Goloubitski attack/total point scored ratio

[Grasshopper]

I just watched the original Goloubitski Golden Bouts (worth twice the price) video and counted the number of points he scored on his attack. In three 15 hit bouts (45 total points), he scored only 10 on his attack.

By my count, 3 vs Kim, 4 vs Gregory and 3 vs Zennaro.
(note: some of his counter-attacks may be attacks in prep, but I mainly counted attacks where he clearly had ROW.)

Before I counted, I knew it would be rather low, but is this not amazing???!!!

This begs the question: In foil, how important is it to attack?

(Also curious whether the G-man himself has any comment on this. )

[ReverseLunge]

Yeah that was an amazing video. Well since ROW is the only way to score in foil, I think it's not so much how well G-man attacks it's about how well G-man takes over ROW. I've seen other video where he attacks none stop. It all depends on who he is up against. If you notice in the Golden bouts video, all three of his opponents are very agressive attackers. He played it just right. Though I have to say I thought Kim was the ebtter fencer and should have won that bout.

[achilleus]

I just watched the original Goloubitski Golden Bouts (worth twice the price) video and counted the number of points he scored on his attack. In three 15 hit bouts (45 total points), he scored only 10 on his attack.

By my count, 3 vs Kim, 4 vs Gregory and 3 vs Zennaro.
(note: some of his counter-attacks may be attacks in prep, but I mainly counted attacks where he clearly had ROW.)

Before I counted, I knew it would be rather low, but is this not amazing???!!!

This begs the question: In foil, how important is it to attack?

(Also curious whether the G-man himself has any comment on this. )

Barring the nebulous attack into prep, what about false attacks? Attacks that fell short or were parried? Attacks that landed off target?

They also play a role into determining the importance of the attack.

I seem to remember his bout with Elvis he moved up and down the strip a lot. As opposed to his bout with Kim, were he was mainly defensive.

[Grasshopper]

Barring the nebulous attack into prep, what about false attacks? Attacks that fell short or were parried? Attacks that landed off target?

They also play a role into determining the importance of the attack.

I seem to remember his bout with Elvis he moved up and down the strip a lot. As opposed to his bout with Kim, were he was mainly defensive.

In all 3 matches he is moving like a madman - Forward back forward back, making tonnes of attacks that end short. The interesting thing to me is that he seems to purposely not finish his attacks. I'm sure if you counted the number of his "false attacks" or attacks that end short, the number would be well in the hundreds.

[achilleus]

In all 3 matches he is moving like a madman - Forward back forward back, making tonnes of attacks that end short. The interesting thing to me is that he seems to purposely not finish his attacks. I'm sure if you counted the number of his "false attacks" or attacks that end short, the number would be well in the hundreds.

There's the catch.

Determining the importance of the attack is not solely based on the number of attacks that one scores with.

After all, Kim scores almost all his touches against Golubitsky with the flick attack, and while he lost that bout against Golubitsky, he is the current Olympic Champion.

[Grasshopper]

There's the catch.

Determining the importance of the attack is not solely based on the number of attacks that one scores with.

After all, Kim scores almost all his touches against Golubitsky with the flick attack, and while he lost that bout against Golubitsky, he is the current Olympic Champion.

Actually, Kim scored with alot of counter-time flicks to the back mixed with flick attacks, but I do agree with you about your point - some excellent fencers score with attacks 95% of the time.

What makes me think deeply is the fact that it is possible to be a 3 time World Champion without scoring often on your attack.

[ReverseLunge]

Actually, Kim scored with alot of counter-time flicks to the back mixed with flick attacks, but I do agree with you about your point - some excellent fencers score with attacks 95% of the time.

What makes me think deeply is the fact that it is possible to be a 3 time World Champion without scoring often on your attack.

Golubitsky's game is beating other people at their own game. If you have seen a lot of his bouts like I have you will notice that he seldom fences the same way. It all depends on who he is up against. There was one bout (I can't remember the other guys name) where all Golubitsky did was attack into preperation and he did that like 8 times.

[ReverseLunge]

Actually, Kim scored with alot of counter-time flicks to the back

I don't know if I would call it that. They were pretty much clean parry-riposte flick to the back to me.

[Grasshopper]

I don't know if I would call it that. They were pretty much clean parry-riposte flick to the back to me.

I call that counter-time, whichever the name, he came forward inviting the counter attack from G, then took the blade and hit him on the back.

[whtouche]

That's either a parry riposte or beat attack.
Counter-time attacks involve...well, counter time

[oiuyt]

Countertime is an action made against a counterattack. Draw the counterattack, deal with it (nearly always via P-R).

More completely, countertime is a second-intention action. You do SOMETHING to draw a counterattack (or counterattack-like action such as attack-into-prep) which can be dealt with in order to score a touch. Generally the means of dealing with it is parry-riposte (theoretically something such as stophitting the stophit is possible (especially in epee) but it's rarely the best option). It's a move used against people that are successfully scoring touches with a counterattack (stophit, stopcut, attack-into-prep, counterattack with evasion, whatever). Just the next step on the tactical wheel.

-B :)

[edew]

Countertime is an action made against a counterattack. Draw the counterattack, deal with it (nearly always via P-R).

More completely, countertime is a second-intention action. You do SOMETHING to draw a counterattack (or counterattack-like action such as attack-into-prep) which can be dealt with in order to score a touch. Generally the means of dealing with it is parry-riposte (theoretically something such as stophitting the stophit is possible (especially in epee) but it's rarely the best option). It's a move used against people that are successfully scoring touches with a counterattack (stophit, stopcut, attack-into-prep, counterattack with evasion, whatever). Just the next step on the tactical wheel.

-B

That doesn't make sense. The simplest and safest response to a counter-attack that one draws is to complete the attack. Maybe you're talking about drawing a stop-hit?

If I have right of way and managed to get my opponent to attempt a counter-attack, I see no reason to attempt a parry riposte. I'd just as soon finish my attack and hit. If I don't have right of way because I'm drawing a stop-hit with a big preparation, then I will have to parry riposte, or at least make some evasive action to avoid being hit with the stop-hit.

[oiuyt]

Obviously if your first intention action were scoring you'd ignore whatever your opponent is attempting. Only need to spin the wheel when s/he is scoring touches. And of course you're further right that the counterattack that most often requires countertime will be a stophit (or an attack-into-prep which I consider counterattack-like as it can be treated similarly although, clearly, it is not technically a counterattack). A stophit is a subset of a counterattack.

Out of curiosity, what is your definition of "countertime"? I'm aware that there are people that use it in a way other than how I use the expression, but I've never received an explanation of a definition that didn't fit mine that was complete. I assume that this is because there is another completely reasonable usage of the word but that I've only talked to people that were unable to articulate something they had poorly learned well enough for me to internalize it. If you have a complete definition for an alternative meaning you might help me with something I've wanted to know for a while now.

-B :)

[Grasshopper]

Countertime is an action made against a counterattack. Draw the counterattack, deal with it (nearly always via P-R).

More completely, countertime is a second-intention action. You do SOMETHING to draw a counterattack (or counterattack-like action such as attack-into-prep) which can be dealt with in order to score a touch. Generally the means of dealing with it is parry-riposte (theoretically something such as stophitting the stophit is possible (especially in epee) but it's rarely the best option). It's a move used against people that are successfully scoring touches with a counterattack (stophit, stopcut, attack-into-prep, counterattack with evasion, whatever). Just the next step on the tactical wheel.

-B

Thank you Oiuyt, you are 100% correct and this is exactly what Kim used vs. Golobitski several times. Counter-time is very effective when coupled with long attacks without the blade. Kim was smart enough to alternate back and forth between the two, which really threw G-man off.

[Grasshopper]

I think this 10/45 ratio is most interesting because Golden Bouts features Golobitski in the later stages of his career, when perhaps he didn't have as much confidence in his attack compared to when he was a young buck.

Could this be a lesson to older fencers (over 30) that you don't need a steamroller attack nor legs like pistons to compete at a high level in foil?

Ask any older high-level foil fencer: once you pass age 30, your legs are the first to go, and therefore your attack suffers.

[Peach]

It's a useful strategy for older fencers. I love counter-time in sabre. There's nothing like the disgusted and baffled expression of a tall, young, fast opponent when he realizes that somehow his high-speed counter-attack (which would be called attack in preparation if he pulled it off, especially since my light would never go off if I just tried to hit him--his arms are longer than mine) sort of slid past me on my blade. If I'm lucky, he thinks it was a mistake and tries to do it again.

Happened 5-0 in a bout last night, and Tuesday a young gentleman only managed to beat me 15-11 because he simply couldn't believe it wasn't happening by accident.

[sabreur]

Countertime is an action made against a counterattack. Draw the counterattack, deal with it (nearly always via P-R).

More completely, countertime is a second-intention action. You do SOMETHING to draw a counterattack (or counterattack-like action such as attack-into-prep) which can be dealt with in order to score a touch. Generally the means of dealing with it is parry-riposte (theoretically something such as stophitting the stophit is possible (especially in epee) but it's rarely the best option). It's a move used against people that are successfully scoring touches with a counterattack (stophit, stopcut, attack-into-prep, counterattack with evasion, whatever). Just the next step on the tactical wheel.

-B

I'd always learned that countertime is an action against a composed counterattack--i.e., against a feint in tempo. It is generally a simple attack.

The wheel is:

1. Simple attack
2. Parry-riposte
3. Feint-attack
4. Stop cut
5. Second intention (parry-riposte against the stop cut)
6. Feint in tempo (feint-attack against second intention)
7. Countertime (which is generally a straight attack, often with opposition, against the feint in tempo--this action is the same in practice as #1, although the thought process is different, and returns you to the top of the wheel again).

Cheers, MR

[Peach]

I'd always learned that countertime is an action against a composed counterattack--i.e., against a feint in tempo. It is generally a simple attack.

The wheel is:

1. Simple attack
2. Parry-riposte
3. Feint-attack
4. Stop cut
5. Second intention (parry-riposte against the stop cut)
6. Feint in tempo (feint-attack against second intention)
7. Countertime (which is generally a straight attack, often with opposition, against the feint in tempo--this action is the same in practice as #1, although the thought process is different, and returns you to the top of the wheel again).

Cheers, MR

I've always learned the same list of terms but with different definitions for second intention (an attack which is expected to be parried, in order to make a second parry-riposte), feint-in-tempo (false counter-attack in order to draw the attack, so as to parry it), and countertime (making an action, usu. parry, against the feint-in-tempo.)

[Epeecurean]

That doesn't make sense. The simplest and safest response to a counter-attack that one draws is to complete the attack. Maybe you're talking about drawing a stop-hit?

If I have right of way and managed to get my opponent to attempt a counter-attack, I see no reason to attempt a parry riposte. I'd just as soon finish my attack and hit. If I don't have right of way because I'm drawing a stop-hit with a big preparation, then I will have to parry riposte, or at least make some evasive action to avoid being hit with the stop-hit.

I'm in accord with ouiyt's definition: counter-time is any action against a counter-attack, which can include a parry-reposte or a counter-counter-attack / stop-hit (think epee here people). Indeed, counter-time is the bread-and-butter of epee fencing because one has to constantly deal with the threat of a counter-attack.

However, it also has its place in the right-of-way weapons.

1) If a counter-attack / stop-hit is well timed and causes distance to close suddenly, trying to simply complete the attack may result in a miss. The parry-riposte of the counter-attack protects you & let's you find a new hittable target.

2) The opponent may simply be faking his counter-attack with the plan of getting you to commit to completing your attack. Then he is setting you up for a parry-riposte. Counter-time pre-empts this by unexpectedly parry-riposting rather than continuing the attack.

3) To ensure one light so the ref doesn't mess up the call.

Drawing a stop-hit would in fact be counter-time (since a stop-hit is a type of counter-attack). I'd call what you describe as drawing out the attack-in-preparation. The difference is that in first (c-t) the preparation is a fake attack and in the second it is a sideways movement of the blade (an invitation or pressing the blade to encourage a disengage).

[Rolls]

2 Comments:

1)

Though I have to say I thought Kim was the ebtter fencer and should have won that bout.

Huh? Is this taking into account the nearly 10 point lead that was established at the begining of the bout? I must be missing something. Granted coming back was a remarkable feat, but anyone who has such a lead established against them deserves to loose.

2) On the topic of the number of attacks made during the Golden Bouts, Golubitsky talked about this at his camp. He said something along the lines that during this time period he had changed the tactics of his fencing to be more defensive. He seemed to not like the overly defensive stance he had taken in these bouts.

In fact, he had brought a tape of a bout from 2002 (? maybe 2001 or 2003) that he described as his most perfect bout. He said he was much more evenly balanced between defense and offense. Anyway, we didn't get to see the tape. It was a VHS formatted to the PAL standard and there was no available VCR to display it. Really,unfortunate.

Rolls.