Overview of tactical differences between Epee and Foil

[EdGardner]

Is there an objective overview somewhere (book, website, series of posts here, whatever) of the tactical differences between Epee and Foil (arm straight out as you retreat in epee, for instance versus withdrawing the arm in a parry in foil)?

I have fenced foil for a little less than a year now, and tried epee a few weeks back, and it seems that all my liabilities in foil actually make sense in Epee, so I would like to read up on the subject, if possible, without too much in the way of "my weapon is better than yours, nanananana" (wishful thinking I know).

[Medinilla]

I can't wait to see what comes out in this thread

[EdGardner]

Yeah, I have little faith, based on my searches here so far. Sometimes people surprise me on the internet...

[noodle]

hide your hand and arm behind your bell better so you don't get hit so much there.
concentrate on not getting hit, instead of hitting.
thats about it.

[AdamH]

Epee can be quite subtle and although I'm a poor epeeist I'll try to give some overview here:

If, while you are fencing epee your opponent makes a large preparation, like foil, you ought to hit them.
If your opponent retires, hit them.
If your opponent parries, hit them.
If your opponent attacks, hit them.
If your opponent hits you, hit them.

[EdGardner]

Well, it was worth a try to ask.

If anyone has a link or a book, please let me know.

[noodle]

Well, it was worth a try to ask.

i think you underestimate the ability for someone to fence epee however they want to fence, and be able to be successful.

[Allen Evans]

A lot of coaches teach epee as though it were foil without right of way, or as if epee was some sort of medeival tilting game, in which you simply keep your arm out and move towards your opponent. Both of these approaches -- of course -- are hopelessly wrong.

As far as I have read (and I have read a lot) there is no comprehensive analysis of the tactical difference between the weapons (at least, written in modern times). I've written a little bit about both weapons at http://home.earthlink.net/~allenevans59/ , and reading some of the articles about foil and epee might be helpful in framing your question, but are not going to answer it.

Allen Evans

[wbowman]

it seems that all my liabilities in foil actually make sense in Epee

As I once heard one of my clubmates say (apparently quoting someone else, but I forget who): "Epee is bad foil, done well."

[noodle]

As I once heard one of my clubmates say (apparently quoting someone else, but I forget who): "Epee is bad foil, done well."

disagree, people who fence bad foil in epee typically do badly. or plateau at a certain level, at least.

[piste off]

i think you underestimate the ability for someone to fence epee however they want to fence, and be able to be successful.

I think I agree... There are always exceptions to the rule.

Also, any "book" (like Emil Beck's) that does discuss tactics for each weapon (I have not seen any "side-by-side" comparisons) is going to be oriented toward that school/country's style, and these vary considerably (certainly for epee). At best, you will only have a comparison within that school of thought.

If I were you I'd spend less time on compare and contrast and more time on what works for each given your own style/proclivity and the nature of each weapon.

For example, epee by nature is a counter-attack game. True, you can be aggressive and have a game based on attacks... but that is not the norm (you need exceptional athletic ability at a minimum).

Rick

[piste off]

As I once heard one of my clubmates say (apparently quoting someone else, but I forget who): "Epee is bad foil, done well."

They did not understand what they were talking about.

Rick

[EdGardner]

Thanks Allen, not knowing how to frame the question certainly is a liability in and of itself. I'll have a look and maybe come back with a better question.

[rudd]

As I once heard one of my clubmates say (apparently quoting someone else, but I forget who): "Epee is bad foil, done well."

Foil is the right way.
Epee is the wrong way.
Sabre is the wrong way but faster.

[ddavis]

While it is not a direct comparison of foil and epee, take a look at the book "Epee 2.0"

Since you already have an understanding of foil, this book provides a nice perspective on modern epee.

[samh]

Ed why don't you just take a couple of epee lessons? Then you can see the difference for yourself.

Its really difficult to compile all the differences between foil and epee because there are a lot of them. In addition anything you learn is going to depend a lot on the coach.

A couple of general differences that will not hold true for all fencers:
- The guard is generally more extended in epee
- Attacks in epee are generally shorter, and will often start on the opponent's step forward
- The arm will extend earlier in the attack in epee than in foil (generally but not always)

As you can see there is a problem with the list because none of them are true always and I'm sure there are epeeists on this forum who will disagree

[D'Artagnan1673]

Epee is more philosphical than the conventional weapons because there are no conventions. Epee is more about your body's build and your likes and dislikes in terms of fencing actions.

You have to develop your own style, and only you can do that for you. Sure, a coach or a mate can help you, but they must see you in action in order to give you assistance.

In my opinion, epee certainly requires more precision in terms of point control than foil. I base this upon the fact that body shots are more forgiving than attempting to hit the wrist or forearm, which certainly change positions more than the torso.

Now for the flames...

[HDG]

Ed why don't you just take a couple of epee lessons? Then you can see the difference for yourself.

Agreed; there's no shortage of good epee coaches at BFC.

[EdGardner]

In épée, the roles of "attack" and "defense" do not exist—or at least are poorly delineated. The lack of priority in épée means that both fencers are free to seek an appropriate tempo to score without consideration of who is "attacking" or "defending". The attacking épée fencer does not obligate the defender to a restrictive set of actions in defense. Because of this, attacking entails a risk to épée fencer. In classical times the épée fencer was very conservative in attacking and was taught to do nothing that exposed the fencer to large tempos that might allow a counter-attack. Classical épée fencers worked to the opponent's hand, attempting to score against any exposed target while keeping his or her own hand protected behind the bell guard. Arms were carried well out in front of the body, and actions were made to the opponent's forearm and wrist.

That's the kind of thing I was looking for.

And I am starting lessons, but I can't be in lessons all the time, and fencing is as much mental as it is physical, so reading stuff helps me "frame the questions" for my coach

[Jason]

I have fenced foil for a little less than a year now, and tried epee a few weeks back...

This is silly. You don't even really understand foil yet, so there are no real "tactical differences" you need to be worried about right now. By all means try epee and see if you like it. Train in whichever weapon you want or just pick one randomly. Forget about asking these kinds of questions on the internet--it's not what you need. Just go have fun.