Defending Against a Passive Attack in Foil 

RU-vid Commenter thank you 🙂

I don't think epee is more or even equally straightforward than foil because, you know, right of way. Right of way ironically makes things more straightforward, most of the time

You do all three?

Philippe Baudouin thanks my guy, will do

:-)

I've seen other bouts where Garozzo does not adapt to what is happening and gets drawn into the other fencer's game.

Is it the opponent parries? If so are they covering with their non sword arm? If you take the parry and they turn to close out the line with a riposte then try indirect hit/flick to shoulder or back.

lol go watch my video on how to defend against the bounce, the two concepts are quite similar

CyrusofChaos alright thank you

Not in modern foil any more. They are still threatening you because they can land a hit from that position plus if you are moving backwards then you do not have ROW. If from En-guard, ready, fence you step and lunge and the opponent steps with blade in the air then hits as you lunge, there is a good chance you will score because you lunged and they did not. The march wins when one fencer cedes ground (it tells the ref you are defending).

You could, but you really have to launch your attack when your opponent starts moving his front foot while his point is up. Your window of opportunity is less than half of a second. And above all, you must have a referee who can recognize an attack into prep when he sees one. Because if your opponent manages to hit you at the last moment, a lot of referees will judge that you are counter-attacking rather than attacking into prep

So here's the dilemma: Fencer A continuously advances with tip pointed towards ceiling, if fencer A is counter attacked or attacked, they simply lunge and hit. Because Fencer A is coming forward and timing the final lunge with the extension of Fencer B, Fencer A is always getting the ROW.

no

Nope. Epee is reality, no right of way to save you from suicidal styles of fencing.

There's no need for it in épée, since you just counter and then time the other person out. At worst it's a double, so all's cool.

At some point, a whole bunch of referees decided to read the words "The attack is the initial offensive action made by extending the arm and continuously threatening the opponent’s target, preceding the launching of the lunge or flèche" as "The attack is starting to advance at your opponent first, basically." It's dumb, cheapens the sport, and as far as I know this kind of "I read the rules but have no idea what they are" situation doesn't exist in any other sport. It's how you get completely absurd actions like this ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-MNgYrGwvpuw.htmlm9s, where Scruggs "establishes right of way" by simply running at Binder with her arm behind her back. Because of the interpretation, she's completely helpless in this phrase. The right thing to do is just stick her arm out to hit, and the call should either be "left preparation, attack, touch, point" or "incorrect attack from left, attack, touch, point." Binder is just kind of resigned her, because she knows if she actually did that, she'd never get the call from 999 out of 1000 foil referees. This situation in the weapon is frustrating, but I would take that frustration every day over allowing the legs and arm to be valid target, and whatever the hell ridiculous bullshit goes on in saber.

@@femmesec8968 Let me chime in....as most know the "priority" rules are designed for you to survive a bout with sharp weapons. Now while you make great points...especially since it is a sport that resembles a sport much more than a duel, having said that...IN REAL LIFE WHEN AN OPPONENT IS WALKING TO YOU WITH A SHARP WEAPON, REGARDLESS OF WHERE THEIR POINT LOCATED IS DANGEROUS! Therefore, it is not advisable to attack into a person that is moving towards you and looking to "cut" you. By attacking on prep you actually risk of being "killed"...way too many things can go wrong and it will not be an attack on prep. So from that notion is why the rules the way they are....Thank you for your time.

@@HowtoFencingbyYarikandTim And walking towards your opponent with your point offline is even more dangerous. :)

Coronal equally agreed. But the priority of threat is given to the person moving forward. I agree rules are not perfect or pure but that's just the logic used for when the rules were created.

@@HowtoFencingbyYarikandTim Working off what Femme said in his comment, I don't think that is the intent or what the masters meant when they came up with the rules.