Coaching Conflicts

[LaFlick]

For awhile I was a rec fencer. I began competing the last year+ and find I enjoy it. I have been taking lessons from a coach I like and this summer took the opportunity for lessons with other coaches in camps. The problem is my regular coach does not agree with some things the other coaches teach. I have tried the new techniques in only 1 tournament so far and they seemed to work well. Is it a bad idea to have "multiple" coaches? How should I approach the ego of my coach if I like the things taught by others?

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by LaFlick

For awhile I was a rec fencer. I began competing the last year+ and find I enjoy it. I have been taking lessons from a coach I like and this summer took the opportunity for lessons with other coaches in camps. The problem is my regular coach does not agree with some things the other coaches teach. I have tried the new techniques in only 1 tournament so far and they seemed to work well. Is it a bad idea to have "multiple" coaches? How should I approach the ego of my coach if I like the things taught by others?

Take look at the background of both individuals, and the program they run.

Work with one that is most congruent with your own learning style, goals, resources and beliefs.

It's a highly personal decision, and not one that anyone here can help you with from the information you have provided.

[HDG]

Can I take it from this

Originally Posted by LaFlick

The problem is my regular coach does not agree with some things the other coaches teach.

that you have actually discussed this with your coach, or are you concluding this from what you have been taught so far? If you haven't discussed it, definitely do so. If you have discussed it, and your coach is dead set against the sorts of techniques you've learned elsewhere, then you have a decision facing you that I'm glad I don't have to make.

Out of curiosity, what kind of stuff are you talking about.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Originally Posted by LaFlick

For awhile I was a rec fencer. I began competing the last year+ and find I enjoy it. I have been taking lessons from a coach I like and this summer took the opportunity for lessons with other coaches in camps. The problem is my regular coach does not agree with some things the other coaches teach. I have tried the new techniques in only 1 tournament so far and they seemed to work well. Is it a bad idea to have "multiple" coaches? How should I approach the ego of my coach if I like the things taught by others?

Well, first, ask your coach WHY he/she disagrees--- perhaps, based on that discussion, you'll learn that the coaches don't agree as much as you first thought, or understand why one thing works better in one situation, while another works better in another situation.

Secondly, poke around the forum. There are a number of things that are varying shades of correct, and there will be good coaches who use different styles, or who teach different things at different times with differing intent, and just because two coaches disagree doesn't mean one is wrong. However, one of your coaches might, in fact, be wrong. By poking around current and previous threads, you can get a better idea of what the consensus is in the general fencing community, and have a better idea who's right, and who's less right. (For example, one girl showed up to my college team's practice convinced that all sabre cuts came from the elbow. this was bad and wrong. another girl just came from a coach with a different perspective, and after several conversations with our college coach, understood what she should carry over, and what she should retrain.)

Then, when you talked to coaches, looked at the forum, you have a decision to make. Sometimes you can maintain having more than one coach, and sometimes you can't--- but it's definatly trickier to get input from more than one person if they're not coordinating what they say. I'm pretty lucky, in that my college coach recognizes that the coach I go to when I'm home and have access to a car knows more than he does, and will specifically ask what I worked on with her, so that he can reenforce it. If you're current coach continues to have ego issues, it might be better to either switch entirely, stop going to the other coach, or just not tell your current coach about it--- depending on circumstances.

good luck!

[Phaeton]

I'd recommend against a coach with any ego issues at all whatsoever. Fencing is about the athlete and not the coach.

A coach should be secure enough in his ability as a coach for his students to survey the fencing environment and decide that what he or she is doing is best.

Different coaches will teach different things in a different fashion. I've taken lessons with coaches that for the most part teach an action and immediately take it combative, and those with an almost solely obsessively technical focus. I've always returned to my coach, but having more diversity and seeing more options is a good thing.

As recommended it's best to have both coaches rationalize why an idea is bad, and quite often one will be better than the other in an individual aspect.

You also have to have the realization that bad habits are a lot easier to acquire and to fix. It's also important that the coach you go to is open eyes, as it's very hard and tiresome to turn closed eyed actions in to open eyed.

Either way you have to notify your coach that you’re getting lessons from someone else, and if he wants to change an action that you don’t, you have to be vocal about it.

There’s nothing wrong with sticking with a coach, and as a beginner fencer that’s probably by far the best thing to do, but as you gain a greater understanding of the sport you may have to change coaches to be brought to next level, and eventually learning becomes a responsibility of your own, and once you understand what’s a good action you can freely take from any number of individuals what you want to add to your repertoire

[eac]

My view is simple. As a competitive fencer, you would like to win. You go to a coach to learn how to win. You would therefore prefer your coach to learn how to win, or he's going to tell you a lot of bogus stuff. So in picking coaches, your decision process is also simple: look up the national and international results of each coach, and the potential for future results based on the current ones. Go with the coach with the best results.

[seven6ty]

I disagree with the above post. It's taken me about 12 or 13 years to learn, but fencing is not about winning, or, at least not for me. There have been times where that's what I thought it all came down to, but I have a much broader view of things now. At any rate, I believe a good coach may have their own preferences and things they do and don't like to teach, but a good coach is open to new ideas. At present, I have a coach I can work with, and feel free to ask to work over new ideas and techniques with him. We see what works, and what doesn't. I'm free to compare one action to another, in a similar situation, and we'll evaluate together, which one is more likely to work, when the percentages are higher, etc. At this point, I would hate to have a coach who blows an idea out of the water without even going through the actions with me, or someone who dismisses an idea with little to no explanation of why.

If you're just starting out, you will have to trust the knowledge of your first few coachs, as it will take you a while just to understand the pros and cons of even the most fundamental actions. At this point, it's important to choose your instructors wisely, and based on what is most important to you. If winning is the most important part, then yes, find a coach who has high placings in individual events or who has produced top level fencers. People have different priorities in fencing, and it's important to choose an instructor who has similar priorities, thoughts and ideas to your own.

So, at this point, I'd say to go with who ever you are most comfortable with. Although, I definently think it is a good thing to be exposed to many different styles, and I'd recommend working with more than one person too, if that's an option for you.

[BySword]

Originally Posted by eac

My view is simple. As a competitive fencer, you would like to win. You go to a coach to learn how to win. You would therefore prefer your coach to learn how to win, or he's going to tell you a lot of bogus stuff. So in picking coaches, your decision process is also simple: look up the national and international results of each coach, and the potential for future results based on the current ones. Go with the coach with the best results.

the best fencer doesnt always has the coach with most prominently competition results. while a good coach knows his/her fencers well and knows the best way the teach them.

[erooMynohtnA]

I've had several coaches, and I've taken unique insights from each one of them. I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with having multiple coaches, but some problems can arise.

I would ask my coach to explain why he thinks I shouldn't do what the other coach teaches. If I weren't satisfied with the explanation, I would tell him that I respectfully disagree, and will continue to do it because it works. If my coach can't deal with that, it's time to switch coaches. It essentially comes down to the fact that I'll fence how I want to fence.

It would also help if you were a little more specific on what the actual disagreement is about.

[eac]

Originally Posted by BySword

the best fencer doesnt always has the coach with most prominently competition results. while a good coach knows his/her fencers well and knows the best way the teach them.

These two sentences are fairly difficult to parse, since they don't follow any rules of grammar I've ever heard of. If I may rephrase and retain the intended meaning: "The best fencer doesn't always have the coach whose students have the best competitive results."

I suppose it depends on how you define 'best.' I define best to mean most competitively successful, i.e. wins the most. So it seems somewhat contradictory to say that the best fencer doesn't have the coach whose students have the best competitive results. However, I don't know what definition of best you're using, so I can't argue about it.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Originally Posted by eac

These two sentences are fairly difficult to parse, since they don't follow any rules of grammar I've ever heard of. If I may rephrase and retain the intended meaning: "The best fencer doesn't always have the coach whose students have the best competitive results."

I suppose it depends on how you define 'best.' I define best to mean most competitively successful, i.e. wins the most. So it seems somewhat contradictory to say that the best fencer doesn't have the coach whose students have the best competitive results. However, I don't know what definition of best you're using, so I can't argue about it.

There is the example that there may be two coaches of similar caliber, but one has students with slightly better competitve records, but the other works with a particular fencer better (for whatever reason). As well as the point that ONE fencer with good results doesn't necessarily mean that coach is amazing, you need a pattern of good results.

[Army Fencer]

There are a number of top athletes who use more than one coach, but I wouldn't recommend it to a newer fencer. It takes a good deal of understanding of the game to decide what things to follow and what to discard. Otherwise, you just end up confused.

Stick with the coach you trust the most and go from there.

[Allen Evans]

Originally Posted by LaFlick

I have been taking lessons from a coach I like and this summer took the opportunity for lessons with other coaches in camps. The problem is my regular coach does not agree with some things the other coaches teach.

You really don't have "multiple" coaches. You have one coach, and some ideas from other coaches from summer camps (at least, I assume you are not working with those other coaches, still). These ideas conflict with what your current coach would like you to do, even though you find the new ideas useful.

It's difficult to integrate new ideas into your game unless you've been fencing for a while. Here is the advice I give my students when they are at camp and they are introduced to something "new".

1. Is it really new? Or is it a restating of something I have been trying to teach you (the student) for a long time, but you just haven't heard -- or been ready to hear -- yet. Recently a fencer wrote to tell me about this great new way of doing footwork that he's just learned. I had been trying to discribe this footwork to him five years ago: just not in a way he was ready to hear.

2. Are you ready for this action or method yet? Sometimes there are great ideas out there, but the student doesn't have the base or foundation for idea yet. Camps may often feel that they have to introduce "advanced" moves to keep the camp interesting. When a student comes to me with an action they learned a camp (they invariably do it poorly) I show them how we are building up to that action, and we'll get to it in time.

3. Is this radically different from what I'm trying to teach? If it is, I'll explain why I don't teach it, or what move I teach in its stead. For instance, the passata soto. I don't teach it. I teach the student to duck instead. The passata soto isn't a very safe action any more, and the duck integrates into what I teach with the same effect.

4. Is this just a trick? There are just some plain bad ideas out there, such as an inquartata in saber. Everyone gets hit with it....once, and usually when they are still a beginner. Getting hit with it on occasion doesn't make it a valuable move. It's not worth practicing over and over again, and it's not worth incorporating into a lesson, or, at least not my lessons.


I find that multiple coaches work only when the coaches are "pretty much" on the same page, with a very experianced student. If the coaches are communicating about the student often, and the student has a good base to integrate different ideas, the arrangement can work out well -- though I think this combination of factors is very rare.

Again...my mantra...talk to your coach, communicate with him or her. Without this communication, you're best to file these new ideas for a future time.

Allen

[Durando]

If you're American, know that one of the strong points of your fencing culture is its eclectic nature. As Army points out, having several coaches isn't a good idea for a beginner-- or anyone who hasn't learned how to synthesize what they've learned. One of the many pleasures of coming back to the States this summer was grooving on the difference. I took a couple of lessons with good coaches who nevertheless are very different from my present French coach. There's this natural tendency to watch and disagree. Some of the touches I practiced in the U.S. would simply not be considered here-- you might do them in competition, but you would have a hard time finding someone to teach you. But I'll be damned if I didn't integrate a couple of those moves into my game right away. (Thank you, Jim and Mike!)

[RITFencing]

Originally Posted by Phaeton

I'd recommend against a coach with any ego issues at all whatsoever. Fencing is about the athlete and not the coach.

Best bit of advice in this thread. Have some rep.

MP had an excellent point too about asking your coach WHY they disagree. Your old coach may simply have stylistic differences, may find that some actions work better than others, or find that some techniques work better when performed a different way. Ultimately, there is no one "right way" to fence, though there are very many wrong ways. If what your coach is telling you sounds like it makes sense, then there's not a huge problem. If it doesn't get confusing, you can learn to do things in two different ways, and having more tactical options is generally a good thing. If it's too confusing (and it might be) to keep getting conflicting information from two different coaches, then pick one and stick with them.

If, however, your old coach says "It's bad fencing. Improper form. No." or anything to that extent without providing reasons WHY the form is improper, or just generally avoiding any application to a bout, then I would start to have questions about the utility of that coach's lessons.

Finally, think about each coach as a person. Would they be offended if you stopped getting lessons from them? Would they try to prevent you form fencing at another club? If so, then I would once again have serious doubts about fencing with that coach.

EDIT: Ack! Can't rep you yet! Quick, someone else say something rep worthy.

[Army Fencer]

Originally Posted by RITFencing

EDIT: Ack! Can't rep you yet! Quick, someone else say something rep worthy.

I've always admired your big nose.

[RITFencing]

Originally Posted by Army Fencer

I've always admired your big nose.

Jerk. Oh, what the hell, have some anyway. But for Phaeton's sake, not yours, Isaac.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by Phaeton

I'd recommend against a coach with any ego issues at all whatsoever.

Heh. And where are these mythical creatures to be found?

[Phaeton]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Heh. And where are these mythical creatures to be found?

A man can hope can't he?