Most effective fencing strategy

[drippingwet]

The most effective strategy in foil seems to involve sticking to the parry riposte and attack on preparation. Golubitsky seemed master of this and perhaps mainly went for attacks when the opponent's offense was better than or equal to Goly's defense e.g. Elvis Gregory, Philip Omnes. Am I right? Is the parry riposte/attack on prep strategy the safest option, leaving you're opponent to do all the work while you take all the glory,and only start attacking when the opponent stops attacking?

[Grasshopper]

In my experience, the fencers who choose the "safer" approach, risking nothing, often end up not improving in the long run. To excel in fencing, you need to risk - during practice and competition. Sure you will get burned and you might lose bouts that you would have won if you didn't risk, but over time, you will find that your entire game will improve.

Please understand that G's game at the height of his career was a culmanation of years and years of practice and trial and error. What we see a the end of that road looks effortless, but only because he had the 's early in his career.

I have tapes of G from the early 90's. I remember one particular match at a big world cup where he was fencing an opponent that was very very weak and he was having a hellova time scoring on him. This was back before he perfected his flicks and he was missing his flick attacks all over the place! Miss the shoulder, miss the chest, get parried, miss the fleche flick. It was kind of funny, because even if G missed, his opponent was so weak that no points were scored anyway which kept this farce from ever ending. So did he switch back to straight hits or counterattacks? NO! He just kept trying to flick him! The point of this story is that he had the confidence and drive to not give up doing a risky move, even in a world cup. And look where it got him.

Interestingly enough. I remember fencing a young Cliff Bayer (15ish) who was experimenting the same way with flick hits in the first round of an NAC way back when. I could easily counter-attack and score against him. I was leading 3-0. When most fencers would stop flicking and switch to straight hits, Cliff didn't. He kept on attack flicking until the end of the bout. He lost that bout and I thought he was a bit of a fool at the time, but a few years later, he showed up on the podium of almost all NACs. The lesson here is the same - don't give up doing a technique because it is risky. Fencing takes balls, not just from bout to bout, but in your whole training method. The style of fencing that leads you to win bouts in your club, is probably different that what you need to be doing to win bouts nationally or internationally.

Fencers who win local club tournaments don't risk.

Fencers who win international tournaments risk.

Good fencing!

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by drippingwet

The most effective strategy in foil seems to involve sticking to the parry riposte and attack on preparation. Golubitsky seemed master of this and perhaps mainly went for attacks when the opponent's offense was better than or equal to Goly's defense e.g. Elvis Gregory, Philip Omnes. Am I right? Is the parry riposte/attack on prep strategy the safest option, leaving you're opponent to do all the work while you take all the glory,and only start attacking when the opponent stops attacking?

Personally, I wouldn't say that. With flicks still very common, attacks are often very difficult to parry or hit in prep. If that's your strength, then of course, that's what you should do, but I'd say attacking is slightly more powerful.

If you watch the tapes of high-level foil (or if you've happened to have been there), the fencers quite rarely sit back once the director says "fence" (or "allez"). They usually go forward, at varying speeds, trying to get right of way so they can launch an attack. In épée, meanwhile, defense is just as powerful as offense, and épéeists can go for very long without even trying to close distance.

In foil, I'd say it's probably 60% offense, 40% defense. With these new timings, that might change (less target area to hit), but for the most part I think that's pretty accurate.

Of course, what you describe, only attacking once your opponent has stopped, is more of a mental game. Rather than attacking first off, you get a few quick points on your opponent defensively, and mess up his game, allowing you to attack more effectively. I don't know how well that works at higher levels, but at the local tournaments I go to, it's very effective.

[mackillian]

I've found that effective as well. Opponents expect you to continue your pattern of defense, so your attacks can take them by surprise. It's pretty cool.

[SwordSoul]

By understanding what it means to be on the offensive and the defensive, you can understand how best to apply each tactic in each situation. Practice being on the offense, so like we've been saying, when you take the blade, or when defense has been reliable (or unreliable) you can "turn on" your offense when you need to. By practicing different tactics, you broaden your arsenal significantly.

peace,
matt

[LordTofuDog-jnr]

I think the most effective tactic in foil is to get the point to depress whilst in contact with the oponents [hopefully] working lame.