Tried new foil times

[Alan]

The flick has been discussed to death on this board because the flick sucks. Tons of people hate it.

And tons of foilists (specially the young) and even more spectators love it.

The only problem is abusive Row given not flicks
(unless you are a Romankov nostalgic)

[billpealer]

So, you pasted my whole thing there to tell me that fencing is not for me? And you don't want to talk to me. So you commented to say "no comment". Whatever man.
Fencing is who I am, I am not in charge in deciding what i love. The things you love tend to find you. And i read one of Evangelistas books when i was 18, 7 years ago. It was a good read. I'm sorry you don't agree. I'd rather read some opinionated old bastard that makes me laugh and think, than some boring instructional manual. It was entertaining. It's too bad you live in greece. I'd love to disarm you.

[dramamine]

If you took Tae Kuan Do for 10 years, but didn't compete abroad, and then went to the olympics to find that punches and kicks would be scored if they merely grazed the opponent's Gee, you'd be embarased. You'd think, this is no martial art.

If you took TKD for 10 years and didn't compete abroad, you wouldn't qualify for the olympics. I'm not arguing that your hypothetical person wouldn't be embarassed, I would be too if I had been doing something completely wrong for ten years. Someone who had just become really good at shooting hoops alone in their garage would be pretty confused looking at basketball and all its fancy rules, shots, and regulations, does this in any way reflect a flaw in the game of basketball?

People say when they watch modern foil matches, and I have plenty on video, "what are they doing waving their arms around up in the air like that? I thought they were supposed to be stabbing each other." That's how you know it's a scam, when the everyday Joe can see thats it's no longer sword skills we are engaged in, but flexible metal trickery.

I don't know who you've been showing fencing. I am a high school student (read: the people who we want to promote the sport to) When I tell people I fence, they go, "Wow. That's a pretty gay sport. I didn't know people actually did that. Do you like hold your arm up behind your head and wear white pants and stuff?" However, when I show them recent world cup footage, they say, "Holy ****. Those guys are pretty fast. I didn't know you could do that whippy thing either, cool!"

It's ridiculous to say modern fencing is about learning to fight with a real sword. Foil fencing is not about learning "sword skills"! We fence on metal, specially formulated strips with a myriad of conditions and rules. Our blades weigh 500 grams!

Anyways the point of that is that the argument, "Well, I showed 5 people fencing and they all thought flicks were dumb" has no real basis or credibility. Moving on...

I find that flickers also spend more time watching the box than they do their opponents. I mean who cares about people and technique, form and tradition, the Box is god right? Also poor manners. It is. A successful parry does not have to stop the attack. It just has to alter it.

Basically, what I gather from all this is that you fence a bunch of crappy fencers who have bad distance and look at the box too much. This is in no way indicative of anything but the skill of the people you are fencing. Any fencer who has is half decent knows to keep fencing until the judge says halt and let him worry about the box. Moreover, I'd like to point out that in success in modern fencing requires an enormous amount of technique, both in terms of handwork and footwork, as well as great distance, timing and control of tempo. A good fencer fencing the people you are talking about would probably either do a simple parry-riposte on that attack or back up, let it fall short, and launch their own attack. It's simple.

What is this about a successfull parry not having to stop an attack? That's the whole purpose of a parry! Flicks are not difficult to parry at all either, unless your distance is bad. I do (did) it all the time and my flicks are (were) parried all the time! Not to mention that if I come forward, take your blade in counter six, then raise my arm and extend it to flick you on the back, I did not "alter" my attack. This just doesn't make sense.

In regards to grips, there is a reason foil fencers, flickers and non flickers alike, have chosen the pistol grip. If you believe in the superiority of another grip by all means fence with it, clearly that's your prerogative. I don't really see the point you are trying to make here; the pistol grip simply will not disappear as its purpose is not merely to facilitate flick hits (which by the way are equally easy with a french grip, if not easier)

I'm not going to touch the rest of it, "The flick has been discussed to death on this board because the flick sucks" is not really a statement I can argue with.

Cheers

[achilleus]

So, you pasted my whole thing there to tell me that fencing is not for me? And you don't want to talk to me. So you commented to say "no comment". Whatever man.
Fencing is who I am, I am not in charge in deciding what i love. The things you love tend to find you. And i read one of Evangelistas books when i was 18, 7 years ago. It was a good read. I'm sorry you don't agree. I'd rather read some opinionated old bastard that makes me laugh and think, than some boring instructional manual. It was entertaining.

Hm, perhaps you misunderstand. One I made a comment, and two there are many different branches of fencing these days...

I've seen a master who coaches traditional italian style of fencing and has numerous pupils. They fence. They don't do what I do. They don't like what I do. I don't like what they do.

All of us do something we call fencing.

If you really agree with Evangelista's teachings, and hate the flick that much, then fencing with USFA and FIE fencers isn't for you. It's simple.

There are numerous websites and people on this board who can give you information into those avenues of fencing, whether it's historical, classical, or fantasy. I'm not quite sure of the exact differences, or where Evangelista fits in, but he sure doesn't fit in modern competitive fencing.

It's too bad you live in greece. I'd love to disarm you.

I'm flattered. Really, I am, but I don't date guys from online forums or anywhere else for that matter...

[andrewmcleod]

A successful parry does not have to stop the attack. It just has to alter it.

"The parry is the defensive action made with the weapon to prevent an offensive action arriving."

Open to interpretation, admittedly...

I sort of agree with most of what you are saying (maybe not how you are saying it), but you seem a little outside of the fencing community (which is OK, I was too - I just spent some time on the UK forum and suddenly I seem to know everything! ). Evangalista purposely puts himself outside the majority of fencing so as to appease his ego without restraints (like actually having his fencers lose in competitions?)... but you probably know that anyway.

It's not really a matter for us mortals to decide anyway, Roch will do whatever the hell he wants to...

[striker]

.................................................. ...............................
6. "fly fisherman". Have you been reading Evangelista? Stop, before it ruins you for fencing. Unless you want to stay in that hermetically sealed tiny corner of the fencing world.

Which corner is the "hermetically sealed tiny corner of the fencing world" ?
Is it Evangelista Fencing, Classical Fencing, Historical Fencing, or all
of them ?

[billpealer]

I don't think spectators love it. Poeple that i have brought to tournaments have no idea what it is. They can watch a sabre match and understand the process. Epee`, no problem. But when they watch foil, they say,. how is this sword fighting? I think it is foolish to skate around the truth. We are sword fighters. This is our sport. And any method or advancment in technology that further removes us from the art of sword play (we already are far removed as it is) is doing a diservice to the practice. We should take pride in our game. Not emphisise exploitation of our modern scoring devices and flexible weapons. What kind of morals do we instill in youthful fencers if we promote the message, "anything for that light". It boggles my mind that this whip over technique was even given a chance to grow into what it has become.
I blame gun powder if we all had to use our skills like what they were intended to be, a flick would be nonsense. Of course you can argue it's not real any more. it's a sport. Yeah well so f-ing what! why on earth would you want to remove the sport from what it was intended? Why?
And of course kids love flicking. It's an edge, a loop hole,. a warp to the next level with very little understanding or experience behind it. And its violent. What kids doenst get a kick out of hacking his opponent? Especialy one that doesnt flick back, or one that has ethics and knows we are not out to cause pain. Kids love cheat codes for video games too. If I was an electrition I probably to could rig devices to emulate a touch, making the light go off. Especialy if scoring goes wireless. Because i can, does that mean i should? NO. flicking is an ethical question. Should you do it just because you can? If we keep the flick we should just get rid of ROW, because ROW was designed as a method of not to cause dual deaths in a real engagement. Well there are no real engagements any more,. so we should get rid of old nasty ROW. Who needs it, we dont stab anymore anyways. we whip and hack, and don't even go into enguard stances anymore.

Out with the old in with the new. I have changed my mind. these new timing changes are stupid. they should make it 1 milisecond touches! if i can move that fast i should be rewarded!!!!!!

Sad. Sad time for the sport. I hope this new ruling stays, i hope it goes longer. touches should be measured in 100ths of a second not thousandths.

If you cant keep a touch for 1/100th of a second you suck! you do! Do you really know how fast millisconds are? hard drives have seek times in milliseconds? you cant see a millisecond. you cant. we see TV at frame rates of 30 frames a second,. so one frame of tv is 1/30th of a second. thats FASTER than an eye blink. to think that the average flick only stays connected for 8 milliseconds,.. its a joke!

[andrewmcleod]

Which corner is the "hermetically sealed tiny corner of the fencing world" ?
Is it Evangelista Fencing, Classical Fencing, Historical Fencing, or all
of them ?

All of the above?
Seriously though, I can understand people wanting to do historically accurate fencing, but I don't think they claim it is a sport, or even a martial art. And I can understand some aspects of classical fencing, but not the rampant bigotry. If you don't want to be competitive, fine, but don't say you are better than modern competitive 'sport' fencers just on principle. The aim of the game, as in any game, is to win.

[billpealer]

I knew you had a crush on me you greek ba$tard!
i will ask my girlfriend if she's ok with our relationship. She likes feta so it shouldn't be a problem.

[billpealer]

No. I know. I play to win. And i have learned the flick. I just feel dirty. I think to my self,. "this isnt fencing." The issue here is the interpretations. This is so very subjective. We need a concrete thing to hold onto. I used to have that faith in ROW. It was my traffic light. Now it seems ROW is up for grabs as well.

[andrewmcleod]

I blame gun powder

Funny that, because it was the invention of firearms that led to the reduction in the use of armour and thus created fencing as we know it...

And of course kids love flicking. It's an edge, a loop hole,. a warp to the next level with very little understanding or experience behind it. And its violent. What kids doenst get a kick out of hacking his opponent? Especialy one that doesnt flick back, or one that has ethics and knows we are not out to cause pain.

Flicks don't cause pain unless done badly. Now, counter-attacks to the chest, that's something else entirely...

If I was an electrition I probably to could rig devices to emulate a touch, making the light go off. Especialy if scoring goes wireless. Because i can, does that mean i should?

Not really the same thing at all... one is currently OK by the rules, the other is obvious blatant cheating.

we whip and hack, and don't even go into enguard stances anymore.

?? You are required by the FIE to come on-guard in sixte (after the 'En-garde' command). You can then do whatever you like - this is the beauty and freedom of fencing. The only reason fencers generally do in fact keep engarde is that there is a REASON for the engarde stances - not a 'principle handed down from the ages' reason, but it is simply a REALLY GOOD IDEA (RGI). Fencers are free to come engarde with their sword in whatever line they like, but generally sixte and octave are the most effective.

Sad. Sad time for the sport. I hope this new ruling stays, i hope it goes longer. touches should be measured in 100ths of a second not thousandths.

The contact time is now 1.5 100ths of a second.
Unfortunately that uses a silly unit and takes longer to write than 15ms.

If you cant keep a touch for 1/100th of a second you suck! you do! Do you really know how fast millisconds are? hard drives have seek times in milliseconds? you cant see a millisecond. you cant. we see TV at frame rates of 30 frames a second,. so one frame of tv is 1/30th of a second. thats FASTER than an eye blink. to think that the average flick only stays connected for 8 milliseconds,.. its a joke!

If swords were sharp, then this wouldn't be a problem... but because they are not, sword tips fortunately tend to bounce off...

[achilleus]

I knew you had a crush on me you greek ba$tard!
i will ask my girlfriend if she's ok with our relationship. She likes feta so it shouldn't be a problem.

I see you have a problem with reading comprehension.

So, I'll just say what I was taught to say:

No, means NO.

[andrewmcleod]

PS I think the rules should have been changed (as indeed they have, though in a typically ham-fisted incompetent SEMI kind of way) to prevent flicks.

[jeff]

Which corner is the "hermetically sealed tiny corner of the fencing world" ?
Is it Evangelista Fencing, Classical Fencing, Historical Fencing, or all
of them ?

"All of them" fits to a large extent when you compare to the much larger world of fencing, but I meant Evangelista. He doesn't get all that much credit in the CF crowd, actually (I've been on the classicalfencing list for about 4 years). Evangelista is not a classical fencer - he was trained as a sport fencer around the same time as me, and never particularly distinguished himself.

[achilleus]

A successful parry does not have to stop the attack. It just has to alter it.

Hey question for you here:

I'm being attacked in my 4 line
As I attempt to parry 4
my opponent alters his attack, disengages and hits me in the 6 line.
I hit him at the same time


Is it my parry riposte?

[jeff]

The flick has been discussed to death on this board because the flick sucks. Tons of people hate it.

As I first said, I dislike the flick. Nonetheless, the post I was responding to was ill-informed.

People have used examples of golf and tennis. I play both. I think they are right but still off target. Those changes in racquet and ball tecnology aren't completely changing the way the game is played. You would still use the same style swing to serve or dirve the ball with modern equipment or clubs from the 40's.

Doubtful. The increased athleticism of tennis has dramatically changed the game, besides the results of the equipment.

If a master fencer from the 40's saw someone fencing modern foil, they'd be shocked, because what they would be watching is NOT FENCING.

And you say this based on your great authority - thanks for letting us all know.

The advances in our sport of fencing were designed to protect us from injury and aid the judges. Not change the way we fence. I would like to also point out that the flick is not a style, it's a manuver.

Advances like electrical fencing had nothing to do with safety. Wherever did you get that idea? They were introduced to increase the accuracy of determining who got hit and when, compared to the notoriously inaccurate (and liable to bias and corruption) dry judging.

And your point about flicking not being a style is what? Of course it's a maneuver. Who said otherwise?. So what?

And it's getting bad press because this manuver is painful when it doesnt land correctly and insistant flickers make it the focus of thier game, therefore making it a style. And a nasty one at that. People say when they watch modern foil matches, and I have plenty on video, "what are they doing waving their arms around up in the air like that? I thought they were supposed to be stabbing each other." That's how you know it's a scam, when the everyday Joe can see thats it's no longer sword skills we are engaged in, but flexible metal trickery.

Yes, it's that well-informed non-fencing public that helps inform us what fencing is. Got it.

Flicking turns this sport into a scam, based more on making a light turn on, than doing what you are supposed to be doing, and thats stabbing your opponent. I find that flickers also spend more time watching the box than they do their opponents. I mean who cares about people and technique, form and tradition, the Box is god right? Also poor manners. It is.

I've seen people of all styles watching the box for 30+ years. Bad habit. But I think you're more interested in repeating Evangelista's nonsense. It's hitting the person that makes the box turn on - that continues to be what everyone tries to do. And it has nothing to do with manners, either.

If you took Tae Kuan Do for 10 years, but didn't compete abroad, and then went to the olympics to find that punches and kicks would be scored if they merely grazed the opponent's Gee, you'd be embarased. You'd think, this is no martial art.

Unless it was no-contact or light-contact rules, in which case it would be no problem.

A successful parry does not have to stop the attack. It just has to alter it.

Well, that's ridiculous (and contrary to historical practice, too). Of course a parry stops the attack. The classical fencing credo is "what if it were sharp?" You want to keep the attack from hitting you so you don't bleed.

The flick IS a consequence of electric play. The defination of consequence is something happans after as a result to something else. 40 years after electric is main streamed we now flick.

If electrical weapons caused flicks we would have seen it in the 60s. Instead, it was produced by a trend established decades later by a particular group of international fencers and referees.

By the way - low line and flank attacks were a direct consequence of electrical foil. You wouldn't see these attacks land reliably in dry fencing, so you had to go to the chest and plant the point so the blade bent upwards so the judges or their seeing eye dogs would see it. Low line and flank shots would be lethal in the real world but had to be avoided in sport fencing till the machine came. Electrical fencing made fencing more realistic, not less.

You think people weren't landing odd whip overs in the 60's 70's and 80s? In the 50s it was never an option to move in such manner as to execute the flick. There was probably 30 years of lights going off untill they realized what was happening. Most likely early flicks were assumed to be error, equipment failure. As they should have.

I know quite well that such whipovers were landed in the 60s and on, since I was fencing then. The problem isn't whipovers, it's the recent tendency to consider any forward motion of the fencer as an attack. Early flicks were not considered equipment failures, they were just called by other names. Interestingly enough, in dry sabre it was common to whack your opponent as hard as you could, so you could either inflict enough pain that the judge would see it, or whip through a parry.

Your number 3, which is actually your 4th point, didn't really have a backbone. I showed no disrespect by using the McDonalds analogy. That woman's lawsuit WON. She technicaly was right. Ethicaly,... that's up in the air. My house isn't glass. I have an apartment If you consider to be likened to the McDonlads lawsuit woman an insult, than you might be of solid character.

You were making an analogy of fraud, or at least foolishness. Of course you were being disrespectful.

I have read Evangelista. There is nothing wrong with what he writes. An idealist is the artist. Foil is art. The realist is the carpenter. What book makes for better reading, Moby Dick, or an instructional manual on How to Kill a Whale? I don't read to learn how to fence. I fence to do that.

Well, if you think there's nothing wrong what what he says, then we have little ground for agreement. I think he's a minor player with no credentials or accomplishments, a big mouth, and foolish remarks about fencing. You're entitled to your own opinion.

I fenced dry for 4 years because we were isolated. Small town, w/ a dozen fencers. We were poor high school kids, we bought what our maestra told us to buy. We felt lucky to be fencing at all. And I will always be grateful of my roots.

I started with dry foil and little money too. I learned directing off-machine too. Just realize your limited background reduces the knowledge that you bring to the discussion.

Though the Italian and Pistol grips both employ a lever/fulcrum mechanism. The pistol uses verticle torque and the Italian horizontal. To whip over w/ pistol your hand is up and down, palms facing inward. Italain, to whip over your hand is supinated, palm up. So though they use leverage, they don't use them the same. Nore should they even be compared as similar. The only thing they have in common is that they are grips.

I trained and competed with Italian grip and gratefully gave it up to fence with pistol. I assure you you can do anything in Italian that you can do with a pistol, except not as easily and with much less comfort. You would do a flick in Italian exactly as you described for pistol. You would not hold your hand with the palm facing up.

You live in jersey? I'm in Stamford, CT. wanna fence? I just moved here and need a cheap club, have any recomendations?

I'd love to. My club - Salle Santelli - recently went out of business after some 70 years and I've yet to find a convenient and compatible new home. My suggestion is for you to go to the USFA website and click on the "where to fence" links leading to Connecticut.

[ChubbyHubby]

billpealer,

You may or may not have noticed when you read this thread today that it was about a year old. Since then a lot has happened.

1. You *can* flick with the new timings
We've been competing with the new timings since last sept in the UK. Most flickers have readjusted to get the light on. Especially when fencing against people who just lunge at you as you come forward. It has become less tactically viable due to the blockout time, but then again attacking is less tactically viable.

2. The lengthened contact time causes some problems with thrusts
When the tip hits at a slight angle (even when it fixes on the target) it sometimes bounces off. It bounces also when it hits hard surfaces (e.g. ribs, collar bone). There is a good chance it will be reduced to 8ms.

Some fencers are wearing plastic chest protectors (men and women), which bounces tips causing hits to fail.

3. Top fencers have staged protests
In a recent world cup event, fencers protested by agreeing to fence to a single hit and then be passive, causing massive embrassment to the FIE.

So things are rather fluid at the moment.

I wouldn't swap to a french grip just yet...

[billpealer]

yeah,. i have read a gazilion other boards. I don't know how long these changes will stick. i read a lot of posts from people in the UK that think these new boxes rock as well. Epeeists were contemplating fencing foil again. Heaven forbid. Yeah i guess i don't have a big contact circle in the fencing community. The score boxes i know were not designed for safty. You have to cool off. I talked about the metal being too flexible as well. idc about the box, its the whips that suck. yeah a good flick doesnt hurt, well i dont know when was the last time you fenced down here in the trenches, but in the realm of unrated fencers or even e and d rated USFA, maybe one in 20 foilist can flick wth out bruising.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doubtful. The increased athleticism of tennis has dramatically changed the game, besides the results of the equipment.--------------------------------------------------------------------------

ok. how? the advent of gaterade?
\------------------------------------------------
Hey question for you here:

I'm being attacked in my 4 line
As I attempt to parry 4
my opponent alters his attack, disengages and hits me in the 6 line.
I hit him at the same time


Is it my parry riposte? ------------------------------------------------------------
if you attempted to parry and made no contact with his blade, no it would be impossible to class that as a riposte. If you made contact with his weapon during your mal parry and then extended, or you parried with point in line (which how i was tought every 4 and 6 should be) , yet his disengage was still good, and there were two lights, around here, the mal parry would get the vote. Because contact was made.

My first experience with this was in Rochester (ny)in 2001. My opponent was pretty much circling 4 the entire bout, so i would lunge to his 6 knowing he'd take my blade to his left with his circle 4, my lunge being fast and deep, would hit his 4 everytime, yet after redirecting my attack to his 4 he would riposte (whip over to my spine). We would 2 light, he would get the point. After loosing 3 points in a row with this. I gave up. I no longer use planned attacks that take into acount light parrys and or people who parry the blade as so that attacks cross their chest. kinda like leading when you shoot trap. if you know how they will parry they will take your blade into them.
It is my belief that my lunge to the 6 knowing i'd be parryed to 4 is not successful parry because thats what i wanted to do. my intent was that. ThaT was my attack. I was not remesing. That wasn't a parry. I wanted you to do that.

[kalivor]

It is my belief that my lunge to the 6 knowing i'd be parryed to 4 is not successful parry because thats what i wanted to do. my intent was that. ThaT was my attack. I was not remesing. That wasn't a parry. I wanted you to do that.

Ah! I get it!

So if I attack someone with the INTENTION that they parry successfully and riposte, with me continuing on into valid target afterwards, then their parry becomes a mal-parry and my remise is not a remise!

Brilliant!

[darius]

If a master fencer from the 40's saw someone fencing modern foil, they'd be shocked, because what they would be watching is NOT FENCING.

I'm actually quite well-acquainted with a master fencer whose competitive career was in the 40's. He has seen modern foil, and fails to be shocked. He still teaches, and preaches good fundamentals, distance, timing, etc. The only time I've ever heard him say, "That's not fencing" is when watching a group of fencers trained by so-called classicists. Go figure.

i dont know when was the last time you fenced down here in the trenches, but in the realm of unrated fencers or even e and d rated USFA, maybe one in 20 foilist can flick wth out bruising.

I fence/teach in that realm. And know plenty of people who can flick sans bruising. With the new timings, since the blade should be flicking to the top of the shoulder, it's probably going to be a little more painful (oof...collarbone!).

Anytime you're dealing with worse people, the chances of getting hurt are less. I played soccer with some extremely good folks over the summer; we'd play hard, and there were collisions, but nobody ever really got hurt. Playing with a few of the more spastic members of my club, however, is where people get banged up.

The answer to this is to fence better people; something that those of us who are trying to improve tend towards, anyway.

Doubtful. The increased athleticism of tennis has dramatically changed the game, besides the results of the equipment.
ok. how? the advent of gaterade?

The serve-and-volley and all-around play of yesteryear has been replaced by strong baseline play. Modern racquets and athleticism have basically made the power-serve game the one to play; Andy Roddick holds the record at over 150mph, and averages in the 120s -- at those speeds, even an elite athlete has to guess at the spin and court placement. Look at all the top players; they are all tall, have hard serves, and rarely rush the net.

I no longer use planned attacks that take into acount light parrys and or people who parry the blade as so that attacks cross their chest.

If the blade contact comes before the hit is made, the blade is parried. Further offensive movement is a remise. The materiality of a parry is really determined by sound; a ref can't stop the action and measure whether the parry cleared the attacker's tip "enough."

Chances are, however, that given the flexibility of blades, that the tip deviates from threatening target, even with the lightest of parries. I've seen even club-level fencing in slow-motion, and it's amazing how much the foils move around.

darius