New foil and sabre timings

[Inquartata]

So, I do a head parry, stopping my opponent's blade 2 inches from my noggin. Distance for his blade to travel to score on the remise: 2 inches. Distance for my riposte to travel to score: depending to target selected, up to several feet. Who's going to score if the remise is now so favored by the lockout time?

It's not like foil, guys. You don't have to bring the point back in line after being parried, put it on target and depress the tip. You just have to brush a thread with some part of your blade...

[sabreur]

Originally Posted by Rolls

Huh? I'm confused where in the parry-riposte or beat-attack does your opponent get a chance to hit you? If he does, then you WERE in prep.

The times for sabre really don't change that much anyway.

Rolls.

The time in sabre changes from 0.3 seconds to 0.1 seconds.

That's a big change, and I believe will greatly favor the remise over the riposte.

It will make close to simultaneous actions easier to call, because often there will be only one light. I believe that the intent is to allow the ref to call two light close to simultaneous actions as simultaneous, which will cut down on some very close judgement calls and make it easier for spectators to understand.

But essentially I believe this will screw up the game for the benefit of spectators, and how many of us get to fence in front of a bunch of spectators, especially spectators that don't understand the game to begin with?

MR

[The0ne]

all the changes are un-nessecary (god I can't spell that word!!!). Foil is becoming mostly point oriented anyway. . . Sabre is freaking fast enough. . . Oh well, good thing I'm practicing disengages now!

[mike morgan]

Now that we've finally recovered from Hurricane Charley's unwanted visit our club is back in operation. We will receive a scoring box with the new foil and sabre timings this Wednesday. We are going to thouroughly test the effect of the timings on both foil and sabre. I'll post our findings as soon as I can.

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by The0ne

all the changes are un-nessecary (god I can't spell that word!!!). Foil is becoming mostly point oriented anyway. . . Sabre is freaking fast enough. . . Oh well, good thing I'm practicing disengages now!

I agree, at least half.

I truly don't understand why the FIE changed the sabre timings. In foil, they changed them to acheive a set goal: help eliminate excessive flicking. Whether or not that goal is OK is up to you, but at least they have a purpose. I don't get the sabre changes; sabre looks pretty good to me.

I suspect that the reason behind the sabre timings are to make more one-lights for TV, but that's kinda stupid. Sabre ROW is very difficult to direct, but it follows very specific rules, even in attack in preparation and similarly complex calls. The announcer might say, "well you see, the Russian hit Mariel before she started to extend her arm, and therefore the Russian gets the point" At least it's not like foil, with ambiguous calls, and odd rules about RoW.

And I appreciate the effort to get fencing on TV, but we have to be careful, because if it's not fun, no one will do it.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by Rolls

But it doesn't change the fact that a good parry/riposte should land without you getting touched. So, the lockout time shouldn't have any effect. Same with a beat/attack. I say shouldn't because I know it's not always the case.

One could equally validly subscribe to the theory that a good attack should land without one getting touched. Some people even attempt to fence like this. If I were playing with sharps I might very well.

Given the rules of the game, however, I really don't care about late counterattacks. Similarly, when fencing a ROW weapon, I don't really care about remises against my riposte. Why should I? If my opponent is busy remising it generally means that s/he isn't busy parrying my riposte. Same exact situation on an attack. I COULD try to control my opponent's blade throughout the attack and never be hit. OR I could just count on the fact that the rules say that my attack will be valid even if I get hit on a counterattack.

-B :)

[achilleus]

Y'all might as well switch to epee now.

[Rolls]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

One could equally validly subscribe to the theory that a good attack should land without one getting touched. Some people even attempt to fence like this. If I were playing with sharps I might very well.

Given the rules of the game, however, I really don't care about late counterattacks. Similarly, when fencing a ROW weapon, I don't really care about remises against my riposte. Why should I? If my opponent is busy remising it generally means that s/he isn't busy parrying my riposte. Same exact situation on an attack. I COULD try to control my opponent's blade throughout the attack and never be hit. OR I could just count on the fact that the rules say that my attack will be valid even if I get hit on a counterattack.

-B

That's basically what I was talking about. It doesn't matter whether your opponet throws in a late counter-attack or a remise, because it won't lock you out (it'll lock out the other guy and become a one light action).

I was just trying to counter the argument that shorter lock-out times would end RoW in saber.

[keith]

Originally Posted by Rolls

I was just trying to counter the argument that shorter lock-out times would end RoW in saber.

will confess to being a foilist not a sabruer - but how many swingers of the sabres can bring their riposte to target in under 100msec?

sorry if I am just misunderestimating y'all

[ViewtifulMisho]

You are slightly underestimating sabre fencers, but those who say it will have an effect are not entirely wrong. The actual riposte is a very quick action. Even the fact that a remise only has to travel 2 inches while a riposte has to hit a target a few feet away does will not significantly harm RoW.

The real effect is on how much time the riposter has to commit. Once you take a parry, if you ripost immediately the remise cannot lock-out your light. Your arm is just not that slow, assuming you are not in Y10. The action in your head might seem like it's longer than .1 second, but that's only because you're seeing the actions as a (sabre) fencer does. I'm sure your first time watching fencing, you didn't think it was possible for anyone to distinguish what's going on. Slowly and surely, the actions became slower and clearer to your eyes.

Anyway, an immediate riposte won't be affected, but the riposter will not be able to dilly-dally. He'll have to make the decision of whether to commit or to hold much faster. As a result, we're likely to see many more counter-parrys and possibly short attacks, since fencers will be eager to finish more quickly.

[P00Man]

its not really a problem with a fast riposte, the problem comes with slower ripostes and slower beat attacks.

Ive seen it happen dozens of times where what would normally be a perfect riposte is now a one-light counter-attack into the riposte.

Also a lot of problems arise with PIL because what would normally be called passe' is now also often a one light touch for the person with the PIL thats going passe'

Also if you are doing a slow, smooth attack, a sharp and fast counter-attack can now garner a one light touch for the counter-attacker.

maybe if they move it up to .15 or .2 or something, i think that the .1 is a little too quick, at least for now it seems so.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by Rolls

That's basically what I was talking about. It doesn't matter whether your opponet throws in a late counter-attack or a remise, because it won't lock you out (it'll lock out the other guy and become a one light action).

I was just trying to counter the argument that shorter lock-out times would end RoW in saber.

Clearly there's a point at which shorter lock-out times basically end ROW. Set a box on epee. Referee it with ROW. I'm guessing stophits would still be a huge part of the game. Okay, they lose out on double touches, so aren't as powerful as they currently are (in epee), but they might still be the way to go in most circumstances. At some point (and this point will be somewhat different for different pairs of opponents) enough favor tips to the counterattacker that mostly ignoring ROW is the correct option (correct defined as is the option that will maximize the odds of scoring a touch). Is .1 seconds below that point? Probably not. I wouldn't be surprised if it's low enough that ignoring ROW in selected situations is correct however. Quick remises are likely one of the situations where ignoring ROW becomes correct first as the lockout time is decreased. Some types of counterattack are also likely to become worthwhile fairly early on in this process.

The problem that lowering the time is attempting to solve is that non-fencing spectators (and, to be honest, many fencers) don't see what is causing the referee to make each decision. Lots of actions that look the same, at least superficially, can be awarded to either or neither of the fencers. There are differences, they're just subtle and hard to see. If every two-light situation were thrown out and every one-light situation were awarded it would be very easy for a newbie to grasp what was going on. It's not hard to explain enough that a new spectator gets who's scoring when in epee. This is an attempt to make sabre as accessible. The only problem arrises when one notes that ROW does NOT lend itself well to solutions like that. He who hits first does NOT always score the touch with ROW. Adjusting the scoring machines to mostly record merely the first to hit has a dramatic impact on what actions will be used.

Would the new game be better than the current game? Maybe. Maybe it'll be more impressive, will have more involved exchanges of bladework, etc. Maybe it'll degenerate quickly into a "who can hit sooner" fest and ruin the weapon completely. Given that I see little upside -- sabre is a good weapon currently, the shift in the refereeing back a bit on the pendulum swings of how much prep is allowed have improved it further recently, etc. -- I don't favor taking drastic actions that WILL change how sabre is fenced in the hopes that the result will be better than what we have currently. If it ain't broke.... And sabre is not currently broken.

Now maybe the change in timing won't have any noticible effect. In which case there isn't much point, is there? If it does have a dramatic effect then it'll dramatically change the game (kinda by definition). I like the way sabre is currently and see no need for a dramatic change. Certainly not a dramatic change that may or may not lead to an improvement or fix a major flaw. Absent such need for a fix, why muck with it?

-B :)

[Foilling Around]

Hi folks, my first posting on your side of the pond.

I haven't used the new timings yet, but maybe we will have to start using "real" parries (what the public would regard as parries) to aviod the immediate remise.

We have got used to the slighest blade contact being regarded as a parry, but maybe we need more opposition parries and actually taking control of the opponants blade.

We coaches will have to experiment with a variety of different tactics to work out the optimum fencing style for each of our charges.

[Capt. Slo-mo]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

So, I do a head parry, stopping my opponent's blade 2 inches from my noggin. Distance for his blade to travel to score on the remise: 2 inches.

Inq brings up the best example in sabre. If an opponent attacks to my five, even if I parry it cleanly, a lackadaisical remise or continuation to the head will always beat my riposte by a large margin.

If the lockout margins are going to be as tight as they seem, I'd just attack to the head as often as possible. If they parry, immediate remise. Beat attack? Counter immediately. Attack early and often. Handspeed will rule, and ROW be jiggered.

[prototoast]

Interesting thought. What if they kept new box timings combined while re-allowing the crossover. I think that might make things even better.

[Rolls]

Originally Posted by Capt. Slo-mo

Inq brings up the best example in sabre. If an opponent attacks to my five, even if I parry it cleanly, a lackadaisical remise or continuation to the head will always beat my riposte by a large margin.

If the lockout margins are going to be as tight as they seem, I'd just attack to the head as often as possible. If they parry, immediate remise. Beat attack? Counter immediately. Attack early and often. Handspeed will rule, and ROW be jiggered.

But this is the case even now, so it does not change things. If you don't parry 5/riposte properly, it's easy for your opponent to remise and get out (or cut off) without getting hit. So, it's not different. But I have seen people parry 5/riposte to the head where the opponent didn't have a chance to do anything (in which case the lock-out time makes no difference).

I don't think the lock-out times (in theory) make a difference because even if that action had continued and both lights went off it should be called by the referee the same way. That's what I think the FIE is trying to do. Eliminate many of the decisions the ref has to make.

To me RoW ALWAYS exists. ESPECIALLY in epee. It's just not enforced in epee. You still have to find someway to establish RoW (or some sort of priority) over your opponent so that you can hit him/her without being hit.

In epee, you can watch a beginner attack over and over again and get hit by a counter attack. Usually they aren't getting their arm out there. But basically they're not establishing RoW. As you watch more advaced epee-ist, you see more attacks from further away and towards further/deeper targets etc. Why because the advaced epee-ist can commit themselves to attacks more because their attacks force their opponent to defend. I.e. they carry a credible threat OR have RoW.

I'm not saying the new timings won't change fencing. They will. But I think they will make it MORE dimentional. And a game where the remise or counterattack always wins out is NOT a more dimentional game. I think the new timings will let fencers consider, train, and use more options, be they straight attacks, counter attacks, remises, parry/ripostes, or whatever, as long as their technique, execution, and strategy is better than their opponents. It's an environment where any properly used technique can garner a touch.

Rolls.

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by Rolls

I'm not saying the new timings won't change fencing. They will. But I think they will make it MORE dimentional. And a game where the remise or counterattack always wins out is NOT a more dimentional game. I think the new timings will let fencers consider, train, and use more options, be they straight attacks, counter attacks, remises, parry/ripostes, or whatever, as long as their technique, execution, and strategy is better than their opponents. It's an environment where any properly used technique can garner a touch.

Rolls.

Epee is without RoW, with the counter-attack and remise being very favorable options, yet the game is very complex at the higher levels.

The timing changes won't make foil or saber one dimensional, but they will make more like epee. Or basically epee with restricted target, and epee with edge being valid.

An aside: I wonder if stop thrusts, as opposed to stop cuts, will become more prevalent in saber. I mean, the thrust is more efficient, and faster way touch the target, and given the new lock out time could make a lot more actions one light than a stop cut.

[sabreman]

In the Smart - Pozdniakov bout there is a touch where Smart makes Pozdniakov miss but Smart bends his arm so Pozdniakov's counter action lands well before Smarts attack. This touch was awareded to Smart and Pozdniakov acknowledged but I am thinking this action might have resulted in a one light touch for Pozdniakov with the new timing.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by Rolls

But this is the case even now, so it does not change things. If you don't parry 5/riposte properly, it's easy for your opponent to remise and get out (or cut off) without getting hit.

It's so easy that no one is doing it...

Seriously, I don't see this happening a lot. In fact, I don't ever recall seeing it done with just one light. And that's the difference: currently the ref can sort out the ROW. With the new timing his opinion is officially moot.

I think it's going to play hob with sabre, and unnecessarily. All in the chimaerical interest of "spectator appeal".

I'm not saying the new timings won't change fencing. They will. But I think they will make it MORE dimentional. And a game where the remise or counterattack always wins out is NOT a more dimentional game. I think the new timings will let fencers consider, train, and use more options,

You are an optimist. In my estimation the FIE's tinkerings do not very often justify optimism. I hope that you are right, but fear that I am.

[dunastor]

Originally Posted by The0ne

un-nessecary (god I can't spell that word

Just remember that the root of the word comes from the Latin necessare ie 'to need'. That should make things easier...