Help with defense against a marching attack

[Rambaldi47]

I have a fencer in my club who constantly marches at me from various distances and although I can stop her from getting the easy in time hit, I usually end up pushed back to my end of the strip where she pressures me. She tends to displace herself frmo me vertically and kind of side hits me. Her big trick is a lot of hand movements and whatnot to distract while she executes all of this.

I've got it figured out that I can hit her just as she starts her march if she's too close, and I can set up a stop thrust if she starts too far away, but if she starts from just the right distance, I'm out of ideas. And I'm definitely out of ideas once she gets me to my end of the strip.Sometimes I can score a lucky flick on her during the march, but that's about it, and I'mnot even sure I'm using correct flciking technique.

Can anyone help with any tactical ideas? And also, what is the correct flicking technique? Are there any tricks to it I don't know? Thanks!

[klauver]

There is a great discussion regarding use of the piste on this ite at:
http://www.fencing101.com/content/category/5/87/43/
They are the last two lessons under tactics.

[The0ne]

you already figured out that if you stay close with pressure you can break-up the beginning of the march with an esquive or something, which is a very good tactic. Once the march is underway things get harder, the way I try and defeat the march is to use body-feints to get the attack to finish, so you can parry-repost, or get your opponent to hesitate then make attack in prep. Your main goal is to get your opponent while in the march to get too close so you can counterattack with close of distance, or to make them finish the attack sooner than they wanted to, and make parry repost.

[oiuyt]

Draw either the finish of the attack or the LACK of finish of attack and deal with it appropriately.

Examples:
False counterattack (draws the finish of the attack), followed by a parry riposte.
False counterattack (same thing), get-away-go (distance parry then take over).
False counterattack (designed to get them NOT to finish after you've hit them a couple of times with options 1 and 2), followed by a real counter attack with collapse of distance.
False counterattack (same as in 3), followed by a stophit with opening distance.
False parry (designed to get them to feel safe finishing indirectly), followed by a real parry (with tempo change between the parries ideally).
The rest of the above options starting with a false parry rather than a false counterattack.
etc.

Key is to get either a predictable finish of the attack or a predictable lack of reaction (lack of finish). In most cases the bladework (false-CA or false-P) needs to also be accomanied by the distance collapsing such that the chaser feels comfortable finishing. This can be accomplished merely by stopping but with experience the false action can be coordinated with a half-advance which really helps to sell it. The multiple direction change (from backwards while being chased to forwards in the half advance to backwards with the parry to forwards with the riposte) is difficult without extensive practice. If you master the various combinations then it becomes MUCH more difficult for your opponent.

Other key is you need to convince your opponent of two things. One that you're doing something which you are not (either counterattacking or really trying to parry) and that the distance is such that they need to finish and are safe to do so (in the case of options 3 and 4 with either starting action what you need to convince your opponent is that you're TRYING to convince them of those two things but are actually planning to P-R them when they do finish and thereby have now convinced them NOT to finish but to continue chasing).

Mostly you need to play a lot with the various options and figure out what works against the opponents that you typically face. What stimulus provides the best reaction (best being defined as a combination of predictability and your ability to dealt with it effectively) is going to be slightly different for every opponent. Play with these options with enough opponents and you'll get a feel for what will work well for you in various situations and against various opponent types. If you can't do a convincing false-CA then that's not going to be an option for you. If you can't do a good distance parry after triggering the finish of an attack, don't do that. Etc.

-B :)

[Rambaldi47]

Yeah, I can see how the multiple change of direction would be the hardest to master. I've got a tendency to do quick counterattacks (sometimes even when i shouldn't) so I should be able to sell the initial counterattack and then go from there. Seems like it's really about doing something to put the tempo back in my control--makes sense. I think the half advance idea will be VERY helpful as well.....I'll work on it--thanks for the advice guys.

Any thoughts on flicking in this situation? And I'm right in that it all comes from the wrist with a flick, right?

[The0ne]

In this situation I usually don't flick on the counter, since you're closing distance, it's very hard to get the hit in. Go straight so you know you hit. Once in a while going on the back with the distance change is good, because if you do this move to 4 a couple times they might do an automatic 4, hunching their back slightly so the flick is easier. On the repost, be my guest.

My flick doesn't come from the wrist, the main motion is from your elbow, and after seeing Brendan Meyers flick (freaking insane, I swear he could hit his own hand. . .) he flicks mostly from the arm too. I would say the strength of the flick comes from your arm, and your wrist can bend a little to sneak hits in on the lower back.

[nahouw]

This situation boils down to how good your footwork is -- which is why they always say that good footwork is the foundation of good fencing.

Throughout your opponent's march, you have to keep impecable footwork and distance -- and if the opportunity arise to stop thrust, so do it -- of course, if the referee that you have is unable to understand the rules and the subtley of the footwork changes, you then have to successfully parry (close out ) their subsequent action -- and you should be prepared to do that -- don't lose focus.

Your other option is to successfully body feint to get your opponent to finish, and then parry-riposte.

[neevel]

People have pretty well covered what you can do with feint-in-tempo (false-counterattack) or false parries. Another way you can set up a counterattack is by using a false retreat (or a very short retreat) to fool the attacker into taking an extra step in their march. You'll typically need to preface this with a couple of larger retreats to get your opponent chasing you. Then throw in the false or short retreat (a "backwards" body-feint to further create the illusion of a full retreat can be included). If your opponent falls for it and takes the extra step, you then need to make the counterrattack with a very strong tempo change- a fleche could be a very good choice here, since it both produces the needed tempo change and will shoot you past your opponent (stopping the action and limiting their ability to finish if you should miss).

The key thing is that you can not wait until your opponent has pushed you nearly to the end of the strip before setting up your action. If you can't disrupt the march at its initiation, you should start getting your response to it going within the first couple of steps. Having good small footwork is crucial-- if your footwork is precise enough that you can slip in, say 6 foot-tempos to your opponents 5, you'll have a much easier time of things.

-Dave

[prototoast]

Point-in-Line can also work some times. If nothing else, it will force her to react to you, which you can use to shift the momentum.

[achilleus]

Originally posted by prototoast
Point-in-Line can also work some times. If nothing else, it will force her to react to you, which you can use to shift the momentum.

Be very careful about using PIL in this situation.

If the ref deems that the marching fencer is attacking, then what you think is PIL is merely a counter attack.

The ways to make sure it's your PIL and not merely a counter attack are

1) extend fully before opponent initiates the attack

or

2) Break the distance by running far away and then establish the Line

or

3) Know that your opponent will search if you try to establish line into their attack

or

4) Pay the ref before the bout

[Boo Boo]

Don't get hung up on flicking: it's just a way of finishing your hit (although not normally recommended on a stop hit...), it's not a solution to your problem.

What Oiuyt says is incredibly constructive - and saves me typing what I was going to say... - that is what I would try.

If you are stop hitting, remember to stop hit, runaway and block (if you want to claim a stop hit, you want to ensure it is one light)

Boo

[The0ne]

PIL just has to be before the beginning of the final adnvance lunge, not before the entire march, just wanted to clarify that.

[Boo Boo]

Still PIL into a marching attack can be very dangerous.

During the marching attack, you may mis-judge just when your opponent has started moving their hand forward. Some people do marching attacks and progress their hand slowly towards the target. You may think you are establishing your PIL into their preparation, but they may have already started - when they finish and hit you, it is still their attack.

If the her hand is progressing toward the target on the march before you establish PIL (even if it is slow), she can ignore your PIL and just finish her attack. So a PIL wont necesarily draw a reaction (although it might - depending on your opponent).

So, generally, it is really not a good tactic.

Boo

[Craig]

One suggestion for throwing out a point in line against a marching attack - use a check step and you're more likely to get a reaction.

What is a check step?

A check step is like an appel going backward. Instead of tapping the toe/ball of foot on the piste, you start with the ball of your foot on the piste and then slam your heel down. The motion should make the ball of your foot slide forward and the foot to rock back so that you can follow the "check" with a fluid retreating motion.

What does it do?

The check step adds both a visual and aural reinforcement to the establishment of the point in line, making the point in line seem more definate to both your opponent and the referee. If you simply extend your arm while retreating, there's now definate beginning to your line but with a check step, you crystalize that (1) there is a line and (2) when exactly it was established.

The aural cue of the "check" also serves to bait the fencer into taking your line since it make the line a more "real" thread in their mind. This gives you the ability to go for derobement or parry-riposte, or even a counter attack since the attacker may hesitate and be out of position to finish on target.

Done properly, the check step will help you to accelerate the retreat that it leads into, which further reinforces the line. (You establish it with the "check" and then the distance breaks, leaving you outside of simple attack distance with a clear line.)

Try it out and let us know if that helps you out.

Cheers,
Craig

[The0ne]

Boo boo,

they can be extending with their hand before you make PIL and you can still score. The line just has to be before the final advance lunge of the action, because by definition a double advance lunge is not an attack. But you're right, it is very hard to correctly time, but if you score on it, your opponent will be more careful marching on you. . .

[achilleus]

Originally posted by The0ne
Boo boo,

they can be extending with their hand before you make PIL and you can still score. The line just has to be before the final advance lunge of the action, because by definition a double advance lunge is not an attack. But you're right, it is very hard to correctly time, but if you score on it, your opponent will be more careful marching on you. . .

You are both right and wrong.

Distance is the key. If the PIL is established from beyond adv-lunge distance it's valid, although getting the ref notice can be difficult.

If the fencer who is doing the marching attack is within adv-lunge distance, and the defender retreats and the distance remains constant, it often times is considered attack-counter.

This question came up a while back. Bill Oliver FOC posted on it.

It's a interpretive call that varies from country to country and ref to ref. Best not to rely on PIL in this situation unless the ref is giving the call to you consistently.

[labouche]

Originally posted by achilleus
Be very careful about using PIL in this situation.

If the ref deems that the marching fencer is attacking, then what you think is PIL is merely a counter attack.

The ways to make sure it's your PIL and not merely a counter attack are

1) extend fully before opponent initiates the attack

or

2) Break the distance by running far away and then establish the Line

or

3) Know that your opponent will search if you try to establish line into their attack

or

4) Pay the ref before the bout

Or you can make a PiL and continue moving back forcing your opponent to make multiple advances onto you point. Remember and attack is advance lunge and anything more is a preperation.
-la bouche

[labouche]

oh, i see I'm a little behind. =)

[achilleus]

Found the old thread that mentioned PiL and marching attacks.
So, remember establish the PiL out of distance, and/or before that attack begins.

It's at http://www.fencing101.com/vb/showthr...threadid=1992.

Bill Olliver's answer is attached to Craig's post at the bottom of the first page.

It reads as follows:

I sent this question over to the Bill Oliver at the FOC along with my "answer".

Please read the "official" response below. It's rather long, but Mr. Oliver provides some great insights.

Craig
============
Given what I've seen of this during bouts, I would be included to give the point to A (assuming that B did not break distance and A did not make a search for the blade.) B would, in my mind, earn the touch only if they broke distance, if A searched for the blade, or if A never began the extension until after the PIL was established.
Thanks,
Craig

Bill Oliver's response:

There is no "step rule" in foil. The only description of footwork in relation to priority is in saber. The attack in foil is defined by the "threat" of valid target, not the feet. One could argue that in foil, the distance between the fencers is key. Once a fencer has closed the distance (going from on guard distance to something that could allow an advance-lunge to hit) then that fencer has established the beginning of threat. Of course, the fencer must
do other things to establish threat, but distance is very important to the creation of threat.

Your assessment of the action is correct. If A begins some kind of arm motion going relatively toward the opponent's target, and doesn't do something wrong, like search, and a makes the initial action, then it's A's attack. B has to defend. Breaking distance can work, but with the speed and adgility of most contemporty foil fencers, it's almost impossible to do so.

Ultimately, threat is defined by the impressions of the referee.

Let's assume that at the command "fence" fencer A
begins with closing the distance and some kind of
extension of the weapon arm (even a little bit counts as a threat). If fencer B's action is a reaction to fencer A's action, then it's wrong, and fencer A has to do something wrong to lose the priority, i.e. stop, search for B's blade, miss, whatever.

If both fencer's actions begin with the command
"fence", then the point in line is correct, as it was, by definition, established out of distance, and fencer A must deal with it to take priority.

At the highest levels of fencing, fencer A always
makes a threatening action, and fencer B never gets the line established in time. Olympic class fencers don't make mistakes like that too often.

In bouts at the local club, fencer A's actions are
often incorrectly exectued. As the rules state, in order to have a threat, the attacker must make the initial offensive action, continuously threaten valid target, and must not withdraw the attack. Quite often, less skilled fencers move their feet before their hands, or try to hedge their bets in the middle of an action and switch from a direct attack to a beat attack. This has nothing to do with priority, but merely is poor mechanics.

In that scenario, the referee is reduced to deciding who made the fewest errors, or whose action was the closest to being correct. It's all too common, and one of the main reasons why there seems to be inconsistancy on the part of referees.

Right of way in saber is very strictly governed in the rules. One must have an extended (not extending) arm, one's blade much conform to a 180 degree angle, one cannot cross over the feed, after the three steps, the attack is considered over, etc. This is not the case in foil. Remember foil is the practice weapon for epee, not saber. The idea behind many of the foil
rules was to encourage correct epee form. Bent-arm attacks aren't what the fore-fathers had in mind, but a counter attack that gets on killed in the process is definately what they were trying to teach beginners to avoid. Once the threat is established, the objective is to hit early in the acion, thus stopping the opponent before he or she starts or defend.

Sorry for the long response, but this is an issue that doesn't lend itself to description in words.

(Bill also offered to provide visual aids if I meet up with him at a NAC.)

Bill Oliver
=========================

So, there you have it.
Craig

[Rambaldi47]

Thanks for the help with this marching attack defense everyone. My club just had a inter-salle tournament for unclassified foilists, and I competed. I ran into people who do some marching and was able to beat them both. In fact, one of them was in the DE Final match and I won 15-14 with a simple attack when my opponent tried to start a march on me at to close distance. So again--

THANKS!!