Fencing has often been compared to chess, and in fact I've included a copy-paste of what Microsoft Co-pilot AI has to say on the subject below:
What AI has to say on the subject:
Indeed! Fencing and chess share some interesting similarities. Both are strategic games that require mental agility, quick thinking, and precise execution. Let’s explore the parallels:
1. Strategy and Tactics:
In chess, players plan their moves several steps ahead, considering various possibilities and anticipating their opponent’s responses.
Similarly, in fencing, fencers strategize by analyzing their opponent’s movements, predicting attacks, and adjusting their own actions accordingly.
2. Positioning and Control:
Chess pieces occupy specific squares on the board, and their positions determine their influence and potential threats.
In fencing, fencers move within a limited space (the strip) and aim to control the distance between themselves and their opponent. Footwork and blade work are crucial for maintaining advantageous positions.
3. Attack and Defense:
In chess, players alternate between attacking and defending. Sacrifices may be made to gain positional advantage or create threats.
Fencing involves offensive actions (attacks) and defensive actions (parries, blocks). Timing and precision are essential to score points while avoiding being hit.
4. Mind Games:
Both chess and fencing involve psychological battles. Players try to deceive their opponents, create traps, and exploit weaknesses.
Fencers use feints, changes of tempo, and psychological pressure to gain an edge. The “en garde” stance itself is a mind game, inviting the opponent to make the first move.
5. Rules and Etiquette:
Both games have strict rules governing movement, piece interactions, and conduct.
Fencing has its own set of rules, including valid target areas, scoring methods, and safety precautions.
6. Physical Demands:
Chess is mentally demanding, requiring concentration and calculation.
Fencing combines mental focus with physical agility. Fencers must react swiftly, maintain balance, and execute precise attacks.
Remember, in fencing, the “sword” (foil, epee, or sabre) becomes an extension of the fencer’s mind and body, just as chess pieces represent strategic choices. Whether you’re a fencer or a chess player, both games offer rich experiences that blend intellect, skill, and passion!
I first heard the analogy a month or so after I started fencing, and only really understood it some two years later when I started to think about 'tempo' more seriously.
Tempo explained
Having learned 'German' longsword, before moving on to sabre and then sword and buckler, the Italian concept of 'tempo' wasn't something that I'd learned from a practical perspective, but I was broadly familiar with it.
Recently I had an opportunity to spar with a world class HEMA practitioner, and afterwards he told me that I have 'good timing'. I was naturally flattered, but he might as well have told me that I had good 'spacing' (which means nothing, I just made it up). I had a bit of a sense of what he meant by timing - perhaps I move at the right time? - but it caused me to want to understand the concept of timing/tempo in more detail.
I stumbled across this video from Dimicator Schola which explains timing and tempo (which is just Italian for 'time') in an intuitive way:
In brief, fencing involves the 'doing' of actions: walking forwards, walking backwards, striking, parrying etc. Every time our brain tells our muscles to take a fast action, we are committed to that action for a short space of time, and it is hard for us to stop the action half-way. Most actions are done in straight lines (such as raising the sword as we prepare to strike, stepping forwards), and then the reversing of direction can be considered a separate action (lowing the sword as we strike, stepping backwards). Our fencing techniques can therefore be split into moments of movement followed by moments of stillness. We call these moments of movements a 'tempo'. If I step forwards with one leg, this is a tempo. If I raise my sword, this is a tempo. If I change guard, this is a tempo.
It is somewhat subjective what is and isn't a tempo, and some tempos can be longer than others. If you act in a long tempo (i.e. a large or a slow action) your opponent might be able to make two smaller actions (two tempos) for your one. In many ways, tempo is therefore relative to your opponent.
If two fencers are both standing stationary, time is in effect frozen, as no fencer can endanger the other. Fencer 1 makes a passing step: this is one action, and one tempo. In response, Fencer 2 now takes a gathering step backwards: one action, one tempo. Fencer 1 reacts to this by taking another step forwards and simultaneously changing from one guard to another: although this is two actions, they are done at the same time, so we class this as one action and one tempo. In response to this fencer 2 stands still, but raises their sword: one action, one tempo. Fencer 1 attacks with a lunge and thrust: one action, one tempo. Fencer 2 parries the thrust: one action, one tempo.
These moments of stillness in between tempos - even if they are short or imperceptible to our opponent - are extremely important: they are decision points. They are the moments when we can react to what our opponent is doing. Likewise, your opponent's 'moments of stillness' are the moments when they can react to what you are doing.
This means that, if you want to act against your opponent in a way that prevents them from reacting to your action, the 'correct' time to initiate an action is not during your opponent's moments of stillness, but during their moments of movement. In effect, every time they are moving, they are busy - imagine a little spinning wheel or hourglass briefly hovering above their head - and they cannot react to your move until they have finished theirs.
Since each fencer should be reacting to what their opponent is doing, the movements of each fencer are rarely done at exactly the same time. However, because you always want to act while your opponent is busy moving, neither are these actions completely separate: they are overlapping, e.g. Fencer A moves first, and Fencer B moves second, but before Fencer A has finished their action. Now Fencer A reacts to Fencer B, again before Fencer B has finished their action. This looks like this:
For this sort of fencing to work, at least one of the fencers needs to be aware of tempo and trying to fence in relation to the tempo of their opponent. They should do this because it will be more successful than fencing randomly.
Fencers do not need to always move at the same tempo. Fencer A may start the action, and so Fencer B is always reacting to Fencer A. However, if Fencer A takes an extended moment of stillness and Fencer B takes two actions, Fencer A is now reacting to Fencer B:
Likewise, some tempos are larger than others, some moments of stillness shorter or longer, so the 'Rythm' of the fight is not steady and predictable.
The basic rules of chess
If you are familiar with chess, skip this part.
Chess is a board game played by two people. Each player takes it in turns to move various pieces around the board. My piece can remove ('take') your piece from the board if it lands on the same square, but different types of pieces can only move in certain ways, some straight forwards, some diagonal, some in an L shape, etc. Some pieces can move only one square at a time, others as many as they want but only in a straight line, etc..
Player 1 starts by moving a piece. Player 2 then moves one of their pieces. Now player 1 moves their piece, and so on. Each player is moving their pieces one turn (one tempo) at a time in reaction to the opponent's last move. At the same time, players are looking for patterns of behaviour in their opponent, trying to predict the moves they will make one, two, three moves ahead in order to lure the opponent into a trap.
By strategically taking key pieces from the opponent, each player aims to open up the King piece of the opponent and maneuver their own pieces into range to take it. The King cannot be taken directly (i.e. it can't be attacked by a piece), it can only be threatened. When the King is threatened this is called ‘check’. This forces the next move of the opponent to be to defend the King, by moving the King to a safe position, taking the offending piece, or moving another piece in the way.
The aim of the game is to get the King of your opponent into ‘checkmate’. This means that you have positioned your pieces in such a way that the King is threatened from multiple angles: whatever the next move of the opponent is, the King will be taken, and the game is over.
Ok, so how is this like fencing?
Fencing is turn-based
The concept of Tempo shows us that fencing is turn-based, with moments of movement followed by moments of stillness where decisions are made, just like chess.
However, there is a key difference: in chess, players take their turns separately, during their opponent's 'moment of stillness'; but in fencing the fencers can take their turns while the other fencer is still making their movement. Likewise, if a fencer takes too long to make a move, the other fencer can make two moves. Imagine a game of chess played like this, in real time!
We recently did an exercise at the club where we introduced the concept of tempo, and we asked students to take turns moving. The expectation was that the fencers would move while their opponent was moving, in a staggered pattern like in the bottom half of the diagram below, but they actually moved after their opponent had finished moving, like the top half of the diagram below, sometimes with extremely long pauses while they thought about their next move:
This generated really odd fencing behavior, as the fencers couldn't react 'in real time' to what their opponent was doing. This was because they were not used to thinking in terms of tempo, were unclear on the 'rules' of the game, or what constitutes a tempo in the opponent.
However, it is up to each fencer to decide what constitutes a tempo in the opponent, and therefore to decide when to move. Once this was figured out and the fencers were moving and acting in the proper time, it generated some nice fencing, and it made the cause of double hits much more apparent.
Strategy
Chess is not just about reacting to your opponent’s last move. You are also looking for patterns of behaviour and ultimately trying to lure your opponent into a trap. You might move a pawn into a position where it can be taken by a Queen, so that you can then take the Queen. You make small sacrifices to lure out your opponent into a vulnerable position.
This sounds like fencing in many ways.
In fencing, although I am reacting to my opponent’s last move (perhaps they have stepped forwards, perhaps they have placed their sword over mine) at some point I may see a plan of attack that will require me a few tempos to complete.
Let's take the example of the opponent coming forwards. They step towards me. I think they are closing to attack, and I think I can counter-attack. I step a little backwards (I give ground, I let them take my pawn), and simultaneously raise my sword into a guard from which I can attack (I move my knight piece into position). They step forwards again to make an attack, and in that tempo, I quickly react by making a strike that simultaneously parries their attack and hits them. This successful attack by me didn't just happen: it was planned a few tempos ahead, and it was only possible because I was thinking and acting in terms of tempo.
If I wasn't acting in tempo, then my actions would have been 'out of time'. For example, instead of waiting until my opponent initiated their attack, if I make my 'counterattack' while they are still, this is no longer a counterattack: it is an attack. Because my opponent is in a moment of stillness and not in a moment of movement, they can easily react to my attack with a parry (at best) or (at worst) a counterattack of their own.
If I acted randomly, then sometimes my action would be in tempo, sometimes not, so I would get random results.
Checkmate!
We can use the analogy of checkmate to help us formulate our strategy.
In chess, in order to get a King in checkmate, I first need to get it in check. This means I need to put it in immediate threat so that its only course of action is to defend, e.g. by moving to a new square.
In fencing, check would be the equivalent of getting an advantage over the opponent leading to an immediate threat they need to deal with: e.g. an impending strike or thrust.
When the opponent is merely in check they have options: they can parry or counterattack, avoid or take some other action.
In Chess, checkmate means that whatever move the King makes, it will be taken in the next tempo by one of my pieces. By definition, then, it is related to movement: the King is in checkmate if its next move results in it being taken.
In fencing, I would define checkmate as being where the fencer is threatened in such a way that defense is impossible, they will be hit in the next tempo regardless of what they do. The only way to make this happen is to strike while the opponent is in motion - they are busy taking their turn - and not standing still.
Attacking a stationary opponent who is waiting in guard is extremely dangerous. In 1572, Bolognese fencing master Giovanni Dall'Agocchie gave us 5 tempos when it is safe to attack and they all involve attacking while the opponent is busy 'taking their turn':
After we have parried our opponent. I would add that this is only safe if we then have a direct line to our opponent. If we have to pass around their sword after we parry, they will likely attack us as our tempo is too large. Think of it like this: the strike comes in in one tempo, we parry it, and because our swords meet in the middle, really the parry is a half-tempo action, giving us a half-tempo more to make our riposte. If the riposte takes more than half a tempo to complete, e.g. because we need to strike around their blade, this gives the opponent a tempo to strike us at the same time or with an after-blow, resulting in a double hit.
After the opponent has attacked and missed us.
When the opponent is stepping.
When the opponent is raising their sword preparing for an attack.
When the opponent is switching guard.
Angelo Viggiani (1575) gave us a number of ways we can achieve this, by gaining various advantages (from Schildwache Potsdam YouTube channel):
"1.) Get a better position (Advantage of Guard)
- Your sword points at them, theirs does not at you
- Use displacing half-cuts and feints
- Use offline footwork
2.) Get into the right distance (Advantage of Attack)
- Too far away and you'll just walk into a counterthrust
- Too close is deadly for both of you
3.) Take small steps, use mid-air time of opponent (Advantage of Stepping)
- A closer stance allows to extend your stance further
- Once they commit to a movement / step, use that because they cannot easily change direction"
Conclusion
So there you have it. Fencing in tempo is extremely important, especially once the fencers get within the sorts of distances where they can start gaining advantages, threatening and striking each other. If you are not fencing in tempo, you are fencing randomly or out of tempo and can expect random results. I'd advise everyone to learn tempo, even if you do not practice Italian fencing.
Exercise: Fencing in tempo
Rules of the game:
This is a light sparring session. Fencers should wear appropriate levels of protective gear.
Fencers start out of distance. Each fencer tries to limit their movements and actions to single tempo actions. This can be simplified as an action that can be completed with a single passing or gathering step.
Each fencer tries to only move while their opponent is making their move:
Fencer A moves
Fencer B moves
They should not move in unison, but they should move at broadly the same time, slightly staggered like in the diagrams above.
It helps if one fencer sets the pace, and the pace should not be too fast, perhaps 1 move per second, or two moves per second for strikes and parries.
Fencers can choose to stay still while their opponent takes a tempo, but should not stay still for too long.
Fencer will do all the normal things they do when sparring, such as stepping, changing guard, making attacks, making parries; but they try to do these things in the proper tempo. As such, actions should be fairly simple so they can concentrate on acting in tempo rather than pulling off complicated techniques.
Learning objectives
Each fencer should have a list of things they want to achieve:
Can you move in single tempo actions instead of making compound actions?
Can you spot the opponent's tempo?
Can you move at the appropriate time, i.e. while the opponent is busy moving?
Can you spot patterns and plan strategies a few tempos ahead in order to gain an advantage over the opponent? This could include an advantage of guard, advantage of distance, an overbind, etc.
Can you take offensive actions at the right time in a way that makes it hard for the opponent to react? Actions include beats, binds and attacks.
Do you know when to stay still, e.g. so you can make defensive actions such as parries and counter attacks in tempo?
After a parry, can you use tempo to decide when to re-double your attack, when to parry and when to riposte so as to avoid doubles?
If an opponent is still, can you use provocations such as feints to force them into motion to gain a safe tempo to attack?
When sparring or competing normally, can you apply tempo in their fencing, and does this improve your fencing?
Comments