Why Do Fencers Often Fence Better in Training Than in Competition?

Why results drop under pressure, and what fencers, coaches and parents can practice.

Author: BenFencing
Published: 17 October 2026

‘You fence better in practice!’ An athlete may hear this from a coach or a parent — or say it to themselves. But the phrase explains very little. Performing an action in familiar surroundings and choosing the right moment to use it in a competitive bout are related, but different, tasks.

A more useful starting question is: what actually changed at the competition? The opponent? The distance? Decisions? Attention? Or simply the score by which we judge the performance?

First, check what you are comparing

At the club, a fencer knows their partners: who likes to counterattack, who retreats after an initial preparation, who changes tempo. At a competition, those clues must be discovered afresh. A training partner may also be working on a specific task, trying unfamiliar actions or fencing after a demanding session. Losing a practice bout in those circumstances says little about the competitive balance.

So a fencer who wins more bouts at the club is not necessarily underperforming at tournaments. With a coach, it helps to examine the quality of the actions: does the fencer notice the opponent’s preparation, choose an appropriate moment and change their decision when the original plan stops working?

It is a different situation when video shows an athlete abandoning actions they normally use, attacking from an unsuitable distance or repeating the same decision after several failures. Those are specific episodes to review. ‘They were just nervous’ is too general an explanation to help.

Pressure can change attention

Researchers use the term choking under pressure for a deterioration in performance under psychological pressure. It is not a label for every defeat. A strong opponent, a poor tactical choice or an action that is not yet well learned does not by itself demonstrate such a breakdown.

Work by psychologists Sian Beilock, Thomas Carr, Marci DeCaro and their colleagues helps explain two possible mechanisms. In one, attention drifts to consequences: ‘What will people think if I lose?’ or ‘I must not concede again.’ In the other, the athlete starts controlling, step by step, a skill they can already perform fairly automatically. The mechanism can depend on the task and the type of pressure.^[1]^[2]

Imagine a fencer approaching a decisive exchange while running through several instructions at once: foot placement, when to extend the arm, what to do with the body. This illustrates how excessive monitoring might disrupt a coordinated action. Another fencer may instead be thinking about their final placing and stop noticing changes in distance.

Beilock and Carr’s experiments included golf putting, while DeCaro and colleagues used laboratory tasks. These studies explain how pressure can affect performance. They cannot tell you why one fencer made one mistake. The fencing examples are ours. The studies did not test fencers.

What to practice in training

If difficulties arise specifically when the score and the importance of the bout become prominent, discuss with the coach how to introduce those conditions gradually. Examples include starting a practice exchange at a tied score before the deciding touch, fencing with limited time or holding a small club competition.

There is research support for this approach. A meta-analysis by William Low and colleagues, published in 2021, combined 14 studies of training under simulated pressure: ten in sport and four in policing. On average, the findings supported its usefulness. The authors also highlighted the need to test whether the benefits transfer to real competition.^[3]

The review did not test these fencing drills. Discuss them with your coach. Conditions should suit the athlete’s age and experience. Be clear about the skill being practised: deciding under time pressure, recovering after an error or following a plan at a tied score. Humiliation or threats of punishment are not needed for this task.

Use a clear preparation sequence before stepping onto the piste

This means a short sequence the athlete has already tried in practice: finish the warm-up, check that equipment is ready and recall one task for the opening exchanges. For example: ‘Find out how the opponent responds to preparation.’ That is more specific than the vague demand to ‘perform well today’.

A meta-analysis by Anton Rupprecht, Ulrich Tran and Peter Gröpel, published in a 2024 journal issue, supports the benefits of pre-performance routines. It included 112 effect sizes from different research conditions. Adjust the order to the fencer.^[4]

Preparing for a single golf putt also differs from preparing for a fencing bout. The practical takeaway for a fencer is narrower: find a brief, understandable preparation sequence and try it in training. Introducing a complicated ritual for the first time on an important competition day is unlikely to be sensible.

After an error, identify the next task

A touch already conceded cannot be undone. What can change is the next action. ‘I have ruined everything again’ offers no decision. ‘They catch me as I exit — I need to check the distance after my attack’ gives the athlete something concrete to work on.

During a pause, an athlete can try a simple sequence: notice their reaction, take a calm breath out and choose one task for the next exchange — for example, resume watching the opponent’s preparation. Agree the wording with the coach: a cue about distance may make sense to one fencer, while another needs a cue about tempo or when to begin an action.

Try it and see if it helps. Its purpose is to bring attention back to an available action. An athlete need not demand that all nervousness disappear before allowing themselves to fence.

Parents can reduce unnecessary pressure

‘You always beat that opponent’ may be intended as encouragement, yet also turn winning into an obligation. ‘Why are you not doing what you do in practice?’ asks a child to explain the situation at a moment when they may not understand it themselves.

In an Association for Applied Sport Psychology article, mental performance consultant Michael Huber draws attention to both the content and the timing of feedback. He recommends avoiding categorical judgements, supporting the athlete’s autonomy and considering whether the child is ready to discuss their performance.^[5]

Instead of an immediate analysis, ask: ‘Would you like to talk about the bout now or later?’ When that conversation happens: ‘What went well? What was hardest? What would you like to discuss with your coach?’ This leaves room for the child to make sense of the experience. Agree any technical instructions at the piste with the coach beforehand, so the athlete does not have to choose between competing voices.

Look for recurring situations

One disappointing competition does not explain the whole training process. For the next review, record a few observations: when the athlete began rushing, what changed after conceding a touch and whether they returned to the plan. Record sleep, travel, warm-up and waiting time separately. Some bad days have physical causes.

With the coach, choose one recurring problem and one way to address it. If an athlete rushes in close finishes, model those situations in practice. If they lose focus after an error, practice returning to the next task. Then check whether their behaviour changes at the next competition, even if their final placing stays the same.

For persistent difficulties with competitive pressure, a sport psychologist can join this work. Frame the request specifically: ‘In decisive exchanges I stop following my plan’ or ‘It takes me a long time to switch attention after a mistake.’ That starts the work with an observable situation.

What the research shows

A 2026 meta-analysis by Zhoujie Zeng and colleagues brought together 21 studies of interventions intended to counter performance deterioration under pressure. Approaches included pre-performance routines, gaze control, self-talk and mindfulness. The authors note the need for further research in settings closer to changing competitive environments.^[6]

It would therefore be wrong to promise that a breathing technique, keyword or exercise will necessarily improve competition results. In fencing, the opponent continuously changes the situation. Any approach needs to be tested alongside technical, tactical and physical preparation.

Fencers can practice competing, just as they practice footwork. A useful question after a competition is: ‘What made it harder to apply my skills — and how can I prepare for that situation?’