Thanks - I'm glad that they're useful to you :)

Thanks! I'm glad people find them useful :)

Very helpful.Thank you.

Thanks! I'm glad you found it useful :)

Thanks 😊

I completely agree that for the most part Meyer intends attacks to be interactive/open-eyes. I do think it's useful to practice and understand both, though, as there are times when you may want to perform attacks at an automatic level, particularly when it comes to feints etc. Meyer does mention a number of times sequences of cuts/provocations to flow without any delay as well, before the opponent can react (MS 3337a says something similar), which can be taken as a kind of automatic attack, though that doesn't mean I disagree with your point :)

Ok, I have to agree with you. Meyer says the device should be performed quickly and he provides us with the exercise to practise and be able to so. As I understand it, he describes this as a set of priorities. First, learn to attack quickly at the four opening, and train for it (a lot.) Then, learn how to defend on the four openings, how to block or counter the attacks. Then, thirdly, learn to read the opponents reactions and adapt your attacks. So, how I undestand it, the attack has to be running on an automatic level for you to be able to "detach" from it and have time to react and adapt... Anyway, thanks again for all your videos, they have been most helpful to gain some insight on the tactical part and have been a joy to see and study!

@@JulienGuegan I actually agree with this analysis of the progression - nicely put.

You’re quite right - I’m a big fan of ‘natural’ footwork: when I’m feinting I’ll very often land on the heel inadvertently. Great catch for noticing one of my tells (shhhh don’t let anyone know 😉)

If the opponent maintains control then it becomes much more difficult, but you can certainly surprise them as you mention. Moreover, if your oppoenent is expecting the attack you can break time between cuts, and redouble to the same opening, or simply skip on of the openings and move to the next (this works pretty well after you've done the sequence to the once before :D )

I think he has practiced it and knows it enough dude ... It's "usual" name is square because of the drawn diagram, which appears to be... a square, nothing more

@@StuffGong it’s lazy to call it a square. It’s almost insulting to call it a square. Have a little more respect to call it by its correct name. If you have been practicing it long enough you should know it has nothing to do with a square.

@@WehrenAcademy insulting no less xD xD dude you need to chill

@@StuffGong sorry it’s a pet peeve of mine. We need to call things by their correct names. Are going to start calling the guards and cuts by different names then what the master you’re describing does? No. In the video he uses the correct guard name but then uses the incorrect name.

I agree that the term "Meyer Square" is a misnomer. Unfortunately by now it's become so ingrained in the language of the community that it would be futile for me to try to change it (language is defined by usage after all). It's a little like the term "feder" - totally not a thing historically, but it's a modernised term we all use and understand. Your point is well taken though, but for the purposes of visibility, using the term "Meyer Square" is the best way for people to search for the topic. That's the reason the video title uses the more correct (shorterned) term "Attacks to the Openings", before saying Meyer Square :)