Defender

Who Is the Defender?

A defender is the fencer facing an immediate threat from an opponent’s committed attack. Until the attack ends—whether parried, avoided, or falling short—the defender remains responsible for the exchange. Attempting to strike back before neutralizing the attack is dangerous and tactically unsound. If a double hit occurs, it is considered the defender's fault.

A valid defense must first deal with the threat rather than simply striking back. In conventional (Right of Way) systems, a counterattack that ignores the incoming action never gains priority over a valid, timely attack. The right response to being attacked is to employ defensive tactics, ideally with anticipation and awareness of the opponent’s habits and intentions. In many cases, this begins with retreat, adjusted to the situation.

An effective defense creates a clear shift in momentum. The usual way to respond to an attack is with a parry, followed immediately by a riposte, allowing the defender to take the initiative and become the new attacker. A riposte may be direct or indirect, but it should be delivered without hesitation or delay.

Depending on the attacker’s movement or mistakes, the defender may prepare a parry–riposte, effective against simple attacks, or use a counter-offensive action that prevents the attack from landing, which is often better against compound actions

Understanding the defender’s role helps referees judge more fairly. It also teaches fencers that the safest and most effective way to score is to first neutralize the threat and then respond with their own attack, rather than exchanging blows recklessly.

compose.mp4

Q/A

Q1: I was unaware that defender had to land the hit before attacker started for it to be valid, a bit different than what I’m used to. But upon explanation the exchange and ruling make sense to me.

A1: its a bit funny but in that sense, something similar to the afterblow is present in row, more than in combat. and it works against the defender, if they dont hit early enough to make the attack 'irrelevant'.

but please nobody misunderstand me, this is a metaphor im using to try and explain some approach XD i hope it doesnt end up being confusing

we are talking about cases when both fendlcers hit each other. of course, if a late counterattack also opposes the attackers blade (like in some indes techniques if im not mostaken), or combines with distance, there will be a clean hit from the defender, the attacker, even if he had priority, fails to hit.

if the attack manages to hit, the counterattack must have hit before the final move of attack is started, to score. otherwise, the attack should be parried instead ot trying a countercut.

Q2: So if I understand correctly left starts his actual attack (which lands) before right does. So right’s would be more of an afterblow (by Nordic)? And also, moving backwards he cannot establish priority, only attack on prep etc? (I think it’s more clear to me now, thank you)

A2: yeah, and ill try to rephrase to make sure i get you right

1. in my view left starts his attack with that feint, but his technique could lose him the prio, i think i agree w you.

the greatest problem for Right is that he is retreating, even with his counterattack, so he validates the attack and prevents himself from taking the tempo.

taking priority with retreating* is not possible, as you wrote.

so, (because he is retreating?), left does start the attack-- even if they cut at the same time, that would be late for a counterattack, to succeed he should HIT before the final move of the attack is started.

2. the dynamics of advance and retreat/defense already puts the defender at disadvantage, he needs to stop to engage the offensive fencer, while the offensive one can already start their attack during this move. so the defender is expected to handle these situations with a greater margin than just cutting into the forseeable, incoming, even if just initiated cut/thrust.

3. the attack on preparation is not an existing term in the rules, we use it in refereeing to give an explanation with the judgment. those cases are attacks, simply. 'in prep' means that we acknowledge that you wanted to attack but we think you didnt threaten, technically. either because you expected a longer march, and stepped into it, or because you wanted to launch an attack but your technique is bad 🥹

we use attack on prep more in the 'box', after we start the bout, in case both fencers attacked but we think one of them failed and the other should win instead of calling a simul.

4. in order to perform an attack after a retreat, we must make sure that we arent being attacked--because we just parried, evaded, or because the opponent just failed his attack, and we can take the initiative.

as long as we are still under attack, and we are planning to cut against the attack, we can only think in counterattack terms. we have to hit before the final cut of the attack starts. this can happen because they feint, or just take a step forward before they start the cut misjudging the distance.

if we cut while retreating, it can be viewed as counterattack, although counterattacks (that have no prio) are also better performed and taught with preparation and then stopping the retreat, because the chance to successfully and timely hit is worse while we are also retreating.

*there are cases of parry-riposte when someone is just stopping from a long retreat, and needs to finish the last step while parry-riposting, this can cause them to still kindof move backward, but his move is no more a retreat, and the riposte is still valid--if he didnt continue retreating after the parry.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse