Jeff Bukantz article in "American Fencing"

[mrbiggs]

I got my issue of American Fencing today (yay). As usual, I flipped right to Jeff Bukantz's article, because I've always enjoyed his articles the most in the past. He usually has something interesting and informative to say.

Instead, he went on a rant about the new timings, and how they've ruined foil and sabre. He goes as far as to create a list of "winners" and "losers" from the new timings. Under "losers" are:

Coaches who teach correctly
Fencers, clubs, parents, divisions
technically proficient fencers
the sport of fencing

Am I going insane? I don't think there's ANYONE out there that thinks that there are no disadvantages to the new timings, but I've been to several competitions (on top of my club, which also uses the new timings.) And I haven't seen this complete collapse of fencing everyone is talking about. Sure, there's a few one-lighters here and there that weren't earned. Sure, foilists don't attack quite as much, being worried about attack in preparation. But I don't see any C-rated fencer below 5'9" losing tournaments all of a sudden. I don't see bouts where 90% of the touches are one-lighters, where the director would otherwise have to make a call. I don't see ANY actions where BOTH fencers hit, but don't register, and there's a giant, random remise battle. And I don't see quick-remising fencers beating their superiors.

I realize that I fence at a low level (definately lower than that which Bukantz is observing). Are the high-level fencers falling apart, while the lower levels only gain? Or has the effect been similar across the levels?

[Mr Epee]

It seems best to think of Jeff Bukantz as sort of a Howard Cossell type.

There are a very large number of fencers and coaches who have serious issues with the newly implemented timings, and if they don't speak up now during the "test season" then they may never get their problems corrected. People who are members of large clubs, or browse online forums (like this one), are often way ahead of the information being disbursed through traditional publications like American Fencing.

I would be curious if anyone submitted articles supporting the changes in box timing.

[Red #40]

My son fences Saber and his coach was worried about the new timings, however since one of the things that the coach concentrates on with my son is foot work the timings seem to be an advantage. Since my sons footwork is great he seems to get a lot more single light touches in his favor. After seeing the results of my son and the rest of our club at the last RYC we went to the new timings are pretty much a non-issue for us.

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

It seems best to think of Jeff Bukantz as sort of a Howard Cossell type.

There are a very large number of fencers and coaches who have serious issues with the newly implemented timings, and if they don't speak up now during the "test season" then they may never get their problems corrected. People who are members of large clubs, or browse online forums (like this one), are often way ahead of the information being disbursed through traditional publications like American Fencing.

I would be curious if anyone submitted articles supporting the changes in box timing.

I agree that the disagreements have to be made, but he was acting like foil is ruined. Just plain not even worth fencing anymore. And I just don't see that at all. Are there problems? Sure. But his attitude is extremely negative for the circumstances.

[wflaschka]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

I would be curious if anyone submitted articles supporting the changes in box timing.

In the same issue, pg 22, Andy Shaw reflects on the numerous rule changes that have hit fencing over the years. He gives examples of some pretty insane rules. Overall, the big-perspective tone of Shaw's article seems to balance Bukantz's "the sky is falling!" article.

Bukantz's article is an opinion piece, but I think fencing would have been better served with an article about how to work with the changes. Fencers who take this article to heart will self-righteously resist updating their game, they'll end up getting beaten by people who view the timing changes as an opportunity to apply more classical technique to foil.

[garyhayenga]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

Am I going insane?

No, you just don't have enough experience with/against better fencers yet

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

Sure, foilists don't attack quite as much, being worried about attack in preparation
.

It's not attack into preparation they are worried about, but simple counter-attack, or dodge-twist counter-attack, since perfectly good actions that hit straight on with the point don't go off 25% of the time if they are done too fast.

Some in this forum have said "attack slower", but to slow the attack down is both is unsuccessful against a better or quicker fencer (I say OR because it doesn't work against *me* and I am by no means quicker than anyone).

Others say, "hold it on target longer", but it should have already gone all the way through them.

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

I don't see ANY actions where BOTH fencers hit, but don't register, and there's a giant, random remise battle. And I don't see quick-remising fencers beating their superiors.

I see a lot of it. But I am fencing against a half dozen A-rated fencers of wildly varying styles.

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

I realize that I fence at a low level (definately lower than that which Bukantz is observing). Are the high-level fencers falling apart, while the lower levels only gain? Or has the effect been similar across the levels?

The high levels aren't falling apart, but there is now a high level of randomness in foil fencing that is completely unneccessary. In a DE bout it can easily change the outcome and eliminate the wrong fencer, and does.

gary hayenga

[USWomensfoil]

I don't like the new timing. It's too extreme. It has changed the way I teach foil and made it more like epee- counter attacks, stop hits, remises and so on take a much higher priority. Do I miss the flick? - yes. Can I live without the flick? - yes. Can I go back to the flick? - yes.

The biggest problem is not the demise of the flick, it's the demise of direct attacks that bounce off of the target and don't register.

The 15ms contact time is far too long and has a big impact on the fencers at the highest level - they hit harder and faster and so the bounce off is more significant. At least 2-3 touches get bounced off in most every bout at world cups. Also, the machines vary a bit in how they handle this. Some machines seem more lenient and others very tight. This further compounds the problem.

I am not as strongly opposed to the lock out time, but again, I think it went too far. Compound actions do get locked out by the fast remises or hits in the preparation and I tend to think that they shouldn't.

The drive behind the changes was a political one and not a technical or tactical improvement. Roch didn't want the flick to exist so he gathered up the votes and pushed the changes through without any sort of testing that I'm aware of.

I think overall that the changes are bad. There was little wrong with foil before hand and I don't see a need to tinker with it in the name of politics.

Mike Pederson
US National Coach Women's Foil

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

I got my issue of American Fencing today (yay). As usual, I flipped right to Jeff Bukantz's article, because I've always enjoyed his articles the most in the past. He usually has something interesting and informative to say.

Instead, he went on a rant about the new timings, and how they've ruined foil and sabre. He goes as far as to create a list of "winners" and "losers" from the new timings. Under "losers" are:

Coaches who teach correctly
Fencers, clubs, parents, divisions
technically proficient fencers
the sport of fencing

Am I going insane? I don't think there's ANYONE out there that thinks that there are no disadvantages to the new timings, but I've been to several competitions (on top of my club, which also uses the new timings.) And I haven't seen this complete collapse of fencing everyone is talking about. Sure, there's a few one-lighters here and there that weren't earned. Sure, foilists don't attack quite as much, being worried about attack in preparation. But I don't see any C-rated fencer below 5'9" losing tournaments all of a sudden. I don't see bouts where 90% of the touches are one-lighters, where the director would otherwise have to make a call. I don't see ANY actions where BOTH fencers hit, but don't register, and there's a giant, random remise battle. And I don't see quick-remising fencers beating their superiors.

I realize that I fence at a low level (definately lower than that which Bukantz is observing). Are the high-level fencers falling apart, while the lower levels only gain? Or has the effect been similar across the levels?

[garyhayenga]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

I agree that the disagreements have to be made, but he was acting like foil is ruined. Just plain not even worth fencing anymore. And I just don't see that at all. Are there problems? Sure. But his attitude is extremely negative for the circumstances.

If that's what Mr. Bukantz thinks I agree with him. Foil is ruined. It's not worth fencing anymore. I don't enjoy it at all anymore and before it was my favorite, but I do it because I have friends and teammates who want to get ready for the circuit events. If not for that I would give it up completely and switch to epee and sabre instead. I could care less that you can't flick anymore, I just want to be able to make my straight hits go off reliably. The fact is this actually makes *me* more effective against high level opponents, but it does it for the wrong reasons.

I also think the change to sabre timing is bad, but not to the same degree as the foil change.

gary hayenga

[garyhayenga]

Originally Posted by wflaschka

Bukantz's article is an opinion piece, but I think fencing would have been better served with an article about how to work with the changes. Fencers who take this article to heart will self-righteously resist updating their game, they'll end up getting beaten by people who view the timing changes as an opportunity to apply more classical technique to foil.

You are incorrect. More classical techniques will not help. One of the fencers who we practice with regularly never flicks, he has beautiful footwork and is lightning fast. He can't get his straight parry-four-riposte that leaves a bruise in the middle of your sternum to go off anymore. His lunge on preparation is beautiful to see. But it doesn't have to be avoided anymore because it's too fast and bounces off.

Not being able to flick anymore is *not* the problem. The problem *is* that classical techniques done at high speeds don't work anymore.

What *works* is fencing it more like epee. But it's really *ugly* epee! Duck remises and counters that would never work in epee will work with the new timing and have to be guarded against.

And let's face it, when I want to fence epee, I fence epee. But when I want to fence foil, I am now screwed.

gary hayenga

[MikeHarm]

I've been enjoying fencing a lot more, and finding my scoring percentages increasing to higher than they were pre timing as I've been adapting to the new timings. The foil game in general I think was improved greatly. The timing change shifted things back to a more balanced game between the offensive and defensive aspects of foil. Its also brought back more skillfull moves that dropped by the wayside when people could get away with doing lazy back flicks instead and provided a competitive advantage to fencers who work hard to develop their technique. In particular the skill of setting the point correctly.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

I've enjoyed fencing epee more with the new timings.

[telkanuru]

As I have now seen several Open level events (A2/B2s) and a handful of lower-level events on the new timings, I'm going to have to say you're very much overreacting, Gary. I've seen good, clean technique win out over sloppy, and ROW still very much has meaning. I've seen perhaps 2-3 direct attacks debounce in an entire competition. Heck, even the flick isn't very much affected, as long as you restrict your target to everything but the lower back. I dunno, what are you doing that these guys aren't (or what are we doing that you aren't)?

[wflaschka]

You are incorrect. More classical techniques will not help. One of the fencers who we practice with regularly never flicks, he has beautiful footwork and is lightning fast. He can't get his straight parry-four-riposte that leaves a bruise in the middle of your sternum to go off anymore. His lunge on preparation is beautiful to see. But it doesn't have to be avoided anymore because it's too fast and bounces off.

By "apply more classical technique to foil," I mean the intrinsic foily stuff, the combination of point and RoW which are particular to foil. For example, there are some fun and interesting moves which have been languishing at the highest levels: the coupé, binds & transfers, their ceding parries, the trompements needed to get around a composed defensive hand. There is a wealth of technique that now might rejoin the sweeping parry and the vague-threat attack, now that fencing is less arc-y and more tippy.

The description of your technically strong fencer does raise flags: Riposte to the sternum; attacks on prep where the tip bounces off the target. I won't pass judgement on a fencer I haven't seen. I will say that of Some A's I've watched, I was surprised that they could set off their tips under the old timing.

A large percentage of us fencers look nothing like the fencers in the World Cups and the Olympics. We keep our wrists in a broken position; we extend from the hip; we never plant the point; we lunge in the wrong distance and at the wrong time; ...and we really believe our technique is okay. Under the old timing I was quite impatient with opponents who slid across the target with zero penetration, and then would stare at their tips with deep suspicion (or worse, waste my time changing their weapons). We all know fencers who will spend hours adjusting the tolerance of their tip-springs, and zero time at a wall target. When I was competitive, I certainly cast a lot of blame on equipment that didn't deserve it.

As a coach now I take a hard line: If you can't land a 6mm disc somewhere on a human torso, don't blame your *****ing tip-tape. The real answer to the timing changes is, of course, just technique and burn-in time. (That was also the story under the old timing, but you didn't have to read that story because any crappy hit would turn on a light. Now we have to read the story, and lo, more of us will look like World Cup and Olympic fencers sooner.)

The same spirit of invention which created flicks in the first place is still around; dinosaurs who cannot or will not adapt will get replaced by furrier creatures. So I'm suspicious of these early complaints, and not just because I dig the timing changes. If not enough time has passed to build new technique based on the timing change, it means these complainers are trying to fence with old timing under the new timing. That, of course won't work, and it wasn't supposed to. I completely believe that duck remises and counters are useful now, but I also believe that this isn't the end of the story.

/rant over

I'm still hopeful the changes will be beneficial. Otherwise, I have a lot of words to eat. Time will tell.

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by garyhayenga

You are incorrect. More classical techniques will not help. One of the fencers who we practice with regularly never flicks, he has beautiful footwork and is lightning fast. He can't get his straight parry-four-riposte that leaves a bruise in the middle of your sternum to go off anymore. His lunge on preparation is beautiful to see. But it doesn't have to be avoided anymore because it's too fast and bounces off.

Not being able to flick anymore is *not* the problem. The problem *is* that classical techniques done at high speeds don't work anymore.

What *works* is fencing it more like epee. But it's really *ugly* epee! Duck remises and counters that would never work in epee will work with the new timing and have to be guarded against.

And let's face it, when I want to fence epee, I fence epee. But when I want to fence foil, I am now screwed.

gary hayenga

I'll take you at your word for the classical techniques not working. My observations disagree with yours, and that can be attributed to several things.

But, I do have one question. The actions you describe---counterattacks being nearly invincible, parry-4's that are picture-perfect not registering--why do those land in epee? Epee timings are still stricter than foil's....with 2/3rds the debouce time, and a very small fraction of the bloackage time. On top of that, the weight regulations are higher. And yet I've yet to see a beautiful parry-4 riposte fail to get a light, unless the other fencer hit first.

[nahouw]

I absolutely agree -- this has brought foil back to the original conventions of the game, and removing referee discretion. The only people who complain are those who were beneficieraries with the referee discretion under the old timings.

Originally Posted by MikeHarm

I've been enjoying fencing a lot more, and finding my scoring percentages increasing to higher than they were pre timing as I've been adapting to the new timings. The foil game in general I think was improved greatly. The timing change shifted things back to a more balanced game between the offensive and defensive aspects of foil. Its also brought back more skillfull moves that dropped by the wayside when people could get away with doing lazy back flicks instead and provided a competitive advantage to fencers who work hard to develop their technique. In particular the skill of setting the point correctly.

[MikeHarm]

Gary does these hits where he makes a nice clicking sound and then bends the barrel against the opponents lame so the button releases before the 15 ms timing is up.

As a side note, me and some of the other Michigan fencers I hang out with talked about who would be most hurt by the new timings change before they went into effect in the competitions. The other guys thought I was insane when I picked Gary for it. I wish I had at least bet a beer on it now. Hindsight is always 20/20 I suppose.

Originally Posted by telkanuru

As I have now seen several Open level events (A2/B2s) and a handful of lower-level events on the new timings, I'm going to have to say you're very much overreacting, Gary. I've seen good, clean technique win out over sloppy, and ROW still very much has meaning. I've seen perhaps 2-3 direct attacks debounce in an entire competition. Heck, even the flick isn't very much affected, as long as you restrict your target to everything but the lower back. I dunno, what are you doing that these guys aren't (or what are we doing that you aren't)?

[garyhayenga]

Originally Posted by MikeHarm

Gary does these hits where he makes a nice clicking sound and then bends the barrel against the opponents lame so the button releases before the 15 ms timing is up.

As a side note, me and some of the other Michigan fencers I hang out with talked about who would be most hurt by the new timings change before they went into effect in the competitions. The other guys thought I was insane when I picked Gary for it. I wish I had at least bet a beer on it now. Hindsight is always 20/20 I suppose.

You would have lost. Of the A's and B's in Michigan the new timing has hurt my success the least. At least twice as many of my opponents pefectly good solid hits bounce off of me without lighting a light per bout than do mine (I think it's because I'm a lot slower and just have naturally ugly fencing, unfortunately). I am winning bouts that I shouldn't, don't deserve to win. Not because I've adapted better, but because more randomness is involved. A lot more. When Ann Marsh lunges at me and slams her point straight into my solar plexus, knocking the breath out of me (and it's a padded solar plexus too!) because the blade doesn't bend at all and I win the bought because my feeble counter-attack is the only light there is something seriously wrong.

The mother of one of our top junior fencers asked me who I thought would benefit the most from the new timing. My answer was *me*. And I've been completely correct so far. But I haven't enjoyed it. It's ugly and stupid.

gary hayenga

[garyhayenga]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

I'll take you at your word for the classical techniques not working. My observations disagree with yours, and that can be attributed to several things.

But, I do have one question. The actions you describe---counterattacks being nearly invincible, parry-4's that are picture-perfect not registering--why do those land in epee? Epee timings are still stricter than foil's....with 2/3rds the debouce time, and a very small fraction of the bloackage time. On top of that, the weight regulations are higher. And yet I've yet to see a beautiful parry-4 riposte fail to get a light, unless the other fencer hit first.

That's my complaint. I've fenced a *lot* of epee over the years and the hits that I'm talking about are ones that I am *absolutely* sure would have gone off with even the most rigid heavy springed epee. And they *aren't* going off with the new foil timing. And that's just wrong.

If they had just said from now on you have to use an epee to fence foil with but we'll have right of way and foil target it wouldn't have bothered me much. But this new foil timing just doesn't work.

gary hayenga

[cowpaste]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

I'll take you at your word for the classical techniques not working. My observations disagree with yours, and that can be attributed to several things.

But, I do have one question. The actions you describe---counterattacks being nearly invincible, parry-4's that are picture-perfect not registering--why do those land in epee? Epee timings are still stricter than foil's....with 2/3rds the debouce time, and a very small fraction of the bloackage time. On top of that, the weight regulations are higher. And yet I've yet to see a beautiful parry-4 riposte fail to get a light, unless the other fencer hit first.

They work because épée timings are NOT stricter than in foil. There are different. In épée, the lockout time is very fast, something like 40[ms] I believe. However, the required the depression time is still very short (1[ms]?) compared to foil's new 15[ms]. It is the depression time that causes these fast foil attacks to not register. I believe you are getting the technical aspects of the timing mixed up.