If you're saying that there's no glossary or explicit list (such as Ringeck's explicitly listing the "three wonders"), I believe you're right. If you mean that there weren't three phases of combat (OK, so maybe "ranges" is a poor term; I stand corrected), and that those three terms aren't used in conjuction with those three phases, I'll have to disagree. I might not have the world's greatest intellect, but (1) there appear to be three phases of combat in their manuals (2) we need names and (3) those terms appear in conjunction with those phases of combat, thus it seems a reasoned conclusion. You're free to fuss over the fact that the recorders of the Lichtenauer tradition forgot to spell everything out step by step for us. Past a certain point I don't let it bother me and have no problem saying that represents a modern understanding of a subject that's opaque in many ways. I'm open to alternative, reasoned opinions, and have changed my mind in the face of a compelling contrary argument. Until then I reserve the right to spout off my understanding (including those times when I'm struggling to put both feet in my mouth). I don't have that one. I've seen it a few times and have casually flipped through it. IIRC it was only English (?) in which case I'm not too interested.