-
Title
-
Why Not a Straight Lunge?
-
Date
-
December 1939
-
volume
-
4
-
issue
-
7
-
page start
-
6
-
page end
-
8
-
content
-
en
Why Not Try a Straight Lunge?
In baseball, have you ever seen a runner on first easing off toward second base? The right-handed pitcher with his back toward first base appears indifferent to the runner or how far off-plate he goes. Such, however, is not the case. Suddenly he whirls, throws to first and the runner is out. There was no luck in this. It was a mathematical certainty based upon timing, distance, and speed. The pitcher might have appeared indifferent to the runner, but the third baseman and the catcher had been very alert to his position. Let the runner advance one inch beyond a certain known distance and the pitcher or third baseman signals the pitcher and Mr. Base Runner is a sure "out."
We admire the coordination among players which makes such plays possible. We give praise to the spectacle of such a play and overlook the study which made the play possible. We know that a ball can travel faster than a runner. Therefore, no runner can beat the ball back to first base once he has transgressed a certain limit by as little as one inch. The same thing is applicable to fencing. Let an opponent come one inch closer to you than he should, or you creep in one inch closer to him than he should allow, and a straight lunge will beat his parry every time.
How quickly can you parry a straight lunge? Very quickly, you think, and you are right, but have you added the time you need to see the necessity for the parry? That is important, and we shall test its importance with a simple experiment. Have a friend hold a fencing glove against a wall, fingers down, at about sword height. Stand back from the wall with your foil pointed at the glove's finger. How far away? Only an inch. Now have your friend drop the glove without warning and try to hit any part of it before it passes your foil. The word "try" is used purposely here, for that is all you will do. You can make money on this trick betting on the glove nine times out of ten. This experiment should prove to you that a lot can happen before you can start a foil into action.
If we add this starting time or inertia of a parry to the parry itself, we have a sizeable total, insofar at least as the split-second totals in fencing are concerned. This starting time may vary by considerable amounts within the same fencer depending upon whether he is on the defensive and set to parry, or whether he is intent upon an attack at that moment and, therefore, temporarily asleep defensively. It may also vary considerably within the same fencer from day to day with discouraging unpredictability. It is this variation in reaction time which accounts in great measure for our being "on" or "off" from day to day or from competition to competition. It, of course, varies considerably between individuals.
This article is limited primarily to the efficacy of a straight lunge. Thus far we have dealt with the problem of the defense and why that defense, which is apparently simple, contains difficulties. Now let us take up the straight lunge itself and what we mean by it. We may be going contrary to general fencing vocabulary, but we mean a direct lunge into the opponent's open line without a preliminary advance. It may be necessary to disengage or even coupe into the open line, or the line may be open for a lunge without a disengage. For our purpose, we, therefore, consider any direct or simple lunge, or a lunge with disengage, as a "straight lunge."
If we are correct in our contention that a straight lunge is as fast or faster than a parry, then there must be much greater speed in a lunging foil than in a parrying foil. To arrive on the target, a lunging foil must move forward from between three to four feet in less time than a parrying foil can move from 4 to 12 inches. Is it possible that we may have here a ratio comparable to that between the baseball and the runner? Perhaps not, but we do know that a lunging foil travels faster than the lunge itself. We would all be very much surprised to know just how fast a foil point went forward at its maximum in a lunge.
A foil has two sources of power, one from the extension of the arm and the other from the push of the body which is being propelled forward by the straightening of the back leg. All of us can testify as to the terrific speed in a foil merely from the extension of the arm. This is evident from any direct riposte. We also know that a well-executed lunge can be fast. Now blend the two, and we have a greater speed than either the lunge speed or the extension speed, although less than the sum total of both.
The classical French School may rise up in wrath at the implication of the above paragraph. This school insists that the arm be extended first and the lunge start at near-termination of the extension, resulting in a constant foil speed. The modern French and Italian Schools, whether they are willing to say so in writing or not, practice a straight lunge by starting the arm and front leg forward together. The start is slow and harmless-looking; it gathers speed as it goes and ends at top speed. It was what Warren Dow meant in his article, "Fundamental Foil Training" in the July issue, when he said, "The last action of an attack should literally explode." Your classical French foilsman would shudder and murmur, "Bent arm attack," if he saw this done. However, the fact is that it is being done and very effectively.
Do not take this to mean that every attack is executed in this way. This applies only to the straight lunge as we mean it in this article. For attacks with deception such as the double and the one-two, the arm must be fully extended before the lunge. This is necessary to draw the parry which the second motion is to deceive.
There are two arguments frequently used against the bent arm attack: one is that you have no right of way until your arm is extended and, therefore, any stop thrust would be against you; and the other is that it is dangerous. An important element of the modern straight lunge is its surprise, not only in time but in intent. It comes so fast that a stop thrust must be planned in advance. Even so, opposition just short of blade contact can be practiced so that even the threat of a stop-thrust can be eliminated. There is no more danger in this direct lunge than in any other lunge. There is no jab or poke to this attack. The arm is straight when the point lands. It hasn't been straight for as great a part of the attack as before, but it is straight, and there is none of the jab which makes the real bent-arm attack taboo.
We have advocated the straight lunge for point-making usage. There are several reasons for this:
1. It is the most direct and fastest attack that a fencer can make. After all, a straight line is the shortest distance between two points.
2. It is easy to judge. Your judge will see a hit from a straight lunge more easily than any other touch. You may fail to receive credit for some good touches made by more complicated methods since the movements that fooled your opponent may also have fooled the judge. A straight lunge carries no element to fool a judge.
3. It is daring. Few opponents give you credit for being able to hit them with a straight lunge. They consider a straight lunge as risky for you and not for them. Therefore, they do not expect you to try it. They usually anticipate something more complicated. This helps you, for they tend to hesitate in their parry, believing that your action is only a feint.
4. It is embarrassing. A hit with a straight lunge undermines your opponent's morale. He loses his confidence if you show him that you can hit him with the first thing in the book.
5. It limits your opponent's offensive. With a straight lunge threatening at all times, he dares not fool around but must confine himself to close play. You may thus have cut his bag of tricks in half.
The straight lunge may be used defensively as well as offensively. Many fencers overlook its potentialities as a defensive weapon. Let us explain. An opponent is pressing you hard. He is intent upon the attack and your retreats or parries do not seem to alter his intention. He has shown ability to hit and temporarily seems to have taken your number. In other words, he has the psychological upper hand, and you are at a loss for the moment as to any plan or tactics. Why not make a straight lunge every time he seems about set to come at you—not necessarily to make a touch, but rather to disrupt his plan, to confuse him, to gain time? Just as Joe Louis uses a straight left to annoy an opponent set to attack, you may use a straight lunge to force your opponent to hesitate in his plans.
Some of our readers, professionals and amateurs alike, may say that this article thus far has been interesting and theoretically correct (we hope), but pooh-pooh it insofar as actual practice is concerned. "It sounds well, but who is going to fall for a straight attack? Anyone is crazy to risk a straight lunge against a parry-riposte." To refute any accusations of being only a rocking-chair fencing philosopher, we should like to cite a classical example of its use and analyze its use among some of our leading amateur foilsmen.
We consider Gustavo Marzi of Italy as the finest and most consistently strong amateur foilsman today. His technique is perfect, his execution is machine-like. He is versatile and resourceful. In the 1936 Olympics, he was faced by a situation most unusual for him. His opponent was leading him with a score of 4-0. All of his well-planned and well-executed attacks had failed to score. He was apparently up against an opponent whose offense and defense that particular day were better than his own. He did not lose the bout. He made the next five touches with straight lunges proving, I hope, that the straight lunge is not too elementary to be used by or to be effective against the best foilsmen today.
Our own American senior foilsmen are not above its use. On the contrary, they recognize its great value and depend upon it more than Novices and Juniors do. The most effective attack of Norman Lewis, National Foil Champion, is his straight lunge. If he can get within striking distance of his opponent, Lewis will invariably make his touch with a direct attack. He does not even bother to conceal his intent but is able through fast and deceptive legwork to conceal his timing so well that he steals distance and lunges before his opponent is willing to believe that it is not just another feint. He is also patient and can wear down an opponent's alertness with a series of body feints prior to the actual attack.
Warren Dow was the most successful foilsman in Metropolitan competition during the past season. He carried away first place undefeated in all four of the individual competitions he entered in New York City. An analysis of his touches would show that more than half of them were made with straight lunges—either in time through the opponent’s defense or in countertime into the start of an opponent’s offense. These, plus the many stop and time thrusts he made, show conclusively how much this experienced foilsman believes in and depends upon a straight-extended foil plus timing.
Daniel Bukantz, ranked #6, uses an attack very similar to Lewis’. He has not the latter’s deceptive footwork, but he disguises his intent better with a wider variety of other attacks and employs fast fleches as well as lunges for his direct attacks.
Jose de Capriles, Individual 3-Weapon Champion, has a highly developed sense of timing. Being one of the tallest men in fencing today, he does not need to concentrate upon distance as much as the others. He is patient and waits—and waits—for the right “time” and then is out straight and far for a direct touch. His long reach also makes it possible for him to use a simpler adaptation of the same principle—the straight thrust. Should an opponent, intent upon gaining distance upon Jose, come within his tall shadow, we see a fast straightening of the arm with or without a half lunge, and that opponent is added to a long list of embarrassed predecessors.
We do not intend to review the entire Senior list and shall, therefore, mention only two others: John Huffman and Hugh Alessandroni. We mention them particularly because they are definite exceptions. Neither makes any noticeable use of straight lunges. They each prefer to prepare their openings rather than accept those already offered. Each has special equipment for this more difficult task: Huffman with a fast and strong balestre and a well-mixed variety of changes, beats, and pressures; Alessandroni with the fastest hand in amateur foil today, which is good offensively in deception attacks or defensively in false or secondary-intention attacks.
We must now come back to our younger fencers and address them more directly. In practicing straight lunges in your lessons and exercises, do not look upon them merely as drill. Remember that, although they are the first thing you were taught, they are also used effectively in every competition by men who could spot you three touches every bout. Get over the idea that the straight lunge is too simple for practical use and that every attack must be complicated. Remember your first lesson in plane geometry where you proved that a straight line was the shortest distance between two points and appreciate fencing’s acceptance of that truth in its own first lesson.
The use of the straight lunge is not going to change you overnight into a Marzi. You are going to become very disappointed with it when it fails to win for you, as it will fail. That failure will be due to your poor sense of timing, and after trying and failing with poorly-timed straight lunges you will want to put them aside as suicidal. Do so in competition, if necessary, but resolve to perfect your timing in the meantime. When practicing free play or bouting in the salle, concentrate on some straight attacks. Don’t tell your partner what you plan to do but see if you cannot “steal” a few straight touches when he is napping. Analyze your failures to see whether your timing was poor, your legs were lazy, your arm came out too soon and awoke your partner’s parry too early, or a combination of these. This concentration with one purpose is good fun and wonderful training. Mix it up a bit so that your partner won’t be all set for just the one thing and don’t care if he hits you more times than you hit him. You will get more pleasure and good out of the few times you hit him, as intended, than he will get out of the results of haphazard fancy.
And now we come to an important discovery you should make during this practice. In fact, it is so important that it should have been featured earlier in this essay. Give it just heed. You will find that while you are standing in good guard, waiting, shifting distance and watching for just the right moment to lunge at your partner, most of the attacks he throws at you will rattle off your blade harmlessly. You will find yourself safer from his attacks while concentrating upon your offense than had you been concentrating upon your defense. A crazy statement like this certainly demands explanation, and here it is. You were so intent upon hitting him that you ignored all movements of his that didn’t threaten your actual target. In other words, you withheld your parry and ceased to bite on every will-of-the-wisp feint your opponent made. You subconsciously did what the good fencers do consciously: ignored the false feints. You were intent on distance primarily and, therefore, probably stepped back when your opponent started. Any complicated attack was futile against you. You are theoretically hittable by only one type of attack—a simple attack, such as another straight lunge or a beat-lunge. In general, therefore, a fencer intent upon making a straight lunge may be said to be invulnerable to any type of attack more complicated than the one he is planning to make himself. By confining your thoughts to the straight lunge, you will, at the same time, confine your opponent’s effectiveness to the same simplicity. This is a fencing axiom that, unfortunately, is overlooked by a majority of the amateurs and professionals today. It is, in our opinion, so valuable that we believe that any foilsman who practices the straight lunge for defensive and offensive purposes, studies the results and primary reasons for those results, and absorbs the real feeling for basic swordplay which these practices offer will find his foils-manship so improved that he will begin winning competitions in which he otherwise could not have hoped to place.
—D.E.
