Skip to main content

Some thoughts on offensive v's defensive tactics

"Attack is the secret of defense; defense is the planning of an attack"  ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Just to clarify my understanding of terms, as I see it, being offensive or defensive is about who takes that first step from out of range to into range, whomever takes that step is being offensive and whomever waits to receive that step is being defensive. I then agree with Meyer that broadly people fall into four types based on who steps into range and then the type of action they do in range. So this means either acting Before or After in the first action and then acting Before or After on the second action. 

This breaks down into four behavior types:

1. Acts Before, then acts Before
2. Acts Before, then acts After
3. Acts After, then acts Before
4. Acts After, then acts After

Sounds weird but I think it is shorthand for:

1. This person steps into measure behind an action that blocks their opponent & takes center, they then act immediately to strike an opening.
2. This person steps into measure behind an action that blocks the opponent & takes center, then they wait for their opponent to try to come out from under this and seize the now very open opening
3. This person waits for the opponent to step into measure, they however take the center line and strike to an opening 
4.  This person waits for the opponent to step into measure, they work to keep the center and strike when their opponent tries to seize it again 

Meyer I think breaks it down with a weighting against acting in the After, or defensive, into:

1. Acts Before, then acts Before (relying on speed) - Wrathful
2. Acts Before, then acts Before well (relying on guarded actions) - Cunning
3. Acts Before, then acts After (keeps the center until a perfect opening appears) - Judicious
4a Acts After, then acts Before (Counter attacking) - Sharp
4b Acts After, then acts After - Foolish

Not surprising really because the whole tradition could be characterized by this weighting:

"Who goes after hewing, He deserves little joy in his art.

Gloss: This is when you come to him with the pre-fencing, then you shall not stand still and look after his hews, waiting for what he fences against you. Know that all fencers that look and wait on another’s hews and will do nothing other than parrying deserve such very little joy in their art, since they are destroyed and become thereby struck."

Interesting to compare to Silver, who breaks it down weighting against acting in the Before:

"3 actions by which you may endanger him & go free yourself:

1. The first is to strike or thrust at him, the instant when he has gained you the place by his coming in.
2. The second is to ward, & after to strike him or thrust from it, remembering your governors
3. The third is to slip a little back & to strike or thrust after him."

1. Acts Instantly (counter-attacking)
2. Acts After, then acts Before (parry & riposte)
3. Acts After, then acts Before (traveling after)


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…