There was a passage I was reading today that reminded me of this video and I would like your take on it. It is on page 226 in Academy of The Sword (Chapter 15 after circle 15). 'But concerning the pauses that we require in the midst of the battle, it seems to them that they have good reason to argue. For they object that every moment that one does not seize and every eye blink in which one holds back, are indeed mistakes for one is not able to put the enemy in disorder, except by so much quickness that he does not know which part of us he ought to attack. They also object that if we try to do anything else then we will not be able to do anything useful, neither in attack, nor defense as slow movements will not be able to raise defenses to counter so many quick movements , which pass one way and another, and arrive before one is able to stop them.' This to me is a beautiful articulation of the Italian way of going about fencing and in particular the understanding of tempo which is different from the way Thibault does it. Fabris I think would say that lifting up your foot is a tempo so in this respect maybe Thibault is in dialogue with Fabris. I think Fabris would also say that holding your foot up for a period of time is also a tempo. The response to this criticism that Thibault gives is, 'I replay that it is not our intention to prize slowness alone and to devalue swiftness, but rather one ought to have it's proper place, and so indeed should the other;... the great preparations are not to be feared but rather the great attacks, and in order to accomplish the latter it is only necessary to be sure of 𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐜𝐡.' So the thing that Thibault is prizing and is sacrificing for seems to be having that good approach. Which I think is probably one of the principles of Thibault, 'That which begins poorly cannot have a good end.' (Rule is from page 69 of Chapter 3). Thibault seems to have sacrificed the ability to punish the opponents at Larga for what he sees as a better approach. Do you think this sacrifice was worth it?
What you have written here is fucking RAD I absolutely agree, one of the hardest parts of fencing at the moment for me is how easy it is to punish at larga while doing Italian fencing, and how difficult it is to do the same while standing upright. I don't know which is better, the running theory Woody Craig has is that Thibault becomes a strong meta play against that fencing ONCE everyone is playing that fencing regularly enough and it's widespread enough, but before that occurs, it's actually going to struggle to gain it's foothold in greater fencing because there is so much of it that may just not occur outside of a few small pockets of fencing around the world. The tempo actions themselves, I absolutely agree, and I think it has to do with how much bodyweight has to get disrupted to get that lift, The difference to lifting your right foot when all your weight is on your left foot, and lifting your right foot with varying percentages of your own bodyweight on that foot, where you will have to spend a slight moment adjusting before and during the lift, and that can create the action of commitment that they can blast through, combine that with the swords touching and the swords being found or not, and it tightens it up to not be as spooky, which I think is a really cool strength that Thibault has, that then you can develop not using those tools easier, fabris' fencing has gotten more intuitive because I CAN play the wrestle/bind/sword rub game some comfortably and I can feel what I must do if I'm effectively taking away those second sets of eyes and not touching. This was rad!
What do you think about the Neapolitans? They have read both the Spanish and the Italian (like Thibault) and believe they have crafted the greatest fusion out there. (In particular Marcelli).
This is very funny, I have read through that lineage up to Parise and I am quite fond of the whole progression, but I don't find anything new that I wouldn't find in most fencing texts other than it being their flavour of an action with a few changes that are not exceptionally profound. The intentional restriction without discussion and the ideal to do it to their style became more apparent as you go in, and differentiation from other fencers and their styles became a core value, which in its own, gets in the way of just raw improvement and the ceiling of ability. I also really adore my dear friend LV Fontain's rendition of marcelli and his approach has helped inspire edits and changes in my own fencing that I cherish, but his rendition is also through the lens of being taught by Chris holtzman who also translated more than just marcelli, and there are data points that he obviously cared about that help make it holistically better, and LV has elaborated upon that in his own journey.
There was a passage I was reading today that reminded me of this video and I would like your take on it. It is on page 226 in Academy of The Sword (Chapter 15 after circle 15).
'But concerning the pauses that we require in the midst of the battle, it seems to them that they have good reason to argue. For they object that every moment that one does not seize and every eye blink in which one holds back, are indeed mistakes for one is not able to put the enemy in disorder, except by so much quickness that he does not know which part of us he ought to attack. They also object that if we try to do anything else then we will not be able to do anything useful, neither in attack, nor defense as slow movements will not be able to raise defenses to counter so many quick movements , which pass one way and another, and arrive before one is able to stop them.'
This to me is a beautiful articulation of the Italian way of going about fencing and in particular the understanding of tempo which is different from the way Thibault does it. Fabris I think would say that lifting up your foot is a tempo so in this respect maybe Thibault is in dialogue with Fabris. I think Fabris would also say that holding your foot up for a period of time is also a tempo.
The response to this criticism that Thibault gives is, 'I replay that it is not our intention to prize slowness alone and to devalue swiftness, but rather one ought to have it's proper place, and so indeed should the other;... the great preparations are not to be feared but rather the great attacks, and in order to accomplish the latter it is only necessary to be sure of 𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐜𝐡.' So the thing that Thibault is prizing and is sacrificing for seems to be having that good approach. Which I think is probably one of the principles of Thibault, 'That which begins poorly cannot have a good end.' (Rule is from page 69 of Chapter 3).
Thibault seems to have sacrificed the ability to punish the opponents at Larga for what he sees as a better approach. Do you think this sacrifice
was worth it?
What you have written here is fucking RAD
I absolutely agree, one of the hardest parts of fencing at the moment for me is how easy it is to punish at larga while doing Italian fencing, and how difficult it is to do the same while standing upright.
I don't know which is better, the running theory Woody Craig has is that Thibault becomes a strong meta play against that fencing ONCE everyone is playing that fencing regularly enough and it's widespread enough, but before that occurs, it's actually going to struggle to gain it's foothold in greater fencing because there is so much of it that may just not occur outside of a few small pockets of fencing around the world.
The tempo actions themselves, I absolutely agree, and I think it has to do with how much bodyweight has to get disrupted to get that lift,
The difference to lifting your right foot when all your weight is on your left foot, and lifting your right foot with varying percentages of your own bodyweight on that foot, where you will have to spend a slight moment adjusting before and during the lift, and that can create the action of commitment that they can blast through, combine that with the swords touching and the swords being found or not, and it tightens it up to not be as spooky, which I think is a really cool strength that Thibault has, that then you can develop not using those tools easier, fabris' fencing has gotten more intuitive because I CAN play the wrestle/bind/sword rub game some comfortably and I can feel what I must do if I'm effectively taking away those second sets of eyes and not touching. This was rad!
Also, message me on Facebook, Instagram or email
What do you think about the Neapolitans? They have read both the Spanish and the Italian (like Thibault) and believe they have crafted the greatest fusion out there. (In particular Marcelli).
This is very funny, I have read through that lineage up to Parise and I am quite fond of the whole progression, but I don't find anything new that I wouldn't find in most fencing texts other than it being their flavour of an action with a few changes that are not exceptionally profound. The intentional restriction without discussion and the ideal to do it to their style became more apparent as you go in, and differentiation from other fencers and their styles became a core value, which in its own, gets in the way of just raw improvement and the ceiling of ability. I also really adore my dear friend LV Fontain's rendition of marcelli and his approach has helped inspire edits and changes in my own fencing that I cherish, but his rendition is also through the lens of being taught by Chris holtzman who also translated more than just marcelli, and there are data points that he obviously cared about that help make it holistically better, and LV has elaborated upon that in his own journey.