Can you parry with the sword arm?

[ReverseLunge]

That ref is wrong.

[MikeHarm]

I think one of the biggest alternate internet things going now are the darknets where you can get all the legally questionable downloads and discussions with access on an invite only basis if you're into that sort of thing.

Hijack on/ There are a couple of different "Internets" of which the largest I know of is a specialized one used by the US DoD and associated agencies, as well as access by agencies in several other closely allied countries. It's used to send and share intelligence and other classified information. I've heard this referred to as "Mil-net" or "Intel-net". For security purposes, there is supposed to be no cross-connection with the regular internet, so don't expect to be able to find something on it on Google . There are a couple of other, smaller internets including some speciality industry internets with hundreds to tens of thousands of sites, which usually do have a hefty firewall with the regular internet, but are basically seperate networks.

Hijack off/ I think if someone attacks you and drives the blade into your bicep, that's not a parry with your weapon arm. If you move your arm in front of a point, that's replacement of target and you will get carded and have a point scored on you.

The one I was fuzzy on was if you were extended, and someone did a parry riposte back at you, but as you parried the riposte, you pushed the blade aside with (say) the back of your hand, or forearm. You'd have to be really pronated with your wrist to do this, though. You sort of parried with your weapon arm. I *believe* that might be a legitimate parry, but rather unlikely. I'd sure like someone to give me an opinion on how that should be judged.

[Neil]

That ref is wrong.

You're entitled to your opinion. In the slow-mo replay, it does look like Wu is deliberately trying to cover his chest without parrying. I think it's a fair call.

The only weird thing is I can't remember him getting a yellow card in that bout (covering target should only be a yellow card for the first offence).

[jeff]

Hijack on: of course there are private networks at many institutions: almost every medium to large company has its own network, firewalled away from the Internet, if any connection exists at all. They're sometimes called 'intranets'. There are even purpose built consortium networks (eg: funds transfer networks like SWIFT and electronic exchanges) That doesn't mean that there are multiple Internets in the sense of "networks of networks belonging to and administered by completely different each managing their own domain". There's a difference between having a private network and an Internet. Anyhow, it was just GWB misspeaking, and a minor mistake. We're just having too much fun quibbling over a non-existant distinction. Hijack off. Send further items to 127.0.0.1

Anyhow, other than this - "what noodle says"

[Epee_Pox]

The ref who red carded Wu for covering target with his weapon arm against Vanni in the Olympic men's team foil final might disagree with you . If you deliberately cover your target area with your weapon arm, and it's obvious to the referee, you will get carded.

Forgive my obvious ignorance of foil, but it seems to me that most foilists advance and retreat with their sword arms held close across their chest, with the sword pointing off to the side. I don't know why this is, but I see it an awful lot. If it was cardable, wouldn't people do that less often?

[Neil]

Forgive my obvious ignorance of foil, but it seems to me that most foilists advance and retreat with their sword arms held close across their chest, with the sword pointing off to the side. I don't know why this is, but I see it an awful lot. If it was cardable, wouldn't people do that less often?

I think the situation in the bout I referred to (I'll have to watch it again to be sure) was : Vanni attacked and initally missed or was parried. Wu was in an awkward position and so couldn't riposte/counter attack. Vanii goes for the remise. Wu covers his chest with his weapon arm. The weapon arm is bent and close to his body - it's not like he's trying to parry and the arm just happens to cover the target.

I agree with noodle that 99.9% of the time, if someone is hit on the weapon arm it won't be called as covering target. But there are situations when it can be called.

[pkt]

In sabre it's called "attack arrives".

...ditto in epee unless, of course, you did not get hit by the point.

ps. dripping wet, i see that you just joined and you're asking many questions, which Craig and others appreciate, but if you troll some of the older threads first you'll see that your questions have been asked before already.

Perhaps Craig should have some FAQs for the newcomers to the site.

PK

[pkt]

The ref who red carded Wu for covering target with his weapon arm against Vanni in the Olympic men's team foil final might disagree with you . If you deliberately cover your target area with your weapon arm, and it's obvious to the referee, you will get carded.

Is this the same Hungarian ref who is been accused by the FIE to have made 6 errors in this team match all favouring the italians - be mindful that the Italians won 45-42 - and is now suspended for 2 years from refing?

So, Neil, IMHO, you'd be wrong if you call that, like the Hungarian coach.

PK

[pkt]

what he's saying is that he was trying to be sarcastic but it didn't flow well through the internets. ( )

you can't parry with your back arm. you can't cover target area with your back arm.

your front arm can't help but be in the way. parries are defined by blade contact, so you're not going to get a P/R called for an arm parry. you're also very likely to get hit on the arm if you attempt one of these, which will either end the action or score a touch (in foil or epee, respectively).

Yes, you can and are allowed to parry with your sword arm. it's easy to do, esp. if your distance is slightly off - i.e. your opponant's blade is too close for a parry with your blade. Think this through. In the 80s the BC provinial coach was a Polish master - Skrudlik - and he did this to perfection, even in a lesson.

Don't be lazy, read the Rules. Tehre is a rule for displacement, but there is no rule against parrying with your sword arm.

PK

[pkt]

Forgive my obvious ignorance of foil, but it seems to me that most foilists advance and retreat with their sword arms held close across their chest, with the sword pointing off to the side. I don't know why this is, but I see it an awful lot. If it was cardable, wouldn't people do that less often?

No, it's not cardable.

What they're doing is called "preparation" which means it's a nothing action. whatever offensive action the opponant makes would and should be called "attack", not "counterattack" - you cannot make a counter attack on a preparation: there's no attack.

IMHO, with the new foil timing, i hope you'll see less and less of the action you're describing.

PK

[pkt]

...there is no legitimate sword-arm parry. parries are blade only.

ain't necessary so:
t.16 "With all three weapons, defence must be effected with the guard and the blade used either seperately or together." Notice there is no disciplinary action attached to t.16.

That said, here's the call in foil re a 'parry' with the forearm:
~ attack, no [ref's forearm on the non-attacker side pointing to the ceiling and waving about];
~ riposte, (if any,) yes.

The Rules are written the way they are to allow flexibilities and inventiveness.

PK

[noodle]

Yes, you can and are allowed to parry with your sword arm. it's easy to do, esp. if your distance is slightly off - i.e. your opponant's blade is too close for a parry with your blade. Think this through. In the 80s the BC provinial coach was a Polish master - Skrudlik - and he did this to perfection, even in a lesson.

Don't be lazy, read the Rules. Tehre is a rule for displacement, but there is no rule against parrying with your sword arm.

PK

i'm not lazy, read my post.

i never said you aren't allowed to parry with your sword arm, its legal. i said that its not going to be considered a parry, the director's phrasing should not include a parry/riposte. t16 includes the guard in a parry and thats something i forgot to mention, but it doesn't say the sword arm.

[Neil]

Is this the same Hungarian ref who is been accused by the FIE to have made 6 errors in this team match all favouring the italians - be mindful that the Italians won 45-42 - and is now suspended for 2 years from refing?

So, Neil, IMHO, you'd be wrong if you call that, like the Hungarian coach.

PK

There were two referees for the match, Jozsef Hidasi and Piotr Kielpikowski. Hidasi was the Hungarian ref who was suspended. Kielpikowski was the ref for the Vanni vs Wu bout. The FIE didn't accuse him of making any errors.

I watched it again: it was a fleche attack by Vanni which hit the arm when Wu was covering. Wu already had a yellow card earlier in the bout for corps-a-corps or something, so he got a red card for covering target. It looked like a hand judge called Wu for covering - the commentators might have said something about it, but I don't know since I don't speak Italian.

[OffTarget]

i never said you aren't allowed to parry with your sword arm, its legal. i said that its not going to be considered a parry, the director's phrasing should not include a parry/riposte. t16 includes the guard in a parry and thats something i forgot to mention, but it doesn't say the sword arm.

Regarding the call that should be made, I presume that, as long as the point does not register and off target hit, it would be a failed or passed attack and then a counterattack.

Just curious as to the correct phrasing.

[Epee_Pox]

No, it's not cardable.

What they're doing is called "preparation" which means it's a nothing action. whatever offensive action the opponant makes would and should be called "attack", not "counterattack" - you cannot make a counter attack on a preparation: there's no attack.

IMHO, with the new foil timing, i hope you'll see less and less of the action you're describing.

PK

Thanks for the info. Yeah, the new timing might affect that somewhat -- if they tried that in epee, holding their weapon forearm across their body with the weapon pointed off to the side like that, they'd be in a sorry state indeed.

[pkt]

There were two referees for the match, Jozsef Hidasi and Piotr Kielpikowski. Hidasi was the Hungarian ref who was suspended. Kielpikowski was the ref for the Vanni vs Wu bout. The FIE didn't accuse him of making any errors.

I watched it again: it was a fleche attack by Vanni which hit the arm when Wu was covering. Wu already had a yellow card earlier in the bout for corps-a-corps or something, so he got a red card for covering target. It looked like a hand judge called Wu for covering - the commentators might have said something about it, but I don't know since I don't speak Italian.

Thank you, Neil.

One of the important rules of fencing RoW weapons, is to make one's hits one-light-hit as often as possible. Do not allow the ref to, erhm, shall we call it, exercise his ingenuity. Look at the sabrte men's Team Bronze medal bout between Keeth Smart and Pozdniakov in Athens. Most of the hits that Poz made on Keeth were one-lighters.

Regarding the call that should be made, I presume that, as long as the point does not register and off target hit, it would be a failed or passed attack and then a counterattack.

Just curious as to the correct phrasing.

As long as the attacker's point did not land, the correct phrasing should be:
attack: No. [Ref waves his forearm with his hand pointing towards the ceiling on the side of the fencer under attack.]
counter-attack (if any): [whatever happened with the appropriate hand gestures.]

PK