Fencing Logic

"It is not logical, but it is so"
Mr Spock

Yesterday I was having a discussion about simplicity of method and tactics with one of my students who is fencing at the English Championships today. I was explaining that in the most part it is the simple tactics and techniques that win fencing matches simply because of the level of opponent you are facing. The simplest technique is the lunge and if you carry out this attack with the right distance and timing you will defeat your opponent's defences in the majority of cases. Enhance a basically simple technique such as a lunge with a good grasp of footwork (to bring them within distance) and timing (hitting then when they move forward, are unbalanced or are thinking about hitting you) and you have a winning combination. However, a lot of tactics rely on the opponent reacting in a certain way and therefore if your opponent is not capable of doing this then they will fail. It is the logic of fencing that employing an attack that is too advanced for your opponent may well result in failure. It ain't no good trying to provoke and then disengage around a circular parry if your opponent doesn't know how to do one!
So tactics must take into account a certain level of ability on the part of your opponent and is something that the fencer should be looking for as he fences.
This is often the reason why lessons in the class build up movements. Yesterday we taught a lesson which progressed from step-feint disengage lunge, countered by successive parries of quarte-sixte, countered by compound attack. This progression fails when the technique is inadequate and is often the reason why fencers fail to understand it in their haste to progress to the 'next level'. It's vital to master all the preceding techniques before you move on otherwise you will fail. That is the logic of fencing.