Skip to main content

Some thoughts on "Judgement" and the "Initiative"

"There is no doubt but that the Honorable exercise of the Weapon is made right perfect by means of two things, to wit: Judgment and Force: Because by the one, we know the manner and time to handle the weapon (how, or whatsoever occasion serves:) And by the other we have the power to execute therewith, in due time with advantage." Di Grassi, The true Art of Defense

Following on from this post I thought I'd put some thoughts around about reaction time or "judgement".

Speed is composed of two elements: movement speed and reaction speed. Most historical sources are aware of this distinction referring to movements of the body and your "judgement" or "reason." Improving the physical action is relatively easy: you work until you become faster. However this is of little use if you do the wrong action. Therefore being fast is also largely about thinking fast and forming the correct action. This is the subject of serious concern in many treatises because fencing is complex, it has both complex stimuli and complex reactions to those stimuli. It's not like Sprinting where you have a simple stimulus (the gun goes "bang") and a simple decision (go/don't go). The more complex the stimuli and more responses that are possible the longer the decisions process and the more important this is to the sport.

I'm going to slightly tangent here to have a ramble about the concept of initiative. I usually talk about the initiative in a very careless way but it's understood that whomever is dominating the fight has "the initiative" and letting the other person "lead" equates to "loosing" the initiative. But in general I have tended to equate who is moving first with who has the initiative. Surely the first mover is the faster, therefore they must be leading? I'll illustrate why this is incorrect with an example: press an opponent from the Onset and then, when they're flustered, pause at long measure to give them opportunity to attack an deliberately exposed opening, then deliver the prepared counterattack into the anticipated action. In this example I would argue that you have maintained the initiative throughout but have allowed your opponent to act first in the middle segment; you have simply varied the timing.

The point behind this is that it is not the first mover who dominates the fight but the first thinker. In other words: the first person to accurately evaluate the situation and select the optimal movement has the "initiative". Of course, as I covered previously, if you move really slowly then thinking time becomes unimportant however once you are conditioned to act at intensity thinking fast can take significantly longer than moving fast. Watching an experienced fencer lazily work a less experienced fencer into a frenzy of activity by seemingly always to be in the right place, at the right time with the right action is demonstrating the advantage thinking fast against simply moving fast.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Kit mod: heavy sparring glove 2

This is a follow on to heavy sparring gloves and SPES arm protectors.

Finally: a pretty good HEMA glove.

Essentially I've created this final stage by removing the cuff from the gauntlet and attaching Velcro so the SPES arm & elbow protection attaches to the gauntlet. The Velcro attaches under the lip of the arm protection providing a solid join between the pieces.

My photography is lame but I hope you get the idea:



Good protection.

I would say that this setup has good protection from injury from sparring blows from fingers to elbow. Against full force blows it takes it down from injury to some mild discomfort and possibly light bruising, against moderate blows you feel some pressure with no discomfort. The fingers are where I've invested the heaviest protection but there is still some room for improvement.


Light weight

Because the weight is distributed along the length of the arm rather than at the wrist/hands end and because they can fit quite tightly to your body they seem…

Halberd Waster

Several times through my historical martial arts career I've got it into my head that I'd like to do halberd. However, the issues with a suitable waster have tended to put me off, specifically creating anything that can be used at something approaching full intention. The issue is that if you make the head from the usual materials (steel, aluminium, wood, leather etc) you have to exercise extreme caution at very slow speed because all you've made is a giant heavy mace on the end of a 6ft lever.

Recently I was working on making foam swords for another side project and while doing this it occurred to me that foam was the obvious solution to the halberd head issue. Pretty quickly I developed this simple waster.

The head is cut from EVA foam matting. This material is importantly both ultra light and pretty robust. To get a good strength I cut two head shapes out and stuck them together. The bracket to attach the head to the pole is just PVC piping with a slot cut into it for th…

Absolutely no absolutes

The more I study and learn of historical fighting, and the more I teach, the more I become careful in throwing around "absolutes" in terms of technique. I find that to say that something is "wrong" is a sub-optimal way of thinking about fencing that hinders development. Rather I like to highlight that everything is situational, i.e. with a proper understanding of the principles of fencing that there is often a time and a place where a particular technique is optimal and that you should not completely discount anything.

For example:

(and I'd like to make it clear that I'm not being negative on these examples, I liked and remembered both these videos I'm just using them to illustrate a pedagogical mindset.)

In this interesting video, the view is put forward that you should cut and step at the same pace to ensure that your hand and body land together. This is so that you cut with maximum strength and for reasons of balance.  The idea of not stepping and cu…