The perfect engarde..

[rudd]

..or what are the most important elements of one. This post deals with how to coach the engarde. But given that people are different shapes, with different levels of flexibility and athleticism what are your basic requirements.

Front foot pointing straight ahead, feet perpendicular, knees in line with toes, rear heel lifted on down? Describe the ideal engarde position and also say how you adapt it for a student who could not achieve that stance.

[Durando]

The en garde is complex so you should limit your teaching to making sure your student is properly balanced. Don't teach it as a static position. Have your students jump up and down in place facing you. Once they're comfortable, have them stop with their knees bent. Ask them to turn their leading foot out. That's their en garde. Proceed immediately to advances and retreats, controlling constantly for balance. Rest them frequently and "bounce" them back into en garde after each rest.

Don't worry about the perfect image (and therefore the students who cannot correspond to it). A usable en garde facilitates movement. A good one does this better and is learned while moving. Get your students bouting . If you ask the right questions they'll make the corrections themselves. At the end of the year everyone should have at least a usable en garde .

[eac]

I won't give a complete description, but it seems to me that the most common problem in people's guard positions are that they aren't low enough. In general, if you haven't thought about it before, you probably need to be four inches lower, and stay there. In another measure, your thighs should be lower than 45 degrees from the horizontal, especially the front thigh. Being this low will hurt a lot for the first months that you do it.

As Durando says, static positions are bad, but being low IMO is one thing that should always be true, even while you're being very dynamic otherwise.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

I spent a long time playing with my en garde (copying other fencers en garde, listening to what coaches told me, concocting the mathematically perfect en garde, ect)....

But its all bull, really. The best en garde for me is the one that feels comfortable and lets me move freely, not a pre-conceived stance which a fencer is supposed to adhere to.

Like Bruce said, keep what works and toss out the rest.

[jBirch]

Had a revelation the other day...

En garde doesn't exist as a useful fencing position because it is a STATIC position. Fencing is a DYNAMIC sport. Ergo, concentrating on technical perfection in a static frame is time ill spent.

What works better is to learn to MOVE:

1) In Balance, with your weight evenly distributed over your feet.
2) Smoothly, with no rocky transitions between weight shifts.
3) Safely, with your most vulnerable target covered by your blade.
4) Quickly, with your feet positioned so that you can accelerate in either direction.

Hope this helps.

James.

[veeco]

Yes, it's all bull to speak about en guarde, because it's a static position. However, it is important IMO to have a good idea of what that position is and feels like, even in a static context, because having a poor en guarde is the 1 most common thing I have noticed that people overlook. If people spent a couple of hours figuring out what they do wrong, and how they can improve this position, they would probably fix about 90% of their point control or precision problems.

For sure, you want to make sure that people can move in and out of en guarde smoothly, but being in the right position with the right balance is much more easier to see and fix in a static context.

The one most common flaw I have seen is leaning too far forward. Loses balance, and makes your point go down when you extend. This happens a lot when the fencer goes into a counter-attack, and or retreats. It is often coupled with having too much weight on your front foot.

There are also lots of people who just slouch too much, and don't keep their back straight. This leads to their shoulder jerking when they extend, and makes their points wobble too much from side to side.

Another common problem is having your feet too far apart, or too close to each other. They should be spread about the same width as your shoulders are broad. This allows the most punching power going forward into a lunge or a fleche, and keeps you balanced. If your feet are too much underneath you, you cannot push forward, but end up pushing upwards when going forward. If your feet are too much spread apart, your lunges will be weak and lack explosiveness.

There are many other problems, but those are the most common ones I see out there. So fix your en guarde!

[veeco]

Originally Posted by D+F+P=Hadouken!

I spent a long time playing with my en garde (copying other fencers en garde, listening to what coaches told me, concocting the mathematically perfect en garde, ect)....

But its all bull, really. The best en garde for me is the one that feels comfortable and lets me move freely, not a pre-conceived stance which a fencer is supposed to adhere to.

Well, I beg to disagree with you on this. The en guarde position is definitely not a natural one, so it will not feel comfortable to people who start fencing. And it may work, for a while, even if you don't do it perfectly right, because other factors can allow you to make up for your shortcomings, but overall, having a "correct" en guarde is more important, in the long run.

This "pre-conceived" stance exists and has existed for many years, and it hasn't changed much. The reason for it is that it works. Trying something different, while educational and fun, isn't going to improve your fencing, IMO.

[crquack]

I have changed my en garde too. Two issues I have struggled with:

1) The position of the rear foot - none of the other sports that require mobility for combat (boxing, other martial arts) encourage the rear foot to be at 90 degrees to the front foot. I find the mobility is better with this angle being somewhat less than 90 degrees but, critically, the lunge is not. It does not take much time to adjust during the lunge though. Interestingly, I have watched tapes of top line fencers and some seem to be doing just that.

2) The body angle. I used to be way more sideways which threw the sword arm into all sorts of contortions. I am more squared off now which gives the sword arm more natural attitude and I seem to get less hit on the arm.

Anyone else found this?

[D'Art]

Does not exist. If it did, everyone would use it. The traditional one is fairly close (hence the reason it's traditional - it works), but individual fencers have their own take on it. It's like the perfect golf swing.

[Durando]

Originally Posted by veeco

Lots of very good and useful observations...

I'm fascinated with the differences in how fencing is learned in France and my experience in the States. Here (France) students are exposed to correct form and corrected a bit. When I learned to fence in South Texas, I was completely neurotic about technique. So was everybody around me. We had those perfect images in mind that I denounced in my post.

Over here, yeah, you've got people who have a technically bad en garde, but they do a lot of other things right, fluidly, and without thinking about it too much.

So I'm curious:
Do you agree with my observations?
How was it when you were learning?

[veeco]

Originally Posted by Durando

I'm fascinated with the differences in how fencing is learned in France and my experience in the States. Here (France) students are exposed to correct form and corrected a bit. When I learned to fence in South Texas, I was completely neurotic about technique. So was everybody around me. We had those perfect images in mind that I denounced in my post.

Over here, yeah, you've got people who have a technically bad en garde, but they do a lot of other things right, fluidly, and without thinking about it too much.

So I'm curious:
Do you agree with my observations?
How was it when you were learning?

Mmh, I think I see things a lot differently. Perhaps it is different in Texas than in the Bay Area, but here I see a lot of people who have bad form, but who also have a very good sense of timing, tempo, and are actually quite good. It's just that they would be so much better if they had good technique.

On the other hand, in France, in the few clubs I fenced in, and at tournaments, I usually saw people with better technique than here. But again, it probably depends a lot on the coaches. I have been "lucky" to have worked with very anal coaches when it comes to technique in France (the old school maitres, who trained under the military system), and as a result I have gained a better understanding of technique and what it's here for (which is the most important).

I kind of see where you're coming from, though with your note "students are exposed to correct form and corrected a bit". I have seen this done a lot, in France, with beginners, and/or with kids, where most of the emphasis is spent on actually getting people fencing, in a fun environment. The technique comes much later, and very few kids actually take regular lessons. But then again, overall, people don't take as many lessons in France as they do here, so I guess it's probably "same difference" in the end.

I guess the major difference is that here, in the US, even people who fence recreationally do take lessons, whereas in France, they don't. They just fence and have fun :-).

[TrainingDummy]

Different en guardes are also needed for different opponents: short or tall, left handed or right handed. Some basics need to be taught at the beginning, though. For a beginning epee fencer, hiding the arm is critical and is hard to get at first, especially if the fencer learned the very basics, as many do, on foil.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

"Comfortable" is all well and good, but what i'm noticing more and more in my college club is that the people who were "close enough" when we were trying to correct 30 people at a time are now "not even close" when i'm correcting 5.

The big mistake of this year on my team is the front knee shifting in. Not the front foot, not the body- the body and foot are in the right place, the knee is not. I imagine that some amount of this is due to body difference, and that not 100% square can be just how some peoples knees are constructed-- but there is at least one fencer whose body "comfortably" goes to the awkward position that constantly looks like her knee will blow out, and I can't imagine it's okay for her body. {Granted, this is the newbie who has just fallen down the stairs for the second time so far this year..... so........ yeah.}

I personally had to get away from the habit of keeping only the ball of my back foot on the ground--- when I was doing it all the time, my foot hurt so much it felt like I had fractured something in it. I then spent a school year only keeping my back foot on the ground enough to avoid pain. over the summer, I was yelled at often enough to actually use my back foot, and now when I do, I end up easily hitting people who think i'm out of range because my lunge grew so much......


There is some extent where it's your body, and your zone of comfort---- and then there are some things that are more comfortable when corrected, and are significantly more effective when corrected.

[Durando]

Originally Posted by MyrddinsPrecint

"
The big mistake of this year on my team is the front knee shifting in. Not the front foot, not the body- the body and foot are in the right place, the knee is not.... I personally had to get away from the habit of keeping only the ball of my back foot on the ground--- when I was doing it all the time, my foot hurt so much it felt like I had fractured something in it.

I think you're absolutely correct about the back foot being flat. I used to fence with a lot of pentathalon fencers back in the day. They were on their toes, their weight a bit forward. This became my guard. Like you, I eventually hurt that trailing foot. Like you I was forced to keep it flat. My balance improved. (Thus my attacks, my arrêts, etc.) And like you I discovered a few hidden centimeters in my lunge. Which changed everything, of course.

I also have that bad habit of letting the knee be pulled inward (Oh, do stop kicking your students down the stairs). It is a very subtle correction that leads to all sorts of increased precision and distance. But it is also something I wouldn't teach at first. I always try to give a student a chance to do it correctly and then only correct stuff like this once they are doing other things well. I think teaching fencing is really about intelligent and timely decisions about what to *recalibrate*--even things which have been "learned". A good coach finds the shortcuts through the sequence of recalibration.

[Durando]

Originally Posted by veeco

Mmh, I think I see things a lot differently. Perhaps it is different in Texas than in the Bay Area, but here I see a lot of people who have bad form, but who also have a very good sense of timing, tempo, and are actually quite good. It's just that they would be so much better if they had good technique.

Concur.

Originally Posted by veeco

On the other hand, in France, in the few clubs I fenced in, and at tournaments, I usually saw people with better technique than here. But again, it probably depends a lot on the coaches. I have been "lucky" to have worked with very anal coaches when it comes to technique in France (the old school maitres, who trained under the military system), and as a result I have gained a better understanding of technique and what it's here for (which is the most important).

We share salle space with a club whose MdA comes from the military tradition. It's the "good" épée club in Nantes (I can only ever belong to a club that is an underdog.) And, yes, these students have nice guards and good hand/foot tempo. They are deadly in competition and must be beaten on tactics. Thank goodness they're around, because they're gratifying to beat. It's real fencing with them. Unlike most of the others who you just try to take out based on their technical errors. Still and all, they are less mobile.

I think, however, that the less traditional approach is beginning to really prevail, at least here in the provinces. Instead of an emphasis on perfect technique, physical strength and touches composed with superior mobility are
where it's at. I'm thinking specifically of Laura Flesselles's fencing.

Originally Posted by veeco

But then again, overall, people don't take as many lessons in France as they do here, so I guess it's probably "same difference" in the end. I guess the major difference is that here, in the US, even people who fence recreationally do take lessons, whereas in France, they don't. They just fence and have fun :-).

Thread drift warning:
I was thinking about your comment and it is interesting how much economics determines pedagogy. I think the main reason Americans take so many lessons is that that is how coaches get paid. This isn't necessarily better or worse, just different. Hell, technique is hard and takes many lessons to master. So, you have to ask yourself how much you want to spend learning "the perfect en garde." Because there will always be an American coach who will tell you to change everything.

Also, how much of what you have learned in lessons have you been able to integrate into bouting? If the ratio is something above 1:3, I think you can safely lay off the twice-weekly lessons until you've integrated whatever you've been taught.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

Originally Posted by veeco

Well, I beg to disagree with you on this. The en guarde position is definitely not a natural one, so it will not feel comfortable to people who start fencing. And it may work, for a while, even if you don't do it perfectly right, because other factors can allow you to make up for your shortcomings, but overall, having a "correct" en guarde is more important, in the long run.

This "pre-conceived" stance exists and has existed for many years, and it hasn't changed much. The reason for it is that it works. Trying something different, while educational and fun, isn't going to improve your fencing, IMO.

I'm not really talking about changing the basic formula (feet at right angles, knees bent, arm out, ect), but rather tweaking the distance between the feet, the amount of bend in the knees and ankles, the amount of lean forward, ect.

You see fencers even at the highest levels using en gardes that differ. Compare the en garde of Pavel, Fabrice, Verwiglen, Janvier, ect. They stick to a basic format, but the En Gardes are not identical, varying in depth, width and turn-in of the feet.

[veeco]

Originally Posted by Durando

I think, however, that the less traditional approach is beginning to really prevail, at least here in the provinces. Instead of an emphasis on perfect technique, physical strength and touches composed with superior mobility are
where it's at. I'm thinking specifically of Laura Flesselles's fencing.

I am not sure about that. I think technique still plays a major part, at least at the lower levels. At the higher levels, I assume that technique has already been mastered. Also, for what it's worth, I am not sure Laura Flessel can be put forward as an example of someone who wins only based on superior mobility and physical strength. Sure, she has a lot of those, but she also has superior technique :-).

Originally Posted by Durando

Thread drift warning:
I was thinking about your comment and it is interesting how much economics determines pedagogy. I think the main reason Americans take so many lessons is that that is how coaches get paid. This isn't necessarily better or worse, just different. Hell, technique is hard and takes many lessons to master. So, you have to ask yourself how much you want to spend learning "the perfect en garde." Because there will always be an American coach who will tell you to change everything.

I guess my point is that you do not learn "the perfect en garde", but rather understand the shortcomings or benefits of a certain position, and use that knowledge judiciously. It can be beneficial both for your fencing, and for analyzing someone's fencing you are going to fence.

Originally Posted by Durando

Also, how much of what you have learned in lessons have you been able to integrate into bouting? If the ratio is something above 1:3, I think you can safely lay off the twice-weekly lessons until you've integrated whatever you've been taught.

That is another can of worms :-). I have to say I have learned a lot from having regular lessons in France, when coaches actually used the lesson to point out my technical shortcomings. Something like, they noticed I tend to lean forward on my retreats, and made me do actions such as "feint to the toe, with a little hop forward, then on the counter attack take a step back and hit with angulation under the arm." This particular action actually emphasizes my shortcoming because I would lean too far forward on the retreat, and miss my angulation shot. Once I corrected that, I was much more successful doing this action in bouts.