After starting to learn some striking and other stuff from a friend and recently watching some Olympic fencing highlights, I have a lot of questions I’m confused about.

First of all the fencing footwork seems really odd. Never mind the strict linearity. That is explained by the transition to the sporting format and seems fine for what it is.
– lunging – the back leg is way back. This basic footwork is what I find most odd. If they do this to lower their center of gravity for some reason, it might make sense. If they do it for balance, maybe, but that seems odd. If they do it for reach, it seems really odd. Xingyi’s beng quan gives better reach while maintaining balance.
– the fleche – seems to have the pros and cons of any “flying” technique
– in between there is various shuffling that seems more consistent with most other martial arts’ footwork – here is where Xingyi’s beng quan footwork seems oddly missing. If fleche is too risky and lunge has drawbacks, why not find something in between?

Since some of the JKD footwork and theory seems to come from fencing, I tried to find good video of JKD’s straight lead to look at the footwork. Couldn’t really find any but as far as I can tell, the back leg comes up as in boxing footwork. In trying out this footwork, beng quan’s footwork gives far superior reach than lunging footwork as one might expect from a spear art. Perhaps something is missing because of the (d)evolution from combat to touching point competition.

Update: I had this on the wrong post about Dog Brothers: Hmm, well it turns out my wife tried fencing in college and my brother used to fence so he has an old foil sitting around… maybe I can try out the fencing footwork sooner than I thought…

Advertisements