PiL question

[fleshbroiler]

The PiL references in the ROW thread inspired me to ask this. I'm a very new foil fencer and I was just in a group class where we were working with PiL from both offence and defence. My first thought was "cool, this looks badass!" In practice, all it seemed to do is give my partner an opportunity to smack my blade out of the way and drill me. Clearly, it's a technique I won't be using anytime soon. So my question, does anybody out there have much success setting up a successful attack using PiL?

[erooMynohtnA]

Do you mean successfully scoring a touch with PiL or using it to set up your action? In both cases, yes, but the former against bad fencers and the latter against good fencers.

There are many ways to use a line.

You can leave a line out and hope your opponent runs into it. If they try to take the line, you derobe. If they get close enough, you lunge and hit them.

You can leave a line out against an aggressive opponent, and when they stop to think, you can attack.

You can put out a line to entice a defensive opponent to execute a beat attack then parry and riposte.

You can put out a line, let your opponent beat it, then remise and fade away before they complete their attack.

You can put out a line and hold it really firmly against a shorter, weaker opponent, and they won't be able to move it away from their target to get close enough to hit.

[fleshbroiler]

Do you mean successfully scoring a touch with PiL or using it to set up your action? In both cases, yes, but the former against bad fencers and the latter against good fencers.

There are many ways to use a line.

You can leave a line out and hope your opponent runs into it. If they try to take the line, you derobe. If they get close enough, you lunge and hit them.

You can leave a line out against an aggressive opponent, and when they stop to think, you can attack.

You can put out a line to entice a defensive opponent to execute a beat attack then parry and riposte.

You can put out a line, let your opponent beat it, then remise and fade away before they complete their attack.

You can put out a line and hold it really firmly against a shorter, weaker opponent, and they won't be able to move it away from their target to get close enough to hit.

Great food for thought, thanks! I can use this information.

[CvilleFencer]

One thing to keep in mind before you get too in love with PIL. In my experience it is the single most blown call/action in ROW fencing. Even good referees get it wrong sometimes or have misconceptions about its use/setup. Use it if you like, but it is not a "money" action. When the referee isn't giving it to you, drop it an move on. When it doesn't work because the opponent is closing to fast or is able to get a piece of it on the way in, drop it and move on. If the other fencer is setting up a good march, don't even bother. I could go on, but point is this. PIL is very easy to defeat, easy for a referee to blow and very sensitive to timing, tempo and somewhat to technical execution. It is not a tool to keep near the top of the box for the average fencer.

Eroo gives some good, simple ideas on how to use it but notice a couple of things:

1. As an "attack" action (it is not really and attack, but using it with the idea of scoring a touch without going tactically deeper is what I mean here) it usually only works against people you could hit with something less likely to be screwed up by the referee.

2. Against equal or better people it is something done to give them pause or part of a more complex action that will eventually score with a repost or attack.

Moral: It's either a setup or a toy in most situations. Fun to annoy scrubs with and sometimes useful to set up a deeper string of actions against decent fencers but it is not something you are going to score a good percentage of your touches with in an average DE and not something to try overly much.

All that said, it does have its place. Just not where it used to be when things were fenced "as if they were sharp".

[fleshbroiler]

One thing to keep in mind before you get too in love with PIL. In my experience it is the single most blown call/action in ROW fencing. Even good referees get it wrong sometimes or have misconceptions about its use/setup. Use it if you like, but it is not a "money" action. When the referee isn't giving it to you, drop it an move on. When it doesn't work because the opponent is closing to fast or is able to get a piece of it on the way in, drop it and move on. If the other fencer is setting up a good march, don't even bother. I could go on, but point is this. PIL is very easy to defeat, easy for a referee to blow and very sensitive to timing, tempo and somewhat to technical execution. It is not a tool to keep near the top of the box for the average fencer.

Eroo gives some good, simple ideas on how to use it but notice a couple of things:

1. As an "attack" action (it is not really and attack, but using it with the idea of scoring a touch without going tactically deeper is what I mean here) it usually only works against people you could hit with something less likely to be screwed up by the referee.

2. Against equal or better people it is something done to give them pause or part of a more complex action that will eventually score with a repost or attack.

Moral: It's either a setup or a toy in most situations. Fun to annoy scrubs with and sometimes useful to set up a deeper string of actions against decent fencers but it is not something you are going to score a good percentage of your touches with in an average DE and not something to try overly much.

All that said, it does have its place. Just not where it used to be when things were fenced "as if they were sharp".

More valuable input, thanks for taking the time.

[Craig]

For good examples of using point in line, check out some videos of Golubitsky. He used it both to frustrate attacks and score touches.

Successful use of point in line is not a basic fencing skill. You need to know what it is, but it's more of a high level action than a beginner action.

Craig

[fleshbroiler]

Successful use of point in line is not a basic fencing skill. You need to know what it is, but it's more of a high level action than a beginner action.

Craig

Thanks!

[edew]

The PiL, much like the simple straight attack, is the easiest to explain and do (as a drill, at least), but the hardest to master in competition situations.

[LTranter]

We just talked about PiL in class today. From what I have gathered, there is a distance factor to establishing PiL, as well. From on guard, if you take a step back and establish PiL, you have it. If you advance into your opponent's attack range and try to establish it, you do not. You may advance and back up with it, but it must be a firm, straight line, palm down.

Also, remember, this. If you have a PiL and your opponent parries it, it can be very difficult for you to get your arm back in time to produce your own parry.

I like using it sometimes, especially if I need a moment to catch my breath. Successfully being able to pull it off is another matter.

L

[erooMynohtnA]

We just talked about PiL in class today. From what I have gathered, there is a distance factor to establishing PiL, as well. From on guard, if you take a step back and establish PiL, you have it. If you advance into your opponent's attack range and try to establish it, you do not. You may advance and back up with it, but it must be a firm, straight line, palm down.

Also, remember, this. If you have a PiL and your opponent parries it, it can be very difficult for you to get your arm back in time to produce your own parry.

I like using it sometimes, especially if I need a moment to catch my breath. Successfully being able to pull it off is another matter.

L

The OP is talking about foil, not saber, so you do not pronate your hand.

Furthermore, this arcane footwork bull**** is part of the reason so many people can't call the simplest action around. I can advance as close into attack range as I want so long as my opponent doesn't attack before I have put out my line (admittedly not going to happen in saber). I can back up as far as I want, but if I don't put up my line before my opponent's final action starts, I do not have a line.

Here's the question you need to ask yourself: "Was his arm set in a line before the attack started?" If yes, it's a line. If no, it's not a line. All this unnecessary and confusing "was his aura reading dark when the dove crossed the node?" is just a pedagogical tool to try to keep you from putting a line up in the wrong situation.

I have a related anecdote about a referee and a fencer who were taught the same thing as you. I was at a small, local, and very informal saber tournament. It was informal enough that the on guard lines were closer than normal. In one bout, I advance-lunged off the line at the word fence. My opponent took a small retreat and put out a line at the same time. I hit him on his arm, and he also put on a light. The director gave him the line and I started my logic puzzle.
Ref "Touch left" (I was on the right)
Me "Can you call the action?"
Ref "What do you mean?" (not a lot of high level referees at this thing)
Me "Can you describe what happened?"
Ref "He put out a line and you attacked."
Me "Did I advance lunge at the word fence?"
Ref "Yes"
Me "Isn't an advance-lunge the longest one tempo action into which no other action can start with priority?"
Ref "Yes"
Me "Then how was his line established before my attack?"
Ref "Touch right"

The ref saw a retreat with a line and turned off her brain at that point. My opponent was obviously taught that a retreat with a line will stop an attack from the guard line, because he did it several more times and got several more touches against him. Obviously this wouldn't have happened on a regular strip, because I don't have a three meter lunge, but watch out for a taller guy. You don't retreat to gain priority, you retreat to get out of the way.

[Goldgar]

We just talked about PiL in class today. From what I have gathered, there is a distance factor to establishing PiL, as well. From on guard, if you take a step back and establish PiL, you have it. If you advance into your opponent's attack range and try to establish it, you do not. You may advance and back up with it, but it must be a firm, straight line, palm down.

Pronation or supination of the hand is not actually relevant, though you have to watch out for referees who think only a pronated hand is correct in sabre.

Stepping back is not required, it's just one way to *attempt* to ensure that your opponent doesn't have an attack in progress when you try to establish line. If you're outside of advance-lunge distance, your opponent can't be attacking you. But you can be inside that distance and, if your opponent isn't attacking you, you can establish point in line freely. Now, from a practical point of view, in sabre, there's a very good chance that your opponent is attacking you off the command "Fence". In that case, you're going to need to open out the distance to establish your line.

[Goldgar]

I can back up as far as I want, but if I don't put up my line before my opponent's final action starts, I do not have a line.

Do you really mean to say that? If your opponent is making a correctly executed compound attack (even with multiple footwork, so long as you don't get out of distance), you can't establish point of line into it even if you get the line out before the opponent's final action starts.

[AdamH]

We just talked about PiL in class today. From what I have gathered, there is a distance factor to establishing PiL, as well. From on guard, if you take a step back and establish PiL, you have it. If you advance into your opponent's attack range and try to establish it, you do not. You may advance and back up with it, but it must be a firm, straight line, palm down.

L

As long as your arm is straight before your opponent begins an attack, the line is valid.

The line must be established before your opponent begins their attack for the line to be valid.

You can stand still, retire, advance while establishing your line.

If your opponent is standing still, you advance whilst extending in the high line, threatening your opponent's high line and they do not begin an attack by the time your arm is straight you have a valid line.

Once you have a valid line, you can stand still, advance and retire and the line remains valid.

Eroo and Cville give good advice.

[erooMynohtnA]

Do you really mean to say that? If your opponent is making a correctly executed compound attack (even with multiple footwork, so long as you don't get out of distance), you can't establish point of line into it even if you get the line out before the opponent's final action starts.

I think we disagree on establishing a line into a compound attack. I know who you are, so I'm probably wrong.

To claim a small moral victory I don't think what I said was wrong by either definition. A line established during the final action of the attacker is not a line no matter how far you retreated beforehand, which is all I meant.

I have been taught differently. I was told (or at least not told it was wrong) that a line established into a compound attack is valid if it comes before the final tempo (which should be an advance lunge, advance fleche, or ballestra). Is that wrong?

Assuming I'm interpreting what you said correctly, can an opponent take ten steps while moving forward and extending and I can't establish a line into it? Or is it that I can't establish a line without breaking distance?

[fleshbroiler]

Assuming I'm interpreting what you said correctly, can an opponent take ten steps while moving forward and extending and I can't establish a line into it? Or is it that I can't establish a line without breaking distance?

I'm pretty sure your question is directed at least partially at Goldgar, but, my understanding is that; assuming neither fencer has ROW, and fencer A extends whether advancing or not and is threatening the target, that A gains RoW and B can only get it back by making contact with A's blade, either with a beat attack or by parrying when A's attack is delivered. If that is correct, then B can't establish PiL until RoW has passed from fencer A. Is this correct?

[erooMynohtnA]

That makes a lot of sense, so it's probably wrong.

[Goldgar]

I know who you are, so I'm probably wrong.

Wow, no one ever said *that* to me before. I'm flattered, but let's not make a habit of it.

To claim a small moral victory I don't think what I said was wrong by either definition. A line established during the final action of the attacker is not a line no matter how far you retreated beforehand, which is all I meant.

I agree. I wasn't challenging your statement as such, just the inverse implication someone might draw.

I was told (or at least not told it was wrong) that a line established into a compound attack is valid if it comes before the final tempo (which should be an advance lunge, advance fleche, or ballestra). Is that wrong?

Assuming I'm interpreting what you said correctly, can an opponent take ten steps while moving forward and extending and I can't establish a line into it? Or is it that I can't establish a line without breaking distance?

If you break distance outward, so that you are beyond advance-lunge distance, then you've nullified the attack (no threat exists from out of distance) so you can establish line. But if you don't manage to open the distance that far, so your opponent's attack continues to threaten you while he pursues you down the strip, then it doesn't matter how many steps he takes forward as you retreat -- you can't establish point-in-line.

Consider the scenario step by step. You and your opponent are at advance-lunge distance (or closer). Your opponent begins a properly formed attack with an advance, and will lunge in the next tempo if you don't do anything. If you stand still and put out a line, can it take priority from the attack? No, you're being attacked and your opponent will lunge and hit you.

Suppose you retreat and put out a line as your opponent makes that first advance (extending and threatening target, yadda, yadda). Can that line take priority from the attack? No, you're still in attack distance (advance-lunge distance again) and your opponent is still attacking you. (Consider: if you were to lunge at your opponent at this point, could you expect it to be called anything but a counterattack?) According to the rule book, you can't establish line into an attack, so your line is still too late.

Because you stepped back, of course, your opponent now has to advance again before he can lunge and hit you. But as he does you retreat again, with your arm still extended. So we're at advance-lunge distance again, or still. But your opponent still has an attack under way, so your extension can't be granted the special status of point-in-line.

This could go on for any number of steps, until you run out of strip, but unless your opponent does something to nullify his attack -- withdraws the arm, searches for your blade without finding it, stops momentarily, etc. -- or you are able to nullify the attack by breaking out of distance (requiring you to move backward faster than your opponent can go forward), your attempt at line is not going to be able to get priority.

I should say, by the way, that I'm not particularly happy with this interpretation. It has always seemed to me that after taking some number of advances with a line staring me in the face, I should have to do something about that line before continuing my attack. But the rules don't support any other interpretation.

You may find, of course, that your opponent doesn't like chasing down the strip with that extension pointing at him, so he attempts to beat or take the blade. He may not be confident of how the referee will call the action, as you and other have pointed out. That's great for you, because now you can derobe that attempt and truly establish your line, or else allow the beat, parry back and make a riposte. So your opponent's uncertainty about the referee opens up options for you.

[fencerbill]

A final action is, at most, an advance lunge. The PIL to be valid must be completed before the final action.

So if you extend and establish PIL while you retreat for several steps , even without breaking distance, how can you say that the PIL is not valid?

Threatening continuously doesn't make any difference. Either the PIL was established before the final action or it wasn't. That makes the difference.

[Goldgar]

A final action is, at most, an advance lunge. The PIL to be valid must be completed before the final action.

So if you extend and establish PIL while you retreat for several steps , even without breaking distance, how can you say that the PIL is not valid?

Threatening continuously doesn't make any difference. Either the PIL was established before the final action or it wasn't. That makes the difference.

Nowhere in the rules does it say anything about the point in line having to be established before the "final action" of the attack. It must be established before the attack *begins*. Provided the attack is correctly executed, it can be a compound attack.

Now, if the defender can manage somehow to actually hit with the line before the final action of the attack, that's another matter. But that's not what we're talking about.

[edew]

Bill, that's a saber mentality. In foil, as I was corrected by Bill Oliver, it is possible for the PiLing fencer to retreat a lot with a straight arm and still not have RoW. The threat in foil does not require completion within an advance lunge. On the other hand, the referee will probably see multiple advances as not having RoW.