Jumping.... Target Displacement?

[counter riposte]

Is jumping an abnormal movement which would justify a card for Target Displacement?

[telkanuru]

Er.... do you mean a card for covering target? I wouldn't think that displacing target was illegal, otherwise I'd get more cards for retreating. And no, the only way jumping is illegal is if it constitutes an uncontrolled action.

[counter riposte]

by t.22, In foil and saber, it is forbidden to protect the target area or to substitute another part of the body for the target area, either by covering or by an abnormal movement (cf. t.114, t.116, t.120).

At the same time by t.21, Displacing the target and ducking are allowed even if during the action the unarmed hand comes into contact with the strip.

So to clarify.... would jumping be an abnormal movement, subtituting the legs for target area?

[telkanuru]

t.22 is target *substitution*. I thought that's what you ment. And the answer is no, unless you manage to curl yourself into a ball while doing so (or bring your hand across your chest).

[downunder]

No, it is not covered as an abnormal movement.

[Inquartata]

Only if, say, you brought your knees up in front of your valid target while doing it...although I've seen that done, and not penalized. Your opponent actually has to be in a position to hit you while your doing it. ( If he's out of distance, for example, it's not usually called. )

[mrbiggs]

It's important to note that while such a move will not earn you a card, it is a counterattack. (Because of target displacement.)

[achilleus]

It's important to note that while such a move will not earn you a card, it is a counterattack. (Because of target displacement.)

It's very possible to parry while jumping or riposte while jumping, especially if one is trying to flick to the back.

Witness Jon Tiomkin's photo at the Olympics. Certainly looks like a (attempted maybe) parry.

http://www.printroom.com/ViewGallery...9&image_id=432

[mrbiggs]

True. BUT, if your movement is intended to dodge their point by moving target area, it is considered to be a counterattack. The jump to flick after a parry won't fall under this category because if you parried, he wouldn't be able to hit you before you riposted.

[achilleus]

True. BUT, if your movement is intended to dodge their point by moving target area, it is considered to be a counterattack. The jump to flick after a parry won't fall under this category because if you parried, he wouldn't be able to hit you before you riposted.

It was a long day at work, so maybe my reading comprehension is off, but what are you trying to say?

You say, jumping is a counter. I say no. You agree then throw in a but.

Jumping is not a counter, attempting to avoid an attack without deflecting the blade is.

[Black Jeebus]

Damn. I so clicked the wrong answer...

[mrbiggs]

Yeah, I wasn't very coherent, sorry.

Jumping is not a counter, attempting to avoid an attack without deflecting the blade is.

But I don't understand this post. There are 4 directions you can go to avoid the blade and have it count as a counterattack, and "up" is one of them. Thus, if you jump to specifically avoid their blade, as would be necessary for it to be considered as "target displacement", aren't you attempting to avoid an attack?

[Black Jeebus]

In this instance should your opponent hit say your leg as you go up, wouldn't that just result in them getting the point (assuming they had right of way to begin with)?

[mrbiggs]

They would have ROW off target, but they wouldn't get the point.

[Black Jeebus]

But if you displace target by ducking they get the point so wouldn't it work the same way.

[achilleus]

But I don't understand this post. There are 4 directions you can go to avoid the blade and have it count as a counterattack, and "up" is one of them. Thus, if you jump to specifically avoid their blade, as would be necessary for it to be considered as "target displacement", aren't you attempting to avoid an attack?

OK, first a counterattack is not a merely avoiding an attack.

A counterattack is an attack launched into an opponent's attack.
Successful counterattacks can be done in time, with opposition, or with evasion.

Evasion can be almost anything. Retreating, stepping inside the flick, sidestepping, ducking, jumping, squirming, etc...

These actions in and of themselves are not counters. Some of them are primarily used as counters (ducking), and some specific actions, like the inquartata are oppositional counters with evasion.

Now, I'm assuming you know what a parry is. So hypothetically, Ganeev attacks Tiomkin. Tiomkin leaps into the air, sweeping in 7. He finds the blade, and flicks to the back. Ganeev's point lands valid.

Tiomkin jumped, but clearly made a parry riposte, thus Ganeev's point is called remise.

A jump is not, in and of itself a counter.

Another hypothetical, A attacks B searches finds the blade in 8 while ducking and scores. A rolls of the take and hits shoulder. B, although ducking, made a parry riposte, and A remised.

[ReverseLunge]

Just don't jump off the forking strip.

[Epeecurean]

Thus, if you jump to specifically avoid their blade, as would be necessary for it to be considered as "target displacement", aren't you attempting to avoid an attack?

Using target displacement to avoid getting hit doesn't necessarily brand someone a counter-attacker. If I clearly attack you and you counter-attack and I turn my shoulder in an attemp to avoid a double-light that doesn't change the RoW. However, if there is doubt in the referee's mind as to who had RoW in the first place, then it may tilt him/her to call the touch against the person who took evasive action.

[Joe biebel]

As in most cases, their is room for interpretation. I believe the substitution rule is aimed at defensive actions rather than offensive. If the action (jumping) is offensive in nature, I do not see it being a substitution any more than a lunge (without ducking) is. However, I could see it being called in the event a fencer is attacked with a direct attack to the middle of the target and their response is to leap up, to the point that the attack now hits the leg. Good luck getting that called though
Joe Biebel

[oiuyt]

But if you displace target by ducking they get the point so wouldn't it work the same way.

That's simply not true. If you duck and they hit you on the mask (what I assume you are suggesting) they do NOT get a touch. Ducking is NOT abnormal movement.

-B :)