the back hand

[Hauptman]

Originally Posted by OROD

I really doubt either one of these things are true, even though you always hear them as reasons for the "classical" fencing stance. The fact is I dont feel any more balanced with my arm back or at my side. And as far as adding power to the lunge, just stand on guard with your back arm up and throw it back... see how much it pushes you forward. Answer: Not at all.

.

I've fenced for years with coaches that are both modern and classical. Without a doubt it will take a fair amount of training and practice to get used to the classical form, and until you've invested that time you won't be able to appreciate any of the advantages.

Now having said that, I fence with my arm down which is how I originally fenced, and I'll be honest and say that the attention you get with a classical form is annoying. I've never found that the added momentum of throwing the arm back amounted to enough to make a difference, but lately I have found an aspect that is significant.

The rear arm being up really keeps your torso in the proper profile. It keeps your rear shoulder up and back, and that is when the improved balance is noticable.... it's not that it gives better balance, but that it helps keep you in better balance and form.

That's my take on it.

[mrbiggs]

I know of no nationally or internationally successfully fencers that keep their arm up above their shoulder in any weapon.

I'm not as knowledgeable as some others on this forum, so it's possible that several exist, but as far as I know they are the exception and not the rule.

[Joe biebel]

I have actually experimented with the back arm position and movement for my own personal curiosity. I did notice differences, especially with arm position up vs. down. When attacking deep, I noticed that it was easier for me to recover from the attack, back to en guarde position, if I started with my arm/hand down and lifted it strongly, in the lunge. My guess is that the created some up ward lift at the end of the lunge countering the downward momemntum. Conversely, I had shorter attacks done this way. This is so unscientific and everybody is going to be different based on so many variables. Just my 2 cents.

Currently, I practice all of my "static" drills with the classical back arm position. I also work at close quarters against a target, where I concentrate on making "clean" arm position infighting. I do a lot of repetition, consciously lifting the back arm and reversing my shoulders to make the hit inside the rules. This is not the kind of thing you can do without practicing it.

I got sloppy the other day, bouting during training, and lifted my arm at an "inappropriate" moment. Very nicely and cleanly lifting my opponants blade away from me. The interesting thing was, I was trying to make sure I did not cover target. Red Card! Grrr. My bad.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by OROD

No one is disputing Newtons laws of motion, just how much additional momentum your arm (actually half of it) will impart in relation to the rest of your body moving forward. The arms weight is pretty trivial in this relation (to the rest of the body), which means the amount of momentum imparted for the brief time you are throwing it back is also trivial.

Except that you didn't say "trivial" before, you said "not at all". I call definitional retreat!

In any case, fencing is sometimes a matter of trivial improvements reaping huge dividends. How much extra distance do you really get because you stretch before fencing? How much extra power from plyometric exercise? How much more control with grip X instead of grip Y, or traction with these shoes instead of those? At the margins of performance, a 1% improvement can mean a big difference in results.

[OROD]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Except that you didn't say "trivial" before, you said "not at all". I call definitional retreat!

By "not at all" I only meant it in the common language way of refering to a quantity that is so close to zero that it's practically zero. Language in common usage often contradicts absolute scientific and mathematical precision... that's my story and I'm sticking with it.

Originally Posted by Inquartata

In any case, fencing is sometimes a matter of trivial improvements reaping huge dividends. How much extra distance do you really get because you stretch before fencing? How much extra power from plyometric exercise? How much more control with grip X instead of grip Y, or traction with these shoes instead of those? At the margins of performance, a 1% improvement can mean a big difference in results.

Regarless, I think the main reason people kept their back hand up and back in real sword fighting was to not get it cut off, not to impart momentum in a lunge. I was just objecting to that particular reason that is commonly given.

.

[Phaeton]

Originally Posted by Goldgar

I dunno, I consider myself current.

I think it helps for balance, helps keep from covering target, helps keep the fencer from leaning and twisting forward in the lunge, and throwing the hand back in the lunge (which I agree can also be done from other hand positions) assist by leaving some mass behind.

That said, I don't obsess about it. My own hand, while held back, tends to sag to a relaxed position at about middle height, not the "scorpion sting" of yore. I tell my students to keep the hand up "-ish", back, and relaxed, not to swing it around at their hips. It helps.

I have seen you fence before. I am pretty sure I would not consider what you do keeping your hand "up" as much as keeping it out of the way in a pretty normal and intelligent manner.

Originally Posted by keropie

I suppose I should mildly moderate my earlier position: I know of no one teaching the 'scorpion sting' position, but I do know of some people who teach a position somewhere around the waist, and somewhere near(ish) the height of the back shoulder. And many more who teach floppy.

I do know lots of people that do. I know now one of note that does. The people that do are all cooks that need to realize that they are being stupid. What a menace on society...

Originally Posted by crquack

1)
2) I have seen somewhere research showing that the lunge was 23% faster if one uses the hand in the classical manner th

Wrong. Dead wrong. Show me something that actually proves it and I might entertain the idea. You're not going to convince me, but I'll at least give it a moment of thought.

Frankly, I think the only thing, in sabre at least, that keeping your hand up does is A) make you look like an idiot and B) tense you up if you do it wrong. Then again I'm not sure that it has any downsides to it. I know that I'll never do it. Just be aware that if I catch you doing it I'll probably ridicule you mercilessly you for it, even if you beat me.

[statisticool]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

I know of no nationally or internationally successfully fencers that keep their arm up above their shoulder in any weapon.

Nadi? Guadin? I know you said "keep" and not "kept", but hey, I'm just saying.

Some reasons why it is important to keep the free arm held in a classical style, off the top of my head:

-balance, mainly prevent forward leaning

-only really tenses the shoulders in the beginning

-add some forward velocity by throwing free arm down and back during lunge

-pulling the free arm back up helps in recovery to en-garde

-acts as a rudder, stearing the sword arm

-kept back it helps prevent body contact with opponent

-it is simply not logical to have your free arm out there to be hit, especially with weapons where the arm is a valid target

-maybe more polite with foil, due to an instinct to use it to (illegally) cover your target area?

-most people I see keeping their free arm down, tend to always invite

-it is simply not logical to have your largest target area facing your opponent head on


The only benefits of keeping it down I can think of are

-the claim of more relaxed

-if you're really good at inviting

-a lot of people do it

[HDG]

I have a perfectly good brain that takes care of most of these.

[TBean]

A more classical stance does help keep your engaurd in a more upright, correct position. This is very important for beginning fencers for whom everything in the sport is foreign. Learning how your body is supposed to feel in engaurd and while doing footwork is really important - the bedrock of the sport as others have said - and until you have that ingrained in your muscle memory, doing something like dropping your back arm might only serve to reinforce bad habits that will take you years to fix. The luxury of dropping your back arm comes from having learned the footwork properly to begin with. Even after many years of fencing I will still come to engaurd with my back arm up and my coach will often have me bring it up during lessons because it does lift your upper body and make you aware of having your core support your actions.

[randomsabreur]

I use my back arm at foil (and epee when I fence it) as an additional cue that I'm doing a strange pointy weapon and to increase the contrast from sabre.

When I fence sabre, I try to keep the palm on top, otherwise as relaxed as poss.

My back arm is never above shoulder height - it's kind of up about elbow height, palm on top.

Given my other pointy weapon reminders are that I have a pistol grip in my hand and no visor mask - I need all the help I can get...

[erik_blank]

Originally Posted by Phaeton

Frankly, I think the only thing, in sabre at least, that keeping your hand up does is A) make you look like an idiot and B) tense you up if you do it wrong. Then again I'm not sure that it has any downsides to it. I know that I'll never do it. Just be aware that if I catch you doing it I'll probably ridicule you mercilessly you for it, even if you beat me.

Phaenton:
From your posting I have to assume that you are one of those that fight with the 'only true and Glorious weapon' - the saber. (note only a SMALL amount of sarcasm here...)
From my experience, the raising of the rear arm was only ever called for in Foil and Epee, the classical position for saber was with the back arm making a “<” with the fist of the back arm planted firmly against the hip. This was to keep the hand out of the way of oncoming attacks and to protect it as much as possible. At this point with electrical equipment, I believe that putting the hand there may be construed as covering target area, and also places it too close to the body/reel cord connection, so that referees may feel unhappy with you placing your hand there.

[Hauptman]

Originally Posted by erik_blank

Phaenton:
From your posting I have to assume that you are one of those that fight with the 'only true and Glorious weapon' - the saber. (note only a SMALL amount of sarcasm here...)
From my experience, the raising of the rear arm was only ever called for in Foil and Epee, the classical position for saber was with the back arm making a “<” with the fist of the back arm planted firmly against the hip. This was to keep the hand out of the way of oncoming attacks and to protect it as much as possible. At this point with electrical equipment, I believe that putting the hand there may be construed as covering target area, and also places it too close to the body/reel cord connection, so that referees may feel unhappy with you placing your hand there.

Yup... they only ever taught the raised rear arm for foil and epee; sabre always put your fist on your hip.

Anyone out there know why that was? What made sabre different for this? You weren't going to raise your rear arm while fighting with sabre on horseback? Beats me

[erik_blank]

Originally Posted by Hauptman

Anyone out there know why that was? What made sabre different for this? You weren't going to raise your rear arm while fighting with sabre on horseback? Beats me

As I said earlier, this was in an attempt to protect the back hand from stray hits from the opponents weapon. Worked pretty well too, as I can't recall getting clocked on the oof hand when I fenced saber that way... Way back in teh stone ages of the early 90's...

[jeff]

I don't recall any arguments back in the Days When Dinosaurs Walked The Earth that the classical rear hand position in sabre - firmly planted on hip - harmed body mechanics or increased Global Warming (there, mixed a few threads together), compared to the (never used in sabre) scorpion position

[Phaeton]

Originally Posted by erik_blank

Phaenton:
From your posting I have to assume that you are one of those that fight with the 'only true and Glorious weapon' - the saber. (note only a SMALL amount of sarcasm here...)

I'm glad you acknowledge the supremacy of sabre.

From my experience, the raising of the rear arm was only ever called for in Foil and Epee, the classical position for saber was with the back arm making a “<” with the fist of the back arm planted firmly against the hip.

I did fence epee for a bit, and quite frankly I wasn't all that good at it. My natural inability to point is one of the reasons I fence sabre.

I don't think I've ever seen a sabre fencer that keeps their hand up, and now i know why. Just because someone fences another weapon than I do does not make them immune from snide comments.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by OROD

I think the main reason people kept their back hand up and back in real sword fighting was to not get it cut off, not to impart momentum in a lunge.

If we're talking historical origin, quite the opposite: The left hand was used defensively in rapier play, to push or slap an opponent's blade aside. If you look at some of the old illustrations you will sometimes see the back arm held with the elbow up and the hand dangling to the left of the face or slightly forward. Probably someone rationalized the position as a matter of body mechanics once fencing shed its duelling use...

As Jeff pointed out, this position was restricted to use with thrusting weapons, sensibly enough. At sabre, it would have had no defensive utility, so it was never adopted.

[erik_blank]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

If we're talking historical origin, quite the opposite: The left hand was used defensively in rapier play, to push or slap an opponent's blade aside. If you look at some of the old illustrations you will sometimes see the back arm held with the elbow up and the hand dangling to the left of the face or slightly forward. Probably someone rationalized the position as a matter of body mechanics once fencing shed its dueling use...

As Jeff pointed out, this position was restricted to use with thrusting weapons, sensibly enough. At saber, it would have had no defensive utility, so it was never adopted.

To add to this thread of historical origin. Most duelists at that time would carry a dagger in th off hand or use either cloak or scabbard in that hand to provide additional defensive options. Most of the stances actually have the fencer starting out with the off hand/shoulder closer to the opponent than the weapon hand so that the extra defensive options of the dagger/cloak/scabbard could be employed and the motion of the rapier could be hidden prior to the ultimate thrust/cut (yes, the rapier WAS used to cut, just not to hack. The action was that of a 'draw cut' and was used to weaken the opponent prior to being able to actually give the coup de grace with either the main gauche (dagger) or the rapier.) All in all a rather bloody affair, and not one that I would actually want to take part in.
I have not seen many histroical texts describing or illustrating saber from that period, but I could see someone with an off hand parrying device for this as well, but I feel that it would be impractical considering the type of attack employed by this weapon.

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by statisticool

Nadi? Guadin? I know you said "keep" and not "kept", but hey, I'm just saying.

I meant people who fence under the rules we do. Dry fencing was an entirely different game.

Originally Posted by statisticool

Some reasons why it is important to keep the free arm held in a classical style, off the top of my head:

-balance, mainly prevent forward leaning

-only really tenses the shoulders in the beginning

-add some forward velocity by throwing free arm down and back during lunge

-pulling the free arm back up helps in recovery to en-garde

You need your arm up to prevent you from leaning forward? Really? Can't do that by yourself?

Saying that it doesn't necessarily tense the shoulders is hardly a reason to do it. It's more like a reason to hate it less.

I don't buy that the velocity difference is consequential.

"The recovery to en-guarde" I'm not so sure about either. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one; however, I should point out that a classical en guarde is not necessary to use this benefit. It's quite possible, and indeed common, for a fencer to keep their hand fairly low, throw it back during the lunge, and then do the classical motion during the recovery, but replace it where it started instead of in the classical position.

I split your post up for readability.

Originally Posted by statisticool

-acts as a rudder, stearing the sword arm

-kept back it helps prevent body contact with opponent

-it is simply not logical to have your free arm out there to be hit, especially with weapons where the arm is a valid target

-maybe more polite with foil, due to an instinct to use it to (illegally) cover your target area?

-most people I see keeping their free arm down, tend to always invite

-it is simply not logical to have your largest target area facing your opponent head on

Acts as a rudder? That's not how my body works. A relaxed back arm won't affect my sword arm, and I don't want it to.

Body contact? I don't see that.

In sabre, if someone hits your back arm, they're gonna hit you anyway. In any case, no one is saying that you should put your arm somewhere in front of your body, simply that a relaxed position with the hand near the hip is more comfortable. The arm is still behind the body.

Using it to cover target area is entirely different from keeping it in a classical position. I know plenty of fencers who keep their arm in a modern position and don't cover target. Most, actually.

"-most people I see keeping their free arm down, tend to always invite" can you explain what this means? I don't understand it.

No one is saying that the shoulders should be square to the opponent. There's a full 90 degrees of middle ground where you should actually place your body.

Originally Posted by statisticool

The only benefits of keeping it down I can think of are

-the claim of more relaxed

-if you're really good at inviting

-a lot of people do it

Again, you have to explain the &