catwood1

Sample lesson: Foil attack

, 07-29-2009 at 04:19 PM (132 Views)

As I said in my last blog, I've been thinking alot about coaching, and things to do that would take elements from multiple of the coaches I've interacted with this summer. So I wrote a lesson and posted it in this entry.

My coach often does a variation off of the same drill. Student is attacking, and will finish with a set number of disengages with a lunge. Say its 1 disengage. Initially the student with make advance with feint (starting from a normal engarde), and lunge on the coaches search. Then after doing it stationary a bit, it would evolve into doing the same thing from motion. The coach would push the student back, then the student would make a few advances pressing till he finds the right distance, then make advance feint, the coach would search, and the student would finish.

Sometimes its a different drill with 2 disengages. Same thing with advance feint, the coach backs up, student makes disengage with a 2nd advance, then the coach searches, and the student lunges to hit. Its always done with a big focus n a big change of tempo between the advance and the lunge to accelerate through the lunge to break through the space.

I've been thinking about this, and wrote a similar lesson based on the same ideas, using a bunch of other ideas, some of my own, some inspired by Michael Marx. (I don't think I have any Mr. Ma stuff in here)

Please feel free to let me know what you think

Attack with single disengage

Warm Up
W.1 From stationary extension distance, coach searches, student disengages and hits, coach searches, student disengages and hits many times repeatedly, different searches, including a search that opens the flank.
W.2 Then same thing with coach moving a little so that student must make a few advances and retreats along with this
W.3 Now coach is constantly moving from a short lunge distance. On the coach’s search, the student should make a quick explosive lunge with disengage to hit. It doesn't need to be a long lunge, but quick is the key. The coach should always be going for the 2nd parry. If the hit is in time, it will arrive well before the 2nd parry, but if its late, the attack will fail.

Element 1: Coach doesn't react to change in distance

o From stationary, student starts with absence of blade at advance lunge distance. Student makes advance. On the back leg on the advance, shows feint.
o The coach should take a small step back, but allow the student to invade the distance. He should either parry immediately on the feint, or not immediately parry. If he does not immediately parry, he should make a late parry that drives the student to finish
• If the coach immediately parries student should make disengage lunge.
• If the coach does not immediately parry, student should lunge without disengage, and finish strait
Element 2, coach can react to change in distance
o Same start
o If, however, the coach parries, and follows distance immediately, then the student should be to avoid the blade, and go back into absence of blade, and try again in a step or 2, when the student hits his distance.

Note: A key part of this is the student differentiating between the 2 different steps back a coach could take in response to the attack. In element 1, the coach isn't actually getting away, simply taking that small cursory step that fencers will basically always take. In element 2, however, the coach is truly recognizing the attack, and getting away from it. If the student tries to rush and break through that distance, the coach should make the attack fall short.

Element 3 freedom of motion with set start
o The drill ends the same, but can have a number of different starts
o Both fencers maneuvering freely, coach should tell the student 1 way to start it out of the variety of moments to go.*
• Options of when to start are:
• on the stop of the coach,
• on the attack short of the coach
• On the big step forward with no attack from the coach**
• Final option is on a finding of the blade
o Coach now has the option of immediate counter attack to keep the student honest. If coach counters, student should finish strait, without any backwards motion of the hand and no disengage. If the student flinches, then it becomes attack no, counter arrives for the coach.

Note: With any of these, I think a student should start it 1 of 2 ways, depending on the distance. If 1 of these moments appears when the fencers are in distance of each other, then the student should make immediate feint and start the attack. However, if 1 of these moments appears when the fencers are NOT in distance, the student should go to Absence of Blade and start pressing an attack until he finds his distance. I don't want to train a fencer to make a feint disengage that starts from wayyy out of distance.

Element 4 freedom of motion freedom of start
o Same thing, only student can start action on any of moments to go.

Note: In elements 3 and 4, it should be a pretty bout like scenario. When the coach is pressing the attack, it should be realistic. If the student does something stupid, HIT HIM (with the point, not the flat of the blade). If at any point when the student is pressing with AoB, the blade is easily findable by the coach, the coach should parry riposte against him. AoB is kinda pointless if the coach can easily parry it. Think about, though, that its very likely that as the coach is starting a search for the blade, the student will hit his distance. If this happens, the student MUST start the real attack there. don't just let the moment pass. If at any point the student is getting too close before starting, a counter attack by the coach might be appropriate.

Done
----------------------------

That's what I wrote. I think overall, its not bad. Obviously, if the coach breaks distance with the parry, the student could leave the blade out and make a 2nd advance with 2nd disengage then lunge. But that way seems riskier to me, because its spending more time with the blade right out in front. Its just another way of doing it, and I would probably teach 2 disengages, but in a slightly different way.

And again, let me know what ya think.

* I know "moments to go" is a term used by some... I want to say Hungarian... coach, and my moments are slightly differently from his, but at least for the sake of my writing a lesson, it gets the point across very well.

**I still have some big issues with starting an attack on the coach's step forward, because it seems extremely likely for the coach to simply finish, and have it called attack counter attack in favor of the coach. I'm still working on that. If you have any suggestions, please let me know.

Share
- Share this post on
- Digg
- Del.icio.us
- Technorati
- Twitter

Tags: NULL

Categories: Uncategorized

Email Blog Entry

« Prev Main Next »

Comments

oiuyt - 07-29-2009 06:04 PM
A couple of quick comments. If you grab me next week I can probably go more into depth and add additional thoughts.

You seem to always be connecting the footwork and the feint. Without going through carefully to confirm, it seems that you always have the (or a) feint occurring at the conclusion of an advance. Loosen that framework of thought. The disengages can occur at other places. It's quite possible to disengage mid-lunge. Especially with a couple of disengages there's no need for multiple advances. Etc.

Pairing the advance with the feint tends to cause unrealistic feints. Even pairing them with a footstep (e.g. front foot of an advance, rear foot of an advance, etc.) can. This actually fits with much of the rest of your descriptions, so it's an active concern, although certainly it could also not be a problem with what you're described.

A good feint should be indistinguishable from the start of a good attack. If they aren't the same the opponent should not be reacting. Bad feints only work because we (fencing, in general) mis-train most of our athletes.

I still have some big issues with starting an attack on the coach's step forward, because it seems extremely likely for the coach to simply finish, and have it called attack counter attack in favor of the coach. I'm still working on that. If you have any suggestions, please let me know.

Great. So now you've established a perfect counter-time opportunity instead. Still a good action for the student to set up a touch, just with a different finish.

Incidently, reacting to the advance with a quick advance lunge, which is USUALLY achievable vs. a large, preparatory advance, will frequently get an attack call where merely lunging would get a counter-attack call. The key, naturally, is the advance needs to be TINY (assuming we're still talking a distance where a lunge could hit), both to maintain the correct distance and for amount of available time.

See you in Colorado.

-B
keith - 07-29-2009 06:52 PM
Comments;

You have nothing in here about keeping the student honest. Which matters when you are talking about having the student controlling aspects of the distance.

In the warm up you are focusing on disengage/lunge. With the intention of having the student initiate their movement on the very initial movement of the search, so they are getting towards performing the disengage during (not prior to, the initiation of the lunge) - good idea . One aspect you might want to include is the forward-extension (with foot) by the coach to get the pupil seeing the difference between search/preparation and extension/line change/attack.

In element 1 you move away from this (the disengage is coming within the step component). Given the distance, with the coach retreating (but insufficiently), the more honest action is probably search followed by parry. Or no search with a parry during the lunge. Your action is probably more appropriate where the sequence is;

Student leading (very similar to your warm up but now student led).

Coach retreats their back foot on the students front foot - the coach is just mirroring to maintain distance.

While mobile student advances front foot.

Coach does not mirror.

Student extends on back foot and lunges.

Coach may or may not parry.

If you then start from a longer distance you move to a point where the student must make an initial partial extension (with or without evasion of search), a second step and then hit with a lunge (with or without a disengage of the parry).

The other catch with element 1 is the size of the students step; there may be a tendency for them to try and steal some distance with and overly long step (you have no actions on the students front foot). The student may end up pushing to far on the front foot and end up presenting the blade for a beat. Again keep them honest.

2 cents
Allen Evans - 07-30-2009 08:12 AM
I've just given this lesson a brief read, but it seemed to have very little student initiated actions until the end. I think it's important that the student learn to start an action, even in the beginning levels of execution. You might give some thought to that.

A Evans
catwood1 - 08-17-2009 02:45 PM
Keith,

I thought I would be keeping the student honest. I don't see where they have the opportunity to "cheat." Its true that I'm not doing any actions on the students front foot of the advance, but, when the coach has the option of counter attacking, it would be very early in the action, like on the front foot.

Looking at this again, I would include that option earlier. Probably in element 2 of having coach reacting with different distances. Coach either does nothing, breaks distance, or immediately counter attacks. I think that would serve to keep them honest in the way that you mean.

Also, I don't follow you when you say that the warm up is disengage lunge, while element 1 puts the disengage in the advance. I would say that the disengage is happening at the same time in both, which is right as the lunge is starting.

I'm not trying to argue with you, just my thoughts. Do you still disagree?
catwood1 - 08-17-2009 02:46 PM
And on a side note, the first time I was doing this with a student, I probably would not get through the entire thing in 1 lesson of 20-30 minutes. There is alot of bout context to this lesson, so it would need to be a student that can perform everything from element 1 cleanly, before moving on to 3 and 4. I might do a simplified version of 2 or 3 the first time in a lesson, but I wouldn't get into the nuts and bolts of it, unless it was a fairly advanced student that was just breezing through it.
keith - 08-17-2009 08:22 PM
Well I was trying not to disagree at all! Although I have been told I have a naturally critical demeanor.

As to the tempo stuff - it is hard to parse that in text so my thoughts might not apply. I still suspect that there is a danger of training a disengage for an early parry that leaves time for a second - but only you know if that is actually true given the actual distance you are working at.

As to the cheating and honesty bit. Any task (fencing or otherwise) has 'proper solutions' and workarounds. No matter what you are trying to teach there is danger of the student learning the workaround by mistake - and having to be retaught later.

happy trails.