Smoking and fencing.

[ChubbyHubby]

Originally Posted by dramamine

Jeez, everyone here is talking like cigarettes are performance enhancers. I don't want to name names but there are two specifically I can think of who were senior national team members before beginning smoking, and their results dropped significantly over time due to bad cardiovascular fitness.

Ah, but fencing isn't just about cardiovascular fitness though is it? An extremely unfit but experienced fencer can beat a ultra-fit but not so experienced one. ie. it is skill based too. Fencing will never have the same doping problem like say cycling has for example.

Is it not possible that what fitness you lose could be offset by possible gains on the mental side of things (more relaxed, focused etc)?

Also if a lot of the top WC fencers are smokers, then any loss of fitness is levelled out?

No question smoking is bad for you healthwise, but isn't the question here if smoking could improve your fencing? not if it is bad for you?

[dramamine]

Originally Posted by ChubbyHubby

Ah, but fencing isn't just about cardiovascular fitness though is it? An extremely unfit but experienced fencer can beat a ultra-fit but not so experienced one. ie. it is skill based too. Fencing will never have the same doping problem like say cycling has for example.

Is it not possible that what fitness you lose could be offset by possible gains on the mental side of things (more relaxed, focused etc)?

Also if a lot of the top WC fencers are smokers, then any loss of fitness is levelled out?

No question smoking is bad for you healthwise, but isn't the question here if smoking could improve your fencing? not if it is bad for you?

I have these neat gloves. When I wear them, exercise regularly and eat well, I notice a major increase in performance. I can get you a pair for $100.

Some top fencers are smokers. Some are not. Some wear funny coloured socks... do you know what I mean?

People can succeed in spite of things which are hindrances or simply not relevant. Someone who is born with excellent genetics can have an amazing body with a crappy workout routine and a mediocre diet. A top level athlete who is obviously gifted can do some things that are not optimal and get away with it. Unless you are one of those athletes - which most of us are not - then you are going to need all the help you can get if you hope to reach that level. Cigarettes are not going to enhance your performance. This is another absurd example of how fencers are still in the dark ages in terms of athletics.

I also don't think top fencers smoke as much as you think. You just notice the ones who smoke because you perceive it as unusual when you see them outside taking drags, but if you looked inside at the gym and counted the number of top level competitors who DIDN'T smoke you would see that the claim that "most" top fencers smoke (I know you didn't say this) is greatly exaggerated. Also I know a few who only smoke at tournaments (this might be a different discussion altogether though? Not sure)

If you have problems focusing or relaxing, there are many things you can do that are not detrimental to your health and performance - see a sports psycho, put yourself in high-pressure situations in training, get your coach to help you, etc.

Last thing: You're right, fencing isn't JUST about cardiovascular fitness. Does that mean that you can completely neglect it, or do things that are detrimental to it? Obviously not. Fencing isn't JUST about technical skill either, and lots of good fencers do big parries, why do we bother teaching small ones? Fencing your 4th or 5th DE bout of the day against someone who is very close to your skill level is tiring, in any weapon.

Sorry if I came across as condescending, it wasn't my intention but I just reread the post and it comes off that way.

[ChubbyHubby]

Originally Posted by dramamine

....I also don't think top fencers smoke as much as you think. You just notice the ones who smoke because you perceive it as unusual when you see them outside taking drags, but if you looked inside at the gym and counted the number of top level competitors who DIDN'T smoke you would see that the claim that "most" top fencers smoke (I know you didn't say this) is greatly exaggerated. Also I know a few who only smoke at tournaments (this might be a different discussion altogether though? Not sure)

If you have problems focusing or relaxing, there are many things you can do that are not detrimental to your health and performance - see a sports psycho, put yourself in high-pressure situations in training, get your coach to help you, etc...

.

Reading a lot of the posts on this thread I get the feeling a lot of the comments are confusing "could smoking be performance enhancing?" with "should you smoke?". Almost an underlying fear of being seen to be "pro-smoking" for any reason. Even a sense of we shouldn't be discussing if smoking could possibly have any positive effects for the fear of encouraging any young fencers (or any fencer) to start!

Personally, I don't smoke and never even tried - and don't have any intention to start (even if it improves my fencing).

I didn't say "most" top fencers smoke, although I can say "a lot of the top fencers" do smoke, the ones at the very top internationally. Purely an observation. It could be as you say they are at the top in spite of them smoking.

But are people open minded enough to even entertain the idea that it is a "possibility" that it is performance enhancing? Not whether you should or shouldn't, or there are alternative ways of acheiving the same results.

I am not saying that fitness don't matter, the question I am asking is that is it possible that the possible positive effects on the mental side offsets enough the negative effects on fitness you end up with a net gain?

[dramamine]

Originally Posted by ChubbyHubby

Reading a lot of the posts on this thread I get the feeling a lot of the comments are confusing "could smoking be performance enhancing?" with "should you smoke?". Almost an underlying fear of being seen to be "pro-smoking" for any reason. Even a sense of we shouldn't be discussing if smoking could possibly have any positive effects for the fear of encouraging any young fencers (or any fencer) to start!

Personally, I don't smoke and never even tried - and don't have any intention to start (even if it improves my fencing).

I didn't say "most" top fencers smoke, although I can say "a lot of the top fencers" do smoke, the ones at the very top internationally. Purely an observation. It could be as you say they are at the top in spite of them smoking.

But are people open minded enough to even entertain the idea that it is a "possibility" that it is performance enhancing? Not whether you should or shouldn't, or there are alternative ways of acheiving the same results.

I am not saying that fitness don't matter, the question I am asking is that is it possible that the possible positive effects on the mental side offsets enough the negative effects on fitness you end up with a net gain?

I understand what your premise is, I'll try to actually answer your question instead of rambling: the (perceived) benefits of smoking can in my view be obtained through methods that don't require you to consider a "net gain". Besides, a fencer at the top internationally has great mental focus and is relaxed, or else they wouldn't be there. Maybe they smoke because athletes have addictive personalities, or because of where the majority of them live in the world. Smoking isn't going to take an A level athlete and make them a B or C level athlete, but it might make the difference in a close bout at the end of a day of fencing. Not sure but it's not a risk I'm willing to take.

It kind of depends on the fencer though. Milanoli is not the most "active" fencer - he expends a lot less energy than many of his competitors. One of my friends' parents are friends with the German team (lol - real close connection to me eh?) and they say that most of their members take their bodies very seriously - no alcohol, smoking, etc. A more active fencer who expends a lot of energy has a lot more to lose from decreased cardiovascular ability than a guy who kind of sits back, picks people off, and throws in the occasional fleche here and there.

[purpzeyFCLI]

It's fairly simple and I can't really conceive of why this thread has gone on to this length.

Are there top level international competitors who smoke? Yes.
How many? It's hard to say.

Does the fact that they smoke indicate in any way that smoking could be beneficial for fencers? No.

Does the fact that they smoke indicate in any way that smoking could be
a malignant for fencers? No.

It's very simple, smoking is bad for you. IT IS POSSIBLE to be a VERY successful fencer and smoke. But by the same token it is just as POSSIBLE to be a VERY successful fencer and not smoke.

As a smoker I can say very simply, if you want to be healthy DON'T SMOKE. It is NOT going to make you a better fencer. And any influence it might have over your fencing (which is probably limited, for better or worse) IS NOT WORTH THE EFFECT IT WILL HAVE ON YOUR OVERALL HEALTH AND WELLBEING.

Conclusively and finally (I hope), if you are a good fencer smoking is not going to make you better. If you are a mediocre fencer it's not going to make you worse. It has little or no effect, period end of statement. The simple reality is, DON'T SMOKE. It's not going to help your fencing...I'm agreed it might not hurt it too terribly either, but, it isn't worth it at all.

[ChubbyHubby]

Originally Posted by purpzeyFCLI

It's fairly simple and I can't really conceive of why this thread has gone on to this length.

Are there top level international competitors who smoke? Yes.
How many? It's hard to say.

Does the fact that they smoke indicate in any way that smoking could be beneficial for fencers? No.

Does the fact that they smoke indicate in any way that smoking could be
a malignant for fencers? No.

It's very simple, smoking is bad for you. IT IS POSSIBLE to be a VERY successful fencer and smoke. But by the same token it is just as POSSIBLE to be a VERY successful fencer and not smoke.

As a smoker I can say very simply, if you want to be healthy DON'T SMOKE. It is NOT going to make you a better fencer. And any influence it might have over your fencing (which is probably limited, for better or worse) IS NOT WORTH THE EFFECT IT WILL HAVE ON YOUR OVERALL HEALTH AND WELLBEING.

Conclusively and finally (I hope), if you are a good fencer smoking is not going to make you better. If you are a mediocre fencer it's not going to make you worse. It has little or no effect, period end of statement. The simple reality is, DON'T SMOKE. It's not going to help your fencing...I'm agreed it might not hurt it too terribly either, but, it isn't worth it at all.

Yes, we get the message "Don't Smoke, it's bad for you".

Your post is exactly what I was talking about in my last post (ie. too eager to reintirate the "don't smoke" message).

Originally Posted by dramamine

the (perceived) benefits of smoking can in my view be obtained through methods that don't require you to consider a "net gain".

That doesn't actually answer the question though. Yes, the same perceived/possible benefits could be obtained though other methods that don't require you to smoke. But does that mean the same benefits (for fencing, not your health!) couldn't be obtained through smoking?

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by Fencergrl

Intersting how ZZ & I had a similar view on smokers... a "ewww yuck!" response. Turns out our countries share similar % rates of smokers. The national average for Sweden & Canada is 19% of our population are smokers.

Huh. Using the link you provided I checked out where I currently live (NJ, 19.1% the 4th lowest rate in the US) and where I've lived most of my life (MA, 19%, the 3rd lowest).

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Both countries are just too cold and wet to make keeping a cigarette lit worth the effort. The cure may be as bad as the disease.

One problem with your joke -- the US state with the highest rate is Alaska at 29.4%.

-B

[purpzeyFCLI]

Originally Posted by ChubbyHubby

...does that mean the same benefits (for fencing, not your health!) couldn't be obtained through smoking?

Yes, I get the question.

I would like to know what difference it makes? What is the point?

Do we want to establish that it is possible that smoking could benefit your fencing? B/C that's as strong an argument as anyone here can prove, and I barely see the point in that.

I mean, is it purely academic? If it's purely academic, we can go ahead and grant you that thesis b/c it doesn't really get us anywhere. I don't think anyone is denying that it is POSSIBLE. But, no one is going to conclusively be able to speak beyond that unless they are a research scientist and have done a study specifically pertaining to that question.

It is not a question for philosophy and rhertoric -- It's a question for science. Clearly, there is no science (that has been stated) that supports or nullifies such a claim. If the conversation seems to run in circles it's b/c NOBODY HAS THE ANSWER.

I want to know the answer to another question, seriously, I mean, I really want to know, scientifically speaking how many times can you beat a dead horse?

[ChubbyHubby]

Originally Posted by purpzeyFCLI

Yes, I get the question.

I would like to know what difference it makes? What is the point?

Do we want to establish that it is possible that smoking could benefit your fencing? B/C that's as strong an argument as anyone here can prove, and I barely see the point in that.

What's the point in asking any question on a forum? To simulate discussion and provoke thought. Not neccessarily to get a definitive answer.

Why is there no point in discussing it?

What if we ended up with a general opinion that smoking is positive for your fencing? Is that bad? The opinion may not be scientifically valid and just an opinion - but what's wrong with having a bit of fun discussing it?

You are right, there won't be conclusive answer either way but if that's your criteria for discussing a topic then most threads on forums are pointless. Why do you bother to log on?

[purpzeyFCLI]

Originally Posted by ChubbyHubby

You are right, there won't be conclusive answer either way but if that's your criteria for discussing a topic then most threads on forums are pointless. Why do you bother to log on?

B/C I do estimate that on any given subject there might be some form of consensus. At least some limited outline for A or B. But in this case there is no such possibility.

So what it amounts to is a lot of people spouting hot-air (myself included). In a lot of cases on any forum (web forum or live forum) there is a dialogue. Dialogue is a derivative of a dialectic. The form of dialectic (and often dialogue) involves two people conversing on one subject both from two standpoints but with the objective of reaching some actual knowledge.

In this case, I don't see any actual knowledge coming forth. There is no one being convinced. No convincing to be done. No one knows. We can keep talking about it and agree that nobody knows, but that just seems rather pointless.

In short, IMO it is fruitless and therefore need not be up for discussion anymore.

Maybe it's just me.

[MikeHarm]

I'm in favor of my opponents smoking, or picking up the habit if they haven't started yet.

[Warrior Princess]

I'm really worried because I just found out that this person that I really care about has started smoking (he's underaged). I confronted him about it, but he denied it. I know him well enough to beable to tell when he's lieing. Any advice on what I can do to talk to him about it, help him get help, ect? Please help me with this.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by Warrior Princess

I'm really worried because I just found out that this person that I really care about has started smoking (he's underaged). I confronted him about it, but he denied it. I know him well enough to beable to tell when he's lieing. Any advice on what I can do to talk to him about it, help him get help, ect? Please help me with this.

Clearly you're in the wrong thread. Try posting here.

-B

[Warrior Princess]

Oh come on. I'm serious. Don't send me to the bad advice thread. I need some GOOD advice.

[Fencergrl]

Honestly, my dear.... I don't think there is much you can do. We all have to live with the decisions we make.

You can try telling him how you feel and that you think it’s a dumb idea, but I doubt very much he’ll listen. It’s best in life, to look at the pitfalls in front of your own feet rather than spend a lot of time worrying about someone else tripping up.

I know it’s not the advice you want to hear… but the best advice I can offer is to spend your energies on changing yourself for the better rather than someone else. You’ll be a whole lot happier in the end.

[mrbiggs]

If you really want an answer, make your own thread in the water cooler and let this one die.

Actually, never ask for advice that matters on the internet.

[bunbury]

An underaged smoker?! HOLY CRAP SAY IT AIN'T SO.

Eitherway, I smoke to get high, not to die.

[Zilverzmurfen]

Originally Posted by bunbury

I smoke to get high

Which, of course, is significantly healthier...

[Sciurus-Rex]

Originally Posted by banane16

when he was still going competitive abou 10 yrs ago, almost everyone did without problems with their performance.

Heh! Of course not -- if "almost everyone" did it, they were comparing their performance against other smokers.