擊劍是一種開放性運動，要求選手在移動快速的攻退瞬間去知覺對手產生的訊息，以作為攻擊或躲避的依據。目的：本研究探討對戰中的選手在距離、時間差及速度等運動學參數的特徵，並觀察此些運動學參數特徵與對戰結果的關係。方法：六名男子擊劍國手依序與彼此對戰，兩方相距90, 100或130公分用以觀察起始距離對攻防角色所產生的不同影響。攻擊方在指示鈴聲後自行啟動以兩步為限的攻擊動作，目標以手指接觸到對手慣用手側胸；後退方限制不能發揮手部技巧處理攻擊，僅能以後退腳步退開攻擊，後退步伐數不限（第一段交鋒），若其成功逃避攻擊，則可再度發動以兩歩為限的攻擊接觸原攻擊方（第二段交鋒）。每名實驗參與者依指示擔任攻擊方或後退方，在每種距離情境下進行10次試作，因此共有900次試作。以高速攝影機（200Hz）拍攝參與者矢狀面影片，並追蹤對戰雙方脖子、攻擊方指尖的x座標進行分析。
結果：兩段交鋒所呈現的結果有所不同，源自於操弄在第一段交鋒的相對距離因第一波攻擊產生後而不再明顯。由結果顯示，在第一段交鋒中，不同的相對距離對於攻擊方的成功率、使用交叉步比例、策略性製造平手結果所產生的第一段攻擊誤差距離、以及雙方動作啟動時間差、雙方最大速度相對值均造成顯著差異；其運動學特徵在不同對戰結果中可看出，獲勝的對戰中有較高的交叉步使用率、雙方動作的啟動時間差較大，雙方產生最大速度的時間差也較大。在第二段交鋒則可觀察到較小的雙方啟動時間差及攻防角色產生的影響，即後退方會比攻擊方先啟動動作、而雙方產生最大速度的相對值也較小。結論：綜合上述結果，可推論出若攻防兩方相距90公分以上，以快速度積極向前是成功攻擊的有效策略，意即「速度」是攻擊方能否在第一段交鋒成功觸及對手的關鍵；而由第一波攻擊失誤或攻擊方策略上故意製造平手所產生的第二段距離相對地遠小於90公分，儘早發動反攻才能成功觸及對手，即說明動作啟動時間在第二段的重要性。本研究結果呼應了Gibson（1961）所提出的知覺與行動相互連結的概念，並提供擊劍選手對戰之間的基礎運動學分析，可應用於實際訓練及比賽中以增進運動表現。

Fencing is an open-skilled combat sport that requires fencers’ perception and action tightly coupled to fulfill the severe spatio-temporal constraints while dueling with the opponent. Purpose: The present study investigated the characteristics of kinematics between fencers in different duel situations, and explored the relationship between the kinematics characteristics and the performance outcomes. Methods: Six male national-level fencers performed duel with one another in a round robin format. Three initial distances of 90, 100, and 130 cm between the opponents were used to examine the characteristics of attack and defense performance. The attack initiator were instructed to self-trigger the two-step forward movement to reach the defender who was required not to react with any hand skills but retreat by footwork only (the 1st phase), and in case of an unsuccessful attack, the defender should initiate his rebound attack to the attacker (the 2nd phase). Each fencer played the role of both attacker and defender with one another for 10 trials per distance condition with the total of 900 trials of the duel fencing performance collected. A 200 fps high speed camera was used to capture the sagittal view of the duel performance. The anterior part of the neck of both fencers and the index finger tip of the attacker were digitized for analyses.
Results: The results demonstrated the very different profiles for the two phases of duel because the original distance manipulation had been washed out at the end of the initial attack. For the 1st phase, different distances resulted in different winning rate, different rate of using cross-steps, different movement initiation time lags, different amount of spatial error leading to a “draw” in the 2nd phase, and different amount of difference in maximum movement velocity between fencers. In terms of the kinematics characteristics for different performance outcome, the winning outcome tended to have higher cross-step rate, the movement initiation time lag tended to be longer, and the amount of difference of the maximum movement velocity between fencers also tended to be larger. The 2nd phase, however, was not influenced by the distance manipulation, but the winning outcome tended to show not only smaller movement initiation time lag but also a directional effect, that is, defender initiated the movement earlier than the attacker; and a closer occurrence of the maximum movement velocity of the 2 fencers. Conclusion: Based on the integration of the kinematics analyses, we conclude that when the fencers were space apart more than 90 cm, “to fight” aggressively with high maximum approaching velocity was the useful strategies to make a successful attack, in other words, “velocity” played an important role in determining the results in the 1st phase. Spacing between fencers in the 2nd phase was much shorter because it was the error or strategically-left distance from the initial attack, thereby the quick initiation of rebound attack became the key element in winning the duel. These results were interpreted as the further evidence of the perception-action coupling (Gibson, 1961), which provided the basic understandings of kinematics analyses in duel of fencing, and could apply to practical training and competitions for better performance.

Bootsma, R. J., & Van Wierigen, P. C. W. (1990). Timing an attacking forehand drive in table tennis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1, 21-29.
Bower, T. G. R. (1974). Development in infancy. San Francisco: Freeman.
Clifton, R. K., Muir, D. W., Ashmead, D. H., & Clarkson, M. G. (1993). Is visually guided reaching in early infancy a myth? Child Development, 64, 1099–1110.
Chen, Y.H., & Liu, Y.T. (2007, December). Perceiving the distances with a hand-held object and a lunge (in fencing). Poster session presented at the annual meeting of Asia-Pacific Conference on Exercise and Sports Science 2007, Hiroshima, Japan.
Chen, Y.H., & Liu, Y.T. (2008, June). Perceiving the distances of opponent’s lunge in fencing. Poster session presented at the annual meeting of North-American Society For Psychology of Sport and Physical Activity 2008, Niagara Falls, Canada.
Cronin, J., McNair, P., & Marshall, R. (2003). Lunge performance and its determinants. Journal of Sports Science, 21, 49-57.
Do, M., & Yiou, E. (1999). Do centrally programmed anticipatory postural adjustments in fast stepping affect performance of an associated “touche” movement? Experimental Brain Research, 129, 462-466.
Edelman, G.E. (1987) Neural Darwinism: the theory of neuronal group selection. New York: Basic Books.
Fischer, M. H. (2000). Estimating reachability: whole body engagement or postural stability? Human Movement Science, 19, 297-318.
Gasell, A. (1929). Maturation and infant behaviour pattern. Psychological Review, 36, 307-319.
Gabbard, C., Ammar, D. & Lee, S. (2006). Perceived reachability in single- and multiple-degree-of freedom workspaces. Journal of Motor Behavior, 38, 423-429.
Gabbard, C., Cordova, A. & Ammar, D. (2007). Estimation of reach in peripersonal and extrapersonal space: a developmental view. Developmental Neuropsychology, 32, 749-756.
Gabbard, C., Cordova, A. & Lee, S. (2007). Examining the effects of postural constraints in estimating reach. Journal of Motor Behavior, 39, 242-246.
Gibson, J. J. (1961). Ecological optics. Vision Research, 1, 253-262.
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Harmenberg, J., Ceci, R., Barvestad, P., Hjerpe, K., & NystrÖm, J. (1991). Comparison of different tests of fencing performance. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 12, 573-576.
Hubbard, A. W., & Seng, C.N. (1954). Visual movement of batters. Research Quarterly, 25, 42-57.
Ketlinski, R., & Pickens, L. (1973). Characteristics of male fencers in the 28th annual NCAA championships. Research Quarterly , 44, 434-439.
Klinger, A. K., & Adrian, M. J. (1983). Foil target impact forces during the fencing lunge. In H. Masti & K. Kobayashi (Eds.). Biomechanics VIII-B: Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Biomechanics Nagoya, Japan, (pp. 882–888). Champaign, Illinois: Human Kinetics.
Kugler, P. N., Kelso, J. A. S., & Turvey, M. T. (1980). On the concept of coordinative structures as dissipative structures: I. Theoretical lines of convergence. In G.E. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.), Tutorials in motor behavior (pp. 3-47). Amsterdam: North Holland.
Lee, D.N. (1978). The functions of vision. In H. L. Pick Jnr, & E. Saltzman (Eds.), Modes of perceiving and processing information (pp. 159-170). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Lukovich, I. (1986). Fencing. Debrecen: Alfoldi Printing House.
Michaels, C.F., & Carello, M. C. (1981) Direct Perception. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pretice-Hall, Inc.
Müller-Lyer, F.C. (1889). Optiche Urteilstäuschungen, Dubois-Reymonds Archiv für Physiologie, VII, 263–270.
Natta, F., & Nouillor, P. (2004). Searching for characteristic variables of the first step in “target” saber fencer. Archives of Physiology and Biochemistry, Vol. 112 Suppl., p.124, 29ème Congrès de la Société de Biomécanique, Paris, 8-10 Septembre 2004.
Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive Psychology. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Newell, K. M. (1986). Constraints on the development of coordination. In M. G. Wade & H. T. A. Whiting (Eds.), Motor skill acquisition in children: Aspects of coordination and control (pp. 341-360). Amsterdam: Martinies NIJHOS.
Robinovitch, S. N. (1998). Perception of postural limits during reaching. Journal of Motor Behavior, 30, 252-358.
Rochat, P. (1995). Perceived reachability for self and for others by 3- to 5- year-old children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 59, 317-333.
Rochat, P., Goubet, N., & Senders, S.J (1999). To reach or not to reach? Perception of body effectivities by young infants. Infant and Child Development, 8, 129-148.
Sapega, A. A., Minkoff, J., Valsamis, M., & Nicholas, J.A. (1984). Musculoskeletal performance testing and profiling of elite competitive fencers. Clinics in Sports Medicine, 3, 231-244.
Sanderson, F. H. (1983). The effect of directional uncertainty on reaction time and movement time in a fencing task. Journal of Sports Science, 1,105-110.
Schwartz, S. H. (1999). Visual perception: a clinical orientation (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Shepard, R. N. (1990) Mind sights: original visual illusions, ambiguities, and other anomalies, with a commentary on the play of mind in perception and art. New York: Freeman.
Sherrington, C. (1906). The integrative action of the nervous system. New Haven. CT: Yale University Press.
Szabo, L. (1977). Fencing and the master. Budapest: Corvina Kiado.
Turvey, M. T., & Shaw, R. E. (1979). The primacy of perceiving: An ecological reformulation of perception for understanding memory. In L. G. Nilsson (Ed.), Perspectives on memory research: Essays in honor of Uppsala University's 500th anniversary (pp. 167-222). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Wang, S. T., & Shiang, T. Y. (1997). The reaction and strength of fencing lunge. Physical Education Journal, 1, 363-374.
Williams, A. M., Davids, K., & Williams, J. G. (1999). Visual perception & action in sport. London: E & FN spon.
Williams, L. R. T., & Walmsley, A.(2005). Response timing and muscular coordination in fencing: a comparison of elite and novice fencers. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 3 ,460-475.
Woodworth, R. S. (1899). The accuracy of voluntary movement. Psychological Review Monographs, 3, 1-144.
Yiou, E., & Do, M. (2000). In fencing, does intensive practice equally improve the speed performance of the touche when it is performed alone and in combination with the lunge. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 21, 122-126.
Yiou, E., Schneider, C., & Roussel, D. (2007). Coordination of rapid stepping with arm pointing: Anticippatory changes and step adaptation. Human Movement Science, 26, 357-375.
Yonas, A., & Hartman, B. (1993). Perceiving the affordance of contact in four- and five-month-old infants. Child Development, 64, 298-308.