1. Phoebe Camilletti ESS 110 The Physiology of Fencing

2. “A touch of imagination and instead of working on the strip of the Salle, masked and padded, the sword tip blunted, you are standing, naked to the waist in some glade, facing an opponent with a deadly weapon in hand. Only one of you will leave the scene. Even to think of this in a friendly pick- up bout is to make your work ten times more cautious, your determination to touch and not be touched a hundred-fold more intense, a thousand times more enjoyable. I never fence without conditioning myself to believe that if I am careless, my punishment will be a slit forearm, or a blade through my lungs” (Gallico, 2005).

3. Fitness Demands Energy FitnessMuscular Fitness AerobicAnaerobicFlexibilityStrengthEnduranceSpeedPower HighMedium LowMedium My Musings ASEP Findings Energy FitnessMuscular Fitness AerobicAnaerobicFlexibilityStrengthEnduranceSpeedPower Low- Medium Medium- Low Medium Low- Medium HighMedium- High Indeed, fencing is a sport that is 80% anaerobic. Softball and baseball are too (Reilly, 1990).

4. Areas of Discrepancy AEROBIC PROMINENCE -“The maximal oxygen uptake as a measure of cardiorespiratory fitness measurements: 51 ml. kg -1. min -1 in college champions to 67 ml. kg -1. min -1 in world class fencers.” (Harmenberg, J.) -differences between weapons/styles SPEED -differences between weapons/styles -no studies have really concluded that there is a “correlation between speed or accuracy of fencing motion and success” (Harmenberg, J.). -psychological factors

5. Areas of Discrepancy STRENGTH -needed for explosive lunge; quick retreat; deep en garde— vary between weapons/styles -“Fencers show a greater cross-sectional area (CS A) of the dominant forearm, arm, thigh, and calf, which are independent of technical level and years of training.” (Roi, 2008). -overuse injuries; primary and secondary prevention

6. Conclusion The ASEP findings are more accurate, but they cannot fully account for the subjectivity that evaluating the range of fencing styles involves.

7. References Aldo, Nadi. (1943). Nadi on Fencing. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons. Harmenberg, J. & Ceci, R. “Fencing: Biomedical and Psychological Factors.” Department of Virology, Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease Control.. Martens, R. (2004). Successful Coaching. Hong Kong: Human Kinetics. Reilly, T. (1990). The Physiology of Sports. Taylor & Francis. Roi G.S. & Bianchedi D. (2008). “The Science of Fencing: Implications for Performance and Injury Prevention.” Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.). 38 (6), 465-81.