The Student Controlled Lesson
Coach Allen Evans, Dominion Fencing
|
|
|
"...training in taking the initiative in the bout must begin in the lesson..."
|
In fencing, the advantage goes to the fencer who takes the initiative and controls the bout. In the weapons with priority, it is apparent that the vast majority of touches are scored on on the attack in first intention or second intention. In the weapon without priority it is still vital that the fencer make opportunities to score, rather than reacting to the opponent. By controlling the initiative in the bout, the fencer creates opportunities to score while denying the same to the opponent. By constantly controlling the initiative, the fencer increases the psychological pressure on the opponent: forcing them to be "behind" in the bout. Playing "catch up" in the bout insures that the opponent will make mistakes in timing, distance, and/or execution, increasing the opportunities for the student to score.
"Taking the initiative" or "controlling the bout" (the two are similar but not exactly the same) should not conjure an image of a fencer always on the attack. Rather, the fencer that is in control of the bout is picking the time and the actions most favorable to them. The fencer may actively control the opponent through strong preparations and attacks, or may passively control the opponent by denying them opportunities to score; laying traps that lead to parries and ripostes or counterattacks. The actions done by the fencer depend on the situation, the opponent, and the fencer's own abilities and preferences. In all cases, control of the bout means control of the distance and the timing. As Maitré Ed Richards has said: "If the time is right for me, it is wrong for you."
Initiative in a bout goes to the fencer who makes the first meaningful fencing action, who "begins fencing first". If a fencer is facing an opponent he or she believes is superior, the fencer might be very cautious. On the command "fence", the fencer will step from their on guard line to a distance that he or she feels comfortable, and then wait for the opponent. By waiting, the fencer gives up the initiative: no meaningful fencing actions occur until the opponent initiates one - even if that action is a preparation or reconnaissance of some type. Waiting allows the opponent to chose the time and place of their actions - to take control of the bout. Some fencers will begin a bout in a series of explosive, ill-timed attacks. This fencer will often be "fencing first" but since they are picking such poor times and distances to attack (they will invariably attack from too far away and without proper preparation) they may "have taken the initiative", but they are certainly not controlling the bout! These fencers fall behind in the score; demanding more attacks and throwing more control over to the opponent who can passively control the bout.
Controlling the bout is not easy. Not only does it demand good technical skills and an ability to gauge distance, it must also be done in the face of an opponent who is not willing to cooperate! To control a bout the fencer must have a good technical foundation. The fencer must also understand the tactical concept of distance underlying fencing actions, to sense when he or she is in a one-tempo situation and to be able to deny the same to the opponent. The fencer, above all, must have confidence in his or her ability to control the actions of the opponent. To do this, training in taking the initiative in the bout and in controlling the opponent must begin in the lesson, and transferred to the strip.
Traditional coaching has the coach moving up and down the piste, giving cues (verbal or physical) to the student who executes the required action. This method of instruction does not allow the student to learn to dominate his or her opponent on the strip. Rarely does the opponent give a cue and allow the student to hit! On the strip, the coach wants the student to control the opponent but the student is never exposed to what this should feel like.
To teach control of the bout, the coach must allow the student to initiate and control one or more of lesson's elements. This does not require a radical shift in how lessons are taught. For example, the coach may let the student start the footwork and "lead" the coach in the lesson, controlling one aspect of the lesson. The student may also control a lesson by making actions without a specific cue from the coach when the right conditions for that action exist. A student may control a lesson "passively" by not acting on a cue given by the coach. Any of these methods may be used to introduce the student to taking control of the lesson.
Student control of a lesson differs from a "choice/reaction" lesson. In the choice/reaction lesson the coach presents different cues for a student to discriminate against. The student is not, per se, in "control" of the choice/reaction lesson: the student does not initiate any actions without prompting from the coach. This does not preclude a student-controlled lesson from also incorporating a choice of reactions. The difference between a student controlled lesson and a choice/reaction drill lies in who initiates the action and the choices made by the student - including the choice to ignore the coach's cue or cues entirely.
A fencing lesson has two elements: foot work and blade work. Control can be exercised in one or both of the elements. At one end of the control spectrum is the coach-lead lesson: the coach leads the footwork, determines the blade work to be executed, and picks the time and distance for the blade work (by giving a cue). The coach gives a cue and the student acts on the cue. This is a good lesson to teach technical skills to the student and is the way all actions new to the student should be introduced. This lesson has advantages for the student. Difficult technical actions can be done in a lesson completely controlled by the coach, actions that might not be possible if the student was left to decide when and where to execute actions. The student can work at his or her maximum speed without taxing the coach, who finds it physically easier to be "ahead" of the student in their actions.
At the other end of the control spectrum is a lesson that the student controls completely. The student initiates the footwork, chooses the time and distance for the given blade work and may even pick the action to be executed. In this lesson, the coach can be cooperative or un-cooperative: either conforming to the student's actions or resisting them. As a result, this lesson is very tactical - very "noisy" - especially if the coach chooses to be un-cooperative. At its highest level, this lesson looks much like a bout. Completely student controlled lessons are much less common than completely coach controlled lessons because of the skill necessary on the part of the student and the work needed by the coach to keep up with a very dynamic lesson.
In the middle of the control spectrum is a lesson in which the control of the lesson is mixed. The student and coach will initiate one, but not the other element of the lesson. For instance, the coach may lead the footwork, but the student will pick the time and place for a pre-determined action. The student may lead the footwork and the coach will offer a cue, which the student may or may not act on.
Teaching the Student Controlled Lesson
|
"These are exactly the errors the coach is attempting to correct..."
|
The simplest of the student controlled lessons is to let the student initiate and lead the footwork. Footwork should be very simple, and preferably in a pattern so the coach can follow. (see: Using Footwork Patterns in Foil and Epée Lessons) The student begins the first step of a pattern and the coach follows, giving cues for actions as he or she would normally. These cues can be blade cues, distance cues, or both. For example: the student is leading the footwork and moving the coach up and down the strip. When the coach attempts to engage the student's blade, the student avoids the engagement and lunges to score. Another example: the student is leading the footwork. If the coach stops, the student makes a straight attack with lunge. If the coach searches for the student's blade and steps back, the student avoids the sweep and makes a one-two with advance and lunge. The coach can alternate between these two actions, or do them randomly. Another option when the student leads the footwork gives the student a choice of footwork on the attack. If the designated action is a press, disengage attack, the student can be allowed to score with an advance lunge or advance fleche and may do them alternately or randomly.
When the student is leading the footwork, the coach should be very conscience of the student's footwork and balance when giving cues. A beginning student leading the coach in footwork should only get cues when the student is in the proper distance, is balanced, and is ready to act. If the coach cues for actions randomly, the beginning student will act from a desire to please the coach, and will not consider their own balance before attempting to answer the cue. As a result, the student will act prematurely and from poor balance. These are exactly the errors the coach is attempting to correct. The coach should stress to the student only to act on a cue when the student is balanced and ready. With a beginning student, the coach should observe the student's footwork and make that choice for them. Later, a student will decide independently. This moves the student into the next lesson, where a coach gives cues and the student has the option of refusing to act on the cue. For the advanced and very advanced student, the coach may give a cue at any time in the lesson. It is up to the more advanced student to discern when they can and cannot respond.
The next step is to return the control of the foot work to the coach. The coach leads the footwork and gives cues. The student follows the coach and may act on a cue or "refuse" the cue. An example: the coach is leading the footwork and controlling how the space opens and closes. The coach is in low line, the student in high line. When the coach raises his or her blade, the student may - if the distance is correct - beat and lunge. If the student feels that the distance is not correct for this attack, they do not make the attack, but continue to follow the coach until the next cue is given. In this lesson, the student's control of the lesson extends only to the choice of making the attack or not. Another example: the coach is controlling the footwork and makes an attack against the student. The student may elect to parry and riposte against the attack, or avoid the attack by retreating. As the coach recovers, the student may either return to the space or may start an attack of their own. The coach may give more advanced students a third option of making a counter-attack with opposition against the attack. This additional option adds a choice/reaction drill to the partially controlled coach lesson.
The final step in the progression of control is to turn most of the control over to the student. Now the student leads the footwork and makes blade actions, often independent of the coach giving a cue. The coach should assign an action - or choice of actions - to the student to execute. The student must look for the proper time and place to execute the assigned action or actions. An example: the student must make a straight attack OR a feint and disengage. The student maneuvers the coach and picks the appropriate time to make a straight attack or a feint and disengage to score. The coach attempts to parry the feint at the appropriate time.
Another expression of the student-lead lesson is an exchange lesson, in which the student makes a preparation on his or her own time, observes the coach's reaction to the preparation, and then acts on the observation in the next phrase. For example: the student leads the lesson and comes to the middle distance and makes a preparatory beat and small feint. The coach makes a small parry appropriate to the feint, or makes an attempt to counter attack. On the next preparation by the student, the coach must replicate the same response, and the student acts on the response to score. The coach may cycle through any number of responses, by "revealing" his intentions to the student on the first preparation, and allowing the student to learn and score in the next preparation.
When the coach is controlling the blade cues in a lesson, the coach must always be watchful that the student is responding correctly to cues. Students who have spent their careers in purely coach lead lessons will feel that every action by the coach is a cue to attack, and will not discriminate between good and bad times to act, even when they admit after the action has failed that they knew the distance or the cue was not appropriate. It will take time for the student to become more discriminating. In student lead lessons, the student will at first be hesitant to control the footwork, or make a blade action independently. Surprise actions by the coach - such as a late counter attack - will often cause the student to hesitate, or break off an attack to attempt to find the coach's blade. The student must be encouraged to know that they are in control of the action and they must start and finish actions decisively. The other side of the coin in student-controlled lessons is the student who makes actions at random, without observing the coach at all. The student will usually "cheat" by stretching their lunges out over a long distance, excessively crowding the space, or in other ways that are unfaithful to a bouting situation. Often it is the very athletic student that will make these mistakes: relying on their physical abilities to get them out of trouble. When faced with a student of this type the coach may use "shock-exposure" actions: attacking with out warning, sudden changes in distance, or surprise parries and ripostes, to make the student pay more attention to the action
Adding Difficulty: the Uncooperative Coach
|
"Only when the student develops more skill and confidence should the coach begin to frustrate and attempt to "escape" the traps of the student."
|
At first, the coach is pliable in the lesson, falling for distance and footwork traps set by the student, taking the bait in invitations offered, and so forth. Essentially, the coach has the option of cooperating with the student's intentions all of the time, some of the time, or not cooperating at all. In this last option, the coach may actively attempt to frustrate the student by attacking in preparation, opening up the space, making parries in surprise, and so forth. Only when the student develops more skill and confidence should the coach begin to frustrate and attempt to "escape" the traps of the student. This should only be used with accomplished students, and used sparingly.The goal of the coach is to build confidence and raise obstacles for the student to overcome, not to frustrate the student.
The obstacles should be within the context of the action the coach is teaching. For instance: in the example above, the coach can give the cue for a beat attack, but pull the space before the student arrives; or the coach can raise the blade quickly, and take the cue away before the fencer can act on the cue. Some good examples of these types of actions in the student-controlled lesson can be found in Signal to Noise: Adding Confusion to the Fencing Lesson on this website.
Student-controlled lessons are not presented as an element of more traditional "classical" training. Even in modern fencing salles, there is a feeling that the student benefits more from work on technique under the control of a coach then in the initiation and control of the lesson. It is true that when a student first undertakes to control even small elements of the lesson, their technical abilities often show a marked deterioration! The student is often awkward and off balance, rushed, and mores the blade too much. The coach, alarmed, cuts short this lesson and returns to work on technical skills. The student continues to fence well in lesson, but loses bouts.
While the acquisition of technical skills is necessary for the fencer, it is not always the best fencer in the room that wins the tournament. In the final bout of the day, the fencer that can pick the time and place for their actions, control the opponent while keeping calm and avoiding being controlled, is the fencer that will win.
The author is indebted to Coach Jim Denton for his assistance with this article.
Last edit: October 2005
|
