Thank you so much for your wonderful videos Maître D'Armes Crown! I have incorporated this concept explicitly into my Eskrima (Filipino Martial Arts) classes after watching this video. I have never really understood "right of way" for exactly the reason you outline. It sounded arbitrary. But what to give "priority" to is a fantastic way to explain the concept. Your video helped me make sense of why it exists in European fencing, and I think it is a concept that is often lacking, and really valuable to incorporate, in FMA.
This man should be teaching a Master Class of philosophy at Caimbridge University. The Levels he speaks on are top tier. Fencing being a beginner level.
11:55 as a former kendoka it was a very important exception - same goes for maternal instinct ( but more likley in battle not duel) I appreciate your work - thank you for the lession
Hi, it makes sense the way you explain it, it would work if people looked at what the blade is doing, but unfortunately, they aren't. Especially the first part of "the attacker is counted as touched" happens to be often ignored, at least in historical fencing where we don't even have electrification to show that the guy who held the line touched first.
Thanks for your comment. This is a common misconception. It doesn’t matter who “touches first.” What matters is who has the priority. For example: You can make a stop hit against a simple attack and touch first in real time, but not in fencing time. The fact that you may stab the attacker a moment before he stabs you at the conclusion of his lunge is completely irrelevant. If the people in your historical fencing group don’t understand the principle of priority, or if they are so dishonest that they do not freely acknowledge hits against themselves, then an electrical scoring apparatus isn’t going to help you. The electrical apparatus only determines the materiality of the hit. It does not analyze the phase. If the President is calling the phrase based on which light goes on first, he is utterly incompetent (or cheating) and should be replaced immediately. BTW, if a person needs the electrical scoring device to know what happened, that person does not know how to fence. It would be like watching a basketball game and not knowing if the guy who just slam-dunked the ball scored a basket until you look at the electronic scoreboard. I once officiated at a tournament during a thunderstorm that resulted in a power outage. Fortunately, it was during the day, so there was plenty of light to see. We finished the two final rounds without a hitch using judges. -AAC
The problem is, these rules only really make sense from the "combat optimization" viewpoint if you are significantly better and more concerned about geting wounded and avoiding that, than the possibility of actually dying. If you have 50-50 chances of survival fighting this way, but 70-30 chances of survival if you, for example, sacrifice your left forearm, than the +20% of survival may offset the cripled hand. And if you are worse than your oponent, your only realistic option of survival may be through some sacrifice. On top of that, the whole thing may not be voluntary. With the "parry-riposte" mindset, any partially deflected/avoided blow followed by direct hit in repost will mean death for the attacker and "only" a wound for the defender, even if the defender tried to do everything right according to the priority - therefore, it really did not give the attacker the right he thought he has. Plus, in compound attack, if the attacker confuses the defender to the point that he cant reasonably defend, the priority logic breaks again, because you are on one hand rellying on the defense response and on the other hand confusing your oponent to the point he can not execute it. And the next defense response if I am too confused to parry is to make space by extending my sword forward (and thus forcing the attacker to stop attacking, because he will throw himself on my blade if he continues the attack). In short, if the attacker attacks in such a confusing way that it does not trigger my defense response and throws himself at my blade in the process...
There are cases in English duels where the protagonists died un duel. But later on the "winner" also died from an unknown belly wound that as the record stated the fat closed the wound". The "winner" went home and fell asleep and passed on while resting. When the autopsy was performed the body cavity was full of coagulated blood. The opponent's blade had pierced the descending aorta . So there were no winners. This shows how dangerous duelling was. Also that the lunge is more deadly than a slash. Records also show that two fencers went home with terrific wounds but a thrust showed that the lunge to a critical spot almost always died. Fights are the closest humans come to anarchy, it is anyone's game. The one that is more practiced, and cautious has the greater chance of winning. So there is a difference between just being practiced and well practiced where moments are set in muscle memory. This is preferable. When one is in the middle of fence, off and de The learning curve is what one knows is what one will use. School is out. It's literally do and live, or die. Lesson reiterated in video. Excellent work.
Very interesting and detailed explanation, thank you 😀 I would like to comment: Some of the rules of priority, also favour a longer assault that is more technically and aesthetically pleasing, Angelo being the main influence, with his aristocratic game. Also, specially in foil, they tried to protect the face, remember NO masks at the time. So people trained foil and were beaten in duels, ence the more realist epee appear. Cheers
I don't fully understand the meaning in a comment of "Respondeat Superior" the expression is used in tort law to indicate that an employer responds for the acts of its employee, could you clarify. Cheers
Hi, i have seen some sabre fencing clips and im confused why the other opponent who didn't have the priority touched the opponent and the other opponent won the point.
With out actually see the phrase to which you refer, I can only say this: the fencer who hit his opponent and was therefore awarded a point, was, in the opinion of the PdC, the fencer who had the priority because ONLY the fencer with the priority CAN be awarded the point. It is possible that the Director (PdC) was wrong in his interpretation of the phrase. Indeed, it’s quite likely. -AAC
If you think my self defence reflex is going to save you in a sword fight, then you’re mistaken. You don’t know me. “If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” -Sun Tzu
Thank you so much for your wonderful videos Maître D'Armes Crown! I have incorporated this concept explicitly into my Eskrima (Filipino Martial Arts) classes after watching this video. I have never really understood "right of way" for exactly the reason you outline. It sounded arbitrary. But what to give "priority" to is a fantastic way to explain the concept. Your video helped me make sense of why it exists in European fencing, and I think it is a concept that is often lacking, and really valuable to incorporate, in FMA.
I’m not a fencer, but I’m a wiser person now than I was 25 minutes ago.
This man should be teaching a Master Class of philosophy at Caimbridge University.
The Levels he speaks on are top tier. Fencing being a beginner level.
11:55
as a former kendoka it was a very important exception - same goes for maternal instinct ( but more likley in battle not duel)
I appreciate your work - thank you for the lession
Hi, it makes sense the way you explain it, it would work if people looked at what the blade is doing, but unfortunately, they aren't. Especially the first part of "the attacker is counted as touched" happens to be often ignored, at least in historical fencing where we don't even have electrification to show that the guy who held the line touched first.
Thanks for your comment.
This is a common misconception.
It doesn’t matter who “touches first.”
What matters is who has the priority.
For example: You can make a stop hit against a simple attack and touch first in real time, but not in fencing time.
The fact that you may stab the attacker a moment before he stabs you at the conclusion of his lunge is completely irrelevant.
If the people in your historical fencing group don’t understand the principle of priority, or if they are so dishonest that they do not freely acknowledge hits against themselves, then an electrical scoring apparatus isn’t going to help you.
The electrical apparatus only determines the materiality of the hit. It does not analyze the phase. If the President is calling the phrase based on which light goes on first, he is utterly incompetent (or cheating) and should be replaced immediately.
BTW, if a person needs the electrical scoring device to know what happened, that person does not know how to fence.
It would be like watching a basketball game and not knowing if the guy who just slam-dunked the ball scored a basket until you look at the electronic scoreboard.
I once officiated at a tournament during a thunderstorm that resulted in a power outage. Fortunately, it was during the day, so there was plenty of light to see. We finished the two final rounds without a hitch using judges.
-AAC
@@swordmastery In my group we do acknowledge hits, tournaments are a different thing entirely, only the judges can decide
Finally 🤺
You did very well sir , thank you
I have been in self defense all.
My life your making me interested to this wonderful spot
The problem is, these rules only really make sense from the "combat optimization" viewpoint if you are significantly better and more concerned about geting wounded and avoiding that, than the possibility of actually dying.
If you have 50-50 chances of survival fighting this way, but 70-30 chances of survival if you, for example, sacrifice your left forearm, than the +20% of survival may offset the cripled hand.
And if you are worse than your oponent, your only realistic option of survival may be through some sacrifice.
On top of that, the whole thing may not be voluntary. With the "parry-riposte" mindset, any partially deflected/avoided blow followed by direct hit in repost will mean death for the attacker and "only" a wound for the defender, even if the defender tried to do everything right according to the priority - therefore, it really did not give the attacker the right he thought he has.
Plus, in compound attack, if the attacker confuses the defender to the point that he cant reasonably defend, the priority logic breaks again, because you are on one hand rellying on the defense response and on the other hand confusing your oponent to the point he can not execute it. And the next defense response if I am too confused to parry is to make space by extending my sword forward (and thus forcing the attacker to stop attacking, because he will throw himself on my blade if he continues the attack).
In short, if the attacker attacks in such a confusing way that it does not trigger my defense response and throws himself at my blade in the process...
There are cases in English duels where the protagonists died un duel. But later on the "winner" also died from an unknown belly wound that as the record stated the fat closed the wound". The "winner" went home and fell asleep and passed on while resting. When the autopsy was performed the body cavity was full of coagulated blood. The opponent's blade had pierced the descending aorta . So there were no winners. This shows how dangerous duelling was. Also that the lunge is more deadly than a slash. Records also show that two fencers went home with terrific wounds but a thrust showed that the lunge to a critical spot almost always died. Fights are the closest humans come to anarchy, it is anyone's game. The one that is more practiced, and cautious has the greater chance of winning. So there is a difference between just being practiced and well practiced where moments are set in muscle memory. This is preferable. When one is in the middle of fence, off and de
The learning curve is what one knows is what one will use. School is out. It's literally do and live, or die. Lesson reiterated in video. Excellent work.
Very interesting and detailed explanation, thank you 😀 I would like to comment: Some of the rules of priority, also favour a longer assault that is more technically and aesthetically pleasing, Angelo being the main influence, with his aristocratic game. Also, specially in foil, they tried to protect the face, remember NO masks at the time. So people trained foil and were beaten in duels, ence the more realist epee appear. Cheers
Very nicely done, well explained! Are (or have you) done an Epee video where priority is different?
Why would priority be any different in epee?
@@vfencers especially after understanding what and why it is like that, epee is still a pointy iron stab stab stick to your body
There is no priority in olympic epee
@@vfencerscause epee doesnt have it
love it. perfect education.
Where do you get your rapiers and Italian foils?
I don't fully understand the meaning in a comment of "Respondeat Superior" the expression is used in tort law to indicate that an employer responds for the acts of its employee, could you clarify. Cheers
Hi, i have seen some sabre fencing clips and im confused why the other opponent who didn't have the priority touched the opponent and the other opponent won the point.
With out actually see the phrase to which you refer, I can only say this: the fencer who hit his opponent and was therefore awarded a point, was, in the opinion of the PdC, the fencer who had the priority because ONLY the fencer with the priority CAN be awarded the point. It is possible that the Director (PdC) was wrong in his interpretation of the phrase. Indeed, it’s quite likely.
-AAC
6:11
I got it right here
This guy is so cool😂
By the way: "ex recto" faux Latin, I suppose you can say anything as long as you use Latin 🤗
Pete you have no idea how true you speak, "Respondeat Superior".
Interesting. Are you familiar with the current allegations of arbitrary priority for the sake of choosing winners in international sabre competitions?
Priority goes to the "right one" has been going on for decades
If you think my self defence reflex is going to save you in a sword fight, then you’re mistaken. You don’t know me. “If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” -Sun Tzu