This is the first in a series of bouting tutorials we're creating in order to help the members of our online program who are at that stage in their broadsword training. All members of our Apprenticeship Program- especially those who are bouting- should study this video and article very carefully. Each tutorial will have a different theme, and the theme of this one is "Killshots." All of our bouting tutorials will be explained on the basis of our "seven words": wait, provoke, overwhelm, simplify, deceive, disrupt and change.
Thomas Page and Archibald MacGregor both discuss two different types of sword combat- ordinary bouts "which arise from mere trifles" are fought according to a "first blood" mentality, and the swordsman is expected to try to end the fight with a non-lethal wound. MacGregor refers to this approach as "anything but taking the life," and it was the traditional ethic of broadsword fencing. The second type of swordfight, which Page refers to as "promiscuous combat," is a case of kill or be killed, in which adrenaline, rage and desperation combine to make minor injuries much less relevant, as each man knows he must end the fight with a single blow. To simulate this type of fight, we agree to ignore all minor touches and acknowledge only strikes that would have been likely to end the fight immediately if we had been using sharp weapons. This rule-set has significant tactical implications not found in a standard bout.
Bout #1- At the beginning of this bout, Chris (in the sweatshirt) is using the Black Watch version of the Regimental style, and Matt (in the blue shirt) is using Henry Angelo's version of the same style. Both swordsmen are using the "provoke" strategy- note how the attacks at this point in the bout are not very deep. This is because they are primarily intended to draw the opponent out of his guard. The feeling of this strategy is like poking at a dangerous animal with a stick to get it to come out of its lair so you can capture it. Both swordsmen are hoping to prod the opponent into committing to a large attack that can be timed and countered. However, neither succeeds immediately in opening up the other's defenses. When your strategy is not working, you must "change" to something else. Chris stops using the Black Watch method and switches to the Backsword method described by McBane and Lonnergan. Matt switches shortly afterward to the closely related style of Thomas Page, and both swordsmen begin to work the traverse, attempting to use the circular footwork of the Old Style to put pressure on the opponent's flank. This is actually a different application of the "provoke" strategy- the goal is to put the opponent under enough pressure to push him into either making an ill-considered attack or not noticing when the fight has moved into close distance, either of which will result in an opportunity for a hit. Matt changes back to Angelo's linear style and the "waiting" strategy, and Chris switches to the "waiting" strategy while continuing to use the Backsword style. Neither fencer can out-wait the other, so Matt switches back to Page's style and Chris begins to use more aggressive attacks. This is the moment Matt has been waiting for. As Chris moves in, Matt thrusts into Chris's attack with opposition. The thrust to the face stops Chris in his tracks, and Matt finishes with a cut 7 to the head. Silver tells us that two swordsmen who are fencing correctly will be unable to hit each other, and this unusually long bout is a good example. As long as both swordsmen fight according to the logic of our system, neither can hit the other. When Chris pushes his attack just a little too far in an effort to gain the victory, Matt immediately takes advantage. This is the concept of "predatory defense," a strategic cornerstone of our method. Don't try to win through aggression alone. Instead, make yourself impossible to hit and wait calmly and alertly for the opponent to hand you an opportunity.Bout #2- The first bout was very typical of our approach to broadsword fencing, but the next few bouts involve an unusual situation created by the "killshot" rules and the presence of a tree. This is not how you should usually fence with the broadsword, but in this case it is an effective method. The "overwhelm" strategy is usually vulnerable to the "waiting" strategy, and close distance is usually a dangerous distance from which to fight. Normally if Chris was using the "overwhelm" strategy, Matt could simply keep his distance and counterattack. In this case, however, he knows that a minor touch will not stop his determined opponent- if he can't get a powerful hit, Chris will just keep coming. However, Chris isn't pushing in too close- he has Matt backed against a tree. On the one hand, this is an advantage, but on the other hand it's also a risk. All too frequently, the person backed into the corner will suddenly prevail when the attacker pushes his advantage too far. To avoid this risk, Chris is staying just at the boundary of close distance, attacking with a continuous series of cuts from all directions, primarily in the 1-2-3-4-5-6-7 pattern. This pattern is useful for the purpose because the sequence of cuts tends to provide opposition against the most likely ripostes the opponent might make. The cuts in this situation have the same purpose as suppressive fire- they are not intended to hit the opponent but to pin him down. This allows Chris to maintain the initiative- to stay "ahead" in our terminology- while Matt is forced to stay "behind." Matt is trying to get "ahead" by making repeated timing cuts into Chris's attacks, but he is unable to land an effective strike. Eventually, Chris finds Matt's blade and knocks it offline with his false edge, then cuts to the head to end the bout.
Bout #3- This is the same situation as the previous bout, and is a good illustration of the psychology of the "overwhelm" strategy. When Chris comes in for his final attack, Matt can't gauge exactly where it's going to land but he can see that it is a powerful cut. He instinctively flinches or cringes away from the expected blow. This collapsing of the opponent's defenses is the intended outcome of the "overwhelm" strategy. Matt could have prevailed in this situation if he had moved into the attack rather than away, choking up the cut by making a true cross near the hilt. He would then have had an opportunity for a throw or some other close-distance attack. He could also have dropped under the attack on deeply bent knees to attack Chris's legs. The important point here is not which technique he should have used, but the mentality. Our strategy is "predatory defense," and it doesn't work if you leave out the "predatory" part! When faced with an overwhelming display of aggression, your response must never be purely defensive or you will be struck. You must be constantly thinking of how you can use what the opponent is doing as a means of hitting him.
Bout #4- We are once again in the same situation. This time, Matt is attacking Chris more aggressively, seeking to keep him off-balance and prevent him from applying his attacks. This could be considered an application of the "disrupt" strategy, but in this case it doesn't work. Chris once again uses a false-edge parry, with a strong riposte to the legs and then a finishing strike to the back. Chris receives a thrust in the shoulder on his way in, but a wound like this would not immediately stop a determined attacker, so it is ignored under the rules of a "killshot" bout. There is a big difference between the techniques you would use in an ordinary bout and the techniques you would use to stop a man bent on killing you. One aspect of the "change" concept is that you have to be able to adapt immediately to the real situation no matter what it is, rather than fighting as if you were in a hypothetical or ideal situation.
Bout #5- This is a good example of both "wait" and "simplify." Chris takes McBane's version of the St. George's guard. From this position, he can apply a parry against any attack to his outside, followed by a bind with the hand and a pass forward to finish with a cut. Against any attack to his inside, Chris can counterattack with opposition, striking Matt and parrying at the same time. What this means is that Chris only has two things to think about- this is "simplify"- and he can afford to "wait" for Matt's attack. In this situation, Matt should use the "provoke" strategy to get Chris to come out of his guard. Chris's guard is like a strongly-fortified castle, with Matt as the besieger. If Matt tries to storm the castle he will be at a disadvantage, so he should try to get the defenders to come out from their walls and fight. In this case, Matt does attempt to "storm the castle," and he is struck on the way in. Never play the game the opponent wants you to play, no matter what it is. If he takes a particular guard and stands in it, he is doing so for a reason. If you simply make a deep attack, you'll be giving him exactly what he wants. This principle applies to every situation. Whatever the opponent wants or initiates should be refused. On a higher level, you can pretend to give him what he wants in order to draw him into what you want instead, but the basic principle is "if he wants it, don't allow it."
