[.ca] The Art and Science of Fencing (ISBN 1570280754)

no proof:
Writing a decent book takes a lot of time and effort. Active, top-level coaches are generally too busy with the business of coaching (training their club/team, travelling with fencers to tournaments) to have time to write books. Thus, fencing books have a tendency to be either retirement projects by those who are winding down their involvement with active coaching, or written by people who really aren't participating at a high competitive level at all. Either way, the net result is that fencing books tend to be a little (or a great deal) out-of-date at the time they are published. Obviously promoting the book by his friends, students and HIMSELF on various internet websites that sell books may help with his sells figures. With that being said, there are better books out there Rudy Volkman's book are indeed far better the Mr.Evangelista's and also Aladar Kogler's books. I also completely agree that while Mr.Evangelista claims to have produced champions on his books and his website, he has failed to mention even one single name. I think it's safe to say, that if Mr.Evangelista had produced some champions, he would have mentioned them in his books specifically. But I wouldn't be suprised if he comes back and says, that's not what classical fencing is all about. He claims that he produced champions so you can't really make that argument stick. As it is, he writes about the people that his teacher Ralph Faulkner produced.

Review, Review, Review:
The previous reviewer seems to have mistaken Maestro Evangelista's review page for a chat room. I'm sure there are few people as intelligent as this individual, so it seems odd that she can't understand that more than one person in the world might wish to express an opinion regarding negative reviews about a book they find valuable. I have no idea who Cal Worth is, but I certainly agree with his thoughts regarding Nick Evangelista's work. As for writing approaches, having never written a review on Amazon.com before, I studied other reviews before I wrote mine, to see how they were put together. So what does any of this have to do with Maestro Evangelista's book? I have noticed that negative reviews tend to follow the same pattern. First, they rarely include the name of the reviewer. It is easy to perform an anonymous hit-and-run. And, second, they always attack the person, not what he says. What does calling the Maestro the "David Carridine of fencing" have to do with anything? Does this address the issues of fencing? It is nothing more than immature name calling -- in this case from somone who didn't even identify himself. As in the case of the reviewer from Texas, she had to make up a little story regarding what she believes about my review, not dealing with the issues I broght up regarding the Maestro's work. This, of course, is the ad hominem argument that has been around for centuries: if you can't attack the issue, you attack the person. Even the ancient Romans, who put the name on this approach, thought it was the weakest form of debate. And this is what sport fencers do continually when they throw their invective at Maestro Evangelista's books. The previous reviewer, for all her glibness, is, apparently, no different. At this point, I see no reason to continue reviewing reviews of reviews of reviews, responding forever to remarks made by other reviwers in an endless display of ... what? Obviously, this is not a chat room or a message board. But, I think, it was valid this one time to add a few more thoughts, given the opportunity, about the way reviews regarding any book are handled. I still support Nick Evangelista's writing. I think he is one of the very best writers around dealing with the art and science of fencing. Actually, I have copies of all his fencing books, and I give copies out as gifts whenever I have the opportunity. I hope the readers of this review and Amazon.com take my remarks in the honest spirit in what they were given. I leave it up to the readers of these reviews to make up their own minds regarding Nick Evangelista's books.

Pass on this book:
Do all Nick's disciples all sound the same? Go ahead and read all the reviews that favor this book. It's like they make this second rate teacher some sort of a god. Always arrogant, I guess humbleness is not something Nick has not been teaching his disciples...if you read the reviews, it comes off being arrogant, calling other sports meaningless, bad mouthing modern fencing. Nick's standard method of arguing a point in print: 1. Make assertion. 2. Set up straw man in opposition to that assertion. 3. Flame away. 4. Get into copyright fight with Ann Coulter over who used a particular string of invective first. This is what appreciating martial art is all about? Time and time again, you find his disciples trying to defend this guy. Only claim to fame is his teacher was Ralph Faulkner, has Nick even train any well known fencer? I am not talking about giving few classes to some beginner who later studies under a different coach or maestro, I mean someone he personally taught from beginning to his or her fencing career to a divisional title or the olympics? He makes quite a few claims about having been a fencing coach for 30 years, and having coached several champions. Does anyone know of any champions that credit Evangelista as having been the major influence on their fencing? Even any highly rated fencers? I think not! His book at best gives a glimpse of the history of fencing and some basic knowledge of the sport but his book comes off being arrogant just like his "disciples." He, at best, is respected among non-fencers (who love reading about the notion of romanticized "classical fencing") and new fencers. Even among classical fencing community, Unlike Nick Evangelista, such classical fencing masters appears to have no need to "validate" their art by denigrating the character, motives, and competence of those who don't practice it. If you want to read a good fencing book read "Big Book of Fencing by Rudy Volkman."

Haha:
Too too funny, Cal aka James, when you are writing two reviews using two different names you might not want to make your writing pattern so obvious. Always capitalizing the title of the book and too many "--" gives your writing style away. Oh my gosh, how I dare I defame Nick, please.

A sound, honest book on fencing!:
I have read Nick Evangelista's book The Art and Science of Fencing through and through a number of times, and have never encountered a shread of arrogance in it. It is a sound, honest book on fencing. It is, in fact, the best written fencing book I know of. It is a very "human" fencing book. Evangelista displays a thorough knowledge of fencing. He says nothing without backing it up with the logic of traditional fencing. His love of fencing can be felt on every page. I have fenced off and on for forty years in the U.S. and abroad, and so do not come to the subject as a beginner. Moreover, I know many longtime fencers, and fencing masters, who share Evangelista's views and respect his thoughts on the subject. It is interesting that the previous review is another anonymous attack. It is easy to throw rocks from the darkness. I do not envy Nick Evangelista his position in the modern fencing world. He definitely has a bull's eye painted on his forehead. I recommend The Art and Science of Fencing. I also recommend The Inner Game of Fencing. And I say this without arrogance.