LUPOLD'S CREATE-A-STYLE RECIPE SHEET

My intention here is for you to use this to create a style for single rapier or rapier and dagger. I honestly like the idea of using rapier and dagger, because daggers remove a lot of messy infighting situations. Also, a lot of sword-and-dagger styles are more universally-applicable. But single rapier is more basic option which is more educational.

This process will create a static "style" or "stance". An opening position and a set of techniques which "hang together" well. As a note - one master might have multiple of what I'm calling a "style" in their book. But there isn't a good word for an individual one of those, so I'm going to call it a style.

Before we create a style, it is useful to consider what we like to do. Most people have specific actions or positions that their brains and bodies enjoy more than others. Furthermore, our subconscious minds can have a lot of opinions about the correct way to do things, and it is useful to try to take them into account. In my experience, this is usually expressed in a "this feels wrong" way, even when you think that the thing is correct.

*****

1. EXERCISE: What feels "natural"? Guard and First Technique.

So, as the first step, grab a sword-like object like a ruler or something, stand up, and figure out three things.

a. How do you like to stand in guard?
b. What is the first action that comes to mind to do, from that guard?

As a note, These are intended as quick, rough ideas rather than end products.

Unless you have a very strong ability to visualize an opponent spatially, I suggest taking a photo or video of yourself in each of those positions or movements, with your camera facing you, at head-level or maybe a bit lower.

From there, we start exploring the philosophy of the style we are going to create.

*****

2. EXERCISE: Consider the above.

a. If the action in 1b was an attack, is it the sort of attack that you would throw while approaching an opponent, or in response to them approaching you?

b. If 1b was not a direct attack, do you imagine it as a response to their action, or as an aggressive movement you perform to take up space?

*****

Based on your answer to this exercise, the style we are creating will be classified as approaching/receiving, and attacker/defender.

So if the action from 1b was an attack where you take their sword with your dagger, the style we are creating would be an "approaching attacker" style.

If the action from 1b was to gain your opponent's blade hard and see how they react, it would be an "approaching defender" style.

If the action from 1b was a retreating lunge where you parry their sword with your dagger, it would be a "receiving attacker" style.

If the action was to let them come to you and then parry them, it would be a "receiving defender" style.

I personally tend to favor "approaching attacker" and "receiving attacker" styles, but other styles definitely have merit. There are also ambiguities about these classifications, but we're just going to use them as a starting point, so don't worry about it too much.

*****

From here, the next few steps fork based on the approaching/receiving attacker/defender classifications. At a high level, we're just taking the stance and the first technique, and trying to figure out things which would compliment that technique.

If you don't want to read through this heinously long section, just consider the following:

1. What do I like to do?
2. What can my opponent do about it?
3. What can I do about the thing my opponent does?

If you want to skip all this bullshit, go down to the "SKIP ALL THIS BULLSHIT" section.

*****

3. EXERCISE: A Second? (and Third?) Technique

A. Approaching

a. Attacker

If you find yourself tending to want to attack, you should consider what positions you expect your opponents to be in. There is no need to be exhaustive. Feel free to imagine some specific fencer as a "default" and proceed from there. If you are not able to visualize your opponent spatially, ask to take a photo of them in guard and use it for this exercise.

If you chose "attacker", then you should consider how you are going to use the attack from 1b to strike your imaginary opponent's openings.

If your imaginary opponent doesn't have an opening which can be reached by that attack, consider how to convince them to open up that spot in particular. This will be the second action of your style. There is a set of questions to help think this through, after this.

If your opponent does have an opening there, consider what the most "obvious" thing for them to do to defend against your attack is. Generally, this is the thing which involves the least movement of the body and blade possible. Consider the following questions from the perspective of where they are when they have defended against your attack.

i. Do they have other openings? If so, are they open enough that you could strike them from your default stance or abort your attack into an attack to that location? Might as well add that in as an attack.
ii. If no clear other openings, is there a place you can push an attack through their sword to maybe hit them? In this case, it is most important to be defended against their sword and disorder them. If you do it enough times, they will need to adapt their guard, and you can return to the first technique.
iii. If no clear openings and their weapon is not available to attack through, are there harassing threats you can make, such as trying for hand or wrist shots?
iv. In a worst-case scenario, look at the next part and crib something from the Approaching Defenders.

Ideally, after those questions, you will have a Second Technique. We'll get back to you, Approaching Attacker!

b. Defender

If you chose "defender", your task is a bit different from the attackers. Your "First Technique" is probably the thing that will happen if your opponent just stands still forever - you bind their blade, or beat it, or go for a disarm, or something like that. Something which gains you space and time, rather than the immediate gratification of stabbing a motherfucker. Regardless - it is usually a proactive action toward their blade. If it is not, then I have failed in my assessment and you should go to the "receiving defender" section immediately.

A receiving defender controls the timing of the bout by the implicit threat they present when approaching. This forces your opponent to do something, anything. Very frequently, this will be an attack.

Get out that photo of yourself. Look at it. Consider where is "open" on you. Is your blade low enough that someone could strike above it to your chest? Is your blade far to one side or the other, making a location for attacking obvious? Keep in mind that there are relatively few "bad" guards. Something that looks like an opening is merely an invitation. It tends to close off other locations, and encourage your opponent to strike at particular openings. This gives you knowledge.

Once you have figured out your most obvious opening, you need to figure out something you can do to defend it. This is generally a large and sword-primary defensive maneuver, like a big ol' windshield-wiper parry or something. It should defend a lot of space and have a large margin of error. You should be able to do it as a reaction without any thought, so it needs to be simple. This is your Second Technique.

After that, go back to looking at that photo. Where is the second most obvious place for an opponent to attack - one which wouldn't be covered by the Second Technique. If you don't see one, move on. If you do, figure out another big ol' obvious parry which feels nice to do, which will cover that opening. That is your Third Technique.

Generally, from that type of big ol' parry or big ol' sword-gain, an attack is difficult. The attack after a big defensive maneuver is improv as much as anything else. Consider what your most obvious attack from the big defensive thing is, and get good at it. Consult the Receiving Defender section for more info.

B. Receiving

As a note - one problem with our game is that in order to win, you have to stab your opponent. This means that in some circumstances, you will need to approach rather than receive. This is especially true when your opponent out-ranges you. It sucks, but it is life.

a. Attacker

As a receiving attacker, your job is generally to convince your opponent to make some kind of a mistake. This is generally done by manipulating time and distance. Moving backwards slowly to make your opponent's attack just a split second slower, or other mean tricks.

Consider what your First Technique is responding to. Is it an attack to your left shoulder? To your belly? to your face? Regardless of what it is, you should look at that photo of yourself in guard. Make sure that the attack you are responding to with the First Technique looks enticing. Stand in front of a mirror, adjusting your guard in small ways to make it look more or less open. The more something is open, the more someone will assume it is bait.

A good complimentary technique for this is a response to something that isn't an attack. The idea here is to increase the amount of cognitive pressure on your opponent, to give them less brain-space to realize that your obvious opening is a trap. Thus, they attack into it, and you can use your First Technique.

Generally, an opponent approaching you goes something like this:

i. They walk up to measure.
ii. They get in guard.
iii. They approach a bit.
iv. They find your blade, increasing their safety a little.
v. They gain your blade in preparation to throw an attack.
vi. They attack.

Between each of those steps is a moment where your opponent's brain is switching gears from one thing to another. And in the moment of your opponent's brain switching gears, they are paying less attention to what you are doing. There are studies to quantify this, but we're just going to leave it at that for the moment.

Choose two of those moments. Make a study of what it looks like when people are finishing up each step in that process. Try to find the rhythm of those actions. Attacking during these moments is all about speed, so try to work on making your attack as fast and efficient as possible, while blocking the most obvious responses. That is your Second Technique.

A good candidate for a Third Technique is to throw an attack from when you are doing these things. So for exmple, you walk into measure and immediately throw an attack without getting into guard.

b. Defender

Receiving Defender - the thing I'm worst at. Also, I'm running out of attention span to write this, so this is gonna be quick.

In general, the receiving defender wants to have the best possible defense. I would say that invitations aren't necessarily in-genre for this style, but two-tempo parry-riposte actions are. The problem with two-tempo parry-riposte actions is that generally, your opponent has an idea of how they are going to exit if their attack fails. Fortunately, most opponents don't think much beyond that.

Look at the photo of your guard. Imagine your opponent attacking, and then you performing the parry which is your First Action. From there, imagine the fastest, most obvious, most direct attack. Then, imagine what your opponent can do about that attack. Consider what you can do to counter this.

In general, an opponent will retreat or otherwise desperately try to parry after their attack fails. You will need to run them down. You will need to practice the timing of people's desperate parries, and ways to get around them or through them. It is a hard time, being a Receiving Defender.

You will also need to integrate one or two more parries into your game, because it is unlikely that a single parry will be enough. Do the same exercise of running through a layer or two of chess-game of what your opponent can do. When doing this, try to keep broad strokes - if you can, try to make sure your actions work against a wide variety of parries and counter-attacks.

In-fighting is a strange and mysterious thing, but it can be useful here. As can dagger-thrusts.

*****

"SKIP ALL THIS BULLSHIT"

So, you have constructed the skeleton of a style. Yay! What do you do with it?

Bring it to practice and make a specific intentional effort, every practice, to use it against at least a few people. Note down how you get stabbed. Fencing has a lot of variance to it, so it takes a lot of examples of a thing to get good data.

Keep in mind - this is a good situation for the use of plus-minus-plus. Because with too many areas for improvement, it is easy to forget about one thing before it is dealt with.

After practice, think about one of the ways you got stabbed multiple times. Or try to think about situations that maybe look like you could have taken advantage of something. Try to figure out which of the following categories it fits in:

1. I can make a small adjustment to my guard or how I perform a technique, and I will be able to stab/not get stabbed.
2. I can make an adjustment, but that adjustment will open a hole in my technique that can be exploited.
3. My style is completely unprepared to deal with this.

If something falls in 1, that's great. You can make that adjustment.

If something falls in category 2, it is likely that you will need to add a technique. Stealing something from the four sections above might be useful. Especially from the sections that do not match your style.

If something falls in category 3, adding a technique might help. However, it is possible that you have run into a central problem in fencing, and you will need to make larger changes beyond the scope of this article. Running into this sort of problem is usually what causes me to read historical masters or try to make up a new style or any one of a thousand questionably-useful things.

One key thing - each practice, only make at most one adjustment to the style you are working on. Again - fencing is a high-variance sport, so you need a lot of data of a narrow set of things in order to draw good conclusions. For examples, I believe that the posts tagged "Focused Work" are where I wrote about that on this blog.

Ideally, try to keep the number of techniques in the style as low as possible. Studies show that when someone is trying to react to a larger set of cues, their reaction time slows down. As well, that point I keep harping on about fencing being a high-variance sport. Doing 100 techniques a single time each gives very little data except "it is possible for this to work". Doing 3 techniques 30 times gives a reasonable distribution of what is or is not working.

*****

It is important to note as well - you don't need to stick rigidly to the techniques. There will always be improvisation after the initial clash of blades. But understanding the first things you do extremely well allows for a better understanding of what comes later, and allows for better improvisation.

GOOD LUCK.

If you want an example of a constructed style, I can provide a link to one. But I'm not gonna do that right now, because I want to go for a run.

Skill Improvement for ADHD Brains with a TL;DR List

 Earlier today, I wrote a comment in response to a post on reddit about how to improve when you have ADHD. As someone who has ADHD and is pretty okay at a number of skills, I thought I would put that comment here too, since that's what a blog is for.

 Enjoy!

*****

I have ADHD-PI, and here is a bunch of actionable advice I've used with myself for improving at skills. Since we all have ADHD here and are likely to type much more than we're willing to read, here's a tl;dr:

TL;DR BULLET POINT LIST

• Cultivate relaxed, sincere interest
• Don't over-read
• Don't over-train
• Don't keep playing when in a bad headspace
• Get exercise

I'm not amazing at the game, but I do have other competitive things I'm good at. Generally I try to cultivate a "relaxed, sincere interest" in things I want to get better at. If I try to force my brain to focus on the game, then I end up beating myself up about not doing things correctly. That teaches my brain that playing the game causes suffering, thus making it harder to focus. If I relax and let my brain think about the things I love about the game, that means my brain is more likely to stay engaged.

Honestly, having too much knowledge about the game that you're not ready to apply can be a hindrance to improvement. If you have too many things you're trying to do, you won't improve at any of them. Maybe try to focus on improving one thing at a time, and try reading about the game less. I've also often found that a lot of what people say online is either not applicable to my play-style, or I'm not ready to hear it yet. If I don't have the skill to pull off something that someone says online, the solution isn't to try harder. The solution is to ignore it until it seems more natural to me. I have often found that advice has made no sense to me, but after playing and improving for a few months, it will suddenly make sense and be the easiest thing in the world to execute.

(As an example - I used to not understand why people loved Ridley's nair so much. I would try to use it, but then it would get stuffed by disjoints. So I stopped trying to use it for a while. Eventually my spacing and match-up understanding improved enough that using nair seemed natural. So I, too, started to love the nair.)

The brain is an associative learning device - that is to say, if you are spending a lot of time playing sub-optimally, the brain will learn to continue playing sub-optimally. If you notice yourself on autopilot, go do something else so your brain doesn't train itself harder to play on autopilot.

Brains require actual physical chemicals in order to improve at skills, and they only produce those chemicals at a certain rate. If you try to improve at a skill when your brain doesn't have any more of the chemicals needed for learning, you won't be able to improve. So don't overdo it, and if you're already tired then don't play very much.

Exercise also improves the rate at which the brain produces these brain chemicals, so doing some sort of exercise can help. Half an hour of cardio per day has been shown to improve the ability of ADHD brains to focus. As well, strength training increases the rate at which the brain produces dopamine, which is one of the brain chemicals needed to learn. Especially if you're starting out, you don't have to do much - just a nice walk is good. 

*****

Again, I hope that y'all had a good time reading this thing. I hope that at the very least the bullet-point list helps some of you.

Have a good day!

Practice Report

I just want to write a quick practice report in order to not forget A Thing. I found this thing because I couldn't use my left hand while fencing, due to not wanting to pop some stitches in my left hand.

While I was fighting Zohane, I realized that a particular thing was working well. When I felt him pressing against a part farther out on my sword, it was better for me to execute "tippier" opposition. So, the disengage/change-lines/counter-disengage game. However, as soon as I felt him press into the middle of my blade, I could do more "hilt-forward" actions, bringing my tip farther away from his body than my hilt in preparation for a cut, as I stepped forward. I used this for the rest of the night, with a decent amount of success.

If I remember correctly, it seemed like this was possible regardless of which part of his sword he was pressing with. I don't know if it's that he just happened to be pressing with a relatively middle-ish part of his blade, or if the level of pressure required to trigger the feeling of correctness here could only be expressed through a somewhat middle-ish part of his blade, or if the pressure required meant a level of commitment on his part. For that last one, I mean that if he pressed that hard with his tip it would mean he couldn't move his sword in time. But if the point of contact was farther down on his sword, it might have meant that I was deep enough in that he couldn't do a quick little disengage.

That last point is a thing I should Do Some Math about. Lever equations and such. The basic idea, semi-mathematically expressed, is this:

(directional commitment from hand of opponent) /( distance from hilt of contact on opponent's sword) = (amount of sentiment felt by you)

At longer distance, this would mean that if you feel a lot of sentiment, there is a large amount of commitment from your opponent's body-structure to press into your sword. At closer distance, the same amount of sentiment doesn't necessarily represent the same degree of commitment. But at the same time, as you get closer, there is more of their sword past the point of contact with your sword, meaning that any motion to get around your parry would be larger. This means that their commitment is less, but it doesn't matter. Which is fascinating to think about.

The weird thing to me, here, is that the feeling I was keying off of was "where on my sword I thought that they were pressing". Not the strength of pressure, but the location. It's very possible that the strength and location are linked - after all, strong pressure at my tip just feels like my opposition failing. It's also possible that the mechanics of how my sword can hinge on my opponent's sword (without changing the relationship of our blades) are linked more closely to location of contact on my sword. It is a thing for me to think about.

The more I think about it, the more I think it has to do with the idea that, if I'm using my sword to make a "wall" between their sword and my body, if I rotate around anywhere other than the center of my blade, then one "side" of the "wall" will be shorter than the other and thus more vulnerable. So if I rotate my blade around a part near my tip, my opponent can probably disengage around my tip. And if I rotate my blade around a part near my hilt, it's very likely that my opponent can disengage under my hilt.

This likely means that, since there is more of me below my shoulder than above it, high guards (like my interpretation of Narrowing) should distribute my sword's defensiveness farther forward, since my hilt needs to be less far off-line to cover the size of my head, rather than needing to cover the height of my gut.

In summary, this is what I found.

• Taking my tip far off-line feels correct and works correctly when my opponent presses against the center of my sword.
• Why?
• 1: Is it because of the ratio of depth of penetration and commitment?
• 2: Is it because of the special case of how swords hinge around the center?
• 3: Is it because if the center of my sword is being pressed against, my opponent is probably using the center of their sword and this means they have deep penetration?
• 4: Is there a parabolic arc of "ideal angle of blade" versus "location of contact"? 
• It seems like 1 and 3 are opposing assumptions, as are 2 and 4. Interesting!
• How do I prove this?
• If it's #1, this would mean I can do this even when just the barest amount of tip is pressing against my sword. If it's #3, this would not be the case.
• If it's #2, I shouldn't be able to do half of the blade angle when my opponent is pressing against 3/4 of the way up my blade. If it's #4, this should work.
• It would be interesting to figure out how the back half of the blade should act based on #4, if #4 is true. My gut says it is. Further testing would probably be something like, "we start in this position. What is optimal here?"
• Regardless of if it's #2 or #4, I probably need to figure out special cases for defensive opposition at various locations of blade contact. From there, I can probably tease out a general rule, but that is not yet where I am.
• Thinking about different-sized implements would be interesting for #4. Would the arc be the same for a dagger as for a sword? Even though the dagger has much stronger opposition at its tip than the sword at its tip?

I have a thing to think about. YAYS.

Also, topic to think about: What kinds of attacks can one do when in-fighting, and how can one neutralize the possibility of the opponent using their off-hand to defend themselves?

Also, other topic to think about: How, in this system, can I avoid having to come to (or close to) in-fighting?

Running?!?!?

I decided halfway through writing this that it should be in my blog. I'm not a doctor, but these are all things I've found work well for me over time. I'm not a marathon runner and my speed isn't super fast, but these things seem to work.

My standard running checklist for when something is going less-than-ideally is as follows:

1. Check my torso and head positioning.

Breathing is a difficult subject. You're doing cardio, so the exercise you're doing is optimized to place that system under stress. The thing you're trying to train up is your diaphragm and chest cavity's ability to pull in and expel air.

The most important thing I corrected here was my posture - maintaining a light engagement through your mid to lower back is super important for giving your chest cavity the space to breathe. The "bracing method" would work here, with perhaps a bit less engagement through the abs.

Further related to posture, I find that rolling my back "upwards" helps to "open up" my chest and allow me to engage my chest musculature a bit better, to allow me to get more muscles involved in pulling in oxygen. The position is a bit like the "idealized body position" that Devon described in class and said *not* to do when in a fencing guard. In this case, I thiiiiiink it's okay because you're doing it for a specific purpose. Alternately, it's very possible that my chest cavity is shaped in a way that means I need to do this to optimize, but other people don't need to.

Looking forward or upward makes it easier to breathe. Looking downwards with your face creases your esophagus, which means the air going into your lungs has to change direction more, and thus experiences more friction with your esophagus.

Mouth-shape matters here. I usually find that a shape closer to an "O" or a circle makes it easier to pull air in for some weird reason. The other thing I do here sometimes is open my mouth wide enough to bare my teeth, which engages tissue in the nasal passages enough to open them a bit more, which allows me to combo mouth-nose breathe. Unless I do that, pulling in air through my nose is a complete no-go while running, especially outside.

2. Check my breathing pace.

The most important thing for me these days, after dealing with all of that, is breathing pace. So, how often you breathe in or out.

One thing to keep in mind here is that the cycle of breathing is easier if you only cycle from about ~25% full to about ~75% full, averaging around 50%. The farther from 50% your lung capacity is, the harder you have to push to get there. This means that up to a point, you can breathe shallower and more often.

Eventually you hit diminishing returns here - rapidly changing from inhaling to exhaling requires energy too. As well, the faster you breathe the less efficient the oxygen exchange in your lungs grows. This means that for your breathing, you have to optimize among a whole bunch of different things.

Usually my ideal pace is about half a breath per time my foot strikes the ground. So, right foot hits and then I breathe in, and then left foot hits and I breathe out. This usually feels a little too fast at the start of the run, and gradually feels better as I continue. I tend to have pretty close to three steps per second when going for a run, which should give you an idea of the pace of breathing.

For selecting a pace of breathing, I usually try to synchronize it with my steps. If your lungs feel tired, you need to give them time to recover. This means you need to breathe slower for a while. So after a really hard hill, I might switch from an in-out pace of 1-1 to 2-2. So - start breathing in with the step left, then step right, then step left again and start breathing out, step right, and repeat with a step left and breathing in.

I've found that developing breathing strength is more effective if I go through "reps" of breathing faster and harder, then slower to let my lungs recover. So, I go through the following sequence:

-Start at 1-1

-Go for a while at 2/3-2/3 (counting out that I should have four breaths per three steps)

-Go for a while at 1/2-1/2 (one in-out per time a foot hits the ground)

-Maybe go for a while at 1/3-1/3 (in-out-in or out-in-out each time my foot hits the ground)

-back to 1/2-1/2

-back to 2/3-2/3

-back to 1-1

-Down to 3/2-3/2 (two breaths per three steps)

-Down to 2-2 (one breath per two steps)

-Down to 3-3 (one breath per three steps)

-Maybe down to 4-4

-back up to 3-3

-back up to 2-2

-back up to 3/2-3/2

-back up to 1-1

-Repeat

This is a weird sequence to time out, but it provides steps upwards and downwards in breathing-exertion that feel to me like they are progressive in terms of effort, so long as you don't let your breathing get too shallow. The faster sequence forces you to push your lungs harder, and the slower sequence lets your breathing-muscles dispel some lactic acid and recover.

Generally though, a 1-1 breathing sequence is the most efficient sequence as far as I can tell from my heart rate.

Breathing is also important for dispelling heat - I usually end up breathing faster and shallower when it's hotter out. At that point the thing my body is trying to do isn't get oxygen - it's shed heat.

 

Paying some passive attention to counting out my breathing also helps me to not get bored.

2. If my ankle hurts, or both my knees and shins hurt, I'm probably hitting the ground too hard.

It's likely that you might be bouncing up and down too much. This is usually what causes ankle or knee/shin problems for me. Try to make your gait more efficient in terms of how far your head goes from the ground.

 

It's also possible that you need to stretch after running. I do some ankle stretches after - wall leans with leg both straight and bent, and standing on my tippy-toes several times for strength. That's a whole post on its own.

I need to wear athletic insoles because I have somewhat collapsed arches. These are the ones I wear. I wear them in all of my shoes, including my running shoes.

3. If my knee hurts, I'm probably heel-striking more than I should.

 

One fix for this is to make your foot strike the ground more toward ball of the foot. Usually the ideal place for me feels like the middle of my foot. There's a bit of contact, bend, and bounce with my ankles, but not too much.

It's also possible that my shoes are tied too tightly or too loosely. Usually for me I end up heel-striking more if my shoes are too loose, because when my toes strike my feet shift around in them.

 

It's also possible that your gait is inefficient in a weird way. Generally, if you are going either uphill or downhill, you need to decrease the size of your gait based on the size of the hill. This is because otherwise, you're pulling yourself up with your thighs, rather than letting yourself bounce forward.

 

It's also possible that you're not using your shins as a lever appropriately. Look at this gif of someone jogging. Note how as the runner extends their leg, their knee moves "backwards" relative to their ankle, and their ankle moves "forwards" relative to their knee. It's harder to see, but during their stride, their knee bends so that their ankle moves "backwards" relative to their knee, and their knee moves "forwards" relative to their ankle.

 

This results in a place on the runner's shin that essentially only moves forwards, and acts as a fulcrum between the knee and the foot. The lower this is, the slower you go, but the more leverage you have and the less stressful your stride is on your knee. I like to imagine that my feet are going around a wheel, and the shin-fulcrum is the middle of the wheel. If I'm going uphill or downhill the wheel gets smaller, and if I'm on a flat the wheel gets larger.

Essentially - the more your knees move back and forth relative to your feet, the more shearing stress you are putting on your knees.

4. If my shin hurts, I'm probably toe-striking more than I should.

Easiest fix here is to do the opposite of the above - try to make the place that you're striking the ground farther back on your foot, closer to your heel. Generally you should also be aiming to have your foot impact the ground pretty "flat" relative to the angle of the ground. So angle your toes up some if you're going uphill, and down some if you're going downhill.

Or make your stride less fast and more leverage, like I rambled about above in the knee section.

Or you could wear shin sleeves. I have a pair of these.

(I got interrupted here and lost momentum, so I'm going to slack-ass the last bits of this.)

5. Make sure I'm not running too fast.

 

I frequently have to step my speed back a whole lot, until it feels like I'm barely doing more than walking with some bounce in my step, in order to have successful runs.

6. Make sure I have a semi-positive point of view on run.

Getting out and doing anything, even one minute of exercise, is better than nothing. Beyond that, the point of cardio is to raise your heart rate for a period of time, rather than to cover distance. If you wanted to cover distance we have cars. The health benefits of a run are based on how long you're in cardio heart rate zones.

Re-focusing on my 45 and dagger

Hello!

Today, I write a post in order to help me re-focus on my 45-inch rapier and my dagger. Pennsic is coming, and I have been slacking. So, in order to re-focus, I should take inventory of the largest holes I see in my sword-and-dagger game. Even though this will be less correct before practice than it would be after practice, doing it now means I'll be thinking of it at practice.

• WEAKNESSES
• My sense of distance can be shaken with timing. Frequently I fall into a trap of viewing my opponent's measure as being the same as mine, even if they have a longer measure.
• The first problem can be fixed by a variant on the Peony Visualization Technique (which I have never described here, at least never under that name). Essentially - at all moments, I should be automatically visualizing where my opponent could place their center of mass, one quarter-second from now. I should be acting based on the worst-case scenario that this presents, not based on their current location.
•  The second problem can be solved by being mindful of their measure. I can work on starting each match with an internally verbalized inventory of my opponent - "Slightly taller person with a slightly shorter sword and dagger", "much shorter person with case of much shorter weapons", etc. This will force me to be mindful of their distance.
• In this example, "slightly" means about 3 inches in terms of blade length and 2 inches in terms of height, whereas a lack of descriptor means 4+ inches of difference in terms of height, or 6+ inches of difference in terms of blade length. Donovan is equivalent height to me or slightly taller than me, depending on what shoes I'm wearing. Doroga is taller than me.
• Here, we care about relations more than exact values. If I have a longer weapon and they are not taller than me, I can likely throw shots all day and have a very narrow area to defend against counter-attacks. If this isn't the case, I have to Actually Fence.
• I have grown to be hesitant and less likely to recognize and seize upon moments where I can win.
• This is likely because I have been working the defensive side of things more than the offensive side of things - "how can my opponent confound my parries". In order to solve this without losing what I've gained in terms of defensive skill, I need to start recognizing German-style "master strokes", which allow me a defense and a counter-attack in the same tempo.
• More, I need to recognize when one of the elements of Six Elements Theory isn't applicable, and what portion of the Perfect Defensive Paradigm I can break from because of it.
• Perfect Defensive Paradigm is essentially performing my interpretation of Line in Cross or Narrowing - a parry that carries my hilt slightly out of my presence, and takes my tip off-line in an arc that prevents opposition.
• This is a homework assignment. I need to look back at my original Six Elements Theory post and read when each Element is inapplicable. Then, take that and develop a counterattack for it. From there, drill the counterattacks into my fencing, either by drilling or by mindful and focused fighting.
• My style has grown too diversified. Every time I fence, it's a game of "what bullshit can I make up centered around these base principles". This slows me down.
• I need to re-develop a core set of techniques that are my go-to techniques for Just Winning Bouts.
•  I miiiiight be concentrating too much on defense.
• Keep an eye on this. While "defense is most important" is a very useful philosophy for growth, going too far into that world means not winning.
• I am very used to doing cuts with my shorter sword.
• Cuts are still possible with the longer sword, but I need to figure out exactly the threshold where they become practical, for the longer weapon. This means drilling my hilt-first approaching-defenses some, because that's where the fastest cuts come from.
•  People don't seem to believe my feints any more.
• This might be just that people have gotten better, but my old strategy of "twitch at people to make openings" doesn't seem to be working well. It might be a side-effect of me moving overall slower when I fence these days, but I need to figure out why this is.
• If it's just that people are fencing in a more technically sound manner, I need to make smaller feints and be able to take advantage of smaller reactions.
• If people are just not trained to respond to my feints any more, this doesn't mean I need to re-train them - it means that my feints weren't a well-founded set of techniques in the first place, and I need to understand better how, in the midst of a single bout, to figure out the "volume" of feint that someone needs to see in order to respond, and how large that response will be.
• This one is probably the one to go with, since it will be less possible to do as I get back into the groove of things.

So, that's a decently-sized list of things I get the opportunity to learn to do better. That's awesome! I look forward to fencing people and working on these things.

Six Elements Theory

Practice Monday night kinda sucked.

tl;dr: I work through a theory of fencing in this post. If you want to, you can skip to the end and just skip back if something doesn't make sense. I don't mind!

I was trying to work on my recent "6 elements of attack" theory. Essentially, I argue that there are 6 types of attack, and to be defended you must defend against all six of them. Each one has a corresponding way-to-defend, and so an ideal defense includes all six elements of defense. And an ideal attack contains as many of the six elements as possible, to try to take advantage of any flaw in defense.

This post, I want to work on building up this idea which has been in the back of my head. This involves going through all possibilities related to it and branching out ideas,  until we have covered everything necessary for it to be useful.

Those elements of attack are:

• Technique: Attack to absence. In general, the Italians call this a "disengage". Super obvious. When your wrist moves your tip in a circle in front of you, dipping past your opponent's tip or pommel. I call this "attack to absence", since it's literally moving your sword to the place that their sword isn't and attacking.
• Technique: Yielding around. That thing where someone pushes their hilt "outwards", perpendicular to the line between two fencers, while moving their tip "inwards" toward that line.
• Technique: Pulling out. This is when someone's sword moves in a way that moves the tip away from your shoulder, meaning that their tip can get around your sword. If their sword is below your shoulder, this can mean a move straight down. The key here is that the attacker's tip (or pommel in really really really weird circumstances) is the one that makes way for the defender's sword, whereas in Attack to absence, the attacker's tip stays forward, but the blade makes its way around the opponent's tip or hilt. This also means that some things which would normally be called a "disengage" would be considered to be this technique, too.
• Technique: Opposition. This is when someone uses a stronger part of their blade to push through a weaker part of your blade.
• Technique: Attack to slowness. This is when someone attacks right next to your hilt, meaning you can't parry them with your blade. This is mentioned in several manuals, but Fabris is notable for how he talks about doing it.
• Technique: Feinting. This is a weird meta-technique. This is when you half-attempt one of the above techniques in order to attempt to "draw out" a response which leaves an opening. Usually this is done by Italians using disengaging, since the Italian counter to a disengage leaves you open to a second disengage. Note that a feint can be intended to create a small advantage, and further feints can be designed to create slightly larger advantages until you are stabbed, which is why you need to react to a feint. Just, you need to react smaller, as we will cover later.

And the elements of defense:

• Technique: Attack to absence.
• Countered by: Cutting to the reverse. Italians do this by default when changing lines, since their hand stays largely in the same place, but their blade moves. In general, you want to cut in a way that gets as close to perpendicular to their blade when your blades impact. This can be weird sometimes.
• Technique: Yielding around.
• Countered by: Pulling your hand away from the center line or back. This is what happens when an Italian executes a "transport". It also happens in Thibault a few times. This can be done by moving your hand backwards and maintaining your blade's angulation, or it can be executed by moving your tip backwards by moving your wrist. The former is probably better.
• Technique: Pulling out.
• Countered by: Following their blade. This means you need to extend your tip farther, or move forward, or lean, or something to prevent them from getting "out".
• Technique: Opposition.
• Countered by: Coming off-line with contact. If you let your tip come off-line, you can refuse them contact with weaker parts of your blade, or at least force them to come off-line as well if they wish to try pushing through your blade. This happens a lot in various dialects of LVD.
• Technique: Attack to slowness.
•  Countered by: Voiding / Pushing. This is changing the relationship between your sword and your body, usually by pushing your sword in one direction while moving your body in another. You can also do just one or the other of those - a sideways void while not moving your sword counts as this, so long as your sword or hilt is between you and their blade. Fabris does this a lot, too, but more on this later.
• Technique: Feinting.
• Countered by: Keeping your previous line closed. This means that if someone is in a position and they move to disengage, your action needs to defend against both the line that you previously had closed, as well as the line they seem to be attacking on now. It amounts to knowing exactly what you are defending against, and how they can take advantage of your openings. Honestly, it boils down to good technique.

In theory, those should be the basic elements of fencing. Unfortunately, time is a thing too, and frequently we can't perceive what our opponent is doing until they are finished doing it. So we need to figure out how to perceive these six techniques as early as we can.

• Technique: Attack to absence.
• Defensive cue: Sudden lack of blade contact. Their blade is completely and very suddenly gone!
• Countered by: Cutting to the reverse.
• Technique: Yielding around.
• Defensive cue: Change in direction of blade pressure. This signifies that they are no longer trying to push through your blade, and now want to get around it and let your blade fall toward their hilt.
• Countered by: Pulling your hand away from the center line or back.
• Technique: Pulling out.
• Defensive cue: Avoiding blade contact. It's hard to pull out or away when blade contact has been established, so the best way to pull out is to avoid it in the first place. This can be accomplished by maintaining distance, using a refused stance, or moving their blade parallel to yours.
• Countered by: Following their blade.
• Technique: Opposition.
• Defensive cue: Movement toward your blade. This is what allows them to push through. This can be accomplished by snaking around behind your sword, too, which is an altogether more effective way of moving toward your tip.
• Countered by: Coming off-line with contact.
• Technique: Attack to slowness.
• Defensive cue: Coming on-line with your hilt. There is no reason they would do so otherwise, since coming on-line with your hilt leaves them terribly open to counter-attacks.
•  Countered by: Voiding / Pushing.
• Technique: Feinting.
• Defensive cue: Attack that could not succeed / is too far away. If your opponent couldn't actually strike you if they followed through on their newly-attempted attack, it has to be a feint. Anything else is committed enough that it can be countered. In general, this is dictated by distance. Note that you still need to act on a feint, since a feint can be used to cover for a movement toward a better position, but the action you need to take is different.
• Countered by: Keeping your previous line closed.

But even beyond this, we need to be able to confirm to ourselves that our defense succeeded, even as we prepare our next defense and consider executing our next attack.  Fortunately for us, none of these defensive techniques is mutually exclusive with any others. As well, most of these are touch-based cues, which are processed faster than visual information.

• Technique: Attack to absence.
• Defensive cue: Sudden lack of blade contact.
• Countered by: Cutting to the reverse.
• Success cue: Hard, sudden rotation-ceasing blade contact. A disengage is a quick movement, involving moving your tip as fast as it can move. This will result is a sharp, clanging impact that will reduce the amount that your sword is rotating.
• Technique: Yielding around.
• Defensive cue: Change in direction of blade pressure.
• Countered by: Pulling your hand away from the center line or back.
• Success cue: Smooth, sliding blade contact. The yield doesn't have a huge amount of force to it in general, and hopes to make its way using reach rather than strength. So a yield, when blocked, presents nice, smooth contact.
• Technique: Pulling out.
• Defensive cue: Avoiding blade contact.
• Countered by: Following their blade.
• Success cue: Continued pressing contact. When pulling out, they are presenting you with their weak. You will be able to feel your weak pressing against their weak.
• Technique: Opposition.
• Defensive cue: Movement toward your blade.
• Countered by: Coming off-line with contact.
• Success cue: Sudden reduction or stasis in pressure. Either they will match your force by winding behind your sword, or they will not get there in time and the possible pressure they can exert will diminish as you move your stronger part of your blade closer to their weaker part.
• Technique: Attack to slowness.
• Defensive cue: Coming on-line with your hilt.
•  Countered by: Voiding / Pushing.
• Success cue: Thudding impact. This impact will not result in your blade rotating, really, since most of their force will be focused forward toward your hilt and body.
• Technique: Feinting.
• Defensive cue: Attack that could not succeed / is too far away.
• Countered by: Keeping your previous line closed.
• Success cue: Smaller versions of other defensive success cues. Less pressure, that sort of thing.

Of course, attacking is necessary to win a bout. So we need to figure out the minimum cue to understand if we have succeeded or failed at our attack, as well, so we can proceed to our next attack or defense as necessary. Similarly, these should ideally have touch-based cues for success or failure, so we can act with as much speed as possible.

• Technique: Attack to absence.
• Defensive cue: Sudden lack of blade contact.
• Countered by: Cutting to the reverse.
• Success cue: Hard, sudden rotation-ceasing blade contact.
• Attacking failure cue: Arrested movement. So if your disengage stops before you would have stopped it yourself, your attack to absence has failed.
• Technique: Yielding around.
• Defensive cue: Change in direction of blade pressure.
• Countered by: Pulling your hand away from the center line or back.
• Success cue: Smooth, sliding blade contact.
• Attacking failure cue: "Pulling" movement. Basically, if your tip doesn't feel like it's quite going in as far as you need for it to, your yielding attack has likely failed.
• Technique: Pulling out.
• Defensive cue: Avoiding blade contact.
• Countered by: Following their blade.
• Success cue: Continued pressing contact.
• Attacking failure cue: Continued pushing against your blade. This means that you haven't actually succeeded at pulling out, since they are still in contact with your blade.
• Technique: Opposition.
• Defensive cue: Movement toward your blade.
• Countered by: Coming off-line with contact.
• Success cue: Sudden reduction or stasis in pressure.
• Attacking failure cue: Sliding toward their hilt. If they have adjusted their blade to overcome your attack by opposition, that means they are in a position that forces your sword to either give up its strength, or slide toward the strong part of their blade.  
• Technique: Attack to slowness.
• Defensive cue: Coming on-line with your hilt.
•  Countered by: Voiding / Pushing.
• Success cue: Thudding impact.
• Attacking failure cue: Blade movement off-line. This is similar to the failure cue for Pulling out, but where you're probably moving backwards for Pulling out, in this case you are moving forwards. They are essentially acting as a bullfighter and allowing your forward momentum to carry you past them.
• Technique: Feinting.
• Defensive cue: Attack that could not succeed / is too far away.
• Countered by: Keeping your previous line closed.
• Success cue: Smaller versions of other defensive success cues.
• Attacking failure cue: Small response. The point of a feint is to draw an exaggerated response so that you can execute a counter to their defensive technique. If they don't respond, or they respond in a very small way, then your feint has probably failed. 

Beyond even this, we need to know how to counter our opponent's defenses. While a perfectly-executed defense might not be easy to take advantage of, all defenses create openings. And for each defense, there is a particular way to best use those openings.

• Technique: Attack to absence.
• Defensive cue: Sudden lack of blade contact.
• Countered by: Cutting to the reverse.
• Success cue: Hard, sudden rotation-ceasing blade contact.
• Counter-counter: An even smaller Attack to absence. The way absence works is by trying to rotate around the physical limits of their weapon. If they have rotated their weapon to defend against your attack to absence, that means there's likely an opening on the other side of their weapon now. Unfortunately, the defensive action is smaller than the offensive action here, so there's no guarantee this will work. This is where mid-blade disengages tend to come into play, for the offense.
• Attacking failure cue: Arrested movement.
• Technique: Yielding around.
• Defensive cue: Change in direction of blade pressure.
• Countered by: Pulling your hand away from the center line or back.
• Success cue: Smooth, sliding blade contact.
• Counter-counter: Opposition / Winding. If you have executed the Yield around, then you have gotten your sword "behind" theirs. This means it is will be hard for them move the strong of their blade in the way of the weak of yours. This is similar to the German concept of "winding", in that you wrap your blade around their blade to make it impossible for them to gain back opposition.
• Attacking failure cue: "Pulling" movement.
• Technique: Pulling out.
• Defensive cue: Avoiding blade contact.
• Countered by: Following their blade.
• Success cue: Continued pressing contact.
• Counter-counter: Attack to slowness. By virtue of your opponent extending their blade, they are presenting you with their hilt. This means it is very easy to attack toward their hilt in response, especially if they are not in a position that allows for a good void. 
• Attacking failure cue: Continued pushing against your blade.
• Technique: Opposition.
• Defensive cue: Movement toward your blade.
• Countered by: Coming off-line with contact.
• Success cue: Sudden reduction or stasis in pressure.
• Counter-counter: Yielding around / Winding. These counter each other in an exciting way. As stated above, the combination of Yielding around and Opposition leads to a concept the Germans call "winding". It is likely that you and your opponent will get into a stalemate here, in which you need to abandon your plan and do something else. 
• Attacking failure cue: Sliding toward their hilt.
• Technique: Attack to slowness.
• Defensive cue: Coming on-line with your hilt.
•  Countered by: Voiding / Pushing.
• Success cue: Thudding impact.
• Counter-counter: Pulling out, depending on distance. Attacks to slowness imply more forward movement than a lot of other actions here. If you are still far enough out, though, you can Pull out. The sideways movement of Voiding / Pushing from your opponent makes this easier. As you get closer, Pulling out becomes less of an option. In this case, the changing relationship between blade and body becomes harder to take advantage of, and you must use a different technique. Of course, a moulinet, which can arguably be either Pulling out or an Attack to absence depending on execution, remains possible.
• Attacking failure cue: Blade movement off-line.
• Technique: Feinting.
• Defensive cue: Attack that could not succeed / is too far away.
• Countered by: Keeping your previous line closed.
• Success cue: Smaller versions of other defensive success cues.
• Counter-counter: Redoubling. So, executing the same attack, but bigger. If your opponent doesn't move at all, then you are likely to catch them off-guard. If they move a bit, but not too much, they can still defend themselves.
• Attacking failure cue: Small response.

So as you can see, this leads to sequences. Attack to absence forms its own little loop. Opposition and Yielding around form a loop called Winding. Pulling out and Attack to slowness have a bit of a looping quality, but eventually lead something else due to the nature of distance. Feinting has its own loop with true attacks, due to the nature of attacks, but that is weird and not the kind of loop we're looking for here.

There's also a relationship between Attacks to absence and Feinting, since the size of your Attack to absence will decrease over time. As the size of these Attacks decreases, the size of what qualifies as a Feint decreases as well. So while a tiny twitch might not be useful at the start of a fight as a feint, after three disengages it might be useful as one.

We can also look at the defensive and offensive actions and guards that make those actions easier. For the defense, this allows us to change and fortify our stance based on what we think our opponents will do. For the offense, that allows us to choose our attack based on what our opponent's stance is.

• Technique: Attack to absence.
• Offensive guard: Angled guards. The idea is that if your guard is angled such that your sword can cross with your opponent's sword, you can use your wrist to move your blade above or below your opponent's guard.
• Defensive cue: Sudden lack of blade contact.
• Countered by: Cutting to the reverse.
• Defensive guard: Counter-angled guards. A similar thing. If you have no crossing with your opponent's guard, it's hard to cut into the reverse of their disengage motion. The important part here is that you know what direction they can move their sword, and how to execute a counter-movement.
• Success cue: Hard, sudden rotation-ceasing blade contact.
• Counter-counter: Attack to absence.
• Attacking failure cue: Arrested movement.
• Technique: Yielding around.
• Offensive guard: Arm or body pulled back. This means you have distance to extend your arm and bend at your wrist, to suddenly gain distance and angle around your opponent's blade.
• Defensive cue: Change in direction of blade pressure.
• Countered by: Pulling your hand away from the center line or back.
• Defensive guard: Blade away from the diameter. This means that your blade or tip is already away from the diameter line between your shoulder and your opponent's shoulder.
• Success cue: Smooth, sliding blade contact.
• Counter-counter: Opposition / Winding.
• Attacking failure cue: "Pulling" movement.
• Technique: Pulling out.
• Offensive guard: Arm has room to pull sword back. This means you can pull your sword away from their shoulder, even if it's not straight backwards. Reserving some space to move forward as well is useful in order to make it harder decide what your end target is.
• Defensive cue: Avoiding blade contact.
• Countered by: Following their blade.
• Defensive guard: Arm and sword extended. If they can't get out, then they can't pull out.
• Success cue: Continued pressing contact.
• Counter-counter: Attack to slowness.
• Attacking failure cue: Continued pushing against your blade.
• Technique: Opposition.
• Offensive guard: Blade "over the opponent's blade". This means that your blade is angled in a way that makes it take longer to regain opposition, and the process of regaining opposition might just put you back on-line.
• Defensive cue: Movement toward your blade.
• Countered by: Coming off-line with contact.
• Defensive guard: Mid-blade at or near the edge of profile. This means that if they try to strike through your mid-blade or the weak of your blade, they will miss you. The idea is to force your opponent to place their weak on your strong if they want to attack you.
• Success cue: Sudden reduction or stasis in pressure.
• Counter-counter: Yielding around / Winding.
• Attacking failure cue: Sliding toward their hilt.
• Technique: Attack to slowness.
• Offensive guard: Attacker's hilt in-line with defender's hilt. This means that you can push your hilt in toward the defender's's hilt, and the line through their hilt will connect with their body.
• Defensive cue: Coming on-line with your hilt.
•  Countered by: Voiding / Pushing.
• Defensive guard: Hilt near or past the edge of the profile, arm extended. This would allow you to have less distance to move your body or your sword to push their sword past your profile. The extension of your arm means that your profile is effectively smaller. Having your hilt near the edge of your profile means that there's really only one direction that they can strike toward your body, near your hilt.
• Success cue: Thudding impact.
• Counter-counter: Pulling out.
• Attacking failure cue: Blade movement off-line.
• Technique: Feinting.
• Offensive guard: A compromise among several. Feinting works by overwhelming your opponent with options. Don't do any particular guard which would let them know what you will do.
• Defensive cue: Attack that could not succeed / is too far away.
• Countered by: Keeping your previous line closed.
• Defensive guard: Counter-guard. Make sure to be in a guard that can defend against all options that they have.
• Success cue: Smaller versions of other defensive success cues.
• Counter-counter: Redoubling.
• Attacking failure cue: Small response. 

Beyond this, there are things which we can call "master-strokes", in the German tradition. The Germans tend to believe that the person attacking has the advantage. In order to win from the defense, you need to perform an attack that also defends you, which is difficult to do. The Italians would call this a single-tempo parry-riposte, in some circumstances. You do need to do a tiny bit of prediction, to know what your opponent will do. Master-strokes are good to execute if your opponent over-commits to a technique.

• Technique: Attack to absence.
• Offensive guard: Angled guards
• Defensive cue: Sudden lack of blade contact.
• Countered by: Cutting to the reverse.
• Defensive guard: Counter-angled guards.
• Success cue: Hard, sudden rotation-ceasing blade contact.
• Counter-counter: Attack to absence.
• Example master stroke: Single-tempo parry/riposte. This is a largely Capoferro thing. The idea is that you extend and counter-rotate into their disengage, attacking to their body. Thibault also has a similar concept. This can be difficult to do if the attacker's blade is very low. This is a special case of Attack to slowness.
• Attacking failure cue: Arrested movement.
• Technique: Yielding around.
• Offensive guard: Arm or body pulled back.
• Defensive cue: Change in direction of blade pressure.
• Countered by: Pulling your hand away from the center line or back.
• Defensive guard: Blade away from the diameter
• Success cue: Smooth, sliding blade contact.
• Counter-counter: Opposition / Winding.
• Example master stroke: Leaning thrust with shoulder away from the diameter and elbow bent. Here, you lean forward while pulling your arm to the side so that your weapon moves forward, while your hilt and blade create space. Your face will likely be closer to their body than your hilt. This is a special case of Opposition.
• Attacking failure cue: "Pulling" movement.
• Technique: Pulling out.
• Offensive guard: Arm has room to pull sword back.
• Defensive cue: Avoiding blade contact.
• Countered by: Following their blade.
• Defensive guard: Arm and sword extended.
• Success cue: Continued pressing contact.
• Counter-counter: Attack to slowness.
• Example master stroke: Circling thrust. This is essentially pushing their blade in a circle, while presenting your tip to their body as a threat. They may pull back far enough that you can't continue to do that, in which case you should probably cut them or stab them or some such when they are so far back that they can't attack. This is a special case of Cutting to the reverse.
• Attacking failure cue: Continued pushing against your blade.
• Technique: Opposition.
• Offensive guard: Blade "over the opponent's blade".
• Defensive cue: Movement toward your blade.
• Countered by: Coming off-line with contact.
• Defensive guard: Mid-blade at or near the edge of profile.
• Success cue: Sudden reduction or stasis in pressure.
• Counter-counter: Yielding around / Winding.
• Example master stroke: Jam your hilt into their mid-blade and attack. Essentially, you want to short-circuit the opposition game by putting your hilt onto their mid-blade. This lets you win opposition handily and frequently cut to them. This is a special case of Opposition.
• Attacking failure cue: Sliding toward their hilt.
• Technique: Attack to slowness.
• Offensive guard: Attacker's hilt in-line with defender's hilt.
• Defensive cue: Coming on-line with your hilt.
•  Countered by: Voiding / Pushing.
• Defensive guard: Hilt near or past the edge of the profile, arm extended.
• Success cue: Thudding impact.
• Counter-counter: Pulling out.
• Example master stroke: Thread through their blade. In this case, you thrust in the direction of their blade redirecting your tip toward their body at the last moment. Your hilt will likely follow a curved path through space, since you are pushing their blade with your hilt and quillons. This is a special case of Opposition.
• Attacking failure cue: Blade movement off-line.
• Technique: Feinting.
• Offensive guard: A compromise among several.
• Defensive cue: Attack that could not succeed / is too far away.
• Countered by: Keeping your previous line closed.
• Defensive guard: Counter-guard.
• Success cue: Smaller versions of other defensive success cues.
• Counter-counter: Redoubling.
• Example master stroke: Just attack. If a feint isn't sincere, you can simply attack them and be fine. If you can't tell whether or not it's sincere, you can't take that gamble.
• Attacking failure cue: Small response. 

In reality, the master-strokes listed here aren't a full list. There are many other ways to attack and defend at the same time. While I think that the earlier parts of this post are very good, the deeper into the rabbit-hole we get, the farther from certainty we go. As well, I have an obvious bias toward using Opposition to attack people. I can imagine many different master-strokes that involve many different types of attack. So let's leave things at the previous bullet-point list, shall we?

THE END OF THIS POST

This is our end result, with the example master-strokes removed.

• Technique: Attack to absence, aka Disengage
• Offensive guard: Angled guards
• Defensive cue: Sudden lack of blade contact.
• Countered by: Cutting to the reverse.
• Defensive guard: Counter-angled guards.
• Success cue: Hard, sudden rotation-ceasing blade contact.
• Counter-counter: Attack to absence.
• Attacking failure cue: Arrested movement.
• Technique: Yielding around.
• Offensive guard: Arm or body pulled back.
• Defensive cue: Change in direction of blade pressure.
• Countered by: Pulling your hand away from the center line or back.
• Defensive guard: Blade away from the diameter
• Success cue: Smooth, sliding blade contact.
• Counter-counter: Opposition / Winding.
• Attacking failure cue: "Pulling" movement.
• Technique: Pulling out.
• Offensive guard: Arm has room to pull sword back.
• Defensive cue: Avoiding blade contact.
• Countered by: Following their blade.
• Defensive guard: Arm and sword extended.
• Success cue: Continued pressing contact.
• Counter-counter: Attack to slowness.
• Attacking failure cue: Continued pushing against your blade.
• Technique: Opposition.
• Offensive guard: Blade "over the opponent's blade".
• Defensive cue: Movement toward your blade.
• Countered by: Coming off-line with contact.
• Defensive guard: Mid-blade at or near the edge of profile.
• Success cue: Sudden reduction or stasis in pressure.
• Counter-counter: Yielding around / Winding.
• Attacking failure cue: Sliding toward their hilt.
• Technique: Attack to slowness.
• Offensive guard: Attacker's hilt in-line with defender's hilt.
• Defensive cue: Coming on-line with your hilt.
•  Countered by: Voiding / Pushing.
• Defensive guard: Hilt near or past the edge of the profile, arm extended.
• Success cue: Thudding impact.
• Counter-counter: Pulling out.
• Attacking failure cue: Blade movement off-line.
• Technique: Feinting.
• Offensive guard: A compromise among several.
• Defensive cue: Attack that could not succeed / is too far away.
• Countered by: Keeping your previous line closed.
• Defensive guard: Counter-guard.
• Success cue: Smaller versions of other defensive success cues.
• Counter-counter: Redoubling.
• Attacking failure cue: Small response.

And this should be a full system list of what makes a valid fencing strategy. This isn't a "how to fence" - it's more of a blueprint for constructing valid strategies, and seeing where a particular system might fall down.

Next post, I plan to do a take-down of a few systems and show how they can be modeled in this system.


Edit: Oh shoot, I forgot to include "conditions that will make this technique work without question". Oh well.

Review???

I need to review my blog.

My shoulder has been a touch unhappy with me when I fight Spanish, lately. This is likely because I drilled too much a few weekends ago. Fortunately, fighting Italian doesn't seem to bother it at all, so it appears that I'm taking a break from Spanish.

As well, I've been so focused on my shorter-rapier game that I've lost sight, somewhat, of how to correctly fight with my "standard" load-out.

I fought seriously with my 45-inch rapier and my dagger for the first time in a long while, at that regional. It was good, but I kept starting off sets of passes doing badly, then remembering little bits of guiding principles over the course of passes which improved my game.

Such principles included:

-Use counter-guards. Rock < Paper < Scissors exists, and it is defined in terms of dagger position. Sword-forward-dagger-back is paper < Dagger-middle-sword-middle is scissors < dagger-forward-sword-back is rock.

-The primary driving goal should be to "create openings", rather than to try to figure out how to strike my opponent. This is easiest to apply against less-skilled fencers. The more skilled a fencer is, the smaller the "openings" one can create, to the point that an "opening" might just be the ability to create a slightly larger and larger "opening", and so forth.

-Tip-middle-hilt principle of sword-contact. Which is to say - usually the safest way to engage with a sword is by switching sides that one engages with. So if I engage with the false edge of their tip, I should engage with the true edge of the middle of their blade, and then with the false edge next to the hilt. This confuses opponents, and all of those positions are good for both offense and attack. As well, it creates more obvious "lines" to use to attack through an opponent's sword. In general, the middle of the sword or the hilt are the only safe places to attack through, for various reasons.

-Old-style off-line fighting is very nice, if my opponent doesn't wish to make contact with my blade. It's a different way of doing Scissors, which relies on misdirection more than my dagger to do things. Sweep / tap / through is still a good strategy. However, if they make contact with my blade, my ability to deceive is greatly reduced.

In all, I'm pretty happy with how my fencing was. I just need to get the essentials back into my working memory, and perhaps make some sort of mnemonic phrase to remind myself of the essentials.

Further madness. Or, "Gaining the Blade"

BACKGROUND

I've been working my destreza-variant more, and I think I've finally got "gaining the blade" down to an effective, exhaustive, reproducible process. First - pictures.

This image shows how someone can attack to vital areas of the body. We should, for this exercise, consider ourselves to be the person on the left, and our opponent to be the person on the right. For the moment we are ignoring the third dimension. We will get back to it, but for the moment it would merely hinder our explanation.

The area O is the area in which it is hard for our opponent to do anything direct to us. In order to stab us, they need to bring their sword out of O and into either M or C.

So - the triangle labeled C is the area that our opponent can attack through in order to hit us with a straight thrust. This is the type of thrust in which your arm and your sword all become a single line, with no bend at the wrist or elbow. It is the longest-reaching attack, and the fastest as well. However, if we push their tip outside of that triangle, they cannot hit us without making an additional movement to re-position themselves.

The triangles Mt and Mb, collectively called M, are the area that our opponent's blade must reside in, in order to perform a yielding thrust. Yielding thrusts are characterized by maintaining a bend at the wrist in order to "angle around" an opponent's attempt at parrying. However, there is a limit to how far you can "angle around", defined by your sword and the length of your arm. Because of this, if we push any part of our opponent's blade outside of M, they can no longer execute a yielding thrust.

It is important to note that, as you get farther away, the M-triangles get smaller, because your opponent needs to be able to reach you with their blade. The angulation created by having their blade in M reduces their reach, and so they can angle farther around, the closer they are.

This all seems obvious, but by overthinking, we can strictly characterize the positions from which our opponent can stab us.

A straight thrust is characterized by decreasing the angles contained in our wrist and elbow, while raising or lowering our arm from the shoulder or moving forward with the body. In particular, we use this motion to push our hilt toward our opponent. The line followed by our hilt does eventually intersect our opponent's body.

A yielding thrust is characterized by increasing or maintaining an angle in the wrist, while rotating forwards at the shoulder or moving forwards with the body. This angle means that when an opponent attempts to parry, their parry at-best moves your tip toward their body. Here, our hand moves in a line that does not eventually intersect our opponent's body.

From the hand movements here described, we can see that a straight thrust and a yielding thrust are two separate things requiring strictly different movements. They cannot be done at the same time. As such, if an opponent executes one, they cannot execute the other without first arresting their sword's momentum and moving counter to their previous movement.

"A tempo", if you're into that sort of thing.

Okay but for real though, there is one weird edge-case that could be considered both, in which you maintain a bent elbow and lunge forwards, not moving your shoulder at all. It, however, can be defeated by both things that defeat straight thrusts and things that defeat yielding thrusts, so let's move on with our lives, shall we?

Ahem. "A tempo".

In order to defeat these things, we ought to characterize exactly when your opponent can hit you with either of these.

• An opponent can hit you with a straight thrust when 
• Their tip is in C.
• An opponent can hit you with a yielding thrust when
• One of the following is true
• Their hand and entire blade are in either M or C, with no part touching the other area.
• Either their hand or their tip is in M, and the other is in C.

This means that, to defend ourselves, we can either place their tip in O, or make sure that their blade is folded across C, so their hand is in one M-triangle and their tip is in the other triangle.

As we approach, we want to be defended at every single moment. This is the definition of gaining the blade.

*****

THE THIRD DIMENSION

Hopefully, the way this applies three-dimensionally should be obvious, or at least possible to extrapolate. If not, perhaps this picture of the same two figures, in slightly different stances and from top-view, will help.

Again, this ignores the length of the blade. The angle made by Ml and Mr would need be wider,  if yielding out that far meant that your opponent's blade would not touch you.

*****

STRATEGERY

When gaining the blade, the first thing we need to do is make sure that our opponent can't execute straight thrusts, because straight thrusts have more reach than yielding thrusts. We do this by, at large measure, blocking them out of C. This is assisted by the fact that, at large measure, the M triangles are very small.

Once we assure ourselves of that, we want to make sure they can't attack with a yielding thrust. This can be accomplished either by blocking their blade across their body, such that the middle of their blade is in C, or by pushing their blade outside of M.

After or during that, we can attack. This can be accomplished by either maintaining their blade outside of M using your quillons, or using timing and positioning to make sure that your strike gets there fast enough that they cannot respond.

One thing that has not yet been noted - body positioning can influence the shape of C and M. If you lower your body, you can change which zone their tip is inside of, even if they don't move at all.

*****

TIC-TACS

My current flowchart for executing this is as follows.

1. As you enter their large measure, if their tip is inside of C, use a very shallow version of the blade positioning outlined by last post to push their tip out of C.
1. Use spiraling or flipping your blade, as outlined by last post, to follow them if they disengage. (Maybe? Untested.)
2. Their tip is now outside of C. As you take tiny steps into their perfect measure, extend your blade toward their blade, perhaps leaning forward. You should, with your quillons, block their tip from entering C. If you can, make sure your blade is touching their blade.
1. If their tip is in M and their hand is in C or an opposing part of M, with their blade intersecting C, execute a direct thrust immediately, pushing their blade with your quillons. The approach and push should allow you to either push their tip into O, or at least maintain safety as outlined above.
3. Moving forward, angle your blade outwards in the spiraling fashion dictated by last post to block their blade out of M. They now can't hit you until you abandon their sword.
4. Attack, I guess? Ideally while using your off-hand or timing to neutralize their offensive capacity.

*****

ASSORTED THOUGHTS

This way of looking at things creates a relatively clear expectation of how to attack from measure. Ideally, you can find a line from your shoulder to their shoulder that pushes their blade out of C, while their hand is in the M on the opposing side.

It also creates an interesting way to define some positions where you would want to keep your blade to attack. Essentially, you want to be in a position that optimizes for the largest distance required to push your tip out of both C and whichever section of M your arm is in, or all sections of M if your arm is in C. If we go back to our first drawing, that means your tip (or the point of contact between your sword and your opponent's sword, if you get the chance to control that) should be along one of three lines, drawn in sharpie in the below image.

This is a touch farther out from your shoulder than your elbow,  which makes sense given how many fencing stances feature a bent-at-90º elbow and a blade pointing at your opponent's center-of-mass.

I also wonder about keeping one's arm extended along the line between C and M. This would place your hand at one of the two X marks, and then you would probably put your tip somewhere along the central line.

This line of thought also yields useful things for people with more reach. If their tip is along one of those three lines, they can more effectively feint in a direction and then strike in the other direction, because either attack would require an equal movement from their opponent to defend against.

Entirely separately - the slowness with which it is necessary to progress from large measure to perfect measure is interesting. It puts new context in the Spanish stepping. After all, if you need to slow the forward component of your stepping, why not use that part of it to move sideways and possibly void an attack from your opponent?

*****

That's sort of where I am, in terms of using one blade against one other blade. Ideally this takes care of the mid-blade disengage problem I was previously running into, because mid-blade disengages are generally dangerous only when they lead to your opponent's tip being in C.

From here, I think I need to map out how to attack more thoroughly than I have previously, and taking into account this somewhat rigid flowchart. I need to see if this style works correctly. If so, I might be able to effectively bring single 37-inch rapier into K&Q next year, which would be interesting.

But yes. It's important to gain blades, and to stab people, and to do all those good things. Closing an essay is hard.