http://www.fencingtime.com/LiveResults/Battle2016/FTEvent110264329.htm
https://askfred.net/Results/roundResults.php?seq=1&event_id=121254&highlight_competitor_id=91067
The Battle in Seattle! One of the biggest tournaments in the Pacific Northwest. I always look forward to it. People come from far and wide. It is a Div-1A ROC, which means, well I'm still not quite sure what it means—something like, if you do well you earn points that effect your competitive ranking and qualify you for various national events. I don't know exactly how it all works, since I am not good enough for it to matter. But many people are, so tournaments like this tend to attract good fencers from all over the western US and Canada. The points and qualification stuff matter less for the vet events (for people over 40) than for the senior (over 14). Just showing up at a vet ROC qualifies you for summer national vet events.
A few years ago, after I had only started fencing again about six months earlier, I went to the Battle in Seattle vet epee event but skipped the big senior event because it looked scary—but I went to watch, then wished I was in it. Since then I've done both vet and senior epee every year.
That first time I did surprisingly okay. Looking back I see I went four and two in the pools, beating Maria Copelan, William Walker, and Jim Henderson (all of whom I've lost to in later tournaments). How weird, especially given how raw a fencer I was back then. In that first year DEs I beat John Comes before losing to Erich Cranor. I came in 17th out of 33. Huh. Not bad at all. Maybe that was what gave me my love of this tournament.
Let's see how I've done since then <sound of looking stuff up>. The next year, 2014, I did worse in vet epee, coming in 21st out of 35. I did alright in the pools (3 and 2), beating Mike Perka and Mark Blom, surprisingly. But my DE was with James Neale and I lost badly. Then, last year I did even worse, 25th out of 30, losing every pool bout but one and losing my DE to William Walker.
So I've had a downward kind of progress in the Battle in Seattle vet epee. I hadn't realized that until just now. Well, this year I turned it around. I didn't do great, but well enough. I ended up 14th out of 28, the exact halfway spot. That's slightly better than my first year, where I ended up slightly below the halfway spot. My pool result wasn't quite as good this year, but in my defense it was a harder pool.
Overall, well, something I look at is how well I do compared to my initial seed. In this case I ended up 14th and my post-pool seed was 15th. My initial seed? It was 13th. But I was seeded highest of the four C15 fencers. I think the seeding is random within fencers of the same rating and year. So my initial seed could have ranged between 13th and 16th. But whatever, my final result and seeds were more or less the same: right around the middle of the pack. I'm okay with that! The Battle in Seattle attracts a lot of great fencers.
POOLS
My pool had two good A-fencers I doubted I could beat (Ameli and Perka), two guys I "should" be able to beat (Lucas and Robinson), one guy who is tough and maaaybe I could handle (Moore), and another guy I didn't know at all (Goossens).
My first bout was with Sean Ameli. Might as well get the hardest one over with, eh? Maybe Mike Perka is better on average, maybe not, I don't know. Perka did just slightly better in the pools this time (tied victories and indicator, one more touch scored), getting 2nd seed to Ameli's 3rd. But I figured Ameli would be harder for me. I've fenced Perka more, even won a pool bout once, and had ideas about how to fence him. I've only fenced Ameli once, I think, several years ago when I had only recently started fencing again. All I knew was that he beat me badly that one time and I barely understood what had happened. I remembered that he's left-handed, and that had been hard for me back then, and that I felt like a noob, heh. It may have been my first serious experience with lefties. I got hit on the outside line a lot.
This time I felt a lot more comfortable. Less of a noob! Still, he got the first two points, then quickly got up four to my one. I'm better than I used to be, but still have a long way to go. I hardly remember the points, they went by so fast. I think he got me nicely on the leg with an accelerating lunge. Another time I attempted a flick to the inside wrist but apparently mismanaged distance and got hit on the arm.
I had been trying to play it safe, but at 4-1 I changed to riskier tactics. Playing it safe sure wasn't working. I held my blade up in a semi-absent position, making an obvious invitation to the lower arm. I even stuck my arm out a bit, trying to tempt him. He clearly saw this as a blatant invitation and made a few feints into it, perhaps to see how I would react, what my plan was. Or perhaps to hit, as I was being rather risky sticking out a target like that. I let one of his feints come awfully close, trying to dare him to really try. I think I instinctively pulled my whole arm back a bit. After a little bit he made a more committed attack to my arm and I did what I had planned: retreated a step, straightening and raising my arm while angling the blade down a little. It worked perfectly, my tip landing on his arm near the elbow, while his tip went below my arm.
That felt very nice. It was something I had in my mind from watching videos of Max Heinzer earlier in the day. Watching Heinzer do this thing was odd, because it looked so obvious, yet he was getting people to walk into it. That's kind of how I felt here. It felt too obvious to actually work, but it did.
That made is 4-2, still not very good. Next I tried another thing I've gotten watching Heinzer. Not that I think I'm doing what he does by any stretch—more like stuff I've been inspired to try after watching the way he fences, and developed into something of my own. In fact, I think I've developed a small set of inter-related tactics inspired by both Heinzer and Dragonetti. Maybe I could call it my Heinzeretti tactics? I don't know. Anyway, this next one involved holding the blade level but angled maybe 45 degrees to the inside. I'm still working on this and figuring out how and why it works when it does. There are a number of things that can happen. If nothing else the blade position is another semi-absent type of thing, and sets up several invitations. I've found that some people are tempted to attack into my high outside line, and that it is easy for me to move into a strong six parry. I've also played with holding my blade out rather far in this position, then slowly bringing it in, combined with footwork and other blade movements, with the goal of stealing distance. In any case, I haven't tried it much with lefties and thought it might not work very well. But I tried it anyway. We maneuvered about a bit and I at least tried to do the stealing distance bit. I think he probed my high outside line and I responded with motions toward a six parry. Eventually he did attack high and outside, with more speed and more angulation, perhaps thinking he could angle around my six. That is a common leftie thing, isn't it? Being able to get around a "normal" six? But I saw his attack coming and instead of going to six I counterattacked low and inside. In doing this I dropped my body down and inside a bit. As a result his blade went just over my head and I hit his body.
After that 4-1 start those last two points both felt very nice. I had made it 4-3, a much nicer place to be. But I still needed two singles and was running out of ideas. Going back to the line I thought if I was in his place I might just try to double out, get it over with. Perhaps I could do something to encourage an attempt to double, then deal with it? I decided to make a fake charge right off the line. I'd act like the last two points had given me some kind of momentum and I was going to do some kind of fast advance-advance-fleche or something. But I'd break off suddenly and if he attacked into it I would retreat and counterattack. So that's what I did. At the call "fence" I came forward quickly and, hopefully, aggressively, then stopped abruptly, ready to counter and retreat. But I botched it. I had advanced a little too far and perhaps a little awkwardly, and he had advanced too. So when I stopped he easily hit me before I could retreat or counterattack. Whoops. Still, a 5-3 loss was better than 5-1, especially against the guy I thought I'd have the most trouble with.
My next bout was with Michael Moore. I like him. He's fun to fence. Lots of energy! I fenced him once before, in a DE at last year's Columbia Cup in Portland, vet epee. I mentioned it to him, chatting, but he didn't remember that specific bout. I had also watched him at another tournament or two. In particular I remember watching George Raush beat him in a DE, but only by putting everything he had into it, leaving George "out of gas" for his next DE. I mentioned that to Michael too and he said something about how he likes to fence hard, such that even if he loses his opponent will have paid a price for it.
So we fenced, and it was a great bout. I think we have somewhat similar styles. Strong blade actions, for example. Not someone you want to try to power through. We both fenced quite patiently though, which surprised me a little. I thought he would attack more, but we both worked hard to get the other person to attack. And we both seemed to want to use strong bladework counterattacks. So the bout was a fun, very active game of distance and feints. A game of seeing how close you could get, trying to draw an attack, without getting too close.
He got the first point, basically because I was less patient and attacked from too far. Then I began to see how it should go and tried to work the distance right, taking plenty of time. I don't remember who started the next attack, but it wound up a double, making it 2-1. Then he tried an attack right off the line, perhaps because we had just spend a good bit of time setting up patterns of baiting and waiting. He almost got me by surprise. I managed to get my point out and make it a double, 3-2. Then we had another lengthy distance and feinting game, which finally ended up in a bunch of action and...another double? No, I had a single light! Tied 3-3. He had the ref check his weapon, which seemed like a good idea. I had no idea if he had hit me or not. Maybe he had. His weapon checked out. Perhaps he had hit flat.
Then we had another long but high energy distance game, finally resulting in a double, making it 4-4. Exciting! We started up another distance game, but I stupidly got impatient and attacked at a non-ideal time. He got a single and won, 5-4. Why did I attack impatiently? I don't know. Maybe the excitement got to me?
Next I had my friend Jeff Lucas. If I remember right I got up 2-1, then he got a simple pick under my forearm. He put his tip out and I stuck my arm onto it. I felt like it was at least half my fault for sticking my arm out, but later he said he has been working on picking under the guard like that. Then we maneuvered around a bit and I got a touch on his outside arm. I don't remember the details. I think he had let his guard drift a little to the center, opening his outside line just enough for me to pick it off. Then, he got the next point, making a 3-3 tie. I forget what happened. My notes for that point just say "oops, uh oh". Whatever happened I thought I could do better. I tried to up my game, be more careful and tricky, more dynamic.
I got the next point with a "Heinzeretti" type thing—I think it was the "blade to the inside and steal distance" thing. On the last point, he kept making feints and probes, putting his blade out, but from a reasonably safe distance. Somehow I got into my head the notion of closing distance quickly and "taking" his blade in prime. It is something Russ has shown me a few times but I have not practiced much recently. I tried it, advancing fast and moving my blade into prime, with the idea of pushing his blade away as I closed. But he retreated and pulled his blade back faster than I advanced, so my prime "take" missed his blade. By that point I was committed to some kind of attack, so I just made a weird, very pronated fleche out of prime. He tried to retreat and do something about my blade, but I managed to hit. So I won 5-3. Right after that last point he said, incredulously, "what was that??" I said something like "I'm not quite sure, it wasn't supposed to go like that!"
My next bout was with Bruno Goossens. I had never met him or seen him fence before. I lost 5-2 and ended up somewhat confused about what had happened. He had a style that looked like just the kind of thing I like and could do well against—French grip, holds the blade out a lot, that kind of thing. But he was tricksy and smart, and amazingly controlled and accurate.
I think he got the first point, then I got one. Then I tried a fast attack off the line, maybe because he had a calm demeanor and seemed surprisable. He wasn't. Now down 2-1 I took a more cautious approach and tried to find a way to deal with his French grip and extended arm tactics. I tried some kind of beat attack. It worked, but he got his point back on very quickly. We doubled, 3-2. So I tried being more cautious. He was patient and let me edge in. I made various feints and beats while slowly advancing, looking for openings, trying to figure him out. At some point, while my mind was occupied with his blade and how to get it out of the way he went for a toe touch and got it easily. It was nicely done. I was overly concerned with his blade and focused on beating and feinting combined with advancing. He waited for the perfect moment when my weight was on my front foot. I had an instant of time in which I saw the attack coming but was unable to do anything about it. He timed it just right. Next, if I remember right, he made an attack off the line and I wasn't quite ready for that. He scored and won, 5-2.
I watched him fence a bit after our bout, and chatted to a couple other people about him. I was not able to "figure him out", but got the idea that he had a "French style". I think he is French. At least his jacket said FRA on it, although he lives in Oregon and is a B13 in the USFA. He came in 8th overall, winning two DEs, including one against Joel Howard. In my pool he did well, beating everyone except Sean Ameli and Mike Perka.
My next bout was with Doug Robinson, down from Canada. We've fenced a few times and although I couldn't remember the details I felt fairly confident. But I started off a bit awkwardly and he got up 2-1. Then he attacked into my six line with a disengage to the inside. Instinctively I went into prime and scored. That felt nice. After that we doubled, making it 3-3. At that point I started using "Heinzeretti" tactics more. I had been trying to use them less, but when things got close I tended to fall back to them, and they worked pretty well for me, late bout. Maybe, for pool bouts, a slight change of tactics toward the end, to something I am comfortable with, is useful.
So I was doing a slightly blade-up thing, showing a bit of arm invitation. He made an extension, probably just a feint. I did a double beat advance fleche and scored, which felt good. After a meh start things were feeling better. Confident again I tried to use better footwork, bouncing in and out, looking for openings or trying to draw attacks. Eventually he attacked and I was able to bounce back and counterattack, getting a single light. So I won 5-3, yay.
At this point in the pools I was 2 and 3. My last bout was with Mike Perka, an A-rated fencer who often wins or places high in vet events. I had almost beaten him a couple years ago, in the pools of an earlier Battle in Seattle vet epee event. I remembered thinking he seemed a bit slow, at least footwork-wise. Also, someone in that pool had suggested I attack "straight up his arm" when he does "blade wiggle" things. So I went in with those things in mind, planning to use quick in-and-out footwork while looking for chance to go "up his arm".
I don't remember the first few points exactly, except at one point he got me with a lovely hit to the hand—to the finger even. And another time he fleched with disengages or "wiggles", getting me to go for a prime parry while his blade ended up on the outside. Wrong parry! Soon he was up 3-2. Then, maybe getting a better sense of timing I attacked "up his wiggle". I scored on his arm, but he managed to get my arm from below, doubling. Now we were at 4-3 and again I turned to Heinzeretti tactics. As with Doug I tried a slightly blade-up position, using in-and-out footwork, hoping to tempt him toward my lower arm. He extended, perhaps just a feint, I beat hard and went up his arm, getting a single. Yay, 4-4. Then I tried my Heinzeretti "to the side" guard. I was not at all sure this was a good idea, but wasn't sure what else to do. At some point he made a "blade wiggle" and I went for it, and got him on the arm again. Single light. I won 5-4, woo!
So I came out of the pools 3 and 3, which was what I had been hoping for, but didn't think I would manage after losing to Michael Moore and Bruno Goossens. Sean and Mike did the best, both winning five, and both with a +11 indicator. Bruno had won four, +8. Michael and I had both gone three and three. His indicator was zero while mine was -1, so he seeded higher.
DIRECT ELIMINATION
I seeded 15th out of 28. Not bad. Michael Moore was one spot above me, but looking at the DE table I don't think it would have been better for me if I had had his spot. He started with Mark Blom, who I may or may not have been able to beat. Then he had 3rd seed David Jensen, who I probably couldn't beat. Then again, I don't think I've ever fenced Jensen, so that could have been cool.
Instead I started with Gerald Duffy and then had Mike Perka, again. Still, although I've fenced Perka before, and just had in the pools, it was interesting to see how things differed between the pool bout, which I had barely eeked out a win, and the DE, which was a lot harder.
But first my first DE, which was against Gerald Duffy. I had never even seen him before and went in with no idea at all about his style. But that is one of the things I like about tournaments like the Battle in Seattle: Getting to fence people I've never even seen. Especially in a DE where there is more time to figure things out.
I started out cautious and probing, trying to figure out how this guy fences, what might work, what to be careful about, etc. I used a lot of in-and-out footwork, trying to set distance traps, and Heinzeretti-type blade stuff, combined with probes, feints, and shallow attacks. I also tried to use a lot of tempo changes—switching up being bouncingly aggressive with slowing down, breaking off, or even suddenly freezing for a moment. I was planning to keep the first period score low while I tried to figure things out. But he made attacks perhaps a little too quickly, or into my traps. I got a lead, and soon a sizable lead. The first period ended 7-3 or 7-4. A comfortable lead in a DE to ten.
In the second period I felt comfortable being patient and killing time, while doing the same sort of stuff I used in the first period. Maybe he attacked more than was wise because he knew he had to catch-up. In any case I got the three points I needed while he only got one, or none. I won 10-4. I enjoyed the feeling of being in control of a DE bout. After the first few points I felt relaxed and confident. I felt like I was in control of the tempo, like I had the initiative, while he was more reactive. That was nice because it is something I have definitely been working on, and have too often been on the wrong side of—being reactive to someone else's tempo.
I was near the bottom of the DE table, so my second DE was with the 2nd seed, which was Mike Perka. Seeing that made me laugh. The odds of winning were slim, but I had just beaten him in the pools. Then again, I had barely beaten him and felt there had been at least a little luck involved. Well, a DE should show if either of us had learned something useful in that pool bout.
He got a lead early on. I tried to do the kind of things that had worked in the pool bout, while also trying to see and adjust to changes he might make. He made some nice attacks, confusing me with his blade wiggles. Once he was up two or three points I got a little smarter and started scoring doubles. Or maybe he was content to double. Either way we reached 9-5 before the first period ended. Not a good score in a vet DE to ten points!
So it was a long shot, a very long shot. Still, I wasn't about to give up, especially since this would be the last bit of fencing I would get that day. I went into the second period determined to at least get a good point or two. I got a single light on his arm, attacking "up the wiggle". Okay, good. Then, although it is risky, I tried that high-low-outside fleche. It came off well and gave me another single light. Good, good. Then, after a little maneuvering, I tried it again, which was probably not the best idea. As a tactic it depends on the other person responding to the high feint with a parry or high-line counterattack. The first time he made a counterattack, which went over my shoulder. This time, however, I could not surprise him and he counterattacked lower, perfectly nailing my arm long before I came close.
I lost 10-7. But those last two points of mine had felt nice, so I was pretty okay with it.
Perka went on to lose 10-8 to Carl Loeffler. I don't know Carl, but he did well. He went on to beat David Jensen to face Sean Ameli in the final. I watched the final closely, knowing that Sean is very good, but Carl had been fencing very well. Should be good! But it wasn't even close. Carl won 10-3.
No comments:
Post a Comment