The ankle isn't being rolled. Pushing off completely from the back leg, and extending your leg for a proper lunge necessitates keeping your back ankle in alignment with the tibial bone for a deep lunge. Otherwise you can strain the ATFL and CTL ligaments of the angle, or, if keeping your toe forward, risk damage to the navicular bone of the foot by contact with the talus. Without this position you end up shortening your action and under commit to the lunge, making your attack more easily avoided

Peter, I know right? This electrified nonsense is strange. Well, it is to be expected. The actions described within the Classical Italian Schools and Maestro William Gaugler's "The Science of Fencing" cannot be expected to be properly executed by non-initiates of the schools and fencing traditions that these techniques originate from. That ankle roll is definitely a French action.

This demonstration is meant for young students who usually can't grasp nuances in technique. So the steps are exaggerated. However this balestra meets the official definition. Further, here is an Olympic medalist demonstrating essentially the same thing, without the tell, or exaggerating the step. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oNCSqaiDy5PZfWQ.html

She isn't doing a ballestra in that video...

Hi Chris. Your comment isn't adding anything to this discussion. What are you trying to say exactly? As is, it looks like you aren't paying attention. Of course the woman in the link above isn't calling her actions a balestra. However, if you look again at the official definition of a balestra you will see her entire maneuver meets the definition. "A footwork preparation" (She steps and slides forwards) "with jumping forwards" (She jumps forwards) "Often followed by a lunge."(She lunges at the end) "Changes the rhythm and timing of moves." (She talks about changing timing) I've presented it differently, but have no apologies for it. I've found it useful at teaching new student the right concept. It's not a comprehensive instruction. I save that for class. The woman in the link doesn't call it a balestra, but it is a balestra.

Here are 3 official links to definitions of terminology. They each agree, and confirm, what I've provided IS in fact the definition of a Belestra. You are mistaken sir. I respect your opinion that the two demonstrations involve "totally different footwork," however I recognize no significant difference in footwork (aside from the obvious difference in look, which is intentional. Not designed to be the ends of the technique but a training strategy) to warrant distinction between them. Both still meet the official definition available through multiple resources. Therefore, if you continue to troll this site making unsubstantiated, unsupported claims in the future I will simply report you as spam and block you. Here are those links: www.fencing.net/glossary.php www.britishfencing.com/about-fencing/glossary_of_terms/ www.busybwebdesign.com/saskfencing/fencing_glossary.htm

Well you must have fenced 42 years in a cave by yourself because I've been doing it for 42 days and I've already seen it done.

Thank you for the correction.

I wanted to add to my reply. I like that you point out the Korean example. I've linked to a video of Korean tactics, showing what you're suggesting. You're absolutely right. This can be considered a Sabre Skip. However, I still must include it under the category of Balestra. The reason is, while you've offered a more specific definition of the Balestra, as its commonly performed, your specifics aren't included in definitions of the term, found in four different and commonly used sources of fencing information. as it is, the accepted definition is somewhat unspecific, in that a number of actions are similar, and still meet all literal requirements of the definition as it is written, and still be different from what others do. I suppose then, the more accurate title would need to be, "skipping balestra." In any case, the definitions should be undated, or additions canonized. Don't you think? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/naybgMeDvpq8pGQ.html

Yes, you should never go off the strip. A judge should call you out on even placing a hand off the strip, on the ground. If you are worried about going off the strip while moving to a 3 point contact position I would think there is some part of the technique being done wrong. In the demo above, there isn't shown any risk of going off. I'm visualizing a person falling somewhat sideways, if they are going off the strip to perform the passata sotto. In that case, the judge may be right to red card while scoring in this position. I would also suggest that from an anatomical standpoint, if a fencer has a negative ape index (the arms are shorter across then the body is tall) they may have a harder time being effective with this strategy. And a fencer with a positive ape index ( very long arms) would have a much easier time with it. Of course, not every technique used in fencing, is for everyone. There are few things I believe, should be universalized. Instead, you learn to use techniques that work for your body, against the fencers you face. That's it. We shouldn't try to codify fencing too much. Everyone's different, everyone needs different things (strategies, techniques, training, discipline, mind body development). However, the passata sotto is an officially recognized fencing maneuver, and I recognize some may do it and teach it differently. I'm totally cool with that too. Take things from many sources, learn from many different people, and take what works for you. A judge shouldn't have a problem with this maneuver if it is done correctly. I've used is on several occasions in competition myself and haven't had a problem. Thanks so much for your thoughts and questions.

Relevant rules: t.26.1: When a competitor crosses one of the lateral boundaries of the piste with one or both feet completely off the piste, the Referee must immediately call ‘Halt!’. t.26.3: However, a hit scored by the fencer who leaves the piste with one foot only is valid provided that the action was started before the ‘Halt!’. So you can still get the touch if you go off strip with one hand. Also, just noticed how late this reply is, haha

Hi Calvin. Thanks for your comment. I appreciate where you are coming from in asking about this maneuver. The action isn't something I would ever use regularly. It's specialized for the right conditions but a nice tool to have in your back pocket. I've used it effectively many times in tournaments and it has helped me win in cases that I otherwise struggled in. First of all, it's unexpected. Versatility of movement and displacement is always something you should be developing. This action displaces your target, ideally moves ahead of your opponents tip to the inside and in-fighting position, places your arm in position to make a counter attack your opponent isn't ready for, and the hook at the end moves you more forward to land the touch without having to move your arm and risk missing the target. I've found it especially useful against opposite arm blade users (i.e. right vs left). I personally feel it is beneficial at further controlling your opponents blade as well. You can keep their blade easily captured to one side of your body without risking much. As far as balance goes, if you are worried about being off balance, NEVER USE THIS! It's not for you. Footwork is without question the strongest asset a fencer can have. Your balance and stability should be considered in almost every exercise and drill. That said, many fencers never develop their versatility of movement in the sport. They don't practice changing position on the strip, using angels, or doing much more then moving forward and back in the same position. That's actually fine for the most part, since just about everyone does the same thing. And that's another reason why this maneuver works. Personally, I've never had an issue with performing the In Quartata and recovering my position. But I'm also a dance professional, gymnast, martial artist, and well versed in the study of kinesiology. I consider my balance, stability, versatility of movement and direct, and control to be very high considering all I practice. Many fencers have bad habits of turning the toe slightly inward. This will make you fall and turn your ankle. In some cases, the reason for this habit comes from their own anatomy. They may have very tight ligaments which limits the amount of turn out and makes it difficult to maintain a forward facing toe, especially while performing something like the In Quartata. In such a case, this tactic is likely best left alone. Hope that helps.

well executed inquartata can be quite helpful, it helps you dodge an attack! It is after all a defensive move.

The in quartata, or quarter turn is an evasive action, displacing target, so that opponents tip is parallel to your target and thus unable to land.

he says it twice, I have no idea what an intagliatta is, this guy must have a hard time reading

please don't insult Syrio, he was a much better fencer than this guy!