Jeff Bukantz article in "American Fencing"

[wflaschka]

EDIT: Do'h... I'm completely crazy. 15 ms = .015 second, not what I said, 1/7th second. So I'm deleting my paragraph about time/distance. It's a blind alley, sorry for the confusion. (Though, I guess my original point still stands.)

The rest of your post seems a bit facetious. "The perfect hit is one that turns on a light" ?? Is the perfect golf shot one that goes in the hole?

You said a perfect hit doesn't turn on a light under the new timing. I'm pointing out that your standard of "perfection" is: "Whatever worked under the old timing." So you're not really saying anything.

But I haven't heard or read *any* positive reports from *any* high level fencers or coaches, have you?

Indeed I haven't. In fact, there are very few reports from high level fencers or coaches, positive or negative. Pre-change opinions were all over the map and not inspiring (Sywlwie Gruchala: "I don't think they'll change the timing."). Bukantz is the first bigwig to weigh in post-change, and his opinion isn't compelling to me. I see flaws in all the complaints against the timing, and moreover I know how possessive fencers are about their sport, and how they moan when someone changes it. Prior moans: Foil ruined by going electric, Sabre ruined by going electric, Sabre ruined by removal of fleche, etc.

So I'm looking for the big picture, is all. It will come into focus as all the fencers/coaches training to the changes start bringing their game to the strip. I do hope you find foil fun in the future, somehow.

[mike morgan]

Originally Posted by wflaschka

The math isn't the whole picture. Shift the 1/7th second to 1/10th (old timing) and the likelyhood of a hit still seems a bit implausible. Even more implausible when two "fast" fencers double out at 15mph, or 4.4' per 1/10th second relative speed... 52.8" of bend shortening in 70" net of blade. But it all worked (or works) because in real life, fencers don't max out against an opponent who stands as immobile as a wall. Why don't they do that? Because they know they won't turn a light on that way.

You said a perfect hit doesn't turn on a light under the new timing. I'm pointing out that your standard of "perfection" is: "Whatever worked under the old timing." So you're not really saying anything.

Indeed I haven't. In fact, there are very few reports from high level fencers or coaches, positive or negative. Pre-change opinions were all over the map and not inspiring (Sywlwie Gruchala: "I don't think they'll change the timing."). Bukantz is the first bigwig to weigh in post-change, and his opinion isn't compelling to me. I see flaws in all the complaints against the timing, and moreover I know how possessive fencers are about their sport, and how they moan when someone changes it. Prior moans: Foil ruined by going electric, Sabre ruined by going electric, Sabre ruined by removal of fleche, etc.

So I'm looking for the big picture, is all. It will come into focus as all the fencers/coaches training to the changes start bringing their game to the strip. I do hope you find foil fun in the future, somehow.

Walter, I couldn't agree more. The NCAA season beings in earnest in about two weeks and we'll begin to get continuing ongoing analysis from that sector. And as the major world cup events occur, more solid, evidentiary analysis will also be available.

I vividly remember the changeover from ‘dry foil’ to electric. It took several seasons to effectively analyze what was happening, learn how to adjust and how best to teach these adjustments.

[sabreur]

Originally Posted by mike morgan

I vividly remember the changeover from ‘dry foil’ to electric. It took several seasons to effectively analyze what was happening, learn how to adjust and how best to teach these adjustments.

1955-1956, for those of you who are wondering--L'ancien indeed!

MR

[garyhayenga]

Originally Posted by mike morgan

Walter, I couldn't agree more. The NCAA season beings in earnest in about two weeks and we'll begin to get continuing ongoing analysis from that sector. And as the major world cup events occur, more solid, evidentiary analysis will also be available.

I don't believe the NCAA is requiring the new timings this year. And most NCAA teams have scoring machines that aren't able to be upgraded and don't have the budget to do so anyway.

gary hayenga

[haroldbuck]

Originally Posted by foilz

Is that a fact, or a hypothesis?

The lower bound is indeed 0. I can't confirm that the upper bound is 6.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by garyhayenga

I don't believe the NCAA is requiring the new timings this year. And most NCAA teams have scoring machines that aren't able to be upgraded and don't have the budget to do so anyway.

gary hayenga

The new timings are being used in NCAA competitions... at least when MIT's box isn't malfunctioning.

[MikeHarm]

Here is the thing. Gary Hayenga fences at RFC, a club filled with a lot of high level fencers from Michigan. Possibly the most of any other club in Michigan. Ann Marsh fences there, Mike Cho, Justin Purcell, Samantha Nemechek fenced there a lot, maybe still does etc etc. Its the place to go in Michigan if you're an A.

Its not surprising to me at all that they'd pick up each other's habits good or bad including barrel bends. Noone would recognize it as a bad habit from the old timings, before it set the light off 100%. Now you don't get a light and wonder where your touch went.

Barrel bends are now a critical bad habit to work out of your game.

As for me, I'm continuing to work hard on doing lunges and ripostes and angulated actions that set the light off without any barrel bends that deny me from scoring. Having my own scoring machine at home for drilling with the new timings will help a lot. If people don't want to do the work and spend their time complaining that the scoring box is being mean to them then thats cool. Its more touches for me.

If Gary is right that this is affecting all the A level fencers in Michigan and they aren't changing their game I'm going to have a great season.

[mike morgan]

Originally Posted by sabreur

1955-1956, for those of you who are wondering--L'ancien indeed!

MR

Yes, proudly L'ancien, monsieur Sabreur! What a great sport we enjoy!! How many 'combat' sports are genuinely life-long? It's been a wonderfully rewarding career. And how true in fencing, "….plus ca change, plus la meme chose."
PS: I very much enjoy your posts.

[garyhayenga]

Originally Posted by MikeHarm

Here is the thing. Gary Hayenga fences at RFC, a club filled with a lot of high level fencers from Michigan. Possibly the most of any other club in Michigan. Ann Marsh fences there, Mike Cho, Justin Purcell, Samantha Nemechek fenced there a lot, maybe still does etc etc. Its the place to go in Michigan if you're an A.

Its not surprising to me at all that they'd pick up each other's habits good or bad including barrel bends. Noone would recognize it as a bad habit from the old timings, before it set the light off 100%. Now you don't get a light and wonder where your touch went.

Barrel bends are now a critical bad habit to work out of your game.

As for me, I'm continuing to work hard on doing lunges and ripostes and angulated actions that set the light off without any barrel bends that deny me from scoring. Having my own scoring machine at home for drilling with the new timings will help a lot. If people don't want to do the work and spend their time complaining that the scoring box is being mean to them then thats cool. Its more touches for me.

If Gary is right that this is affecting all the A level fencers in Michigan and they aren't changing their game I'm going to have a great season.

The randomness that the new timing introduces means that the weaker high level fencer will score an extra 4-6 touches (2 or 3 touches for that should have been against) in about 25% of the bouts.

Even if you get an extra six touches in *every* bout you still can't beat any of those people.

gary hayenga

[garyhayenga]

Originally Posted by wflaschka

EDIT: Do'h... I'm completely crazy. 15 ms = .015 second, not what I said, 1/7th second. So I'm deleting my paragraph about time/distance. It's a blind alley, sorry for the confusion. (Though, I guess my original point still stands.)

You said a perfect hit doesn't turn on a light under the new timing. I'm pointing out that your standard of "perfection" is: "Whatever worked under the old timing." So you're not really saying anything.

Indeed I haven't. In fact, there are very few reports from high level fencers or coaches, positive or negative. Pre-change opinions were all over the map and not inspiring (Sywlwie Gruchala: "I don't think they'll change the timing."). Bukantz is the first bigwig to weigh in post-change, and his opinion isn't compelling to me. I see flaws in all the complaints against the timing, and moreover I know how possessive fencers are about their sport, and how they moan when someone changes it. Prior moans: Foil ruined by going electric, Sabre ruined by going electric, Sabre ruined by removal of fleche, etc.

So I'm looking for the big picture, is all. It will come into focus as all the fencers/coaches training to the changes start bringing their game to the strip. I do hope you find foil fun in the future, somehow.

Where did *I* ever say that a perfect hit is "Whatever worked under the old timing." Since I don't believe that, I don't think I would ever have said it. You are making things up and accusing me of saying them. This is not good.

What I *am* saying is that hits that would have punched through my chest or rib cage and penetrated my heart if the blade were sharp should set off a light. Is that clear enough?? Do you disagree with this? This doesn't happen nearly enough. Seven or eight out of ten times it will work and not the others. If this were happening due to a electrical problem with your foil (or epee, or sabre) I don't think you would find this acceptable. Would someone telling you that the same thing happens to your opponent mollify you? It doesn't mollify me. It takes away most of the advantages of electric scoring over side judges. The hits that I am talking about should all be clearly visible to a competent judge.

How few are very few reports? I have six from high level fencers who've experienced it. And six from coaches of high level fencers who seen it in action. And my own experiences in practice. 100% negative. And I'm talking about fencers who were *successful* at the NAC and Junior World Cups they went to. 100% negative.

While I acknowledge there may be a high level fencer (or coach) who thinks nothing but good about the results of the new timing I have not yet heard even a *rumor* of one, much less an actual identification of one.

I hope I find foil fun in the future somehow too. But I suspect that it will require that they change this new timing. Because what it produces is ugliness.

gary hayenga

[mrbiggs]

My question in regards to epee still hasn't been answered. I fenced 180 touches of epee this weekend, and you know how many straight hits failed to go off? 1. Including me AND my opponents. And that one had already been parried, so it was coming in at a high angle.


And so I repeat the question. The epee timings are, I beleive, still stricter than the foil ones. Why don't epeeists see this problem with straight attacks?

DieterS, I, um, strongly disagree in my observations with some of your comments. Especially #11. Foil's footwork has gone way up, because fencers are less confident about finishing their attacks. Attack in preparation is more a part of the game now, and that means more change in RoW. As for #1...have you been watching foil with the new timings? People are still attacking. Just as much as before, nearly. Aren't they? Or where you live, are all the foilists standing and looking at each other the entire time, then both counterattacking? Is the difference in our location really that drastic in fencing style changes?

[drippingwet]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

And so I repeat the question. The epee timings are, I beleive, still stricter than the foil ones. Why don't epeeists see this problem with straight attacks?

Maybe foilists are used to a lighter weapon and lighter touches, flicks, glancing hits, etc. Now they have to use their lighter weapons and perhaps make more heavy touches, plant the point, etc. Maybe it will just take a bit of time to get over that 'lightness'.

In the old days, before the box, it was important to plant the point and make the blade bend so that the judges et al could see the hit was valid. When the box came, the emphasis wasn't so important. Now perhaps aiding the hit is important again, and maybe we just need to re-calibrate.

[mrbiggs]

Yes, but that's not what many are saying. They are saying that perfect, straight on hits aren't registering.

[drippingwet]

Well I'm not sure what their experience is. Unless they're commenting on cases which involved debounce, then I can't think of a reason why a well planted straight hit wouldn't register.

[Epee_Pox]

I can only think of 2 explanations (other than equipment failure) for a light not going off when you think it should have:

1) You really didn't plant the tip with enough force for enough time. It was just a glancing blow or a faint tap, so it shouldn't have counted anyway. You need to adjust your feeling for what should count as a hit.

2) You somehow managed to bend your blade so far, so fast, that the tip was no longer encountering pressure and released before the box registered a hit. Your blade is way too whippy. Get a stiffer blade.

As has been pointed out, epee fencers manage to score consistently with higher weight and time threshholds. If we merely graze the other guy, or give him a light tap or a glancing blow, we don't expect the light to go off (except maybe for the other guy). So I'm guessing that for most foilists the fix is simply a matter of adjusting expectations.

I refuse to believe that a properly-planted foil touch, which depresses the button for the required length of time, will not register a point. If the light isn't going off, you didn't keep the point depressed long enough. No matter how firmly you've bent your blade against the opponent's chest.

[cowpaste]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

My question in regards to epee still hasn't been answered. I fenced 180 touches of epee this weekend, and you know how many straight hits failed to go off? 1. Including me AND my opponents. And that one had already been parried, so it was coming in at a high angle.

Didn't you read my post? I'll restate. Epée timings are not "stricter" than foil timings. The current foil timing requires the tip to be depressed for 15 miliseconds. The current épée requies the tip to be depressed for 2 miliseconds or something. Therefore, a glancing hit has a much higher chance of going off in épée than it does in foil.

Anyway, I fenced my first foil tournament today with the new timings. Nobody flicked because it was just too risky. I also lost A LOT of points because my tip clicked, but did not register on the box. A LOT of fencers were getting really annoyed when a straight lunge attack to the chest didn't work. Great stuff.

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by cowpaste

Didn't you read my post? I'll restate. Epée timings are not "stricter" than foil timings. The current foil timing requires the tip to be depressed for 15 miliseconds. The current épée requies the tip to be depressed for 2 miliseconds or something. Therefore, a glancing hit has a much higher chance of going off in épée than it does in foil.

Anyway, I fenced my first foil tournament today with the new timings. Nobody flicked because it was just too risky. I also lost A LOT of points because my tip clicked, but did not register on the box. A LOT of fencers were getting really annoyed when a straight lunge attack to the chest didn't work. Great stuff.

Actually, I didn't read your post. I missed it somehow. Sorry. (<--not sarcasm)

Well, if your first paragraph is true, than my epee comments have no relevance. Which is too bad.

__________________________________________________ __________
Is there any way better than tip tape we could insulate our blades so we don't have all these problems? I mean, alot of this seems to stem from the blade touching the lamé. Nearly all, as a matter of fact. Is there another way that more effectively insulates the blade, so no part of the barrel could possibly touch the lamé fabric?

[peet]

Originally Posted by neevel

After seeing the problems with strong, straight thrusts not lighting and hit bouncing off of chest proctectors that should be good, I put the 11 ms F/W in for a couple of weeks to see what effect it had. The result was that the great majority of the instances where good hits didn't register cleared up, but flicks didn't become substantially easier to register. So backing off to 10 ms would probably help the situation a great deal without upsetting the goal of reducing flicks.

I find this VERY interesting...

-p

[peet]

Originally Posted by Epee_Pox

1) You really didn't plant the tip with enough force for enough time. It was just a glancing blow or a faint tap, so it shouldn't have counted anyway. You need to adjust your feeling for what should count as a hit.

This is sometimes the reason. This kind of failed hit, while still quite frustrating, is less the source of our ire than #2. That being said, I'd say what kind of tip application to the target "should" count is open to opinion. IMHO, the game is in the strategy, the footwork, deceptive blade actions, etc. and not in how hard or how long my tip is depressed.

Originally Posted by Epee_Pox

2) You somehow managed to bend your blade so far, so fast, that the tip was no longer encountering pressure and released before the box registered a hit. Your blade is way too whippy. Get a stiffer blade.

I do plan to get stiffer blades. But: There are lots of reasons a blade can get bent very quickly. (distance, timing, one of those parries that "drag" the point onto the lame, etc.), and the flexibility is only one variable. IMHO, if my attack is moving fast enough (perhaps increased by my opponent choosing just the wrong time to step in) to bend the blade that much in 15ms, a stiffer blade will help a little, but not much.

Some people have also postulated a #3 in addition to your #2:
3) Even though the tip may have been depressed for longer than 15ms, the blade, in bending deep, may have contacted the lame before 15 ms is over, thereby closing the circuit in less than 15 ms, causing the touch not to register. I myself argued against this theory at first, but after some experience, i have to agree it's possible.

Originally Posted by Epee_Pox

As has been pointed out, epee fencers manage to score consistently with higher weight and time threshholds. If we merely graze the other guy, or give him a light tap or a glancing blow, we don't expect the light to go off (except maybe for the other guy). So I'm guessing that for most foilists the fix is simply a matter of adjusting expectations.

My experience is different. I fence a fair amount of epee (not as much as foil, but enough to get me the same rating in both weapons, if that matters...) and I have often gotten touches without knowing it in epee. Haven't you? That little skip across the forearm that surprises you by lighting the light? In contrast, how often do you bend the blade double on your epee opponent's chest, and fail to register a hit?

Originally Posted by Epee_Pox

I refuse to believe that a properly-planted foil touch, which depresses the button for the required length of time, will not register a point. If the light isn't going off, you didn't keep the point depressed long enough. No matter how firmly you've bent your blade against the opponent's chest.

(See #3 above).
But even if you leave out the possiblilty of #3, this point begs the question. Basically what you're saying is: "If you don't satisfy the box's requirements for a touch, it won't register your touch". Well, that's certainly true. Some of us are just of the opinion that the new box's requirements are a little too strict, and fail to register a touch that we think should register. A matter of opinion? Yes it is. But, IMHO, a hit that bends the blade double in my opponent's valid target should score, and too many of these are not.

Just my $0.02.

Thanks for listening, and please understand that i also respect your opinion on the matter!



-p