Preparations

[Markstorm]

I've heard of the term Preparation thrown around but what exactly does it mean? Can you give examples of preparations? Thanks!

[dunastor]

Preparation is everything you do fencing wise on the strip before you make an attack.

It's not clearly defined in the FIE rules, but it comes in handy with for example an attack in preparation. This means someone attacks while the other one is still "walking around" on the piste...

[downunder]

a preparation is anything that a fencer does that isn't an attack.

An attempted beat is a preparation, a step forward is a preparation, a feint, a forward movement with a non-extending arm are all preparations, and as such any attack on them has priority

[Markstorm]

Thank you for your help.

[cfaustus]

To give a slightly more narrow definition, a preparation is not simply ANYTHING a fencer does which is not an attack... Rather, a preparartion is usually considered things which a fencer does to prepare for to attack. Lots of times fencers will simply swing their blades from line to line with no intention behind their actions. This is NOT a preparation, it is just nervous action and a waste of energy and fencing time. A preparation must have intent. So if you do change beats w/the intent of un-nerving your opponent into doing something which you can then attack into, you may call the change beats performed, a preparation. Beats are generally viewed as preparation if followed almost immediately by an attack (beating the blade clears a line for you to attack into). Feints can also be considered preparation because you are doing them to illicit a specific response from your opponent which makes it easier for you to attack him or her.

Other motions not involving intent to prepare to attack can not be rightly deemed preparations, unless you want to call them preparations to be hit, which I am sure none of us would really want to do intentionally anyhow.

[dunastor]

A preparation must have intent

The term preparation is mostly used in refereeing circumstances. It is to clarify to some fencers that they were NOT attacking, let alone counter attacking.

In this sence, the term preparation is used for something other then attack.

That being said, I agree that there must be something more to it than that.
Referees don't always use the phrase attack in preparation, so sometimes a fencer is apparently NOT in preparation (ie nosepicking or the above example of swinging your blade).

It is when you see a fencer moving towards his opponent, with some intention, but still failing to meet the criteria for an attack, that the term preparation is heard.

Thank you, cfaustus for a more differentiated view on the topic

[Allen Evans]

For the fencer, a preparation may have one of serveral purposes:

1. to gain information.
2. to provoke a response.
3. to steal time from the opponent.

any or all of which must proceed an attack. Sometimes the preparation is completely in the hands of the fencer, and sometimes the opponent "helps".

When a referee states that someone was hit "in the preparation" he or she is stating that the fencer was hit while attempting to do one of the above in anticipation of launching an attack of their own.

Allen Evans

[Txakurra]

I competed and spent much time observing and at Summer Nationals I can say that "preparation" was virtually ignored. In spite of the direction from the FOC, the attack is mostly being given to the fencer advancing (even if his blade hand is being held back by his ear).

FIE RULES: T.56.4 Actions, simple or compound, steps or feints which are executed with a bent arm, are not considered as attacks but as preparations, laying themselves open to the initiation of the offensive or defensive/offensive action of the opponent.

If the standard call from referees will contradict this clearly stated rule, why don’t they just change the rule. Some say that it is a highly interpretive call. It is no more interpretive then “four of a kind” beating a “full house” in poker. At the Summer Nationals I purposefully looked for directors that called “attack in preparation” and I only found 3. All three were older eastern European directors. Not one of the younger American directors even considered the call.

Why is this rule so blatantly ignored? Why do so many fencers and directors invent rational for the bent arm attack? I realize that like all sports fencing is evolving, but then why don’t the rules change? I would love to read some answers to these questions.

Well, as the FIE stated in the last Escrime , If the directors can’t direct according to the rules, the box will be programmed to do it for them.

I must add that it was a rare pleasure to watch David Ferguson win div III men foil with a very straight attack. Bravó!

[Inquartata]

Heh, I can assure you that preparation gets called plenty in sabre. I know this from sour experience.

Although, I did have one ref at Nationals who as you said awarded the attack solely on the basis of advancing feet, disregarding arm extension almost entirely. It was...disconcerting, to say the least. Not primarily a foil ref, either, but a sabre fencer of some repute. By the time I figured out what was going on it was too late.

[prototoast]

Heh, I can assure you that preparation gets called plenty in sabre. I know this from sour experience.

Although, I did have one ref at Nationals who as you said awarded the attack solely on the basis of advancing feet, disregarding arm extension almost entirely. It was...disconcerting, to say the least. Not primarily a foil ref, either, but a sabre fencer of some repute. By the time I figured out what was going on it was too late.

Could you give a name, so that those of us who weren't at nationals might know if we get this ref in the future?

Actually, what if we had an entire folder for posting things about how different refs were calling different actions. Sort of a ref heads-up database so that some of us could start the bout knowing if there are any important quirks to be worried about? Sort of like when baseball players get reports on different umpires strike zones.

[Inquartata]

Could you give a name, so that those of us who weren't at nationals might know if we get this ref in the future?

I hesitate to do so, inasmuch as I was fencing at the time---hence my perceptions may have been faulty. I hate to impugn anyone's ability on opinion only...

[Schiavona]

Actually, what if we had an entire folder for posting things about how different refs were calling different actions. Sort of a ref heads-up database so that some of us could start the bout knowing if there are any important quirks to be worried about? Sort of like when baseball players get reports on different umpires strike zones.

Gee, what a great idea! Maybe we could call it........Bout Committee! Yeah! Bout Committee.