Fencing Sabre with the new timings: comments?

[oso97]

Okay, so there have been a couple excellent analysis posted of how foil is changed with the new timings, and what works and what doesn't. But everything for sabre has basically been "Its a completely different weapon."

Anyone care to shed some light on the details here?

[afc fencer]

To me it does not change things much at all. The first few bouts I got hit on remise a few times but then I just took more distance when I parried and I was fine.

[Inquartata]

I have not yet experienced the new timing. But Derek Cotton says that it completely kills the few remaining vestiges of parrying left in sabre. No point in doing it because the riposte is almost always slower than the remise, and you will get locked out by the latter...

I'll offer up a preliminary "Stupid FIE!" on the basis of Derek's analysis of why the new timing was adopted and why it's being rushed into general use with no testing of its effects. I expect to expatiate dramatically on that comment once I have fenced within the new parameters.

[Epeecurean]

If that's the case (the parry is dead), then they have definitely been way too aggressive in shortening the lock-out time in sabre. 200ms would have been more reasonable than 110-130ms.

[afc fencer]

I had no trouble taking the parry and landing the riposte. Its really not that big of a change.

[AndrewH]

I love it. I've had no problems with parrys, i mean if you're holding the riposte that long you deserve to get hit with the remise. Also it makes attacks into preparation much easier to pull off as one-lighters. I wouldn't want to go back to the old timing.

[CvilleFencer]

Just from my very limited use of the new timings (2 bouts) I have to say I like them. The parry reposte works just fine, the catch being that you have to PARRY, not just swat at the blade. Strong Parries and parries with a bit of opposition (although I did have a few problems with this, something about to much contact with the blade/guard within a certain fraction of a second will not score?) will score one light with no problem, and I was able to get in a few parry/reposte shots, about as many as I normally do.

What I really like is that it gives a bit of power back to the defender. If you are coming forward and it is not a clear and immediate attack an attack into prep will give your opponent a one light hit into your prep, and that is how it should be... Of course I am an epee fencer so anything that gives me a good counterattack without having to figure out that ROW stuff is an awesome change for me!

[whtouche]

The new timings haven't nearly killed parries. Infact the more you fence with the new timings the more you realize they don't even make a huge difference. There are a few "new timing touches" that will be one lights where they would be called simul or attack in prep, but it just makes the reffing easier.
The only remise of an attack that I've seen beat a parry is those attacks where your opponant is stretched all the way out and really reaching for you, you get his blade and before he can recover he knicks you and before you know it you dont have time.

It's annoying, but it's once instance, and will teach people to manage their distance better.

[HilandDoug]

Ok, so does this mean they'll bring back the crossovers and fleche?

[nahouw]

Originally Posted by CvilleFencer

The parry reposte works just fine, the catch being that you have to PARRY, not just swat at the blade. Strong Parries and parries with a bit of opposition (although I did have a few problems with this, something about to much contact with the blade/guard within a certain fraction of a second will not score?) will score one light with no problem

Yes, if you stay too long on the guard with your parry, you will lock yourself out for a riposte. Rather than a bit of opposition, it would be much better if you took a good parry in a good hand position so that the opponent couldn't remise, and get your riposte off quickly.

[nahouw]

Originally Posted by whtouche

There are a few "new timing touches" that will be one lights where they would be called simul or attack in prep, but it just makes the reffing easier.

Precisely why the need for the new timings -- to clean up those double-light actions of whether it was truly a simultaneous or an attack-in-preparation (or a touch awarded incorrectly as an attack when it was truly a simultaneous or an attack-in-preparation!!).

Now, with the new timings, simultaneous and attack-in-preparations will be obvious, and also, the discretion of a referee to award an inaccurate touch to somebody under the old timings is removed. Makes refereeing easier, and touches will be adjudicated more correctly.

[Victor]

Solid technique should solve any teensy-tiny little timing differences. If an initial attack is landing after parry, then obviously the parry wasn't sufficient to begin with, no?

[ra2000a]

my attacks in prep land a lot more than they did before. sometimes i feel like the new timing is a little bit in my favor because im left handed and i tended to take advantage of that little benefit that i have. it is much easier to direct now. also, when i take a parry, i cant be late anymore with my repost. The timing wont change much, but when i first went fencing with it,i was in awe.

[Inquartata]

I'll only say this: Your opponent does a head cut, you parry quinte and stop it dead. Distance from his blade to your mask: inches. Distance from your blade to his valid target: feet. Same for the other parries. Only now instead of the ref knowing that and awarding accordingly, you have one-light lockouts. I see sabre developing into a game of fast remises and stop cuts. Epee with the edge, in other words.

I hope I'm wrong. I hope you guys who find it a nonissue aren't just experiencing the initial uncertain testing of the waters, before people learn how best to "work" the new timing. I really do hope that...

[Philistine]

Fenced with the new timings last night for the first time. Only a couple of bouts--so very preliminary thoughts:

Like some of the others, I didn't see too big of a change--and I found (somewhat to my surprise) that I didn't hate it.

Had a few go for me that wouldn't have before, and a few against me. Overall, it seems to punish long, slow attacks and slow (though still immediate) ripostes the most.

In trying to cut stop-hit timing finer, I found that I wasn't very good at getting in hits by attempting ones I wouldn't have tried before , but that my "old" timing did result in a few one-light touches that would have been called against me using the old boxes.

I didn't really try the remise game, and those I fenced didn't/don't use it either--so didn't really see how that'll work out.

All in all--not as bad as I feared, at least after a small taste. (As opposed to the foilists in our club who seem to, for the most part, absolutely loathe the new foil timing--or really the debounce time). This Sunday, there's a sabre training event (no medals, just lots of fencing) at our club (FAP in Philadelphia, 8:00 a.m. if you're interested) so I should get a much better idea of how it works under bout conditions.

--Philistine

[OffTarget]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

I'll only say this: Your opponent does a head cut, you parry quinte and stop it dead. Distance from his blade to your mask: inches. Distance from your blade to his valid target: feet. ...

However, your opponent must move the arm to remise - otherwise you can just keep your parry in 5. Once the arm withdraws or moves, you have a clear shot to the forearm or maybe the body in time.

Perhaps this is why the timing issue is not so significant as stated above. Those are quick ripostes one would be making anyway.

[ViewtifulMisho]

Feet to inches sounds like a big difference in everyday life, but in a bout, they become almost the same. Your mind and body work totally differently when you're fencing, and movements are faster than you imagine them to be.

The new machines change almost nothing. In fact, and this is for those that think parries will be killed by the timings, they almost seem to promote parries. To stop a quick lockout time, fencers instinctively try to make better parries that keep them from being hit alltogether.

The other small difference is in the remises that occur when the attacker is stretched out/falling short, and it has been mentioned before. But this change is for the better, in my opinion. If the opponent falls short, the defender (now the attacker) has less time to make up his mind. He either has to commit to the riposte (new attack... whatever) or he will most likely get remised. This is a good dynamic since it removes the opportunity for the defender to get the often-awarded cheap touch, the one in which he takes his time establishing the attack and only launches it when he sees the attempt for remise.

Overall, we're not likely to see many changes, especially in Div. I and internationals, where timing differences very rarely use the full lockout time alloted by the machines.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by OffTarget

However, your opponent must move the arm to remise - otherwise you can just keep your parry in 5. Once the arm withdraws or moves, you have a clear shot to the forearm or maybe the body in time.

This is sabre. How many fencers are going to just stand there deadlocked, neither willing to move lest they give up the advantage? And if they do, we'll soon see the inactivity penalty migrating from epee to sabre. Wonderful prospect, that.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by ViewtifulMisho

Feet to inches sounds like a big difference in everyday life, but in a bout, they become almost the same.

Er---what? I'm sorry, fencing doesn't repeal the laws of physics. The person with the shortest distance to cover is very likely to hit first. And it's not always necessary to DO anything, the whipping nature of blades being what it is. One can sometimes do a perfectly sufficient parry---in fact, an excessively sufficient one---and still have the light go off. Now, a good ref will take that into account; it's only the bad and mediocre ones who take the lazy "any light=malparre" way out. But with the new timings, that whipover hit is going to lock out ANY riposte...which may be what Derek meant when he predicted that the last vestiges of incentive to parry were going to be swept away...

Your mind and body work totally differently when you're fencing, and movements are faster than you imagine them to be.

So are your opponent's. It's a "wash". Proximity to target is bound to be an advantage under the new paradigm. Once people set their fertile minds to exploiting the peculiarities of it----well, we'll have to see. But it took a while to sort out how to circumvent past rule changes, too. Take the no-crossover in sabre: the flunge and the various makeshifts didn't appear immediately. They took time to get devised and perfected. I am reluctant to render a verdict while we are still feeling our way through the vagaries of the new timing, myself. But being a pessimist at heart I must say that I doubt that "all will be for the best in the best of all possible worlds".

The other small difference is in the remises that occur when the attacker is stretched out/falling short, and it has been mentioned before. But this change is for the better, in my opinion. If the opponent falls short, the defender (now the attacker) has less time to make up his mind. He either has to commit to the riposte (new attack... whatever) or he will most likely get remised. This is a good dynamic

So, it's good to reward momentum?

The retreating defender has to be given a modicum of consideration. He must reverse direction, often at high speed, while the remising attacker actually benefits from the tendency of moving bodies to keep moving. I cannot see how penalizing the former still further will help matters.

Now yes, some referees permit an inordinately long time to the riposte. This is a matter best remedied by referee training and experience, I think, not by removing him from the equation and simply letting physics fill the void.

[CvilleFencer]

Inq, just to refresh my memory, when the reversal of the lights and no crossing the feet first came out, didn't you rage about death of fencing as we know it? Was it not the worst idea ever? Of course now, IIRC you agree that it has actually helped saber and was a good call?

Moral of story? Give it time and play with it. Change is always frustrating at first because it is so differant. Thats the problem with you kids today, so quicksilver and ready to nail your petitions to the church door. When you get to be my age you realize that the radical causes you once fought for are the standards that you defend against the radicals of today. Wait a minute... Somethings not quit right...