Coaching: (Epee) Counter-attacks w/ opposition vs. Parry-Riposte w/ opposition

[noodle]

Originally Posted by thekoby

I hardly ever teach my epee students to parry. Instead I follow the traditional counter-attack with opposition method because epee comes down to timing in most points earned.

The way I view it is that if you parry a blade in epee that takes away 1-2 seconds of time which you could use to either retreat and take the counter-reposte or stick a well-placed counter. For example, if an opponent is making an attack to the inside of my weapon arm (assuming it is right vs. right), I would teach my students to bind the blade with a quick extension and land the touch on the opponent's weapon shoulder. Another example is if an opponent is coming in towards my non-weapon shoulder (extreme 4 in this case), I would teach my students to simply aim with the fingers and extend straight, landing the point right in the opponent's inner elbow.

Having switched from foil to epee, I used to parry a lot, and it cost me several matches. To quote my former coach, "If you can't get the point, go for the double." Either way, you still get a point!

that might work up to a certain level, but to become a higher level fencer, you're going to need to know how to parry, and be good at it. it will come up eventually, even if you have a very specific no-parry game. or, again, you can just lose the matches, but how is that any different from parrying a lot and losing some matches because of it?

[Allen Evans]

Originally Posted by jBirch

I was speaking to another coach at a competition recently and he was of the opinion that instead of teaching classic parry 4-riposte (hand in almost full pronation, tip curve heading out-to-in) as part of the epee curriculum that we should be teaching engage in 4 counter-attack with the hand in neutral position (tip curve going down).

I might be a little confused here, but it seems to me that your not talking about teaching one action two different ways, but two different actions the same way?

Allen Evans

[jBirch]

The other coach and I were talking about defense in epee and how to stop an attack in progress and make an effective reply. In his view, parry/riposte was a "higher level" epee skill and shouldn't be taught as a matter of course to dedicated epeeists. His preferred option to deal with that threat was to take sorta-opposition and stop hit.

Mechanically, the classic parry-riposte technique was to stop the attack first with a correct parry, then issue an immediate reply to valid target with or without a preparation or two.

The other coach was mentioning that that was a waste in epee and a sure way to get beaten on the remise. His solution to the same tactical problem was a "sorta stop-hit with opposition".

It wasn't quite a proper opposition, but rather an engagement and then an insistence executed against an attack.

I was wondering what the general thoughts on this theory were. I'm inclined to stick with the old-school parry/riposte methodology, but I have a funny feeling that the new way may be better for the majority of dedicated epee students.

I've been playing with it in the interim and it seems to give good mechanical results but at the expense of tactical and theoretical skills.

James.

[Allen Evans]

When you talk about closing out an attack, there are three times to do it: at the very start (the classic parry and riposte, in which the attacking point is deflected and then the riposte given), a thrust with opposition (in which the thrust and the deflection occur nearly simultaneously) and a stop followed by a closing action (often nothing more than bumping the attacking point with the bell after making a counter in order to insure a single light).

Each of these actions have their uses, but I'll make an off the cuff guess (without any research) and suggest that the classic parry and riposte has fallen out of favor, with more use of timed thrusts and counters, instead.

Even the classic parry riposte isn't really done the way you mention in your post, as a two (or more) tempo action. I see (and currently teach) more actions in which the point is slightly "thrown" across the attacking blade and the riposte made immediately with opposition or with a flick over/around the opponent's blade.

The exception is with fencers using a pommeled French grip, in which I teach a deeper, more classic blocking parry and riposte (often angulated) when the distance collapses. The pommeled French grip usually demands that sort of deep parry to control the attacker's blade if they press home (and the remise off the parry is of less concern than a remise through the parry).

Ultimately, to say "this is the only defense against attacks" is going to be an over simplification of the action.

Allen Evans

[Allen Evans]

Originally Posted by jBirch

My question is really about teaching this reflexive OH SHI! action. Should it be a parry, or should it be an opposition attack?

This situation is almost always the case when, as RIT says, distance as collapsed and your student must clear the line to avoid being hit. This absolutely demands parry riposte*. If the opponent has gotten their tip 3-6 inches past the bell and is moving forward, a counter is going to get your student hit as they extend their arm, and an opposition is probably not going to have the leverage. Parry is the answer.

AE

*unless you are Laurie Shong, who always seems to be able to make that angulated counter just when you thought you had him.

[thekoby]

The exception is with fencers using a pommeled French grip, in which I teach a deeper, more classic blocking parry and riposte (often angulated) when the distance collapses. The pommeled French grip usually demands that sort of deep parry to control the attacker's blade if they press home (and the remise off the parry is of less concern than a remise through the parry).

I have seen this done and had it done to me on several occassions with French-grip epee fencers. They tend to hold the grip closer to the pommel to gain a few more inches of reach then parry wide and angle into the target area.

that might work up to a certain level, but to become a higher level fencer, you're going to need to know how to parry, and be good at it. it will come up eventually, even if you have a very specific no-parry game. or, again, you can just lose the matches, but how is that any different from parrying a lot and losing some matches because of it?

In response to this idea, I've fenced numerous people in my years and once lost 8-15 (with an unanswered 5-point comeback in the 3rd period) against an A-rated Olympic epeeist with my non-parry technique. What got my points were binds and in-fighting. Now if you are considering a quick bind as a parry in epee, then I can see your logic in this, but if not, I hardly ever see any of the more skilled epee fencers use parries to deflect attacks; most of them use the counter-attack or stop-thurst methods that I have been working on myself and teaching. Even my former Epee coach (who is rated a B2008 and should in all rights be an A, but every A-ranked tournament he attends and wins is usually bumped down to a B because someone doesn't show or is knocked out of DEs early in) refuses to teach parries in epee and sticks with counters, binds (take-overs), and stop-thursts as a response to an attack in epee.

[Jason]

Originally Posted by thekoby

In response to this idea, I've fenced numerous people in my years and once lost 8-15 (with an unanswered 5-point comeback in the 3rd period) against an A-rated Olympic epeeist with my non-parry technique. What got my points were binds and in-fighting. Now if you are considering a quick bind as a parry in epee, then I can see your logic in this, but if not, I hardly ever see any of the more skilled epee fencers use parries to deflect attacks; most of them use the counter-attack or stop-thurst methods that I have been working on myself and teaching. Even my former Epee coach (who is rated a B2008 and should in all rights be an A, but every A-ranked tournament he attends and wins is usually bumped down to a B because someone doesn't show or is knocked out of DEs early in) refuses to teach parries in epee and sticks with counters, binds (take-overs), and stop-thursts as a response to an attack in epee.

This is crazy-talk.
Top epeeists use parries.
As an example, go watch this fellow named Kolobkov. I suspect he's better than your B-rated coach and he parries all the time.

If that doesn't work, go watch everybody else.

[noodle]

Originally Posted by thekoby

In response to this idea, I've fenced numerous people in my years and once lost 8-15 (with an unanswered 5-point comeback in the 3rd period) against an A-rated Olympic epeeist with my non-parry technique. What got my points were binds and in-fighting. Now if you are considering a quick bind as a parry in epee, then I can see your logic in this, but if not, I hardly ever see any of the more skilled epee fencers use parries to deflect attacks; most of them use the counter-attack or stop-thurst methods that I have been working on myself and teaching. Even my former Epee coach (who is rated a B2008 and should in all rights be an A, but every A-ranked tournament he attends and wins is usually bumped down to a B because someone doesn't show or is knocked out of DEs early in) refuses to teach parries in epee and sticks with counters, binds (take-overs), and stop-thursts as a response to an attack in epee.

you can fence however you want, its a perfectly valid tactic to not use parries as i said before. HOWEVER, don't kid yourself that either you or your coach are/were somehow special or extremely qualified, especially on this board.

i (edit: and jason, too apparently) am telling you now that your logic is faulty. if you want to build your game around not parrying, have at it. but don't pretend that its the magic way of doing things, and you will get beatten because of your lack of parries, once you reach a certain level. people will see through a purely counterattack-ish defensive game real fast.

[thekoby]

I think I might have some confusion between a parry as you call it, and a beat as I call it.

Granted, a parry is a beat, I'm not going to deny that at all. I teach beat attacks and beat with couther (which I assume you could constitute as a parry) to my more skilled epee students, but I don't think of that as a parry of the blade despite the motion and actions are generally one and the same. Perhaps it's just a method of mindset.

but going back to the original topic: I tend to teach more counter-attack and in the case of needing a parry, only to use it to evade a tricky attack and not go for the riposte.

[Allen Evans]

Originally Posted by thekoby

Granted, a parry is a beat...

Did you go to sleep yet? Your posts are making less sense.

A beat may serve as a type of parry, but a parry isn't always a beat. I think there is more to this epee world than you think.

AE

[thekoby]

A beat may serve as a type of parry, but a parry isn't always a beat. I think there is more to this epee world than you think.

Perhaps...maybe some of you guys and gals can PM me and lecture me a little bit on what I don't know yet.

[tdwg83]

Originally Posted by thekoby

Perhaps...maybe some of you guys and gals can PM me and lecture me a little bit on what I don't know yet.

Someone should invent a weapon to use for training purposes.

Here's the the short of it.

Parry = defensive move with blade to stop attack.
Beat = Aggressive contact upon an opponents blade.

Yes, many people use a beat type parry. This type of parry is pretty useless in epee if your opponent is intending on going through anyways. A parry in epee is more useful on the close touches. IE the 1/4" between a beautiful short to the wrist or missing completely. Every move has a place. Your coach may be successful at a certain type of game so that is what he teaches. That doesn't mean other strategies are useless.

[MdA]

Originally Posted by RITFencing

I
Back to the original question... which to do better as an oh crap, I'm about to be hit action? Probably the parry riposte. It does an immediate job of clearing out the line, and is more effective than the thrust with opposition when the opponent's tip is in close, which is really the gist of many oh crap situations. Just be sure that in addition to teaching your students how to get themselves out of a jam, you're also teaching them how to keep control of a bout so that they are less likely to get into said jam. Just like car safety... a safe car has to not only do well in crashes but be able to avoid them easily.

I agree the parry riposte is best in this situation. Don't pronate the thumb past 12 noon. All that twisting and turning is bad for point control.

The parry riposte option is also the best ...because in tactical progression the next thing coming would be a feint with disengage. The parry allows you to do another parry or at least retreat out of distance.

The counter-attack with oposition would just impale your arm.

I think they need to do both ...and understand the difference...one does not replace the other. For beginners, I would teach the parry riposte first...opposition is a little more difficult.

[MdA]

Originally Posted by jBirch

.... Is this just a stylistic thing that will work for some and not others or is it a technically superior base to build the defensive aspect of epee upon?
James.

...and yes this is a stylistic approach. I have seen it used very effectively if students are drilled repetitively to do it very quickly. But, it is very easy to defeat if they do it all the time without parry riposte....best used as a surprise tactic then to do it every time in place of parry 4.

[Allen Evans]

And you can even do BOTH. I have taught a few epee fencers to do an early parry while pulling the distance, and then counter-attack into the opponent's disengage, if the opponent doesn't perform a compound attack well.

Allen Evans

[MdA]

Originally Posted by Allen Evans

And you can even do BOTH. I have taught a few epee fencers to do an early parry while pulling the distance, and then counter-attack into the opponent's disengage, if the opponent doesn't perform a compound attack well.

Allen Evans

I agree. Very good idea.

[thekoby]

Originally Posted by Allen Evans

And you can even do BOTH. I have taught a few epee fencers to do an early parry while pulling the distance, and then counter-attack into the opponent's disengage, if the opponent doesn't perform a compound attack well.

Allen Evans

I'll look into this. Thanks! :-)