Regarding the new "no ducking" rule in foil...

[mrbiggs]

I have a foil student that has a tendency to curl up almost into a ball when someone is attacking him. I am trying to break him of this habbit since it could be considered covering target area by some judges, and it doesn't allow him to parry or riposte properly.

Sounds like a good idea to me. New fencers nowadays sometimes get into the habit of just curling up on defense. It generally works very well against their (inexperienced) opponents, and it's rare that they'll get called on covering target in practice or even in low-level tournaments.

However, it's a bad idea in the long run unless it's used properly.

My other question on this point is what I've heard called the 3-point lunge, where you have both feet and typically your non-weapon hand, planted on the floor in a rather deep, and dangerous, lunge. Would this be considered "ducking" an opponent's blade?

No, it's specifically mentioned as legal in the rulebook as several have pointed out in this thread. I'm unconvinced that it's a good action to practice as such, though. I haven't seen Guyart use it, though, and I figure if he can get points off of it there's certainly some merit.

As for dangerous, any action is dangerous if done forcefully at odd times. This is no exception.

[fencerbill]

I would like some more information on this as well. If I recall correctly, a few years back they started allowing foil fencers to turn their shoulders again. We had a member of our club that took great advantage of this and would rotate his upper body so the opponent's blade would miss his weapon shoulder, then he would make an overhead attack to the opponent's chest, gaining a point from the counter-attack. This would be considered a lateral move, IMHO, and if that type of lateral movement is legal I am still against it and do not even mention it to my foil students.

My concern is the term "ducking" in the title of this thread. I have a foil student that has a tendency to curl up almost into a ball when someone is attacking him. I am trying to break him of this habbit since it could be considered covering target area by some judges, and it doesn't allow him to parry or riposte properly. My other question on this point is what I've heard called the 3-point lunge, where you have both feet and typically your non-weapon hand, planted on the floor in a rather deep, and dangerous, lunge. Would this be considered "ducking" an opponent's blade?

Goodness, if they punished what you are describing, Cassidy Luitjen would never have gotten to Columbia.

[OROD]

WTF is this thread all about? No ducking? No lateral movement? What kind of drugs are you people on?

.

[rudd]

I haven't seen Guyart use it, though, and I figure if he can get points off of it there's certainly some merit.

But not to be confused with a passata soto which AFAIK is a reverse lunge while simultaneous lowering the body so it's supported by the non weapon hand. Not really seen any more.

What Guyart (amongst others) does in the "ironingboard" lunge, a long lunge with so much lean from the hips that the body is parralel to the floor and may require the off hand for support. Looks similair in a photo, very differnt move