Frustruated Fencer

[smurfette]

I want to echo the response of: why are you even fencing the new student? It seems to be an odd call on your part. If she has only been fencing for a few months, you are not going to be a wonderful bout for her. But more importantly, bouting between a coach and an inexperienced student sets up all kinds of wierd power differentials that are very conducive to making someone upset. Most likely, she not only wants to get a touch on you, but because you are her coach, she also does not want to disappoint you. Add to that the gender differential, and I would say: why not just stick to lessons and drills? If you must fence, fence the students who will really get something out of fencing you (such as the more experienced men perhaps?)

[Ordway]

Definitely an interesting discussion!

I commented that some students just need more attention than others:

Originally Posted by jBirch

This doesn't work so well when you have different levels of ability and are striving for excellence.

Yeah. In the context of my English class, it's a freshman comp class, and my first goal has to be to get every student up to "competent writer of academic papers." Some students start closer to that goal than others. A few are already well past my baseline, and I work hard to challenge them to improve toward excellence; since I use a very individualized approach, that works reasonably well. But when push comes to shove, I don't have unlimited time and resources, so in a class with widely divergent ability levels, the ones who get a larger share of attention are the most needy and the most assertive. (The upside is that a lot of the better students end up signing up for my higher-level writing course the next semester, where I can really push them to the next level, and where they can get a running start since they already know me and my methods.)

But yeah, balancing mixed-ability classes is an eternal challenge. A worthwhile challenge, but very... challenging!

[Ordway]

Originally Posted by smurfette

I want to echo the response of: why are you even fencing the new student? It seems to be an odd call on your part. If she has only been fencing for a few months, you are not going to be a wonderful bout for her. But more importantly, bouting between a coach and an inexperienced student sets up all kinds of wierd power differentials that are very conducive to making someone upset. Most likely, she not only wants to get a touch on you, but because you are her coach, she also does not want to disappoint you. Add to that the gender differential, and I would say: why not just stick to lessons and drills? If you must fence, fence the students who will really get something out of fencing you (such as the more experienced men perhaps?)

In certain contexts, it can be useful for a low-level fencer to fence the coach; I'll do it occasionally with my students. If the entire group is at the same level, it's important to show the students what the "next level" looks and feels like, so it won't be a total shock at their first tournament or when they go to another club with more experienced fencers. If I do fence a student, I'll stick to simple actions for the most part, with the occasional different action thrown in, simply because the "Heyyyyy... how'd you DO that, Coach?!?!" reaction can be very motivational!

I agree that the power differential is important to be aware of; I think it's important to make it clear that a bout vs. Coach is a learning experience, and not Coach trying to win, per se. When I manage to get a touch on my coach when we're fencing a bout, I know it's a good touch, but also that it's in the context of a practice bout - not at all the same thing as if I met up with him in a tournament pool.

I don't necessarily see the gender differential as being particularly relevant. I'm a female fencer with a male coach, and it's not even on the radar as an issue. (Then again, I'm a fairly assertive woman who gets along well with men, and I'm definitely not prone to tears.) I'd view this as more of a personality-match concern rather than a gender-based one.

[smurfette]

Please forgive me for opening up a gender discussion. But I do think that the bigger, stronger, faster, more experienced man/ coach fencing an inexperienced beginner (freshman?) girl might create some uncomfortable power asymmetries. Not simply because "he" is a man and "she" is a woman -- gender, after all, is a social construction, something that is "performed" (Judith Butler). But rather, because of the difference in strength, size, and speed, as well as the difference in positions of authority/ power. That said, those learned socially constructed gender divisions do often come to matter, particularly in pedagogical situations. Anyway, I too am an assertive woman, who is also fast and strong. But I tend to avoid even training with most men, for a whole number of reasons. Other than "fencing" my coach in a more drill-like situation (as in the bouts that you describe), I don't think it is such a good idea. But there are, of course, always exceptions.

[Grasshopper]

Hook her body wire into a car battery and shock her when she misses a riposte. Good old-school russian technique! She'll be riposting like Romankov in a week!

[PalmFrond]

Originally Posted by smurfette

Please forgive me for opening up a gender discussion. But I do think that the bigger, stronger, faster, more experienced man/ coach fencing an inexperienced beginner (freshman?) girl might create some uncomfortable power asymmetries. Not simply because "he" is a man and "she" is a woman -- gender, after all, is a social construction, something that is "performed" (Judith Butler). But rather, because of the difference in strength, size, and speed, as well as the difference in positions of authority/ power.

In that case, should a small, slightly built man train with larger/faster/stronger fencers? Or is it only women who suffer from this crippling inability to train with those who are physically and technically superior to them? Anyway, how else do beginners, male or female, learn but by training with or fencing those who are superior fencers?

(Heck, maybe we just need weight/height divisions in fencing! )

[Allen Evans]

It takes a very mature student (and coach!) who can bout with their coach and keep all the interpersonal teacher/student dynamics at bay while trying to learn something. There are better ways to make actions more "realistic" for the student outside of a bout (see here) and better ways for the coach to get a lesson across without having to work so hard!

New students have a huge confidence hurtle to over come, and it is the teacher's job to boost them over it. When the student is working on an action "at speed" and fails, the coach has to quickly recognize the error and simplify the action, focusing on the part of the action that isn't working (in the case of the post that started this thread, the riposte), identify the reason for the failure (which may or may not be the riposte itself) and gradually add complexity back. It may even be worthwhile to abandon the action and go back to it later.

Crying is a normal frustration response for some students (some throw things, some swear). What isn't clear is what other factors entered into this equation. Where there a lot of people watching her fence? Is this an action that's failed with her before? What tells you she could be a good fencer (does she do other actions very well)? And, as Mr. Epee points out, what's your relationship with this student and the class?

I would suggest re-reading Ordway's posts and following some of the excellant advice.

[smurfette]

Originally Posted by PalmFrond

In that case, should a small, slightly built man train with larger/faster/stronger fencers? Or is it only women who suffer from this crippling inability to train with those who are physically and technically superior to them? Anyway, how else do beginners, male or female, learn but by training with or fencing those who are superior fencers?

(Heck, maybe we just need weight/height divisions in fencing! )

So, do you really think that coaches should go around fencing with their beginner students, even whent the student gets clearly upset? There is a difference between a reasonable bout that one can grow from and a bout that is just too much, as a bout with a coach can be, for a whole host of reasons -- physical/ technical superiority, as well as power asymmetry. That of course depends on whether the coach is fencing or just really drilling with the student. If a student is not ready for a much harder bout, that can be a real blow to (his)/ her confidence, as the original poster of the thread made very clear to us. Regarding men/ women and size, a smaller, slightly built man who also does not hit way way too hard would, I think, be a much better women's bout. But forget the whole gender discussion. It's very problematic, and I should not have opened up that box.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

If the coach upsets the student, he's usually doing something wrong. Its really as simple as that.

[Fencergrl]

I re-read the original post. Nobody (including the poster) knows exactly why this student started crying. Perhaps it was frustration, perhaps a combination of frustration and something else... perhaps her cat died that day as well…. Who knows???

I don’t think you can assume it was because she was fencing her coach or because he was a man. It’s a possibility, but not a certainty. I personally love fencing guys that are bigger and stronger than I (so much target!) others feel less comfortable.

In all likelihood she’ll say something to her coach next time she sees him… or not. This has been an interesting discussion however.

[jBirch]

Originally Posted by Fencergrl

I re-read the original post. Nobody (including the poster) knows exactly why this student started crying. Perhaps it was frustration, perhaps a combination of frustration and something else... perhaps her cat died that day as well…. Who knows???

True. I think that most coaches, however, have seen exactly this pattern of response and it is almost invariably a result of frustration. There are certainly other things that might be the cause, but generally (and that's all we can do on a forum: talk about generalities) it's a result of frustration. The key is how the student responded after the 3-0 point: they gave up.

I don’t think you can assume it was because she was fencing her coach or because he was a man. It’s a possibility, but not a certainty.

It's a remote possibility. The Smurf's comments, IMHO, go more toward Mr. Epee's apt comments that there is most possibly some other emotions happening concurrently that are confusing the issue. And there is certainly an influence when gender is involved.

You and I are both married and I'm sure you've had crying outbursts with your husband. I'm equally sure that he's mystified about how he's supposed to respond to that. The general feeling amongst men is that crying = unbelievable pain. Therefor, a man tries to make the pain go away (with humour, by ignoring it, by fixing it, whatever). What we fail to realise (as men) is that often crying from a woman needs nothing more then a hug and a sympathetic ear. There is no unbelievable pain. In this case, the gender differences are apt and important to any potential solution recommendation.

When you have unmarried coach and unmarried student in a college/HS environment you often have sexual undertones to most endeavours. If you don't realise these (as Freud recommends) then you're going to get yourself into trouble. If you encourage the dependency (by comforting them for example), you encourage the romance. The student must not look to you (as coach) for self-esteem and you (as coach) must discourage any such situations from developing.

I personally love fencing guys that are bigger and stronger than I (so much target!) others feel less comfortable.

Absolutely. You know how to handle them and it's fun to take the big men down a notch. Especially for the wee girl. But...do you like losing to your husband? Have you played full contact football/rugby/hockey with him and his buddies? If not, why not?

James.

[oso97]

Hrrmmm, there's some good thoughts and points raised in this discusssion and some really bizzare one's too. Allow me to toss in my ideas.

First of all, it is extremely common for students to get frustrated and upset as they are making the transition from beginning student to an intermediate level - this is what I call the process of learning how to actually use the techniques learned in class/lesson in a bouting situation. An important part of the development of a fencer is learning how this application process works. It is also critically important that the student develop a technique for learning how to add new actions from their "lesson repetior" to their "bouting repetior" and to have a general framework for doing so.

As students begin this process, they often get extremely frustrated, and express their frustrations in different ways: crying, temper tantrums, sullenness, surly behavior, late and/or hard hits, and various other signs. It is important that the coach recognize these manefestations for what they are, and treat the underlying cause, not just the symptom. Its neccessary to provide a bouting enviornement where the student CAN apply such things, with an opponent of suitable skill. Sometimes, this needs to be an opponent of equal measure, sometimes less skilled, and sometimes more skilled.

The coach can often provide a useful bouting opponent for this process. He can simulate an opponent with certain moves, a propensity for a specific action, and various other types of situtations. It is important though that bouts with the instructor been clearly seen as training opportunities - not contests of skill. For this reason, its typically important that a coach NOT engage in direct competition with his students, either in the club or a tournament. There are specific times and coaching styles when this is not as important, and certainly there are some excellent coaches who compete along side their students. But one should not extrapolate from these situations to a more generalized consideration, and if one to was to witness first hand the coach/student relationships of these fencers, you'll find it to be very very different than is typical (I've had the opportunity to witness first hand a coach with some very talented students who regularly competes along side them, and it works ONLY because of his coaching style, philosophy and some unique circumstances to the situation -I know I would not be able to pull it off).

This aside, what does one do with a student who is displaying inappropriate behavior because of the frustration of translating "lession repetior" into "bouting repetior?" First, distract the student from the inappropriate behavior. This needs to be handled carefully, and 'punishment' routines should NEVER be used. Get the student to focus on something else entirely, and find a way to regain their focus. If this can be achieved, the potential for an excellent "teachable moment" is at hand. Then, get the student to talk, and express their frustrations. Odds are, they don't even knowwhy they are frustrated, and you'll hear phrases like, "It doesn't work!", "I am no good at this!", "Nothing I do is any good!" or "Why can't I do a simple [Parry-riposte/compound attack/etc]?" Take the time to explain to the student why they are frustrated. Praise their accomplishments to this point - simply making it to the level of trying to incorporate "lesson repetior" into "bouting repetior" shows that they have successfully mastered at least a handful of techniques. Explain to them that trying to make such a transition is frustrating, but in spite of the frustration, that their expression of such frustration was inappropriate. Invite them to talk to you, or one of your experienced students the next time they are feeling frustrated. Tell them that even though it may not sound like it now, they will get it soon. Give them a specific set of things to work on. And the best solution is NOT more drilling (unless the student is having severe technical defficencies in their lesson), but rather to bout against an opponent of appropriate skill, with the understanding that this bout is for the purpose of working on that exact move they are having trouble with.

The sex of the student and the coach has nothing to do with it. And Frued was an idiot.

[sabregrrrl]

Originally Posted by D+F+P=Hadouken!

If the coach upsets the student, he's usually doing something wrong. Its really as simple as that.

I have to disagree. There are times when I'm feeling frustrated during a lesson, to the point that I want to cry. I don't (at the salle anyway), but I feel like it. It has nothing to do with my coach doing something "wrong"; most of the time it's due to the fact that he's presenting me with a new, challenging concept (which is what he's supposed to be doing) at a time when I'm feeling stressed about something else not related to fencing. And, as several people have already said, sometimes we ladies just feel the need to cry. It makes us feel better, cleanses out the stress, then we move on to the next challenge.

[Fencergrl]

Originally Posted by jBirch

But...do you like losing to your husband? Have you played full contact football/rugby/hockey with him and his buddies? If not, why not?

James.

I am a pretty rough and tumble girl, so I don't know if I'm a good example (with 4 brothers you have to be!). I don’t mind losing to people I know well or like because I grew up playing sports against friends and family. Having 4 athletic older siblings and 3 younger ones meant someone was always better than someone else… yet we are all very competitive.

I play to win especially against my husband... when we ended up on different teams in wheelchair basketball; I used his unwillingness to hurt me against him. He had a habit of flying down the gym (I forget what his speed was but he was one of the fastest on the team). …. His upper body is all muscle and he’s a 200 lbs+ and takes a size 56 jacket.

I would plant myself somewhere on his path to force him to swerve around me causing him to slow down… sure it would have been his foul if he hit me… but it was suicidal as these chairs have no breaks and they’re built for speed.

He never hit me…. Swore at me… perfectly legal move, just stupid (if I weren’t so confident that he would swerve).

If I got hit… well I would have took my knocks as I had it coming. He would have felt horrible…. So yeah it was mean… but I was (and still am) very competitive.

I see your point, however… if a young girl had a crush on her coach and wanted desperately to be a good fencer and failing repeatedly, this would bring her to tears. As would having a bad day, being in certain parts of her period, or being frustrated by fencing a bigger stronger guy…. Hard to say what’s going on, but there has been many interesting theories.

[Ordway]

I commented earlier that I didn't think the gender difference was particularly relevant, but this is a good point:

Originally Posted by jBirch

When you have unmarried coach and unmarried student in a college/HS environment you often have sexual undertones to most endeavours. If you don't realise these (as Freud recommends) then you're going to get yourself into trouble. If you encourage the dependency (by comforting them for example), you encourage the romance. The student must not look to you (as coach) for self-esteem and you (as coach) must discourage any such situations from developing.

In my case, I'm married and so is my coach (to other people, in case anybody's gearing up for a smart remark ) so that most likely takes a whole swath of potential issues out of contention.

I was thinking about the frustration issue. I get frustrated in lessons at times too (and, as someone else pointed out, not because of anything my coach did wrong, but because I'm not assimilating a complicated action or idea as well as *I* think I should be.) I'm not likely to break into tears, but I'll get mad at myself, which is probably nearly as counterproductive.

Yet in thinking about it, I never *stay* frustrated in a lesson, because my coach deals with it promptly. Any complex action is made up of a sequence of smaller actions, which I can do successfully. So if I am getting frustrated with my inability to do it, he'll move back to the very basics, add an action, add another one, building up to the complete (more complex) action at slow speed, then do it a bit faster, building up to doing it at full speed. This is important because it teaches a new skill by building on repeated successes, not by repeated failure to complete the complex action.

[KD5MDK]

People keep asking why the fencer was bouting the coach. It seems to me that when it comes time for a beginning fencer to engage in free-form competitive performance (bouting, as opposed to a lesson where there is a "right" thing to do), a coach who knows that fencer's skills and capabilities is one of the best people to put them up against, providing an opponent who can provide them with a legitimate challenge (as opposed to another beginner, who might turn this into a flailing match) without making it a hopeless contest. The coach say makes a clear straight attack, expecting the fencer to make the correct parry-riposte response. If the fencer is making technical errors which prevent the response from working (3 times in a row?) then they're bound to get frustrated when they're down 0-3 and feel like they should be doing better.

The whole point of a coach bouting a beginner is to allow the coach to provide a reasonable level of challenge in their opponent.

If the coach upsets the student, he's usually doing something wrong. Its really as simple as that.

Define "coach upsets". How about the coach asks me to do something and I keep screwing it up? That regularly upsets me, but it's not his fault I'm failing to properly execute a perfectly reasonable drill. About every third time something goes wrong, my coach asks me "What happened?" and I tell him which part I screwed up. Sometimes I get so mad at my failures it drives me to a totally different level of performance. (i.e. simulating being chased down strip. Not only do I set up the final parry riposte and stick the riposte (what I had been screwing up), I threw in 2 beat-attacks in preparation as well while running away. I was tired of screwing up and was going to get it right.)

[jBirch]

On the subject of the coach fencing beginners, I've got a couple of thoughts...

1) When the coach is fencing, they must be fencing to the utmost of their ability. Anything else should be done in the context of a drill.

2) That said, it is unfair for the coach to be doing things that the student has never seen. If the student knows only straight attacks and parry-riposte then the coach should be limited to exactly that. Beats, disengages and flicks are to be saved for a later date. This doesn't mean that the coach can't be a crafty bastard. On the contrary.

3) The coach has to carefully gauge whether the student will get anything out of the process. Fencing an adult beginner with skill, talent and a problem-solving mindset is productive. Thrashing a 10 year old is not.

4) Sometimes, just seeing the coach getting frustrated, making mistakes and enjoying the sport makes the lessons all the more real. Part of our job is to instill a continual love of the game into our students and part of doing that is playing the game ourselves.

5) Sometimes, the student starts to feel that the coach has nothing more to teach them if the coach can't beat them in a bout. You have to watch out for this. I know some high-level coaches who refuse to fence competitively even in the club because they are afraid of the consequences of losing.

6) Losing to your students can be an increadible confidence boost to them. When they are ready to seriously challenge you, let them have a go and don't hold back. Your students will start to set their own realistic goals naturally by fencing you that can be invaluable for competition.

7) This concept of "playing" with your students is very different from the upper-level concepts of shadowing and mimicing where the coach portrays a particular fencer's style so the student has a realistic opponent. This is merely fun practice competition for competition's sake.

Hope this helps.

James.