Unconditional Mistakes - a Typology

Unconditional mistakes however are different: They are actions which are never a good idea to perform and should be avoided altogether. This can best be achieved by training and establishing good habits.

Releasing a contested bind

Why this is a bad idea: The opponent was poised and pushing for an attack to the head. The tactile reaction time is fast - usually some 30% faster than the reaction time for visual cues, so basically the moment you pull back to gain room for a strike, the opponent realizes that there is an opening. He doesn't even think about this, he can simply keep doing what he planned and go for the head. Usually this will succeed and you will get hit.

What to do instead: There are multiple ways of fencing from the bind without opening yourself. Fiore for instance suggests to grab the opponent's blade, Döbringer describes to counter strength in the bind by suddenly yielding and cutting from the outside while remaining in contact (Duplieren), Meyer describes the Zirkel, a Zwerchhau-like motion in contact with the blade - there is a rich set of techniques to go into the offensive from a bind without releasing it. If you know none of these techniques, just retreating while keeping to push against the opponent's sword is still better than pulling the sword away.

Attacking the strong

Why this is a bad idea: What inevitably happens when you attack the strong of the opponent's blade is that you get blocked. The opponent doesn't even have to work to achieve that result. Tactically such a cut will accomplish nothing - but even worse, it will automatically place your own weak against the opponent's strong, so the opponent gets handed an excellent position for a counter attack.

What to do instead: Cut towards an opening - out of the four openings, only one can ever be covered with a longsword (more if the opponent carries a one-handed sword and a shield). If you attack an opening, you force a defensive reaction which you can use. Don't select the next cut because you really want to do it, select a cut because it threatens an opening.

Freezing

Why this is a bad idea: The active phase when blades cross and blows are exchanged (Krieg in the German terminology) is no place to make plans. Anything you do there is highly time-critical, do nothing for even a quarter of a second and any halfway capable opponent will have you hit and be on the retreat before you know it.

What to do instead: If you don't know how to continue because your plan doesn't carry so far, break off the attack and retreat, when you are at a safe distance, think about what to do next. It's as simple as that.

Side note: There is a big difference between thinking about what to do next and evaluating the situation. Taking a split second to evaluate the tactical situation usually is a good idea, but it presupposes that you already have alternatives in your mind and just want to decide which of them to fence depending on what the opponent is doing. Quick evaluations usually deal with yes/no questions like 'does the opponent react to the threat' or 'is the opponent strong in the bind' - they do not start by making a plan from scratch.

Sloppy guards

Why this is a bad idea: A sloppy stance in a guard simply doesn't guard you. If you hold the sword vertically in front of you, you can cut from the position but your arms are exposed to quick snipes. If your point in a thrusting guard is not threatening the opponent, he can simply move in without meeing opposition - if you throw your arms forward instinctively, you'll do nothing. If you don't bend the knees, you'll find it difficult to react if you need to rapidly move.

What to do instead: Practice and monitor proper stance in every guard - and make this a habit. It's sometimes exhausting, but that's fencing for you. Incorrect footwork and erratic sword tip in the heat of the exchange can happen, but in Zufechten when you have plenty of time, there's simply no reason to be sloppy.

Repeating a technique that just didn't work

Why this is a bad idea: You might have learned to identify the mistake - and even maybe how to fix it. But the opponent has learned just as well from the experience. And he already knows how to deal with the attack because he already succeeded in fending it off. If you repeat it, you will have lost any element of surprise you had the first time, so the overwhelming odds is that you will not fare better a second time.

What to do instead: Do something else, and after a few exchanges, come back to what you want to try.

Side note: There is a case to be made for repeating actions that did have success. For instance in a competition if you figure out a weakness of the opponent, you can exploit it. However, also here the opponent learns. In an exercise where we tried to have the attacker repeat the plan five times, usually by iteration three or four the fortunes reversed and the defender knew what to do.

Created by Thorsten Renk 2025 - see the disclaimer, privacy statement and contact information.