top of page
Writer's pictureJason Bright

Paradoxes of Defense (pt. 9): Mirroring your Adversary

Of striking and thrusting both together.


Many firmly believe that when facing an opponent of superior skill, the best approach is to continually mirror their strikes and thrusts. This strategy aims to equalize the fight, allowing the less skilled fighter to gain an advantage comparable to their more adept counterpart. However, when their swords are longer than their opponent's, they consider this a substantial advantage. They maintain that even an inch can prove lethal. With a significant sword length advantage, they are confident that by precisely matching their opponent's strikes and thrusts, they will consistently inflict harm upon the one with the shorter sword, while escaping unscathed due to their extended reach.[1]


These assertions, however, reflect the rhetoric of those who discuss Robin Hood's archery without having wielded a bow themselves. Striking or thrusting in perfect synchrony with a skilled opponent isn't within the capacity of the inexperienced. Skilled combatants always operate within the precise timing of true actions, causing the unskilled to miss out on both timing and position. Consequently, the inexperienced fighter is perpetually forced to anticipate their opponent's next move, whether it involves striking, thrusting, or feinting. Should the unskilled fighter choose to strike or thrust during a feinting action, their timing isn't synchronized with the opponent's, making their actions ineffective. While they may claim to have struck or thrust ahead, it serves no purpose, as their actions during the feinting sequence fall short in timing, causing their strikes or thrusts to be inadequately placed.


In that moment, the unskilled fighter finds themselves lacking both the opportunity and the positioning required to deliver a successful strike. As commonly stated, an unskilled individual attempting to match their strikes or thrusts with a skilled opponent must first carefully observe the skilled fighter's actions and anticipate their timing. This invariably compels the unskilled fighter to allow the skilled individual to initiate the first move and engage in their chosen action, be it a blow or thrust.[2] The undeniable veracity of this argument becomes apparent. Now, consider whether it's feasible for an unskilled fighter to strike or thrust simultaneously with a skilled opponent. However, the skilled fighter can certainly manage to strike and thrust in harmony with the unskilled adversary. This stems from the fact that the unskilled fighter operates on false timings, which, being excessively drawn out to correspond with the true timings, permits the skilled fighter, who operates on true timings, to achieve a precise convergence despite the unskilled fighter being the initial instigator and initiating their chosen action, be it a blow or thrust. Due to the brevity of the true timings, the skilled fighter can manipulate the timing to align both actions perfectly. In an ideal combat scenario, two skilled fighters never simultaneously strike or thrust, as they meticulously control the timing and positioning to prevent such an occurrence.[3]


On numerous occasions, two unskilled individuals find themselves accidentally striking or thrusting simultaneously. This occurrence is purely coincidental, as they lack an understanding of their actions or how they align. The underlying factors behind these chance encounters are as follows: At times, two instances of false timings converge and create a harmonious timing, and on other occasions, a true timing coincides with a false timing, resulting in a precise alignment. Furthermore, two instances of true timings can also coincide to create a fitting timing. All these instances transpire due to their unfamiliarity with the genuine timing and positioning in combat.


______________________________

[1] The concept of mirroring your adversary is to strike or thrust simultaneously as your opponent to displace their blade and hit them in a single tempo. This concept is taught as an ideal defense in the Bolognese fencing tradition. It is to attack into your opponent's attack. George Silver rightly states that this tactic should not be taught to the inexperienced fencer because it takes excellent judgment to pull it off successfully. The Germanic longsword (KDF) tradition emphasizes this idea as well. The idea is to cut at your opponent’s incoming cut to catch and hopefully displace it. It’s about counter-cutting or mirroring your opponent's action. If you mirror your opponent's cut and then meet in the middle, hopefully you'll have seized the advantageous blade positioning for a simultaneous off-setting and counter. This often requires that the movement of the hands are then tied to the motion of the body and the feet which makes this action slower than a simple parry and riposte and the one mirroring is exerting the same amount of force as the initiator and ultimately this tactic is unreliable. A more conservative parry and riposte is both faster and reliable.

[2] Once again Silver is defining what "mirroring your adversary" means: It is waiting for the action of your opponent (cut or thrust) and subsequently delivering a corresponding cut or thrust which mirrors the same action. This again is not for the inexperienced fighter and relying on this trick will prove ineffectual against skilled fighters.

[3] In a true bout between two skilled fencers, it is rare to see these mirroring actions occur simply because both fencers are too adept at controlling their distance and timing. Silver states that the skilled fencer can pull this tactic off against an unskilled fencer, an unskilled fencer cannot pull it off against a skilled fencer, and two skilled fencers don't allow for this to happen at all. Further, the initiator will have the advantage if he is skilled and in true times whereas the mirroring fencer will counter in a lesser true time (slower) or in a false time altogether.

28 views0 comments

Kommentare


bottom of page