Fencing.Net - Your Guide to Fencing & Fencing Equipment

slosher · 08-01-2002, 04:32 AM

Saw this action in foil practice and there was some question on how it should be called.

Fencer A winds up with a flick (arm bent, tip to the ceiling)

Fencer B establishes a point in line and begins retreating

Fencer A advances and Fencer B retreats four steps

On the fourth step Fencer B reverses direction and lunges (point still in line) and hits while Fencer A flicks and also hits (begins extending before hit from fencer B lands).

In this case, who gets the point?

Thanks

Zelda · 08-01-2002, 04:33 AM

Ick I HATE those calls.

epeemike81 · 08-01-2002, 06:01 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by slosher:
Saw this action in foil practice and there was some question on how it should be called.

Fencer A winds up with a flick (arm bent, tip to the ceiling)

Fencer B establishes a point in line and begins retreating

Fencer A advances and Fencer B retreats four steps

On the fourth step Fencer B reverses direction and lunges (point still in line) and hits while Fencer A flicks and also hits (begins extending before hit from fencer B lands).

In this case, who gets the point?

Thanks<hr /></blockquote>Point in line is established if it exists for more than one tempo before the attack starts (one tempo being, at most, an advance lunge). four advances is certainly more than one tempo. Thus, PIL was established, and held ROW through the lunge and B SHOULD get the touch.

Another way to look at it is did fencer B START extending before fencer A did? if so, then it is B's attack.

that having been said, however, it will almost always be called as A's attack and B's counter. Though I give lots of leeway to flicks, I have always thought that this was too much. but, that is how it will be called.

D'Artagnan1673 · 08-01-2002, 06:07 AM

Ah, the joys of being an epeeist.

achilleus · 08-01-2002, 06:56 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by slosher:
Saw this action in foil practice and there was some question on how it should be called.

Fencer A winds up with a flick (arm bent, tip to the ceiling)

Fencer B establishes a point in line and begins retreating

Fencer A advances and Fencer B retreats four steps

On the fourth step Fencer B reverses direction and lunges (point still in line) and hits while Fencer A flicks and also hits (begins extending before hit from fencer B lands).

In this case, who gets the point?

Thanks<hr /></blockquote>Have to see it, but some things to consider:

For a point to be consider 'in line', it has to be established before fencer A begins the attack.

So, if A winds up, did B actually take advantage of the preparation? Did B's arm straighten completely before A started extending and advancing?

As they moved down the strip did A make any extraneous blade action? If A made a smooth controlled extension of his arm, and hit in tempo, it's still considered A's attack, by the higher rated refs.

The only time B would be given the attack after 4 retreats then lunging, would be as an attack into prep, which means B hits a full tempo ahead of A.

Also, if A hadn't established an attack, why did B retreat?

While no who wasn't there can give you an answer, Those are the things that refs look at. Hope that helps.

damianip · 08-01-2002, 08:46 AM

I would like to know how close they were or how the distance changed during the action. If they are out of distance, nothing but the PIL is happening. If the are very close A's wind up may be an attack, but then he would have been hit by the extending line if they were.

However, a couple of thoughts:

If A merely cocks the flick and doesn't close any distance before B puts out the line, I'd find it hard to consider that an attack.

If the retreating now begins, and B never breaks the line, then the PIL condition persists and A should do something about it to take priority.

Not having seen it, I'd venture to say that:

1) PIL was established before any attack came from A.

2) Four steps advancing with the blade cocked might be considered marching and, therefore, a preparation.

3) Nowhere is blade contact mentioned.

4) I'd give it to B based on that.

I'd still need to see the distance change at the initial blade actions, but it seems that cocking the blade with no advance is not an attack.

The PIL came out before the A's "attack" which really could only be considered an attack during the final advance-lunge. However, by that point in time the PIL is clearly established and A must remove the established PIL or avoid it.

I don't miss foil.

Paolo

counter riposte · 08-01-2002, 09:00 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by slosher:
Saw this action in foil practice and there was some question on how it should be called.

Fencer A winds up with a flick (arm bent, tip to the ceiling)

Fencer B establishes a point in line and begins retreating

Fencer A advances and Fencer B retreats four steps

On the fourth step Fencer B reverses direction and lunges (point still in line) and hits while Fencer A flicks and also hits (begins extending before hit from fencer B lands).

In this case, who gets the point?

Thanks<hr /></blockquote>Maybe a simplified way of explaining it would be this:

IF A was beginning final action of attack (Lunge) prior to B's counterattack, it would be A's touch, "Attack A, Counterattack B"

If B lunges before A begins final action, it would be B's touch. "Attack in preparation B, Remise A"

Ultimately, it is your judgement call of whether or not B reversed before or after A's final action. From your description, B reversed into A's preparation of attack.

D'Artagnan1673 · 08-01-2002, 09:01 AM

Alright, time to get flamed.....

Maybe a good reason to ban the flick in some way is for this very problem. I see and hear of it fairly often. The nature of this "attack" is so iffy that we cannot even decide sometimes if it fits into the description of attacking. Maybe it does give foil an additional dimension to play in, but at what cost?

If fencer A had made a "traditional" attack (IE forward extension of the arm) there would have been no question whatsoever as far as ROW. This is especailly true if Fencer A begin the extension before B placed his point in line.

I've also seen different directors at the same tournament call this action completely different. Fencer A comes back to flick, I launch into him. Director calls it attack in preparation for me. My buddy fences the same guy in the Semis, does exactly what I did, many times, and the director always calls it attack/counterattack. Let me say something in defense of the call. My buddy should have done that only one time. After he saw how the director was going to call this, he should have fenced the director instead of making the same move time after time. Another amusing thing is that my director, the attack in prep call, is one of the most prevalent flickers in the Houston area at our skill level. Neither one of us could hold a candle to Salle' Mauro's crew, esp. not Gerbermann.

That said, I most emphatically concur that I do not miss foil.

damianip · 08-01-2002, 09:14 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by counter riposte:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by slosher:
Saw this action in foil practice and there was some question on how it should be called.

Fencer A winds up with a flick (arm bent, tip to the ceiling)

Fencer B establishes a point in line and begins retreating

Fencer A advances and Fencer B retreats four steps

On the fourth step Fencer B reverses direction and lunges (point still in line) and hits while Fencer A flicks and also hits (begins extending before hit from fencer B lands).

In this case, who gets the point?

Thanks<hr /></blockquote>Maybe a simplified way of explaining it would be this:

IF A was beginning final action of attack (Lunge) prior to B's counterattack, it would be A's touch, "Attack A, Counterattack B"

If B lunges before A begins final action, it would be B's touch. "Attack in preparation B, Remise A"

Ultimately, it is your judgement call of whether or not B reversed before or after A's final action. From your description, B reversed into A's preparation of attack.<hr /></blockquote>I actually believe that the whole matter hinges on when or if the PIL was validly established. Once established, the condition remains until B breaks the line or A displaces the line sufficiently.

B can retreat and advance with the line in place and it remains a PIL. He can even lunge out of it as the recent changes in the rule reflect.

Paolo

achilleus · 08-01-2002, 11:24 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by D'Artagnan1673:
Alright, time to get flamed.....

Maybe a good reason to ban the flick in some way is for this very problem. I see and hear of it fairly often. The nature of this "attack" is so iffy that we cannot even decide sometimes if it fits into the description of attacking. Maybe it does give foil an additional dimension to play in, but at what cost?

If fencer A had made a "traditional" attack (IE forward extension of the arm) there would have been no question whatsoever as far as ROW. This is especailly true if Fencer A begin the extension before B placed his point in line.

I've also seen different directors at the same tournament call this action completely different. Fencer A comes back to flick, I launch into him. Director calls it attack in preparation for me. My buddy fences the same guy in the Semis, does exactly what I did, many times, and the director always calls it attack/counterattack. Let me say something in defense of the call. My buddy should have done that only one time. After he saw how the director was going to call this, he should have fenced the director instead of making the same move time after time. Another amusing thing is that my director, the attack in prep call, is one of the most prevalent flickers in the Houston area at our skill level. Neither one of us could hold a candle to Salle' Mauro's crew, esp. not Gerbermann.

That said, I most emphatically concur that I do not miss foil.<hr /></blockquote>The flick doesn't need to be banned.
Even before the flick, people argued about calls.

Just because refs at a local tournament have differeing opinions means nothing. Refs across the US aren't very good due to lack of seeing top level fencing on a regular basis, and not knowing how actions are interpreted. This is the brunt of all the problems in the US.
We also get tons of people who go to one large tournament, get hit with what the perceive to be this huge giant wind up flick and think that since they got hit with it once, it must always get ROW. Then they return to their small division and ref giving such a wrong action priority.

What needs to happen is that people need to informed about what the current interpretation of ROW is. Obviously, it's all subjective, so there will be some differences, but the smaller the differences the better.

Also, the majority of fencers I've seen complain about the wind up fail to realize that, yes although the other fencer did prepare, they did not take advantage of it.

achilleus · 08-01-2002, 11:26 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by counter riposte:
[quote]
If B lunges before A begins final action, it would be B's touch. "Attack in preparation B, Remise A"
<hr /></blockquote>Actually, B would have to hit before A started his final action to get the attack into prep call. Much more difficult to do than merely lunging.

D'Artagnan1673 · 08-01-2002, 11:53 AM

I agree, the smaller the differences, the less likely that there will be wild interpretations. Misunderstandings need to be resolved to avoid additional confusion. The flick doesn't bother me too much for a few reasons.

1. I do not like the flick so I fence a weapon in which its use and application are quite different.

2. I didn't like foil enough in the first place to be bitter that I was "forced" to switch weapons.

In truth, I only ran into a handful of flickers, and they all beat me because they were more advanced and skilled fencers.

I really love to start arguments because it makes this board much more exciting. When I first started in early March, this board was a blast because I was posting heated and highly opionionated, and unpopular at that, posts that were getting everyone's blood going and we were quite an active board for a while.

Sadly, I have argued every point I have till I am blue in the face and I can't think of too much more to argue about. Therefore, I endever whenever I can to inject a little opinion to get people going. It makes it much more entertaining. A fellow clubmate whose Fencing.net name is FlyingPhil quit reading the posts after a while because he said we all died down and things got dull in his opinion.

Just because I argue doesn't mean that I dislike anybody or that I am a rude and argumentative person in general. In fact, I'd be thrilled to meet anyone on this board who is a frequent poster next Summer in Austin. I simply am very strong opinionated and love to argue my points.

slosher · 08-01-2002, 12:03 PM

Isn't it that the point moving forward is only valid for a simple action on fencer A (one advance-lunge)? If he advances four steps and then flicks, doesn't it become a compound action or would Fencer B still be considered counter-attacking into an attack?

For more info. Fencer A has a natural coiled flick position so I guess he establishes it before Fencer's B Point in Line but, they are way out of distance of each other.

epeemike81 · 08-01-2002, 12:10 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by slosher:
Isn't it that the point moving forward is only valid for a simple action on fencer A (one advance-lunge)? If he advances four steps and then flicks, doesn't it become a compound action or would Fencer B still be considered counter-attacking into an attack?

For more info. Fencer A has a natural coiled flick position so I guess he establishes it before Fencer's B Point in Line but, they are way out of distance of each other.<hr /></blockquote>I would like to point out that a "coiled" flick position is NOT a part of ANY attack, simple OR complex. if you're arm is not extending, it is not an attack. flicks ARE attacks, but they don't start until the arm starts moving forward.

Since it is not an attack, if B starts an attack before A starts his attack (i.e. extends), B has ROW. That is still not relevant here, though, since a PIL established in distance gets right of way after the second of the four advances. it is B's touch, even if A was extending the whole time, which I would bet he wasn't.

-m

damianip · 08-01-2002, 12:11 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by slosher:
Isn't it that the point moving forward is only valid for a simple action on fencer A (one advance-lunge)? If he advances four steps and then flicks, doesn't it become a compound action or would Fencer B still be considered counter-attacking into an attack?

For more info. Fencer A has a natural coiled flick position so I guess he establishes it before Fencer's B Point in Line but, they are way out of distance of each other.<hr /></blockquote>If they are way out of distance at the beginning, then the PIL must be dealt with. The point in line is not an attack but a condition. Cocking the hand for a flick out of distance is not threatening and not an attack.

Assuming that the PIL does not break, and there is no blade contact, point must go to B.

Paolo

D'Artagnan1673 · 08-01-2002, 12:14 PM

Once again, I say I amen that I am an epeeist. We don't have these problems. If someone wants to attack me with a bent arm, let him and we'll see how quickly I land the touch.

Granted, we've got a guy who does that foil coil in epee and I'm honestly afraid to launch a counterattack out of pure fear of bodily harm. Another thing about this isolated indivudual. He's just converted to a Belgian grip and he's doing the death grip no matter how much we tell him not to. Of course, I'm not terribly suprised since he talks to himself often.

[ 08-01-2002, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: D'Artagnan1673 ]

achilleus · 08-01-2002, 01:05 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by epeemike81:
[quote]
That is still not relevant here, though, since a PIL established in distance gets right of way after the second of the four advances. it is B's touch, even if A was extending the whole time, which I would bet he wasn't.

-m<hr /></blockquote>PIL is not established after 2 advances. If the A is extending, and within distance, and that distance is maintained, it's A's attack.

PIL would be established if A searched, waved his arm back and forth, or if B broke the distance so that A couldn't hit him with an adv. lunge.

achilleus · 08-01-2002, 01:08 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by slosher:
Isn't it that the point moving forward is only valid for a simple action on fencer A (one advance-lunge)? If he advances four steps and then flicks, doesn't it become a compound action or would Fencer B still be considered counter-attacking into an attack?

For more info. Fencer A has a natural coiled flick position so I guess he establishes it before Fencer's B Point in Line but, they are way out of distance of each other.<hr /></blockquote>If they are out of distance, than it can't be an attack, it is PIL. If they are within distance, and they maintain that distance throughout A's advances, it's A's attack.

angrylemur · 08-01-2002, 01:57 PM

fencer A gets the touch. The line is not valid if turned into an attack while facing another action. Had fencer B kept point in line and not turned it into an attack, the touch would go to fencer B as fencer A did nothing to break the line after making extra preparation (in form of steps).

epeemike81 · 08-01-2002, 02:03 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by achilleus:
PIL is not established after 2 advances. If the A is extending, and within distance, and that distance is maintained, it's A's attack.

PIL would be established if A searched, waved his arm back and forth, or if B broke the distance so that A couldn't hit him with an adv. lunge.<hr /></blockquote>PIL is established in time if it is established more than 1 tempo before fencer A lands. since four advances is MORE than 1 tempo, the PIL is correct, and B gets