Sabre Mask Windows

[Pepster]

Functional question:

The olympic Sabre masks I saw on TV had a clear window, A-la the Epee/Foil masks that have been around for a while.

( Visual Aid: http://www.leonpaul.com/acatalog/Sho..._Range_79.html )

how is it legal to have a non-conductive area on an electric sabre mask? If I attack with the point (legal in sabre) and hit you in the fron of the face (valid target in sabre) do I still get a touch even though a light won't go off?

-Pepster

[kalivor]

Actually, in the Olympics it was *illegal* not to have such a sabre mask. The FIE required them -- they have yet to require them in foil or epee. And yes, there's a big dead spot in the middle of the mask -- apparently that's OK.

I've seen several hits on the window at smaller competitions that didn't register, but there didn't seem to be any such hits at the Olympics. If (when?) you hit the window (and only the window) you don't get a point.

[acaba]

The rules state unequivocally that if your light is not on, you can't score. Same in all weapons. (Assuming no penalties for your opponent). So yes, a point attack to the window will not score. Given what (little) I know about sabre, this seems to be a rare occurance, since point attacks to the face are rare.

Even so, everyone at the Olympics had the same dead spot, so it did not provide any advantages

[greenchick]

Originally Posted by acaba

Even so, everyone at the Olympics had the same dead spot, so it did not provide any advantages

Didn't provide an advantage to one fencer over another, no, but it did effectively change the legal target area for the sake of TV-friendliness. This is not a good thing.

(And, as a data point, I do see point attacks to the face in sabre -- not frequently, but they aren't as rare as living dodos, either.)

[Pepster]

Originally Posted by acaba

Even so, everyone at the Olympics had the same dead spot, so it did not provide any advantages

I would say it provided an advantage if you were fencing an opponent who was proficient with point attacks or liked to attack the mask.

Why was it required? TV reasons only?

Originally Posted by acbaa

The rules state unequivocally that if your light is not on, you can't score. Same in all weapons. (Assuming no penalties for your opponent)

For some reason I'd thought a direcotr could award an OBVIOUS touch even if the light did not register. (I.E. - Epee lands square on chest with blade bent, light fails to go off, no repost)

Perhaps I was mistaken.

-Pep

[kalivor]

Originally Posted by Pepster

I would say it provided an advantage if you were fencing an opponent who was proficient with point attacks or liked to attack the mask.

Why was it required? TV reasons only?

Yep. The FIE makes changes for other reasons?

Originally Posted by Pepster

For some reason I'd thought a direcotr could award an OBVIOUS touch even if the light did not register. (I.E. - Epee lands square on chest with blade bent, light fails to go off, no repost)

Perhaps I was mistaken.

You were mistaken. t.40 states "Under no circumstances can the referee declare a competitor to be touched unless the touch has been properly registered by the apparatus."

Exceptions are given for penalty touches and the substitution of invalid target.

[Inquartata]

Yep, as everyone else noted it's just the FIE changing the essential nature of the sport in their pursuit of the chimaera of "spectator appeal" and the dreams they have of luring TV audiences ( and their money ) into the sport. Idiots.

[JAySE SUiCiDE]

yep, the FIE. Willing to go against the rules they set up to degrade our sport for their own well being.... Just like a back-stabber... Good 'ol FIE...

~Jes

[mrbiggs]

At first I thought they were pretty coulle, and I was considering getting a foil/épée one, but a) I don't have the money anyway for a new mask b) I don't know where to buy them, and, most importantly c) they cost like 8 bazillion dollars. $350 for a sabre mask!? It's going to be a good $150-$200 for a foil/épée mask in that case.

[cowpaste]

Don't forget that the Lexan masks have proven themselves to be quite unsafe. :/

[JAySE SUiCiDE]

Originally Posted by cowpaste

Don't forget that the Lexan masks have proven themselves to be quite unsafe. :/

How's that? Just wondering.

Yeah..how do you mask punch the lexan part?

~Jes

[DHCJr]

In the beginning there were 2 basic designs of visor masks. One type that has been banned at holes through the plastic to hold them in place. There has been a case of 3 failures in one tournament of this style. The 2nd style has it's own problems. Since you don't have the screws through the visor, they can shift and have. Also in February a mask failed because of stress at the metal holding the visor in place. I have had one turned in missing a nut.

In how you can test the visor part of the mask. You can't, only your opponent can fail it.

[JAySE SUiCiDE]

Originally Posted by DHCJr

In the beginning there were 2 basic designs of visor masks. One type that has been banned at holes through the plastic to hold them in place. There has been a case of 3 failures in one tournament of this style. The 2nd style has it's own problems. Since you don't have the screws through the visor, they can shift and have. Also in February a mask failed because of stress at the metal holding the visor in place. I have had one turned in missing a nut.

In how you can test the visor part of the mask. You can't, only your opponent can fail it.

Only your opponent can fail it..thats definately safe.. :-/

Though I'm just wondering..is there a rule that says the window can only be that big? Could someone just make a sabre mask with the whole front lexan, and technically not get in trouble?

~Jes

[whtouche]

Im not sure what the rule is, or if there is one, concerning the size of the window, but I do know making one with the whole front made of lexan(I presume for reduced target area purposes) would be substantially less safe. There have already been complaints about the current lexan masks of restricting air flow significantly. You might as well fence with a plastic bag over your head.

For reduced target and cheating purposes, why not a mask with a lexan moon roof

[P00Man]

i hate the lexan, i think the whole point of the MASK is to hide the face...

[whtouche]

Originally Posted by P00Man

i hate the lexan, i think the whole point of the MASK is to hide the face...

Or...to...protect it ?

[Artisan]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Yep, as everyone else noted it's just the FIE changing the essential nature of the sport in their pursuit of the chimaera of "spectator appeal" and the dreams they have of luring TV audiences ( and their money ) into the sport. Idiots.

Man that's a lot of fuss...how about some cheese with your whine?

I don't see how the slight reduction in scorable area would count as "changing the essential nature of the sport." Replacing the saber with a cavalry sword would though. Taking away the back of the hand is probably a more significant loss of scoring opportunity.

Please explain how changing the sabre mask "degrades the sport" or why seeking more public interest is such a terrible thing. More interest = more fencers = better fencing. Period. Plain numbers. More scubs too and more bad fencing as well - that comes with the territory.

Electric scoring didn't END fencing (except in the eyes of a few classicists). The DH didn't ruin baseball, and moving the hockey net farther out from the boards didn't destroy that game either.

And as far as being unsafe... Mesh masks apparently fail all the time. Isn't that why we test them? Come to think of it, haven't the few head injuries that have occurred in this century happened with mesh masks?

Personally I think the masks are cool to see on TV, where a close up view can be provided to the audience, and a fencer's expression can be seen. Other than that novelty, it won't do much to put fencing on John Q public's radar. Would I wear one? No - because I know I would be too hot - and heavier. Do I think they are any more unsafe than a regular mask? Probably not, with proper care, maintainance and inspection. If the masks become popular, eventually a means of testing the lexan will be implemented, probably by using polarized light, which can reveal stress patterns in optical materials.

Complaining about the FIE is like complaining about the government. There's always going to be aspects of being governed that some people won't like, but the total absence of the organization would be far worse. Whether income opportunities drives the growth of the organization or vice versa, I doubt there are many who get involved in international fencing because its an easy way to make a lot of money. It it was there'd be all kinds of venture capital available for any number of obscure sports and atheletic endeavors.

I wonder... are the folks complaining about transparent masks the same people who complain about flicks, pistol grips, shouting, bad sportsmanship, modern fencing sneakers and electric scoring? Perhaps they should get thine selves back to the days of yore and fence maskless with sharp points on aristocratic estates, wearing puffy shirts and holding a lantern overhead with their off-hand....

We're 4 years into the 21st century.... wake up and smell the coffee.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by Artisan

Man that's a lot of fuss...how about some cheese with your whine?

Golly, what a clever locution. Bet you thought that up all by yourself.

Get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning or something?

Please explain how changing the sabre mask "degrades the sport" or why seeking more public interest is such a terrible thing. More interest = more fencers = better fencing. Period.

Ah, I see. You think my simple assertion of opinion is full of it, and then choose to refute it with---a simple assertion of opinion?

How about this? You're wrong. "Period". There. You're refuted again. You buy that tactic when I use it? No? Then don't expect to be able to use it, either.

Removing target area alters the basic nature of the game. You now cannot do things you once could do, cannot make attacks you once could make. I suppose you'd view with equanimity the introduction of off-target areas into epee? Hey now, for the sake of the spectators, no more of those silly incomprehensible toe shots. Henceforth, below the knee is off target. Enjoy your unchanged fencing.

Electric scoring didn't END fencing (except in the eyes of a few classicists).

Nor did it alter the basic rules or imperatives of the sport. Electric scoring was just a refinement of an existing part of the sport: scoring. It made scoring less subjective. And importantly, it had utility for the actual FENCING, as opposed to the convenience of those standing idly by LOOKING AT fencing. Not a great analogy, IMO.

The DH didn't ruin baseball, and moving the hockey net farther out from the boards didn't destroy that game either.

I neither know nor care about baseball or hockey. Let the players of those take care of their own sports. I care about fencing. That's fencing, not the marketing of fencing, not the presentation of fencing, not the way fencing looks to the uninitiated, not whether the FIE can augment it's power, budget and prestige. I do not care to sacrifice anything of the former at the dubious altars of the latter.

And as far as being unsafe... Mesh masks apparently fail all the time. Isn't that why we test them?

Yes. So how do we test plastic?

However, my concern is not primarily with the safety aspect. You don't catch a lot of thrusts to the mask ( or anywhere else ) in sabre. I care about fiddling about with the way the game is played for NO other reason than a will-o'-the-wisp fantasy about crowds of avid fencing fans in sports bars or equally nebulous wishful thinking about plastic visors creating hordes of new fencers. Or even satisfying the whims of the "look cool" set.

Come to think of it, haven't the few head injuries that have occurred in this century happened with mesh masks?

And your point?

Personally I think the masks are cool to see on TV, where a close up view can be provided to the audience, and a fencer's expression can be seen.

Your opinion is as valid as mine. Well, perhaps a little less so, as sabre is my weapon and you are an epeeist.

I am curious as to why you're flying off the handle about ME having an opinion, though. Or must everyone agree with you, else be a priori a "whiner"?

Other than that novelty, it won't do much to put fencing on John Q public's radar.

Exactly. So we remove target to achieve the goal of---what? Satisfying your cravings for "cool"-looking things?

I thought you believed it WOULD do that. What exactly IS your position, anyway?

Complaining about the FIE is like complaining about the government. There's always going to be aspects of being governed that some people won't like, but the total absence of the organization would be far worse.

So....let's all just be good little subjects and not question, not raise concerns, not dare to oppose the decisions of our betters. Is that your thesis? Everyone just shut up, because they are annoying you?

Whether income opportunities drives the growth of the organization or vice versa, I doubt there are many who get involved in international fencing because its an easy way to make a lot of money. It it was there'd be all kinds of venture capital available for any number of obscure sports and atheletic endeavors.

So, again, why do it?

I wonder... are the folks complaining about transparent masks the same people who complain about flicks, pistol grips, shouting, bad sportsmanship, modern fencing sneakers and electric scoring?

Don't care about flicks; let the foilists hash that out. Same with pistol grips. I don't like screaming. Electric scoring is fine.

But your attempts to stereotype and ridicule all those who disagree with you is duly noted.

Perhaps they should get thine selves back to the days of yore and fence maskless with sharp points on aristocratic estates, wearing puffy shirts and holding a lantern overhead with their off-hand....

Supercilious a bit, don't you think?

We're 4 years into the 21st century.... wake up and smell the coffee.

Another oh-so-original sneer, er, phrase. How DO you keep coming up with these gems?

But in the final analysis, well....no. No, I will not. Sorry if it grates on your sensitive, change-loving, anything-different-is-progress world view, but no, I'm not going to stop voicing my opinions anytime soon...

[Stylothek]

I don't think Lexan masks are a bad idea, but I do believe it is to require them at tournaments. Sabreurs should stick to mesh IMO because after all, it does affect the way people fence. I fence foil and I will stick to pure mesh aswell because:
a) Lexan masks are expensive
b) They look like crap
c) visibility might be better but airflow is bad, I gather
d) Security problems seem to be an issue
e) Mesh (especially colored mesh) hides your face and I enjoy that effect.
Still, I think anybody who doesn't agree with my points above should get one, It doesn't make a difference in foil or epee fencing anyway.

[mrbiggs]

Inquartata, I agree with you mostly, but I don't understand how the new masks will "change the game". You're not going to make attacks you wouldn't otherwise make with the new masks. The odds of getting hit in that part of the mask are small-too large for my tastes, but they're not going to change the game. "When my opponent attacks, I hit him with the point of the blade DIRECTLY between the eyes, not an inch different in any direction!"

BUt I do agree that it doesn't really gain much for anyone. Who wants to see a fencer's eyes other than their opponent? And even then, it doesn't make much of a difference.