Dry fencing

[jeff]

Repost-hole: whether I am a better fencer or not isn't the point - though I do think I have more of a perspective on this than you. I'm not posting to score points off you, but rather to correct what I think a mistaken argument.

There was a tradition of duel to first blood and it's inaccurate to say that foil was invented as preparation for duel to the death instead. I suggest you read up on the historical origins of foil. There is also a long tradition of "elegant" light touches in dry foil, so the distinction between "would have been deadly" in dry foil and "just a scratch" with electric has no basis in fact.

Just as you don't disparage electrical fencing, I don't defend the flick or claim that it's realistic. Electrical fencing far predates the flick, so to equate the two of them is simply wrong. I'm old enough in fencing to have done a lot of fencing dry as well as wired, and the idea that dry is more realistic than electric is, to me, obviously false. The indisputable fact is that electrical foil permits hits made more quickly and to target areas than visual judging would reliably see. In dry fencing you have to show it to the judge.

By way of anecdote: in the 1950s Georgio Santelli (one of the great fencers and maestros, and who did in fact fight and win a duel) got a bunch of the early electrical foils. He spent some time testing them by fencing with his students (essentially, most of the US national team), and pronounced them as okay. If it's good enough for him, and realistic enough, then we lesser fencers should be less quick to write them off.

[Von_Moss]

I personally like dry fencing better than electric, in particular with sabre, as you are forced to deliver a distinct blow and not just an imperceptible scrape.

[KD5MDK]

To quote my friend, "Dry fencing is like dry humping. You can, but there's not much point."

[Dax]

I like dry fencing just fine for practise at the club, but electric fencing is only acceptable for tournaments. Most of the time I do fence dry, its self directed, because I know if I get hit, and I know if I get a touch. Dry fencing is really hard to do with a single director, most of the time everything gets called a double. I also get flusterated a lot when I score a good solid touch and the director does not see it...

[striker]

Originally Posted by jeff

Nothing here contradicts what I said. Some salles sponsor competitions - very nice - but I still call that "few real competitions". NJ Division probably has more and larger junior foil events (for example) per year than all the non-electric, historical, classical competitions in the US added together. Go to classicalfencing group on Yahoo and you'll see how infrequently these events occur. The Salem event has something like 10 pre-entries, and juniors at that. That doesn't make them bad things, but my comment that they're infrequent still holds. And, club competitions don't meet my notion of "real".
.................................................. .

How can we compare apples with oranges and call the comparison
objective ?! How can we add two and two and come up with five and
a half as the answer ?! The original post that is still available on this
forum was talking about Classical Fencing salles as places "where
observance of the forms and rituals are much more important than
actually winning touches". First of all good form has always been
part of classical fencing. What is the big surprise here ? Second of all, it is
not clear what "ritual" we are talking about here ? Third of all, which
classical fencing is being discussed here ? Classical fencers do not care
about winning and getting a touch ?!!!! Classical fencing means, the way
it used to be. It has its roots in the art of defense with the sword. It
was practiced not to simply get a touch and win a 5-10-15 touch game, but
as a way to win duels and defense in life and death situations. Practicing
to win a duel is an indication of a lack of desire to win ?!!!!! These
principles go way back before Nick Evangelista. I hope just for once we
leave him out of these discussions.

I provided the example of Salem Classical fencing as one small
classically oriented salle where they seem to be going towards
the right direction by providing an opportunity for their own fencers to
compete. By the way, I am not and I have not been a member of that
salle. I said this in my previous post and I say it again, there are
classical fencing salles where there is little or no competition available.
There was no attempt to compare a small salle with the New Jersey
division !! There was no attempt to compare the
number of national sports fencing competitions with the classical
fencing tournaments. Everyone knows that the number of classical fencers
is a small fraction of sports fencers. Also, the Classical Fencing posts
from yahoo group are compiled and posted right here on the fencing.net
and it is available for all to read.

[jeff]

So, you agree with me: there is relatively little competition in CF compared to SF, form is considered very important, and scoring touches less so. What was your point?

(BTW: I don't read the CF group on Yahoo here. I've been a member of that group for several years)

[VERITAS]

Another point of importance: CF is very decentralized. The rules, teaching, and practice differ from instructor to instructor or from salle to salle.
But there are many opportunities for competition. There are probably at least a dozen salles that host one or two competitions a year. Given the number of Classical fencers vs. the number of Sport fencers, I think we do pretty well.
My salle hosts 2 big tournaments a year, one in St. Louis and one in Milwaukee.
Many come from all corners of the country: Florida, Illinois, New York, Missouri, and Wisconsin. There are fine hand-crafted prizes, and dinner afterwards. It is very well put together, a lot of fun and really, really hard.

CFers are a lot harder to score against that SFers since CF trains to not be hit at all, while SF trains to hit more than the other guy. My experience has simply been that CF competition is much harder and more satisfying.

Also, while sport fencing is nearly useless in CF, CF works just fine in sport fencing. Those of us who (like me) enjoy competition to a fault can seek out any sport tournament.
So actually CFers have more competition opportunities than SFers. There are fewer of us, creating the illusion that we never compete.
However, a good point for CF is that you don't have to compete to enjoy the art and to benefit from it.

Regarding the notion of good form in fencing, this is completely different from kata or from ritual announcement of target in kendo, or from a sense of proper social behavior. It is about proper technique.

In a way, SF has good form and bad form, according to its standards. There is a proper way to flick and a bad way to flick. Differences exist between a fast, efficient fleche and a sloppy, badly timed fleche.

Form is cultivating as a basis for creativity and improvisation. If you cannot form letters A-B-C, or spell, how can you write a book? So form must be practiced and properly instilled before bouting.

This seems to be a major difference between CF and SF: the pedagogy.

And of course, Jeff is correct in saying there is really no inherent nature to electric vs. dry fencing that would make one better than the other, assuming the same rules are followed of course. Comparing the CF and the SF competitions, using the most skilled directors/referees and scoring equipment/judges, I have found simply that the CF fencing is more efficient, clean and easy to follow. Whether I'm watching, competing or directing, this has been my experience. Just my opinon, though.
What do you think?

charley

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by VERITAS

CFers are a lot harder to score against that SFers since CF trains to not be hit at all, while SF trains to hit more than the other guy. My experience has simply been that CF competition is much harder and more satisfying.

Also, while sport fencing is nearly useless in CF, CF works just fine in sport fencing. Those of us who (like me) enjoy competition to a fault can seek out any sport tournament.

Although I cannot argue with your personal experience,

At the competitive level of SF this is not true. Just as a modern fencer is at a competitive disadvantage in a classical setting, the same is true of a classical fencer in the modern setting. Each style is uniquely adapted to the rules set that it utilizes.

[RebelFencer]

Well if you want to try and think that way, it really depends. A novice only tournament would obviously have a much lower quality of fencing than an upper level CF tournament. Whereas I believe that a high level tournament or NAC would have much better fencing than any CF. Why? Because The fencers there had to train hard and go to many tournaments to even qualify (NAC-wise). And since tournaments are more readily available, are going to be much more seasoned. As for Classical Fencing transferring to Sport Fencing, I have seen one CF make it past the first round in a tournament...one.

If we really wanted to settle it perhaps we should have the best Classical Epeeist fence the best Sports Epeeist. No culture shock for either side. One light, one touch. Two lights, two touches. That seems to be the only fair way to decide as sabre and foil would have ROW discrepencies.

[jeff]

Originally Posted by VERITAS

Regarding the notion of good form in fencing, this is completely different from kata

Interestingly enough, Adam Crowne, who's very well known in the CF community, teaches sets of katas (he calls them "etudes") of up to several minutes duration, in both 1-person and 2-person forms, that would be used in training and even as a tournament category. We discussed this in polite private communications a few years ago. I'm dubious about this (I studied Asian martial arts that were kata oriented, and I was dubious about it there too, so I'm not picking on him or CF with this observation). I have no idea if he's continued with this or what experiences resulted.

[striker]

Originally Posted by jeff

So, you agree with me: there is relatively little competition in CF compared to SF, form is considered very important, and scoring touches less so. What was your point?

(BTW: I don't read the CF group on Yahoo here. I've been a member of that group for several years)

The points were crystal clear in my previous post.

[Aestro]

It depends on what I'm doing really. If I'm simply working on maneuvers or something to that nature, I like dry. It keeps me from worrying about getting every point - something about that box brings out the competitor in me. It's nice to be able to relax and work on just getting better or enjoying myself, rather than getting the win all the time. We hold a dry pre-1972 rules sabre tournament every year in which we vote on who we think best represents the "essence" of sabre, and it's just a big round-robin of pools without DE's. It means people are forced to acknowledge touches or be known as underhanded, which is nice because it ends up being a really friendly tournament. I don't think that could happen with electric. I'm a terrible sabreur and really only fence it a couple times a year, but that sort of friendly environment makes it worth it.

On the other hand, I can't stand dry epee. Those arm shots are incredibly difficult to know whether they slid down the arm or actually landed, and in epee I'm really wanting to practice point control. In foil, I'm torn. Right of way isn't judged by a box, and it's what's most in debate anyway. On the other hand, not worrying about whether it was actually tip or not does mean there is more room to watch for right-of way. Plus I can actually prove those damn flicks aren't hitting. :-P

[striker]

Originally Posted by VERITAS

...............................
CFers are a lot harder to score against that SFers since CF trains to not be hit at all, while SF trains to hit more than the other guy. My experience has simply been that CF competition is much harder and more satisfying.

Also, while sport fencing is nearly useless in CF, CF works just fine in sport fencing. Those of us who (like me) enjoy competition to a fault can seek out any sport tournament.
...............................

I believe these discussions can never be proven until we put a CF and SF
on the same piste, using the same weapon and grip, and competing based
on the same set of rules.

From my own personal observation Classical and Sports fencers compete
based on a very different set of standards and principles. It is true that
the fundamentals of fencing stay the same and do not change, however
from what I have seen one group is playing the game of Tennis and the
other is playing Badminton. Maybe my personal experience is different
than others but this is what I have seen so far. Your experience may be
different because you maybe attending a school that is a "classically
oriented" salle and the fencing masters have both extensive sports
fencing competition and classical training background. That is very
different from a "pure classical" fencing salle. I am just guessing here.
As you correctly stated in your post, the method of teaching Classical
Fencing is very different from salle to salle.

From what I have observed the two schools have very different
views on even the basic fundamentals:
- The guard.
- The position of the weapon arm.
- The position of the free arm.
- The position of the back foot.
- How to launch an attack.
- The most effective parries for defense.
- Etc. etc .

What I have personally gained from listening to this and other SF and CF
debates is to try both methods on the piste and find out which one works
the best for me. Dry fencing for some of my practice sessions is one of
those things that I picked from CF.

[I_luv_saber]

Love to fence dry, hate to direct dry.

[Mauler]

Originally Posted by Aestro

.
On the other hand, I can't stand dry epee. Those arm shots are incredibly difficult to know whether they slid down the arm or actually landed, and in epee I'm really wanting to practice point control.

I once brought up that very topic to the gentleman who taught me point weapons in my formative years. I asked him how I would know whether the shot to the forearm was valid or not. He promptly took of his jacket and flipped it inside out. Inside the weapon arm sleeve were three long rectangular "pockets" sewen in. I asked him what it was for.

He kindly explained to me that back in his days, he used to slide in three light metal plates into those pockets because he didn't take a particular pleasure in his opponent's point d'arret digging into his forearm and the needle portion penetrating the jacket to poke his skin. He showed me an old Epee he used in his younger days, and it had three needles on the tip that basically facilitate the point catching the fabric of the jacket to indicate a solid hit.

[Kitana]

Dry fencing is great for practicing, especially with beginners. It gives them a chance to get their feet wet and understand somewhat the things that could occur during a bout. It can teach you to make your attacks clear and clean. In a competition, it could be a problem because you don't have that reassurance of the lights. You also have to have judges who are honest and pay attention (because I've lost many a competition due to judges not paying attention to the bout...staring at the ceiling or the walls and whatnot). I don't mind it personally.

[Christopher J Umbs]

Originally Posted by Mauler

He showed me an old Epee he used in his younger days, and it had three needles on the tip that basically facilitate the point catching the fabric of the jacket to indicate a solid hit.

And, in fact, point d'arret is required for AHF epee tournaments. We've never used any metal inserts though. One odd thing that we've noticed though is that they seem to chew through balistic nylon far quicker than they go through canvas... They do catch beautifully though.

[ducdequenelles]

I like electric fencing better, simply because I can concentrate on my game, and not have to worry about questionable hits, or whether the phrase ended in a double-touch or if one person hit first. Someone might end up feeling cheated. On the other hand, dry-fencing really makes you pay attention to what you're doing, and encourages solid hits that require more effort instead of light ones that the other person might not feel or see.

[VELISARIOS]

It nice to fence dry.

[broncofencer]

I went 50/50 on this because while electric has eliminated a few of the problems associated with dry fencing but has introduced its own problems. I don't find one better than the other. Sabre I find is the easiest Dry because the human error puts more of the form back into sabre which can sometimes especially at the low levels just a high speed crash and swing.