Fencing.Net - Your Guide to Fencing & Fencing Equipment

niblik · 08-20-2004, 12:56 AM

The TV coverage is much better than past Olympics (need much more) & way too much volleyball. We know the US must be contenders to be covered.
This little coverage will help the sport very much
But how much worse could the judging have been on the men's sabre finals?!
What is the story? Hatred of the US? or something worse?
Why is there only one Ref.? the action is hard enough to see, obviouslly this guy couldn't see both fencers. That would warrant the need for at least two judges, if not some kind of video replay
Before the electronics there were five observers.
It really seems like a perfect case for appeal.

About the sportsmanship: the celebration was bad, but fist pumps, as a form of appeal to the judge, should be totally banned. Fencers call touches on themselves, or used to

sabreman · 08-20-2004, 01:14 AM

I agree that they are calling things way to tight and they are not always consistent. One time they call simo and the next attack counter attack on same action. Smart should have stayed away from that game and tried to make Pozdniakov miss more (easier said the done). Also wouldn't be surprised to see the FIE locking down (again) on protesting.

Sabresque · 08-20-2004, 01:53 AM

France match was horrible. They were just out to get us I guess.

glowstix · 08-20-2004, 01:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by niblik

About the sportsmanship: the celebration was bad, but fist pumps, as a form of appeal to the judge, should be totally banned. Fencers call touches on themselves, or used to

yeah, i agree with that. clearly the action is attack/counterattack and the dude is STILL appealing. this is ridiculous. also, they don't salute each other or look each other in the face afterwards. thats lack of respect for the opponent and the sport.

reposte · 08-20-2004, 03:04 AM

Quote:

France match was horrible. They were just out to get us I guess

Not at all.

Your fencers are relying too heavily on athletic ability and are rather weak on tecnique.
Both Smart and Lee rely on the demi flech and think that because they provide the ref with a much athletic and aggresive action he'll forget that attack is measured by the extension of the hand.
It is almost instinctive that when the demi fleche is carried out the hand goes backwards and up in a slicing action and that's a retraction in comparison with the forwards action the French applied.
It was close, but they weren't out to get you.

Sabresque · 08-20-2004, 03:57 AM

I can see what you're saying but when I watched it I noticed that the calls on this action were extremely inconsistant, and many of our fencers' non-fleche preps in between the en guard lines were completely disregarded or given to france. I'll have to watch it again but that was my take.

Agent_V · 08-20-2004, 08:07 AM

good eyes, Riposte, that was definitely a complaint of mine during the bronze bout against russia. Besides a few of these which were given to the US or called simultaneous, there were at least a couple calls that to me seemed convincingly russia's but were called for the US, especially in Roger's second bout.

However, I guess this means that we've become a great fencing power, now that close calls are often favored to us...

Alexander

sabreman · 08-20-2004, 09:13 AM

I agree about the technique part but the refs are also inconsistant. One time they allow it and the next they don't. Also the other side is not always perfect either. Why not award the attack to Smart on the touch prior the final one in the Russia match? Just feel the last touch in a 44 - 44 medal match should be much clearer.

qatet · 08-20-2004, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabreman

I agree about the technique part but the refs are also inconsistant. One time they allow it and the next they don't. Also the other side is not always perfect either. Why not award the attack to Smart on the touch prior the final one in the Russia match? Just feel the last touch in a 44 - 44 medal match should be much clearer.

And yet, if I do something that the ref is inconsistent on, I don't do it in the last few touches of a bout - especially if I've had a long time to see the opponent and the ref, as one does in a team relay. Doing it repeatedly when the ref only sometimes pays it makes one look like a one-trick pony.

whtouche · 08-20-2004, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qatet

And yet, if I do something that the ref is inconsistent on, I don't do it in the last few touches of a bout - especially if I've had a long time to see the opponent and the ref, as one does in a team relay. Doing it repeatedly when the ref only sometimes pays it makes one look like a one-trick pony.

Yeah, but that doesn't work when the thing the ref is inconsistent on is attack counter attack.
Maybe the refs read that SI story, because they seemed more often than not to be giving the touch to whoever hit first, not who had right of way.

sabreman · 08-20-2004, 10:29 AM

Qatet, I agree the US tactics might have been flawed. I am looking at it from a non fencers view. My guess is that they think the refs are flipping a coin most of time on determining ROW on close simo actions and in some cases I think they might actually be right. LOL!

qatet · 08-20-2004, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whtouche

Yeah, but that doesn't work when the thing the ref is inconsistent on is attack counter attack.

Unfortunately true. I ref foil a bit, and make no claims to being a decent sabre ref, but I was baffled by some of the riposte vs. remise timing. Seems that if you're getting hit by the remise before you even begin your extension that there's something doing wrong.

Sabresque · 08-20-2004, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabreman

I agree about the technique part but the refs are also inconsistant. One time they allow it and the next they don't. Also the other side is not always perfect either. Why not award the attack to Smart on the touch prior the final one in the Russia match? Just feel the last touch in a 44 - 44 medal match should be much clearer.

That's also what I saw

Inquartata · 08-20-2004, 03:12 PM

Are they showing each touch in slo-mo after?

Watching the tapes from the 2000 Olympics I thought a lot of actions were simultaneous or reversed. Almost every time, when they showed the action in slo-mo the ref turned out to have been correct, and my pereceptions wrong...

qatet · 08-20-2004, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Are they showing each touch in slo-mo after?

Watching the tapes from the 2000 Olympics I thought a lot of actions were simultaneous or reversed. Almost every time, when they showed the action in slo-mo the ref turned out to have been correct, and my pereceptions wrong...

Yes, that marvellous Italian site had each touch in full, from a good distance and angle, then gave slo-mo replays from two or three different angles. Lovely.

(You listening, NBC? Lovely, I tell you! Go watch and learn!)

C.J. · 08-20-2004, 03:34 PM

I am truely disappointed by the directing in the medal bouts. When you see two fencers have to yell to sway the director on every touch and in every bout, except one-lights, and invariably at least one fencer will show some resentment to the decision, you know something fundamentally is wrong with this sport. It shows this sport has zero sportsmanship, and it's ambiguous rules have made it that way. I can't think of another sport that is like that.

sabreman · 08-20-2004, 03:38 PM

>>
Are they showing each touch in slo-mo after?

Watching the tapes from the 2000 Olympics I thought a lot of actions were simultaneous or reversed. Almost every time, when they showed the action in slo-mo the ref turned out to have been correct, and my pereceptions wrong...

>>

Yes they showed some replays but the refs judgements were not always consistent. Why make some flip of the coin decision when you could just throw it out. The last two exchanges in the Smart - Pozdniakov bout are a good example. The first one is called simo and the other attack Pozdniakov. To me the simo action looked more like Smarts attack then the touch awarded to Pozdniakov in the last exchange. I am sure some one on this board will have a different opinion but I think all that says it wasn't very clear so throw the damn thing out.

DanInMI · 08-20-2004, 03:40 PM

Inquartata: "Are they showing each touch in slo-mo after?"
I watched the men's team finals on video tape....so I was able to rewind and play over each touch....I thought the reffing was dead on, especially Keeth's bouts. On the touches that Keeth seemed to think were his he was prepping.

Almost all of his attacks were the same low line "fleche/lunge" thing. (I don't know what to call it...he leaps off his front foot but tries not to cross over and lands with thee front foot still forward. ) He would step forward stop, draw his hand way back to his hip and start leaning forward...then leap off his front foot while extending. Often his opponent would attack while Keeth was starting the lean forward, and the ref would give the touch to his opponent. Presumably he was calling it attack in prep. If Keeth was advancing at that moment or his arm was extending I am sure he would have gotten the calls, but leaning forward is not attacking.

sabreman · 08-20-2004, 03:51 PM

I can see what you are saying but they didn't always call it that way. He does that all the time. Also what about the second to last exchange against Pozdniakov?

DanInMI · 08-20-2004, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabreman

I can see what you are saying but they didn't always call it that way. He does that all the time. Also what about the second to last exchange against Pozdniakov?

I played that one over about three times because Keeth seemed to think that was his.... Pozdniakov started first.