Experience Gap

[Bard]

i have been fencing for a few months and I love it. But there is a person I fence with who is very cocky and has been fencing for about three years. He always wins and rightly so. My question is: At what point does experience give way to skill? How much time does it take before the number of years you've fenced doesn't matter as much as the quality and skills you've been taught?

[MyraTrue]

Bard: you ask a good question. I'm not sure I'm the best qualified person to answer it, but I can take a shot at it.

I think you've already caught on that years fencing and skill are two different things. I've seen some fencers that had very good coaching and were natural athletes and fencers, who are highly ranked and very good fencers in the first 2 years. I've also met some that have "been fencing" for 8, 9, 10 years, yet who are poor fencers at best (say they lack the skill, the motivation, or the chances to get a coach or to improve with the fencers they are around).

In short, the more skilled fencer will win over the "I've been fencing longer" fencer. I am a little hesitant to use skill and experience to explain this, because experience helps build skill (say, you compete at a lot of tournaments, which teaches you new skills.)

I myself am an E rated epeeist. E is the lowest rating one can be given, but I know at the time I was incredibly proud to earn my rating. I've been fencing for 2 1/2 years, epee for 2 (wow, I just counted and realized I've not been fencing as long as I thought!). I think the hardest thing I had to learn to do was to stop measuring myself by other fencer's achievement. The better thing for me is to use my fencing as my own yardstick and try to outdo what I've done before. I try to set a personal standard- I want to fencer better against someone than I did before, maybe even beat them. But how fast I do it depends entirely on me, and just because so-and-so at such-and-such university had a B in 2 years doesn't mean I have to.

Will you ever be able to beat the fencer who's got 3 years "experience" on you? It might be possible. It depends on you, how hard you work, how well you learn, and also on him. Use him as a yardstick too, if you like. Once you've been fencing another 6 months, look back and try to decide if he is as difficult for you, if you can score more points, if you understand his fencing better.

And of course, my own little soap box is to add that just because someone's been fencing longer than you, or is a "better fencer" is no excuse for them to treat you poorly or be arrogant. I've fencer people like that, and because I dislike that kind of thing so much, try very hard to never act that way myself. Those people are not fun to fence!

[Peach]

I can beat a whole bunch of people who started before I did, and a whole bunch of people can beat me who started after I did. At my club, I always hope that the people who came later will work hard, get better, and figure out how to beat me because then I will have good people to practice with. Enjoy having someone at your club who can beat you, because when you go to national tournaments that experience will help.

[S. Hunter]

Also (I haven't been fencing for a long time but sometimes people will fence for several years without getting really good, then they will have a burst of skill. The best fencer at our club fenced like a mannequin for his first 3 and a half years, but after that he got very good very fast, and I believe has an A and epee and is ranked pretty high in the other two weapons. I guess the morale is: Keep fencing and you'll get good eventually.

[pacer]

I think that the amount of time since starting to fence is only one factor and not the most significant. Some kids at my club have progressed very quickly given the elapsed time they've been fencing. usually they are also committed and have lessons more than once a week, are athletic and accustomed to their own strength. Some others who started more slowly (one lesson a week) are not as good. The same goes for some of the kids who are in a growth spurt and are just plain gangly/uncoordinated for while. I'm old enough to be a veteran fencer, and only made time for group lessons once a week for about 2 years - I find that helped with general conditioning and footwork, but I judge myself as only being at the level of fencer with one year's experience.
The great thing I've found is that everyone at my club realizes that progress and hitting plateaus is a very individual thing and they help each other work through it.

[wflaschka]

I second MyraTrue -- great question!! I've paid close attention to skill vs. experience, because frankly I don't want to spend 5 years with a student before we can start doing advanced lessons. I believe that with strong technique-building early on, and a consistent lesson program, it's possible to make a winning beginner in about a year. Winning beginner = beats opponents with 2+ more years of experience, i.e., surpasses expectations. If not that, then the beginner can at least get further than most people think is possible -- our expectations for new fencers are much too low.

A (foil) beginner who fences with long distance, makes oppositional parries, and hits with the tip using a long lunge can toast many of the intermediate-level fencers I've seen. The beginner only needs to trust the technique, and run a basic program. I've seen this happen, for example when a 15-yr-old Russian girl fenced against my college team (years ago), and she was hitting us using nothing more than a committed lunge and nice footwork.

The "tough" stuff is where experienced fencers prosper -- intuiting tempo, when to stop-hit, when to esquive, how to keep an attack with a bent arm. These take some feeling, and feeling comes with time. But the "tough" stuff is not core to hitting, and anyway it's often put into use by fencers much earlier than it needs to be.

So -- expect results from your labor. 3 years is nothing in terms of experience, though native physical ability will still be important at this stage. It's reasonable look for changes in your performance against this opponent, as you work harder. If you're not getting changes, investigate the work you're doing because the problem lies there, not with the 3-year fencer's wealth of knowledge. Until you face a galactic-level fencer, mere skill can take you very far.

[MikeHarm]

About four to five years.

Originally Posted by Bard

i have been fencing for a few months and I love it. But there is a person I fence with who is very cocky and has been fencing for about three years. He always wins and rightly so. My question is: At what point does experience give way to skill? How much time does it take before the number of years you've fenced doesn't matter as much as the quality and skills you've been taught?

[vincikai]

2 or 3 years if you eat and drink fencing every day

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by Bard

i have been fencing for a few months and I love it. But there is a person I fence with who is very cocky and has been fencing for about three years. He always wins and rightly so. My question is: At what point does experience give way to skill? How much time does it take before the number of years you've fenced doesn't matter as much as the quality and skills you've been taught?

A former coach of mine was very fond of saying, 'it's not the years of fencing, it's the hours spent practicing.'

Really, the answer, as usual with fencing, is you get what you put into it. It varies on how hard one works, how good's one coach is, and how strong your practice partners are.

I trained hard for with a great coach and great practice partners. I didn't win a bout for about 7 months, until I beat a guy 5-4 who was unrated, and back from a multi-year layoff.

2 years after I started, I earned my 'A' beating several nationally ranked, and very experienced fencers.

[Schiavona]

Here's a little joke to illistrate a point;
Q: How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Just one, but the light bulb has got to want to change.

Some people just fence or fence and take lessons but don't improve. From what I've seen over the years they really don't want to improve and so they don't. If you really, really want to be the best possible fencer you can be then you will. It all comes down to desire.

[Artisan]

I would say simply that the difference betweeen skills and experience is the depth of your game. I have aquired via coaching a good (but limited) skill set which with athleticism enables me to sometimes defeat more experienced fencers with a broader range of skills. Lack of experience also allows me to lose to fencers of the same calibre or sometimes way below. Lack of experience makes my game inconsistant from day to day - as well as lacking dimension when its time to adapt to a more experience fencer who can adjust their tactics mid bout. 13-15 defeats in the DE's to another B with more experience are not uncommon for me at this stage. Its the skills sans expereince that got me to that round though.

[MikeHarm]

2 years to an A, you must have a heck of a coach.

Originally Posted by achilleus

A former coach of mine was very fond of saying, 'it's not the years of fencing, it's the hours spent practicing.'

Really, the answer, as usual with fencing, is you get what you put into it. It varies on how hard one works, how good's one coach is, and how strong your practice partners are.

I trained hard for with a great coach and great practice partners. I didn't win a bout for about 7 months, until I beat a guy 5-4 who was unrated, and back from a multi-year layoff.

2 years after I started, I earned my 'A' beating several nationally ranked, and very experienced fencers.

[Aeric]

Most of us don't have that luxury.

It's hard to win a tough bout on pure instinct. You need a freakin' strategy.

[haroldbuck]

I think one aspect of fencing that some people "get" quickly and others never pick up is the ability to look at the opponent, figure out what he or she does, and then figure out what to do against that.

I learned to fence and quickly got into high school coaching. I've never really fenced competitively, but there were people at the club that were objectively better than I was, yet I could beat them because I could analyze and plan. I tried hard to teach this to my fencers.

No matter how many hours you practice, no matter how many lessons you take, if you don't pick this up, you'll never be a great fencer.

[Bard]

I thank you all so much for your input. i am a young fencer and uncertanity and lack of experience are two of my greatest problems. But with your help i can rectify these issues. I'll take to heart what everyone said specifically myratrue and wflaschka, your posts have given me what i need to learn. Thankyou all again and dont be afraid to add more.

[kalivor]

Others have made various good points, but not given you an answer. Here's an answer: 2 years.

With few exceptions (and those mostly based on the level of attention from the coach and commitment from the fencer both being very high), fencers seem to be pretty much evenly matched when they've fenced for two years. A fencer who has fenced for more than two years will usually win against one who has been fencing less than two years.

Why? Two years seems to be enough time to gain a feel for the sport. After this, those who are truly committed to being better tend to seperate themselves from those who don't. A lot of fencers simply stop improving at this point, though an equally large number continue to improve at vastly different rates.

If the cocky guy is really a mediocre fencer who doesn't work hard but has the advantage of an extra few years of experience, expect to be beating him in a couple of years (without having to "eat and drink fencing every day" ... a few times a week while being serious about it should be enough). You didn't say that though -- he could possibly be good, and continuing to get better ... in which case it could be three or four years before his added experience will no longer make a difference.

[jBirch]

My question is: At what point does experience give way to skill? How much time does it take before the number of years you've fenced doesn't matter as much as the quality and skills you've been taught?

Great question!

As has been stated, the answer is, quite simply, when a fencer stops learning.

I break skill and experience into different buckets then ability vs time. Skill is technical ability and knowledge, experience is practical doing. If a fencer is constantly learning from their bouts and adapting their technique for each point then experience is totally tied to skill. If a fencer stops learning and adapting, then skill is irrelevant. Amongst anyone of calibre in fencing, experience is more important then skill because there is so much going on in the individual athlete's head that skill is secondary.

What kalivor alluded to when they mentioned "2 years" was the plateau most fencers hit at about the two year mark, when they've learned the bladework competently but have yet to perfect the analysis, distance and timing that's crucial. Learning analytical skill is about encountering new stuff all the time. The less new stuff you encounter, the less you need to analyse and adapt. Distance is something that comes with endless practice, timing something that can only be learned in competition, where the other person is trying to break your timing.

The key to the answer is the relative difference between your fencing ability and his and the rate at which each is changing. Newb's change their skill levels daily, while more experienced fencers take a little longer to get better. Understand that experience does not equal time, but does equal time encountering the same situation. The more different situations you encounter, the more diverse experience you'll accrue and the bigger your bag of tricks will be. The more of the same situation you encounter, the more you'll reinforce the correct response by simple Darwinism (the wrong response doesn't succeed).

I suspect that you will be beating your obnoxious opponent when your experience level of his fencing is higher then his with yours though how long it takes you to get that experience is anyone's guess and yours to determine. The key to doing well in fencing is to get as much experience as you can, as quickly as you can and as correctly as you can. It's why a fencer who's been competing for 6 months and learning for 6 months will beat a fencer who's been training for a year every time.

Here's a couple of questions to make you think about the problem in a different light. First, if an A rated fencer gets beaten by a newbie, why? Is it luck? Is it skill? Is it a lack of skill? If I tell you that the newbie has fenced nobody but the A fencer, does it make sense that they should win? Secondly, why does a 40 year old usually lose to a 20 year old with less experience? Why does a 60 year old usually beat a 50 year old with more experience? Why does a beginning fencer with 2 years of competitive experience beat a beginning fencer with 2 years of training and practice?

Hope this helps.