Rene's Next Move

[Alan]

Originally Posted by epee1

I've read through the post but haven't come across opinions offered by the "elite" fencers. Has anyone who fences at that level ever made their opinion know? Other than the final four thing (and that was more of a protest) there seems to be a lot of silence from the international fencing community. Or did I just miss the hubbub?

Check the thread "Summary of opponents to the broken test timings"

http://www.fencing101.com/vb/showthr...hlight=summary

[epee1]

Originally Posted by Alan

Check the thread "Summary of opponents to the broken test timings"

http://www.fencing101.com/vb/showthr...hlight=summary

Thanks for the info - I read what I could and it does appear the international fencers have a problem with it. Isn't the FIE supposed to represent the community of fencers? Or has it become more like the NFL and MLB?

[Gav]

I've read some daft things from the FIE, but these really are insane. I've no issue with Videoing [for broadcast later] if Roche thinks that ref's referring to video replays on close calls will make things faster or more dynamic he is sadly mistaken. I agree that reffing needs to be standardised as much as possible. The changes to Foil would probably be have been avoided if the rules were implemented better.

As for Doubles in Epee; there is nothing fundamentally wrong with them. We use a "no doubles" rule during training all it does is eke the bout out. You can try all you like to only have one light come out, but it's the nature of the game that people get caught out and doubled unexpectedly. Removing doubles would probably involve tweaking the boxes ... The only people who complain about the "static-ness" of Epee are those who don't actually watch or take part in it. I'd also chuck in that caution is a part of the game of Epee.

I actually like viewing Sabre in its current state. Since they took out cross-steps it's been a much improved [spectator friendly] game. I don't see what needs to be tweaked with it at the moment.

Stryder I congratulate on a superb piece of April Fools writing! I almost replied to your bonkers suggestions.

[edew]

I think epee will be better served by lengthening the blockout time rather than shortening it. More double hits would make it more interesting and will require more work on the fencers and give shorter fencers a more even chance to do well.

[KD5MDK]

Isn't the time of the epee blockout set by scientific measurement of human reaction time? I thought it had an objective element to it, as opposed to the lockouts in sabre and foil.

[keith]

Originally Posted by KD5MDK

Isn't the time of the epee blockout set by scientific measurement of human reaction time? I thought it had an objective element to it, as opposed to the lockouts in sabre and foil.

only if you react in the same way to having a sharp blade pushed through your eyesocket as you do to one hitting your big toe.

[Jarentz]

From what I've heard the epee blocking time was set at 40ms because that was the fastest vacuum tube or whatever that was avilable in 1939. Making the blocking time longer would just mean that every bout would be tied 15-15.
If doubles were discounted then fencers would still attempt double touches to block their opponents score. bouts would last like 45-90 minutes...
Let's face it, there's no way to make epee exciting ;-D

actually I think the top level epee is the best to watch on TV/video, I don't know what those guys are thinkin...

[Inquartata]

Obviously, there were too many expressions of satisfaction from epeiists worldwide---you know, along the lines of "Epee is perfect as it is, of COURSE they're only futzing about with foil and sabre but leaving epee alone". Such contentment was obviously too much for Roch's megalomaniacal impulses and now he has decided to "improve" epee as well.

Moron.

[KD5MDK]

If I'm fighting to first blood, and not to the death, then as far as winning goes I would.

If the objective is to kill your opponent...

I use 9mm.

[Epeecurean]

I'm against eliminating doubles in epee and I'd go further to say BRING BACK THE DOUBLE-DEFEAT! Even for DE bouts! I think this unique and essential characteristic of epee should be restored.

If this were done, double touches at the early stage of the bout aren't a concern. The score advances as usual and these phrases will provide the fencers with important information about their opponents.

However, as the end of the bout approaches, and certainly at 4-4 in poule bouts or 14-14 in DE bouts (or tied scores in both with time running out), the battle of nerves becomes very interesting. If you attack, will the opponent surpress the urge to counter and parry instead, because he wants a safe single light? Or does he counter to force you to decide whether you want to risk a double-defeat or not?

Double defeats in the DE would result in byes for certain fencers in the next round of the DE. You could either let these byes pass through to the next fencer per usual or you could do a re-seed of the tableau and continue the DE from there. i.e. if there are 56 fencers left from the 128, rather than giving 8 byes the next round would be 56=>28. If at any stage there is an odd number of fencers, then the #1 seed gets the bye.

Under this system, the medal rounds could be the no-medal rounds.

[VorpalCat]

Originally Posted by achilleus

Moreover, and this is particularly important
to me, having requested it for so many years, the use of video must become a reality so as
to support or invalidate the referee’s decision.

To me this sentence is the 'coup de gross' (to coin a useless phrase) of the whole thing. 'It's important to me which makes it important to you' is how it comes across every time I read it. I can't imagine adding video replay to competition being good in any way, shape, or form but if I did somehow see merit to the idea, this single sentence would kill that merit deader than dead to me.

[Alan]

Originally Posted by Jarentz

He wants to change epee too?!
HaHaHaHaHaHa ;-)

Desn't he realize if you threw out the double touches in epee, a bout would last like 1-2 hours?....

As a foilist, i like the suppression of double touches in Epee.

No just kidding ... because so many Epeists wrote messages in favor of the new timings in ... foil.

In fact i leave the decision to (a majority of ) epeists

[DanInMI]

Originally Posted by keith

Well if they manage to standardise the refing between countries it will be a miracle - of the good sort.

The video refs will be a bloody joke, maybe they could run it like american football. So you can appeal but if it goes against you you lose a point? It will also allow time for the pom-pom girls (sorry).

Yes...I think you are correct on both points. Standardizing refereeing is a noble cause, I am all for it. Using video replay during bouts would slow it down too much. Video could be usefull for assessing referees, however.

[DanInMI]

Originally Posted by achilleus

You know, that one doesn't faze me really. I remember reading Nadi's bio and he mentions that they often fenced epee that way, and that any epee fencer worth a damn prefers it that way. Then again, they also called epee the fluking iron.

Really though, I'm not sure it would make the game more dynamic. There is a good chance it would just make people more patient.

I've fenced practice bouts like this, and it definitely changes the game. If you're losing it makes you work. If you're winning, it makes you lazy.

Well, we'll have to see what happens...

Yeah...I don't understand what makes him think that would make the game more dynamic.

[ThatReallyHurt]

Originally Posted by Alan

As a foilist, i like the suppression of double touches in Epee.

No just kidding ... because so many Epeists wrote messages in favor of the new timings in ... foil.

In fact i leave the decision to (a majority of ) epeists

Not trying to threadjack, sorry...

Alan - you've mentioned "majority of" quite often. How would you propose that the FIE get the opinion of the majority of all foilists on the planet?

[One and Only...]

If by getting rid of double touches they simply mean awarding no points to either fencer for two lights, then yes, I can see how it would make epee less static. Epeeists could no longer rely on getting up a few points and consistantly doubling for the win... it would force them to be more aggressive, as countering just wouldn't be as viable. You might see some more parry/repostes, too. Going for a double would just kinda hit the back seat; it would become something to do when you don't know how to deal with the situation and are just trying to nullify your opponent's touch.

Would this be a good thing? That's an entirely different question.

[DanInMI]

Originally Posted by ThatReallyHurt

Not trying to threadjack, sorry...

Alan - you've mentioned "majority of" quite often. How would you propose that the FIE get the opinion of the majority of all foilists on the planet?

I still don't buy his argument that most foilists disapprove of the new timings.

[ThatReallyHurt]

Originally Posted by DanInMI

I still don't buy his argument that most foilists disapprove of the new timings.

A valid point, and it goes hand in hand with what I asked earlier - how do you get the opinion of all (or even most) foilists?

[Zilverzmurfen]

I say, change the lights back again!!!

[nahouw]

Originally Posted by One and Only...

If by getting rid of double touches they simply mean awarding no points to either fencer for two lights, then yes, I can see how it would make epee less static. Epeeists could no longer rely on getting up a few points and consistantly doubling for the win... it would force them to be more aggressive, as countering just wouldn't be as viable. You might see some more parry/repostes, too. Going for a double would just kinda hit the back seat; it would become something to do when you don't know how to deal with the situation and are just trying to nullify your opponent's touch.

I think that it would be a good thing and make epee much more interesting. I once had an epee bout with Margherita Zalaffi (ITA), who used to fence foil before epee for women existed. She was up from the first touch of the bout, but she just didn't passively wait to counter-attack. Instead, she attacked, and I parry-riposted, and then she didn't just choose to go for the remise, but instead, she took the counter-parry and riposte, which I then counter-parried and riposted and then she counter-parried and riposted and hit. This phrase happened 3 tmes in the bout. It made for very exciting fencing -- a great and fun bout. We are both originally foil fencers, so this was a foil bout happening in epee -- and since foil is the training weapon for epee, it made for exciting fencing

I think that years ago when they eliminated the double defeat rule in epee was what started this tactic of doubling out. I have seen World Cup bouts where the score ended 15-14 in which there was the initial one light action, and then 14 phrases of two people coming together for the double. That is not interesting to watch, albeit, only a little more interesting than two people staring at each other and each waiting to counter-attack the other....