Non-valid hits in foil poll

[JackSparrow]

My apologies if such a poll already exists, but I did a quick search of the site and I couldn't find one. My question is, should the non-valid hit in foil be eliminated as proposed by Rene Roch?

[rudd]

What does teh FIE hope to acheive by removing the off target. My understading is that doing so will a) allow for wireless foil and b) make foil easier to understand for the spectator and easier to preside for the ref and combined will give the weapon a better tellivisual appeal.

The problem is that it will require a change in equipement ( lame with sleeves, lame bib and/or mask) and probably change the character of foil way more that the recent timing changes. While the timing changes caused foil to loose thr predomiance it's most defining characteristics of the last 20 years, namely the flick and thr march, I don't believe that the underlying basics of the game changed. OK a fast remise can lock out a slow repsote, more counterattacks and off course the much debated not registering straight hits. On the other hand we seen the return or counter parries, compound attacks and modern iteration of classical foil tactics.

When the off target is removed and the advanced target becomes the upper forearm it's anyones guess what foil will look like. Sabre with a point, slow epee but definitely very different in character and execution. It will have new equipmet cost and new tactics and throw the foil game into flux for another few years a least. For these reasons I've voted against the changes.

I don't believe the changes will create a new televion audience. Fencing has always been a minority sport. Always will be. I believ ultimated the IOC will drop foil from the Olympics and this is a last ditch effort to save it. There used to be 3 Olypic weightlifting events. The press was dropped in the 1972 because it became impossible to judge objectively. One of the IOC primary complaints about fencing and foil in particular. If the FIE make these changes maybe foil will stay in the Games but it won't be anything like the weapon we know today. I don't know what the answer is. A bastardised weapon or ( only my gut feeling) a weapon with no Olympic representation and as such much lower profile.

Sorry for the ramble and typo's

Ger

[wflaschka]

My apologies if such a poll already exists, but I did a quick search of the site and I couldn't find one. My question is, should the non-valid hit in foil be eliminated as proposed by Rene Roch?

Depends what his proposal really is.

If the no-off-target-light proposal includes building a sleeve into the lame, and/or making the bib into target, then I'm firmly against.

If the proposal is just about removing the white light, then I'm cautiously pro.

We don't have much to go on, but we have more than we had for the last FIE changes. With some boxes you can turn off white lights, and there's that Tyshler dvd with the "new-new" fencing. The underlying basics of foil look like they are safe, even without the off-target light. Presently, if a fencer misses the opponent, they don't get to be safe with a 'halt' from the director; without the off target light, they are still not safe even if it's only a near miss. Everything else stays the same, and uses reflexes and tactics the fencers already have.

My biggest concern are the long-term impacts. When contemporary foilists hook up and fence without the white light, they're bringing a game that factors in white lights. In 5-10 years we may have advanced fencers who never had a white light... what will foil really look like then?

[CvilleFencer]

As Walter says it depends a bit on the proposal. I think the lame sleeve would be spiffy personally (in fact, why not just make it all target? That would be a great weapon to fence! Oh wait...) but I think it would be very bad for the character of foil. I would love them to pass the electric bib personally. I know that it would make the equipment a bit more expensive, but it is a fairly simple thing to attack a layer of lame cloth over the existing mask bib for my club gear and the cost of a new mask, even an FIE one is not that huge as an infrequent purchase, say every year or two, which is about when I retire my current mask anyway.

Other than that, the bib think has never made any sense at all to me, and given the lack of enforcement about bib size for fencers, I think it would be just awesome to have all that target back. Especially on the smaller built fencers who buy the biggest bib they can find. I hate that. There are some safety concerns about that which I and others have mentioned in previous threads, but we can trust the FIE to keep our safety as their top priority and fully test this sort of thing before they mandate it right?

I think the off target, while being a part of what makes foil foilish is rather stupid. It may be very bad for the actions of foil as it is now fenced as it removes some "safety" moves like remise to the leg or jabbing anywhere when you are in trouble just to get a light to go off and stop the action, but I think it is a change that foil should make and in the end would make it a better weapon requiring more precision, better planning and more bladework and point control. I think we should try it. We have tried a lot of dumb ideas lately and this one has been around for a while, so while foil is still pretty screwed up, lets go ahead and test this one. Besides it sounds like fun...

[Katman]

I like non-valid hits and the target area the way it is right now.

You don't build an audience by warping the sport to cater an already fencing-ignorant public. Educate them about fencing as it is now. They'll like it or they won't. Joe Schmoe is going to be just as clueless with the new foil as he might have been with the old.

Otherwise I have no idea why they'd want to make these changes. Did non-valid hits halting the action occur because of the introduction of electric scoring? I didn't think that was the case.

[achilleus]

I dislike the proposal entirely. While there are some positives, they do not outweight the negatives.

RoW, with non-valid hits, rewards the correct actions and this is the basis for foil. Eliminating the white lights, would diminish this effect, and thus foil would slowly begin to evolve into something else...

[Feraud]

For the sport of foil fencing to “work” the attack has to be favored by the rules by at least 51%
With the off-target touch removed no fencer will risk an attack if there’s the chance they will miss the lame and not get a white light.
If the chance of succeeding with an attack falls below this level then the game is a stand-off and neither fencer will risk attacking.
Such an argument doesn’t apply to epee since there’s no ROW rules to give priority to an attack. But in foil (and saber) the rules for awarding a touch in the event of a double hit must give favor to the attacker otherwise the game would be a stalemate.

Think about it…

So that’s what would happen to foil without the off-target

Unless you expanded the target area to give the attacker a better chance.

But then you’d have turned the weapon into Epee by adding the sword arm to the target area.

So just leave it alone.

[ojc]

i like foil just the way it is, why change it? why should the general public not make an attempt to understand it as it is and then be chuffed when they 'get it'? i would be strongly apposed to any equipment changes

[Morion]

I just spent $120 USD for a lame this year. I am definately distressed by the idea that it will be obsolete because of a rules change. I cannot afford to be throwing around that type of cash every time that fool Frenchman decides to change the rules!

[mrbiggs]

I just spent $120 USD for a lame this year. I am definately distressed by the idea that it will be obsolete because of a rules change. I cannot afford to be throwing around that type of cash every time that fool Frenchman decides to change the rules!

It won't become obsolete, the lamé is still necessary to distinguish on and off target hits.

[Morion]

My understanding of this is that at least the weapon arm will become a target thereby requiring a lame with sleeves. Seems to me that would require a new lame.

[schlager7]

Did non-valid hits halting the action occur because of the introduction of electric scoring? I didn't think that was the case.

You are correct. I have a number of older rules books from the days of pre-electric rules. In foil, a non-valid hit stopped action even in the pre-electric era. In fact, among the classical salles who still fence according to the old rules of dry fencing (using 4 corner judges and president) off target hits still stop action with no point awarded.

[OROD]

Getting rid of the off-target light in foil will mean that blocking the attack with your weapon arm and mask will now become appealing defensive techniques. It will change foil drastically, and not for the good. People will be more hesitant to attack and you will see fencers continuously moving their weapon arm in front of them to try and avoid touches against them. I can also see that fencers will start leaning forward, ducking, and generally attempting to use their masks to block attacks, and their arm to block or deflect.

Foil will become an ugly defensive game and right-of-way will continue it's way into oblivion that started with the reduction in lock-out time. Think epee without the arm as target.


.

[wflaschka]

The poll right now:

7 FOR Roch's proposal
32 AGAINST Roch's proposal

Looks like Roch wins again!

[CvilleFencer]

I just spent $120 USD for a lame this year. I am definately distressed by the idea that it will be obsolete because of a rules change. I cannot afford to be throwing around that type of cash every time that fool Frenchman decides to change the rules!

If I understand it correctly, there are basically three differant proposals that seem to be getting mixed up into one big one here.

The first proposal, that seemed to be what the thread was about, is the suppression of the off target lights. Everything stays the same, except for that. To all those that say it would decrease the attack, I suggest it would increase the favor of the attack. If you have an opponent waiving his arm around searching for the blade, or tucking into the dfensive ball of doom, the attacker is likely to glance off the arm before he arrives on target. Under this system the glancing attack is irrelevant and the attack can continue onto target, thus giving the attack more chance to arrive. At least that is what I am hoping...

Another proposal that has been around for a few years and has gotten shot down in the past is the "sleeve" of the weapon arm being target. IIRC this sleeve would be worn like an epee coaches padded lesson sleeve, or a really big manchete/overglove if that makes more sense. Thus the arm would only be effective target when a fencer was covering target area by keeping his arm in contact with some part of his chest. The arm would not be all the time target, and I think the idea is to curb the covering of the target with the weapon arm and to get fencers to fence at a more classic fencing distance instead of doing a lot of infighting.

The last proposal that seems to be getting mixed up with the suppression of the off target is the proposal that would make the bib of the mask target. I love this one and think it makes sense, would benefit the sport by eliminating a favorite "unfair advantage" often exploited by smaller fencers and help the target area make a bit more sense to non-fencers. The big danger is that the new timing would make the soft area of the throat a very tempting target, but the use of a gorget or a stiffer/more padded bib or a reinforced bib in the new masks would seem to be an easy fix for this problem.

I really like this proposed rule change myself as the bib being off target never made any sense to me and I think the reason it is the way it is, at least so I have heard, is that when foil went electric the did not have a cheap/easy/reliable was of only making the bib target and not the whole head. We can do it know, and if the idea of foil is to hit someone in a vital area of the torso why exclude the most vulnerable area? After all center mass of upper chest is where all the important stuff goes to the head. A very effective place to stick a sword, and I can't figure out why it is not part of foil...

Anyway, so those are the three separate proposals, most of which have been around for a while and never passed. I like 1 and 3, and I think that 2 is against the spirit of foil to a certain extent, although I can also see how it would benefit the weapon and eliminate an certain quasi-cheat of holding the weapon arm very close to the body and covering as much valid target as possible. But what do I know about foil, I am an EPEEist after all, so I look at it more like "hey, that might make foil suck less, they should try it". I understand completely how bent out of shape dedicated foilist could get over all this, especially considering how much trouble/change/contention the new timings have caused. I know I get steaming whenever the elimination of the double hit in EPEE comes up and that would seem a pretty small change to a non-EPEEist I think. In short, whatever happens I hope it works out well in the end and they get done tinkering with yourall's sport. As long as they don't start tinkering with mine...

[foilhag]

A lot has already been said on this subject, so I'll try not to cover old ground.

I can see removing the off target light encouraging development of blocking techniques that, in my opinion, go completely against the spirit of foil. While I understand that there are those who are critical of fencers hitting off target to stop the action, I think that removing the off targets would make things worse.

Currently, if a fencer is hit off-target by someone with right of way, that fencer is rightly penalized for being hit (and not defending themself) either by not being able to respond with another action because of the halt, or having whatever bad action they did (e.g. counterattack) not score.

If the white light is removed, there would be no penalty for being hit off target, which would encourage squirming and other moves. While some may argue that the rule book takes care of that by not allowing covering target, I think in practice there would be a lot of questionable actions that would be "borderline", difficult to see from the ref's perspective, and therefore difficult to call or call consistently.

The point of foil is not to deflect hits with your arm, take a hit in the mask (face), or parry an attack into your leg -- and then still get to score. As I understand it anyways, right of way was developed to force someone on the receiving end of an attack to defend themselves either with blade or distance before making their own attack.

I would rather see the attacker receive the benefit of the off-target halt, than see a defender benefit by defending artificially by being hit in the arm, leg or head.

[ReverseLunge]

It all depends on if foil is still the training weapon for epee. If it is then off target has to stay in order to teach the foilist what is an attack and what is not.

[remise]

Making the bib a target would be extremely dangerous. Ask anyone who has ever been 'stiff-armed' in the throat. A direct thrust to the bib can be very painful, not to mention that someone could die if the blade went under the bib. Foil is thrusting only - if they're going to make a fencer's throat target - they should just fence with sabres.

[grotto]

I don't like the idea, off target lights reward the attacker by at least stopping the action and punish the defender who does not sufficiently parry. If you get rid of the OT light you effective shrink the area that any parry must protect. To clear the line all you would need to do is parry into either arm. In this the rule would reward poor execution of the parry repost with a touch, whereas now it is more likely to be called attack off target, then the repost / counter attack.

[CheekyCanuck]

If I understand it correctly, there are basically three differant proposals that seem to be getting mixed up into one big one here.

The first proposal, that seemed to be what the thread was about, is the suppression of the off target lights. Everything stays the same, except for that. To all those that say it would decrease the attack, I suggest it would increase the favor of the attack. If you have an opponent waiving his arm around searching for the blade, or tucking into the dfensive ball of doom, the attacker is likely to glance off the arm before he arrives on target. Under this system the glancing attack is irrelevant and the attack can continue onto target, thus giving the attack more chance to arrive. At least that is what I am hoping...

I agree that it would increase the attacks, but I think it would degrade into a poking contest. If the first attack misses, keep trying until a light goes off. Of course the defender is not going to just stand there, so she/he would start poking as well. I can see this as hard for a director to judge.

As for the sleeve becoming a target. I am fully against the idea. It's FOIL, not epee or saber!

And as for the bib being target, I'm indifferent. I have to buy a new mask soon anyway.