Possible error with new FIE foil timing specifications

[JEC]

At least three manufacturers did not alter the off time. However, another three manufacturers did change the on time. It is interesting to me that all six of them received the same set of instructions. Allstar, Uhlmann, and Favero interpreted the mandate differently. Furthermore, the rumor is that the FIE and the SEMI appear split on this matter, but siding with changing both times (as Allstar, Uhlmann, and Favero) interpreted.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by Insipiens

The question of "who got it right" is relevant if you are considering upgrading your box or buying a new one.

Only if you define "who got it right" as who managed to foresee the future and build to those specs, which may or may not be the same as a specs that were delivered to the manufacturers. Or, I suppose, who has enough pull to get the future to be changed to reflect the modifications that they made that weren't in compliance with the FIE specs.

Not like Uhlmann/Allstar don't have a long history of ignoring FIE specs that are clear. Examples: tabs on sabre lames that are too small to be FIE-legal, having the power switch on their scoring machines on the back of the machine.

Seems clear to me that LP and Eigertek made the modifications that followed the FIE specs and that Uhlmann, Allstar, and Favero did not. Wouldn't be at all surprised to see them punished for doing so (indirectly through having to "fix" correct machines when the specs are changed to what the incorrect machines do).

-B :)

[DHCJr]

Originally Posted by Insipiens

Obviously this is going to be a cost to some manufacturers if Barry's compromise (as appears to be the case) has not been accepted.

Obviously this is going to be a cost to some manufacturers if Barry's compromise (as appears to be the case) has been accepted.

[DHCJr]

Originally Posted by JEC

At least three manufacturers did not alter the off time. However, another three manufacturers did change the on time. It is interesting to me that all six of them received the same set of instructions. Allstar, Uhlmann, and Favero interpreted the mandate differently. Furthermore, the rumor is that the FIE and the SEMI appear split on this matter, but siding with changing both times (as Allstar, Uhlmann, and Favero) interpreted.

No two individuals sided with changing both times. Rene Roch has publicly stated he wants the white lights gone and changing the timing of the white lights and the problems that have occurred will make others want to get rid of the white lights. Also Marcello never consulted the rest of the SEMI commission, he just did what President Roch told him to do or should I say Dictator.

If Allstar, Uhlmann, Favero knew any logic and new what their boxes were set at when they received the instructions, Roch couldn't have been able to do what he is trying to do.

[JEC]

One thing that will be the corollary of this debate is that it is very likely that timings will change again in the next year or so. The timings issue might be brought to the floor next congress by some unhappy federation if it is not address before that via consultation.

[DieterS]

JEC wrote: "One thing that will be the corollary of this debate is that it is very likely that timings will change again in the next year or so."

That's one thing we definitely agree on. My son, who fences foil for Penn State, already complains about everyone hitting harder to try to make straight hits go off and getting bruised up (and I know he gives more than he takes). Ugly, hunched-over, static fencing that relies on counterattacks seem to be the direction that foil is heading now.

Personally, I think the situation will reach critical mass by the time of the FIE meeting in Paris in December. Or certainly by the February meeting.

Dieter

[miyamoto]

Originally Posted by DieterS

JEC wrote: "One thing that will be the corollary of this debate is that it is very likely that timings will change again in the next year or so."

That's one thing we definitely agree on. My son, who fences foil for Penn State, already complains about everyone hitting harder to try to make straight hits go off and getting bruised up (and I know he gives more than he takes). Ugly, hunched-over, static fencing that relies on counterattacks seem to be the direction that foil is heading now.

Personally, I think the situation will reach critical mass by the time of the FIE meeting in Paris in December. Or certainly by the February meeting.

Dieter

People, please. It's gonna take time for foilists to learn to fence with the new timings. When the foil first was electrified, similar problems arose, fencers chose simple, straight forward actions, favored remises, etc...

Once the timings are clarified, and the foilists and coaches have time to adapt, it will look vastly different, but still be foil. Right now, epeeist will probably do much better at foil than foilists. Once the foilists figure this out and adapt, it'll all be OK.

Assuming the FIE don't switch the timings before the adaption begins. Rumor has it, were stuck with these timings till the next Olympics. We'll see.

[TheArmourer]

Originally Posted by miyamoto

Rumor has it, were stuck with these timings till the next Olympics.

If the IOC haven't managed to drop fencing by then ;-)

[MikeHarm]

I've fenced hunched over, off balance, hard hitting, static footwork counterattacking fencers at every event I've gone to. It'll be interesting if the new timing makes the experienced fencers morph back into newbie habits for a while. I think I'll have to get an Eiger new timings chip and play with it, this is too interesting to wait till the qualifiers for.



JEC wrote: "One thing that will be the corollary of this debate is that it is very likely that timings will change again in the next year or so."

That's one thing we definitely agree on. My son, who fences foil for Penn State, already complains about everyone hitting harder to try to make straight hits go off and getting bruised up (and I know he gives more than he takes). Ugly, hunched-over, static fencing that relies on counterattacks seem to be the direction that foil is heading now.

[Insipiens]

Originally Posted by MikeHarm

I've fenced hunched over, off balance, hard hitting, static footwork counterattacking fencers at every event I've gone to. It'll be interesting if the new timing makes the experienced fencers morph back into newbie habits for a while. I think I'll have to get an Eiger new timings chip and play with it, this is too interesting to wait till the qualifiers for.

The better fencers used to deal with the hunched over static fencer by flicking to shoulder/back. This has become a lot more difficult with the new timings the better fencers have to work a bit harder to hit the now obscured target.

[cowpaste]

Foil without flicking is young women's foil. I personally have trouble with 13 year old girls if I don't flick. They hunch over. They cover their waists with their sword arms. They wear boobie protectors. I land maybe 1/3 of my riposts/attacks to their chest if I use a straight attack. When they see it coming, they don't parry, but instead they bend over and remise remise remise. Yay!

[MikeHarm]

It sounds like people gave up or tried to smack harder on the obscurred target if they couldn't get their flicks to go off instead of switching to the angulated actions to reach the same area. Or was there a problem with angulated attacks with the new timings as well?

[neevel]

Originally Posted by Insipiens

The better fencers used to deal with the hunched over static fencer by flicking to shoulder/back. This has become a lot more difficult with the new timings the better fencers have to work a bit harder to hit the now obscured target.

If they're hunched over, hits delivered with the right angulation are still easy to register on the shoulder-- it's only if you try to rely just on the flexion of the blade to whip the point in that you'll have problems. Crab-walking Quasimodos may briefly have improved results against beginner-to-intermediate level fencers, but will see that fade as people modify their hand technique.

[MikeHarm]

If thats the case I think this is a good development for me as someone who has been really working to develop my angulated actions hard the last few years and didn't put much effort into learning to flick.

Woohoo, C rating here I come.

[cowpaste]

Woo! Hunched back fencing, here I come!

[Swordmaster]

So back to the question along the line of this topic
Has anyone heard what timing Escrime Technoligies has used in the updating of the St. George machines?

[Swordmaster]

Originally Posted by DieterS

...So, until the FIE makes an announcement that has gone through the legitimate approval process, and the USFA adopts those changes officially, Eigertek will continue shipping Eclipses and upgrades with the officially specified timings. ...

So Dieter,
What is your offical possition now? Are you going to change your NV timing to 13-15ms or leave it as is?

[DieterS]

"What is your offical position now? Are you going to change your NV timing to 13-15ms or leave it as is?"

Eigertek's offical position remains unchanged. We will not change to timings other than those that were clearly specified by the SEMI commission. Eigertek stands by the statement that you noted:

". . . until the FIE makes an announcement that has gone through the legitimate approval process, and the USFA adopts those changes officially, Eigertek will continue shipping Eclipses and upgrades with the officially specified timings."

Personally, I think the new foil timings are proving to be a disaster for foil. I sincerely hope and fully expect the timings to be changed again.

Dieter

-----------------
Dieter Schlaepfer
Eigertek

[R. Exnicios]

I posted this question on an earlier thread but i wanted to put it out again.

We now have several machines with the "new timing" they are ALL different! We have an eigertech a Brand new Favero 05 and an upgraded Favero 01 the debounce time on them is all slightly different!

An none of them seem to be as tight as the SG11s that were at the NAC!

I am trying to make a tested that will test the exact debounce timing but have not gotten a working model yet.

Has anyone expereince this? any ideas?

As a coach and a fencer I think there is going to be a huge problem with boxes having different timings and no way to test them or correct them


R

[JEC]

Distinguishing between old and new debounce timings using a foil is simple and easy ... just try to flick at a 180 degree target (~90-135 degrees for the blade). Using my two foil FAVERO buzzers (one old and one new), the kids in our salle are able to tell the difference right away. However, the issue that you are posing is between new timing machines. Here, the difference is no longer between 3 and 15 msec, but between 13, 14 and 15 msec, plus the differences in off-target timings. Then, we have to go back to electronic testing across a circuit. This is much more complicated. You will need a high frequency stimulator to close the circuit and a detecting device (amplifier/ohmmeter) with a sampling rate of at least 1000 Hz to detect differences of 2-3 msec (sampling rate of more than 2000 Hz is needed for 1 msec differences). This is expensive equipment. Thus, I expect that manufacturers might disclose their settings upon request, but verifying them would be done only at FIE competitions.