Are the new timings constructive in creating popular appeal to spectators?

[jBirch]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

Oh, also, one of the biggest problems in fencing today is lack of coaches. Not many people were fencing 30 years ago, and those that were have jobs and stuff. They're doing other things, not coaching fencing. People can't learn how to fence if there's no one to teach them.

We might have to wait a generation for fencing to really spread no matter what we do today.

You're right. That feeds back into the whole "people who know how to play the sport, are also interested in watching it". Fewer coaches = fewer fencers = fewer specatators = less TV time = less popularity.

[raymac]

Originally Posted by Inquartata
The problem with that line of reasoning is...fencing is not about the effing spectators, or what they want, or what they need, or what they can best understand. It's about the DOING, not the watching; or it's supposed to be. I do not care to have people like Roch mucking about with an activity I enjoy DOING so as to please the great unwashed. Does anyone here really think that the spectators' convenience ought to be a higher priority than the enjoyment of the participants?

One thing fencers don't seem to realize; the timings weren't changed purely for spectator satisfaction, it was an attempt to promote the sport we love without drastically changing it. Obviously some group of people felt fencing is going no where; not evolving, and that it needed a change. Sure the sport is great, but it could be much better if we maintained the fun of it while stimulating a growth in popularity. Fencing clubs would receive larger budgets, become more popular, etc. producing an end result of more fencers, therefore more competition, and thus better fencers.

I think the problem is most people are mad, but they don't know what they're mad about. I find alot of the people on this board are too concerned with 'being cool' or 'fitting in', asking inconsiquential questions, often concerning trivial matters. The best comparison I can think of is when stereotypical 'rich type' parties are shown on TV, the majority of the people talking just to talk, giving those haughty fake laughs and putting on a facade of interest.

None of this is meant to be taken offensively, I'm just sick of people being angry when it appears to me as though they're following a crowd, or emulating the responses of their favourite fencers. When I see posts such as 'Fencer X loses bout as a result of poor officiating, do you feel refereeing is sufficient in modern competition?' or 'Fencer X did a beat attack but it didn't work, are beat attacks still viable in all levels of fencing?' I can't help but wonder what is going through the person's mind as they post. Are you posting to make conversation? Can you not figure anything out by yourself? Are you so insecure about your fencing ability and knowledge that you must run to a board everytime an established fencer does something different, or tries something that doesn't work?

I've only been fencing for 5 months now, but using common sense I can devise counters and strategies for myself. If I do a straight attack and it gets parried, I try a disengage. If the disengage doesn't work, tack on a beat. If your beat disengage doesn't work, try some feints, etc. If nothing you do seems to be working, it's probably a result of superior experience or physical ability on behalf of your opponent. At this stage it wouldn't be uncommon for people to consult their coach, a peer, or this board, but from what I'm seeing a vast number of people seem to be more concerned with whether or not people will think it works, rather than if it will work for them. You are you, and know yourself better than anyone else. Before you come running wondering whether or not to parry while retreating, try it. Advancements in sport come from those who experiment, not those who need to be advised on every aspect of their game.

Don't limit your repitoire to what the 'best fencer' is doing at the moment. Discover what works for you, and use it. Your attack or new march might become the new hot thing in fencing, the thing that people ask how to counter on all the fencing boards. It seems like common sense, but people don't seem to realize it: if you follow the best, you will never be the best.

[Alan]

Originally Posted by raymac

One thing fencers don't seem to realize; the timings weren't changed purely for spectator satisfaction, it was an attempt to promote the sport we love without drastically changing it.

Completely False !!!

The different interviews of King René in "Roch Magazine" clearly show that
he is only interested in foil telegeny :
clear visors, suppression of off target hits, reduced blocking time not for
better foil but for easier understanding for the tv spectators etc ...

In fact he does not care at all about foilists and he proved that once again
by adopting this pathetic "passivity" rule after the stunning protest in Seoul.

(instead of trying to meet the foilists and discuss with them.)

See also the result of the poll " Is the FIE democratic" ?
Eloquent !!!

[raymac]

Originally Posted by Alan

Completely False !!!

The different interviews of King René in "Roch Magazine" clearly show that
he is only interested in foil telegeny :
clear visors, suppression of off target hits, reduced blocking time not for
better foil but for easier understanding for the tv spectators etc ...

In fact he does not care at all about foilists and he proved that once again
by adopting this pathetic "passivity" rule after the stunning protest in Seoul.

(instead of trying to meet the foilists and discuss with them.)

See also the result of the poll " Is the FIE democratic" ?
Eloquent !!!

Clear visors don't drastically change fencing. Supression of off target hits is something that might improve fencing making for a more high tempo bout, and reduced blocking time really doesn't change fencing much. No more ridiculous flicks, so what. Deal with it. Well executed whip attacks still land, just not ones that barely graze the shoulder blade of someone you're standing in front of.

You need to alter your game when the game is changed, not sit there complaining, trying to justify your demands by saying the president is a dictator not concerned at all with fencing. Please grow up, and drop the whole 'King Roch' / 'Foilepee' thing, it's detrimental to your credibility because you're attacking the man personally instead of the ideas which you are against.

Right now you're so blinded by your anger and rooted in your beliefs that you aren't taking a second to stand back and look at the whole picture. Sure, removing off target hits may make fencing more appealing to spectators, but viewers who don't fence wouldn't even notice the change. It's primarily a fresh change for foil that is made to improve the game, with a secondary goal of enhancing spectator appeal.

[Alan]

Originally Posted by raymac

Clear visors don't drastically change fencing. Supression of off target hits is something that might improve fencing making for a more high tempo bout, and reduced blocking time really doesn't change fencing much. No more ridiculous flicks, so what. Deal with it. Well executed whip attacks still land, just not ones that barely graze the shoulder blade of someone you're standing in front of.

You need to alter your game when the game is changed, not sit there complaining, trying to justify your demands by saying the president is a dictator not concerned at all with fencing. Please grow up, and drop the whole 'King Roch' / 'Foilepee' thing, it's detrimental to your credibility because you're attacking the man personally instead of the ideas which you are against.

Right now you're so blinded by your anger and rooted in your beliefs that you aren't taking a second to stand back and look at the whole picture. Sure, removing off target hits may make fencing more appealing to spectators, but viewers who don't fence wouldn't even notice the change. It's primarily a fresh change for foil that is made to improve the game, with a secondary goal of enhancing spectator appeal.

Sorry we don't need clear visors nor Pom pom girls.

The flicks are not ridiculous !!! They are an evolution of the foil.
I personnaly like them and i think that a majority of foilists like them.

(do not confuse the flicks with the ROW problem ...)

The people who want to stop foil evolution and take it back to Romankov time
*are* ridiculous.

I would attack (with words only) any person which behaves like a dictator instead of trying to understand what a majority of foilists want.
Any major change should be approved by a majority of foilists. That's democracy.


And no well executed attacks do not land if they are too fast or too
strong. I don't care (as you have seen about the fencing "tradition")
but nothing is more in the tradition that a direct strong and fast attack right
in the heart of your opponent : fencing was a martial art no ?

And here bizarrely, the tenants of the broken test timings say :
well you should do them not too fast or not too strong or with the fingers
and other ridiculous things ...

NO. If a direct strong and fast hit does not score , the timing is broken.
PERIOD.

I am happy to see that the wind is changing and foilists, trainers, top foilists,
federations have understood that.

The test timings will be a bad memory very soon ...

[Flagrant da Nut]

Originally Posted by Alan

Sorry we don't need clear visors nor Pom pom girls.

sure we do
bring em on! girls are good and one day u will find that out if ur lucky

Originally Posted by Alan

The people who want to stop foil evolution and take it back to Romankov time
*are* ridiculous.

I would attack (with words only) any person which behaves like a dictator instead of trying to understand what a majority of foilists want.
Any major change should be approved by a majority of foilists. That's democracy.

im think alan is the son of rene roche
he acts like a spoiled teenager mad at his dad cos he had to clean his room

enuf whining

[DanInMI]

Originally Posted by Flagrant da Nut

sure we do
bring em on! girls are good and one day u will find that out if ur lucky




im think alan is the son of rene roche
he acts like a spoiled teenager mad at his dad cos he had to clean his room

enuf whining

LMAO

Thank You....I have been told I am not allowed to say things like that anymore!

[Alan]

Originally Posted by Flagrant da Nut

sure we do
bring em on! girls are good and one day u will find that out if ur lucky




im think alan is the son of rene roche
he acts like a spoiled teenager mad at his dad cos he had to clean his room

enuf whining

Come on.
You can't bear hearing the truth.
The fact is that the broken test timings will be gone soon.

I won't regret them for sure.

[ThatReallyHurt]

Originally Posted by Alan

Come on.
You can't bear hearing the truth.
The fact is that the broken test timings will be gone soon.

I won't regret them for sure.

It's become startlingly apparent to me that you've been right all along. I was in a tournament about a month and a half ago and was tied for last place. That tournament was on the old timings. Just last weekend, I was in another tournament, using the new timings, and came in alone in last place!

Obviously, despite the fact that I don't know how to flick, the new timings have so terribly affected my game that they've virtually destroyed my ability to perform at the level that I used to, and I am now destined to sit by myself in last place. As opposed to last place, but with someone else.

Ahem.

[Maeve_Mari]

Originally Posted by ThatReallyHurt

It's become startlingly apparent to me that you've been right all along. I was in a tournament about a month and a half ago and was tied for last place. That tournament was on the old timings. Just last weekend, I was in another tournament, using the new timings, and came in alone in last place!

Obviously, despite the fact that I don't know how to flick, the new timings have so terribly affected my game that they've virtually destroyed my ability to perform at the level that I used to, and I am now destined to sit by myself in last place. As opposed to last place, but with someone else.

Ahem.

Obviously!
You are a very astute fellow.

[DanInMI]

Originally Posted by Alan

Come on.
You can't bear hearing the truth.
The fact is that the broken test timings will be gone soon.

I won't regret them for sure.

Dream on.

[nahouw]

Originally Posted by Flagrant da Nut

im think alan is the son of rene roche
he acts like a spoiled teenager mad at his dad cos he had to clean his room

enuf whining

Sounds like a good assessment to me.

Even Christian D'Oriala didn't whine this much when they went electric....and then he also came back to show his stuff and win...either way, it didn't matter to him, so why is Alan so passionate about this???

[Alan]

Originally Posted by nahouw

Sounds like a good assessment to me.

Even Christian D'Oriala didn't whine this much when they went electric....and then he also came back to show his stuff and win...either way, it didn't matter to him, so why is Alan so passionate about this???

Thanks for the comparison. However it's not a question of ranking.
See the results :

World Cup - Le Caire
Men's Foil Seniors
18.03.2005

1 . SANZO Salvatore ITA
3 . BISSDORF Ralf GER
3 . CASSARA Andrea ITA
5 . JOPPICH Peter GER
8 . ATTELY Loic FRA
13 . RAMACCI Marco ITA
17 . GOHY Cedric BEL

All against these broken test timings.

Who said top foilists were against the test timings because they want
to keep their ranking ?

I would accept without a problem these broken test timings if a majority
of foilists wanted them. It is obviously not the case and King René has to take desperate an ridiculous rule changes (see this passivity rule made just after Seoul ... pathetic)

Yes "I had a dream"
but it will come true sooner than Martin Luther King's !!!

[JackSparrow]

What do you have against the passivity rule?

[Alan]

Originally Posted by JackSparrow

What do you have against the passivity rule?

Well if you consider Foilepee (ie test timings) the rule is indeed needed because this sport
advantages so much defense.

If you consider real foil (ie Athens timings) it is of course not needed.


It is not so much the rule itself but the autocratic reaction of King René
to a legitimate protest against these broken test timings : it is pathetic.

Second, how can it need approval of the commission and being executable immediately ?


Many referees in France have declared that they will not use this passivity rule.