Tests Results with Sanzo, Cassara, Bissdorf in Paris

[gladius]

Here is the report on the results of the tests conducted in Paris last Saturday from the FIS website:

http://www.federscherma.it/news.asp?28006

CHANGES FOR FOIL RULES - RESULTS OF THE TESTS IN PARIS WITH SALVATORE SANZO AND ANDREA CASSARA’

07/18/2005, Rome - Shorter impact times, longer blocking times, introduction of a conductive mask's bib: these are the main innovations which will be introduced in the rules for foil in the near future -- specifically as of the Executive Committee meeting of the FIE scheduled for November in Qatar.

The decision to introduce the above changes was taken after tests conducted last Saturday in Paris, in presence of the FIE President René Roch, with some of the best foil fencers in the world, like Salvatore Sanzo, Andrea Cassarà, and the super champion from Germany Ralph Bissdorf (president of the FIE Athletes Commission) as testers.

The most important new changes concern the shortening of the foil impact time which will now be 12 milliseconds [it was before the changes 1-5 ms, changed to 13-15 ms, and now will go down to 12 ms], and the blocking time will now become 400 milliseconds [was 750 +/-50 ms, became 300 +/-25 ms, and now will increase to 400 ms].

This is a great success for the FIS since this partial return to the past had been strongly advocated by the President Giorgio Scarso during his meeting with Roch in Paris not long ago. This is also a great success for the athletes, a large majority of whom had expressed their dislike for the new rules introduced during this season.

At the Paris tests two days ago, other rule changes have been considered, like the elimination of the white light, and the extension of the valid target area with the introduction of conductive mask's bib and the sleeves (except for the forearm of the weapon arm). In these cases the only test with a positive result was the one for the conductive bib. The elimination of the white light, and the introduction of conductive sleeves will be tested again after the World Championships in Leipzig.

[reposte]

I don't see how the impact time is a great change back to the old state of things, nor an improvement of the new.
I can live with the new blocking time.
I think we have a clear indication that the bib is going to be introduced after Leipzig. Shame, it serves no purpose really.

[peet]

thanks gladius-

for the much better translation of the FIS article than i was able to manage in that other thread...

-p

[KD5MDK]

What is the point of the bib becoming target?

[Katman]

They're doing it to inconvience me.

I hope they vote the stupid bib down.

[Schibilia]

That's pretty sweet, I've gotten tired of rolling the dice every time I do a straight attack into an opponent's target. Does this mean new chips again for everyone though?

[esskreemr]

Does inclusion of the bib offer that much of an improvement? Seems like it be more of a hassle than it's worth. I don't think the additional expense is worth it. How is it done? A connecting cord like sabre? Seems like it would compound existing problems with equipment.

[KD5MDK]

Not to mention making sure the mesh is insulated.

[OROD]

Really? How is this a great success, for anyone? The impact time goes from 14ms (+/- 1ms) to 12ms... that's not a big difference. I have no doubt plenty of straight attacks will continue to not register. The blocking time is increased a bit, that's a minor success. On the other hand, the FIE seems determined to continue making arbitrary changes with total disregard to how it will affect the game or the expense to the fencers. The FIE just pretty much assumes it's ok to make everyone buy new chips for their scoring boxes every season, but this time I guess they wanted to go for the double whammy and make everyone spend $100 - $200 for new masks as well.

And why do we need bib as target area? Anyone? I can only imagine that we either, 1) dont have enough equipment problems yet, or 2) foil isnt enough like sabre as is. And I sooooo want foil to be more like sabre!

Originally Posted by gladius

This is a great success for the FIS since this partial return to the past had been strongly advocated by the President Giorgio Scarso during his meeting with Roch in Paris not long ago. This is also a great success for the athletes, a large majority of whom had expressed their dislike for the new rules introduced during this season.

[nahouw]

I think that this change reflects the optimum point. I'm glad that they ran a second round of tests to analyze the information gained from this season. The first round of tests from last year were made to define the preliminary parameters; having it implemented for this season provided the UAT statistics, and refinements have been made for the unintended consequences that have been born out through a robust UAT testing cycle. By this methodology, they followed an IT testing cycle.

When the new timing changes came out for sabre and foil, I liked the sabre immediately and thought it was appropriate, and I liked the foil with reservations -- the change was good, except it wasn't precise. The problems I had were that the debounce time was too long (didn't effect me as a fencer, however, as a referee, there were straight attacks that I saw that didn't light; as a fencer, sometimes my riposte didn't land within the lockout time, so lengthening by 50 ms will resolve that.

Questions regarding the bib -- too many touches which should be valid but are not because the bib is non-metallic is the issue. Years ago, manufacturers said they couldn't make a metallic bib; now since sabre has a metallic bib, this can be transfered to foil. No need for a clip, because for the most part, the bib will be in contact with the lame.

All and all good news.

[Schibilia]

Yes, this is a good revision to the preliminary changes. They obviously needed tweaking. It seemed as if they hadn't tested them enough with the first change. This definitely is more conducive to the weapon.

The first change squelched my creativity as a fencer as I had to concentrate on turning on a light more than the action I was doing.

Also, this will give the pansies that wear chest protectors less of an incentive to wear them as the unwieldly design and loss of breathing and flexibility will outweigh the benefit of cancelling out those touches that may have just qualified for a light had they stuck on something.

[DHCJr]

Originally Posted by nahouw

Questions regarding the bib -- too many touches which should be valid but are not because the bib is non-metallic is the issue. Years ago, manufacturers said they couldn't make a metallic bib; now since sabre has a metallic bib, this can be transfered to foil. No need for a clip, because for the most part, the bib will be in contact with the lame.

The same could be said about Sabre, but they still use a clip. So if they make the bib target area, they will require a clip.

SEMI and the Medical Commission are against making the bib target for safety reason. But considering they are against the visor mask for the same reason, it probably won't help.

[OROD]

Making the bib target area is just as half-baked as most of the other changes the FIE regularly considers for foil. The fact is there's NO GOOD REASON to make the bib target area, all it will mean is more expense to the fencers... something that Roche doesnt give a damn about.

Originally Posted by DHCJr

The same could be said about Sabre, but they still use a clip. So if they make the bib target area, they will require a clip.

SEMI and the Medical Commission are against making the bib target for safety reason. But considering they are against the visor mask for the same reason, it probably won't help.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by nahouw

I think that this change reflects the optimum point. I'm glad that they ran a second round of tests to analyze the information gained from this season. The first round of tests from last year were made to define the preliminary parameters; having it implemented for this season provided the UAT statistics, and refinements have been made for the unintended consequences that have been born out through a robust UAT testing cycle. By this methodology, they followed an IT testing cycle.

Roch didn't even want to admit that the original 15 ms impact time caused any problems! Now you believe that a 12 ms impact time will make all those problems go away? As far as I know, there has not been a serious study by the FIE into what causes direct hits not to register with the 15 ms impact time (despite others trying to do it for them).

Does anyone have any actual evidence to show that 12 ms timing will register direct hits as consistently as the 1-5 ms timing did?

I will be flabbergasted if a 12 ms impact, 400ms blockout time turns out to be the 'optimum point'.

[nahouw]

Originally Posted by Schibilia

Yes, this is a good revision to the preliminary changes. They obviously needed tweaking. It seemed as if they hadn't tested them enough with the first change. This definitely is more conducive to the weapon.

If you follow the normal life cycle for IT testing, you first have to make a change to the application based upon the desired results, Unit Test it, and then make adjustments based on UAT (User Acceptance Testing).

Last year's testing was what could be considered under IT standards as the Unit Test; running with these changes in the course of a season is considered the UAT.

They have followed a good testing protocol; however, this is fencing and not an IT environment where I have a testing box and a production box, and only promote my code into production when UAT was satisfied.

[nahouw]

Originally Posted by DHCJr

The same could be said about Sabre, but they still use a clip. So if they make the bib target area, they will require a clip.

The reason for the clip in sabre is to make the MASK target -- without the clip, a head cut would not register. By the clip, there is connectivity to the bodywire.

In foil, the mask is not target and is not conductive. As I make a thrust which lands on the bib, and I affix and hold my point there, the bib will be held in contact with the lame, and connectivity will be able to register the touch.

[esskreemr]

Honestly, I don't have a whole lot of faith in the FIE Executive Committee anymore. They seem to be making arbitrary decisions and then pushing them on everyone.

Instead of making everyone at the National and International level a beta tester, why can't they propose the changes, send out a few chips to the feds, give everyone time to test them, and then vote on the changes?

The current procedure seems to be ridiculous. There is quite a bit of frustration at all levels. Now they're going to require a major equipment change to boot? My $200.00 FIE mask which I bought a little over a year ago is now obsolete? Pfffft....

This hackneyed attempt to court the IOC could very well end up irreperably damaging our sport. I don't know about other countries, but fencing in America was starting to grow. We can expect to see further results at the International level as our seniors continue competing and another round of excellent juniors hit the road. USFA embership is up. The future looks bright. Then they pull this bull****.

It will be interesting (and tragic) to see how fast fencing fades into the Olympic archives when the first of these Plexiglass wonders is penetrated by a weapon. I trully hope it doesn't happen, but even if it does for one freak occurrence, all hell will break lose. Who will be the scapegoat? The manufacturer who made the product, or the FIE who decided that the spectators being able to see the fencer's eyes during a brief camera closeup is more important than protecting the fencer. When it happens, then you will see changes to the sport of fencing. Unfortunately, they won't be the changes we want.

[rcmatthews]

You don't want conductive material on the inside of a bib (which would be required for no clip conductivity), for two main reasons that I can think of. The first is the feel of the bib, as I for one would not want lame material rubbing against my neck and chin. Secondly, massive amounts of sweat would reach the bib, causing quick corrosion, which would render the mask useless.

Clipless connection is not feasible because while a majority of the time the bib might be in contact with the lame, sometimes it isnt. However putting a clip on the bib is not a good idea either, because sabre style alligator clips ruin a bib when they are clamped to it.

[AntonioDelMonte]

i wonder if the guys just didn't tank the stuff they didn't want during the test if it was up to me i think i would also the best arguement against the lexan fencing mask in football we can't see the players faces but because their name is on their jersey's just like we have to have our names on our uniforms i would think that would be enough but no mister Roch must be getting kick backs on ever new peice of equipment he thinks up and make this sport an elitest rich man sport like it was a 100 years and i think that sucks as someone who works with alot of kids on a limited budget they can't go out and get the latest gear every year because the rules change i mean what's next all lexan masks, the new margoretti tips on all weapons, foil guards the light up when a touch is scored i mean it is really getting retarted

that's my to bits

Rob

[swordsen]

If companies still made masks with bibs that actually followed the rules there wouldn't be that big an issue. the rule on the bib says, (or used to say,a t least) that the bib on a foil mask could not extend over the collar bones. An epee mask's bib on the other hand was required to extend over the collar bones. with the bib sizes people have today it is not uncommon to see some small statured person with a bib that covers half of the their chest. Hence the bib becoming target. Is it good? Probably not. Another unneeded expense. And the lame will wear and need replaced often Bleah. But I can see why it would be done.