RoW Observations...

[achilleus]

So, I went to coach a friend at one of the first locals of the season...

I watched some... interesting... fencing, for lack of a better word.

Many of the lower lever level fencers (fencer A) attempt to initiate their attack not by extending, but by pulling the arm to the chest and then beginning to advance.

Nothing new there...

What was interesting to me was the opposing fencers reaction. Fencer B would run away, then stop, and extend their arm, (often with a duck, or inquartata or some other squirmy action) and both lights would go on. The ref would call attack-counterattack against B. B several times (througout the event) would complain saying something along the lines of 'His arm was bent, how could you give that the attack? Isn't it preparation?"

To which the ref in question would calmly responded 'When he pulls his arm back it is preparation, however you do nothing to take advantage of the time. You don't initiate an attack, you don't hit in time, you do nothing but counterattack into the final action of your opponent. And by that time, it is an attack.'

Conversly, when B actually did something in the preparation, A complained 'Wasn't that my attack? You've been giving me that attack all day?' Only to be told, 'No. It's preparation, you got the previous touches because no did anything during your prep before...'

Why is it that fencers have a hard time understanding RoW is about what both fencers are doing? Why can't people understand that:

1. Just because Fencer A withdraws his hand, doesn't mean that you automatically get RoW
2. Just because Fencer A withdrew his hand, and you tried to do something, it doesn't mean you were in time
3. Just because the ref calls the final action as attack-counter doesn't mean that Fencer A had the attack during the whole phrase

[Victor]

I believe our frustration with that core question -- why they don't understand Right of Way? -- lies in the learning process itself. Every time a fencer makes a mistake and someone explains what happened, he grows a little closer to skills mastery. It's understandable that a lot of people can't grasp ROW immediately. What's important to note is that those who do learn don't make the same mistakes again, and those who don't learn end up dropping out of the sport. I believe that what prompts frustration from people like us on this message board is that we keep seeing the same problem recur from newbies over and over again ... without appreciating that the previous newbie has, indeed, moved on one way or the other.

So just tighten your grin a little more and be patient. Consider it part of the learning curve of the sport that will never be totally eliminated.

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by Victor

I believe our frustration with that core question -- why they don't understand Right of Way? -- lies in the learning process itself. Every time a fencer makes a mistake and someone explains what happened, he grows a little closer to skills mastery. It's understandable that a lot of people can't grasp ROW immediately. What's important to note is that those who do learn don't make the same mistakes again, and those who don't learn end up dropping out of the sport. I believe that what prompts frustration from people like us on this message board is that we keep seeing the same problem recur from newbies over and over again ... without appreciating that the previous newbie has, indeed, moved on one way or the other.

So just tighten your grin a little more and be patient. Consider it part of the learning curve of the sport that will never be totally eliminated.

I know it's a slow process. I know that people either learn or leave.

I wrote the above since time and time again we see arguments on this board about some similar topics. The arguments focus on rule debates rather than saying, 'perhaps you were out of time?'

And worse, seeing this as I did at this event, throughout the day with a variety of competitors, I have to ask 'Who are their coaches? What are they teaching?'

Shouldn't a fencer who has enough commitment to buy $180 shoes also have logged enough practice hours to know that pulling the arm so far back that the guard touches your lame is the beginning of the attack? Shouldn't the coah be teaching correct actions, and instructing his fencers how to deal with such bent arm attacks?


And worse, I felt bad for the ref. Fencer's would get upset at him over an obvious call, and he just had this look on his face of 'don't blame me for your bad fencing.'

[CvilleFencer]

Also I think it has a bit to do with perception and how it evolves, as you become a better fencer. I am a pretty horrible foil fencer when I am actually trying to fence it, although I do an okay job of coaching it. I think what happens a lot of time with newer fencers is that they see the opening, a bent arm for example, but by the time they have processed it and their brain says "attack into it" the moment has been lost, but the fencer does not see it that way. Since they are not looking at themselves from the side the only point of reference they have is when their brain says "go" so to them they think they were in time. They see themselves acting when they saw the opening as opposed to when their body actually started moving correctly. I am not sure if that made any sense at all...

If I am fencing a very good foilist this still happens to me a fair amount. Of course I am just as likely to stick out my arm if they make a big motion before I can stop myself (I have pretty much switched to epee).

[noodle]

the thing i've noticed is that reasonably inexperienced fencers more often than not think they know all there is to ROW. the ref makes a call and they look at him like he's nuts and attempt to explain to him why they had ROW.

it seems like there's a big lack of humility in a lot of the fencers like this, they should be there to learn about the sport instead of trying to dictate it. anyone experience this kind of thing before?

[oso97]

Originally Posted by achilleus

And worse, I felt bad for the ref. Fencer's would get upset at him over an obvious call, and he just had this look on his face of 'don't blame me for your bad fencing.'

*grin* I gotta remember this, and figure out how to adopt such a face. Might be very useful when refereeing certain people!

[Allen Evans]

"Shouldn't the coach be teaching...?"

It isn't a guarantee, but probably the coach has been trying to teach the student to get his or her arm out first - or, more properly, before the final action of the attack.

The difficulty lies in that this is a very un-natural skill. The next time you shake hands with someone, observe how they do it: do they walk up to you and then offer their hand? Or do they stick their hand out first and then march up to you for you to take it? The first is far more comman than the last. We "practice" moving our body and then our hands every day: shaking hands, opening doors, and so on.

Then, while under stress, the coach asks the student to do something very different, and quite opposite from what they do in their daily life. it takes a great deal of effort and practice to do this in a bouting situation.

And some coaches DO NOT emphasize this as much as they should. To make matters worse, there ARE times when the student should not finish with the hand ahead of the feet (althought those sort of lost tempo attacks are best left to very intermidiate or advanced fencers).

On the recieving end, it's a gutsy and well trained student who can make successful attacks into the preparation. The student who does this is one who HAS learned to accelerate the hand into the attack, AND has their feet under them AND can recognise the situation as it develops (or even before) and NOT after (as James points out).

All in all, it takes a hard working partnership of coach and student to develop the skills necessary. Those partnerships are rare, I've found.

Allen Evans
www.dominionfencing.org

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by Allen Evans

"Shouldn't the coach be teaching...?"

It isn't a guarantee, but probably the coach has been trying to teach the student to get his or her arm out first - or, more properly, before the final action of the attack.
...

Yes, we can all agree fencing can be difficult to learn, and at times counterintuitive.

Yet, when the ref in question called line against a fencer who pulled his guard to his crotch, then started stepping rapidly forward, the coach in question asked the ref 'Wasn't that the attack?' To which the ref replied almost laughing 'No, that's wasn't.'

Which again references my first post...

Also, the ref was rated and quite honestly has a much better competitve record than many of the fencers there, yet the people who were complaining acted like he didn't know what he was talking about. It was rather amusing to watch...

[keith]

Originally Posted by Allen Evans

"Shouldn't the coach be teaching...?"



The difficulty lies in that this is a very un-natural skill. The next time you shake hands with someone, observe how they do it: do they walk up to you and then offer their hand? Or do they stick their hand out first and then march up to you for you to take it? The first is far more comman than the last. We "practice" moving our body and then our hands every day: shaking hands, opening doors, and so on.

The foil learning curve also feeds these bad breaking time habits. There is always a patch were doing it properly means eating the beat in preparation or simple quarte riposte - breaking time becomes an overly used solution.

[Victor]

Originally Posted by achilleus

... the coach in question asked the ref 'Wasn't that the attack?'

Ah. Well. That's a slightly different question from what was emphasized in your initial message ("Why is it that fencers have a hard time understanding RoW is about what both fencers are doing? Why can't people understand?...")

It would *seem* that the coach in question doesn't understand the RoW rules well enough to teach them to his students.

The other responses in this thread still stand, however -- newbie fencers do tend to refine their RoW skills at competitions, much to experienced fencers' consternation.

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by Victor

Ah. Well. That's a slightly different question from what was emphasized in your initial message ("Why is it that fencers have a hard time understanding RoW is about what both fencers are doing? Why can't people understand?...")

It would *seem* that the coach in question doesn't understand the RoW rules well enough to teach them to his students.

The other responses in this thread still stand, however -- newbie fencers do tend to refine their RoW skills at competitions, much to experienced fencers' consternation.

I saw little effort from the fencers to attempt to improve. They complainers thought the ref was wrong, and complained about the horrible state of RoW.

That's my point. These people just didn't get it, and didn't seem to be trying to...

Very different from watching the top fencers at this event. They fought hard, celebrated, and when they complained to the ref, they understood what the ref saw, they just disagreed with it....

[edew]

It's most definitely the coach's fault for not explaining the intricacies of who has right of way. I mean, the name of the game in foil (and saber, too) is right of way. Scoring is, truly, incidental to wresting and maintaining control of right of way. If I have right of way, anytime I score, I get the point. If I don't have right of way, no touches will count.

[keith]

....or coaches believing that anyone who disagrees with their interpretation of RoW is a fool?

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by Victor

Ah. Well. That's a slightly different question from what was emphasized in your initial message ("Why is it that fencers have a hard time understanding RoW is about what both fencers are doing? Why can't people understand?...")

I will also note, that one coach was only one incident at the tournament. He was the coach of the fencer who didn't understand what preparation was. There were others who didn't understand, they just didn't have a coach there obviously teaching them the wrong thing...

[Allen Evans]

Achilles wrote:

Yet, when the ref in question called line against a fencer who pulled his guard to his crotch, then started stepping rapidly forward, the coach in question asked the ref 'Wasn't that the attack?' To which the ref replied almost laughing 'No, that's wasn't.'

(laughing) Well, I would say that certainly the fencer in question is not only struggling against a difficult, and non-intuitive concept, but he (or she) is having to drag an ignorant coach along in the bargin!

There are still a surprising number of fencers in the US who are being taught by coaches who are simply a "chapter ahead" in the book on fencing. That reinforces my original post after a fashion: the technical/tactical skills that are involved in taking ROW from an opponent are difficult enough for the student to learn with a good teacher. An ignorant teacher can make it nearly impossible.

With the best fencers right of way is an intuitive feeling that the coach has to bring out in the fencer. Without decent coaching, simply "knowing the rules" isn't going to help the fencer appreciate ROW. I think we see many examples of this in the long ROW arguments on the Board....and in those arguments by new fences with very experianced referees!

Allen Evans
www.dominionfencing.org

[Namir]

I see this problem not being one of lack of understanding ROW but instead how they preceive the timeing and tempo in which the action occured.

Becouse if "Fencer B" knows that "Fencer A" is in prep and he also knows he has ROW if he puts his point in line, then I whould say he is fairly fimiluar with the rules.

His perception however of the order inwhich the events occured are not however always accurate, mainly do to inexperience.

Also, the director you are fencing under will also make a huge difference, clearly the fencers, very new, have not yet learned that you have to adapt your fencing to the director.
They, also, have not learned to NOT ARGUE with the director, if the director is upset becouse you are argueing with him you will loose calls.
Afterall some directors will only call the attack raised in absence the point, no matter what order the actions occured in.
So one must work on stopping an attack in absence from begging and defending it.

And BTW, It sounds like the director handle this bought, and its arguments very well

Also, In a club that dosn't teach flicks to the back, they will have less attacks raised in absence, so beginers do not get to develop their defence at the club, and coachs can't see them failing to defend it.

For instance in clubs that do teach flicks to the back and attacks in absence their fencers are, in fact, good at defending and attacking in absence. But are not always as good at defending against a good quick straight attack, or stop-thrust, or even maintaing a proper fencing distance (they quite often get to close)

And as has already been said TIMEING IS THE KEY. Regardless of rather they retreated or not, if you get your hand moveing in the direction of your opponet first (weather you are the person in absence or not) you get the point.

So IMHO begginers simply are lacking the experience and skills needed to change up their game.

Also IMHO, and it's always the coachs choice, I whould not teach the flick or the large attack in prep untill long after my students have the skills and experience necessary to fall back on and fence straight in a competition.
For this very reason.

[achilleus]

One other note, I'm not so sure these lower level fencers classify as beginners.

Most had been fencing for several years.

Beginners I can understand, but these people had the full equipment, been competing for minimum two years...

[I_luv_saber]

I have to ask 'Who are their coaches? What are they teaching?'

Try to remember, their coaches are probably quite good, and probably teach quite well. I remember my first tourney I would do the same thing. Not complain on the call, of course, but basic mistakes. Rember many people, especially newbies, get jittery at a tourny. Reflecting back, I see that was, and partially still is, my problem. Everything that they learned in the comfort of a salle goes out the window at a tournament. I remeber my coach telling me this: =russian accent= "This is okay for first tournament, don't worry. Next tournament you will do better". He was right. I still get nervous at tourneys, that's just me, but it got better the more I went.

[swordsen]

I honestly think that a great part of the problem has to do with the fact that they watch higher level fencers and fail to see the intracacies of the action. waht they see is a guy pull his arm back to his chest and proceed down the strip and get the point with. they even get hit by higherlevel fencers doing this and thus they decide, "Ha, the attack can be made with the hand back against the lame." so they try it. And the low level directors who are trying to fit in, and have also seen the higher level fencers do tha, give them the attack. It isn't until they get a high level director or a curmudgeon who doesn't care what the high level fencers are doing that things are called differently. It is a vicious cycle of ignorence.

the coach issue just adds to it. As pointed out before, there are many coaches out there who have little or no training. They watch the top fencers they can find and try to teach their students to copy what works. Then we are back into reinforcing ignorence. And I can't blame them too much. When most of the directors in your division fall into the first catagory mentioned above it works for them in the local events. I see it alot. Heck, I've done it. both as a coach and a fencer. (Although I try and preface it as a coach with some statement like, "this isn't the correct way to do this but with the following directors it will work....."