Countering the Counter-Attacker in Foil

A FENCING COACHES COMPENDIUM Countering the Counter-Attacker in Foil Coach Allen Evans, Dominion Fencing
	The advent of the T2005 timings increasing the dwell time of the the foil hit (the amount of time that the tip must be depressed before lighting a scoring light), as well as reducing the time allowed between two opposing hits on the box between the two fencers. These changes were implemented by the FIE in the hopes of reducing the "marching attack" ending in a thrown thrust or "flick" against the opponent. By increasing the dwell time, it was hoped that the flick would not break the contract of the foil long enough to score. By reducing the time between the lighting of two successive lights on the box, it was hoped that attacks into marching attacks would be easier to referee by resulting in more single light actions. Even though the changes in both timings were a matter of tenths of a second, they have resulted in a change of strategy among foil fencers. The removal of the "flick" made previously accessible targets such as the back harder to access for the attacker. With the removal of the more easily accessible back as the target, defenders found that ducking and twisting would present an unfavorable target aspect to the attacker, delaying the finish of the attack or causing it to miss. The delay in the finish of the attack would often allow the defender an opportunity to counter-attack. The decreased separation between the two times meant that a fast remise could often time out the defenders riposte. In its attempt to return fencing back to its more conventional roots, the FIE, instead, gave the counter-attacker a technological window of opportunity. The attacker now faces a defender who may duck, evade, and counter-attack at will. Under the 2005 timings, the attacker aces a defender that has more "non-conventional" methods of defeating the attack. what follows are some simple suggestions to help the attacker defeat these unconventional tactics> Do keep in mind that as no two fencers are the same, no two counter-attackers are the same. With each piece of advice, the fencer should consider their own situation. Slow down. Counter-attacking has a higher chance of success when the attacker "out-runs" their preparation: the attacker closes distance to the defender while still "preparing" to finish. The combination of the machine timing and the late finish (or absent) finish by the attacker allows the counter-attacker to lock out the attacker's scoring action. The attacker must coordinate the finish of the attack very carefully. As the attacker gets into lunge distance, the attacker's point must be between the attacker and the defender. This does not rule attacks with a absence of blade, but the attacker must plan on finishing with their point ahead of the foot (This is true in most cases. There is still a role to play for a very late finish of an absent of blade attack, but this depends on the behavior of the defender). Holding the blade back at the start will deny it to the defender, while leading with the point insures that any corrections that need to be made for the opponent ~~eskieving~~ can be done. When attacking a prepared defender, the initial start of the attack should be slow (however, see the contrary advice below), with controlled steps. The goal in the preparation against an counter-attack is to never let momentum control the preparation. By starting slowly, the attacker lessens the chance of outrunning their own preparation, and denies the counter-attacker a possible window to collapse the distance in surprise. One of the disadvantages in starting slow is that the defender may switch tactics from counter-attack to parry and riposte. However, often this will happen only after the attacker has gotten very close, allowing the attacker an easier time in making a second intention parry riposte, or feint and disengage (in the lunge). More rarely, the counter-attacker will attempt to "jump" on the start of the attack and make an attack into preparation. This will allow easy counter-time by the attacker, since they are not collapsing the space quickly, and should see the defender start much earlier. There is still a role of a fast attack off the line. A fencer who faces an opponent who counter-attacks regularly might want to start the bout off with a very powerful, fast attack, with an idea showing the opponent a willingness to "go fast". This can then set the opponent up for a slower start and finish, leaving the opponent never quite sure if he should be keeping distance or closing distance to set up his preferred action. Stay simple. Lots of complicated blade actions, false feints, and disengages simply give the counter-attacker more opportunity to exploit the preparations of the attacker. Simple blade actions make it easier for the attacker to keep his point between himself, and the target as he enters the critical distance between himself and the defender. Very advanced fencers which have the technical skills required can return to the use of thrown attacks (flicks) and angulated finishes. However, flicks are not the panacea they once were in defeating counter-attacks, especially involving the displacement of target. The flick requires that the defender be kept in a very tight distance "box". The new timings seem to prevent the sort of "wrap around" flicks of the past that allowed attackers to defeat opponents who closed the distance aggressively. It takes strong technical skills to be successful with a flick, and this should often be left to intermediate and advanced fencers. Rather than use large blade preparations to keep the defender off balance, the attacker should use false attacks to keep the opponent off balance as to the timing of real attacks. The attacker should also consider dissimilar preparations from the real attacks to disguise their attacks even more. For example, the fencer can make false attacks with a preparatory beat, but the actual attack should be made with no preparation at all. Again, the goal is to keep the counter-attacker from accurately judging the start of the attack, either in time or in space. Absence of blade actions have some use. An attacker use to making and finishing attacks from the low line can often goad a counter-attacker into a late attack in preparation while finishing his or her own attack to the flank or stomach. However, this can be difficult against an opposite handed opponent, who usually covers the outside low line (the preferred target) with portions of the weapon arm, and are prone to attempting to close out the line while they make their counter-attack. Absence of blade attacks also open up the attacker to a straight stop and subsequent escape from the defender. Again, coordination of the finish of the hand with the foot is key here. Get closer. A counter-attack needs a tempo difference to exploit in order to score. by decreasing the distance, the attacker does not give the counter-attacker a tempo to exploit. Simple attacks (direct and indirect) in the proper distance are difficult to score against with a counter-attack. However, being close gives the counter-attacker an opportunity to make attacks of their own. A very high state of alertness is necessary to fence close to a counter-attacker. In addition, the attacker will be limited in the types of preparation they can do to make an attack. Actions will primarily be false simple followed by real simple direct or indirect attacks. Don't beat. Beating the opponent's blade does two things: it can alert the counter-attacker to the start of your attack, and can bring your point out of line, making it difficult to coordinate your hand and foot. If you have decided to make a beat on the attack, make the beat as close to the start of the lunge as possible, to give the opponent little warning to the start of the attack, and to prevent them from getting their own point back in line before your attack starts. Often the counter-attacker will simple step in when they feel the sudden impact of a beat, much like an épée fencer will. Countertime. If the attacker wishes to make counter-time actions, they should execute counter-time with blocking or holding parries and not beat parries in most instances. A beat parry clears the line quickly, but also takes the defenders blade out of line almost as much as the defenders. The harder the beat, the more both blades are displaced. It's better to make a blocking parry and control the defenders blade (reducing the chance of a remise). Holding parries will often cause the counter-attacker to prematurely parry, allowing the attacker an indirect repost to an open line. An expert's opinion. At a clinic in North Carolina in March of 2009, Maitre Michael Marx presented a different take on dealing with the counter-attacker. He advocates an attack against the counter-attacker at high speed, with small steps. In this case, however, the attacker should plan to stop slightly short of the counter-attacker, insuring that any action the counter-attacker makes will be premature. This allows the attacker to deal with the counter-attacker with a counter-time action, or by executing another, take over attack when the counter-attacker attempts to recover or retreat. This approach has merit. Rather than avoiding the counter-attack situation completely, the attacker triggers it at his or her own choosing. This method, however, requires that the attacker have a good sense of where on the strip the counter-attacker likes to make his or her attack, and also requires a good grasp of technical footwork to accelerate, and then suddenly stop in the right distance. For the experienced fencer, however, this is an approach that should be considered. Written March, 2008 Copyright © 2008 by Allen L. Evans. This article may be reproduced freely, as long as it remains unmodified and his copyright notice is included.

A FENCING COACHES COMPENDIUM

Countering the Counter-Attacker in Foil

Coach Allen Evans, Dominion Fencing

The advent of the T2005 timings increasing the dwell time of the the foil hit (the amount of time that the tip must be depressed before lighting a scoring light), as well as reducing the time allowed between two opposing hits on the box between the two fencers. These changes were implemented by the FIE in the hopes of reducing the "marching attack" ending in a thrown thrust or "flick" against the opponent. By increasing the dwell time, it was hoped that the flick would not break the contract of the foil long enough to score. By reducing the time between the lighting of two successive lights on the box, it was hoped that attacks into marching attacks would be easier to referee by resulting in more single light actions.

Even though the changes in both timings were a matter of tenths of a second, they have resulted in a change of strategy among foil fencers. The removal of the "flick" made previously accessible targets such as the back harder to access for the attacker. With the removal of the more easily accessible back as the target, defenders found that ducking and twisting would present an unfavorable target aspect to the attacker, delaying the finish of the attack or causing it to miss. The delay in the finish of the attack would often allow the defender an opportunity to counter-attack. The decreased separation between the two times meant that a fast remise could often time out the defenders riposte. In its attempt to return fencing back to its more conventional roots, the FIE, instead, gave the counter-attacker a technological window of opportunity.

The attacker now faces a defender who may duck, evade, and counter-attack at will. Under the 2005 timings, the attacker aces a defender that has more "non-conventional" methods of defeating the attack. what follows are some simple suggestions to help the attacker defeat these unconventional tactics> Do keep in mind that as no two fencers are the same, no two counter-attackers are the same. With each piece of advice, the fencer should consider their own situation.

Slow down.

Counter-attacking has a higher chance of success when the attacker "out-runs" their preparation: the attacker closes distance to the defender while still "preparing" to finish. The combination of the machine timing and the late finish (or absent) finish by the attacker allows the counter-attacker to lock out the attacker's scoring action.

The attacker must coordinate the finish of the attack very carefully. As the attacker gets into lunge distance, the attacker's point must be between the attacker and the defender. This does not rule attacks with a absence of blade, but the attacker must plan on finishing with their point ahead of the foot (This is true in most cases. There is still a role to play for a very late finish of an absent of blade attack, but this depends on the behavior of the defender). Holding the blade back at the start will deny it to the defender, while leading with the point insures that any corrections that need to be made for the opponent ~~eskieving~~ can be done.

When attacking a prepared defender, the initial start of the attack should be slow (however, see the contrary advice below), with controlled steps. The goal in the preparation against an counter-attack is to never let momentum control the preparation. By starting slowly, the attacker lessens the chance of outrunning their own preparation, and denies the counter-attacker a possible window to collapse the distance in surprise. One of the disadvantages in starting slow is that the defender may switch tactics from counter-attack to parry and riposte. However, often this will happen only after the attacker has gotten very close, allowing the attacker an easier time in making a second intention parry riposte, or feint and disengage (in the lunge). More rarely, the counter-attacker will attempt to "jump" on the start of the attack and make an attack into preparation. This will allow easy counter-time by the attacker, since they are not collapsing the space quickly, and should see the defender start much earlier.

There is still a role of a fast attack off the line. A fencer who faces an opponent who counter-attacks regularly might want to start the bout off with a very powerful, fast attack, with an idea showing the opponent a willingness to "go fast". This can then set the opponent up for a slower start and finish, leaving the opponent never quite sure if he should be keeping distance or closing distance to set up his preferred action.

Stay simple.

Lots of complicated blade actions, false feints, and disengages simply give the counter-attacker more opportunity to exploit the preparations of the attacker. Simple blade actions make it easier for the attacker to keep his point between himself, and the target as he enters the critical distance between himself and the defender.

Very advanced fencers which have the technical skills required can return to the use of thrown attacks (flicks) and angulated finishes. However, flicks are not the panacea they once were in defeating counter-attacks, especially involving the displacement of target. The flick requires that the defender be kept in a very tight distance "box". The new timings seem to prevent the sort of "wrap around" flicks of the past that allowed attackers to defeat opponents who closed the distance aggressively. It takes strong technical skills to be successful with a flick, and this should often be left to intermediate and advanced fencers.

Rather than use large blade preparations to keep the defender off balance, the attacker should use false attacks to keep the opponent off balance as to the timing of real attacks. The attacker should also consider dissimilar preparations from the real attacks to disguise their attacks even more. For example, the fencer can make false attacks with a preparatory beat, but the actual attack should be made with no preparation at all. Again, the goal is to keep the counter-attacker from accurately judging the start of the attack, either in time or in space.

Absence of blade actions have some use. An attacker use to making and finishing attacks from the low line can often goad a counter-attacker into a late attack in preparation while finishing his or her own attack to the flank or stomach. However, this can be difficult against an opposite handed opponent, who usually covers the outside low line (the preferred target) with portions of the weapon arm, and are prone to attempting to close out the line while they make their counter-attack. Absence of blade attacks also open up the attacker to a straight stop and subsequent escape from the defender. Again, coordination of the finish of the hand with the foot is key here.

Get closer.

A counter-attack needs a tempo difference to exploit in order to score. by decreasing the distance, the attacker does not give the counter-attacker a tempo to exploit. Simple attacks (direct and indirect) in the proper distance are difficult to score against with a counter-attack. However, being close gives the counter-attacker an opportunity to make attacks of their own. A very high state of alertness is necessary to fence close to a counter-attacker. In addition, the attacker will be limited in the types of preparation they can do to make an attack. Actions will primarily be false simple followed by real simple direct or indirect attacks.

Don't beat.

Beating the opponent's blade does two things: it can alert the counter-attacker to the start of your attack, and can bring your point out of line, making it difficult to coordinate your hand and foot. If you have decided to make a beat on the attack, make the beat as close to the start of the lunge as possible, to give the opponent little warning to the start of the attack, and to prevent them from getting their own point back in line before your attack starts. Often the counter-attacker will simple step in when they feel the sudden impact of a beat, much like an épée fencer will.

Countertime.

If the attacker wishes to make counter-time actions, they should execute counter-time with blocking or holding parries and not beat parries in most instances. A beat parry clears the line quickly, but also takes the defenders blade out of line almost as much as the defenders. The harder the beat, the more both blades are displaced. It's better to make a blocking parry and control the defenders blade (reducing the chance of a remise).

Holding parries will often cause the counter-attacker to prematurely parry, allowing the attacker an indirect repost to an open line.

An expert's opinion.

At a clinic in North Carolina in March of 2009, Maitre Michael Marx presented a different take on dealing with the counter-attacker. He advocates an attack against the counter-attacker at high speed, with small steps. In this case, however, the attacker should plan to stop slightly short of the counter-attacker, insuring that any action the counter-attacker makes will be premature. This allows the attacker to deal with the counter-attacker with a counter-time action, or by executing another, take over attack when the counter-attacker attempts to recover or retreat.

This approach has merit. Rather than avoiding the counter-attack situation completely, the attacker triggers it at his or her own choosing. This method, however, requires that the attacker have a good sense of where on the strip the counter-attacker likes to make his or her attack, and also requires a good grasp of technical footwork to accelerate, and then suddenly stop in the right distance. For the experienced fencer, however, this is an approach that should be considered.

Written March, 2008