12.3.1.1.1. The Disengage in Tempo

In modern fencing, if an opponent attempts to take the fencer's blade and fails because the fencer deceives the action with a disengage and attacks to hit, we call that a derobement, assume the opponent lost right of way because of the failure to connect, and go on our way happy.  Today we don't typically call it a disengage stop hit.  But, is this correct?

The Italian School has a broad view of counterattacks.  Maestro Barbasetti, in his The Art of the Foil (1932), identifies a range of counteraatcks, and subdivides them into passive and active tempo actions:

A.  Passive tempo actions act against the final phase of the opponent's attack including:

1. Coup d'Arret
2. Appuntata
3. Inquartata
4. Passata Sotto
5. Imbroccata
6. Counter-Action

B.  Active tempo actions halt the opponent's action at its start including: 

1. Disengage into tempo
2. Feint into tempo (a feint of any of the thrusts listed above)

Maestro Parise's 1884 Treatise on the Fencing of the Sword and Sabre (Holzman's translation) defines the Disengage into Tempo as an action in tempo of the first tempo.  The disengage is executed as the opponent attempts to find the fencer's blade to remove it from the line of offense, forcing the opponent to stop the attack and parry.  Barbasetti expands this, making it clear that the disengage is followed by a lunge, not just the disengage alone.  He offers four cases:

• Against the beat attempting to contact the blade in fourth - disengage to the outside line.
• Against the beat attempting to contact the blade in third - disengage to the inside line.
• Against the beat attempting to contact the blade in second - disengage to the high line.
• Against the beat attempting to contact the blade in half-circle (fifth) - disengage to the low line.

It is interesting to note that the disengage in tempo (or disengage stop hit) is not well developed in equivalent French sources.  Rondelle (1892), the two editions of the French Army manual (1877 and 1908), Prevost (1892), and Deladrier (1948) do not mention it.  Lidstone (1952) and Crosnier (1967) both writing with a strong classical period influence, mention the indirect stop hit, but only in passing.

The modern derobe and hit against the attempt to take the blade depends on the referee's interpretation that right of way is lost by the evasion.  Viewing the Disengage into Tempo as a stop hit in the period when concepts of priority in the rules were in considerable flux lends a much more offensive flavor to the technique.  The Disengage into Tempo depends on taking the opponent's time, not on making him lose it.

Copyright 2019 by Walter G. Green III

The Disengage in Tempo by Walter G. Green III is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.