Foil VS Epee for beginners?
Christopher L. Medalis
Greeings all!
I am doing some research, and wanted to get input on what the world
thought about the common question:
Which weapon is better to start the beginning fencer with, the foil,
or the epee?
I know that there are a lot of opinions on the subject, and I would
like to hear as many of them as possible. Please, do try to give some
reasons for your preference, wether it be a characheristic of the
weapon, the flavor of the action, style of your school...
thank-you for your input!
Christopher Medalis
MU Fencing
Joe Tantalo
In article <3523d3a4...@jake.esu.edu>, clm8...@marauder.millersv.edu
(Christopher L. Medalis) wrote:
> Greeings all!
> I am doing some research, and wanted to get input on what the world
> thought about the common question:
> Which weapon is better to start the beginning fencer with, the foil,
> or the epee?
"There are three fencing weapons: foil, epee, and sabre. Not for the last
time, I say that he who knows foil knows almost all there is to know about
modern fencing. His knowledge can easily be applied to the other two
weapons - not vice versa. Even though, originally, the foil came into being
in order to study how to defend one's self, and kill with the rapier, today
the technique of the epee is borrowed from the science of foil. In
camparison to this science, sabre fencing is mere child's play."
-- Aldo Nadi, On Fencing
Thinking about it, the bladework and point control learned from foil is of
critical importance to epee, while sabre's right of way concept will
crossover from foil. It's really interesting to see a person who's never
done anything but sabre doing foil or epee. They typically have no idea of
point control. (just my personal experiance)
Later,
Joe
--
Feed your head: http://pilot.msu.edu/~tantaloj | "Killfiling idiots
MSU Fencing Club: http://pilot.msu.edu/~fencing | since 1994."
================================================|===================
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever." -Spinal Tap
Liz & Dan Gorman
Joe Tantalo wrote:
> the technique of the epee is borrowed from the science of foil. In
> camparison to this science, sabre fencing is mere child's play."
>
> -- Aldo Nadi, On Fencing
Hmm... I wonder which weapon he fenced? Just shows that he wasn't above a
little petty inter-weapon rivalry.
Dan
Joe Tantalo
No need to wonder. He fenced them all: gold medals in the 1920 Olympics in
team foil, sabre, and epee and silver in individual sabre.
Just an impressionable youth,
Joe Tantalo
Hans Hepach
Christopher L. Medalis schrieb:
>
> Greeings all!
> I am doing some research, and wanted to get input on what the world
> thought about the common question:
> Which weapon is better to start the beginning fencer with, the foil,
> or the epee?
I _am_ a beginner and I started with epee. Well, and I'm lucky with my
decision. Though beginning at very first with foil (I never practised it
in electric bout) I soon was instructed in epee (oh, I know, bad style,
but what should I do with only having my school-English ? :-) ). I like
it very much, because the rules are much easier than foil and people
(e.g. my parents who don't fence) understand them better. Besides our
club started changing completely to epee because it seems to be the only
weapon that is attractive an succesful enough to keep our little club
alive. I'm not an expert but I would say that foil may be better for
learning some ground tactics but epee is easier and gives people success
experiences so they won't get embarrased to soon. Well, but I'm just a
beginner of a little (well, _very_ little) German club, and it's just my
humble opinion, so does my answer really count ?
Bye
Marlene
HMS Lion
I've taken a contrarian view in the classes I've taught - I favor starting in
epee very strongly.
The reasons are pretty simple.
First, epee has the simplest rules - stick the other guy before he sticks you.
No pesky right-of-way calls or off-target hits.
Second, epee is the cheapest weapon to fence competitively - no lames,
overgloves, or electrified masks to buy.
Third, the lack of right-of-way compels good technique. Foilists are
particularly fond of making ineffective parries, but the noise they made is
sufficient to constitute a parry in the minds of many directors. An epeeist
MUST make sound parries, and attack with minimal exposure, or he will be hit.
Likewise, the business of parrying into one's own arm (which I've seen foilists
taught to do) is eliminated.
Fourth, epee is the last vestige of the martial origins of fencing, providing
a reference point for all instruction. I tend to teach fencing-as-martial-art,
not fencing-as-pure-sport.
For these reasons, I strongly favor teaching epee first.
V/R:
Mike McDaniel
swle...@bsu.edu
Liz & Dan Gorman wrote:
>
> Joe Tantalo wrote:
>
> > the technique of the epee is borrowed from the science of foil. In
> > camparison to this science, sabre fencing is mere child's play."
> >
> > -- Aldo Nadi, On Fencing
>
> Hmm... I wonder which weapon he fenced? Just shows that he wasn't above a
> little petty inter-weapon rivalry.
>
In the Antwerpt Olympics in '26 he fenced all three. In Teams his team
won the gold in all three weapons. He fenced foil and saber indvidually
(using epee to rest up) and got silver in both. He was beaten by his
brother Nedo. When he left Italy he was indisputly the best in all
three in the country, many even say the world.
Steve
LYGS
In this discussion, I would have to say that the best weapon to start with
would be foil.
There are plenty of reasons to begin with epee. One, it is easy to learn.
It's not hard to figure out who gets touched. It is less expensive than foil.
You can hit anywhere on the body. There is a rapid learning curve and a higher
sucess rate early. If you want to build self-esteem, then begin with epee.
If you want to build a competitive fencer, begin with foil. Most of the
foilists I know have better footwork than epeeists. One of my favorite qoutes
from an epee fencer was "We don't do lunges". In foil, you have to learn how
to parry, or else be called for insufficient parries. In epee, all you need to
do is touch the other fencer before they touch you, no defense required. On an
attack, a new foilist is less likely to be rewarded for a lucky touch - in
epee, a beginner can have hideous point control and still win. Even though
right of way is a tough rule to learn, it teaches good control and proper
distance. If you don't have both, you will lose.
These are just some quick thoughts on the two. If anyone needs me to
elaborate, I will be happy to.
Later,
Steve
Ken Mondschein
: > the technique of the epee is borrowed from the science of foil. In
: > camparison to this science, sabre fencing is mere child's play."
: >
: > -- Aldo Nadi, On Fencing
: Hmm... I wonder which weapon he fenced? Just shows that he wasn't above a
: little petty inter-weapon rivalry.
: Dan
Not at all. Nadi was schooled in the classical Italian system, where
the principles are first taught with the foil, and then applied. It's like any
other martial art. You could compare the foil system to a kata, and then see
how it's applied to the other weapons. His brother, Nedo Nadi, once remarked
that a good fencer could fence with a broomstick.
Note, however, this is for *classical Italian* foil, which sought,
above all, to remain a martial art, not a game. Despite the academic style of
the training, it had its roots still firmly planted in the "terrain" of the
duelling field.
Modern sports foil is quite a different thing. It's a sport, where the
objective is not to train in a martial art, but to make little lights go off.
--
Ken Mondschein
Work in Progress
Graduate Student, History Department, Boston University
Chuck Allen
epee point control is everything! Those days (rare for me) when your
point control is really on - you're just about unstoppable. When your
point control is a little off - you're lunch!
Defense is also more important than in foil, as you can get NOTHING
by playing right-of-way. In epee, an insufficent parry is called a
touch!
Chuck Allen
HAGENZONE
>Which weapon is better to start the beginning fencer with, the foil,
>or the epee?
>
There been quite a bit on this already, and most of it well said.
I would add 1comment that, like many things, there is a big individual factor.
Beginning students will vary greatly in their ability to grasp the concepts of
right-of way, visualize the angulations, learn various physical motions and
postions, and react with the timing appropriate to the moves.
Also, coaches and instructors will vary gretly in their ability to explain and
demonstrate.
Short and sweet: It's different for everyone: Let the student follow the path
with the path of least resistance.
=
CLH
Remember, it's only my opinion!
If you disagree, feel free to Byte Me!
Aveare
> One of my favorite qoutes
>from an epee fencer was "We don't do lunges".
must have been a really tall, really bad, or really dumb epeeist...
In foil, you have to learn how
>to parry, or else be called for insufficient parries.
Really? I wish directors felt the same way. Esp. when parry-repostes that
didn't occur are magically called.
In epee, all you need
>to
>do is touch the other fencer before they touch you, no defense required
Last time I checked, unless you enjoy being miserably beat, you need some sort
of defense. The only way a beginner epeeist will win over a more experienced
one is if the experienced fencer is either a) really bad or b) has worse point
control or close outs than the beginner. Thats just my opinion. I find it much
easier to fence foil after begining with epee, because you have solid parry,
disengaging, and counter-attack skills. The speed, i admit, may have to be
worked on. Whereas, if you switch from foil to epee, the usual response is "I
can't hit there, its off-target." There is not the amount of point control
needed for epee. But thats just my opinion. Feel free to contradict.
Aveare
LYGS
>On an
>> attack, a new foilist is less likely to be rewarded for a lucky touch - in
>> epee, a beginner can have hideous point control and still win
>I seriously disagree with the statement regarding point control. In
>epee point control is everything! Those days (rare for me) when your
>point control is really on - you're just about unstoppable. When your
>point control is a little off - you're lunch!
Remember, we're talking about beginners here. How many of them do you know
that have really on point control? They usually aren't the ones going for the
wrist and toe touches. Most of the beginning epee fencers I have seen tend to
go for the body anyway, and if they are lucky enough to get an arm hit, the
reward is almost like a free touch. As fencers get better, point control is
emphasized more in epee than in foil. At the beginner level, the amount of
target area that an epee fencer presents tends to allow mistakes to be
successful and causes beginners to feel that point control is not as important.
>Defense is also more important than in foil, as you can get NOTHING
>by playing right-of-way. In epee, an insufficent parry is called a
>touch!
Let me put it this way. In epee, you can fence a bout where the opponent is
the agressor but you can get away with using distance and point control to win
the bout, never parrying once. I only mention this because I knew a couple of
beginners that would fence by always counterattacking and not parrying.
Initial success with this method caused them to feel that parrying wasn't as
necessary. Everyone who has fenced for a while knows that you need to mix up
your defense as well as your offense, but beginners don't. These guys
basically had to take a step back to relearn parries before they saw success on
higher levels. I agree with you on one thing - a foil fencer in the upper
skill levels can get away with an insufficient parry. But on the lower
beginner levels, it doesn't usually work that way. Maybe it's just me, but
when I direct, I call it more on beginners than on experienced fencers. Sure
it's hypocritical, but it's the way I've seen better directors than me doing
it.
Sorry for being long winded,
Steve
LYGS
>I find it much
>easier to fence foil after begining with epee, because you have solid parry,
>disengaging, and counter-attack skills. The speed, i admit, may have to be
>worked on. Whereas, if you switch from foil to epee, the usual response is "I
>can't hit there, its off-target." There is not the amount of point control
>needed for epee. But thats just my opinion. Feel free to contradict.
When switching from foil to epee, I find that the only hard thing about more
target area is working that new target into my strategy. I would think that
going from epee to foil would be harder - mostly because of right of way. My
comment about 'no defense required' just meant that you don't need to parry to
win in epee. Counterattacks and timing can be all you need. In foil, if the
opponent begins an attack, you better do something with their blade (to include
displacement) or else expect to be scored on. I've seen people win in foil by
just avoiding their attacker's point, but they don't usually get that far.
Anyway, I'm hardly mister know-it-all. Just my opinions.
Later,
Steve
Jim C
Aveare <ave...@aol.com> wrote in article
<199804041801...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
> > One of my favorite qoutes
> >from an epee fencer was "We don't do lunges".
>
> must have been a really tall, really bad, or really dumb epeeist...
>
>> In foil, you have to learn how
> >to parry, or else be called for insufficient parries.
>
> Really? I wish directors felt the same way. Esp. when parry-repostes that
> didn't occur are magically called.
>
Sort of like the modern phenomenon I call the click-parry, as in "the
director heard a "click" as you were coming in so the other guy must have
parried", and that hit you landed is actually a remise. In all fairness to
directors, however, with the speed of modern foil it can be *really* hard
sometimes to differentiate between the two. IMHO, though, if the guy I
just lunged against barely touched my blade without displacing it from the
line I set it up from in any way, he didnt parry. But like I said, that's
just my opinion, and every director is different (in competition, that *is*
who we are really fencing for and against, isn't it? ;-) )
>
> In epee, all you need
> >to
> >do is touch the other fencer before they touch you, no defense required
>
> Last time I checked, unless you enjoy being miserably beat, you need
some sort
> of defense. The only way a beginner epeeist will win over a more
experienced
> one is if the experienced fencer is either a) really bad or b) has worse
point
> control or close outs than the beginner. Thats just my opinion. I find it
much
> easier to fence foil after begining with epee, because you have solid
parry,
> disengaging, and counter-attack skills. The speed, i admit, may have to
be
I have actually seen it to be the other way around, because if you don't
parry in foil you are more than likely rarely going to get awarded a point
(unless you are darn good at avoiding the point, and like I said, foil can
be pretty fast). However, I can see how starting in epee may have the same
effect. I guess it just depends a lot on the fencer and/or his coach.
> worked on. Whereas, if you switch from foil to epee, the usual response
is "I
> can't hit there, its off-target." There is not the amount of point
control
> needed for epee. But thats just my opinion. Feel free to contradict.
>
Well, I dont fence epee, but it seems to me like it would take some pretty
good point control to nail someone on the weapon hand or wrist. Maybe I
should fence epee, my point control is so bad some days that it seems I hit
my foil partners on the arm as often as the torso ;-).
> Aveare
>
Jim
Bryan J. Maloney
Ken Mondschein wrote:
>
> Liz & Dan Gorman (ebg...@unix.tamu.edu) wrote:
> : Joe Tantalo wrote:
>
> : > the technique of the epee is borrowed from the science of foil. In
> : > camparison to this science, sabre fencing is mere child's play."
> : >
> : > -- Aldo Nadi, On Fencing
>
> : Hmm... I wonder which weapon he fenced? Just shows that he wasn't above a
> : little petty inter-weapon rivalry.
>
> : Dan
>
> Not at all. Nadi was schooled in the classical Italian system, where
> the principles are first taught with the foil, and then applied. It's like any
> other martial art. You could compare the foil system to a kata, and then see
> how it's applied to the other weapons. His brother, Nedo Nadi, once remarked
> that a good fencer could fence with a broomstick.
Let us also not forget that Aldo and Nedo kicked ass big-time in the
very first epee tournament they entered.
Bryan J. Maloney
Jim C wrote:
> Sort of like the modern phenomenon I call the click-parry, as in "the
> director heard a "click" as you were coming in so the other guy must have
> parried", and that hit you landed is actually a remise. In all fairness to
It's sad that even directors know the rules worse than I do.
"A mere beat does not constitute a parry."
Bob1epee
Bryan J. Maloney worte:
>It's sad that even directors know the rules worse than I do.
>
>"A mere beat does not constitute a parry."
>
Please explain your statement about a beat, and what constitutes a parry.
Bob
mark....@pulse.com
In article <35290A...@cornell.edu>,
bj...@cornell.edu wrote:
> It's sad that even directors know the rules worse than I do.
>
> "A mere beat does not constitute a parry."
Where in the rules is that?
The closest thing I can find is "mere blade contact is not
considered sufficient to deflect the opponent's blade."
Blade contact and a beat are two very different things.
--
Mark C. Orton
Secretary/Treasurer
USFA Virginia Division
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Eric Dew
In article <199804061912...@ladder01.news.aol.com> bob1...@aol.com (Bob1epee) writes:
>Bryan J. Maloney worte:
>
>>It's sad that even directors know the rules worse than I do.
>>
>>"A mere beat does not constitute a parry."
>>
>
>
>Bob
>
certainly will constitute a parry, if done in a defensive context. It is up
to the referee to determine whether a lateral motion by the blade caused a
parry or a "mere grazing." The referee is certainly allowed to use all his
or her senses to help make that determination. If it means the "click" sound
is sufficient, then so be it. The referee may claim that a "mere grazing"
would sound like a "swish" sound rather than a more solid "click" sound.
It is up to the referee to determine what is right, not Bryan Maloney.
EDEW
Fredrick R. Kenniston III
Hans Hepach wrote:
>
> Christopher L. Medalis schrieb:
> >
> > Greeings all!
> > I am doing some research, and wanted to get input on what the world
> > thought about the common question:
> > or the epee?
>
> decision. Though beginning at very first with foil (I never practised it
> in electric bout) I soon was instructed in epee (oh, I know, bad style,
> but what should I do with only having my school-English ? :-) ). I like
> it very much, because the rules are much easier than foil and people
> (e.g. my parents who don't fence) understand them better. Besides our
> club started changing completely to epee because it seems to be the only
> weapon that is attractive an succesful enough to keep our little club
> alive. I'm not an expert but I would say that foil may be better for
> learning some ground tactics but epee is easier and gives people success
> experiences so they won't get embarrased to soon. Well, but I'm just a
> beginner of a little (well, _very_ little) German club, and it's just my
> humble opinion, so does my answer really count ?
>
> Bye
I am an American, started fencing a year and a half ago in Florida. I started with Foil
and then, six months later, took up Epee. I can definitely say that I learned things
fencing Epee in tournaments that I did not learn fencing Foil. Like opposition parry in
6th. Once I learned this little gem from Epee Trournaments, my Foil improved. I MUST
CONFESS THOUGH, EVEN THOUGH I HAVE SIX MONTHS LESS EXPERIENCE IN EPEE AND HAVE FENCED
ALL THREE WEAPONS SINCE MAY 1997, MY STRONGEST WEAPON BY FAR IS EPEE. I agree with you
that it is great for beginners because of the simple rules and it is by far cheaper to
outfit a person with a couple of electric Epees for tournaments (with Mask, Glove,
Jacket, Knickers, etc.) than to outfit the same fencer for fencing in Foil Events. If I
had to do it all over again, I would have started with Epee knowing what I now know.
As a new fencer, I am absolutely jazzed about the sport!! :-) I have been in 13
tournaments in that time. I find I learn more going to a Tournament, telling my coach
what I had trouble handling at the last Tournament, and drilling the handling until I am
confident I can use the technique in my next Tournament and doing it all over again.
For me, GOING TO FREQUENT LOCAL TOURNAMENTS HAS TAKEN ME FROM FINISHING LAST IN EVERY
EVENT A YEAR AGO TO FINISHING NEAR THE MIDDLE OF THE PACK IN B AND C RATED TOURNAMENTS.
MOTTO: THE MORE YOU FENCE, THE BETTER YOU TEND TO FENCE!
See you!
Fredrick R. Kenniston III
frk...@earthlink.net
Fredrick R. Kenniston III
Chuck Allen wrote:
>
> LYGS wrote:
> >
> > In this discussion, I would have to say that the best weapon to start with
> > would be foil.
> >
> > There are plenty of reasons to begin with epee. One, it is easy to learn.
> > It's not hard to figure out who gets touched. It is less expensive than foil.
> > You can hit anywhere on the body. There is a rapid learning curve and a higher
> > sucess rate early. If you want to build self-esteem, then begin with epee.
> >
> > If you want to build a competitive fencer, begin with foil. Most of the
> > from an epee fencer was "We don't do lunges". In foil, you have to learn how
> > to parry, or else be called for insufficient parries. In epee, all you need to
> > do is touch the other fencer before they touch you, no defense required. On an
> > attack, a new foilist is less likely to be rewarded for a lucky touch - in
> > right of way is a tough rule to learn, it teaches good control and proper
> > distance. If you don't have both, you will lose.
> >
> > These are just some quick thoughts on the two. If anyone needs me to
> > elaborate, I will be happy to.
> >
> epee point control is everything! Those days (rare for me) when your
> point control is really on - you're just about unstoppable. When your
> point control is a little off - you're lunch!
> by playing right-of-way. In epee, an insufficent parry is called a
> touch!
>
I couldn't agree with you more. I can't tell you what going for the
body or legs in Epee does to you if your point control is not good
enough to hit hand or wrist as you are moving in on your opponent or as
you opponent moves in on you.
Let's just say that the more I fence Epee, the better my Foil becomes
AND I HAVE MORE EXPERIENCE FENCING FOIL!!
Later! FRK3
Morgan Burke
ave...@aol.com (Aveare) writes:
|> > One of my favorite qoutes
|> >from an epee fencer was "We don't do lunges".
|>
There are other kinds?
I happen to fall in the 2nd category (really bad, for the epeeists
who haven't yet learned to count that high). But I find that what
works best for me is to simulate being in the 1st and 3rd categories
by holding a French grip by the pommel, never lunging, never
parrying, and completely ignoring the phrase. Parries are for wimps
who are afraid of getting stabbed in the heart!
Okay, okay, I'll be serious for a sec. I have in fact seen some epee
fencers who were not-too-tall, pretty smart, and damn good. The dead
giveaway that you are watching a couple of these guys go at it is the
use of the counter-riposte, which is largely absent from the lower
ranks of epee. I once saw Arndt Schmidt make a 3rd counter-riposte
to the back, which brings me to my real point: when it looks like
foil, it's good fencing. It shouldn't be necessary to add: if you
want to look like you're fencing foil, then start by studying the
foil.
-- Morgan Burke
mor...@sitka.triumf.ca
Aveare
>Well, I dont fence epee, but it seems to me like it would take some pretty
>good point control to nail someone on the weapon hand or wrist. Maybe I
>should fence epee, my point control is so bad some days that it seems I hit
>my foil partners on the arm as often as the torso ;-).
>
I seem to have those days in epee too. ::sigh:: I don't think my point is
anything but fickle. And my coach derives great pleasure from hitting my mask
whenever I miss his arm. <wry grin>
Aveare
>
>
Kelly Ringwald
I think that you are better off starting with the weapon you will
eventually specialize in.
However, if the intent is to keep your options open, then foil would
be the best choice. The early training in foil can help by teaching
finger-play, compound attacks, footwork, and beat parries. These are
all skills that may be neglected by a beginning epeeist in favor of
counterattacks and a power bind game.
Although epeeist skills such as binds and counter-attacks in
opposition can supplement a foil game, I think that it is better for a
foilist to learn these advanced techniques by later foil lessons or
subsequent dabbling in epee.
The transition from foil to epee is also relatively painless compared
to the reverse, since it involves "unlearning" rather than learning
right-of-way ;-).
Regards,
Kelly
On Thu, 02 Apr 1998 18:11:13 GMT, clm8...@marauder.millersv.edu
(Christopher L. Medalis) wrote:
>Greeings all!
>I am doing some research, and wanted to get input on what the world
>thought about the common question:
>Which weapon is better to start the beginning fencer with, the foil,
>or the epee?
>
Bryan J. Maloney
Fredrick R. Kenniston III wrote:
> and then, six months later, took up Epee. I can definitely say that I learned things
> fencing Epee in tournaments that I did not learn fencing Foil. Like opposition parry in
> 6th. Once I learned this little gem from Epee Trournaments, my Foil improved. I MUST
Then you had an incompetent foil instructor. I learned opposition in
sixte in my foil lessons.
Robert Link
ave...@aol.com (Aveare) wrote:
>
>I seem to have those days in epee too. ::sigh:: I don't think my point is
>anything but fickle. And my coach derives great pleasure from hitting my mask
>whenever I miss his arm. <wry grin>
>
My experience has been that good point control is a necessary, but not
sufficient, condition for scoring touches on the wrist and lower arm.
A sufficiently skilled opponent concentrating on keeping covered
should be able to make his arm unhittable. In order to pick up the
touches in those situations you need the patience to wait for your
opponent to give you something and the timing to exploit it when he
does. On the days when you just can't seem to hit the arm, it may be
one of these things that is throwing you off, rather than your point
control per se.
--
-r
``We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.''
--Oscar Wilde
Mary Anne Walker
of course, defending the arm in epee is sometimes just a little more
tricky than just keeping a good guard where your opponent can't see your
arm.....my fav. trick (when my point control is on) is to hit the
underside of someones wrist, when they are in a perfect low
guard.....just 'cuz i can't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.....
--
Hasta,
Mary Anne Walker
****************************************************************
If you can't be good, be careful. If you can't be careful, give me a
call.
Ken Mondschein
Bryan J. Maloney (bj...@cornell.edu) wrote:
I wouldn't say incompetent. That stuff just isn't taught that much any
more in sport fencing.
Robert Link
persi...@erols.com wrote:
>of course, defending the arm in epee is sometimes just a little more
>tricky than just keeping a good guard where your opponent can't see your
>arm.....my fav. trick (when my point control is on) is to hit the
>underside of someones wrist, when they are in a perfect low
>guard.....just 'cuz i can't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.....
>
Absolutely, one can't expect to simply hide the arm behind the bell
and forget about it. Still, I think you would agree that most of the
better fencers you face will not just stand there and let you pick
them off with that, right? They will be moving around, parrying,
etc.
Liz & Dan Gorman
Ken Mondschein wrote:
> That stuff [opposition in sixte] just isn't taught that much any more in sport fencing.
Not necessarily true, I've seen it used and taught in lessons and I've never done anything but
sport fencing. I'm not a foilist, but I see them doing it fairly consistently when I pay
attention to them.
Dan
Joe Tantalo
In article <6gdrcd$rub$1...@news1.bu.edu>, k...@bu.edu (Ken Mondschein) wrote:
> I wouldn't say incompetent. That stuff just isn't taught that much any
>more in sport fencing.
What's an opposition in sixte? A counter (circle) sixth?
Joe
Feed your head: http://pilot.msu.edu/~tantaloj | "Killfiling idiots
MSU Fencing Club: http://pilot.msu.edu/~fencing | since 1994."
================================================|====================
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever." -Spinal Tap
Max G Roshensky
On Mon, 6 Apr 1998, Fredrick R. Kenniston III wrote:
>
> I am an American, started fencing a year and a half ago in Florida. I started with Foil
> and then, six months later, took up Epee. I can definitely say that I learned things
> fencing Epee in tournaments that I did not learn fencing Foil. Like opposition parry in
> 6th. Once I learned this little gem from Epee Trournaments, my Foil improved. I MUST
> CONFESS THOUGH, EVEN THOUGH I HAVE SIX MONTHS LESS EXPERIENCE IN EPEE AND HAVE FENCED
> ALL THREE WEAPONS SINCE MAY 1997, MY STRONGEST WEAPON BY FAR IS EPEE. I agree with you
I started fencing on and off recreationally four years ago. I started in
foil and I have fenced epee on a hand full of occasions. The coach I
started with was a foilist, my current coach is an epeeist. Needless to
say we have some pretty interesting disscusions on which blade is better
to pursue. The way he sees it if the person is agressive and tall or
athletic then make them an epeeist. It's simple, and take thier natural
inclinations into account. I'm inclined to agree with him. When I first
started learning right of way, I enjoyed it, but I can see how for
somepeople it's confusing. If you're heisitating out there your dead, and
it's no fun.
So basically what I'm saying is it depends on the person. If you like the
idea of right of way or your not very aggresive go with foil. If you're
aggressive or you just don't understand or like right of way go with epee.
But to each his own....
The way I see it I face a harder question I've deicided to make fencing a
larger part of my life and head down the road of being a competitive
fencer...I'm tall and aggresive, but I don't think I have the quickness to
be very good at epee. While I enjoy the game of right of way, I keep
wanting to fleche the director (wether it's dry or electric it's the, is
it a beat attack, parry riposte, or mere incidental blade contact). Plus I
think I might be competitive quicker at epee than foil. Plus I'm not sure
the idea of just doing both really appeals to me....
Any advice would be appreciated.
--Max Roshensky
Cal Fencing Club
Ken Mondschein
: > That stuff [opposition in sixte] just isn't taught that much any more in sport fencing.
: Not necessarily true, I've seen it used and taught in lessons and I've never done anything but
: sport fencing. I'm not a foilist, but I see them doing it fairly consistently when I pay
: attention to them.
: Dan
Andy Goldman, from here, teaches it in epee, but I haven't really seen
any foilists using it.
Fredrick R. Kenniston III
Bryan J. Maloney wrote:
>
> Fredrick R. Kenniston III wrote:
>
> > and then, six months later, took up Epee. I can definitely say that I learned things
> > fencing Epee in tournaments that I did not learn fencing Foil. Like opposition parry in
> > 6th. Once I learned this little gem from Epee Trournaments, my Foil improved. I MUST
>
> sixte in my foil lessons.
Truth of the matter is that A) I've been fencing for a year and a half,
B) I have been fencing all three weapons for a year now and C) The
majority of my lessons, from my choice, have been in Epee and Sabre.
With this in mind, I have had some good foil lessons, but opposition
parry in sixte was something I picked up in my first Epee event (third
tournament). I have since had Foil lessons where I have been given
drills to work with this parry. Since I have been setting my training
to the weapons I want most work on, I may not have gotten to a point in
my foil lessons to get opposition parry in sixte. As a result, I feel
that it is quite presumtive of you to call my instructor "incompetent"
when you were lacking a more full picture. No offense taken, however.
FRK3
Andrew Harcourt
Christopher L. Medalis wrote in message
<3523d3a4...@jake.esu.edu>...
>I am doing some research, and wanted to get input on what
the world
>thought about the common question:
>Which weapon is better to start the beginning fencer with,
the foil,
>or the epee?
When one watches an international-calibre epee event, it
looks remarkably like foil. When, however, you watch a
lower-level epee event, you tend to see more of people
standing back, almost in a lunging position with their feet
anyway, and sniping at each other's wrists and toes.
Foil teaches mobility, distance and right of way. Anyone who
says that right of way doesn't exist in epee should have a
serious think about it. If your opponent, in whatever
weapon, is going to hit you, you are very dumb not to do
something about it. If that means that you hit him and then
run away, congratulations. You are very fast and/or very
lucky. If you don't fall into one of those two categories
for 51% of the time, you should consider parrying. Hence
right of way.
Another thing that epee teaches too early is the
inappropriate use of the remise or redoublement. How many
beginner fencers have you seen chasing their opponent down
the piste and jabbing at them? Or, after having their attack
parried, simply jabbing the point home again? Forgetting for
the moment that anyone who has parried them is immediately
going to hit them anyway if they have half a brain and two
working fingers.
Foil teaches the effective use of renewals of attack and
attacks out of time. It also teaches far more effective
defence than "just hit the other bugger first, then his hit
doesn't count".
I'm trying to avoid the "my foil benefits from my epee"
style arguments here. We're assuming that we have a
qualified Maitre d'Armes to teach whichever weapon as best
it can be taught. Incidentally, most maitres d'armes will
advocate foil for the very reasons I've given above.
In my opinion, foil is the only weapon beginners should be
taught.
Regards,
Andrew
Bryan J. Maloney
Joe Tantalo wrote:
> What's an opposition in sixte? A counter (circle) sixth?
First, the thing discussed here is a parry in sixte, followed by a
riposte maintaining opposition in sixte (what has been incorrectly
called an "opposition parry"--it is the riposte that is in opposition,
not the parry). Maintaining opposition means that you maintain contact
with your opponent's blade as you riposte, sliding your attack along his
blade so as to displace him from you while you hit home.
It is possible to do an attack in opposition as well, wherein you make
contact with the opponent's blade and then slide in along it, exerting
pressure so as to keep his point off you while you attack.
The textbook French School response to opposition is, of course, to
disengage. The textbook Italian school response is to lift your
opponent bodily with your pinkie finger and hurl him back 300 miles ;-b.
Robert Link
"Andrew Harcourt" <s34...@student.uq.edu.au> wrote:
>
>
>When one watches an international-calibre epee event, it
>looks remarkably like foil. When, however, you watch a
>lower-level epee event, you tend to see more of people
>standing back, almost in a lunging position with their feet
>anyway, and sniping at each other's wrists and toes.
>
I suppose it depends on how you define ``lower-level''. Rank
beginners may fence this way, but even D and E class epeeists (still
``lower-level'' in my book) generally have moved beyond this
questionable tactic.
>Foil teaches mobility, distance and right of way. Anyone who
>says that right of way doesn't exist in epee should have a
>serious think about it. If your opponent, in whatever
>weapon, is going to hit you, you are very dumb not to do
>something about it. If that means that you hit him and then
>run away, congratulations. You are very fast and/or very
>lucky. If you don't fall into one of those two categories
>for 51% of the time, you should consider parrying. Hence
>right of way.
>
No, not in fact. Right of way, per se, means that the properly
executed attack (as defined by the rules) has priority, even if the
counterattack is an easy pick-off. By contrast, in epee an attack is
by definition threatening if and only if it can hit you before you can
counterattack; it is possible to make a non-threatening attack,
e.g. with a slow attack, a wide, curvy trajectory, or a heavily
exposed arm. A large part of the skill in epee is recognizing the
difference between non-threatening attacks and threatening ones and
making the appropriate response, viz. counterattack and riposte,
respectively. The successful epeeist will be skilled at both
techniques. Speed and/or luck, while both nice to have, take a
backseat to skill and judgement.
>Another thing that epee teaches too early is the
>inappropriate use of the remise or redoublement. How many
>beginner fencers have you seen chasing their opponent down
>the piste and jabbing at them? Or, after having their attack
>parried, simply jabbing the point home again? Forgetting for
>the moment that anyone who has parried them is immediately
>going to hit them anyway if they have half a brain and two
>working fingers.
>
The proof of the pudding, as they say, is in the tasting. If what you
claim is true, then the proto-epeeists should quickly learn the error
of their ways as they get picked off by ripostes. However, in the
case of slow ripostes and ripostes from awkward or unnecessarily large
parries, remise or redoublement is the correct response.
>Foil teaches the effective use of renewals of attack and
>attacks out of time. It also teaches far more effective
>defence than "just hit the other bugger first, then his hit
>doesn't count".
>
[Summary: epee has its own set of tactics and strategies, distinct
from foil, and is therefore inferior.]
Sure, whatever. I would recommend you stick with foil, then. Or, if
you do decide to fence epee with this attitude, please, please, please
be in my pool.
Disclaimer: I like foil; really I do. My comments should be
interpreted in the context of ``Not that I loved foil less, but that I
loved epee more.''
Mark Orton
In article <352B91...@cornell.edu>, bj...@cornell.edu wrote: > The
textbook French School response to opposition is, of course, to > disengage.
riposte (with or without opposition), you'd better defend yourself first. A
ceding parry would be more appropriate. > The textbook Italian school
response is to lift your > opponent bodily with your pinkie finger and hurl
the rear limit of the piste with both feet. :-) -- Mark C. Orton
Aveare
What is opposition in sixte? Is that the circle six parry, a closeout, or a
counterattack?
Aveare
Fredrick R. Kenniston III
It is possible my terminology is incorrect so I will elaborate and,
please, if there is more correct terminology, I'd welcome it.
If I attacks me in fourth, instead of parrying in fourth, I pick up the
opponents blade by going underneath and depending on how quick the
attack is, retreat slightly, followed by an attack completing the circle
and riposte in his sixth or fourth position. I normally can catch this
very quickly and, even if the opponent disengages, my blade position is
in great position to pick up the parry seventh or prime for a riposte.
There are lots of second and third intention patterns that can be
planned and executed off this. The main thing is to pick up the
opponents blade where his point is in the mid to high fourth as you will
tend to pull the opponents point across a large field of large target
area if you don't pick it up right. Timing is very key also. If you
can catch it as the opponent's front foot is still in the air, your
riposte will almost always hit him before he has time to parry.
I would like to point out, that I am a fairly new fencer (1.5 years) and
my fencing vocabulary might be somewhat lacking. Also, I acknowledge I
still have a lot to learn about fencing (in all weapons).
Later! FRK3
Alfred Ng
just one rather nitpicky point i'm afraid, an ineffectual parry is defined
by what it;s supposed to accomplish; therefore in foil fencing any parry
that sufficiently deflects the line of attack such that the wight of way is
taken would constitute an effective parry
HMS Lion wrote in message
> Third, the lack of right-of-way compels good technique. Foilists are
>particularly fond of making ineffective parries, but the noise they made is
>sufficient to constitute a parry in the minds of many directors. An
epeeist
>MUST make sound parries, and attack with minimal exposure, or he will be
hit.
>Likewise, the business of parrying into one's own arm (which I've seen
foilists
>taught to do) is eliminated.
Kelly Ringwald
Could be all three :). A thrust in opposition is one that maintains
contact with your opponent's blade, deflecting it out of line.
Probably what you are calling a closeout.
K
Kelly Ringwald
>Foil teaches mobility, distance and right of way. Anyone who
>says that right of way doesn't exist in epee should have a
>serious think about it. If your opponent, in whatever
>weapon, is going to hit you, you are very dumb not to do
>something about it. If that means that you hit him and then
>run away, congratulations. You are very fast and/or very
>lucky. If you don't fall into one of those two categories
>for 51% of the time, you should consider parrying. Hence
>right of way.
Epee is sort of anti-right-of-way. By this I mean that when fencing
epee, the goal is generally to have the counter-attack rather than the
attack.
The stop hit and the counter-attack in opposition play a far more
significant role in epee defense than in foil, since it is unnecessary
to acquire priority with a parry-riposte. I consider epee a
defensive weapon, since the use of these two techniques makes epee
defense much more effective than in foil. Right-of-way shifts the
the advantage to the offense.
Regards,
Kelly
HAGENZONE
In article <352B11...@earthlink.net>, "Fredrick R. Kenniston III"
<frk...@earthlink.net> writes:
>As a result, I feel
>that it is quite presumtive of you to call my instructor "incompetent"
>when you were lacking a more full picture. No offense taken, however.
>
>FRK3
>
FRED, meet Bryan!
BRIAN, meet Fred!
There! Introductions have been made!
OOPS, Sorry, I guess that wasn't necessary!
;-)
=
CLH
Remember, it's only my opinion!
If you disagree, feel free to Byte Me!
Bryan J. Maloney
Fredrick R. Kenniston III wrote:
>
> >
> > What is opposition in sixte? Is that the circle six parry, a closeout, or a
> > counterattack?
> >
> > Aveare
>
> please, if there is more correct terminology, I'd welcome it.
>
> If I attacks me in fourth, instead of parrying in fourth, I pick up the
> opponents blade by going underneath and depending on how quick the
> attack is, retreat slightly, followed by an attack completing the circle
> and riposte in his sixth or fourth position. I normally can catch this
But that is not a parry-sixte with riposte in opposition, it has nothing
at all to do with opposition in Sixte, that's a contre-sixte followed by
what appears to be a straight riposte.
> planned and executed off this. The main thing is to pick up the
> opponents blade where his point is in the mid to high fourth as you will
> tend to pull the opponents point across a large field of large target
> area if you don't pick it up right. Timing is very key also. If you
Now you are talking about a prise-de-fer, which is not opposition,
either.
> can catch it as the opponent's front foot is still in the air, your
> riposte will almost always hit him before he has time to parry.
If your opponent's foot has already hit the ground, his lunge has been
completed, if he hasn't managed to hit you once that has happened, then
he is point-in-line, attempting to remise. Pokie pokie pokie--a bad
habit I wish I could break myself of.
Freddrick Kenniston
>
> But that is not a parry-sixte with riposte in opposition, it has nothing
> at all to do with opposition in Sixte, that's a contre-sixte followed by
> what appears to be a straight riposte.
Then what is "opposition"???? I understand "contre-sixte", however, my coach
and other top fencers in my division call this "opposition parry in sixte". A
definition of "opposition" would clear the matter up. In looking at "prise-de-fer", the
more correct description would be "contre-sixte (parry) followed by prise-de-fer
(riposte)".
> If your opponent's foot has already hit the ground, his lunge has been
> completed, if he hasn't managed to hit you once that has happened, then
> he is point-in-line, attempting to remise. Pokie pokie pokie--a bad
> habit I wish I could break myself of.
When this occurs I attempt to pick up his blade with a solid beat (from top,
bottom, left or right) and either directly go for riposte in the line opposite the beat,
or, if his parries are good and quick, feint the riposte in the line opposite the beat,
followed by a disengage to opposite line (high to low, left to right, etc.)
If your action is quick enough, you can perform this as a coupe, making your riposte
more difficult to parry.
Thanks, Bryan.
Fredrick R. Kenniston III
(Fredrick the Great)
Freddrick Kenniston
Thanks! Bryan and I were not formerly introduced. Thanks for the
courtesy. :-)
Fredrick the Great
Freddrick Kenniston
Freddrick Kenniston
Freddrick Kenniston
Freddrick Kenniston
Bob1epee
>> But that is not a parry-sixte with riposte in opposition, it has >>nothing
at all to do with opposition in Sixte, that's a contre-sixte >>followed by what
appears to be a straight riposte.
>
>Then what is "opposition"???? I understand "contre-sixte", >however, my coach
and other top fencers in my division call this >"opposition parry in sixte".
>A definition of "opposition" would clear the matter up. In looking >at
"prise-de-fer", the more correct description would be >"contre-sixte (parry)
followed by prise-de-fer (riposte)".
>
Acording to the coaches college manual --
Opposition : A way to deliver a touch with constant blade contact, blocking
the opponent's action until the hit.
From the book "Foil" by Charles Selberg -
Opposition - control of the opponent's blade by means of pressure during either
the attack or riposte.
There is no need for a parry.
Opposition offensive actions can be done as attacks, counter attacks or riposte
with your hand in any of the eight hand positions needed in order to obtain and
maintain blade contact.
Bob
Fredrick R. Kenniston III
All Hail Bob! I appreciate the information very much. Go my son,
spread this knowledge to all that might have it. And my your foils
never need re-wiring. :-)
Fredrick the Great
Stephan Khinoy
The coaches college definition is a very useful one because it is efficient --
"opposition" refers simply to the relationship of the blades *while the fencer is
attempting to touch.*
Many writers and coaches -- including me -- speak of "opposition parries" in which
contact is maintained as opposed to "beat-type" parries.in which contact is
momentary. Since parries don't have to "close the line" of the opponent's attack,
but only *deflect* the threatening point, there's something to be said for this
terminology, too.
You could have (most often) a beat parry with detached riposte or an opposition
parry with opposition riposte. or, less often, a beat parry followed by an
opposition riposte (practical sometimes in epee -- really an opposition
counter-attack against a remise), or an opposition parry followed by a detached
riposte (slower, but necessary with some foil referees!)
Steve Khinoy
Stephan Khinoy
I have been following this discussion with interest and offer a few thoughts:
)It's entirely possible to get good results in any weapon having started in that
weapon and fenced no other. But --
) Foil training probably allows the easiest transition to either of the other
weapons, instilling fewer habits that are actually harmful to the other weapons.
Still --
) The weapon most people will do best in is the one they are most interested in and
pick out for themselves. And --
) For maximum competititve *results* -- the kind of results that most of us only
dream about -- it is necessary to specialize in one weapon. On the other hand --
) For maximum *enjoyment* of the sport under a variety of circumstance -- like the
ability to fence whatever weapon people are fencing in the club that evening --
diversity is required. (And it's perfectly possible to be outstanding in more than
one weapon -- usually foil and epee [could someone remind me of people who combined
sabre with another weapon in recent times?] -- look at Michael Marx and Vinnie
Bradford, or (when I was starting out) Ed Richards or Larry Anastasi).
In conclusion, if you don't know what weapon you ultimately want to fence, start
with foil; if you do, start with the weapon you want to fence.
Then again, you could listen to your coach's advice.
Steve Khinoy
David Leow Shin Hwah
> Regards,
> Kelly
Well I wouldn't say that it is anti-right of way, it's just that concept does not exists in epee. I also
wouldn't class eppe as a defensive weapon either. I fence epee as an attacker. Sure defense is important, but
like my coach always says "you want the hit you gotta go out there and get
it, it is the law of averages. The more you try the more likely you are to
succed." After fencing epee for seven years my attacks always have a
backup plan. i.e. I'm quite prepared for what my opponent has up his
sleeve. This works because I try to study my opponent b/4 I fight
him.(sometimes this is not possible, then I have to size him up on the
piste) . Thus a defensive fencer is at quite a disadvantage facing an
offensive and prepared fencer. Besides it gets really boring fencing just a defensive fencer.
David Leow
St Joseph's Fencing Academy (Singapore)
University of Western Australia Fencing Club (Australia)
Ryan Polasek
LYGS wrote:
> In this discussion, I would have to say that the best weapon to start with
> would be foil.
>
> There are plenty of reasons to begin with epee. One, it is easy to learn.
> It's not hard to figure out who gets touched. It is less expensive than foil.
> You can hit anywhere on the body. There is a rapid learning curve and a higher
> sucess rate early. If you want to build self-esteem, then begin with epee.
>
> If you want to build a competitive fencer, begin with foil. Most of the
> foilists I know have better footwork than epeeists. One of my favorite qoutes
> from an epee fencer was "We don't do lunges". In foil, you have to learn how
> to parry, or else be called for insufficient parries. In epee, all you need to
> do is touch the other fencer before they touch you, no defense required. On an
> attack, a new foilist is less likely to be rewarded for a lucky touch - in
> epee, a beginner can have hideous point control and still win. Even though
> right of way is a tough rule to learn, it teaches good control and proper
> distance. If you don't have both, you will lose.
>
> These are just some quick thoughts on the two. If anyone needs me to
> elaborate, I will be happy to.
>
> Later,
> Steve
NOTE FOILIST: this is a long responce, most is intended merely to counter those
that
bash epee as being bad for beginers and promoting bad style. Read on after this
part
and I actualy do get to a point. I am NOT in any way making any judgment about
foil as a weapon, beginner or not. .......
Whoooooooe, just a sec. It seems to me that this second paragraph is not
comparing weapons, but coaching styles. I started in Epee and I can assure you,
if I do not lunge, I WILL LOSE THE BOUT. Reach is a major advantage in
Epee (tend to get alot of tall epeeist as a result). If your opponent is taller
than you then you most definetely cannot just stand there an make counter
attacks. You must take the initiative and LUNGE. Also, distance becomes more
of an issue because of the ability to score on the arms. In Epee you will learn to
keep distances and adjust those distances depending on who you are fencing.
As for point control. I have noticed that all but the good foilist tend to have
fairly
rotten point control. In foil, right of way allows wild attacks that just have to
hit
on the torso. In epee, if you want to start winning bouts, you must be able to
hit
ANY target, ON COMMAND. No simple "just pop the arm". News flash,
the arm is difficult to hit unless you a) have killer point control b) know how to
make a correct and effective parry. Without these two skills, an epeeist is
basicaly
fencing foil without right of way. This encourages better point control and better
parying style and arm position. As for the argument about epeeist going for the
head and
legs: Like I said , these are secondary-last ditch targets. If you make them your
mainstay
then you will lose. Anybody fast enough to take advantage of these targets is fast
enough to clean house with traditional targets.
Theoreticaly, if an epeeist is fencing correctly, they should be able to win a foil
bout
without having to worry about right of way. ( if you cant touch them , you cannot
get a
point, with or without right of way, and epeeist train to parry attacks so that
they don't get
hit 'anywhere'.)
On to the footwork issue. In my club, all three weapons groups often do footwork
drills together.
We get the same training excepting when our weapons captains lead individual
drills.
As for footwork, epeeist need it more than any other weapon. If you do not have
the proper
distance, you will not be able to make an effective parry or a safe attack. In
foil, even if you do
not have proper distance, it is possible to make a wild parry that makes your
opponent either
hit off target, or lose right of way. This tends to make many foilist forget about
the neccesity
of footwork to get in for attacks but get back out when you need to. As an
epeeist, I have
to MOVE to avoid being hit. I have got to get my whole body out of danger behind
my blade
or someone might just get one of those rare leg or toe touches while I am
retreating.
Now, I finaly get back to the point. Most of the advantages of epee that I have
just listed
merely point out that the successful epeeist learns just as much a the successful
foilist.
The principles that are enforced out of neccesity in epee are many of the same
principles
that are inforced by the rulebook in foil. Not surprising considering that the
foil started
out as a training weapon for epee. As a result, the foilists who do not learn the
principles
that are required in epee are the ones who get cought up in taking advantage of the
rules
to get them through and forget that against a good fencer the technical aspects
such as
hand position an speed matter more, since the good fencer knows the rules better
than
they do and has learned to counter the 'tricks' that they have relied on. The good
foilist
can fence epee any day and do quite a good job of it.
Conversly, the epeeist can theoreticaly forget about right of way and win a foil
bout anyway just
because the techniques they use can be applied and are still very effective ( just
have to remember to
restrict attackes to the body).
As I said, the real difference is coaching style. If your foil coach is coaching
you for technical aspects
and you learn good technique, then you are well on your way to becoming a
profficient
fencier, in 'any' weapon. Same goes for Epeeist. If however, your coach wants
you win
more bouts on the local amature circuit against other beginners, then you will be
trained to
take advantage of natral abilities such as speed and instinct. In epee, this often
involves
very long bouts (often to time) in which you don't move alot and are being slow on
the
footwork. This works great until you go up against an agressive opponent and they
wipe the floor with you. In foil, this coaching style will make for a beginner who
starts off wining
bouts but has horrible point control and bad foot possition. Wild parries and many
off target
attacks are the result. Works well, until you go up against someone with 3-4 years
of experience.
Then you are toast.
I do agree with most of the posts however that, unless you are serious, an epeeist
will have an easier
time at first but lose interest as it gets tougher. In foil, the road is a tough
one but the
destination is a really good fencer. This of course assumes that the fencer is
not
dedicated to do well. In the case where the fencer understands what they are
suppose to
learn and why, then they will be able to exceed in whatever weapon they start with,
and
will be able to make a reletively easy conversion if the need arises.
I know several good foilist who can beat me any day in foil and can usualy hold
their own
in epee. We have been fencing for the same amount of time, but they are really
good
at footwork and are fast. Conversly, once I get used to right of way I can
actualy make
some headway in foil. It is a function of basic skills and of personal skill, not
of your weapon.
So, Foil good. IF you have proper coaching, otherwise it is the worst thing for
you.
Epee good. IF you care about getting good and are not just in it in order to say
that you are a "sword fighter".
Sabre,,,.... Hmmm. I don't have a clue, can't say that it is even remotely close
enought
to the other two weapons to have a comparison. Of course I have never picked
up a sabre before so I really would not know.
Just a few (thousand:) thoughts about how futile it is to compare weapons.
It is just like the martial arts dispute. It matters more how you are coached
and how much YOU care than it does on the weapon you are using.
Now, everybody go out there an kick some butt!!!
-- Shaggy
Epeeist, UM fencing club.
PS:
Sorry for the manifesto lenght post:)
Ryan Polasek
LYGS wrote:
> >I find it much
> >easier to fence foil after begining with epee, because you have solid parry,
> >disengaging, and counter-attack skills. The speed, i admit, may have to be
> >worked on. Whereas, if you switch from foil to epee, the usual response is "I
> >can't hit there, its off-target." There is not the amount of point control
> >needed for epee. But thats just my opinion. Feel free to contradict.
>
> When switching from foil to epee, I find that the only hard thing about more
> target area is working that new target into my strategy. I would think that
> going from epee to foil would be harder - mostly because of right of way. My
> comment about 'no defense required' just meant that you don't need to parry to
> win in epee. Counterattacks and timing can be all you need. In foil, if the
> opponent begins an attack, you better do something with their blade (to include
> displacement) or else expect to be scored on. I've seen people win in foil by
> just avoiding their attacker's point, but they don't usually get that far.
>
Parrying is just as important in epee. If if you have not bound your
opponentsblade with a parry then the only way to get a touch without getting one
on yourself also is if your opponent has really bad point contol or like to leave
big openings. Basicaly, without parrying and defence, there is no offense.
Essentialy you need to create openings before you can take advantage of
them. The same techniques used to create openings in epee are used to
gain right of way in foil, the only difference (as far as I can tell) is when the
attack comes.
> Anyway, I'm hardly mister know-it-all. Just my opinions.
>
> Later,
> Steve
Repectfuly,
A beginner (epeeist) who is hardly an expert just trying to share some
observations
James Dawson
Hello All,
I have seen quite a few post discussing the various benefits of foil vs. epee, epee
vs. foil for beginners. Could any you explain why Saber is not considered. I began
with saber and other than little or no point control <G> for foil; and beats, well, a
bit too forceful, made an easy transition to foil. I have never fenced epee, and
personally find the weapon a bit unwieldy, but I would like to hear your thoughts on
the matter.
James Dawson
Ryan Polasek
Max G Roshensky wrote:
.
.
.
> So basically what I'm saying is it depends on the person. If you like the
> idea of right of way or your not very aggresive go with foil. If you're
> aggressive or you just don't understand or like right of way go with epee.
> But to each his own....
.
.
.
>
>
> --Max Roshensky
> Cal Fencing Club
I could not agree more. There are people in our club that have gone from foil to epee
and just could not get anything to work, only to find that they had a natural affinity for
sabre! It depends alot on personality and natural skill.
I would recomend to the original poster to try each weapon for about 2 months and
see which one you enjoy more. (or which one you are better at, usualy the same thing).
-- Shaggy
Ryan Polasek
Mark Orton wrote:
> In article <352B91...@cornell.edu>,
> bj...@cornell.edu wrote:
> > The
> textbook French School response to opposition is, of course, to
> > disengage.
>
> Ooh, bad textbook. If your opponent is attacking you or making an immediate
> riposte (with or without opposition), you'd better defend yourself first. A
> ceding parry would be more appropriate.
>
Depends on the weapon. In foil your approach would be better because ofright of
way. In Epee you will not be able to parry fast enought to avoid a
touch. If you disengage you have a chance to either get out of range or to
redirect you point to a target on your opponents body or leg. Since they are
most likely
about to start an attack, they might run right into your point ( as your point
is now extended
streight towards them but their blade is at an angle in order to bind your
blade, you will hit
first. Not to mention that if they were not ready for the disengage their point
may have swung
off target for an instant when you removed pressure: Instant opening and your
touch.)
> > The textbook Italian school
> response is to lift your
> > opponent bodily with your pinkie finger and hurl
> him back 300 miles ;-b.
>
> Thus getting the touch due to your opponent crossing
> the rear limit of the piste with both feet. :-)
> --
> Mark C. Orton
> Secretary/Treasurer
> USFA Virginia Division
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
-- Shaggy
Mary Anne Walker
because it's easier to build a solid foundation of point control and
apply that to sabre than it is to unlearn sabre cuts when applied to
foil and epee. that's why sabre doesn't get recommended as much for a
starter weapon. additionally, now that sabre competitions are fenced
almost solely electric, it is the most expensive weapon.....
--
Hasta,
Mary Anne Walker
****************************************************************
"Today the Presidency. Tomorrow, we tango." --The Naked Dancing Llama
Liz & Dan Gorman
Mary Anne Walker wrote:
> it [sabre] is the most expensive weapon.....
I've seen this posted here several times by several people now and I take
issue with it. While it would be foolish of me to attempt to argue the
initial investment, once you have the gear you need, sabre is easily the
cheapest to maintain. Sabre blades are cheaper than foil or epee, there is
no wire to buy, there is no barrel with internal workings to fix on a
weekly basis, and, with basic care, the lame, mask, and body cords aren't
going to vary much from weapon to weapon (yes, I know epeeists don't wear
lames). Basically, it may cost the most to start, but it's the cheapest to
keep up.
Dan
Mary Anne Walker
I would agree with you that once the initial investment has been made,
the cost curve goes down some, but we were discussing for
beginners.....the $300 i laid down for my starter set, plus an extra
sabre a couple of months ago was pretty stiff, and i'm a dedicated
fencer.....and that wasn't including the investment i've made over the
years in knickers, jackets, shoes, socks, etc., that was just for
electric gear....that's a pretty hefty investment for someone who's not
sure they're gonna be in the game for a while......
Joe Tantalo
>Mary Anne Walker wrote:
>
>
>> it [sabre] is the most expensive weapon.....
<snip>
>Basically, it may cost the most to start, but it's the cheapest to
>keep up.
Point taken! And there's less to go wrong with equipment. I don't fence
sabre, can someone mention how often a weapon goes bad?
Joe
Feed your head: http://pilot.msu.edu/~tantaloj | "Killfiling idiots
MSU Fencing Club: http://pilot.msu.edu/~fencing | since 1994."
================================================|====================
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever." -Spinal Tap
Matt Kennel
On Wed, 22 Apr 1998 10:31:25 -0400, Ryan Polasek <ry...@usa.net> wrote:
: Reach is a major advantage in
:Epee (tend to get alot of tall epeeist as a result).
I think this is the most compelling reason to not start out (truly) beginning
fencers on epee.
The shorter ones, and most women, will get too frustrated as they fall
to long-armed and long-legged epeeists over and over. We don't need *any*
needless turnoffs.
The issues of point control vs right of way vs distance vs footwork are
quite secondary and instructor dependent.
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD -
* "People who send spam to Emperor Cartagia... vanish! _They say_ that
* there's a room where he has their heads, lined up in a row on a desk...
* _They say_ that late at night, he goes there, and talks to them... _they
*- say_ he asks them, 'Now tell me again, how _do_ you make money fast?'"
BlakIC
As far as I know, if the insulation on your guard is in good shape, your sabre
is ok. There are no wires connecting to anything (speaking strictly current
capteur-less FIE rules), so unless the blade breaks or your insulation is
faulty, you're set.
Liz & Dan Gorman
Mary Anne Walker wrote:
> I would agree with you that once the initial investment has been made,
> the cost curve goes down some, but we were discussing for
> beginners.....the $300 i laid down for my starter set, plus an extra
> sabre a couple of months ago was pretty stiff, and i'm a dedicated
> fencer.....and that wasn't including the investment i've made over the
> years in knickers, jackets, shoes, socks, etc., that was just for
> electric gear....that's a pretty hefty investment for someone who's not
> sure they're gonna be in the game for a while......
You paid $300 dollars as compared to what for a foil set? Looking at the
prices the difference shouldn't be more than $140* unless you don't get an
FIE mask with the foil (bad move IMHO), plus if you pay more for an
electric sabre than a foil, you're getting robbed. Just buy a dry one,
stick a socket in it, and paint the inside of the guard. The rest of the
investment you made isn't dependent on the weapon you fence -- you'll
always need "knickers, jackets, shoes, socks, etc."
* Now don't get to thinking that I think $140 is chump change, or anything,
but I've fenced in the Midwest and Southwest Sections and in both places
people have been more than willing to share equipment with other fencers.
You don't have to buy all the stuff out of the gate. I was fencing 5 years
before I bought my own lame, so it works to ease into the whole money thing
too.
Just my opinion.
Dan
Seven Fluffy Pink Bunny Rabbits
Joe Tantalo wrote:
>
> In article <353E8B3A...@unix.tamu.edu>, ebg...@unix.tamu.edu wrote:
>
> sabre, can someone mention how often a weapon goes bad?
In Sabre a weapon goes bad....
*****************
NEVER!
*****************
Matthew Cox
> >
> >
> >> it [sabre] is the most expensive weapon.....
>
> <snip>
>
> >Basically, it may cost the most to start, but it's the cheapest to
> >keep up.
>
> Point taken! And there's less to go wrong with equipment. I don't fence
>
>
> Feed your head: http://pilot.msu.edu/~tantaloj | "Killfiling idiots
> MSU Fencing Club: http://pilot.msu.edu/~fencing | since 1994."
> ================================================|====================
> "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever." -Spinal Tap
A sabre blade breaks, and you smack in a new blade. That is all that can
go wrong with an electric, capteurless sabre. As long as there is a
socket for the bodycord, and an unbroken blade, your sabre will work.
Matthew Cox
Mark Orton
In article <tantaloj-ya0240800...@news.msu.edu>,
tant...@pilot.msu.edu (Joe Tantalo) wrote:
> Point taken! And there's less to go wrong with equipment. I don't fence
> sabre, can someone mention how often a weapon goes bad?
Back in the days when capteurs were used for electric sabre, they'd go bad all
the time. The rivets holding the capteur socket onto the guard would loosen
up, and many sabres relied on those rivets for a good electrical connection.
(One fix for this was to add a second wire from the capteur socket to the
bodycord socket, but not everyone did this, as it was not required by the
rules.)
Now that capteurs are a thing of the past, the only things that are likely to
happen to sabres are broken blades, and in some climates, rust on the blade.
-Mark-
Robert Link
mbkennel <replace this with '@'> yahoo.com wrote:
>On Wed, 22 Apr 1998 10:31:25 -0400, Ryan Polasek <ry...@usa.net> wrote:
>:Epee (tend to get alot of tall epeeist as a result).
>
>fencers on epee.
>
I am not convinced that reach is any more of an advantage in epee than
it is in the other weapons. I am reasonably tall (189cm), and I
find that I really have to watch the underside of my forearm against
my shorter opponents.
>The shorter ones, and most women, will get too frustrated as they fall
>to long-armed and long-legged epeeists over and over. We don't need *any*
>needless turnoffs.
>
Long legs and arms mean lots of leg and arm target area. This is not
to say that being tall isn't an advantage, but it is not
insurmountable.
--
-r
``We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.''
--Oscar Wilde
dmtu...@compuserve.com
Cheapest to maintain? Yeah, the weapons are simple and easy to repair,
though blades break. But I'm on my third sabre mask and second lame in two
and a half years of fencing. The electric mask loses conductivity once it's
been beaten threadbare (and yes, I did reattach the fabric several times and
patch it and darn it and paint it with silver paint) and I'm just death on
lames. I've tried rinsing them and hanging them after every practice,
patching them, etc. Now I just keep my old mask and lame for club practice
and take my good ones to NACs, but they still get beat all to heck and gone.
--Delia
In article <353E8B3A...@unix.tamu.edu>,
ebg...@unix.tamu.edu wrote:
>
> Mary Anne Walker wrote:
>
> > it [sabre] is the most expensive weapon.....
>
> I've seen this posted here several times by several people now and I take
> issue with it. While it would be foolish of me to attempt to argue the
> initial investment, once you have the gear you need, sabre is easily the
> cheapest to maintain. Sabre blades are cheaper than foil or epee, there is
> no wire to buy, there is no barrel with internal workings to fix on a
> weekly basis, and, with basic care, the lame, mask, and body cords aren't
> going to vary much from weapon to weapon (yes, I know epeeists don't wear
> lames). Basically, it may cost the most to start, but it's the cheapest to
> keep up.
>
> Dan
Micah T.J, Jackson
Robert Link wrote:
> Long legs and arms mean lots of leg and arm target area. This is not
> to say that being tall isn't an advantage, but it is not
> insurmountable.
I find this to be absolutely true. As my coach once explained it to me when I
began to use my height as an excuse for poor performance (instead of the real
reason - not enough practice) "It's the same distace from the end of your target
area (your wrist) to his, as the reverse. One Epee length!" It's true that it's
easier for someone with more reach to find the body, but... it's bad strategy to
count on that.
Nevertheless, I can't advise epee for beginners. I wanted to do it that way
myself, but my traditional coach wouldn't hear of it. One year foil minimum, he
said. As it happens, he only made me wait 8 months, and I don't regret it for a
second. Foil is the base weapon, nearly all fencers can do it (even if they don't
train or compete regularly with the foil) and so much of epee grows out of the
discipline. Don't get greedy. It's worked this way for hundreds of years. Do
your foil first. <--Micah.
Morgan Burke
In article <353E8B3A...@unix.tamu.edu> ebg...@unix.tamu.edu writes:
>Mary Anne Walker wrote:
>> it [sabre] is the most expensive weapon.....
>
>I've seen this posted here several times by several people now and I take
>issue with it. While it would be foolish of me to attempt to argue the
>initial investment, once you have the gear you need, sabre is easily the
>Basically, it may cost the most to start, but it's the cheapest to
>keep up.
Because of the cuts, sabre lame's tend to wear out much faster than in
foil. Even worse, your bib can go dead, forcing you to invest in a
whole new mask when your old one is still quite strong.
-- Morgan Burke
mor...@sitka.triumf.ca
Peter Gustafsson
Hi!
Morgan wrote:
> In article <353E8B3A...@unix.tamu.edu> ebg...@unix.tamu.edu > writes:
> >Mary Anne Walker wrote:
> >> it [sabre] is the most expensive weapon.....
<snip>
> Because of the cuts, sabre lame's tend to wear out much faster than in
> foil. Even worse, your bib can go dead, forcing you to invest in a
> whole new mask when your old one is still quite strong.
>
> -- Morgan Burke
> mor...@sitka.triumf.ca
There is a type of aluminium tape whis has a extremely strong glue, and
it is quite durable. The glue is electrically conducting, so the whole
tape conducts quite well. This tape is used by electricians for various
purposes.
I use this tape to keep training epee points from coming unscrewed, and
it also works well to protect the blade wires where they go into the
bell since they otherwise can get scruffed off there. This works really
well and never produces any false hits on the bell.
Since this tape sticks to anything, I would imagine that it could be
taped over a dead bib and therefore extend the lifelength of the sabre
mask. Is there any specific reason why you don´t do this?
Have a nice time!
Peter Gustafsson
Harlequin
A major consideration when choosing (which I havn't seen mentioned yet,
which is not to say it hasn't been mentioned... :-) is the status quo.
If you're in a club where people tend to go to epee after learning foil,
then beginning via epee is going to result in there being no epeeist's
of your level to fence with or practice with or discuss with, while you
are learning. If the status quo only maginally favours a discipline,
then you have the choice, but if the status quo firmly favours a
discipline, I think the costs would outweigh any benefits of choosing
the other discipline.
If you have access to a multitude of clubs on the other hand...
Alexandre Sevigny
I find this discussion very strange. I have had a full FIE Uhlmann sabre
lame and mask now for 4 years. I fence at least 2 or three times a week
and my practises are quite intense with a lot of bouting, dialogues and
lessons. I have also competed in many tournaments. Other than a little
fraying on the sides of my mask and a little discoloration on my lame
and a tiny zipper-problem on the lame, I haven't had to replace
anything. Neither have most of the people I fence with and they fence a
lot too. Perhaps all you people who are having problems should take
better care of your stuff!
I don't mean to be mean, but really!
Alex
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alexandre Sevigny sev...@clipper.ens.fr
Ecole Normale Superieure Section de linguistique
45, rue d'Ulm Departement d'etudes francaises
75005 Paris Universite de Toronto
France Canada
www.ens.fr www.chass.utoronto.ca/french/ling
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Passion is my sword. Goodness is my armour. Humour is my shield.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Haar
>Parrying is just as important in epee. If if you have not bound your
>opponentsblade with a parry then the only way to get a touch without
getting one
>on yourself also is if your opponent has really bad point contol or like to
leave
>big openings. Basicaly, without parrying and defence, there is no
offense.
>Essentialy you need to create openings before you can take advantage of
>them. The same techniques used to create openings in epee are used to
>gain right of way in foil, the only difference (as far as I can tell) is
when the
>attack comes.
I disagree.
In my club our coach trains us NEVER to do a parry.
His style is just to hit the opponent on the arm nearly in every situation
after inviting him to attack.
So, as most of the fencers try to hit you on the body and you make one step
back, you have an important advantage which easily avoids getting hits from
your opponent.
Its easy to hit the arm while the opponent attacks because he doesn`t look
at his arm a lot and he often makes an -I`m sorry, i don`t know the correct
english word - that very long step with the front foot while the second foot
stays on his place. That move takes the arm a least 30 cm down, that lets
the arm wide open.
Really, we NEVER do a parry (sometimes it happens, of course, because we all
have started as foilists :-).
We just bound the opponents blade once or twice per fight to make a special
surprise attack they don`t exspect from us, and we make a few slaps per
fight at the blade to destabilize it and to hit the opponent onto the glove.
We have only that style to invite the opponent to attack and then to hit him
on the arm and some special, not exspected from a defensive style fencer
moves.
That concept is VERY successful, so successful that other coaches are
already stealing it.
What makes it so successful is that it is so easy to learn (Our club has
ever dominated the first age classes where you can go to epee tournaments
here in Northern Germany though its a very small club), not normal (the most
fencers don`t know what to do against it) and the ergonomical style (why
trying to hit the body? - its a 20 cm longer way)
Of course, when you get older (and the opponents better) you have to learn
more special moves and to make them faster, but the concept is the same.
Is that style known in the USA, too?
Bye,
Dirk-Hinrich Haar
ps: I would prefer to learn using the foil first again, because it`s faster,
more complicated,... - cooler, at all.
HMS Lion
I have to disagree with both the argument that foil teaches good right-of-way
AND the counterargument that epee needs to be attack-based.
My observation has been that foil encourages poor attack form. Foilists
frequently make sloppy attacks that leave them wide open, relying on
fight-of-way as a "magic shield" to keep them from being skewered before they
can land a touch. IF opportunity permits, a stop-hit is a perfectly legitimate
form of defense.
On the other hand, epee is often best fenced as a defensive weapon -
particularly if a fencer is short on mobility or reach. Let your opponent
supply the footwork, while YOU supply the touch. This is a major reason for
not teaching people to retreat when they parry (an unorthodox position, but a
retreat-parry simply staves off the inevitable. A stand-fast parry is riskier,
but places the opponent in a position where your riposte is well within
range.). Epee is often taught (especially in colleges) as a purely offensive
weapon, but that is more a function of ease of instruction than quality of
result.
V/R:
Mike McDaniel
HAGENZONE
In article <slrn6jt9cq....@lyapunov.ucsd.edu>, mbke...@yahoo.com
(Matt Kennel) writes:
>The shorter ones, and most women, will get too frustrated as they fall
>to long-armed and long-legged epeeists over and over. We don't need *any*
>needless turnoffs.
Will someone please explain to me how having long arms is a bigger advantage in
epee, than in foil?!?
I await your answer with the patience of a saint!
Sinc.
CLH
=
CLH
Remember, it's only my opinion!
If you disagree, feel free to Byte Me!
Otto Johann Schwarz
CLH,
glad to attempt to explain. In foil, although your opponent may be
able to reach your target area before you can reach his/hers, as long as
you have time (i.e. right of way) and you finish your attack (and hit),
you get the point.... however, assuming that in epee you havn't the
ability/opportunity to catch your opponent's arm on the way in, if
he/she taggs you first, no matter whether you finish the attack or not,
its only your opponent's point (neglecting double touches). Having an
appropriate (sp?) control over distance, however, will negate the
majority of this advantage in epee, as a "shorter armed" epeeist, once
inside the opponents tip, will usually have a distinct advantage.
just the way i see it. On a scale of important attributes for a fencer
to have, i'd rate stamina, cunning, and agility over height any day of
the week; I've been beaten by short and tall people alike!
later...
Otto
-----------------------------
Otto Johann Schwarz, EIT "I am prolonging the duel, my friend,
e-mail:ojsc...@eos.ncsu.edu because I can see you need
the practice!"
-----------------------------
HAGENZONE
In article <6hoa5r$2fc$1...@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca>, mor...@sitka.triumf.ca (Morgan
Burke) writes:
>Even worse, your bib can go dead, forcing you to invest in a
>whole new mask when your old one is still quite strong.
>
>
Peter G mentioned using aluminum tape, which certainly soounds great for club
use!
Any input from armourer's guild on tournament feasibility of this?
Otherwise, replacement bibs CAN be purchased and attached, but don't wait until
the night before...
Also, it might be worthwhile to try and find those metal plates some
manufacturers put at the corners, as this seems to be a trouble spot when
reattaching.
Good Luck!