Advertisement

Sports Medicine

, Volume 38, Issue 6, pp 465–481 | Cite as

The Science of Fencing

Implications for Performance and Injury Prevention
  • Giulio S. RoiEmail author
  • Diana Bianchedi
Review Article

Abstract

In this review we analyse the data from the literature on fencing with the aim of creating a psychobiological and multi-factorial model of fencing performance.

Fencing is an open-skilled combat sport that was admitted to the first modern Olympic Games in Athens (1896). It is mainly practised indoors, with three different weapons: the foil, the sabre and the épée, each contested with different rules. A fencing international tournament may last between 9 and 11 hours. Bouts represent only 18% of total competition time, with an effective fight time of between 17 and 48 minutes.

The physical demands of fencing competitions are high, involving the aerobic and anaerobic alactic and lactic metabolisms, and are also affected by age, sex, level of training and technical and tactical models utilized in relation to the adversary.

The anthropometrical characteristics of fencers show a typical asymmetry of the limbs as a result of the practice of an asymmetrical sport activity. Fencing produces typical functional asymmetries that emphasize the very high level of specific function, strength and control required in this sport.

Moreover, the physical demands of fencing are closely linked to the perceptual and psychological ones, and all are subjected to a continuous succession of changes during the bouts based on the behaviour of the opponent. For this reason it is difficult to identify a significant relationship between any one physiological characteristic and performance, and performance is more likely to be influenced by perceptual and neuro-physiological characteristics. Fencers need to anticipate the opponent and to mask their true intentions with a game of feints and counterfeints, which must be supported by an adequate psycho-physical condition to prevent central and peripheral fatigue.

Fencing is not particularly dangerous; however, there is a fine line between a fatal lesion and a simple wound from a broken blade. The suggestions for injury prevention fall into three primary areas: (i) actions that can be taken by participants; (ii) improvements in equipment and facilities; and (iii) administration of fencing competitions. As in every other sport, the prevention of accidents must be accomplished at various levels and above all must involve the institutions that are responsible for safety in sports.

Keywords

Knee Extensor Handgrip Strength Fatal Injury World Championship Combat Sport 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review.

References

  1. 1.
    Porzio L, Mele G. Arte gladiatoria dimicandi. 15th century swordsmanship of master Filippo Vadi. Highland Village, (TX): Chivalry Bookshelf, 2002Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Labat. L’art en fait d’armes. Toulouse, 1696Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Agrippa C. Trattato di scienza d’arme. Et un dialogo in detta materia. Venice, 1604Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Waterloh E, Hollman W, Rittel HL, et al. Die bedeutung der schutzkleidung bei spitzenfechtern für temperaturregulation und kardiopulmonale leistungsfähigkeit. Mediziner Welt 1968; 40: 2174–85Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Daya A, Donne B, O’Brien M. Newly designed fencing face mask: effects on cardiorespiratory costs and sub—maximal performance. Br J Sports Med 2006; 40: 6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Iglesias Y, Reig X. Valoració funcional específica en l’esgrima [dissertation]. Barcelona: University of Barcelona, 1998Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roi GS, Pittaluga I. Time—motion analysis in women’s sword fencing. Proceedings of the Fourth IOC Congress on Sport Sciences; 1997 Oct 22-25; Monaco: 66Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lavoie JM, Leger L, Pitre R, et al. Compètitions d’escrime: epée. Analyse des durées et distances de déplacement. Med du Sport 1985; 59: 279–83Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rittel HF, Waterloh E. Telemetrische Untersuchungen beim Fechttraining. Leistungssport 1975; 5: S116–21Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sardella F. Risultanze delle ricerche effettuate su schermidori impegnati in esercitazioni di gara nel corso degli allenamenti premondiali 1982. Scherma 1983; XXV Suppl. 6: 2–5Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li JX, So RCH, Yuan YWI, et al. Muscle strain and cardiovascular stress in fencing competition. Proceedings of the 5th IOC World Congress on Sport Sciences; 1999 Oct 31-Nov 5; Sydney: 222Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cerizza C, Roi GS. Aspetti fisiologici dell’attività sportiva di base, le caratteristiche fondamentali del giovane schermidore. In: Lodetti G, Ravasini C, editors. Sport & educazione giovanile. Milan: Ghedini Editore, 1994: 89–96Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hoch F, Werle E, Weicker H. Sympathoadrenergic regulation in elite fencers in training and competition. Int J Sports Med 1988; 9: 141–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Caldarone G, Pelliccia A, Gambuli N, et al. Valori antropometrici, abitudini alimentari e parametri ematochimico in un gruppo di schermidori di elevato livello agonistico. In: Studi e ricerche di medicina dello sport applicata alla scherma. Pisa: Giardini Editore, 1983: 51–63Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Falsenberg D, Gowin W. Bone densitometry: application in sports—medicine. Eur J Radiol 1998; 28: 150–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Van Dam B, Waterloh E. Die wirkung eines multi—vitamielektrolyt—präparats auf einige biocheische variablen sowie auf leistungsbeeinflussende faktoren im fechten. Leistungssport 1979; 9: 110–5Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Van Dam B, Haralambie G. Die änderungen einiger biochemischer parameter durch sportartspezifische belastungen im fecht sport. Leistungssport 1977; 7: 285–92Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Van Dam B. Vitamins and sport. Br J Sports Med 1978; 12: 74–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Reinberg A, Proux S, Bartal JP, et al. Circadian rhythms in competitive saber fencers: internal desynchronization and performance. Chronobiol Int 1985; 2: 195–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Roi GS, Toran G, Fiore A, et al. Zur entwicklung eines leistung smodells im spitzensport am beispiel fechten. Leistungssport 2002; 4: 57–62Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tsolakis CH, Bogdanis GC, Vagenas G. Anthropometric profile and limb asymmetries in young male and female fencers. J Hum Mov Stud 2006; 50: 201–16Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rivera MA, Rivera-Brown AM, Frontera WR. Health related physical fitness characteristics of elite Puerto Rican athletes. J Strength Cond Res 1998; 12: 199–203Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vander L, Barry F, Wrisley D, et al. Physiological profile of national—class national collegiate athletic association fencers. JAMA 1984; 252: 500–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Roi GS, Mognoni P. Lo spadista modello. SdS 1987; 9: 51–7Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Harmenberg J, Ceci R, Barvestad P, et al. Comparison of different tests of fencing performance. Int J Sports Med 1991; 12: 573–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Koutedakis Y, Ridgeon A, Sharp NCC, et al. Seasonal variation of selected performance parameters in épée fencers. Br J Sports Med 1993; 27: 171–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Margonato V, Roi GS, Cerizza C, et al. Maximal isometric force and muscle cross’sectional area of the forearm in fencers. J Sports Sci 1994; 12: 567–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nyström J, Lindvall O, Ceci R, et al. Physiological and morphological characteristics of world class fencers. Int J Sports Med 1990; 11: 136–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tsolakis CH, Katsikas CH. Long term effects of a combined physical conditioning and fencing training program on neuromuscular performance in elite fencers. Int J Fitness 2006; 2 (1): 35–42Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Roi GS. Caratteristiche fisiologiche dello schermidore. In: Roi GS, Toran G, Maserati A, et al., editors. Considerazioni per formulare un modello di prestazione della scherma moderna. Naples: Associazione Italiana Maestri di Scherma, 1999: 17–20Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Carter JEL, Heath BH. Somatotyping: development and applications. Cambridge: University Press, 1990Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Stewart K, Peredo AR, Williams C. Physiological and morphological factors associated with successful fencing performance. J Hum Ergol 1977; 6: 53–60Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Manning JT, Bundred PE, Taylor R. The ratio of 2nd to 4th digit length: a prenatal correlate of ability in sport. In: Relly T, Marfell-Jones M, editors. Kinanthropometry VIII: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of the International Society for the Advancement of Kinanthropometry (ISAK). London: Routlege, 2003: 165–74Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Manning JT, Scutt D, Wilson J, et al. The ratio of 2nd to 4th digit length: a predictor of sperm numbers and concentrations of testosterone, luteinizing hormone and oestrogen. Hum Reprod 1998; 13: 3000–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Voracek M, Reimer B, Ertl C, et al. Digit ratio (2D:4D), lateral preferences, and performance in fencing. Percept Motor Skills 2006; 103: 427–46PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sapega A, Minkoff J, Valsamis M, et al. Musculoskeletal performance testing and profiling of elite competitive fencers. Clin Sports Med 1984; 3: 231–44PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gioux M, Arne P, Dogui M, et al. Biomechanical and electromyographycal characteristics of the human quadriceps in relation with sport performance. Proceedings of the World Congress of Sports Medicine. Vienna: Urban and Schwarzenberg, 1984: 699–705Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tsolakis CK, Bogdanis GC, Vagenas GK, et al. Influence of twelve—month conditioning program on physical growth, serum hormones, and neuromuscular performance of peripubertal male fencers. J Strength Cond Res 2006; 20: 908–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bressan A, Ranzani P. La valutazione funzionale degli arti inferiori nella scherma. SdS 1998; 41/42: 104–19Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bressan A. Fiorettisti a confronto. SdS 1990; 19: 10–21Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Astrand PO, Rodhal K. Textbook of work physiology. New York: McGraw Hill, 1997Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Di Prampero PE, Piñera-Limas F, Sassi G. Maximal muscular power aerobic and anaerobic, in 116 athletes performing at the XIXth Olympic Games in Mexico. Ergonomics 1970; 13: 665–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Macarez JA. Effets de l’entrainment et d’un exercise bref et sousmaximal sur differentes variables physiologiques chez de jeunes escrimeurs. Med du Sport 1978; 52: 13–9Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Naghavi H. Echocardiographic aspects of young elite fencers [abstract]. Br J Sports Med 2002; 36: 6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Whyte G, Sharma S, George K, et al. Alterations in cardiac morphology and function in elite multi—disciplinary athletes. Int J Sports Med 1999; 20: 222–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Williams JM, Hoepner BJ, Moody DL, et al. Personality traits of champion level female fencers. Res Q 1970; 41: 446–53PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Caldarone G, Berlutti G. Aspetti medici della scherma. In: Studi e ricerche di medicina dello sport applicata alla scherma. Pisa: Giardini Editore, 1983: 15–28Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Colombo A, De Ambroggi A. Studio sull’età dei partecipanti alle prove individuali dei Campionati del Mondo di scherma. Roma: Federazione Italiana Scherma, 1982Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Azemar G, Ripoll H, Simonet P, et al. L’evaluation de la lateralité en escrime: son interet et ses modealites pratiques. In: VII Congrès Medical de la Federation Internationale d’Escrime. Pisa: Giardini Editore, 1986: 93–116Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Rossi B, Salmaso D. La preference manuelle dans l’escrime. In: L’escrime à travers les ages de la vie. VIII Congrès Medical de la Fédération Internationale d’Escrime; 1987 Jul 15; Lausanne: 77–111Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bisiacchi PS, Azemar G, Ripoll H, et al. Left’handedness in fencers: an attentional advantage. Precept Mot Skills 1985; 61: 507–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Klinger A, Adrian M. Foil target impact forces during the fencing lunge. Biomechanics. VIII—B, International Series of Biomechanics, Vol. 4b. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics, 1983Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Adrian M, Klinger A. A biomechanical analysis of the fencing lunge. Med Sci Sports 1976; 8: 56Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Cronin J, Mc Nair PJ, Marshall RN. Lunge performance and his determinants. J Sport Sci 2003; 21: 49–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Lin FT. Optimal handle angle of the fencing foil for improved performance. Percept Mot Skills 2004; 98: 920–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Legnani G, Zappa B, Roi GS, et al. Dynamic simulation of fencing hits. ISB Symposium on Computer Simulation in Biomechanics; 1999 Aug 6-7; Calgary (AB): 156–60Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Natta F, Nouillot P. Searching for characteristic variables of first step in ‘target’ sabre fencer. XXIV Congrès de la Société de Biomécanique; 2004 Sep 8-10; Creteil: 70Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Bard C, Guezennec I, Papin J. Escrime: analise de l’exploration visuelle. Med Sport 1981; 55: 246–53Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Pierson ER. Comparison of fencers and non—fencers by psychomotor, space perception and anthropometric measures. Res Q 1956; 27: 90–6Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Singer RN. Speed and accuracy of movement as related to fencing success. Res Q 1968; 39: 1080–3PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Sanderson FH. The effect of directional uncertainty on reaction time and movement time in a fencing task. J Sport Sci 1983; 1: 105–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Williams LR, Walmsley A. Response timing and muscular coordination in fencing: a comparison of elite and novice fencers. J Sci Med Sport 2000; 3: 460–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Williams LR, Walmsley A. Response amendment in fencing: differences between elite and novice subjects. Percept Mot Skills 2000; 91: 131–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Do MC, You E. Do centrally programmed anticipatory postural adjustments in fast stepping affect performance of an associated ‘touche’ movement? Exp Brain Res 1999; 129: 462–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    You E, Do MC. In fencing, does intensive practice equally improve the speed performance of touché when it is performed alone and in combination with the lunge? Int J Sports Med 2000; 21: 122–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Toran G. Introduzione alla tattica schermistica. Rome: Società Stampa Sportiva, 1996Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Di Russo F, Taddei F, Aprile T, et al. Neural correlates of fast stimulus discrimination and response selection in top—level fencers. Neurosci Lett 2006; 408: 113–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Zemper ED, Harmer PH. Fencing. In: Caine D, Caine C, Linder K, editors. Epidemiology of sports injuries. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics, 1996: 186–95Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Roi GS, Fascì A. Requests for medical assistance during fencing matches. Ital J Sports Traumatol 1988; 1: 55–62Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Naghavi H. A study of traumatic events in junior fencing competitions [abstract]. Br J Sports Med 2002; 36: 6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Naghavi H. Study of traumatic injuries in women fencing competitions [abstract]. Br J Sports Med 2002; 36: 6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Lanese RR, Strauss RH, Leizman DJ, et al. Injury and disability in matched men’s and women’s intercollegiate sports. Am J Publ Health 1990; 80: 1459–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Zemper E. Epidemiology of athletic injuries. In: Mckeag D, Hough D, Zemper E, editors. Primary care sports medicine. Dubuque (IA): Brown & Banchmark, 1993: 63–73Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Kelm J, Anagnostakos K, Deubel G, et al. The rupture of the tibialis tendon in a world class veteran fencer. Sportsverletz Sportschaden 2004; 18: 148–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Muller-Strum AE, Biener K. Fechtsportunfalle Epidemiologie und prevention. Deut Zeit Sportmed 1991; 42: 48–52Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Moyer J, Konin J. An overview of fencing injuries [abstract]. Am Fencing 1992; 42: 25Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Carter C, Hell J, Zemper E. What hurts and why: data from the 1992 USFA fencing injury survey. Am Fencing 1993; 43: 16–7Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Roi GS, Fascì A. Indagine sugli eventi traumatici nelle gare giovanili di scherma. Med Sport 1986; 39: 45–8Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Calvo-Rubal A, Martínez F, Tarigo A. Cranial wounds of the skull by fencing foil [in Spanish]. Neurocirugia 2006; 17: 550–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Guidelines for safety in fencing for fencers, coaches, referees, clubs, and competitions organisers [online]. Available from URL: (http://www.britishfencing.com/British_Fencing.asp?.PageID=100) [Accessed 2007 May 8]
  81. 81.
    White M. Off—season strength training for competitive fencer. Strength Condit J 1995; 17 (6): 62–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Rippetoe M. Strength and conditioning for fencing. Strength Condit J 2000; 22 (2): 42–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Kucera K, Henn S. Pravention und physiotherapie von verletzungen und uberlastungsschaden im fechten. Sport Orthop Sport Traumatol 2003; 19: 273–80Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Timpka T, Ekstrand J, Svanstrom L. From sports injury prevention to safety promotion in sports. Sports Med 2006; 36: 733–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Education and Research Department IsokineticItaly

Personalised recommendations