Copying the Pros

[FoilyDeath]

Most fencers are better off not watching good fencers fence, simply because they have no idea what they are doing. Back when I had barely started fencing, I picked up a circular parry move of some idiot. Result: for 2 years I was stuck doing bugger all but a circular parry. and a bad one at that. But you know what? For a year or so, I did pretty well. But I was still learning bugger all, and 2 years later, once I had managed to unlearn the whole thing, I was right back where I started.
There are advantages though. Whlen you know what to look for, its a great help, and I also find watching fencing always helps motivate me.

[JEC]

... Why don't you watch a bout with your students and guide their attention in some fruitful direction? Analyze together, for example, Eric Boisse's attacks into preparation. So, so much to learn there.

Boisse is one of my favorite fencers to watch (another is Kolobkov). Most fencers do not have the length or height of F. Jeannet or Fischer. Some of the preparations and footwork that he does are more useful to the average height epee fencer, but difficult to master due to his athleticism. Boisse is 1.80 m in height. His style is quite different than the rest of the French team because he was coached by his father, who was also an olympic gold epee medalist.

http://www.fie.ch/Competitions/Fence...31CEF6DB50D169
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_Boisse

[Durando]

Most fencers are better off not watching good fencers fence, simply because they have no idea what they are doing. Back when I had barely started fencing, I picked up a circular parry move of some idiot. Result: for 2 years I was stuck doing bugger all but a circular parry. and a bad one at that. But you know what? For a year or so, I did pretty well. But I was still learning bugger all, and 2 years later, once I had managed to unlearn the whole thing, I was right back where I started.
There are advantages though. Whlen you know what to look for, its a great help, and I also find watching fencing always helps motivate me.

Well, okay. But fencing is one of those sports where skills are not learned in isolation, thank goodness. At the same time you were doing your crappy parry you had to be changing your distance such that a parry riposte could possibly work. It was working according to your account. It is so hard to get students not to retreat out of riposte distance.

Bladework is one of those things that potentially corrects itself. After you corrected your parry, was your distance (generally speaking) worse than when you started? See, the minute a parry riposte begins to work, you begin to impliment tactics and understand the game in general.

[Durando]

Boisse is one of my favorite fencers to watch (another is Kolobkov). Most fencers do not have the length or height of F. Jeannet or Fischer. Some of the preparations and footwork that he does are more useful to the average height epee fencer, but difficult to master due to his athleticism. Boisse is 1.80 m in height. His style is quite different than the rest of the French team because he was coached by his father, who was also an olympic gold epee medalist.

http://www.fie.ch/Competitions/Fence...31CEF6DB50D169
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_Boisse

I agree. He's fascinating, as is his father. Watch, for example, his back foot. He is rarely on tiptoe when looking for an attack into preparation. This, along with correct posture, lets him counterattack very, very quickly. This is what I would point out to a beginner.

[Inquartata]

Most fencers are better off not watching good fencers fence, simply because they have no idea what they are doing.

Depends on what you mean by "most". You may well be right with regard to novices, your average Us and Es. But I think that certainly As, Bs and Cs can profit by the practice, and perhaps a lot of Ds as well.

Numerically speaking is the former group larger than the latter?

BTW, why did you have to "unlearn" circular parries?

[Qbranch]

Depends on what you mean by "most". You may well be right with regard to novices

Speaking as a novice I would tend to agree with this. I have come to realize that the only thing I've really gained from watching video clips is some sense of my own limitations in reading the movements of top fencers. I would be far more inclined, at this time, to view footage with my instructor and discuss the actions rather than trust my own senses. On the other hand viewing clips has at least made me aware of this fact and put my present abilities into perspective. So, perhaps there are some benefits!

[RebelFencer]

Depends on what you mean by "most". You may well be right with regard to novices, your average Us and Es. But I think that certainly As, Bs and Cs can profit by the practice, and perhaps a lot of Ds as well.

Numerically speaking is the former group larger than the latter?

BTW, why did you have to "unlearn" circular parries?

I think he probably meant that he had to unlearn his tendency to do only circular parries when there were times that other parries were much better options. That said, I disagree with most of his statements.

[BySword]

That said, I disagree with most of his statements.

how many lines of it do you disagree? You sure it's qualified as "most"?
JK.
that said, I went through the stage of copying the pros too (and I am still doing it a bit, but the attitude is not the same). I even went to great length to switch to pommeling with a french (epee). One thing I learn to copying the pros is how to modify what I see from someone else doing into what suits myself. I can't I didn't benefit from watching the pros fencing. In fact I think people at all level will learn something from watching the pros fencing as I still find new ideas every time I watch the same video.

[FoilyDeath]

Depends on what you mean by "most". You may well be right with regard to novices, your average Us and Es. But I think that certainly As, Bs and Cs can profit by the practice, and perhaps a lot of Ds as well.

Numerically speaking is the former group larger than the latter?

BTW, why did you have to "unlearn" circular parries?

I was referring to fencers outside of Div1...I'm assuming most of the USFA fencing licensees arent actually over C....Am I wrong on this? Its just an assumption.

On the circular parry note: its a great move, but only to hold the blade. In no way should it be used to replace your bog standard parry. It takes experience with blade control to master, which is why I had to unlearn it...I eventually actually "relearnt" it...except properly, with my coach.
Anybody can learn stuff from watching good fencers, but unless you know what your doing, make sure you watch it with your coach.

[Durando]

It takes experience with blade control to master, which is why I had to unlearn it...I eventually actually "relearnt" it...except properly, with my coach.
Anybody can learn stuff from watching good fencers, but unless you know what your doing, make sure you watch it with your coach.

And then there is that fine day when you pick stuff up just by having it done to you or seeing it done. Then you realize there are parts of fencing that your coach isn't going to teach you. Yeah, understanding a minimum of technique helps insofar as it helps you understand what you're seeing, but seeing it integrated by someone else can be a great help.

There are two fencers in particular who helped me understand how to set up out-of-distance attacks: Rob Stull and Adrien Bodet. My images of Rob are, ahem, more than fifteen years old (I hear he's fencing again) but I still can say to myself, "Perhaps it's time for this move," and have an exact image of what I want to achieve. Only the image is of Rob, not of me.

[Durando]

On the other hand viewing clips has at least made me aware of this fact and put my present abilities into perspective. So, perhaps there are some benefits!

Knowing where you are is, for some, a prerequisite for getting to where you want to be. Measuring progress is very important to me.

Can you describe more precisely the differences you perceive between your fencing and those high level fencers you watch? And (important) have you seen video of yourself fencing? If not, why?

[Inquartata]

I must also say that I find way too many people putting way too much reliance on the cult of the coach.

Coaches are great, but they do not fence your bouts for you. You succeed or fail on your own strengths and abilities, not those of your coach. You can learn things without a coach holding your hand while you do it. I have, and I'll bet that every single coach has himself done so, back when he was a fencer.

[Allen Evans]

Some fencers watch "the pros" with a critical eye, and a discerning brain. They seem to copy actions only in order to integrate concepts, rather than specific moves. "Hmm....those fencers on that DVD always give distance on defense. That seems like a good idea." Some fencers watch "the pros" and only integrate moves. They think: "Hey, I bet I could learn to leap in the air and flick to the back. I would rule all my fellow D's. Woot!"

Guess which one I like to teach?

Inq is half right. You can learn many concepts and actions without a coach, and learn them on your own*. The other side of this coin is that there seem to be things fencers don't learn without a coach.** The best coaches work very hard at making themselves useless to their fencers, but never quite succeeding.

The best fencers seem to have a knack of learning from all sorts of places, and integrating this learning into their fencing. They are less coach dependent, and seem to be able to integrate new actions into their game very quickly.

Allen

* I picked up a rather nice counter-time action by being hit with it by Bob Marx several times. No one ever taught it to me in a lesson.

**I'm willing to grant that there might be exceptions to this statement, but I've never met them.

[JEC]

Inq is half right.

This is so true

[Inquartata]

The other side of this coin is that there seem to be things fencers don't learn without a coach.** The best coaches work very hard at making themselves useless to their fencers, but never quite succeeding.

To be sure.

We all have blind spots, and we all have weaknesses when it comes to learning ( just as we have strengths ). Having an outside eye and brain working for us is of course a great thing to have.

One of the reasons I have a coach is because he can see me fencing from the outside, which I cannot do, even with the magic of video, and analyze my faults impersonally. Another is that he is much better at analyzing why things work or don't work given a certain set of circumstances than I am, and at deconstructing actions into their constituent components. A third is that he's better at seeing the gestalt than I am---I see an action and I see it works and can adopt it, he sees how and why it works and how best to integrate it.

I'm not denying the benefits of coaching. I'm just saying that putting your whole fencing life into the hands of a coach can do as much harm as good. I see people whose answer to every question is: "Ask your coach" or "Let your coach show you"---who seem willing or able to do nothing without their coach's permission and assistance or hand-holding. I don't think that's healthy.

[Qbranch]

Knowing where you are is, for some, a prerequisite for getting to where you want to be. Measuring progress is very important to me.

Can you describe more precisely the differences you perceive between your fencing and those high level fencers you watch? And (important) have you seen video of yourself fencing? If not, why?

Well, I would say that I tend to regard footage of high level fencing as one might if listening to a complex arrangement without having a great deal of musical knowledge. There are things happening in the performance that I know are there but I know I cannot hear (and will not until my ears have been trained to really 'listen'). There have been several occasions when I have attempted to integrate movements I've seen (in clips) into my own practice sessions and bouts. Most of these have been elemental changes in form or movement such as relaxing the free hand and dropping it to waist level or attempting to change footwork tempo by shifting to crossover steps. In the case of the former all felt nice and comfy until my free hand drifted in front and got jabbed (more than once!). In the case of the latter I quickly became aware of the fact that my distance control is not yet sufficiently developed to integrate a shift in tempo with a crossover step.

Small, failed experiments such as these have at least given me a better understanding of the problems that can arise when a novice attempts to make even the most rudimentary changes too early. On a related note I would also say that I have only just started to become aware of my own form and the degree to which my movements are conditioned by posture, muscle tension, breathing, etc., (matters that have rarely occupied my interest before this time). At the moment I am attempting to evaluate my posture and range of motion to establish some useful stretching exercises tailored to my specific needs. No doubt (and with more practice) I will be seeing changes in form as a result and these changes will hopefully be reflected in an improved personal fencing style. Having said this I would presume that the movements of a top fencer are so very precisely coordinated with the specifics of body structure that an attempt to emulate could be troublesome if the copied action did not, in fact, harmonize with your own body movement. Returning to that music analogy, it would be of little use to try and emulate Rachmaninoff if you have short fingers. This, at least, is how I perceive the issue right now.

You had mentioned video and yes... I have tried this. It is very useful I find but again I would prefer to review the results with someone more experienced. Nonetheless it is a great way to evaluate limits and progress!