The Foilists' Blues

[Katman]

I'm no elite fencer, but I haven't had many of my ripostes locked out by the new timings. Those that were weren't exactly good ripostes in my opinion.

[achilleus]

An electronic device can not decide the appropriate "fencing time".

Why not?

And really, the box always had a say on fencing time, it was just a very long time.

Also if you had read the results from the tests the FIE ran on the new timings, they apparently felt settled on a block time that discounted hits that were so out of time as to make them ridiculous to call, and then they added some time to allow for more complex actions.

So, if you believe the FIE's word, the block time allows for plenty of interpretation of fencing time.

[telkanuru]

Yes but why adopt a law if it is bad ?

I hope these test timings will be rejected and not becom the "law"

You are entitled to this opinion. However, in the spirit of debate, I would ask why you think that the new timings are 'bad'.

The argument of slow attacks or slow riposts are not valid. A slow attack or a
slow ripost does not work against a good fencer.

I have absolutely no idea what this means or what you are trying to say.

[telkanuru]

With the new timings, ripostes that have priority are no longer landing before a remise has caused the box to block out the hit.

Again, since you didn't pick up on it the first time, you know that the box will do certain things, like block out your riposte if your opponent is allowed to remise and/or you're slow, so riposte with opposition or don't, and do or don't get points, but if you choose option two, don't complain.

I should point out that there are many 1-light parry-ripostes in epee, which has a blocking time ~ 1/9th that of foil. Indeed, I've won many bouts with parry-ripostes. What aren't you doing right?

[telkanuru]

Even with the test timings, i have seen top foilists training, and they can flick
in the back of their opponent (over the shoulder).

But not to the deep back, and not reliably enough to use, methinks.

[Alan]

So, if you believe the FIE's word ...

Ha ha. You are very funny.

[Alan]

You are entitled to this opinion. However, in the spirit of debate, I would ask why you think that the new timings are 'bad'.



I have absolutely no idea what this means or what you are trying to say.

Some said here that with the official timings, some "play to the timings"
by doing deliberatly very slow attacks or ripostes

I pretend this is not a valid argument. It may work against beginners
but not against good fencers.

Another thing :

If you take young kids beginning foil, the test blocking time may be
too short for them to learn paray riposte. Just a tought.

[Alan]

From
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com...m?id=140682005


Kruse foiled by new electronic scoring rule from old guard



"IMAGINE you spend most of your life practising a sport and you become so good at it that you reach the last eight in your discipline in the Olympic Games. Then somebody decides to change the rules, and all of a sudden you are back where you started.

That nightmare has just happened to Britain’s top fencer, Richard Kruse, who recently declared that he would fight for Scotland in the new international set-up in the sport."


...


"I am a little depressed with the current situation having spent ten years of my life learning skills which are now completely useless," said Kruse.

"The FIE called for the change because it is run by a bunch of people who were fencing in the 50s and 60s when it was more ‘swash and buckle’-like and they all wanted to emulate this in the modern game.

"Initially British fencing supported a trial run as it was suspected that it would improve fencing and make it a little neater. However, now all the top British fencers and the British Fencing Board have seen how appalling it is.

"It clearly hasn’t worked and it has ruined the game and slowed it right down. It is a completely different game now and I am not really that good at it.

"I have decided to give this season a go and if I really can’t win I will have to call it a day with regards to my fencing career."

[AntonioDelMonte]

As someone that has been fencing for 14 years and comes from a flicky counter acting style of foil fencing i recently began training again i do not like the new timing. while it does benifit me type of fencing it changes the game to much the definition of a proper attack has never been changed yet the directors have given the flick the priority not the timing of the machine Mr. Roch has not addressed the problem he seams to have another agenda which to me does not benifit the fencers but the equipment companies ( masks with visors, new machines and chips, etc.) Fencing is not a big spectator sport nore is it seen on espn so why change the sport towards those ends in the hope that i will become the next big thing there will never be MNF (Monday Night Fencing) on TV so lets fix the problems and not create new ones

[cowpaste]

Periods please?

[Safir]

Lesson Adaptations to the New FIE Timings in Foil

Allen Evans, Dominion Fencing Club

http://home.earthlink.net/~allenevans59/NEWTIMINGS.HTML

[PalmFrond]

Just to stick my oar in...
I fenced with the new timings for the first time in the Irish Open, back in November, and I had no problem with them. I found that any hits that didn't fix themselves on the opponent's lame generally didn't register (for example, I parried septime and my riposte skittered across my opponent's chest, failing to register, and his remise scored. The next time, he tried the exact same thing, I parried septime again, and fixed my point on his flank. Hit to me). Also, the only flicks that registered were very fast, progressive ones, where my opponent's hand travelled in almost a straight line.
Interestingly, presidents seemed to be reading actions differently from usual - instead of giving RoW to people charging forward with their points threatening the ceiling, they gave it to whichever fencer was the first to perceptibly straighten their arm, blade pointing at the valid target...what a nice change for me!
Sympathies to anyone who relied on flicks and/or marching attacks.

[Alan]

Interestingly, presidents seemed to be reading actions differently from usual - instead of giving RoW to people charging forward with their points threatening the ceiling, they gave it to whichever fencer was the first to perceptibly straighten their arm, blade pointing at the valid target...what a nice change for me!

No need of changing the timings for that. And actually directors
were going that way before the timings change

Sympathies to anyone who relied on flicks and/or marching attacks.

Don't worry for them. If they are good at flicks, they will be good
at other actions. (If they don't quit foil disgusted ...)

[wflaschka]

Lesson Adaptations to the New FIE Timings in Foil
Allen Evans, Dominion Fencing Club
http://home.earthlink.net/~allenevans59/NEWTIMINGS.HTML

Allen Evans is right, and these are primarily the changes that were extrapolated for the Future Foil article on this site. I'm only jealous because Evans was more precise and well-written. (Of course, he wasn't trying to guess ahead a year.) I've found his other articles very useful also.

This article is an example of the sort of thinking that is starting to emerge. (I'm only guessing that it's emerging -- but it always does: after change comes adjustment.) As people process the timing changes, they start forming new methods and internalized rule-sets. The change stops being a travesty, and starts becoming an interesting problem. Then it stops being a problem, and becomes the norm.

I'll be glad when we're through the complaining stage. This article is an example of the interesting stuff to come. For example: "The hand will be important" -- there can be 1,000 bboard posts on this topic alone.

[Alan]

http://www.dhnet.be/index.phtml?cont...html?id=112422

Escrime - Epais brouillard

"Fencing - Thick Fog"


Excerpts :
--------

A l'aube de cette nouvelle saison, Gohy reste sceptique face aux nouvelles règles du fleuret. «La FIE a revu les temps d'allumage. La durée de l'impact a été allongée, ce qui signifie qu'il n'est plus possible d'effectuer des coups lancés (NdlR: aller fouetter l'arrière de l'épaule ). Même certaines touches de la pointe n'allument plus forcément non plus. Par contre, le temps du double a été raccourci. Tout cela oblige les tireurs à des contorsions pour toucher ou... ne pas l'être. Il faudra bien les trois ou quatre premières manches de Coupe du Monde pour analyser la façon dont chacun aura assimilé ces règles qui, je pense, modifient l'esprit même de l'arme qu'est le fleuret.»


"With the avent of this new season, Gohy remains skeptic vis-a-vis the new rules of the foil. "The FIE re-examined timings. The duration of the impact was lengthened, which means that it is not possible any more to realize flicks (note: to go to whip the back of the shoulder). But even some direct
shots with the tip do not score anymore. On the other hand, the timing of doubles was shortened. All that obliges the fencers to do contorsions for touching or... not to be touched. One will need well three or four World cups to analyze the way in which each one will have assimilated these rules which, I think, modify the very spirit of the weapon which is the foil."

[Alan]

The change stops being a travesty, and starts becoming an interesting problem. Then it stops being a problem, and becomes the norm.

Why should they become the norm if the majority of adult foilists is against them ?

Because his majesty and some old guard nostalgics have decided so ?

Is the FIE a democratic intitution ???

[wflaschka]

Why should they become the norm if the majority of adult foilists is against them?

Because that's nature.

Your girlfriend breaks up with you: You feel like dying. A month later, you're in love again.

You cut your hand off: At the beginning, you're surprised and upset. 10 years later, you're not as surprised or upset.

World War II: During the war, you're not having any fun at all. 50 years later, you watch hollywood movies about it.

The foil timing changes: At first people are upset and surprised. Then they get tired of being beaten, so they start training again. Then their girlfriends break up with them.

It's the circle of life.

[Mr Epee]

Thank you Simba, we do love a good Disneyesque lesson from the Lion King.

Asking people to adapt to a new timing system, where a large number of well executed direct hits are not registered on the box is not good. Period!

It flies in the face of what sports are about, and is against the reasons why fencing added the electric scoring system in the first place.

Replacing the potentiallity of human error with a machine = Good
Creating a machine that makes errors = Bad

[Alan]

World War II: During the war, you're not having any fun at all. 50 years later, you watch hollywood movies about it.

1) I see that you compare his majesty's reforms with WW II. For once
you are more pugnacious than i am. Congratulations.

2) WW II it is a bad example. If it could have avoided, it would have been
better ! The same for these test timings.

[wflaschka]

Asking people to adapt to a new timing system, where a large number of well executed direct hits are not registered on the box is not good. Period!

It flies in the face of what sports are about, and is against the reasons why fencing added the electric scoring system in the first place.

Replacing the potentiallity of human error with a machine = Good
Creating a machine that makes errors = Bad

Your foundational assumptions are different from mine. Your arguments fall in line with those of GHayenga, who characterized the new timing changes as an electrical problem. There is a nice long argument thread from a month ago.

The worrier's rationale goes: "My light didn't go off as it would have in 2004. Therefore the machines are broken. The machines aren't reflective of perfect touches, which, by definition, are the touches I was doing in 2004."

As others have, and continue to say, foil is changed... we don't know yet if it's broken. The machine is making no errors: It's doing exactly what it's programmed to do. When people understand this in their bones, they will understand why a portion of foilists seem indifferent to foil being "destroyed forever."