Interview with Double Olympic Fencing Champion Áron Szilágyi

If you like what I do here, don't forget to subscribe! You can also help support my videos on Patreon and follow my Instagram account for daily content!
/ cyrusofchaos
/ cyrusofchaos
This is an interview that I conducted with Áron Szilágyi, the 2012 and 2016 Men's Sabre Olympic Champion. Áron told me he did not want to discuss his fencing so I asked him questions about what changes he would make to the sport if he could change anything and how many world championship titles he would trade for one of his Olympic titles. Enjoy!
Also enjoy a discount on all Radical Fencing merchandise thanks to my new partnership with them! Click the link or apply the code "cyrus10" at checkout!
radicalfencing...

[@celestialtoystore]

3 consecutive Olympic Golds. He's a legend and truly one of the all time greats. As much as I love and admire the Koreans, Aron's achievements in an age where everyone is just so damned good are even more impressive.

[@weedywet]

I'm so happy to hear a twice Olympic gold medalist say that the discrepancy between the rulebook and modern refereeing is a problem. It shouldn't be a guessing game for either fencers or the potential non-fencing audience. And this goes for both saber and foil. Just because you CAN get the blade, or the point, on the target eventually doesn't make your forward motion a "threat with the blade"

[@CyrusofChaos]

weedywet well that's a multifaceted question and fixing it as you suggest (making certain blade positions and angles lose right of way for the attacker) is a solution that gives more responsibility to the referee which will just lead to another layer of inconsistency. Also I don't really understand the general argument that certain blade positions aren't threatening. If I can hit your target then I'm threatening target by definition, no? If you want to address this issue the first step has to be to define these terms in a way that makes sense

[@weedywet]

@@CyrusofChaos Of course, I understand the argument that if you pull your arm behind your head but come at me with clear intent to hit me then it should be considered an 'attack'. And that's clearly more the way it's called these days (with almost nothing being considered preparation). But then if that's going to be an attack then the rulebook could (should) be updated to reflect that and at least TRY to define an attack. In "my day" (get off my lawn) you would rarely get an attack called without a clear extension; and that's a lot closer to how the rules read. It's not so much an argument about what "should" be an attack as that the rules and the reality don't agree; or at least aren't clear.

[@hunczar]

Well done Cyrus! Thanks for doing these and thanks to Aron. Also, fantastic Magyar shirt Cyrus!!!

[@donatzhakupov8304]

Very comfy and cute interview,thank you very much,and ofc thanks Aron!

[@moman6280]

Another great interview. Well done. As weedywet says Aron's view of the discrepency between the rulebook and the refereeing being problematic is interesting. I remember being told as a kid not to bother reading the rules on sabre as they are not the same as refereed... also specifically, I don't like how in the new timings they don't give counter-attacks which are a clear period of fencing time ahead of a finishing attack when there are two lights...

[@CyrusofChaos]

Mo Man these are all valid points that need to be addressed either by making refereeing more accurately reflect the written rules or by making the rules more accurately reflect the refereeing. I always say that the worst kind of person to referee for is someone who knows everything about the rules but nothing about actual fencing but it shouldn't be that way. Knowledge of the rules shouldn't be a handicap and the fact that it is shows an underlying problem in our sport

[@Angelimir]

TRIPLE!!!

[@CyrusofChaos]

Haha so true

[@godking720]

I see Szilagyi, I like

[@johnrohde5510]

Refereeing according to the rulebook works surprisingly well and seems to be what the very top referees are doing: far more calling of preparation rather than allowing trundling attacks.
The reset on the back line was a pain: it used to be that the reset fencer came back like a bat out of hell.
The way to enhance the defence is to make referees take note of what the blade is doing: make the attacker commit their blade,