Talk:Aldo Nadi

Aldo Nadi on "The Lunge"
I have removed the following text from the article. I believe it is too detailed for the scope of the biographical article on Aldo Nadi. Also I have concerns that the conclusion of this section is not NPOV. I think it might be possible to add a one or two sentence summary of the material below back in to the article, along with other information on the style of fencing that Nadi taught. A summary of this information would also be appropriate in an article on Nadi's book On Fencing, if one were to be created.

Text removed from article begins here:
 * Aldo Nadi stated that the lunge should start with the point being exploded into the target by an unrestrained, cataclysmic (in a sense) drive originating from the left leg. The right heel should be the last part of the body to be put into motion in a lunge.  Nadi likened the motion of the lunge to falling face forward toward your opponent (being driven of course by the back leg straightening) with the motion of the front leg serving only to catch your balance after the touch is made.  Nadi believed that one must let the point lead the lunge toward the target and every ounce of energy, strength, and momentum be garnered by the fencer to propel that point toward the target.  Thus one doesn't push the point toward the target.  The point pulls the fencer toward the target and the fencer must learn how to convert all her energy and power to back up that point until it is driven home.  The process of learning this lunge involves learning to use the energy from the back leg pushing in order to shift your momentum, weight and force to the point of your weapon.  He writes very clearly that the right foot should land after the touch and only to prevent the fencer from falling on her face.  Nadi notes that moving the leading leg first (kicking out, in a sense) is a dead give-away to the lunge and that in mastering his technique the fencer's point will move inexorably and irresistably into the target.  Nadi writes that it was one of the gravest teaching errors he saw when fencing coaches chided their students for allowing the trailing leg to be dragged forward an inch or two because of the force and momentum of her lunge.  Nadi wrote that in a well executed lunge the momentum and force the fencer generates results in the trailing foot being dragged an inch or two.  Once you have experienced both lunges, the method described by the Master (Nadi) is indisputably the method you will prefer.  It feels faster and more powerful to the fencer - and that is because it is.  The "French" style certainly looks more refined - but that isn't what fencing is about.

End of text removed from article.

--Lini 02:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Aldo and Nedo
What I fail to understand from this article is why Aldo was considered to be the better of the two if his brother Nedo frequently outfenced him and, hence, Aldo always saw him as a challenge to be conquered. Besides, he won more medals than Aldo. Was Nedo always lucky to get easier opponents or how else would we explain the bigger number of medals? What about his bouts with Aldo? If Aldo saw him as something to aspire to, even in those bouts between the two of them, then in what sense was he better than Nedo?? --B. Jankuloski (talk) 00:45, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

It might have something to do with Aldo's self-promotion and his two books. Plus, with Nedo's years in Argentina and his early death, there was less opportunity for him to burnish his reputation. Jsavit (talk) 00:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure where the idea that Aldo was a better fencer is coming from. Aldo himself states several times in his autobiography that his brother Nedo was the better fencer, and everything I have read elsewhere is in accord with that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Onlyfencing (talk • contribs)