Training/practicing Disengages

[RITFencing]

Right on the money, Ins.

[Cookeit]

Okay.

Now I am drawing the parry but I find myself WAY too close when I get in there.
I always need to bend my arm or go prime or something.

After I draw the parry and disengage should I just extend and not lunge?
Or is this just a problem I am having with distance?

[RITFencing]

It could be that you're going too deep, or it could be that you're starting your disengage too late. Try doing this very slowly (think molasses in January) to get the timing and technique right.

You should be disengaging the forte of the blade on most sweeps, at least to start, IMHO. Start forward slowly, when your partner or coach starts their slow sweep/parry, wait until the blades are close, then make a very tiny disengage; just enough to get to the other side of their blade, or bigger if you decide to change targets or have to avoid the bell guard. Right now, try and aim for a small disengage to more or less the same point. There might be a different part of your coach/partner occupying that point, but the thrust will stay much the same.

For any new technique, I like to borrow some of the German system and do it with different types of footwork. Standing, advance, lunge, advance lunge, etc.

Practicing it slowly will help you get not only the technique but the timing of exactly when to start down, and will make things much easier for you when you speed it up.

Hope this helps.

[RITFencing]

Oh, make sure everything has a good sequence. Start forward with the tip, extending the arm , moving the tip first during the disengage, starting the lunge when you're at the right distance and the arm is already getting the tip out there. Arm nice and relaxed, shoulder not bunched up, rear hip engaged, etc etc.

Many times people fail on feint disengage or whatever not because their bladework was bad or even their judgment of distance wasn't good, but just because they didn't have good enough footwork to make everything work.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by RITFencing

It could be that you're going too deep, or it could be that you're starting your disengage too late. Try doing this very slowly (think molasses in January) to get the timing and technique right.

You should be disengaging the forte of the blade on most sweeps, at least to start, IMHO. Start forward slowly, when your partner or coach starts their slow sweep/parry, wait until the blades are close, then make a very tiny disengage; just enough to get to the other side of their blade, or bigger if you decide to change targets or have to avoid the bell guard. Right now, try and aim for a small disengage to more or less the same point. There might be a different part of your coach/partner occupying that point, but the thrust will stay much the same.

For any new technique, I like to borrow some of the German system and do it with different types of footwork. Standing, advance, lunge, advance lunge, etc.

Practicing it slowly will help you get not only the technique but the timing of exactly when to start down, and will make things much easier for you when you speed it up.

Hope this helps.

One key thing for this drill to be really effective is the timing of the parry. One's partner needs to make the parry at a realistic time (granted also slow as molasses), rather than as soon as they see the threat coming (at this speed there's TONS of perception time available -- part of the point of the exercise).

This is a useful drill structure, but does require attention from both parties to keep the timing realistic and ONLY change the speed of execution.

-B

[RITFencing]

Thanks, Brad; that's an excellent point.

[remistress]

Originally Posted by Cookeit

Now I am drawing the parry but I find myself WAY too close when I get in there. I always need to bend my arm or go prime or something.

After I draw the parry and disengage should I just extend and not lunge?
Or is this just a problem I am having with distance?

Okay...so I'm no expert here mind you, but I had big troubles with disenguages. To answer the first question from the "just learning to make disenguages work" point of view, it's best to do that thing which keeps your target area farthest away from their point. If you can hit them with just extension, just extend. To answer the second question, I find that it's oftentimes footwork that is the problem here. Usually it involves my advance in the advance lunge being too big because I say to myself, "Ha! It's time to attack!"...and then I get carried away. Note: this can also happen with lunging more than necessary to get you to the target. I STILL don't have this in any way perfected...but really focus on making that advance baby-small...if you fall short you can always take another.

Something that helped me think about the physics of the disenguage, is to think about the shape the opponent makes with their blade when they parry. If four-six, a flat plane (but a trapezoid if angulation); if circular a cone. To get my blade around the cone for instance, the circles I scribe with my point have to become smaller as they approach the target, as well as faster.

Hope this helps!

[Chafunkta]

Originally Posted by Don Badowski

If you are only disengaging to change the line of engagement (old school), the width of the disengage doesn't have to be any bigger than the width of your opponents blade. If you are disengaging to actually hit an opponent who may have left a line open more than is prudent, same thing.

But if you are making a hard feint to draw a parry, it now depends on the opponents reaction. Consider a feint-disengage from 4 to 6. You make the feint beyond the opponents bell guard, and we will assume its heading straight for target. Since you have to get beyond the bell guard to score, your disengage has be at least the width of the bell. If the opponent takes a small, controlled parry just big enought to close the line, you're going to have to add some lateral motion to get around the bell. But if the opponent makes a big, panic induced parry, you can just drop the point and let them pass over, bring the point up and score.

EDIT: I'm thinking foil here, with big parry 4's and a target that's chest-deep.

I'm going to have to disagree with this. When you make a disengage, the amount of lateral movement is determined by the size of your opponent's parry. If you make a feint in 4, forcing the opponent to parry 4, your disengage can go straight up-and-down. Use your opponent's parry as the "lateral motion" of your disengage.

Simply, start on one side of the opponent's blade, let your blade drop while their blade misses the parry, then pick up your blade as theirs is on the other side (in this case, 4). Finish through with the hit.

I find if I tell students to make a U shaped disengage, or a disengage where they put lateral movement with the tip, they tend to miss their target.

[lanyingjie]

Originally Posted by darius

But if you can teach them to make a strong feint-disengage from lunge distance, you're golden. It's a bit harder to learn that action, because there's more hand-foot separation required, but once you have it, it's easier to do it from longer distances.

darius

Won't it be far better to pressure the opponent with multiple beats on the blade, followed by a double disengage? The first disengage would require the pause to trick the opponent sufficiently, but the second would just confuse him and score easily.

And on a divergent note, I note with some amusement the "Just Joined" status above Don_Badowski's join date of "2002". Maybe post count isn't a great way to gauge date joined xD.

[RITFencing]

Originally Posted by lanyingjie

Won't it be far better to pressure the opponent with multiple beats on the blade, followed by a double disengage? The first disengage would require the pause to trick the opponent sufficiently, but the second would just confuse him and score easily.

Too complex and far too large of a preparation for most things. Of course it CAN work, but a simple fient disengage will serve far better than multiple beats followed by multiple disengages.

A 1-2 or double (that is, a disengage followed by another in the opposite direction or a disengage followed by another in the same direction for those who are unfamiliar with the terms; also, the second is pronounced doo-blay) certainly see a lot of use, at times after beats or other actions on the blade, and should be part of every fencer's toolkit. However, they should learn to do one good disengage first before attempting all the other stuff.

Keep everything as simple as possible, and no simpler.

[Goldgar]

Originally Posted by RITFencing

Keep everything as simple as possible, and no simpler.

As in the storied exchange between Emperor Joseph II of Austria and the composer Mozart:

Emperor: ''Too beautiful for our ears, my dear Mozart, and monstrous many notes.''

Mozart: ''Exactly as many as are necessary, Your Majesty.''

[RITFencing]

Rep for Goldgar; excellent illustration of the point.

[samh]

I am going to catch huge flak for this but I want to say it anyway. A number of people have mentioned small disengages as being extremely desirable and I disagree.

The ex-national epee coach for Canada made a really big deal out of big disengages and at first I though he was crazy but after a while I found myself buying into his theory. Using only the fingers, a large disengage and a small disengage take very similar amounts of time; however, the large disengage is much safer (this is regarding disengage attacks or counter-attacks to the body only, the arm is another can of worms). To practice this in lessons he did huge sweeping attempts to engage the blade, not only with his own blade but with his arm as well. The only options for the fencer are a large disengage, a pull-back of the arm or giving up the blade. This lesson does not demonstrate an unrealistic scenario either because many top-level fencers will make huge sweeps for the blade and use everything, including the arm, to control it.

[RkfdFencer]

I do not see it as "this or that" meaning large or small being the way to go for all time, because you will need to be able to do both. I still prefer to start people out doing small disengages; small everything, almost, to build controlled and precise actions as the framework they can then deviate from as needed.

[Cookeit]

My coach tells me smaller is better because the smaller it is, the less time it takes for your arm to do it..

Size of disengages and time to perform them go hand in hand.

[Allen Evans]

The size of the disengage depends on how deep the feint is before the opponent parries, and how big the parry is when the opponent makes it.

Both of these factors effect the size of the disengage. As samh points out, if the opponent makes a big sweep for your blade, you may have to get around a swinging arm as well as a blade. That might require a big disengage if you've already penetrated pretty far to the target.

If the opponent makes a big parry, but the parry is early and your point is still well in front of the blade, a smaller disengage will probably be sufficient, with the understanding that you might have another, bigger disengage to do before you are able to score.

Try this at home, kids.

AE