Right of Way

Right of Way is a framework to help referees (and fencers) evaluate exchanges ending in mutual hits, as these rarely result from equal mistakes by both fencers. This rule guides fencers to prefer tactically sound choices over simply striving to hit at all costs. RoW does not simulate how a match would end in a sharp duel but trains fencers in habits beneficial for such scenarios.

Right of Way is the acknowledgement of the offensive initiative, valuing the advantage of action (attack) over reaction (defense), reflecting how sensory-motor reactions and decision-making naturally operate. Even if the defender deliberately provokes an attack, they assume the risk, believing they can successfully counter. However, provoking does not reduce the danger of the incoming attack.

A key principle for "double hits" is that if one fencer still has the chance to react (not fully committed to their action yet) and can avoid causing a mutual hit, they have a moral responsibility to do so. This promotes tactical awareness and accountability in competition. Without this accountability, double hits fail to provide meaningful feedback to the fencer who made the more significant mistake.

To illustrate this, revisit this short video from Bratislava Fecht, where our friends from Bratislavsky sermiarsky spolok prepared a showcase of how the FEBUS ruleset works in practice.

The attacker is the fencer who initiates the exchange with a committed offensive action. All other actions, such as defense and counterattacks, happen in response to this decision.

RoW has the advantage of action over reaction (virtual but sound). This is because the person who can react is obliged to do so. Simply striking back after ignoring the attack is a risky and unsafe trade.

To maintain priority, an attack must be continuous, accelerated, simple or compound with the intention to hit. Subtle technical deviations from the "ideal cut" do not remove priority; however, hesitation, withdrawal, or passive waiting will. Attacks require forward intention and presence. A retreating or reactive fencer cannot be the attacker.

Knowing who the attacker is enables the referee to correctly interpret the exchange and reward fencing that demonstrates initiative and tactical thinking.

An attack is still considered an attack even when it is compound — made up of feints or multiple movements. As long as the offensive action is continuous and threatening, it retains priority.

Priority remains with the attacker until one of three things happens:

• The defender successfully interrupts it (for example, with a parry or finding the opponent's blade, or counter-attack that prevents the hit in time).
• The attacker themselves breaks the action (by hesitating, withdrawing, or cancelling the attack).
• The attack fails to succeed (by falling short, missing, or otherwise losing its threat).

Too many feints versus a late stop hit may be evaluated as a fault on both sides, therefore no score is awarded against either.

The previous videos showed asymmetrical attacks versus counterattacks. Simultaneous attacks are almost symmetrical. Ideally, priority should be judged without slow motion, as fencers should be able to recognize the ongoing threat.

Even in these, you can find subtle patterns that might be seen as a defender's role, but we won't enforce it to this extent for longsword competitions. It is not easy to spot without slow motion or sport fencing background.

A defender is the fencer facing an immediate threat from an opponent's committed attack. Until the attack ends — whether parried, avoided, or falling short — the defender remains responsible for the exchange. Attempting to strike back before neutralizing the attack is dangerous and tactically unsound. If a double hit occurs, it is considered the defender's fault.

A valid defense must first deal with the threat rather than simply striking back. In conventional (Right of Way) systems, a counterattack that ignores the incoming action never gains priority over a valid, timely attack. The right response to being attacked is to employ defensive tactics, ideally with anticipation and awareness of the opponent's habits and intentions. In many cases, this begins with retreat, adjusted to the situation.

An effective defense creates a clear shift in momentum. The usual way to respond to an attack is with a parry, followed immediately by a riposte, allowing the defender to take the initiative and become the new attacker. A riposte may be direct or indirect, but it should be delivered without hesitation or delay.

Depending on the attacker's movement or mistakes, the defender may prepare a parry-riposte, effective against simple attacks, or use a counter-offensive action that prevents the attack from landing, which is often better against compound actions.

Understanding the defender's role helps referees judge more fairly. It also teaches fencers that the safest and most effective way to score is to first neutralize the threat and then respond with their own attack, rather than exchanging blows recklessly.

A riposte is the natural continuation of a successful defense. After a parry, the defender gains the initiative and should respond without further delay.

Retreating while parrying is acceptable, since a step back may be needed to cover distance and stay safe. If the parry happens with the first phase (back leg) of a retreat, the riposte can follow with the second phase (front leg) while still moving a bit backward. If the parry comes with the second phase, the defender should better stop retreating and riposte before opening the distance again.

If the defender keeps retreating before striking back, they lose the tempo given by the parry and invite the attacker to renew the assault. In this case it's not a riposte anymore, it's a counterattack.

In practice it is not a race where a very fast remise makes the riposte too slow.