Psych!

[Gav]

" <b>Originally posted by Nebuchadnezzar
If you need a "list" then you should go practice your fencing cause you must be terrible.</b>

do you realize that you (a first year fencer) just accused a517dogg (an A from your area) of being terrible???? just found that amusing..."

Now now *waggles finger* everyone is getting a little personal ...

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by Nebuchadnezzar
BTW: according to Zoran he left the olympic arena because he couldn't stand all of the politics and "headgames" as you call it.

Politics is very different from headgames.

-m

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Likewise i'd rather loose because of my own lack of skill than win due to petty tricks. Similarly, how are you going to improve your abilities if your faults are hidden from you during a bout because your opponent is too intimidated to take advantage of them.

[Gav]

Actually I have this ripchord built into my specially modified Kit , when I need to intimidate someone I just pull it and special airbags inflate to make me look twice as tall and muscular. A special voice synthesizer kicks in and make my voice especially loud and booming,

Works a treat!

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by Inquartata
No, "everybody" doesn't do it. I for one do not, and even a single exception invalidates the "everybody".

I would rather win, or lose, on fencing ability alone. I would rather lose to the better fencer than "win" because I was able to intimidate or irk or rattle him, despite having lesser skills.

If this sort of thing is integral to your game; if you use it consciously, deliberately and in most every bout; if you fall back on it when losing; then you are relying upon it to remedy a lack in your fencing. Using, relying upon, call it what you will.

Is it rampant? Yes. Does the fact that "everyone does it" justify it? Not to me. YMMV.

Actually, that just means you fit into the category of people who don't realize they do it. Tell you what, introduce yourself to me at Arlington and I'll watch you and try to find some examples you do without thinking about it.

-m

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by Nebuchadnezzar
Similarly, how are you going to improve your abilities if your faults are hidden from you during a bout because your opponent is too intimidated to take advantage of them.

well, that is kinda what practice is for.

-m

[fencer-person]

The greatest challenge of head games is dealing with your own head and overcoming your own doubt and fear when you are on the strip.

As for certain tricks or head games: After an opponent losses a touch a reply of "I knew what you were doing" can make an opponent feel that his entire game is obvious even if it isn't. Of course, this being effective depends on how strong a "head" an opponent has and if he is weak I have seen people's games fall apart.

[Inquartata]

Originally posted by epeemike81
Actually, that just means you fit into the category of people who don't realize they do it. Tell you what, introduce yourself to me at Arlington and I'll watch you and try to find some examples you do without thinking about it.

-m

No offense, but that's pretty funny, actually. What a great way to win every argument---"you just don't realize that you're wrong"! Sort of like "Heads I win, tails you lose"...

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by Inquartata
No offense, but that's pretty funny, actually. What a great way to win every argument---"you just don't realize that you're wrong"! Sort of like "Heads I win, tails you lose"...

granted. That is why I want to suspend this argument and take it up with some actual fodder at Arlington.

-m

[epeefencer74]

Originally posted by Nebuchadnezzar
I have repeatedly heard fencing called the gentleman's sport. It has always been described and taught to me as a sport and art in which honor is key. I have also been taught to increase my fencing skill, not my petty tricks to make up for my lack of skill. If you need a "list" then you should go practice your fencing cause you must be terrible. A real fencer doesn't need to intimidate his opponent before the bout. There is a time and place for everything.

It is very admirable that you have these notions of fencing, yes ideally we should all move towards being honourable, but this is not the case in any competition.

I am sorry but psychology comes into the play even before a competition even starts, whether delibrate or not.

Say a fencer has a rep for being brutal and is not above playing it up during comps. That's a form of psychology to put everyone on guard when fencing him. Heck even warming up with your coach just before the start of a competition on the competition grounds is a from of intimidation. Then there are team cheers, projection of self confidence and an air of untouchability. All these are just the tip of the iceburg. On the piste there are a million intimidation tatics to use. Hitting of accupoints, dosen't amount to brutality, but boy does it hurt. Constantly hitting the mask (in epee) hard, this really rattles the opponent and pushes the anger buttons of quite few people. Simply by doing a victory shout at every point scored is enough to rile an edgy fencer. All these are perfectly legal tactics, dishonourable maybe, but definately legal.

All I'm saying is that this is the situation you will have to deal with. If you don't want to use such tactics fine, good for you, but be aware that these things are happening to you and you need to be a really cool guy to take it and not dish it out.

Me, I'm not above doing any of those things, including hitting of accupoints in retaliation to a brute, just to let him know that I can hurt him really bad too and still score a point and yet not be carded.

[whtouche]

I tend to be really friendly off-strip. Talking to my opponants, small talk just being casual. Not at all trying to play head games or distract them from the task at hand.
However, on strip...I wouldnt say I play head games but I do try to intimidate people. Obviously, everyone does this. You know that if people are in a position of uncertainty then they wont fence to the extent of their ability. I say everyone does this because I assume everyone fences to the best of their ability most of the time. Whether you're actively trying to intimidate someone isnt the issue. If you fence to the best of your ability, you are going to eventually end up making someone scared of what you can do.
For example, in this realm this is probably the only thing I do on purpose as far as intimidation. I fence sabre, which is obviously normally a very aggressive weapon. After fencing a few touches, off the call of 'Fence' I'll stand at the on guard line, very relaxed. I wait for my opponant to figure out that I'm not doing anything(duh) and come take a shot at me. Without flinching if I can manage it, I take a lightning fast parry and riposte immedietly. After doing this I return to my guard position already prepared for the next touch.
I have fairly quick hands and have been able to pull this off pretty successfully against nearly all people I've tried it against. The result? Subsequent touches of the bout if they see me doing nothing, hell if they see me doing almost anything defensive, they're more hesitant, and it either affords me the time to breath, or take over and attack.

There's a more articulate way to make my point that I've not been able to find yet. But I think there are two separate arguements going on here, or at least two branches of one. There's a difference between trying to psych someone out, outside the piste, via psychological games, verbally or physically; and psyching someone out on the strip - which could be something as simple as fencing amazingly. In that vein, it can be done subconsciously.
Bah, most of you know what I'm talking about I assume, I'm going to go now.

[BugabooX]

I guess the only psych-out ploy I use on a regular basis is to compliment my opponent for his (or her) spouse's sexual prowess. That tends to upset most of them a teensy bit for some odd reason.

Well, that and one other thing: When we test epee bell guards, I pull mine away before he can touch it and yell, "Psych!" Then I grin and tell him I was just kidding, hold my bell guard up again and repeat the process. By the third attempt to test his weapon, the guy starts to look tense.

And then there's the trick of bending one of my fingers backward until it snaps, while I lock eyes with my opponent and growl. But that only works every other competition after I give myself a chance to heal...

[Peach]

Drooling copiously works for me.

[Slavheart]

I disagree with just about everything that Eppemike81 has to say on this subject. I agree wholeheartedly with the argument that if you're growling, grunting, stomping, etc, etc, etc, then you're compensating for some other deficiencies.

And, in my view, doing the "YES" when you score a touch is simply against the grain and tradition of good sportsmanship in fencing. Not one of the writers I've read, from earlier times to Nadi to contemporaries, ever advise doing this sort of thing. In fact, some even consciously discourage it. It really amounts to a conspicuous effort to humiliate a fellow sportsman. There are other names for this...since most of us probably enjoy examining how aspects of the game can apply to other areas of life, why not ask how this behavior is exhibited in other contexts? Most likely, it would look like this: Being smarmy. Smug. Sanctimonious. Self-righteous. Pompous. Rubbing it in. Rubbing someone's face in it. Adding insult to injury. Essentially, kicking someone when they're already down.

Is that really the character anyone wants to cultivate and exhibit? Looks like a lot of people are o.k. with this sort of thing and the game belongs to everybody. So, as much as I dislike it, there's nothing to do about it but grin and bear it and surpass it whenever possible with superior fencing skills that rely on well-practiced movements and strategy. For my part, I'll stay silent when I score a touch and let the judges or anyone watching make their own comments...whether silent or voiced.

[Inquartata]

Originally posted by epeemike81
granted. That is why I want to suspend this argument and take it up with some actual fodder at Arlington.

-m

I am no one's fodder, and anyone who claims otherwise should produce the DNA test to prove it!

So how am I supposed to look you up, then? Will you be registered as "epeemike81"?

[epeemike81]

Mike Eskin.

I will be fencing the Div II Epee, and probably reffing the other days. (unless I decide to do div III sabre....)

-m

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by Slavheart
I disagree with just about everything that Eppemike81 has to say on this subject. I agree wholeheartedly with the argument that if you're growling, grunting, stomping, etc, etc, etc, then you're compensating for some other deficiencies.

And, in my view, doing the "YES" when you score a touch is simply against the grain and tradition of good sportsmanship in fencing. Not one of the writers I've read, from earlier times to Nadi to contemporaries, ever advise doing this sort of thing. In fact, some even consciously discourage it. It really amounts to a conspicuous effort to humiliate a fellow sportsman. There are other names for this...since most of us probably enjoy examining how aspects of the game can apply to other areas of life, why not ask how this behavior is exhibited in other contexts? Most likely, it would look like this: Being smarmy. Smug. Sanctimonious. Self-righteous. Pompous. Rubbing it in. Rubbing someone's face in it. Adding insult to injury. Essentially, kicking someone when they're already down.

Is that really the character anyone wants to cultivate and exhibit? Looks like a lot of people are o.k. with this sort of thing and the game belongs to everybody. So, as much as I dislike it, there's nothing to do about it but grin and bear it and surpass it whenever possible with superior fencing skills that rely on well-practiced movements and strategy. For my part, I'll stay silent when I score a touch and let the judges or anyone watching make their own comments...whether silent or voiced.

Notice how it is largely rank beginners who are arguing that this is improper (apologies to Inquartata, and any other experienced people I have missed)? notice it is experienced fencers who are saying its part of the game and NOT improper? Does this tell you anything????

-m

[Inquartata]

Originally posted by whtouche
I wouldnt say I play head games but I do try to intimidate people. Obviously, everyone does this.

Again, no, it isn't obvious, because everyone does NOT do it. It isn't universal behavior, much as people would like to believe that it is in order to justify their own usage.

I say everyone does this because I assume everyone fences to the best of their ability most of the time. Whether you're actively trying to intimidate someone isnt the issue. If you fence to the best of your ability, you are going to eventually end up making someone scared of what you can do.

The difference is in the word "trying". You said above that you "try to intimidate", which is a very different thing than having someone BE intimidated by your ability. The former is your doing; the latter is your opponents. If he is "scared" of you based upon your skill, that's his problem. If on the other hand you take deliberate action to bring that result about, using any tactics or techniques other than fencing abilities, it's quite another matter...

[epeemike81]

Inq. what is your demeanor on strip?? there is virtually NO answer which doesn't have a psych effect on your opponent. my bet is that your demeanor changes. if your opponent is up for the bout, raring to go and high energy, I bet you are light and calm. brings them down. good for you. if your opponent is nervous, though i'm sure you are perfectly nice, I'm sure you also exude confidence. this reinforces his nervousness and makes him hesitate. good for you. Regardless of whether you conciously do it, you DO do it. we all do. in life, not just fencing. talk to any anthropology major. many encounters in life are about head games.

-m

[Inquartata]

Like I said, what the fact that so many experienced fencers advocate this says ( to me, at least ) is that the behavior is so ingrained in the culture that it's become ingrained in them, too. Rather the way experienced criminals seem to aquire the attitude that if they want or need something they are perfectly entitled to take it from someone---and are bewildered at the notion that perhaps they ought to work for it instead. The smarter ones build up elaborate rationalizations to justify it; the stupid ones just figure that's the way it is, that the world owes them things because they are who they are; only the relative novices suffer any pangs of remorse...

I hasten to add that I see the two attitudes as similar in nature psychologically, not in any morally equivalent sense.

But again, I make a distinction which you don't seem to grant existence, ie intent. just as in the law, intent is a major element of the worthiness or unworthiness of any behavior. If I kill someone, it matters very much whether I meant to do it, does it not? So too with this psychological warfare that goes onm in fencing, I think. If you are just a skilled fencer, and that intimidates your opponent, it is his problem, his weakness. If you deliberately concoct stratagems and gestures and the like in order to achieve the effect, that is a different kettle of fish in my kitchen.

Deception plays an integral part in fencing, naturally. What is second intention if not deception? That is not what I'm talking about. It is within the framework of the fencing itself. Glaring at an opponent, feigning nonchalance, and so on are IMO something else again.

As for myself, I couldn't tell you what my demeanor looks like on strip---I've never been able to watch myself fence. All I can tell you is that it is not calculated to produce an effect on my opponent or on the referee. If I try to relax, it is because tensing up is having a deleterious effect on my performance. If I try to rouse more intensity, it is to remedy a perceived lack which again is making me fence worse than I ought to be doing. If I express satisfaction or disgust at an outcome, it is directed at myself. Intent is all I can control.