Fencing:  Self Defense or Something More?                                  By: John Proctor

       During a recent family gathering my erudite uncle Peter asked me if anyone learned swordplay for self-defense. I thought about this for a long time before answering him. It was really only about four seconds but in those four seconds I thought deep. I gave him an answer saying, “each person seems to have their own reasons for learning to fence, a few might learn for the obsolete need to defend one’s life with a sword, but no two people seem to have the exact same logic.” Which is kind of odd, for as widely interpreted and individual as fencing is, peoples’ purposes for bothering with it are just as unique.

On my two-hour drive home the question continued to bother me. I wasn’t satisfied with my answer. Trying to guess what somebody’s motivations are has always sparked my attention. What do people find interesting with this old pastime? The word fencing comes from defense. The old Latin word was defensum. Meaning, “to protect yourself, to enclose yourself in for protection.” Fencing, fence, scrimmage, skirmish, they are all closely related. A model or practice for working out a form of protection.

There is little chance any of us are going to be strolling down the street, meet Inigo Montoya, watch him whip out his sword, and hear the challenge, “My name is Inigo Montoya, you have killed my father, prepare to die.” Very odd. But people do come to class for a challenge. How might they fair in a one on one encounter with another individual? Here is a romance, the lonely sword-wielding bravo facing his adversary. Measuring fate in one’s own hand.

Fencing is preparation for dealing with conflict. Other activities like baseball, soccer, business, and boxing all do the same thing in good fashion. Competition and struggle is present in life whether we like it or not, the question is, how do we learn to deal with ithe problem? Fencing is fun, to be sure. The opportunity for challenge and self-reflective study is enormous. Simply doing something constructive is a form of preservation in itself. People learn to swim and usually find the experience enjoyable, but swimming is also an important skill to acquire for practical reasons.

When watching two fencers, regardless of their ability level, certain similarities are apparent. Both of them are trying to unbalance the other, catch one off guard or unawares. At the same time each are grappling with their own instinctive reactions, some of them obstacles to success. A sword unexpectedly swings at the defender’s face, instead of keeping a cool distance and feeling out the range of attack, the defender flinches and unconsciously covers his face with an elbow. At the same time contorting his body into an unbalanced, immobile posture. This happens to the best of athletes. The next time you slip on a patch of ice in a truly quick and unexpected manner try to go into a controlled gymnastic roll rather than instinctively throwing your arms out. It’s almost impossible.

Since fencing is an abstract sport and no one ever hurt, people have to decide on the rules which define the conditions which allow action. An intellectual practice. As there are different reasons for why people fence, many interpretations argue about how fencing is accomplished. At one time there were debates on how to prepare for a duel. After awhile some attention was given to perfecting technique and form. These days speculation exists over how fencing was done in certain periods of history, or how competitors are going to make strategies and plans to win the next Olympics. How to fence, how to we train, how to deal with other peoples interpretations, how to deal with conflict. How do we strengthen our resolve when dealing with adversity? In what ways do we make our points known?

Emotions often rise to the top during competition. At the moment of supreme effort every success and failure is reflected personally. There is no team to hide behind, no one else to blame. Each competitor has a personal view of how to conduct themselves, what is honorable, what is right and wrong. Most of the time things don’t go your way, the referee makes incomprehensible calls, rules are interpreted poorly, certain adversaries are being favored, and “if the swords were real things would be different.” You fancy. An action found to be totally acceptable in one club is taboo in another. Your self -confidence and ego are on the line. In the meantime this beserker assails you with a style learned in the carrot blender school of fencing. The next bout you are facing a polished expert who can flick the eyelashes off a buzzing fly. Is there any sanity? Your breathing is hard, a choking sensation knots in the throat, muscles feel tight, a thousand conflicting urges well up inside your chest. The referee makes a ridiculous call, your coach yells at you. There is no justice. Fans and family in the audience start to growl. But it is just a game, an exhibition, or a chess match. No one is even going to get scratched.

Try and convince your mind of this. Shrewd judgment and calculated effort should strengthen your impulses. Let reason critique volatile reaction, and vice versa. Don’t allow your ignorance to become a puppet to its antique preservation instincts. One day a few efforts will go well.. Observations will be noted and strategies formed. Large pieces making up events are finely understood at a glance. It will become clear what the other fencer is doing and though disagreement might exist over the referee’s call you visualize what the referee is seeing. You learn to move in tune with your opponent, now your fighting actions become persuasive to the adversary, audience, and officials. Changes are shaped in relation to the situation. Personal objectives become realized and conflicting urges controlled. Ten efforts are accomplished in one movement. Courtesy becomes important because struggles can be sometimes won without turning the affair into a riot. Actions made with grace, precision, and physical strength is powerfully coordinated. The results become as concise as they are effective. An adversary toppled and the day won.

Fencing combines a wide range of offensive and defensive practices into one tool. With it comes a complete package of strategy. People of all ages can play the game without coming to any harm, everyone’s combined efforts adapt and evolve quickly into higher skills. Mixing the efforts of many individuals reinforces the best in each other. It shows who you are and what you might want to become. Fencing is the middle ground for self-defense. It is and will always be a useful tool for settling conflict in our society.

Fencing and Reflexes                                                                        By: John Proctor

    A lot of people think of fencing as a quick game of reflexes and wits. Yes, this is true but we have to be careful how the word reflex is used.  The natural reaction which occurs when tapping under the kneecap and causing the lower leg to jump are not the kind of reflexes used here.  Nor is the desperate attempt to protect the face from harm by throwing the arms up and turning away from danger.  The reflexes used in fencing might be best described as learned actions.  Actually, this is what fencing is all about.

    The game is so fast a lot of thought over the past few hundred years has been put into discovering the best way for a swordsman to defend himself.  Normal responses a person exhibits in when defending themselves can actually be dangerous in relation to fencing speed.  Most of the swordplay is in pursuit of finding the right position to make a move.  Calculating how the other fencer will react and using whatever defensive skills are available while scoring a touch best describes the kind of reflex used.  The normal reaction of turning away from danger and covering the exposed body part is an important tool, but defensive movements are performed out of consideration rather than panic.

    Sword adepts seem to spend a lot of time thinking about what needs to be done.  Even an individual who never took a single lesson in their life would have to conclude some kind of planning is in order.  Acute observation is relevant for summing up an opponent's skills, while finding the best tactical conclusion is the key to outsmarting their alter ego's on the strip.  The problem finally becomes a matter of carrying out the action.  Whether a teacher is present or not the fencer becomes obsessed with preparing themselves in many ways to obtain the highest performance. 

Fencers condition their bodies for strength and flexibility.  Learning correct balance and quick movement is significant.  Over reacting is just as much of a problem as under reacting so a lot of effort is given trying to control those natural reflexes which can hinder more than help.  For those who are seriously in pursuit of improvement much time is spent looking for the best situations which improve skills.  This could be fencing among a group of equally powerful adversaries or crossing swords among more highly skilled athletes.

     Learning from a teacher or even several different teachers gives body and structure to what is otherwise extremely abstract practice.  The teachers in turn have learned from other teachers, both past and present, living and dead.  They have learned from general experience and observation.  All of this knowledge strangely affects how reflexes are used.  It is true, the more completely a fencer learns particular movements the better he can adjust to different scenarios.  Yet the learned movement is directed by a mind often faced with unexplainable problems.  Here the fencer has to deftly imagine what is happening.  Fencing is a potent mix of thoughts and reactions.  Describing what a reflex means in relation to learning is no easy task.    
 
    

Parents can be a great promotional asset for fencing activity, not only by helping their children but also by assisting anyone who has questions regarding fencing. However, there is more parents can do than simply verbally promoting the sport of fencing.  For both long-time and new fencing parents alike who are interested in becoming even more involved in their child's activity but don't know where to begin, here some functions which always find a warm welcome both at the Fencing Exchange and abroad:

Referees: These people conduct bouts between two fencers, award touches, keep order on the strip, and decide right of way in the case of a double touch.  Fencers are always looking for them, both in club and during competition.
Auxiliary personnel: During a competition time keepers and score keepers help greatly, freeing up the referee.  If many children are present, a small pit crew of adults can help them get their equipment on, make sure they get to the strip on time, and assist whenever a piece of equipment is not functioning properly.  Fencing strip personnel make sure the tape sticks to the floor properly, fix any hardware type problems which occur, and do anything from replacing tables and chairs to refilling drink stations, to running out for a pizza.  It is truly a luxury event when the fencers don't have to do anything but fence!
Bout committee: During a competition the bout committee is the ultimate governing body, seeding the fencers into pools and direct elimination bouts, settling any rule questions fencers or other personnel may have, and serving as the final authority on executive decisions while running a competition. Experienced fencers and referees best serve this role.  
Drivers:  People who safely get the fencers to and from club or competition sights.  The drivers often end up stopping at an all you can eat buffet on the way home, as the fencers are usually ravenous.
Managers:  People who keep tabs on events, coordinating personnel, training places and times, and organizing events with other clubs.  An event does not have to be a competition, but could be a class, a series of private bouts, a demonstration, or an exhibition.  The managers can also communicate with colleges who are interested in recruiting students onto their fencing teams.
Armorers: A very special branch of people who fix electric and other types of equipment. This is the ultimate service for fencers who do not have the time or the comprehension for repairing a broken weapon. Fixing fencing equipment does take some training and a basic knowledge of electricity helps. Most repairs are very easy to do, but sometimes an exotic scoring machine or reel breaks down. For those individuals with the desire to become a proficient armorer (but not necessarily the knowledge).
Coaches: Since fencing is a pastime requiring study along with practical application, a coach is the first requirement for any club. Instructors teach students how to fence, but they also give structure and management for people who wouldn't know where to begin.  Although teaching six or more people on a regular basis (like what we do at the Fencing Exchange) is a time consuming task, and truly a job in itself, guiding one to three fencers is easy.  Students can be moved anywhere with little coordination, and it is easy to follow their progress.  Two students who are
well trained go a long way, and there are many social opportunities for students to test their skills against other fencers at local clubs.  Fencers are easily motivated when anticipating a visit to another club. A parent-coach who is familiar and trained in fencing theory can do wonders to help a novice fencer in new situations.  A coach can instruct and guide from his or her home, school, church, YMCA, civic hall, or dance studio.  Not much space is needed.
    
 Learning to coach does not necessarily improve ones own fencing abilities, but teaches one a comprehension of fundamental fencing mechanics, what to look for, and how to coach other students. There are plenty of host clubs to visit, new people to fence, and numerous competitions.  A fencing coach can work with two or three students, helping to improve technique, and going on field trips to local clubs.
     The Coaching Clinics' main purpose is to teach instructors.  While the clinic informs teachers about the rules of fencing, it is not a course for instructing referees, although some coaches may become referee competent as a result of the instruction.  The clinic also serves to inform parents and help them become critical thinkers when examining fencing.  Although previous fencing experience helps, it is not a pre-requisite to becoming a coach.  Coaches are instructed from the ground up. The Coaches' Clinic uses French theory and instructs teachers correct body positioning, footwork, bladework, distance, timing, vocabulary, and the rules of foil fencing.  Coaches are required to learn the movements and understand the theory behind the actions.  They are also required to show competence when demonstrating and teaching the movements to other students.

Although a comprehension of fencing logic and technique is important, coaches are not required to be great fencers. This clinic will not give a nationally recognized instructor accreditation, and those who are interested in acquiring this credit will be given direction to the United States Fencing Association's annual Fencing Coaches' College, held at the end of July at The Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs, Colorado. The instructor for the Coaching Clinic at The Fencing Exchange will be John Proctor, who is accredited for instruction by the USFA Fencing Coaches' course in foil, epee, and saber.  John has been professionally instructing for nine years and fencing for thirteen.

     The foil uses a button which can be depressed with about a pound of pressure.  A certain amount of travel allows the button to travel downwards, there bye making an electrical connection when the button is pushed.  Noteworthy is the fact this travel may be infinitely short.  The button only needs to be depressed for one thousandth of a second in order for the machine to register the touch, an amazingly short period of time.  What is interesting is when all the above information is taken into account.  One pound of pressure, travel being infinitely short, electrical contact being made for only one thousandth of a second.  This means a thrust may connect almost ephemerally.  Ad to this the fact most foil blades are inherently whippy in nature and a curious form of fencing develops.

     Back in the bad days of dry fencing when touches had to be seen by a quintuple number of judges fencers had to place the thrust in a way the judges would be able to clearly see where the touch arrived.  Foil play is limited to scoring legitimate points in the torso area, including the sides and back.  However: when fencing dry the most likely target area where an attacker could make a visible hit  would be somewhere in front, usually on the right breast in the case of a right handed defender.  Just securing the sword tip for a moment on the opponent’s chest took a bit of doing and was a skill unto itself.

     Dry fencing is very linear in nature, both in offense and defense.  Having such a limited target to make noteworthy hits creates a certain style of fencing, with the attacks being strait and parries necessarily narrow in width.  Tactics favored the defense.  Other factors contribute to dry fencing taking on a certain atmosphere, such as the fact dueling was still very much a reality in the heyday of classic championships, French and Italian teachers had dominated fencing theory for the past several hundred years, and certain habits of prim, and proper thought had fashionable taste among our Victorian ancestors.   Nevertheless one important mechanic affecting the nature of a dry bout is the fact a touch has to be placed definitively.

       Foil blades have used lightweight, flexible steel for years, even in the days of dry fencing.  Yet this flexibility takes on a whole new meaning with electrical apparatus.  Electric fencing rocked old habits and changed the face of competition forever.  No longer did a touch have to be seen by a jury, machines could pick up the fact in a split second.  Since a button is depressed with only a pound of pressure and the travel can be infinitely short, the blade does not even have to noticeably bend in order to register a light.  This changed habits and tactics of sportsmen.  For one thing more legitimate target area was safely available to foils men.  A quick touch to the side, upper shoulder, or even back became opportunities.  The flexibility of the blade allowed for quick flicking motions a brief score where no judge could ever see.  As a result the target area became “larger” although this was still the same legal target area as before.  Having a larger target area under threat changed defense, now many parries had to be wider.  Since the attacks grew to be faster and more uncertain than ever fencing distance increased and footwork played a more important role.  Tactics favored attacking.   A touch no longer has to be held in order to be seen, this decreases the amount of time a fencer decides to place a hit, defend, or renew an attack.  As a result the timing of foil play has sped up.

     All of this sounds kind of crazy when one thinks about what the original purpose of training with a foil was… attacking in a strait line at the correct distance as fast as possible.  Yet training for the perfect touch, dueling, competing for a set of touches with dry fencing or electric fencing are all different phenomenon.  If an attack were perfectly timed and performed at the correct distance all touches would have a characteristic strait on appearance.  But fighting being what it is, defenders is usually try to protect themselves, distance cannot be held exactly, attacks self destruct, the distance closes or shifts unpredictably, fencers become knocked out of strait lines relative to one another.  Although an attack which develops outside of a strait line is not as fast as one which does, many fencers have weak spots in their defense, there bye allowing such unorthodox attacks to score.  There seems to be no exact science to explain psychology well.  Fencing in competition is not a perfect occupation, the very unstable structure of fighting itself creates all sorts of oddball opportunities, thus electric foil fencing has steered somewhat away from the original orthodox style and form of yesteryear.

     Today coaches have taken a different approach to fencing as sport.  In the twentieth century the Russian school developed a statistical method to determine how training should be approached.  With this tool each weapon’s habitual characteristics are predicted and contending fencers’ movements and tactical patterns are also anticipated.  Finally, the athlete’s training program is outlined and formatted by what the raw data suggests.  Each fencer is still obligated to make personal decisions on the strip but their own decisions are influenced to some degree by the tactics their coaches plug into them. 

     By analyzing raw data, strategic foresight is often made through studying aggregates of points, rather than imagining the delivery of one fatal thrust.  The approach seemed successful, as many Soviet fencers became world champions. After all the statistics suggested which kind of training programs would be the most effective.  Still, this science seems to lack some kind of self-determination. Its calculations are based on what happens in a competition, rather than on what somebody is trying to make happen.  Without the desire of the swordsman being the primary catalyst of effort, statistics seem to slowly lose their punch, eventually becoming faceless data mirroring empty echoes of data.  Individuals become directed to meaningless tasks and the game loses its sincerity with athletes programmed like robots.  Perhaps one marked sign is the deterioration in how fencing is played. 

     The old virtue of practicing for control and personal initiative has taken a sideline to what the game plan is going to be.  Luckily nobody is going to get hurt so fencers and coaches have the luxury to modify actions as they go along.  The statistics suggest the original purpose of fencing only in indirect ways.  For example: in foil, a certain percentage of off target touches are acceptable due to the fact if another percentage of hits gets through, then the off target hits become an acceptable possibility.  This is far removed when off target hits showed poor control, both for the safety of your unmasked sparring partner, and for the fencer himself who is trying to learn about eliminating unnecessary movement.  Now off target hits are a viable tactical alternative.  

      Statistics hint at how speed and power are ever more the necessary prerequisites for improved performance.  Sometimes the game resembles a race to see who can score first, regardless of protecting themselves in the process.  Fighting for a superior position in all aspects becomes unnecessary.  Along these lines the mind behind the matter becomes lost.  Winning the game according to statistical impression becomes the objective point and the central content of the exercise is gone.  As a result the game becomes more and more artificial.  According to this kind of analysis blunders are not only acceptable but can be advantageous.  Worst of all a fencer is encouraged not to think for himself, because breakfast, lunch, and dinner are fed by statistics.   

     Fencing for scholarships, trophies, and sponsorships has already caused fencers to perform irrationally.  The advertisement mindset has pawned the desire to win Olympic medals.  This lure has taken on its own sinister character and like many sports, the idea to win at all costs becomes the main focus.  Common sense rules of defense are affected by manipulations to garnish more money, entertainment becomes the sale, and the athlete’s skills become a puppet of the crowds’ mirth.  Statistics do not take into account the reasons for performance, only the results.  Since they do not consider the common sense directing fencing actions, they only serve to amplify the decay of a practice already grown degenerate.

     Bronwyn majored in the Studio Arts and will take a minor in the Theatre Arts.  Bronwyn learned to fence in high school with John Proctor’s School of Swordmanship where she studied swordplay for about three years.  This work led her to an interest in Theatre Combat which she has assiduously studied in college for the past year.  One of her recent stage combat studies has been with the battle axe.

     To end her senior year Bronwyn will be having two shows.  One of them is a combat recital, literally a series of combat skits using different sorts of historical and fantasy weapons.   In her first skit she will play the evil Calista, a blond hared female villain of the TV series Zena Warrior Princess.   We believe she wields the battle axe in this one.  Her second role will be to play the villain Darth Vader, named “Helmut”  from the movie  Space Balls.  A comedy spoof based on Star Wars.  If anyone would like to watch Bronwyn her recital will take place on May 6 at Brown University in Philadelphia.

     Bronwyn will also be having a personal art exhibition where an array of fantastic neoprene masks will be put on display.  Don’t superhero’s wear this stuff?  Well, this is to be seen.  The show will be on April 28.  Good luck Bronwyn, we wish you a happy graduation and congratulations with such a daring and creative degree in the arts!

     Nicole Polanchika has majored in Social Psychology and minored with the visual arts.  Her fencing career started with John Proctor’s School of Swordsmanship for about four years before going to college.  She went on to Division I Athletics at Princeton University where she successfully held a position fencing on the team as a varsity starter for four years.  

     For the first three years Nicole fenced epee.  Her training coach was Princeton’s Maitre Michel Sebastiani, a polite man and veteran teacher of sword craft.  During Nicole’s freshman year her win loss record was 41-19, a 68% win record.  She took eighth place of about 48 girls in the Temple open.  Nicole was selected as the All-Ivy Second Team Epee and her teamates elected her the Class of 1996 Outstanding Freshman Female Fencer.  During her freshman year Nicole also took medals at the Junior Olympics and Pennysulvania Keystone State games.

     During her Sophomore and Junior years Nicole became the epee Team Captain.  In her sophomore year she was selected to the All-Ivy Academic Team.  At the Keystone State Games she took medals during both years, including two gold medals in Sabre and Epee.

     This senior year Nicole decided to change her weapon to the cut and thrust sabre, a sword she has long held a fire for in spirit.  The fall quarter of 1999 was the inaugural year for the women’s NCAA sabre  teams.  No woman has ever before fenced sabre in college or at high level competitions.  Throughout the year Nicole held the number 1 position on a three person team squad.  Here Nicole places in 6^th position out of 50 girls at the Temple open and took 6^th place of 47 women at the Easterns, an Ivy League Championship. 

     In the year 2000 during the spring semester the women’s fencing team won Princeton’s first ever Ivy League Title for the first time in Princeton’s history.  The team went on to be undefeated in Ivy League competitions and will receive gold championship rings.

     Nicole comments, “The summer before my senior year the NCAA voted to make women’s sabre a varsity recognized sport.  I jumped at the opportunity.  I’d always loved sabre, and would have regretted not fencing for the sabre squad my final year at Princeton.  With a specially designed 12-week running and training program, and the guidance of Grahan Brooks (class of ’98 Princeton Fencer), my senior season rivaled my stellar freshman year.  I’m so glad to have gotten the chance to fence on the debut of women’s sabre!”

     Nicole will give a senior thesis  on “Children, Physical Appearance, and Self Esteem:  A Persuasive Intervention.  She will also give a visual art show  named “Portraits of a Girl.”   Nicole says, “The show consists of very large (life-size or larger), very loud, and very colorful oil paintings.  They are mainly self-portraits and all deal in issues of confrontation.  I take various interiors and force my way into them, putting myself on display while actively acknowledging the viewer.”

     If anyone would like to see the show , opening day will take place at Princeton University on May 9^th from 6-8 PM.  The show will be open from May 7 - 12.  Good luck Nicole, you have done a lot of fencing in your short four years.  What a good experience you made studying Social Psychology, painting loud oils, and learning to fence!  We are proud of you.

     The most obvious and best way to learn real swordplay would have to be fighting under live conditions with sharp swords and final intentions.  Unfortunately most advocates’ careers would be short ones.  Something more along the lines of safety was necessary and swordsman began adhering blunt tips onto their pointed rapiers.

     In the early days fencers did not wear masks to protect the face and eyes. Very little armor or other protective gear was used.  Everyday street clothing was the norm and the artificially blunted dueling swords were very stiff, better suited for their original deadly purpose.  This probably fit in well with the rough and ready culture at the time.

     Since practicing contained its own plethora of maiming and mishaps, practitioners began to put an emphasis on control and form.  The defunct medieval joust had long since passed by ending its days in sport rather than bloodfest.  The old barbarian virtue of displaying courage in the face of dangerous practice went out of fashion.  Accidentally gouging a fencing partner’s eye out became boorish and reflected poor skills, not to mention disgraceful manners.  At the same time applicants desired to learn realism along with an approach which would reveal the conditions of clashing with sharp steel.  An interpretive schism appeared at this point and fencers became divided between an artistic principle that promoted control, and the pragmatic reality of swordplay. 

     Presently the foil became a lighter version of the dueling sword, with a safe, flexible blade.  Target area was limited to the torso since this reflected consideration to guard one’s own vital areas, and doubly protected fencers from chance hits to the face.  Practice actions were light, fast, and conventional, meaning a lot of attention was given to which movements were allowed, and who had an attacking advantage, and who should be defending.  Every aspect of fencing was studied and dissected, then reassembled with the endeavor to idealize all forms.  Distance and timing became exact measurements and certain physical techniques were created in order to fit these measurements.  If unruly fencing resembled a bushy apple tree with tangled limbs and brambles, then practicing with the correct method trimmed its wild excess.  Over grown branches were snipped off and the remaining twigs pruned so the tree could bear ripe fruit.  Like the virtuosity of opera, conventional form became a pursuit all by itself.

     Matters became further muddled when people began using the foil not just as a tool in preparation of self-defense, or as a theoretical model for perfecting fencing actions, but as a game.  Here a third objective evolved, to score a greater amount of touches with a finite time limit.  At first the sporting rules closely approximated what was expected in practice, achieving a touch with an emphasis on perfect form.  Time limits were very long, if any limit was given at all.  Slowly emphasis changed from assuming a correct guard with its related movement to planting a hit in any way possible.

     The mask was invented around this period and fencers where given opportunity to dominate swordplay with added risk.  Foil play gradually became stronger and sometimes less controlled.  Fencers were motivated to score touches and like Pavlov’s dog, felt a sense of gratification when they perceived they would be awarded a touch.  At the same time the sporting craft acquired a new area of discipline in the strategic realm of analysis and planning.   Probably the greatest advantage was crossing blades with a barrage of different people who were trying their hardest to win under conventional rules.  Technique retained its advantages, but there were fewer restrictions on what could happen.  One had to stalk their opponents and calculate what needed to be done.

     Perhaps the most deceiving of all practice methods, the fencing bout, allowed many liberal actions to solve chancy and unpredictable problems. Assaults governed by only a few practical rules introduced a wide range of tactical and strategic solutions - something that a restrictive technical lesson inhibits almost to zero.  As a result certain competitive free fencing antics have become the black sheep of the fencing world.  Some moments allow the performance to reach a pinnacle of skill and strength, while the next can just wind up a mess.  The best bouts are those which perch on the edge of control, balanced between achievement and disaster.  Yet oddly enough the best movements are still classical in nature, or at least derived from a classical foundation reflecting graceful movement and lithe equilibrium.  Without technique there are few tactics to consider.

     Foil fencing has been used as a comprehensive training tool for learning the base root of sword craft.  In its play essential elements are stripped raw, leaving the most functional statement bare.  A good bout reveals balance and effective, if not brilliant guarding actions when confronted by an opponent’s strongest assault. Its artistic merit lies in the challenge to perfect form and cultivate polite manners.  Fencers are at their best when facing adversity with a clear consciousness since there is little time for self-doubt. The practice matures an individual’s personal nature and peels away clouded thoughts, which reveals a clear consciousness and a sharpened degree of self-perception.

     For thousands of years these barbarians more or less lived happily with all their traditional tools of living such as hunting, fishing, small plots of farmland, and bartering for whatever could not be personally made.  For some reason, about two thousand years ago these barbarians began to shift radically from their familiar homelands, and began to look for new places to live.  Who knows why the big migrations became popular, maybe the traditional methods of living were so successful the population grew to large in order to live comfortably with the habits of  hunting, and bartering.  Perhaps the weather grew warmer, or colder, making the food supply shift in availability, or making travel easier, or harder. Maybe the slow build up of trading with distant areas brought  new plagues sweeping through parts of the continent.  It is possible the slow build up of trade with far off civilizations finally gave the barbarians interest to try something new.  Whatever the reasons, large groups of self sufficient barbarians began to shift and migrate.

     Among certain barbarians one popular method of securing new land was by taking it with the sword.  Early roving German and Scandinavian pirates were notorious for this sort of practice.  Any small tribe or familiar band of wandering people without resources to barter with, or land to live on, might try their luck hacking out a living with their swords, so to speak.  It could be said the value of  a pillaging  pirate lay in his skill at arms.  It might also be said how the success of any defending villagers lay in the skill of beating off the attackers.  One might actually seize a living by the efforts of personal combat.

     The more successful of these aggressors or defenders eventually became lords, ladies, dukes, and knights.  These aristocrats earned private fortunes through some of their barbaric ancestors efforts at taking whatever was available at swordpoint.  In fact, they owed their entire existence by the skill of waging private warfare.

     During medieval times life began to change. People settled down in one area and more work could be done.  The aristocrats served as the government, police, and defenders of privately held areas of land.  In order to trade among their neighbors in a more lucrative manner, gold, and silver, was greedily gathered by kings, and queens, and coin was minted.  Now private armies could be hired, inventions found subsidies with rich patrons, and roving bands of desperate adventurers were kept under control. 

     In the heyday of the late Renaissance (1500 to late 1600) when just about everybody was beginning to make a living from the modern concepts of  work and paid salaries the last aristocrats were still practicing the custom of waging war among themselves.  Although a direct living could not be made with the skill at arms, aristocrats still recognized themselves as making a living with such tools.  The noblemen still worked in the armies as officers, and no noble worth their weight in feathers would be caught without carrying a sidearm.  Besides;  bravery and courage shown in mortal combat still had worth, and could gain an important commission in a military, or a political post. This honorable merit  was practically  a business in itself. At the very least it was an active example of the upper classman’s high status among his peers. 

     A unique form of private dueling was born in this time period.  Ancient traditional barbarian customs no longer set rules for combat.  Medieval chivalry died and small bands of  terribly expert knights ceased to roam the battlefield. Because armor was no longer worn the sword became thinner and lighter.  A style of offensive and defensive fencing with the sword alone was developed.  Heavy, armor rending battle swords fell out of use.  The long, slender, and deadly thrusting rapier came into popularity.  It is to this final epoch of  sword play that we owe our modern day techniques of fencing to.  Although no one any longer makes a living out of  swinging a sharp sword around, or gains a commission as an officer in an army with their courageous dueling skills, we do owe our technique, and common sense fencing rules, to the final days of  individualistic, private combat.   

     Wow, sounds like the referee has a lot of power.  In fact, the referee has ultimate power over just about everything going on during a competition.  Being the referee is no easy task since fencing is a highly emotional and subjective sport.  Fencers fight to win; yet they are still subject to highly controversial and stiff rules.  Unlike boxing, which has a continuous flow of action with little interference from the referee, fencers are subjected to a referee’s ruling for every touch they score or receive.  Most people are familiar with the elation or discouragement of boxers who are labeled as either victorious or defeated by the judges when all rounds are completed with no knock out.  Imagine the stress of a fencer when he is judged on every point made!  Perhaps even more nerve-racking, each athlete is given a brief explanation of the action, along with who is being awarded a touch.            

     In foil and saber there is a rule called right of way, or priority, which claims only one person may develop an attack at a time.  If both fencers are touched it is up to the referee to decide which fencer will be awarded the touch and why.  Difficulty arises when the priority relationship between the fencers becomes confused.  Each person is struggling to gain control of the attacking initiation.  If sharp swords were used the truth would become apparent, but with dummy tips understanding this is a subtle matter.  The rulebook has a standard explanation that the referee follows when arbitrating who will be awarded a touch.  However: each referee and each fencer may judge events a bit differently.  When a fencer does not agree with a referee’s call there is little he can do unless the referee said something which was unclear, or contrary to his own logic.  It doesn’t matter if both fencers think they performed in a way completely opposite to the referee’s opinion - so long as the description of the fencing phrase is clear the referee’s judgement is the final say in the matter.

     In the rulebook this decision is called a point of fact.  There is no appeal for this.  However; “if the referee is ignorant of or misunderstands a definite rule, or applies it in a manner contrary to the Rules, an appeal on this matter may be entertained.”  (Fencing Rules, 2000 Edition, t.122, t.96b)  To make an appeal the plaintiff should courteously inform the director that he would like to make an appeal before the bout committee.  Right then and there the bout committee will decide on the issue.  The fencer making an appeal on a point of fact, or anything else for this matter should use discretion, since both the referee and the bout committee can penalize a fencer for an Unjustified appeal t.122, Delaying the bout t.31, or Refusal to obey the Referee t.82, t.84.

     These are the hard and cold facts of the rulebook.  Anyone who fences foil or saber knows how subjective a point of fact is.  So what is a fencer to do?  First of all, read the rulebook.  Understand all the rules.  If you are uncertain of the rules there is not much to consider.  Listen to what the referee says, if you do not understand his call, firmly, yet politely, ask him to repeat the phrase.  If you feel there is a definite misapplication of the rules you may ask for an appeal with the bout committee.  If you decide to appeal do not allow the fencing to continue and do not leave the strip.  Doing either will make your appeal null and void. Once the bout committee rules on your appeal the decision is final, no further appeals can be made. 

     Yet if you do understand the call but simply do not agree with it there is not a single thing you can do.  Asking the referee if he was missing part of the phrase is pointless and rude.  So is asking him what the rules are regarding a certain action, since it is not the referee’s responsibility to explain rules to fencers.  Refusing to be directed by a certain referee will not work since, “non-presentation when called by the Referee at the start of the competition/round/direct elimination bout/match after three calls at one minute intervals; t86”, results in a black card.

     Before swordsmen practiced in this restricted manner fencing was played in a circular motion.  As duelists began to attack frequently with straight thrusts rather than long cuts, swords became lighter in weight and faster in play.  Moving sideways was slow. Plus; an evasion to the side did not put a defender out of distance from a nimble thrust.  If fencers moved in circles or side to side the best position of the feet might be in a horizontal, or slightly angled position with knees slightly bent. 

     Traveling forward and backward changed all of this.  Not only this, the practitioner needed to maneuver forward or backward with equal readiness.  This meant keeping good balance.  The necessity of fast, thrusting play shaped a fencers stance as we see it today.  The way people walk is a good design for efficient, even quick forward motion.  But try to quickly change direction front and back several times and it is easy to see the common crossing motion of legs while walking does not perform well.  Thus is developed a guard position where the legs are held at shoulder width, front foot facing forward, rear foot turned at a right angle relative to the front, hips level with the floor… …

                Being an old science fencing bases most of  its logic and techniques from the centuries old school of  Italian and French instruction.  Although today fencing rules and techniques are hotly debated among the diverse international circles of fencers, referees, and coaches one can still find quality teaching with the old classical schools, sometimes in unexpected places.  One thing can certainly be said of Maestro Sullins instruction, its not easy!

 The Italian school offers students the ABC’s of fencing.  Lessons consist of  perfect technical workouts.    No part of the body, from the leading finger to the last toe is neglected.   The instruction teaches how the body should be held in certain fencing situations.  Some fencers complain it is impossible to mold oneself into these forms during the fluid, ever changing conditions of combat.  The Italian lesson does not profess to teach the student how to fence,  it gives the student an example of what their form would be like if they were fencing perfectly.  The idea of  fencing is to crush the balance and control of the adversary.  Only fencers under absolute control of the bout are able to achieve this with perfect form. 

The Italian school has its roots in defensive rapier play.  This means certain techniques and approaches to swordplay are designed to assist the defender in exiting a murderous skirmish alive, rather then scoring touches according to the currently accepted fashion of fencing rules.  Maestro Sullins  asks the student to have the discipline to strive for excellent body poise.   Movements are fast, compact, and friendly to the body.  Attacks are made with a fully extended arm, rather then a bent one (as in modern day fencing).  Precedence is given to controlling the opponent’s weapon before an attack is made.  All movements of the body, whether it be in footwork, or bladework, are created to get the fencer from point A to point B as soon as possible.

             Since then I have slaved at the bar executing endless plies (squats), releves  (heel raises), and developments (raised, elongated extensions of the leg).  I have been forced to repeatedly lift girls high above my head  until my legs shook, shoulders trembled, and back strained.  My entire body has been levied into performing mind splitting, complex movements.  I have been coerced into moving my feet in a variety of uncomfortable and odd manners, as fast as an insect can beat its wings.  Every muscle, sinew, and bone has been put on the rack, stretched, strengthened, reshaped, and molded. I have even suffered the indignity of being drafted into the defaming role of performing a duet in front of a lot of people.  However; all of this work has indeed caused me to be more balanced, faster, and efficient in body motion.  My posture stands taller and I’ll be damned if I didn’t grow half an inch. 

                Fencing is very much like this, except you are not forced to perform your polished techniques under mercilessly glaring lights, in front of a lot of people.  Instead you are confronted with fighting terrible combat among a lot of people.  The fencing stance is mysteriously similar to a ballet position.  You must squat down with your knees in line with the toes.  The shoulders are held low, stomach held firm, butt tucked under the ribs.  Body weight is evenly distributed over the balls of the feet.  Arms are relaxed but poised in a certain manner.  Your performance, although it is not worked in time with the music, as in ballet, must be synchronized with the fighting timing of your opponent. 

              Kim Whipple teaches a classical form of  Italian ballet called Chechetti.  The focus of this dance is to strengthen the body and get it prepared for dance on the stage.  The teaching order is very strict and possesses a logical order of graded events.  Perhaps one similarity with dancing is the fact you must fence in time with your partner.  With fencing, if one does not move in time with the opponent they will often lose a touch.  If one does not move pleasantly in motion with a dancer you simply look like an idiot.  In fencing, most body motion is done forwards and backwards, with a little side to side, or angular motion..  With ballet the entire stage is used.  Excessive amounts of motion are undergone forwards, backwards, sideways, at angles, in circles, bent over, and flying through the air.  Some dancers take these opportunities to exaggerated degrees and practically turn the dance into a risky athletic event.  But not me.

                Fencing is safer then dancing, safer then basketball, safer then walking up, and down stairs.  About the only thing fencing is capable of damaging is ones ego.  Something which can often afford to be given a strong dose of reality. 

                .Maybe one day when I feel I have had enough dance instruction I will hide a silver spoon in my tights and dig a hole under the ballet bar, through the dance room wall, and escape to the outside world.  But this will have to be done a little at a time when the teacher isn’t looking, or can be distracted.  Until then my ears will have to be subjected to more psycho piano music, and my body made to convulse in a seizure of spastic, and whirling dancing dervishes.    

     For some time foil fencing has divorced itself away from deadly preparation with sharp swords.  Much like mathematics is used in theory to predict the real world of physical  phenomena, foil play locks in its roots with perfect form.  Sometimes one wonders if this is all foil fencing ever was, a tenuous possibility of control and handling in the realm of  specters and shades.  Since fencing embodies constant movement, technical form is an ephemeral event and is nearly impossible for being observed in a permanent state, unlike a sculpture which can at once and forever be viewed.  Theory, no matter how sincerely striven for, remains elusive to the touch under the heat of combat.

     So why bother with theory at all?  Sounds like pursuing this occupation is about as useful as talking with dead family members.  After all a duel is not competition, and competition is not an exhibition, and an exhibition is not even a formula for dwelling on theory itself.  Yet theory is the thing which holds all of these activities together.  True, putting on a jacket and mask does not do justice to having an enemy with cold blooded murder in his eyes thrust a sword into your throat, nor do hey-ni-hackneyed competitive conditions always fit the suit of what should be, or what was.   Each of these different occupations seriously alters the nature of sword use.  Those practicing with a foil might attempt risky moves never dreamt of by a lucid duelist, and at the same time life and death situations sometimes bring out performance impossible to see under any other circumstance.

     Theory is the esprit de elite of fencing performance.  It is the backbone of reality which holds skills together.  Sometimes it shows itself in one movement or a series of phrases, back to back, before fading back into mists of plausibility.   Foil play points the fencer in the direction of correct action.  Fencing actions are dependant upon timing and speed, both remarks related to distance.  The experience and spirit motivating a pupil also germinates an atmosphere affecting the way time and speed are affected.  Needless to say, fencing is dominated by strategic ploys carried out through speed’s mechanism.  Whether carefully wrought or spontaneously consumed the agent of speed creates open doors of activity, or displays dead end alleys where plans come to an end.

     The fastest tempo carried out in a correct action dominates what will be and can be.  This is why he who’s sword tip lies nearest the target, moving in a strait line at the fastest possible speed, carried out at the right time, holds the advantage, thus is the correct action.  Fencers may not meet this requirement every time during the amazingly uncertain conditions which crop up.  But when training they try to grasp the essence of what will bring them success.  In practice having an advantage from as far away as possible while still retaining a maximum ability to defend, yet doing only what is necessary, must be the epitome of skirmishing in all realms.   

1              Skip rope for three sets of three minutes.

2              Stretch.

3              Advance the length of a fencing strip three times.

4              Retreat the length of a fencing strip three times.

5              Double advance half the length of a fencing strip twice.

6              Double retreat half the length of a fencing strip twice.

7              Double advance and lunge the length of a fencing strip.  
                Recover forwards each time or recover forwards with a jump back to en guard.

8              Stretch.

9             Practice extensions.  Extend sword arm.  Bend arm at elbow while rotating the elbow 
               upwards, forming a nice, round half circle.  Pull shoulders down and lengthen the neck.  
               Lengthen the arm, neck, and shoulders, while maintaining a nice circle at the elbow.  
               Extend arm again.  Repeat this five or ten times.

10            Face the mirror.  Slowly and with exact precision go through the guard positions and extensions. 
               The sword tip must remain steady.  Two minutes.

11            Face the mirror.  Practice parries and ripostes.  The riposte should be faster than the parry.  
                Two minutes.

12            Face a target.  Twenty relaxed practice lunges.  Return to a well poised en guard.

13            Stretch.

14            Face a target.  Six controlled, yet powerful lunges.  They do not have to be done all at once.  
                Rest at least between every other lunge.

15            Find a partner.  Practice ripostes or attacks for at least seven minutes.

16            Fence with at least four partners for four minutes each.

17            Stretch.

18            Find a coach.  Ask the coach to give a six minute tune up lesson.

19            Fence with at least four partners for four minutes each.

20            Again look for a coach.  Drill on any necessary skills.

21            Fence at least two serious bouts with a referee for fifteen touches each.

22            Stretch.      

     Sometimes it is almost impossible to visually confirm who was touched first.  The action is too quick.  It is certainly dangerous for the fencer to train in a way he wouldn't know who had the jump. But it is much easier to picture who began the first threat.  The fencer with the advantage should always initiate an attack one fencing time ahead of the other.  If one fencer initiates the attack they are said to have the right of way, while the other
fencer is required to defend himself.  Now a parry, whether it is done through distance or with deflection of the attacker's blade, is a smart thing to do.  After stopping the attack completely the defender who parried can
return an attack of their own.  This immediate return attack is called a riposte. 

     How much time does the defender have between parry and riposte?  Well, this depends on the relative speed of the fencing phrase.  In other words, the defender has as long as it takes to initiate a riposte in relation to a single fencing time, performed by the faster of the two fencers!  If the riposte develops later than this it is really not a riposte at all, only a return attack by the defender who parried.

     All to often fencers pay attention to their blades whacking around while no attention is focused on the fencing time.  Perhaps the defender's parry was insufficiently executed, but in fact the initial attacker may have lost his
right to attack if his last fencing time effectively stopped.  Or was interrupted in a way the tempo clearly ended.  Here the fencer who began the first thrust is now subject to a riposte.  What a nightmare, huh?

     A counter attack means the fencer who was required to defend himself failed to do so.  Instead he counter attacks into the initial thruster's attack. This seems insane.  The only two circumstances a counter attack can gain the
right of way is in the case of a stop hit in time, or with what is known as a time hit. The stop hit into time simply means the counter attacker's touch arrived one fencing time ahead of the fencer who provoked a compound attack.  A compound attack is an action done in more than one fencing time.  On the other hand a simple attack is done in one fencing time.  In this circumstance it would be impossible to produce a stop hit in time.  A time hit made by the counter attacker implies the initial attacker's touch never arrived at all, the point either missed or was deflected when the counter attacker's touch arrived. The first attacking time was literally 'stolen' away.

     Keeping in mind the relative speed of a fencing phrase, see if you can answer these questions....
    "What would distinguish a compound (feint) attack from a simple attack?"
    "How much time can happen between a parry and a riposte for the riposte to be considered valid?"
    "What are some of the circumstances which can end an attack?"
    "Is it possible what appears to be a simple attack executed in one fencing time might actually be
          compound attack, if the simple attack was done extremely slow?  This is in relation to the speed 
          of the other fencer of course."
    "How does distance affect speed?"
    "What would distinguish a compound attack from a renewed attack?  How is this affected by the
          relative speed of the fencing phrase?"

It is best to give an example by citing a high level bout I once coached a friend of mine... against another friend. These two highly skilled and illustrious fencers went by the name of Nelson and Dirk. Both fighters were formidable with their armada of techniques and crafts, but if each man’s arsenal was weighed side by side Dirk had the advantage. His superiority wasn’t enough to be decisive, yet was scary enough to discourage Nelson from taking too many risks.

Nelson’s problem lay in his similarities with Dirk’s style and mindset. Both men liked to use a hand’s on approach attacking each other’s blade and literally controlling it via a wrestling method while thrusting to the target. The fencers liked to tangle blades while exchanging offensive and defensive blows, striking home when the other’s blade was completely dominated. The problem was, Dirk’s ability to control the blade is a little better than Nelson’s. Dirk has shaped his rasps along the blade into a deadly technique, following the adversary’s line done into the heart with bad intentions. Nelson’s attacks on the blade are given to the pathos of a hero. His actions carry all the passion of a martyr and he is willing to scathe himself with a thorn bush if he feels his efforts are less than pure.

While they fought Nelson had trouble defeating Dirk with this elaborate arm wrestling match. Typically Nelson is strong enough to smash most opponents by dominating the blade, but the stronger Nelson attacked Dirk’s blade the more he played into his strongest traps. Dirk had all the answers for Nelson’s methods and literally thrived on the blade domination exchange. If push came to shove Dirk had the elbow grease. Every time Nelson mixed it up Dirk would eventually wind up controlling the exchange and knock Nelson’s composure to pieces.

Nelson understandably became upset. He tried to bind from fourth to eighth, then sixth to eighth, then sixth to seventh. He tried pressing fourth then attacking indirect with sixth opposition, he tried this, he tried that, but each time he was just feeding his line into Dirk’s blender. So Nelson went on the defensive, waiting in turn for Dirk to attack his blade. Dirk did just this and overwhelmed Nelson’s guards. At this point the underdog was in a cage and getting frantic, couldn’t go left, couldn’t go right, so he increased the intensity, trying to see if maybe something would break in Dirk’s web of steel. Nothing broke, Dirk’s blade work is merely became tempered. Here we see two men who thrive on controlling blades, if it didn’t work they drill even harder. Strength of blade action is important to these guerrillas.

All of this is easy for me to say because I’m on the sidelines watching the action with popcorn in hand so to speak. Very entertaining. The fighters had they’re own egos and self esteem to worry about. Winning this competition was akin to putting on a new skin, reaffirming skills, and gaining the confidence that comes along with it. Having the concert seat advantage I ignored Nelson’s slow death by drowning along with his animated struggles and concentrated on Dirk’s reactions. Dirk really liked that blade.

By habits ingrained so deeply into Nelson’s fighting repertoire as to become practically instinctive I watched him try a few indirect attacks with a powerful advance lunge. These attacks have no blade contact whatsoever. On the contrary the attacker’s blade completely avoids the defenders. Being shorter Nelson can shift his positions of both blade and body a little faster. He executes a vertical one-two disengage into Dirks high outside sixth, low outside eighth flank. Dirk’s eighth guard is weak. He mentally stumbles, then follows Nelson’s fake out to the guard of sixth. Quick as a dart Nelson dips back down into Dirks eighth line and strikes. A point! Dirk is uncomfortable with this activity and quickly puts the moves on Nelson. He succeeds in luring Nelson back into a blade domination game. Nelson is not quite aware of what has happened so, perhaps due to an unconscious fear of the unknown, he sinks into a black hole of despair. The shadow of death falls overhead. Dirk is ahead about 5 touches. Time out is called.

My advice is simple, “Nelson, your doing a good job. Listen, you have a great one-two vertical attack with advance lunge; beautifully executed. Dirk is weak in his line of eighth, he thrives on blade contact and is better at it than you. The guard of eighth is naturally weak when faced with crosses, binds, and all kinds of blade trickery. Fake him out with your footwork and hit him in the line of eighth. Don’t let him touch your blade at all. If you want to attack his blade and hit in the line of eighth, fine. Only do so if you control his blade for an instant, but if he regains control even for a moment get the heck out of there. Don’t even think of going toe to toe with blade work and above all means do