Parrying question. (foil)

[Cipher]

Fencer A initiates a simple attack, Fencer B responds with a quick beat parry-riposte. The parry finds the blade, but does not deflect it off target. Fencer A's attack continues undisturbed and strikes the target area while Fencer B continues his riposte, also striking the target area.

So, does a parry have to deflect the blade from the target area, or does the parry merely need to lightly find the blade in order for priority to pass to the defending fencer?

I've looked in the USFA rulebook, but could not find a good definition of parry. I'm just wondering what everyone else's take on the situation was. My opinion was that the blade should be significantly deflected from its course for the parry to be considered successful.

[dunastor]

If it's a good beat parry-riposte (ie against foible) then the blade is deflected from target. There is no reason to suspect otherwise.

So it's a good parry-riposte, with a remise out of time.

[glowstix]

Originally Posted by Cipher

Fencer A initiates a simple attack, Fencer B responds with a quick beat parry-riposte. The parry finds the blade, but does not deflect it off target. Fencer A's attack continues undisturbed and strikes the target area while Fencer B continues his riposte, also striking the target area.

So, does a parry have to deflect the blade from the target area, or does the parry merely need to lightly find the blade in order for priority to pass to the defending fencer?

thats something i've always wanted to know myself as i'm often in that situation when i fence foil (which is why i hate foil!) i've seen it called 2 ways, either beat attack A, counterattack B or attack A, parry-riposte B with remise from A

[keith]

Originally Posted by glowstix

thats something i've always wanted to know myself as i'm often in that situation when i fence foil (which is why i hate foil!) i've seen it called 2 ways, either beat attack A, counterattack B or attack A, parry-riposte B with remise from A

So either a bad ref guessing at random or a good ref calling based on the point of contact between the blades.

Even assuming A initiated the beat/parry action on B's extension it is possible to call the action for B;

A's forte against B's foible = A's parry
A's foible against B's forte = B's parry
If it is midpoint contact then it should be A's parry, since they initiated the action but that depends on the ref being able to accurately spot who started the action.

[Cipher]

Originally Posted by glowstix

thats something i've always wanted to know myself as i'm often in that situation when i fence foil (which is why i hate foil!) i've seen it called 2 ways, either beat attack A, counterattack B or attack A, parry-riposte B with remise from A

The situation I was in was most similar to attack A, parry-riposte B, remise A, but the parry was sometimes so light that it was ineffective. So what constitutes a "good" beat parry? How much force should be applied by the parry? Is it enough to just hear the contact, disregarding how hard or soft the contact was?

It's difficult not having a good ref around when you're fencing and issues like these come up.

[Purple Fencer]

If B makes an action to meet A's blade and does so....it's a parry, regardless of how firm that meeting is. The only exception I would make would be if both fencers visibly make an attempt to meet the other's blade, the parry was down near the guard, or if you hear that low thunk from hitting the guard itself.

You have to use your ears as a director as much as the eyes....the action's just too fast to see if a blade is deflected off-line, then returns to being in line....and the director's looking from the side anyway.

[keith]

Originally Posted by Cipher

The situation I was in was most similar to attack A, parry-riposte B, remise A, but the parry was sometimes so light that it was ineffective. So what constitutes a "good" beat parry? How much force should be applied by the parry? Is it enough to just hear the contact, disregarding how hard or soft the contact was?

If it sounds like a beat it was a beat but a light graze on the blade (slide two blades along each other and that is the sound of a graze) would not count.

[jBirch]

In foil, a simple contact of the blades causes RoW to shift to the person who initiated the contact, whether that be beat attack or parry-riposte, regardless of where the contact occurred.

In sabre, the blade has to be stopped properly. Beats have to be on the top two thirds of the blade or the "beat" is an "attack" and the contact a parry.

[Cipher]

OK, I can understand that. So it doesn't matter how much contact was made by the parry as long as contact was made. I'll have to tell the guy that I was fencing that I was wrong because I gave him some bad advice as a result. When I originally said it to him, I think I was thinking of the line in the USFA rulebook dealing with PiL, where it says that it must be deflected in order for priority to pass.

[Bonehead]

Heres the way I see it. Have someone point a blade at you. Tap it in the middle with your blade loud enough to make an audible blade contact noise. Watch where the tip goes. if you hit near the middle of the blade its almost guarenteed to move the tip off your target area. If you catch the blade with your tip near their gaurd, either they should be pretty much already hitting you (because you must be pretty close to do that), or they're probably the one making the parry (because your arms fully extended and their arm is back, and your tips at their guard).

so pretty much if theres audible blade contact. Its a parry.

[Purple Fencer]

Originally Posted by Cipher

OK, I can understand that. So it doesn't matter how much contact was made by the parry as long as contact was made. I'll have to tell the guy that I was fencing that I was wrong because I gave him some bad advice as a result. When I originally said it to him, I think I was thinking of the line in the USFA rulebook dealing with PiL, where it says that it must be deflected in order for priority to pass.

PIL is subject to the same rules of being parried as an oncoming attack. What's different about losing ROW with a PIL (that does not apply to a regular attack) is that if you have PIL clearly established and make a disengage action when there is NO ATTEMPT to find your blade, you lose the line.

[Irensaga]

I can't speak for others, but this is how I judge it:

I'm watching the entire picture, so I look to the entire body-attitude of the fencers to determine who is initiating and who is responding.

If the attacking fencer initiates a lunge or attack which smoothly makes its way to target area without interruption, I'm going to call it a successful attack or a "malparry." The parry didn't do what it was supposed to do: stop or redirect the attack.

However, if the action includes a pause on the attacker's part, I'll call it like this:

1. Attack

2. Blade Contact

3. Pause on the attacker's part

4. Riposte from defender

5. Continuation from the attacker

Result: touche goes to the defender's parry riposte. Note: I will probably designate it as a parry no matter how slight the contact was. The key part is that the attacker "flinched" so to speak. She gave up right-of-way and anything she does imediately after that is a response to the former defender.

The key is whether the initial attack action arrives in the first place. Getting parried and then executing a remise is not a successful initial attack. On the other hand, incidental blade contact which fails to redirect a continuous blade action that ends on (or off) target is not a successful parry.

This is hard to explain in writing, you have to see it demonstrated to see what I mean.

[Ryne]

if the beat-parry deflects the blade even in the SLIGHTEST [which it will do], it is a successful parry.

Parry ripost la touche B

[carlos]

But see also this thread
http://www.fencing101.com/vb/showthread.php?t=16531
where there was not this consensus.