04/09/2026
The topic of "blade in line" / "Point in line" again.
Especially in my videos, I'm often asked why I get points when my opponents attack and walk right into my blade.
Often, there's a lack of understanding of what "Point in line" actually means. Blade in line doesn't mean the arm has to be fully extended. It means the tip of the blade is positioned on the line of fencing, in the center, facing the opponent in such a way that if they continue their attack, they'll walk right into the point—the sharp, pointed end of the blade. That's all there is to it. The arm doesn't have to be fully extended.
Therefore, in the "real" fencing system, there's the concept of "position"(geman "Auslage") which is distinct from an invitation or parry. Invitation and parry are stances where one side is exposed, either to draw the opponent into action, because it simply happens in the heat of the moment, or because one is executing a parry, etc. Modern sabre fencing no longer uses this position. Due to the rules, one no longer stands in a position with a nearly extended arm, but in a parry, often with the upper body at an extreme angle.
This difference also means that in historical sabre fencing, one must swing up to execute a cut, even if it's just a quick, smart pull. But it's a fundamental principle. When standing in line, one must first swing up. In sports science, this is the first phase of any movement, the loading (or preparation) phase.
And even the German school of fencing before the 17th century, extending into the Middle Ages, recognized this system, which was referred to as "Langort" and "Blöße bedrohen mit dem Ort" in various forms. The term "Auslage"(Position/Guard) was already in use as difference to "Versatzung"(Parry).
And these systems are always based on the experience and logic of real-life duels, which demonstrate that even the most ignorant person who picks up a sword for a duel understands that charging straight into the point is arguably the most pointless thing to do in fencing. And since they have a survival instinct, they simply don't do it. Just as, generally, only those who don't care about their lives jump off a cliff. And you'd better not duel with someone like that.
You'll find this described in detail in fencing manuals. And you'll also find it in several historical rulebooks that aim to educate fencers in proper conduct.
Due to time and space constraints, I'll only cite Luigi Barbasetti here.
Quotes on how to deal with naturalists and unorthodox fencers (translated into English):
"Never close the distance by holding the point against your opponent's chest."
"You pursue the opponent through continuous threats with the point, thereby driving him against the wall or towards the end of the fencing area[...]"
Quotes from the dueling guide of a student of Barbasetti:
"A fencer who is not compelled by restrictive rules during a practice bout to fence exactly as he would in a real duel will soon form misconceptions regarding the feasibility of certain actions in a genuine combat situation. I refer here once again to the fencing tournament organized by Nikolaus von Szemere. Let us consider an example: if a fencer—disregarding his opponent's blade tip extended in a threatening posture—simply rushes into the blade and lands a hit with his own attack, this was formerly scored as a touch for both fencers; however, it counts as a touch only for the attacker, because he failed to deflect or parry the threatening blade tip (or failed to execute a *cavazione* in tempo). In a real fight, he would instinctively avoid rushing into a sharp blade tip; instead, in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, he would deflect it. Consequently, the attack as he executed it here does not reflect reality."
(Bartunek, Josef, RATGEBER FÜR DEN OFFIZIER ZUR SICHERUNO DES ERFOLGES IM ZWEIKAMPFE MIT DEM SÄBEL, Esztergom 1904, S. 101f.)"
I hope this helps to better assess the issue of the blade in line. I probably won't be able to make a video about it anytime soon, although I'd really like to.
