Diversification versus Specialization

[Epee Scherma]

In regards to an advanced level fencer (as in a fencer who can satisfactorily do all text book actions, and can change the tactics of the game when necessary), should a coach focus on diversifying the fencing actions or capitalizing on the fencer's style?

I used to think diversifying and becoming a well-rounded fencer should take priority but much of the hard work spent learning other actions never get applied by the fencer in a bout because they are far more comfortable making some other action. The action generally works and they are fencing in their own comfort zone. Don't you agree that you are fencing your best in competition if you are fencing "your game"? If this "advanced" level fencer can and has changed his tactics in the event that "his game" is working against a particular fencer, shouldn't that be good enough? It seems like its a lot of money and time wasted when a fencer works a fencing action that they may never apply in a fencing bout. That money would be better spent capitalizing on the fencer's strengths and learning how to deal with weaknesses. So they can fence "their game" all the time.
--------------------------------
Alright, here is the short less wordy version of the above:

Even the most succesful epee fencers in the world have their own style. They fence their own game, they fence in their zone of comfort to win a bout. They know how to do other actions, if they HAVE to but almost always fence their game.

If an "advanced level" fencer has his own comfort zone and the ability to succesfully change tactics when necessary, should his coach work to:
A. Help him fence "his game" stronger and more often?
B. Spend lots of time and money teaching him new actions all day that the fencer may only use once in a great long while?

---------------------------------
OK a hypothetical: I know this guy who is an epee fencer. He's got a great sense of timing and is like a sharp shooter. He also moves up and down the strip like gangbusters because hes got the stamina of an... ox. Pow! Lunge or fleche to arm or knee. Its his style. He can hit even the wrist when it is completely hidden by the bell guard. He's an advanced guy. If it isn't working out for him, then he can change up. Like if he isn't getting his touches, he can switch to pris de fer actions or go on the counter offensive.

BUT HE ISN'T PERFECT BY A LONG SHOT. Against better fencers than him he is parry riposted and his change of game isn't strong enough.

SO should coach teach him to work his game against the better fencers? Or teach him to stop what he is doing and promote a well rounded fencer (a path that will be very slow, take much time, much money, and may ultimately fail if he never applies it)?

[Epee Scherma]

I just keep imagining:
Fencer A fences with his own great style and game. He is always in his zone because he is comfortable.
Fencer B has no signature moves, just good in many many diverse actions.

At first fencer A would have problem, because B has a huge repertoire to choose from. So A can't fence his game well. BUT since A has trained how to fence his game right in the face of all different opponents, he would prevail shortly and win the bout (probably by a long shot too).

[oso97]

Hrmm... its an interesting hypothetical you postulate. Here are my thoughts on how I would deal with such a student if he came to me wanting to improve.

First I'd spend some time learning about his favored moves, and what his strengths and weakness are. This would involve observation of him while fencing, both in bouting and in tournaments, and running him through a number of drills testing various different things. At this time I'd also be looking to see if he has any fundemental flaws that can be easily fixed - perhaps a deeper on gaurd position, a shift in hand position, maybe a transition to a smaller or larger grip to enable easier manipulation of the weapon.

From what you describe, it sounds like this fellow has a very strong straight attack, and has been using it for a number of years. So, we'd continue to work on that action, and slowly introduce complementary actions, finding ways to subtly modify what he currently does well. Its not a question of 'changing his game' or 'making him a more rounded fencer' but finding ways to deal with the kinds of actions he is being scored upon by.

Without direct observation, its hard to prescribe a specific series of solutions, but some of the things I'd initally work on would be to try to help him find new ways of setting up his strong direct attack.

In the meantime, I'd also work on adding new kinds of actions to his repetior. Counter-time for example. A good simple compound attack. Change of tempo. Things of that nature.

Call it a dual approach, and I don't think it would be as time consuming, expensive and fruitless as you suggest, unless the fencer in question unable to have any sort of mental flexibility. Yes, there would be setbacks and shortcomings, but likely as not, some good initial results with 3-6 months, and continuing developments after that.

[Jason]

Develop the strengths, limit the weaknesses.
The best fencers in the world aren't the best because they do everything perfectly. They are the best because they develop their strengths to the highest possible level. At the same time, of course, they don't ignore their weaknesses--they don't completely suck at anything, but it's only at certain elements of the game that they're fantastic.

If a fencer has a fantastic fleche--great timing, distance, execution, etc.--and a mediocre lunge, that fencer should develop tactics that take advantage of his fleche.
That doesn't mean ignoring his lunge in training--it means spending even more time developing his fleche.
A fencer's strengths, I should add, may not be limited to specific actions. The strengths may be tactical. Some fencers are fantastic at premeditated actions and actions with change of decision, but not so good at open-eyes actions. That fencer should then use in competition--and further develop in training--mostly the premeditated actions, with a readiness for the possibility of change of decision.

All of this is only really applicable to higher level fencers. The beginner needs to develop a range of actions, tactics, etc., to be able to isolate his strengths. Sometimes beginners will find that something they are quite bad at, later becomes their strongest attribute.

[Mr Epee]

So far, Jason has hit this most cleanly.

Once you reach a certain level every competitor can execute every action, however, the top competitors have at least one (but still a very low number) of techniques which truly set them apart from the field. In tennis this special skill is referred to as a weapon (Think: Sampras' running forehand, Agassi's Return, Roddick's serve, Federer's ability to anticipate and position)

For a fencing specific example: Hungarian epeeist, Kovacs, is a true master of coupe to the hand/arm/shoulder. I have personally witnessed him hitting someone 4+ times below the elbow before an opponent had a chance to respond. He has a huge number of preparations for this action, and can use it both offensively and defensively. That's his weapon. That's his game. However, the rest of his game certainly isn't lacking in any other area(the well rounded game is a fairly recognizable Hungarian tradition). If he's having an off day with the coupe, then he's still not going to get lit up by a less than excellent competitor. If you were to watch his daily lessons, you would see him practicing a full battery of offensive and defensive actions in all four primary lines.

As Jason points out, the idea of specialization on a few actions is really only possible after a fairly high level is already obtained, because the most valuable tools may not show up til later in the development process. It takes a certain level of self-awareness that is simply not available to the beginner, novice, or intermediate fencer.

[Allen Evans]

The ability to develop “weapons” for a student, while improving the weaknesses in the student’s game, is the mark of an excellent coach. Better, the best coaches know when to start this training: to begin to develop the fencer’s own style. The "nuts and bolts" of fencing actions are never left behind, but there is a definate shift in training.

There doesn’t seem to be a manual written anywhere for how to do this (though from Mr. Epee’s comments I’m getting more interested in learning the Hungarian pedagogy). Good coaches seem to be able to feel the right time to make this transition for the student.

[FeatherBlade]

Originally Posted by Epee Scherma

A. Help him fence "his game" stronger and more often?
B. Spend lots of time and money teaching him new actions all day that the fencer may only use once in a great long while?

I totaly agree with what has been sad above (Jason, Mr Epee), a coach should work on both stated points + it´s true, you never know when you will suddenly feel comfortable with an action that you are not using now.

Epee Scherma, I just hope you don´t mean that you know some coach who is totaly overlooking point A.

[Epee Scherma]

If you had to develop a list of requirements/observations/behaviors of the student's fencing in order to define the time of transition what would you say? This question is for anyone interested in answering.

[Epee Scherma]

Originally Posted by FeatherBlade

I totaly agree with what has been sad above (Jason, Mr Epee), a coach should work on both stated points + it´s true, you never know when you will suddenly feel comfortable with an action that you are not using now.

Epee Scherma, I just hope you don´t mean that you know some coach who is totaly overlooking point A.

I have.... six coaches. Of them I see three consistently, and one regularly. My regular one has been coaching me in the "type A".

[oso97]

That is a really broad and openended question, and going to be difficult to answer without actual interaction with the student. And even then, they surprise you. Some of the things to take in mind are how often they can practice/take a lesson, the quality of their bouting partners and what kind of actions they do, the quality of their tournament opponents and what kind of actions they do, the student's mental flexibility and ability to change things about their game, and a number of other factors that vary from individual to individual.

[achilleus]

Epee Scherma,

You ask some interesting questions, that Mr.E and Jason answered quite well, but two things jump out at me...

Originally Posted by Epee Scherma

BUT HE ISN'T PERFECT BY A LONG SHOT.

Have you seen any perfect fencers? I mean, the strive for perfection is admirable but achieving perfection in fencing (or life) is impossible.

Originally Posted by Epee Scherma

I have.... six coaches. Of them I see three consistently, and one regularly. My regular one has been coaching me in the "type A".

That's a whole lotta coaches...

Do the coaches instruct in a similar manner? Information is good, conflicting information is...not so good.

In addition, the answer of who's ready for what type of coaching depends on a two very important things:

1) The coach
2) The student

Each coach wants different things from students, and each student is capable of different strengths and weaknesses...

[Epee Scherma]

Oso, I agree now. Describing that situation is just to broad.
Achilleus, you make a valid point. There is no such thing as a "perfect" fencer. When I said perfect I think I had just one of the world champs in mind.

Have you ever wondered why fencers can't just do what they learn? Like why we always end up with a certain style or preferred technique. You'd think it wouldn't be hard to pick up other actions just like a magnet when you see everyone else doing their things. But... it never is that easy is it.

[Allen Evans]

Originally Posted by Epee Scherma

If you had to develop a list of requirements/observations/behaviors of the student's fencing in order to define the time of transition what would you say?

Sometimes the coach decides this...sometimes the student decides for the coach and the coach is smart enough to play along. Mr. Epee talks about the fencer reaching "a certain" level, but is properly vague about what that level is.

Certainly the student should be able to execute the technical actions in fencing at a very comfortable level. If the coach attacks low line and the student turns him or herself into a pretzel on the parry, or parries when they should counter (since we are talking about epee), the student is not ready for this kind of work, even though they have a devestating fleche attack.

If the coach ignores technical gaps, the coach ends up with fencers that climb quickly into a dead-end game.

[keith]

Originally Posted by Allen Evans

snips.... or parries when they should counter (since we are talking about epee)....snips

Which is also an example of technical depth - if you only counter into the low line attack but never parry - you are going to get gubbed by any fencer with a better control of distance.

... which segues to my only contribution, as every one else has said a certain level of technique is required (an certainly no holes). The real secret is the issue of being able to hit people with an action even though they know it's coming.

Ever noticed that? Before you go up to fence the real athletes you will be told watch out for their action 'X'. Or the observation that such and such a fencer only hits people with action 'Y'?

Which is a way of saying that you will decide you really like action X, you seem to be able to master the timing naturally or whatever - so then you just have to spend increasing amounts of time disguising that action so even though you opponent is waiting for it it still arrives unexpectedly.

At the end of the day preparation is easier to develop depth in since most attacking actions require subtle, but oh so important, differences in timing. The hand foot timing finger co-ordination between a coupe vs a disengage on the attack is an obvious example.