Thursday, July 23, 2015

Fabris' Guards in First!

Seeing First used is rare in the extreme in SCA fencing, at least from what I've seen. I'm pretty sure that this is due to a number of factors - it's not a natural looking or feeling guard, it takes a lot of strength and endurance, head cuts aren't typically an issue (save for C&T), and I believe it to be more useful in Fabris' fight than, say, the more upright fight of Capo Ferro or Giganti - but that may not be saying too much. If you're standing in Capo Ferro's upright and backward-leaning stance, denying your head and upper chest, taking a guard which defends those areas isn't generally going to be the most optimal action you might take.

(As a reminder, here are the visuals!)

We're going to speed through the first guard, mostly because as Fabris says, it's not that safe and it's imperfectly formed. He does note that the high placement of the sword will cause you to rely on your off hand if someone really tries to drive home a shot underneath it, unless you break measure as part of your defense. Attacking from this would be a two tempo action, and we all know how he feels about relying on those!

Looking at the second, properly formed guard though, gives us a lot more to work with. The blade is lower, pointed at your opponent, and the forte is better positioned to defend you. All good things! Fabris notes that you don't want your opponent coming in over your sword, since that's the weakest part.

Here's where we're going to take a slight tangent! Up until now, a lot of the focus on keeping your blade position strong has involved the hand position and the true edge; if you want to oppose your opponent's blade on the inside, you use Fourth, with your hand turned palm up and the true edge in your opponent's blade. Similarly, if you want to oppose your opponent's blade on the outside, you use Second, with your hand palm down and your true edge, again, in your opponent's blade. What we're seeing here (and what we'll see in future guards) is a an emphasis on the fact that the blade is stronger in the direction towards which it is pointing - and it's far easier to point the blade downwards. Additionally, in this (or any) situation, just having your blade physically on top is going to be a pretty huge advantage when it comes to displacing your opponent's weapon. (Devon Boorman's statement to me on finding the blade was something to the effect of "you can cheat a lot of the other requirements, but crossing on top is the biggest advantage you can get.")

Anyhow. Fabris says that you can just keep moving towards your opponent and find and remove his blade from your presence as you do so. You want to wound your opponent while you are over his sword, and on the outside. If he cavziones and tries to get on top of your blade, you can wound him underneath in the same way "by just lowering your body and widening your step even more, while still keeping the arm in the same position."

I can see a couple of ways this statement can be taken, and I believe that they are all accurate. If your opponent is below your blade, you can step in, lower your body, moving your forte through his blade, and strike him. If your opponent has performed a cavazione above your blade, lowering your body and passing underneath your opponent's point will keep you safe as you strike. If possible, you can pick up your opponent's blade to the outside, as he mentions earlier. You can see this concept illustrated here - on the left, we see our fencer passing cleanly underneath the opponent's blade with no contact, and on the right we see our fencer in First, with his hilt on the opponent's blade, pushing them to the outside, just as described here!

We'll close with Fabris' statement, "This guard would be just as good as any other if it were not so fatiguing to hold the arm in such a manner for a long time." Yeah, ain't that the truth. I'll be trying to do more with First, either as a guard or as something to specifically mutate my posture into.


Wednesday, July 15, 2015

Single Rapier Guard Overview!

I'm going to step back from Fabris' illustrated wounds for a little bit, and take a cue from having gone over his cloak guards to take a brief look at his single rapier guards. This is mostly a brief overview just to familiarize us with what we'd be seeing; I'll go into the guards in much more detail in subsequent posts. (It's the first in a series! Get in on the ground floor!)

First, let's go over what Fabris has to say about good counterguards. He begins that section by saying, "Forming a good counter-posture means situating the body and sword in such a way that, without touching your opponent's blade, the straight line between the opponent's point and your body is completely defended." Doing this means that if your opponent wants to strike you, they must move to another line, which is a longer tempo, which means you can better deal with the threat and also strike your opponent. He has more to say about counterguards, but it focuses mostly on measure and doing so in a controlled way, so we'll move on to examining his single rapier guards in earnest.

If we're looking at the guards, let me give you a quick index of the plates for his single rapier guards. He breaks them down by hand position (guards in First, guards in Second, and so on).

Guards in First: Just these two.
Guards in Second: These two, and these two. (As an aside, he illustrates lunging and passing from Second as well.)
Guards in Third: Two shown here, and one here (the right plate being a lunge in Third).
Guards in Fourth: Two shown here, two more here. We also see a lunge and girata here, as well as another girata and a pass in Fourth here.

Let's examine the guards in First. The first one (on the left), according to Fabris, is imperfectly formed. The point is out of presence, the sword is too far back, and it just looks sloppy compared to the properly formed guard on the right. This is because it's representative of what you'd be doing having just pulled your sword from the scabbard. While almost anything you try to do from here will necessitate a two tempo attack, your head is pretty well covered from the outside. The second guard in First is much cleaner - the sword is extended, the upper chest and head are well covered, the body is bent well forward, and there is a small step.

His guards in Second start off with two which look quite similar. Again, Fabris notes that the first one is weaker than the second. It is stronger to the inside as that is the direction toward which the blade points, but to really defend to that side, you'll need to turn your hand into Fourth. His second guard shown is slightly lower relative to your body, and the sword is much straighter. He notes that you can perform very small cavazione from this guard, and it is therefore hard for your opponent to gain your blade effectively, but that it can be tiring to maintain this guard for long. (Although not nearly so as the guard in First!) The second pair of guards in Second are really specialist postures - one sets up particularly well against the inside line (though certainly not solely that) and the last guard in Second is effectively an invitation to attack your head or chest.

Continuing the trend here, the first guard in Third is not what Fabris would call a good one. While it is certainly easier to form and hold, Fabris feels that there are a number of disadvantages which can be taken advantage of by the skilled fencer. He does admit that not everyone knows these disadvantages, so you can use it to trick your opponent. The second guard in Third is much tighter, and one that Fabris considers one of the most useful due to its ability to rapidly move into Second or Fourth. The last guard in Third is mostly a problem-solving guard. It can be used to free your sword, withdraw your body, and to play with your opponent's sense of measure.

Finally, the guards in Fourth. The first one covers well to the inside, but the bent arm will make your cavazioni cover more distance, and be slower because of it. As we might expect, the second guard here is much better formed, and in fact is one that Fabris considers the safest guard to take. The last two are intended to invite the opponent into specific attacks, and Fabris goes into detail with what to do from each of these guards in the face of the opponent's actions.

For the next entry, we'll take a much more detailed look at the guards in First, and probably ramble about the application of them in SCA rapier.

Thursday, June 11, 2015

A quick and dirty summary of Fabris' cloak!

So this weekend at Sommer Draw (a nice chill local event that people should wander out to) one of the twists in the rapier tournament is that you need to spend the first half fighting with what you think your worst form is.

I bet a lot of people will take cloak. Frankly, out of the people who can take cloak in a tournament, I imagine that nearly all of them will end up choosing that as their worst form. So let's jump around in the manual a bit and see what Fabris tells us about cloak! (See, I'm helping.)

First though, here's what we've got for plates that you can feast your eyes upon!

Fabris shows some postures with the cloak here, here, and the left plate here. He shows wounds on the right plate here, as well as here, here, and here. Also, here are a couple more wounds with cloak that he describes later on. Note that the second one, while hilarious and effective, is not permitted in either SCA rapier or C&T combat, which is really a shame. (Fabris notes that the cape is both a defensive and offensive weapon - and it's specifically offensive in the sense that you can hit your opponent with it and throw it over his head or hand. We'll be focusing on how to best use it defensively here. For now.)

Before he gets into guards at all though, Fabris spends a good chunk of text outlining his general principles for sword and cape, which is where we'll be spending the bulk of our time today. (As an aside, Fabris notes that sword and cape is "a very noble weapon combination" and one well worth spending time on because carrying a cape does not fall under any legal restrictions, whereas carrying a dagger can be forbidden in some places. Neat!)

The first thing that we'll notice, both from the plates above and in the text, is that Fabris does not want us using a cape like you typically see it fought in the SCA. Generally in the SCA, you see people with a half-cape held in their off hand, and it's swirled and snapped around at high speed to baffle the opponent and intercept their blade. Fabris is describing how to use a much larger and heavier cape, such as you'd generally be wearing outside. It's much less swishy and flashy, and not so high energy.

Fabris says that you should hold the cape such that it's covering your arm from hand to elbow. It should hang at a level such that you can hold it at the level of your head and look over it at your opponent and still have it protecting your lower body, yet not hang so long that if you lower your arm you have a tripping hazard.

You commonly hear in the SCA that people would wrap their cloaks around their arms to use almost as bucklers against their opponent's sword. While this is true to an extent - the layer or two of heavy cloth was absolutely better than nothing when defending yourself - Fabris explicitly tells you not to put your arm in the way of a cut, because they could still injure you through the cloak. In fact, he says "even if you were to wrap the cape completely around your arm, you may still be unable to oppose a cut without injury to your arm, while leaving your lower body dangerously exposed." This is extremely relevant to SCA rapier and C&T, because whatever you wear explicitly does not prevent you from taking a blow to that area. Interposing your arm between your head and a cut will cost you that arm, regardless of how many layers of cape it has wrapped around it. On that note, be sure that you can calibrate properly through the layers of cloak you have wrapped around your arm. Calibrating before a fight is never a bad thing if there's any possibility of something like that coming up!

Right, then. You have your cape set and ready. How do we assume a good guard with it?

Fabris recommends keeping the edge of the cape directed towards your opponent. This is primarily what you use against your opponent's sword. You can deflect thrusts to either side with it, as well as catch cuts with it. He does remind you that the cape will have some give in it before it moves your opponent's point off-line, which is important to remember. If you hold your cape flat-on against your opponent, they could thrust through it and wound you. While our swords in the SCA won't pierce the cloak, they could reasonably push the cloth right up against your body if you're not careful, and that will work just as well.

In general, you should be joining the cape to the sword. Your sword will offer protection to your off hand, the cape bolsters the protection of the sword, and there's not nearly as much open along your body. Note in plates 97, 98, and 100 how the cape is acting in concert with the sword, and how the cape is joined to the sword relatively far down its length. If your arm gets tired, Fabris advises that you pull it back to the hilt of your sword, but to keep it joined with your sword there, to prevent people from attacking between them. You can see this in plate 99.

Now that you've got a good guard, on to actually using the cape!

If your opponent thrusts high, lift your cape from your elbow (rather than the shoulder), and push their attack up and out, as in Plate 102. As an aside, you can see that the hanging cape offers some additional defense to the side of your head when you perform this parry that you don't get with a dagger or open hand.

If your opponent thrusts to the outside, you can cover with your sword as you typically do, or you can cross-parry with your cloak as seen in Plates 103 and 104. Fabris is very clear that when doing so, you only move the hand, and do not raise your whole arm. This lets you keep sight of your opponent over the cloak, whereas if you lift your whole arm, you blind yourself. Again, this comes up in Plate 103.

This is getting pretty long, so let me summarize how you deal with cuts - you parry them with your sword as you typically do (because remember, interposing your arm is bad) but you support them with your cloak for additional defense. There are absolutely occasions where you're parrying with the cape, but in those situations you want to get the cape right to your opponent's hilt, where it's safer and you can effectively smother any blow they want to deliver.

You should consider cavazione over your opponent's sword, rather than underneath, to prevent your blade from fouling on your cape or your opponent's cape. Also, all of the above information is assuming a sword-foot forward stance, though Fabris notes that cape is very well suited to an off-foot forward stance, as the cape can protect the lower body very well.

There we go! Fabris on cloak. Now all the fencers who're going to Sommer Draw are all kinds of prepared! Helping!

Thursday, May 28, 2015

We're back! Fabris Plates 30 and 31!

Remember when I'd poke at some Fabris plates, and did that, and posted about it? Me too! Let's do that again, and roll in with Plates 30 and 31.

(Yeah, things got kind of crazy for me, and I lost a lot of free time in my brain. Now it's back, so good.)

Plate 30 has what Fabris calls "a wound of mandritto to the head against a third." For reference, a mandritto is a cut delivered from right-to-left. There are a number of sub-types, as you might expect, and Fabris only specifies the type of mandritto in one variation.

The first variation in Plate 30 has one fencer having found the other's sword to the outside. Fabris doesn't specify who has found who, and it really doesn't matter. The action really starts when the fencers both "lock blades" and our opponent starts pushing us to the outside. As soon as we feel that pressure, we yield to the pressure and deliver a cut from the wrist while keeping our hilt on top of the blade. Fabris notes that the opponent's blade will fall enough so that we can put our forte on their blade, holding it down, and thus prevent them from parrying the cut.

I may be missing some implicit information here, but I'm interpreting the delivery of the cut to be entirely on top of the blade - it's very similar to how Fabris wants us to avoid the blade entirely when a beat is delivered. Release your pressure, the opponent's blade falls, and you can deliver the cut while angulating your blade above theirs. Keeping your blade on top and your hilt by their blade is key, because you'll be using that to stuff their attempts to bring their blade back into play.

The second variation of Plate 30 is a good deal different, though. We find our opponent's blade on the inside. Our opponent performs a cavazione and pushes forward to strike from the outside. As they do this, we have turned our hand over to re-find their blade on the outside - but just "let the point fall" into a mandritto fendente, again keeping our hilt by our opponent's blade.

Sometimes it's just easier to drop a cut into your opponent's head than to bring your blade back into line and then push it that way, y'know?

Plate 31 returns us to what's probably more familiar territory for most rapier fighters, and more point work. The first variation starts with both fighters in Third, to the outside. We make an invitation to the outside, and our opponent takes it, moving into Second and striking while stepping with their right foot. Our response is to bail on parrying, perform a girata of the left foot while we cavazione to the inside (rolling our hand into Fourth), and striking.

The other way this wound could happen is if both fencers are on the inside. We move to find our opponent's sword, and they cavazione while turning their hand into Second (which is normally a really good idea). We continue our motion from finding our opponent's blade (and this is a really important detail - don't pause, just keep moving your blade) and perform a contracavazione with the girata and striking - all without touching our opponent's blade.

I really like Plate 31 - it's an interesting application of the fundamentals (Avoid blade contact! Don't pause! Strike in mezzo tempo! Your hilt to their blade!) but it reasserts points from earlier plates that you don't always need to be on top if you're doing things correctly. You want to be, sure, but striking with your blade angled downwards is fine if that's the most efficient way to close a line and to keep your point free of your opponent's blade.

I find performing a girata in earnest combat hard. That said, I think it's really one of those movements that you don't plan for, but just happens. It's worth pointing out how I see the differences in how Fabris illustrates it here than from how Capo Ferro illustrates it, though. Capo Ferro has a fairly extreme body twist, and the left foot is thrown way out there. Compared to Fabris, who doesn't have nearly as extreme a torso twist and keeps the feet much more together and under the body, it really seems to me like the girata of Fabris is one that can be much more easily recovered from. When I try to do it and actually succeed, it feels very much like I can continue to step forward from there and press my opponent. I don't remotely feel like that when I try to duplicate Capo Ferro's girata. I should try to see if it's a product of the opening body postures or what, because based solely on this, I really prefer how Fabris is doing them.

Tuesday, May 5, 2015

Cruddy Practices and Events and Getting Past Them

Pretty sure we've all had off events. Practice or event, pickups or tournament. I've been mulling them over lately, and I figured I'd toss out what's occurred to me, and people can chime in with what's worked for them, and we can all get some good ideas to try and turn cruddy times into productive improvement.

Besides, this might be old hat to a lot of people, but since I had to figure out how to deal with this more or less on my own, I figure that other folks might find it useful.

I think it's easier for me to do this when I'm coming away from pickups or practice bouts; I'm usually not nearly so dialed in as I am in a tournament with something on the line, so I feel like my brain has more cycles to pay attention to what I'm doing (or not doing, as the case may be). I'm probably the most self-critical fighter I know. In some ways, this means that I get to pay a lot of attention to a lot of little details about my fighting, and improve them. This is good! On the other hand, it means that I get really down on myself when things aren't working right. The bar I set for myself is, perhaps, unrealistically high. Oops.

Because of this, I think it's worth starting this discussion at the point where the fighting is going south, and it's starting to bother you. It's pretty easy for a feedback loop of frustration to start, and (as much as I'm terrible at doing this part) getting out of that is super important. Depending on the setting, I might take any number of actions to do this. Sometimes, I just call it a night a bit early. Other times, I'll armor down a bit and go do some teaching. I might even just go work on something simple that always needs attention, like footwork. In all of these cases, I'm making sure to just not do what I'm doing anymore. Give yourself a break, and eventually, some time to think.

The next part is the really hard part - if you're not fighting as well as you think you should be and you're getting frustrated, you have to figure out what specifically isn't working out for you. This can be more than one thing for sure, but be clear and concise. Examples might include:
- I'm not paying attention to distance.
- I'm off balance.
- My lunges aren't committed.
- My buckler isn't being active; it's just a stationary thing all the time.
- My disengages are huge.

These things don't need to be all encompassing, but you're looking for a number of the little issues which are adding to your frustration. I recommend nailing down some of these very quickly after you armor down, if you can. I find that when I'm getting deeply frustrated, the issues I come up with are either things that are ongoing issues that I'm already working on, or things that I know I shouldn't be having problems with but for some reason I'm just messing up. Write these down. If you have a teacher who's watching your fights, absolutely hit them up for their thoughts. Write those down, too.

Then - and this is the really important part - don't do anything until you've slept. No, seriously. Take that night's sleep and just let your brain work through what's been going on by itself on its own. This is super important. Your brain does a lot of work on things when it's not super active, and giving it time to do this is huge.

The next morning, take that list and come up with some drills for the next week. (You knew that drills would figure into this somehow, right?) They don't need to be expansive; you're looking to work on those specific things you wrote about. If the problems were things you've already been working on, you may already have drills that you're using for them. In that case, excellent! Make sure you fit them into your weekly rotation with a bit more prominence. If they're things that you just know you shouldn't be doing because you know better, then come up with something that you can do for five minutes in a drill session to remind your body and brain what's what.

Then go do them. Every day for a week.

Is five minutes a day for a week enough to train yourself a new skill? No, it really isn't. Is it enough to give yourself some progress on fixing a frustrating issue? Yeah, it really is. If it's still bothering you after a week, then you keep that drill in your rotation. If not, awesome, rotate it out and bring something else in.

So, yeah. That's what works for me. If there are better and more useful ways to deal with this type of thing, I'd love to hear them! (And I bet other people here will, too.)

Monday, April 20, 2015


In keeping with the trend lately of examining (or re-examining) fundamental concepts, I wanted to kick around some thoughts on tricks. Most of these are opinions I've held for a long time, but they've been put into a new context recently, so now I get to put these thoughts out here.

Usually when someone is describing a trick that they have, they're talking about one specific set of motions that they do that usually ends up with them striking their opponent. It's usually a set of motions that has a reasonably high success rate, or at least that the fighter perceives as a high success rate. It's a set of motions that they can train repeatedly, and can become very fast and smooth; they're basically setting up a macro that they can execute at whim.

If someone is describing a trick that someone else has, the definition is usually similar - a specific set of motions, a thing that they do, that works most of the time.

I think that both of these are problematic areas of thought to fall into. It's not the training that's the problem - most every fighter that I know has a number of go-to attacks or setups that they use, and a lot of those have turned into signature actions. This person's stutter step, that person's blade displacement on a lunge, that other person's wrist-roll on a cut. Those are all totally reasonable. The problem that I see coming up a lot lately is when the concept of the trick exists in a vacuum, and isn't based on sound fundamentals.

To put it another way, it's not the concept of a trick that I think is an issue, but it's the thought process behind it. If you don't understand what you're doing and why it works - if you can't describe how your trick is playing with measure, or deceiving the opponent, or whatever - then it's not adaptable. You're stuck with this one thing that you can do super well, sure, but it's not really adaptive if the situation changes. I think that the fighters I know who have a few bread and butter shots (and man, now I need a better term than "trick") but who really grasp the core concepts of fighting are insanely dangerous, because they can change up those shots on the fly.

Now that I've written this down, I'm not sure where else to take this (other than to say, "Hey! Learn your fundamentals and also be sure to drink your Ovaltine!") but I'll probably mull this over in my head more.

Thursday, April 9, 2015

The Economy of Tempo and Measure

It's time for more post-VISS rambling! Rather than talk about concrete technique type things, I'm in the mood to kick around some higher conceptual type things - specifically tempo, measure, the relationship between them, and what it means for the fighter.

I tend to work from the Italian framework of rapier theory. In general, this means that closer is better. If my opponent gives me a tempo to work with, I'm generally going to respond by closing. (Striking with my sword is closing of a sort, too. It's just a very final closing.) If I can't close safely, I want to set myself up to be able to do so. If I can ever avoid backing up, I will. (Ever notice how many actions in the Italian - and many other - manuals involve closing, and basically none involve giving ground? I heard some good theories about this from Tom Leoni - in short, if you're on a battlefield you don't want to back up because the ground is littered with tripping hazards and falling is death. In a duel, leaving the circle is losing. Not stepping into areas that you don't have eyes on can dramatically limit these issues.)

The problem with being close to my opponent - ideally close enough to strike with an extension or at most a "firm footed lunge" - is that any tempo I work inside gets shorter and shorter the closer I get. In terms of keeping myself alive, I don't like working inside a short tempo. I want more time to think, to react, and to respond to the attack. If I'm the one doing the attacking then a short tempo is awesome, but the first thing we need to be concerned about is defense, and only then do we consider offense, so there we go.

This leads to something which I've started to mentally refer to as the economy of tempo and measure. They seem to work on an inverse relationship; if you want more of one, you're giving up something from the other. There are some ways you can impact the exchange rate for specific actions, but you're still working against that relationship no matter what. We've all played with this, whether we really understood what was happening or not. Any time you lean or step back as you parry, you're selling off distance to increase the length of the tempo you're responding in. If you close with your attack, you're selling down that tempo to buy back some of that distance.

The more I mull this idea over, the more it gets increasingly clear just how much these two concepts encompass so much of the fight. This was pretty obvious to me before, but now it's become obvious in the way that the sun is kind of a thing that you notice in the sky.

Partly because of an increased mental emphasis on doing drills correctly, I'm looking at setting up exchanges to be what I want them to be. That's far from universally successful for me, but the point is that one of the keys to this is understanding how what you're doing will be impacted by the tempo and measure you're working within, and how it will impact them in turn. If I'm closing, I want to set things up so that whatever my opponent does will require a far longer tempo than what I plan on doing. Sure, realistically, there'll be people who just have insanely fast hand speed, and that's fine - but if you're able to play with the fundamentals really well, that doesn't matter because they just need to take such a huge tempo to strike you that even if they're speeding through the motion, you still have time to strike them safely.

This really feels to me like one of those Matrix moments. Once you've started to see the source code, you can't unsee it. This doesn't remotely mean that body mechanics, moving in good order, or any other fundamentals are unimportant, or even less important. Rather, it highlights the importance of training all of those things so that you can perform them so efficiently that you can shave down the tempo you need, or have a much more fine control over measure.