https://askfred.net/Results/results.php?tournament_id=38616&highlight_competitor_id=91067&event_id=153367#153367
https://www.fencingtimelive.com/events/results/9595CF4923B349D4BFB989DB810112E8
I did a bit better than I feared, in both the vet and the senior events. In both I felt I could have done slightly better, but was fine, even happy with the results. Winning a DE in both was key to being satisfied. Curiously, perhaps, the vet event felt somewhat harder—there are some tough vets! Plus, the vet field seemed rather top heavy. There were an awful lot of A-rated fencers.
As usual, the vet event felt more socially relaxed and enjoyable the way vet events so often are. Not that people don't fence hard and intensely, but outside of the actual fencing there is a sort of calmness about everything. It's nice.
POOL
I had a seven person pool, so six bouts. Nice. I often have trouble in my first pool bout (or first several bouts), but this time things began very well with a 5-0 win against Denis Bridger, a leftie I hadn't fenced before (or even met, I think). Later he asked if I fence lefties at my club a lot, because "you took me apart", as he put it. I said there were a couple in my club I fence semi-regularly (thinking about Chris, Anna, and Shyamala) but not many these days. Still, I said, I was pretty comfortable fencing lefties. I didn't write down anything about the bout. The best I can say now, weeks later, is that it felt relatively straightforward—although I don't remember exactly how so. I think I did a lot of feints and disengages, and was careful about distance. More than that I'm not sure.
I lost my second bout, 3-5, against another Dennis, this one with two Ns: Dennis Clinefelter. Again I don't remember the details. My scribbled notes just say: "Did dumb things. Was unsure, hesitant. Awkward attacks and bad timing." Okay...
Won my third bout, 5-3, against Francis Irwin, another fencer I didn't know. And again I can't remember the details except that he was a leftie and I felt my focus and determination was much improved from the previous bout. As the pool bouts continued I found it easier to get into that mental place of determined focus and semi-anger. Knowing there might not be much fencing left, especially if I did poorly, makes it easier for me to get into that higher energy, somewhat angry headspace. In fact, I deliberately kick it up by thinking about how it might be over all too soon. This, it turns out, seems a decent way to get myself riled up and "angry", making it easier to find that higher energy, focused, determined, competitive groove that sometimes eludes me.
I didn't realize it at the time, because I make a point of not checking peoples' ratings and such beforehand, but apparently my first three bouts were against the lower rated fencers, and the remaining three were higher-rated, very good fencers. I had some suspicion about this, since I had seen the next three before, in other tournaments, and knew they were good, and would be challenging. Still, I don't think I had fenced any of them before—maybe Loeffler and/or Wallace—but long ago if so...I think. In any case, I knew it would be hard, but felt prepared to give it my best. At least I had found something of the right competitive groove.
So, next up with Carl Loeffler. I went in with a vague plan and a notion of what to expect. He seemed fast and strong. Worried about strong blade actions I used some absence of blade, hoping to at least somewhat nullify being taken with binds and beats. What I wasn't expecting was 1) His excellent flicks, and 2) His ability to draw me out with footwork, distance, and general invitation/baiting stuff. In short, he won quite easily, 2-5. My notes say: "Damn flicks! Many times I thought I saw openings and attacked, yet flicks counters and other counterattacks got me." It was a frustrating bout, but impressive too. I mean I was impressed, and think/hope I learned some things.
Then I had the fencer I thought would be the hardest: Mehmet Tepedelenlioglu. Before the December NAC in Portland I had only vaguely heard of him (that last name is memorably long if nothing else). At the NAC I watched him in the vet combined semis and then his victory over Walter Dragonetti in the final. It was quite impressive, watching him and Dragonetti. So I was simultaneously worried and eager to fence him. Worried he might destroy me. Eager to experience and maybe learn something.
I didn't expect to win, although I certainly tried. And I didn't. He beat me 3-5, which was not as bad as I had feared. I had been vaguely planning to try to be very careful and defensive, and okay if the score didn't get to five (losing 0-3 is better than losing 0-5!). But he got me a few times with very good fleches that came out of the blue and hit before it seemed they should—even knowing he's a French grip pommeler and that he is known for his fleches. After getting hit by a couple of those I tried to be ready and better prepared for more—giving myself extra distance, thinking I might be able to duck one, etc. Yet he got another one or two. I realized after that those fleches came immediately after exchanges, when I was least prepared, having been distracted by the exchange, and perhaps a bit off-balance, or leaning, or not at an ideal distance, etc. Still, I did get 3 points and felt okay about that (3-5 is better than 0-5!).
My final pool bout was with Patric Wallace. I'd watched him in the past and knew he was strong and fast. Despite feeling prepared and working hard in the bout, he decimated me, 1-5.
So I finished the pool 2-and-4. Fourth place out of seven, with a -4 indicator. ...well, could be worse.
DIRECT ELIMINATION
My little section of the DE tableau:
When the DE tableau was posted I saw I'd have James Neale. I think I've fenced him before and lost (though I now realize I had partially confused him with David Jensen—at least misremembered some past bouts). I knew he was a very good fencer and I was worried. Later I checked and he's an A2017 from Fencers' Club). But, thinking this DE could well be the end of the day's fencing for me helped me get more fully into that "angry" headspace I "discovered" at the Portland NAC ("damnit I'm not ready to be done!"). I think that headspace helped me quite a lot in this DE. I was energized and on. And I won!
John Comes had been in the same pool as Neale and very helpfully gave me some intel and advice. He said Neale was good at hand hits and binds, so I had to be very careful about sticking my blade and arm out. This info, along with my misremembering past bouts with Jensen and Neale (one of whom beat me using lots of binding fleches), made me decide to try using a strong absence-of-blade approach.
It seemed to work pretty well. I might be wrong, but I got the feeling that my absence-of-blade effectively denied him his strongest tactics and attacks, and, maybe?, frustrated him somewhat. It felt a little like putting some of the ideas from Epee 2.0 into practice and having it actually work: "Identify your opponent's strengths and don't give them the opportunity to use them". The other main concept being "draw your opponent into your own strengths." This, I felt, I did not do as well, but perhaps to some degree I was able to.
In any case, as we fenced and it seemed that this absence tactic was working pretty well, I continued and made it an even stronger absence—that is, holding my blade down and back far enough that he couldn't reach it (or my hand) at all, at normal distance. I remembered Marshall taking about absence of blade a month or so ago, and demonstrating just how far back it "should be". Farther back than my instincts tend to want. Tip quite near the floor.
The absence tactic made things into a game of distance, feinting, and drawing out. I made a couple of foolish attacks early on, but wised up and got better at drawing him out while not getting drawn out or overextended myself. We went back and forth, more or less tied to about 6-6 (with vet DEs only to 10). As we fenced I felt like I got better at this absence-and-drawing-out distance-game approach. I got some singles, making up for my early foolish mistakes. Then a lead of a point or two, giving me confidence and helping with the drawing-out.
The first period ended 9-6. This felt quite nice. I tried to not get complacent during the break. The second period began and I kept "doing what worked". Too often after a break I think "oh they will change tactics so I should too, as a preemptive measure". No no! Especially with a lead, stick with what was working. Maaybe have something to change to if what was working no longer works, but only then.
Anyway, after a short bit he attacked and I counterattacked to the leg. We doubled. So I won, 10-7. Woohoo!
So I made the 16. My second DE was against Mark Segal, a leftie fencer I had seen in various tournaments over the years, and enjoyed watching, but had never fenced myself. We had a great bout, mostly tied off-and-on to about 6-6. I even got up a point or two a couple times. I got some nice-feeling prime ripostes—reminding me of fencing leftie Chris at SAS. I also got some results from broken time stuff. However, he got me too many times with a relatively simple advance-lunge to my thigh/knee. I should have wised up after two of these, but he probably got me four times that way, including the final touch.
The first period ended 6-9—he having gotten a nice lead after the 6-6 tie (and a curious inversion of my previous DE). I think I got a single early in the second period. Then he got me with his leg shot. Just after he said "that's all I got!", with the implied suggestion that I had done quite well otherwise. Still, that leg shot was enough. I wonder if I fell for it so many times because, in part, I was misjudging the distance I needed due to his left-handedness. I needed just a bit more distance than I thought, and I find I sometimes misjudge how much I need with lefties: Sometimes they are closer than it feels.
Still, it was a good, enjoyable bout. I felt like I could have won—he didn't destroy me. I held my own pretty well. Perhaps if I had made a better distance adjustment...? Not only was the fencing fun, but I liked him. He seems like a fun guy. Hopefully I'll get to fence him more in the future.
In summary, I was okay, even happy with my fencing overall. My pool was a bit frustrating, but the DEs felt quite good. And I made the 16. But because my pool wasn't great I ended up finishing at the lower end of the 16: 14th out of 34. Not bad, given my pre-pool seed of 21 (and post-pool seed of 20). Mark Segal went on to finish 3rd, beating Erich Cranor 10-3 (!), then losing to Mehmet Tepedelenlioglu 10-6. The final was Tepedelenlioglu and Dragonetti—a rematch of the vet combined final at the Portland NAC. I didn't stay to watch, but saw later than Metmet won, 10-8. I wonder if it was as odd a bout as the Portland final.
Here's the upper part of the final results. I feel like I'm in pretty good company.
No comments:
Post a Comment