Profiling fencers: inspired by "Winning Ugly"

[El Chucko]

I have been reading "Winning Ugly" lately, by tennis pro Brad Gilbert. It was recommended as a good source of tactics, strategy, and just some general approaches to competition. Even though I don't know alot about tennis, I am very pleased with it so far, and have found some good stuff I can use. Often, the author confirms things I already suspected, or systematizes things that I already have tried to do on a less formal scale. This is still helpful, though, to see it in another context. Overall, it is a good (and surprisingly readable) book.

Anyway, in one section, Brad Gilbert profiles some of the typical tennis players, describes their style, and offers suggestions for defeating them. For example, he talks about ways to beat "retrievers," "serve-volley players," etc.

I would like to profile some common fencing styles and discuss strategies for defeating them. As an epee fencer, I would like to focus on epee in this thread. (Foilists and sabreurs are of course encouraged to start other, similar threads, if you are so inclined.)

To get started:

Profile #1: "Snipers." You know, the guys who stay out of distance and wait, and wait, and wait.... and then POW! One shot, one kill.

Counter-strategies?

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by El Chucko

Profile #1: "Snipers." You know, the guys who stay out of distance and wait, and wait, and wait.... and then POW! One shot, one kill.

Counter strategy - "Counter Sniper" - play the same game. Take your shot and put the Sniper on the offensive. He then has to attack to regain the point. Pull distance, wait for the attack, pick it up and reposte.

[D'Art]

Originally Posted by El Chucko

To get started:

Profile #1: "Snipers." You know, the guys who stay out of distance and wait, and wait, and wait.... and then POW! One shot, one kill.

Counter-strategies?

This works in foil, though it is actually an epee tactic. Advance, then throw a feint to draw out the "snipe", then just use 2nd intention with some sort of pris-de-fer or take an opposition parry (though your footwork has to be reasonable to make sure you don't get too close)

[telkanuru]

Well, give 'em a feint to trigger their attack, and then counter-time.

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Counter strategy - "Counter Sniper" - play the same game. Take your shot and put the Sniper on the offensive. He then has to attack to regain the point. Pull distance, wait for the attack, pick it up and reposte.

Doesn't work if they get one or two points out ahead, though. Countertime is more difficult, but more reliable in terms of winning the bout, in my opinion.

I'm probably a member of the "sniper" club, and most of the time the first one or two points determine the outcome of my bouts. (More in pools than DEs)

[Phaeton]

Don't counter a type of fencer, counter the individual action. As always go in open eyes and set up your points.

[rcmatthews]

i would say more don't play the other fencer's game. Because you will likely lose. You have to figure out how to get them to do what you want them to, rather than what they would like to do.

[noahz]

Originally Posted by Phaeton

Don't counter a type of fencer, counter the individual action. As always go in open eyes and set up your points.

Gotta say I disagree with this. It's the difference between "tactics" and "strategy."

[Phaeton]

You walk in knowing an individual fencer's weakness, and looking for an opening. Generalisations arn't all that useful.

Look at the above thread.

Q:How do you beat a fencer that does X action?

A: You do Y action.

We are countering an individual who is defined by his actions. Why generalize and have details lost in translation or lead to foolish decisions where things arn't specific.

It is easier to analyze what's visible, what's there, what's simple and what's apparent, and much more effective than making a plan on a bunch of preconcieved conclusions.

If somone is doing counter time, change lines. If you can't get around that crazy parry riposte, do a second intention action to stop cut.

I could point out that an individual like stop cuts, but what will work against him won't work against everyone that likes stop cuts. Completely unlike chess, every fencer is absolutely unique. I could say he plays like Tigran Petrosian, and you could decide to play an agressive opening against me like good ol' Kasperov. That's not existant in fencing. There isn't one right answer, and you won't end up in the same position as any previous fencer that's ever walked the earth. You can't plug your position and opponent into Fritz and find out quantitatively how good your choice was.

Look at the actions somone does, look how to counter them. Strategize, and know what action will counter what action, but not build upon that by attempting to categorize an individual into a certain type of individual because this will certaintly lead to mental laziness and stupidity on strip.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by Phaeton

I could point out that an individual like stop cuts, but what will work against him won't work against everyone that likes stop cuts. Completely unlike chess, every fencer is absolutely unique. I could say he plays like Tigran Petrosian, and you could decide to play an agressive opening against me like good ol' Kasperov. That's not existant in fencing. There isn't one right answer, and you won't end up in the same position as any previous fencer that's ever walked the earth. You can't plug your position and opponent into Fritz and find out quantitatively how good your choice was.

I don't know about this. I think there are a lot of parrallels between tennis and fencing in this regard. With Chang be exactly like every other retriever? Will Federer be exactly like every other serve & volley guy? No, absolutely not. They will have differences. Maybe THIS guys's serve is a bit heavier, maybe THAT guy has a bit more spin. It does give a basic framework from which to start. THEN you make it opponent-specific.

I'm a big fan of Winning Ugly. I don't know that reading it changed how I approach the game, but I see this as much more what I do than, say, Inner Game of Tennis (an approach that works very well for some other fencers).

Tennis, having a bigger market and bigger player-base, has more work done on it. Fencing, as a minor sport, needs to be able to find useful information in major sports and leverage that back into our game. I think this is an interesting thread.

-B

[parrythis]

I think I have to jump in and say that I see profiling as a useful tool. Sure, at any given moment, any given fencer can use any given tactic, but as a rule, people don't bring every trick in the book to their "A" game. I have found that most folks build their game around a subset of tactics and techniques that work well for them. For any given fencer, this subset may be small (only a couple of moves) or large (a dozen or more). In general, the better the fencer, the broader the "A" game.

I find it useful to "scope out" the competition as much as possible prior to fencing them. If I can see what they like to do and develop a counter strategy, it often saves me from getting hit a few times and often buys me a few hits in the process. In a five touche bout, "a few" can make all the difference in the world.

One challenge that I am working on is recognizing when my opponent figures out that I'm onto their "A" game and starts bringing their "B" game into the mix. This is more likely to happen during a DE. I've been in situations in which I'm leading, and my opponent switches strategies and catches up. I need to recognize when that happens sooner and figure out my counter-strategy to their new game in order to stay ahead.

Perhaps profiling is more useful during five-touche pool bouts than it is during a fifteen-touche DE. Perhaps fencing during the DE requires an approach that is more open to the possibility that your opponent will move outside their profile.

[RoninX]

Oh I absolutely agree, this is a very interesting thread. As has been said many times before: while not every individual fencer may fit a specific prototypical category to a "T" most of do have a favorite set of tactics that are our comfort zone.

Therefore, espcially at the B,C,D levels of competition one can often effectively categorize fencers. In school we actually treated this somewhat differently - we categorized according to weaknesses in general rather than strengths (though we certainly talked about individuals strengths as well).

example: "Bulls" - Those who would back you down the strip, wait for open target and then charge. There were a lot a bad "bulls" that you could bait by opening lines out of distance. There were some very good and effective ones who you had to play a tight distance game with in order to get a charge when out of distance (this is in epee BTW).

As far a "snipers" - do you mean the ones who wait, and wait and attack when an opening is available or those who love two pick you off as you come in or do you usually see those same traits combined in what you are terming a sniper?

[Allen Evans]

I'm surprised no one has yet mentioned:

Theory, Methods and Exercises in Fencing by Ziemowit Wojciechowski

There is an excellant section on profiling fencers into four different types, and outlining (in very broad strokes) how to fence them. It's limited to foil examples, but I've used it in epee, as well.

It is a very worthwhile book.

[jdoiv]

Originally Posted by Allen Evans

I'm surprised no one has yet mentioned:

Theory, Methods and Exercises in Fencing by Ziemowit Wojciechowski

There is an excellant section on profiling fencers into four different types, and outlining (in very broad strokes) how to fence them. It's limited to foil examples, but I've used it in epee, as well.

It is a very worthwhile book.

purchase this book? I searched amazon but it wasn't listed. Google didn't bring much up either. Thanks

[rory]

You can get it from Leon Paul.
http://www.leonpaul.com/acatalog/Sho..._Books_58.html

Excellent book and highly recommended - I was just about to post mentioning it, and I saw Allen already had

[El Chucko]

Here's my strategy against Snipers:

Give them an opening and tempt them to lunge. When they do, parry or bind and step in to close distance, then stick them at close range. This depends on such perfect timing, though, that I have to be really "on" to get consistent results.

The biggest problem, though, is that I usually identify a Sniper after they already got a couple of touches on me. Of course, now they are more than happy to patiently protect the lead, and will not buy my invitations. Then I HAVE to attack to catch up. They find an unintentional opening, and I'm done for.

[El Chucko]

Here's another.

Profile #2:Hand-huggers. These are the epee fencers who constantly ride your bellguard. Whenever you try to do much of anything, they find a way in and hit your glove. Opportunistic little buggers.

Counter-strategies?

[RoninX]

Many "hand-huggers" are totally baffled if you switch to fencing in absence. Many never develop a deep target game because their primary game is so well suited to epee. Their sense of distance is also primarily based in keeping their tip right on your gaurd so that can be exploited as well.

I actually like fencing those guys alot

Of course attacking from absence is a learned skill... just another thing to practice

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

How to beat a hand hugger? Move your hand around alot so they miss, and then fleche or lunge deep.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by D+F+P=Hadouken!

How to beat a hand hugger? Move your hand around alot so they miss, and then fleche or lunge deep.

Yeah, really. People who base their entire game around finding small openings on your hand just HATE when you move it around a lot, thereby giving them all of those pesky openings. :eyeroll:

-B