I really appreciate your videos but I am curious why you chose to do a video on the number 4 ranked Hungarian (alternate in Beijing). I have seen many fencers in the top 16 beat Lontay. In fact I recently saw a video of Keeth Smart stopping Lontay's attack in the last 32 at the 2007 World Championships.
I know beggars can not be choosers but I would appreciate seeing a full video library of fencers that are consistently ranked in the top 16 in the world before I begin analyzing people further down the food chain.
I really appreciate your videos but I am curious why you chose to do a video on the number 4 ranked Hungarian (alternate in Beijing). I have seen many fencers in the top 16 beat Lontay. In fact I recently saw a video of Keeth Smart stopping Lontay's attack in the last 32 at the 2007 World Championships.
I know beggars can not be choosers but I would appreciate seeing a full video library of fencers that are consistently ranked in the top 16 in the world before I begin analyzing people further down the food chain.
Sure, but he's not analyzing the overwhelming awesomeness and general domination of lontay. He's analyzing his attack. Which I assume is pretty good (haven't watched video yet) and probably improved at least a little bit in the last two years..
__________________
"Their interpretation is, however, refuted most elegantly by your system of radioactive atom + amplifier + charge of gun powder + cat in a box"
-Albert Einstein, in a letter to Erwin Schrödinger
Sure, but he's not analyzing the overwhelming awesomeness and general domination of lontay. He's analyzing his attack. Which I assume is pretty good (haven't watched video yet) and probably improved at least a little bit in the last two years..
exactly. i was really taken with his attack, as i mentioned in the video, and i chose to do a video on it. i dont like almost anyones fencing and i barely have any footage of lontay, probably because he is not a "top flight" guy and when i saw the footage of him at the olympics i was amazed by his attack. you may recall that i have already done a decsi video, even though i dont like his fencing, i really dont like nemcsiks fencing so i dont plan on doing him anytime soon, and szilagyis fencing speaks for itself: he is very spaztic and very athletic with great footwork and bladework. so i did lontay, whose overall fencing i dont like but i love his attack
i really dont like nemcsiks fencing so i dont plan on doing him anytime soon, and szilagyis fencing speaks for itself: he is very spaztic and very athletic with great footwork and bladework. so i did lontay, whose overall fencing i dont like but i love his attack
How about Messrs. Lee and Smart flunges then?
__________________
Randal : [after the fire at the Quick Stop] Terrorists?
[Dante shakes his head]
Randal : I left the coffee pot on again, didn't I?
[Dante nods]
also is there any way i can get my hands on this video? is it somewhere on the internet? is there a way you can send it to me?
Yury Gelman showed it to me earlier this year on his laptop. The folks at MFC have the largest collection of MS footage that I have ever seen - there is even stuff from 2003-2004.
I still am not convinced about the importance of doing a video analysis of Lontay. There is a reason why the Hungarians made him an alternate in Beijing.
Yury Gelman showed it to me earlier this year on his laptop. The folks at MFC have the largest collection of MS footage that I have ever seen - there is even stuff from 2003-2004.
I still am not convinced about the importance of doing a video analysis of Lontay. There is a reason why the Hungarians made him an alternate in Beijing.
Forget that Andrew....another good video w/ many great insights.
I still am not convinced about the importance of doing a video analysis of Lontay. There is a reason why the Hungarians made him an alternate in Beijing.
Yes, but after watching the video do you feel that reason is his attack?
This really isn't that hard.
__________________
"Their interpretation is, however, refuted most elegantly by your system of radioactive atom + amplifier + charge of gun powder + cat in a box"
-Albert Einstein, in a letter to Erwin Schrödinger
Lontay makes what look like a lot of bladework preparations (false five, for instance, I notice in one case), and I am surprised in a couple of places that he actually gets the light on against his opponent's attack in preparation/counter-attack. His arm, as you comment at one point, is held. It's almost not really an attack at all despite the speed of it--it seems more designed as a one-light action than as an attack.
For another video, I would suggest looking at the first step.
As an example, I spent considerable time once just analyzing Podzhniakov's start off the on-guard line during one World Championships gold medal bout (I forget which) and was fascinated to find that he was taking a tiny half-retreat in some cases and making a tiny appel in others. The implications for the resulting amount of distance change were interesting. In both cases, he was showing the referee that he was starting, but he was also keeping the distance wide enough to allow himself more room to set up his actions.
__________________ I'm not anonymous. We just haven't been properly introduced.
Lontay makes what look like a lot of bladework preparations (false five, for instance, I notice in one case), and I am surprised in a couple of places that he actually gets the light on against his opponent's attack in preparation/counter-attack. His arm, as you comment at one point, is held. It's almost not really an attack at all despite the speed of it--it seems more designed as a one-light action than as an attack.
For another video, I would suggest looking at the first step.
As an example, I spent considerable time once just analyzing Podzhniakov's start off the on-guard line during one World Championships gold medal bout (I forget which) and was fascinated to find that he was taking a tiny half-retreat in some cases and making a tiny appel in others. The implications for the resulting amount of distance change were interesting. In both cases, he was showing the referee that he was starting, but he was also keeping the distance wide enough to allow himself more room to set up his actions.
most fencers are actually very good at that, and i am working on a dumitrescu video right now focusing on his odd type of preparation
I do think that this is very interesting -- I would like to know more about how Lontay's attack works with such a clear "settle." It seems to be key to his attack and creating a "broken" tempo -- but it also seems to set him up for attacks on prep if he is even a little off with the distance (a call of "you stop -- he goes.")
Your video made me want to go back and watch Lontay in the team event of the 2007 Worlds, where he did all of the things you talk about (much better, IMHO) and was key in winning the Championship over France. When I did, it was clear how he was using just the kinds of things you talked about. He had a touch against Pillet and one against Sanson that was really amazing.
Last edited by springdon; 09-19-2009 at 12:00 PM..
Sure, but he's not analyzing the overwhelming awesomeness and general domination of lontay. He's analyzing his attack. Which I assume is pretty good (haven't watched video yet) and probably improved at least a little bit in the last two years..
I'd go a step further and say that even if you randomly pick a world cup fencer with a poor attack, the mistakes would be worth analyzing. I disagree with the assertion that these great compilation videos should be done just of dominant fencers. They are useful learning tools either way.
I'd go a step further and say that even if you randomly pick a world cup fencer with a poor attack, the mistakes would be worth analyzing. I disagree with the assertion that these great compilation videos should be done just of dominant fencers. They are useful learning tools either way.
I agree wholeheartedly.
__________________
"If I were ever to challenge you to a duel, your best bet would be battle axes in a very dark basement." Misquoted from The Prisoner
"Technical excellence is the antecedant of tactical creativity." - Nat Goodhartz
But those things which belong neither to God nor to Caeser, feeleth free to writeth them off, for yea, they are deductable.
I'd go a step further and say that even if you randomly pick a world cup fencer with a poor attack, the mistakes would be worth analyzing. I disagree with the assertion that these great compilation videos should be done just of dominant fencers. They are useful learning tools either way.
To an extent I agree with your argument that it is worthwhile to analyze all fencers. Provided you have the time and energy. However I have been taught by Yury Gelman that it's best to study the fencers that are consistently ranked in the top 24 of the FIE standings. They are the fencers that will make multiple national & olympic teams. And they are the fencers that have the highest probability of drawing our American fencers (due to lower seeds after pools). Furthermore, it is important to know the calls that referees tend to give / overlook with these fencers (i.e. Podzniakov & Tarantino's arm pulled back on long-attacks and Smart & Lee's occasional crossovers on flunges).
That's just my $.02. But thank you for posting the videos in a public forum. Too many fencers hold onto their private collection.
Last edited by Jedi Knight; 09-23-2009 at 12:12 AM..
i did really enjoy that actually lol although i am really not a fan of nemcsik. it was actually an incredibly boring bout but it is good to see lontay fencing so well before he was psyched out by the, as you call them, unique calls. you can really see that after he got that bad call to make it 6-5 he sort of lost touch with the settle game that he was playing that was working really well for him. when someone gets tentative like that, it usually becomes a clashing fight in the middle
However I have been taught by Yury Gelman that it's best to study the fencers that are consistently ranked in the top 24 of the FIE standings. They are the fencers that will make multiple national & olympic teams. And they are the fencers that have the highest probability of drawing our American fencers (due to lower seeds after pools). Furthermore, it is important to know the calls that referees tend to give / overlook with these fencers (i.e. Podzniakov & Tarantino's arm pulled back on long-attacks and Smart & Lee's occasional crossovers on flunges).
what does this have to do with anything? sure the top level fencers are efficient but i find most of them have very boring and uncreative games. look at the way tarantino, covaliu, and nemcsik do a lot of stupid actions and then fight a lot with the directors. sure these fencers do some things very well, they have all been at the top of the world rankings at some point, but in my opinion analyzing THEM is a waste of time. pozdniakovs attack, i would love to take an in-depth look at, but i even find his fencing boring for the most part. he is just a hard hitter with a few consistent actions that he knows how to use at the right time, etc. by ruling out everyone outside the top 24 you are ruling out a majority of the fencers with creative ideas. true, creative ideas dont always lead somewhere and sometimes it is better to be efficient, but if you dont at least consider looking at these people you are going to miss out on a majority of what makes the sport interesting
![KShan5[PrFC]'s Avatar](customavatars/avatar1334_12.gif){kind=avatar}
![Send a message via Yahoo to KShan5[PrFC]](images/fencing_net/misc/im_yahoo.gif)
Linear Mode
