Ecological Perspectives on Épée Fencing Footwork: A Delphi Study of Coaching and Progression

BackgroundFootwork choices in épée fencing shape distance management, action initiation and load tolerance, yet empirical guidance on stepping versus bouncing footwork is limited. This study elicited expert consensus on definitions, coaching progression and competitive application of these footwork methods.MethodsA two-round, internet-based Delphi was conducted with Olympic-level épée coaches recruited via purposive sampling (Round One <i>n</i> = 26; Round Two <i>n</i> = 21). Round One open responses underwent inductive thematic analysis to generate statements. Round Two presented concise, operationalised items (single-choice/yes-no). Consensus was pre-specified as ≥70% agreement. For each item, the modal percentage and exact 95% binomial confidence interval (CI) were reported; margins over the runner-up quantified concentration of views.ResultsTwo items reached consensus: (i) teaching sequence: teach stepping first, introduce bouncing later (76.2%; 95% CI 52.8-91.8); and (ii) en garde across development: begin static/comfortable, add bouncing later (71.4%; CI 47.8-88.7). Two items showed near-threshold majorities with large margins: bouncing faster for attack initiation (66.7%; CI 43.0-85.4), and typical attack distance has decreased in modern épée (66.7%, CI 43.0-85.4). Confidence intervals were wide because items were rated by approximately 21 coaches; exact binomial 95% intervals for proportions near two-thirds typically span ∼±20 percentage points, reflecting panel size rather than disagreement.ConclusionsExpert coaches supported a progressive footwork movement pathway (step → bounce) and indicated context-sensitive deployment: bouncing likely affords time-based advantages for attack initiation, whereas defence/change-of-direction benefits from a repertoire that includes both modes. Findings bridge practitioner knowledge with motor-learning theory and promote studies linking footwork type to kinetics and kinematics, bout outcomes and tests of moderators such as athlete characteristics and opponent tempo.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Perceptual and Motor Skills
Published
2026-02-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00315125261418346
Primary Topic
Sports injuries and prevention
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Ecological Perspectives on Épée Fencing Footwork: A Delphi Study of Coaching and Progression

Luke A. Norris, Jon A. Cree, Luke W. Oates, Anthony N. Turner et al.
Perceptual and Motor Skills
Sports injuries and prevention
article

Ecological Perspectives on Épée Fencing Footwork: A Delphi Study of Coaching and Progression

Luke A. Norris, Jon A. Cree, Luke W. Oates, Anthony N. Turner, Hannah J. H. Newman
article en

Abstract

BackgroundFootwork choices in épée fencing shape distance management, action initiation and load tolerance, yet empirical guidance on stepping versus bouncing footwork is limited. This study elicited expert consensus on definitions, coaching progression and competitive application of these footwork methods.MethodsA two-round, internet-based Delphi was conducted with Olympic-level épée coaches recruited via purposive sampling (Round One <i>n</i> = 26; Round Two <i>n</i> = 21). Round One open responses underwent inductive thematic analysis to generate statements. Round Two presented concise, operationalised items (single-choice/yes-no). Consensus was pre-specified as ≥70% agreement. For each item, the modal percentage and exact 95% binomial confidence interval (CI) were reported; margins over the runner-up quantified concentration of views.ResultsTwo items reached consensus: (i) teaching sequence: teach stepping first, introduce bouncing later (76.2%; 95% CI 52.8-91.8); and (ii) en garde across development: begin static/comfortable, add bouncing later (71.4%; CI 47.8-88.7). Two items showed near-threshold majorities with large margins: bouncing faster for attack initiation (66.7%; CI 43.0-85.4), and typical attack distance has decreased in modern épée (66.7%, CI 43.0-85.4). Confidence intervals were wide because items were rated by approximately 21 coaches; exact binomial 95% intervals for proportions near two-thirds typically span ∼±20 percentage points, reflecting panel size rather than disagreement.ConclusionsExpert coaches supported a progressive footwork movement pathway (step → bounce) and indicated context-sensitive deployment: bouncing likely affords time-based advantages for attack initiation, whereas defence/change-of-direction benefits from a repertoire that includes both modes. Findings bridge practitioner knowledge with motor-learning theory and promote studies linking footwork type to kinetics and kinematics, bout outcomes and tests of moderators such as athlete characteristics and opponent tempo.

Perceptual and Motor Skills
University of Hertfordshire (GB), Hartpury University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
Sports injuries and prevention
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.