Compilation Video: Lontay's Attacks

[Inquartata]

As a coach, I hate this phrase. Though it may not be the case this time, it is almost always connected to a statement that the speaker (or typist) does not fully understand the reasoning behind and therefore uses nothing other than the words of their coach or some other person, which may or may not be correct.

You mean, words like "Never go backward off the line. Always take at least one small step forward"?

Yes, that's very ambiguous and easy to misconstrue!

( Yes, I saw your disclaimer. )

[RITFencing]

You mean, words like "Never go backward off the line. Always take at least one small step forward"?

Yes, that's very ambiguous and easy to misconstrue!

( Yes, I saw your disclaimer. )

Ah, but WHY do you always take at least one step forward? Why is it never, not in a million billion years (or even a real number) ever a good idea to open with an unforced step backward?

The face value of the words is often very easy to interpret. However, a purely literal interpretation of what to do, without an understanding of why you want to do it that way, makes it much more difficult to correctly apply whatever concept or action to the constantly changing environment of a fencing bout.

[Inquartata]

How often are students brave enough to ask a coach "Why"?

[Allen Evans]

Good coaches create the climate to ask "why". Why should a student have to be "brave" to ask why?

[RITFencing]

How often are students brave enough to ask a coach "Why"?

During those sporadic periods in my life when I have one, I ask that question constantly. It helps both my fencing and my coaching. I also do my utmost to encourage students to ask, and to both explain things without being asked and prod them with questions to get them thinking and further their understanding.

[RITFencing]

Let me phrase this a more sarcastic and amusing way:

As a coach, I believe my words should stimulate thought rather than substitute for it.

[oiuyt]

How often are students brave enough to ask a coach "Why"?

How often are coaches brave enough to ask "Why"?

-B

[RITFencing]

How often are coaches brave enough to ask "Why"?

-B

Not nearly often enough.

[Jason]

If I can make a suggestion for a future analysis...I'd love to get your views on the little footwork preparations on the line that certain fencers---I think mostly those who have been coached by Bauer---use. For instance, the French and Chinese both sometimes do a small step back, then in again. There's also an occasional thing where the front foot goes forward, the back foot goes back, but there's no actual motion back or forward---just a widening of the stance.

Maybe these are common at WC level, but I have only caught them watching the French, Chinese and once a Hungarian. I'm intrigued by the unforced step back from the line, which I was taught is heresy in sabre...

It might involve splicing bits of too many videos, I dunno. Up to you.

It's certainly true that it's not uncommon for Bauer's students to take a step back from, or simply pause at, the en garde line at the "Fence" command. It's possible that he can even be credited with "popularizing" the idea. However, such an approach to changing the timing and distance in the box has become pretty common, even at the domestic level (James Williams uses it a lot, of course, but you can even see kids at the Y14 level doing it). With the way sabre is currently refereed--with directors looking for almost any kind of hesitation or change in balance to call the attack as having stopped--creating a sudden (and often subtle) change in the timing and distance is the box can have a powerful affect.

(As Brad noted, the "half-step forward, half-step back" was used a lot by Podzniakov for a long time, as well as by a lot of other sabrists certainly for at least the past decade, if not longer.)

[Allen Evans]

How often are coaches brave enough to ask "Why"

I ask "why" all the time...it's just that no one answers me!

[Inquartata]

Good coaches create the climate to ask "why". Why should a student have to be "brave" to ask why?

Let's ask Arkady!

You first.

Not nearly often enough.

Then how can their students be expected to do so?

(As Brad noted, the "half-step forward, half-step back" was used a lot by Podzniakov for a long time, as well as by a lot of other sabrists certainly for at least the past decade, if not longer.)

This however is not quite the same thing as going back immediately...

Even remaining stationary is not quite the same thing.

Is it a way of subtly changing the starting distance between you and your opponent? I notice that Pillet for example almost aways ends up doing either a parry or an AIP after the step back-step forward---and his opponents often seem to be caught in media res instead of continuing their attacks...

[CyrusofChaos]

This however is not quite the same thing as going back immediately...

Even remaining stationary is not quite the same thing.

Is it a way of subtly changing the starting distance between you and your opponent? I notice that Pillet for example almost aways ends up doing either a parry or an AIP after the step back-step forward---and his opponents often seem to be caught in media res instead of continuing their attacks...

well when you mix up these two actions correctly it doesnt really matter where you do them as long as you do a good job of making them do what you want. yes, the step back is to increase the initial distance, forcing your opponent to take the initiative, often earlier than they expect to