individual interpretation.

Here follows a critical analysis of some of the postings in this thread:

Gav is certainly right when he states that good footwork is valid for every weapon. If a fencer moves well, if he is coordinated and reactive on his legs, if he maintains a good center of gravity and a good equilibrium, his movement will be fluid in all three weapons.

As D+F+P says, it's obvious that the sabreists move differently than the foilists, but one must not confuse two things: one is the mechanic, i.e., the principle of the movement, another is the execution of the movement. It is evident that from the kinetic point of view the basic steps, step forward, lunge, etc., they are always the same and they are valid for all three weapons, like Gav properly states. What Sabreur says that the steps of the foilist are longer than the sabreist and all the rest is also true, but Gav in his post writes about the mechanic of the movement, while Sabreur wites about its execution (interpretation).

The interpretation of the movement, beside being a personal characteristic, can also be influenced by tactical reasons. If the sabreist were to use long steps in attack he would find impossible to execute variations in the rhythm which separate the preparation of the attack from its completion. Conversely, if the epeeist were to use long walks he would be more easily a victim of counterattack, etc., like the examples given by Sabreur.

Gav is right again when he says that footwork and timing are not the same thing and that a good footwork is always valid and can be easily adapted to every weapon, irrespective of the timing difference of each weapon. The mechanic of the step is always the same. The fencer will have then to know how to adapt the mechanic to the context of the tempo and measure of each weapon. One could even paradoxically state that THE footwork in absolute terms can be learned only by trying all three weapons at a fairly good level, i.e., when one would have had the experience of trying all possible situations of distance-tempo-measure which can be encountered.

Gav is also right when he recommends to practice a lot what is called "leg-fencing" and every person who wishes to become a good fencer ought to invest a lot of time and effort, especially at the beginning, in these drills, which are boring, but fundamentals. Steps sequences in various directions, lunges, fleches, etc., sensitivity of the foot on the ground, perception of the equilibrium and of the surrounding space with closed eyes, variations in speed, accelerations and decelerations.

Both Achilleus and JBirch hit the nail on the head. Mechanic of the movement, tempo, measure, and interpretation of the same make a unique mix that cannot be separated. The eye just see the end result, but this is the hardest part for the fencer to learn. If we want to dissect the various factors, we can talk about the mechanic of the movement -- the same for each weapon; the tactic -- different for each weapon; and personal interpretation. These are all different facets of the same crystal. However, in the end, what counts is coordination.

A discussion of the differences -- even in teaching -- of epee, foil and saber, is an entire different topic and goes outside what is being covered here. Just to oversimplify for a moment, in saber lunge the foot arrives after the touch (you can even hear it). One could conclude that the saber lunge is different from the other weapons, but this is not so. The coordination between arm-leg is slightly shifted, but the principle is the same.

A final comment on the need not to emphasize too much the footwork discussions. Nobody, for quite some time, has invented anything new in the mechanic of the movement. In my opinion no leading maestro has really invented in recent times a system of movements which is better than anyone else, even though many insist they did. Some teachers follow certain models and this can be seen in their pupils. But I prefer a more laissez-faire attitude because a rigid system tends to slow down the individual initiative and ability to find the right solution to the movement problem which he has to face each time on the strip.

A good maestro should observe and notice the typical and innate characteristics and way of moving of each student and discern which ones could give him an advantage, by strengthening them with specific drills. These natural tendencies should be encouraged and adapted to the footwork.

Lastly, if we talk about high caliber fencers, since at this level we must accept that they master the footwork, the maestro should concentrate on the sensitivity of the foot on the strip, on the rhythm and the tempo in the execution of the movement, on the spatial perception, and again on the coordination of the entire body in motion. This is in my opinion the modern and more widely accepted interpretation of the concept of footwork -- after the basics have been learned and mastered. This is quite different from the time when maestro Janos Kevy was training his fencers to fleche so many times that the fleche became a characteristic of his school.

Finally it is not a specific footwork which can be winning or typical, but the best interpretation of each movement under different circumstances by each individual fencer.

[the doc]

that was a very insightful piece from the maestro and now that we all agree that the actual execution of footwork is the same in all weapons, perhaps we can discuss what kind of moves and combinations an epeeist should do or be capable of.

in epee you don't see much in the way of continuous chases up and down the piste. most phrases tend to keep within a 3 or 4 step pattern at any one time. so for me, an epeeist should be adept at small/subtle changes in distance and tempo within a 3 or 4 step area, able to change direction easily and most importantly be able to explode into the final action from a fairly static (obviously on the balls of your feet, just not necessarily moving up and down very far) start.

those changes in direction are mostly used as a prep, final actions are more likely to be simple one phrase things like lunge, step lunge or fleche.

you should have a fast explosive long lunge, a step lunge like flowing water and a fleche like the spanish inquisition.

if you can do that, you'll probably go quite far.

[Sciurus-Rex]

No. ... ((and other stuff))

Bollocks. But because you're old, we should give you the benefit of the doubt that maybe your mind is already slipping.

Yes, at its core, an advance still requires that the fencer move his feet forward. But the differences between weapons in how that advance is utilized and is more than just timing. A fencer's "footwork," taken as a whole throughout an entire bout, is greater than the sum of its parts. (Edit: ... as has already been explained by a couple of people preceeding me.)

[glowstix]

you should have a fast explosive long lunge, a step lunge like flowing water and a fleche like the spanish inquisition.

.......................