Box Timing Change

[Kris]

My club has an old Prieur 3 weapon box. Does anyone know if, or by who this
box can be changed to the new timing?

[gary hayenga]

On 2005-03-13 17:07:17 -0500, "Kris" <kroberts@bis.midco.net> said:

> My club has an old Prieur 3 weapon box. Does anyone know if, or by who
> this box can be changed to the new timing?

No. It can't.

gary hayenga

[Jonathan Jefferies]

gary hayenga wrote:
> On 2005-03-13 17:07:17 -0500, "Kris" <kroberts@bis.midco.net> said:
>
>> My club has an old Prieur 3 weapon box. Does anyone know if, or by
>> who this box can be changed to the new timing?
>
>
> No. It can't.
>
> gary hayenga
>
I would agree with Gary until someone proves otherwise.
Timing changes are difficult to induce particularly ones
which are so close. I would expect that digital, i.e.
microprocessor based boxes are the only ones that can be
trusted to accurately make the changes.

J.

[David Neevel]

Do you mean a 2-W box (i.e. the flat orange or blue colored ones with 4
rectangular dome lights)? To my knowledge, the 3-W boxes that Prieur has
been selling are just rebadged Escrime Technologies SG boxes, which can
be upgraded just like any other SG box (contact Blue Gauntlet about
that). If it's the 2-W box, they're a TTL design that can not be
upgraded with a firmware swap.

-Dave

Jonathan Jefferies wrote:

> gary hayenga wrote:
>
>> On 2005-03-13 17:07:17 -0500, "Kris" <kroberts@bis.midco.net> said:
>>
>>> My club has an old Prieur 3 weapon box. Does anyone know if, or by
>>> who this box can be changed to the new timing?
>>
>>
>>
>> No. It can't.
>>
>> gary hayenga
>>
> I would agree with Gary until someone proves otherwise.
> Timing changes are difficult to induce particularly ones
> which are so close. I would expect that digital, i.e.
> microprocessor based boxes are the only ones that can be
> trusted to accurately make the changes.
>
> J.

[Kris]

Dave: Come to think of it, you are correct about it being the old 2 weapon
box. We got it several years (actually a bunch) before sabre went electric.
Flat, Orange, etc. I guess that will be relegated to being a club practice
box for beginner getting a taste of electric. Or maybe, as a recreational
club without high level aspirations, we will just stay with the old timings
for the time being. Flicks aren't allowed in our club anyway, and never
were given the statistics of successful attacks to failed ones.

A question though, I have heard a lot of complaining about the new timing,
particularly about the body armour bouncy problem. But how about all those
straight attacks that are good and on target, but have been traditionally so
light that without the box, there was always the question of whether there
was a touch at all. Conversely, the touches that, after all that dry
practice, you just couldn't believe landed once you hooked up? Does the new
timing make sure that the tip arrives with sufficient force to actually
cause a blade bend? Such as how all of us old timers were taught to judge
in the dry tourneys?

Kris

"David Neevel" <neevel@execpc.com> wrote in message
news:113pfohc4sc1399@corp.supernews.com...
> Do you mean a 2-W box (i.e. the flat orange or blue colored ones with 4
> rectangular dome lights)? To my knowledge, the 3-W boxes that Prieur has
> been selling are just rebadged Escrime Technologies SG boxes, which can be
> upgraded just like any other SG box (contact Blue Gauntlet about that). If
> it's the 2-W box, they're a TTL design that can not be upgraded with a
> firmware swap.
>
> -Dave
>
> Jonathan Jefferies wrote:
>
>> gary hayenga wrote:
>>
>>> On 2005-03-13 17:07:17 -0500, "Kris" <kroberts@bis.midco.net> said:
>>>
>>>> My club has an old Prieur 3 weapon box. Does anyone know if, or by who
>>>> this box can be changed to the new timing?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No. It can't.
>>>
>>> gary hayenga
>>>
>> I would agree with Gary until someone proves otherwise.
>> Timing changes are difficult to induce particularly ones
>> which are so close. I would expect that digital, i.e.
>> microprocessor based boxes are the only ones that can be
>> trusted to accurately make the changes.
>>
>> J.
>

[David Neevel]

Unfortunately, the storm of complaints about the new timings are
precisely because many strong, straight touches that produce a nice, big
bend in the blade fail to register. What happens is you make a good,
thrusting touch which arrives cleanly with the point, but then the blade
bends so that the side of the barrel is pressing against the target and
the tip pops up before the 15 ms time is done. Thus, you've buried you
blade in your opponent's chest with an ample bend that would make the
most rigid classicist happy, but there's no light on and your opponent's
counterattack or remise registers. The chest-protector issue is also a
real problem- good, straight, classical-style thrusts skip off the hard
protector before the 15 ms tip time. Part of this is also due to the
fact that the FIE failed to lay out specs for debouncing (i.e., allowing
very short breaks in the contact to be ignored without resetting the 15
ms clock), but a good part of it is due to the 15 ms time itself. Most
of the people complaining can accept the notion of the timings
preventing light flicks from landing-- that was the intent. The side
effect of strong, straight thrusts not registering, however, puts a
serious damper on the sort of point-play that the new timings were
supposed to encourage. There's a fair amount of pressure to back off the
time to something like 8-11 ms-- I have firmware for the Eigertek with
that tip time, and it does seem to mitigate a lot of the problem while
still limiting the ability of flicks to register. Convincing His Divine
Eminence Rene Roch that "additional enhancements could further improve
his already wonderful new timings" (i.e, he was wrong) will be a
challenge, though.

BTW, even with 15 ms you can still land flick-type hits. You just need
to have more precise hand technique, and not rely soley on whipping the
blade in. You generally can't land a shot on the spine of an upright
opponent (unless there's a real height difference), but flicks to the
front torso and the top of the shoulders still work. Parrying flicks is
easier with the longer tip time, since something that just whips around
a parry is not a likely to have enough dwell-time to register.

-Dave

Kris wrote:

>Dave: Come to think of it, you are correct about it being the old 2 weapon
>box. We got it several years (actually a bunch) before sabre went electric.
>Flat, Orange, etc. I guess that will be relegated to being a club practice
>box for beginner getting a taste of electric. Or maybe, as a recreational
>club without high level aspirations, we will just stay with the old timings
>for the time being. Flicks aren't allowed in our club anyway, and never
>were given the statistics of successful attacks to failed ones.
>
>A question though, I have heard a lot of complaining about the new timing,
>particularly about the body armour bouncy problem. But how about all those
>straight attacks that are good and on target, but have been traditionally so
>light that without the box, there was always the question of whether there
>was a touch at all. Conversely, the touches that, after all that dry
>practice, you just couldn't believe landed once you hooked up? Does the new
>timing make sure that the tip arrives with sufficient force to actually
>cause a blade bend? Such as how all of us old timers were taught to judge
>in the dry tourneys?
>
>Kris
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Jonathan Jefferies]

David Neevel wrote:
> Convincing His Divine
> Eminence Rene Roch that "additional enhancements could further improve
> his already wonderful new timings" (i.e, he was wrong) will be a
> challenge, though.
>

Speaking of Monsieur Roch, has anyone else read that most delightful
paean to his excellency otherwise known as the magazine "Escrime"??
Specifically the section titled "RENE ROCH OPENS A NEW CHAPTER IN THE
METAMORPHOSIS OF FENCING". (the upper case is their usage)

I found the opening paragraph so interesting, that I would share
it, "Why was Rene Roch so convincingly re-elected to the head of the
International Fencing Federation, when the programme proposed by
his challenger, Russia's Alisher Usmanov, was full of enticing
promises? Of course there are several explanations for the 75%
of votes (i.e. 78 votes against 30) cast in favour of the REIGNING
President. First, and probably most comforting in an era when the
sporting world in general is being undermined by excess, money is
not enough. World fencing has been able to resist the temptation
of selling itself, and even if this does not solve all its
problems, it has become better for this."

Seriously I do not know the details, internal threads etc that
lead to this point. I have heard some rather ugly rumors - not
worth repeating unless there is something more substantial than
gossip. But the above and the overall presentation in "Escrime"
gives me a certain queasy feel. Is there any enlightenment to
be had from this group regarding the current state of the FIE
and the background?

J.

[Joseph Kormann]

The problem with the point bouncing off, is it only happening in the USA
because of some "American" style or is this happening all around the
world too?

[David Neevel]

Joseph Kormann wrote:

> The problem with the point bouncing off, is it only happening in the
> USA because of some "American" style or is this happening all around
> the world too?
>
This is all over the world. Go read some of the threads on Fencing.net
concerning what's been going on at World Cups. French, German, and
Italian fencers have been some of the loudest in their opposition, and
the heads of both the Italian and German fencing federations have
written letters to Roch calling for revisions to be made to the new timings.

-Dave

[nahouw]

Joseph Kormann wrote:

> The problem with the point bouncing off, is it only happening in the
> USA because of some "American" style or is this happening all around
> the world too?
>
This is all over the world. Go read some of the threads on Fencing.net
concerning what's been going on at World Cups. French, German, and
Italian fencers have been some of the loudest in their opposition, and
the heads of both the Italian and German fencing federations have
written letters to Roch calling for revisions to be made to the new timings.

-Dave

The problem with the debounce time is that people are hitting too hard -- and, with the changes, people are thinking they need to hit harder, which is counter-productive. Hitting within the proper distance and time is not a problem. The women foilist do not experience the same problem that the men foilists have.

The proposed reduction for the debounce time from 15ms to 8ms will help. Of course, the better resolution would be the adaptation of the Mangioratti point -- this is similar to the epee point with two springs controlling -- either you can control it by the box (which we see doesn't work) or control it in the tip (which works in epee).

[gary hayenga]

On 2005-04-24 20:10:10 -0400, nahouw
<nahouw.1o15q0@timelimit.fencing101.com> said:

>
> David Neevel Wrote:
>> Joseph Kormann wrote:
>>
>>> The problem with the point bouncing off, is it only happening in the
>>> USA because of some "American" style or is this happening all around
>>> the world too?
>>>
>> This is all over the world. Go read some of the threads on Fencing.net
>> concerning what's been going on at World Cups. French, German, and
>> Italian fencers have been some of the loudest in their opposition, and
>> the heads of both the Italian and German fencing federations have
>> written letters to Roch calling for revisions to be made to the new
>> timings.
>>
>> -Dave
>
> The problem with the debounce time is that people are hitting too hard
> -- and, with the changes, people are thinking they need to hit harder,
> which is counter-productive. Hitting within the proper distance and
> time is not a problem. The women foilist do not experience the same
> problem that the men foilists have.

What women's foilists have *you* been watching?

The ones I saw at the Chattanooga NAC had the exact same problem. I
saw Samantha Nemechek hit Hannah Thompson square in the middle of the
stomach 3 times in a row, (an attack, a riposte and an attack in
preparation) with no light. She lost that bout 5-4. She still took
third in the tournament. I saw similar things happening to the women
about as often as I saw it happen to the men.

In fact I fence with Sam in practice occasionally and with Ann Marsh
(8th in points) and Inga Walrabenstein (3rd and 3rd at the first two
circuits) regularly and they both bounce hits off of each other
frequently as well as against the men.

So I would have to say from my personal observations, and the reports
of Ann, Sam and Inga, that you are completely off base here. The women
*do* experience the same problem that the men do.

gary hayenga

[Sarah Morgan]

gary hayenga wrote:

> So I would have to say from my personal observations, and the reports
> of Ann, Sam and Inga, that you are completely off base here. The women
> *do* experience the same problem that the men do.
>
> gary hayenga

IME, the point bouncing off is more a problem with faster styles of fencing,
thus it's less of a problem against beginners, and since many female
foilists tend to fence a much slower game than men, this is less of a
problem for them. Thus the assertion that it's not such a problem for women
is essentially correct.

Martin

(posting under Sarah's account)
__________________________________________________ ________________________
grep me no patterns and I'll tell you no lines

Sarah Morgan
mail (at) sarahmorgan.me.uk

[Martin J. Green]

>>> Joseph Kormann wrote:

>>> This is all over the world. Go read some of the threads on Fencing.net
>>> concerning what's been going on at World Cups. French, German, and
>>> Italian fencers have been some of the loudest in their opposition, and
>>> the heads of both the Italian and German fencing federations have
>>> written letters to Roch calling for revisions to be made to the new
>>> timings.

and the Russians, British, German and others...