NAC - changes in directing?

[E-fencer]

Some members from our club who came back from the recent NAC described what seemed to be a sea-change in how referees were being told to call ROW. The effect seems to have been a more conservative interpretation of ROW- at least in foil-

Any comments from others who were in South Bend?

[MHS Fencer]

I thougth that the directing at South Bend was of the highest quality that I have ever seen at an NAC. For the most part that is, they had a bunch of top-level directors who presided over bouts beautifully (and they had french accents too! so they must be right!)

-Ian

[Christopher J Umbs]

OK.. I'll bite.

What do you mean by conservative?

[Peach]

The women's sabre directing was very high-level and professional, though I observed one young man who was being excellent but inconsistent and therefore pissing off the coaches something fierce. However, his manner was excellent and he was imperturbable. Some of the fencers were complaining about one of our highest-level directors on the first day, an extremely competent person who does not always attend closely to the finer points in early-level pool bouts. However, on the whole, the action was being called VERY tightly and made me exceedingly conscious of the high standards of directing good sabre.

Since it's the most intense women's sabre tournament I've ever been in, and that includes the three World Cups I've been to in the U.S., I was very grateful that it was good.

[E-fencer]

[quote] OK.. I'll bite.
What do you mean by conservative?
<hr></blockquote>

My question had to do with the directing conventions for ROW being applied at the NAC rather than the quality of the directing.

The _most_ conservative interpretation of ROW might be when Fencer A is attacking with his weapon arm locked, fully extended at his opponent (within threatening distance).

The _most_ liberal interpretation might be Fencer A is moving forward toward his opponent (within threatening distance), but whose weapon arm may never be locked or fully extended, even at the end of the attack.

[WJM]

The ROW calls were a big reason I spent so much time at the NAC. It had been a while since I had seen National level fencing (instead of international and local) and some people were claiming that pretty much anything would be called the attack (I believe his exact words were something along the lines of "it has nothing to do with the hand anymore, it's all about who charges first"...and "that's the way they call it at NAC's now") I was glad to see this wasn't the case at all. While some of attempted attacks into prep which would of been called on the international level were called counterattacks at south bend, the vast majority of calls of that nature were correct in my opinion, with the Div I men's foil being called better than the junior men's foil if you ask me. The sabre referees (ok, often the same people as foil) were even better, with very few of the calls being unclear. In the junior men's sabre, I don't recall seeing a single call I didn't 100% agree with (and I'm a coach who isn't afraid of making noise) and in Div I mens' sabre, there were a few, but not as many as I expected. In fact, most of the calls in the sabre I didn't agree with had to do with taking the blade, often against a point-in-line. In the first day pools, one referee didn't feel a fencer was taking the blade clearly enough, even though you could see the blade being moved, and clearly hear the contact. Several impartial people watching the bout were confused as to the call, and the referee would only explain to me that "if the blades were real, your guy would be dead". I pointed out that sabre is filled with things you wouldn't want to do with sharps, but we do them anyway and they count, he said, "well, I guess that is true", and walked off. Didn't exactly build my opinion of him, hehe. On the second day, One of our top 15 ranked sabre fencers lost on a number of such calls (different ref) as well as calling some preprations that many found confusing (calling what looked like an attack to the rest of us a prepration). I noticed a number of referees in the foil using the french terms ("allez" "attack gauche" "pas de touche") which of course I have no objection to, but I had been told we weren't supposed to use them in the states.

Overall, I was quite impressed with the level of fencing and the referees. Space issues, walking room, people sitting on strips, stuff like that, I did find annoying at times. Dave Neevel did a great job, and things were well run at that end. I did wonder why the "finals room" didn't host a final other than junior men's sabre though. It was such a nice room to watch fencing in, but the Div I sabre, foil and other events were all upstairs. I think things are looking up for USA fencing, and that foil and epee will catch up to the progress in sabre we've all been so rightly impressed with.

-Will Mego
Naperville Fencing Club - <a href="http://www.napervillefencing.com" target="_blank">www.napervillefencing.com</a>

[goldbaker]

I wouldn't call it a "sea change," but there does seem to be a general trend towards permitting more attacks into preparation and recognizing when the attacker goes for the blade and misses. This is a good thing -- good directing would eliminate the need for the bizarre FIE "anti-flick" proposals.

Still, there was a lot of inconsistency. The director for my DEs at South Bound basically called forward motion and permitted an attacker a huge amount of time to finish. She was consistent and unbiased, so I'm not really complaining -- it probably worked to my advantage in my first bout. At the same time, though, I could see the same actions being called exactly the opposite a few strips over.

Oh well, fencing to the director is always part of the game.