Olympic Fencers on these boards

**The Crazy Wacker** · 08-01-2002 08:28 AM

Does anyone think there are any??

and please.. don't let this turn into a

"I'm *top fencers name*"

"no your not"

"yes i am"

"no... your not"

"yes... I am"

"prove it"

"make me"

etc

**D'Artagnan1673** · 08-01-2002 08:32 AM

I don't think that naybody would have started into such a childish game.

**JEC** · 08-01-2002 08:36 AM

IMHO, no. People at that level have to practice many hours daily beside their day job/studies.
We sitting in computer terminals dream while working <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

**D'Artagnan1673** · 08-01-2002 08:53 AM

**counter riposte** · 08-01-2002 11:34 AM

Agreed. To be olympic fencers, we would be fencing all day, not typing in front of a screen.

***Craig*** · 08-01-2002 11:41 AM

There have been some top level fencers (top tier of the points standings) that have posted here and on newsgroups and have since left because they were treated with stuff like "you shouldn't be able to flick" or other arguments against how they were explaining how bouts/actions are called at nacs/cups/etc.

I've also talked to a member of the FOC who won't post here or on newsgroups anymore because any time he would make a rules clarification he would get flamed.

That may be another reason why we don't see some of those fencers here.

Cheers,
Craig

**latenight** · 08-01-2002 12:02 PM

I remember Jon Tiomkin posting here along time ago. There was a whole lot of what you describe, Craig. It's too bad becasue it was cool to get some insight into what high level competition was like

**D'Artagnan1673** · 08-01-2002 12:18 PM

I've noticed that a high percentage of the main posters are highly knowledgable on computers.

**damianip** · 08-01-2002 12:21 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by D'Artagnan1673:
I've noticed that a high percentage of the main posters are highly knowledgable on computers.<hr /></blockquote>That's because we spend more time on computers than on the strip.

Paolo

**D'Artagnan1673** · 08-01-2002 12:24 PM

Yep, me too by far.

**scarlet_woman156k** · 08-01-2002 12:50 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by webmaster:
There have been some top level fencers (top tier of the points standings) that have posted here and on newsgroups and have since left because they were treated with stuff like "you shouldn't be able to flick" or other arguments against how they were explaining how bouts/actions are called at nacs/cups/etc.

I've also talked to a member of the FOC who won't post here or on newsgroups anymore because any time he would make a rules clarification he would get flamed.

That may be another reason why we don't see some of those fencers here.

Cheers,
Craig<hr /></blockquote>That really pisses ME off. Here we've all had an opportunity to talk w/top level fencers and all they get is flaming and *****ing contrary to what they were attempting to do: just being helpful from experience. I could go on and really speak my mind...but I'll probably get flamed as well.

**counter riposte** · 08-01-2002 01:48 PM

I find it extraordinarily sad that such qualified people no longer post due to contestation with the rules. It would have been interesting to read from someone who has better knowledge and experience at that level of competition.

***Craig*** · 08-01-2002 02:44 PM

If you have any specific rules interpretation questions that you're not able to answer from reading the rule book, email or pm it to me and I'll try to get an interpretation from the FOC on it.

Craig

**achilleus** · 08-01-2002 02:54 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by counter riposte:
I find it extraordinarily sad that such qualified people no longer post due to contestation with the rules. It would have been interesting to read from someone who has better knowledge and experience at that level of competition.<hr /></blockquote>This happens throughout US fencing, people contesting opinions. Buckie Leach argued long ago about how the refs should call certain actions in certain ways, which the refs took great offense to. His reasoning, the world cups call them this way, and if we want fencers to compete at world cups we should do the same.

It's happening right now with coaching on strip. It's against the FIE rules, the USFA allows it and the US refs fought the USFA on it. They are still against it, (re:current issue of AF) but at FIE tournaments, the coaching rule is never enforced, unless the coach is belligerent.

Unfortunately, fencers have to deal with refs and coaches, but participating on this site, where the arguments are just as time consuming, is optional.

[ 08-01-2002, 05:57 PM: Message edited by: achilleus ]

**Purple Fencer** · 08-01-2002 02:57 PM

I remember when I asked Felicia Zimmerman about the boycott a few weeks back. All she said was "You get your information from Fencing.net??" My reply was "Where else? National's not going to post anything on their site."

I suspect she may have lurked here and gotton turned off by the occasional moron. I've actually found most people here informative, and have tried to be the same.

**135711** · 08-01-2002 03:29 PM

we've babied these people long enough, if you can flick well enough to win, then you should be able to explain a flick to a novice without getting upset. calling people morons for having a different thought than yourself is facism, so much for your rainbow. you know, part of playing a sport is eventually learning how to get along with one another, and how to accommodate one anothers ideas. believe it or not, the "rules" are always the subject of debate and discussion, as well as other rules and laws and so forth. sports and sportmanship is supposed to lead one into leadership, maturity and the development of your intellect. these novice fencers have every right to post their questions, however 'moronic' and the so-called 'elite' fencers those with the 'top points' should take a lesson in graciousness and manners.

**damianip** · 08-01-2002 07:24 PM

I think the issue that discourages top fencers from hanging out on BBs such as this is, simply: "What do they have to gain?"

I get a lot out of this because there are plenty of folks with more experience than me and that helps me. I'm new enough to the sport that I still get a feeling of satisfaction on being able to help someone newer to the sport or engage in repartee over some point of strategy, technique or officiating.

However for the top people in the sport, it seems that it could get tiresome to come on this discussion board and be berated by folks who think that flicking is bad and the sport just ain't what it used to be. These folks put their heart and soul into the sport and don't need to explain themselves to dilettantes (I'm a dilettante myself) on discussion boards.

It was interesting to get field reports, but I think that it was a matter of diminishing returns for them on their contributions. I can't say I blame them.

Paolo

**Inquartata** · 08-01-2002 07:31 PM

Uh...what makes a top, or even Olympic, fencer's opinion on whether ( say ) the flick should be allowed or not more worthy of deference than anyone else's?

If it's a question of how to flick, or how to defend against it, or how prevalent it is, or any other matter of fact about the sport, yes, clearly we want to hear this. But a normative matter like whether or not it's good for the sport? No.

There are a lot of good reasons that the elite might not want to pop in here, but having someone disagree with them on a matter of opinion is not one of them. If they think that it is, that their rarefied position entitles them to greater respect for their whims, well, that is arrogance...

[ 08-01-2002, 11:44 PM: Message edited by: Inquartata ]

**neevel** · 08-01-2002 07:39 PM

The issue of top people avoiding particpation in public internet forums is certainly not unique to fencing. In the sciences and engineering, much of the real interaction among professionals on genuinely "meaty" topics takes place in non-public mailing lists, so as to not get interrupted by perpetual-motion inventors, young-earthers, UFO cranks, and college freshmen looking for the answer to Chapter 4, Problem 5. It's understandable that guys like Jon Tiompkin would get a little miffed by some rank novice insinuating that he'd beat them in competition if they'd just ban pistol grips and only call an attack if the elbow of the weapon arm is locked straight.

-Dave

**The Crazy Wacker** · 08-01-2002 09:36 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by scarlet_woman156k:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by webmaster:
There have been some top level fencers (top tier of the points standings) that have posted here and on newsgroups and have since left because they were treated with stuff like "you shouldn't be able to flick" or other arguments against how they were explaining how bouts/actions are called at nacs/cups/etc.

I've also talked to a member of the FOC who won't post here or on newsgroups anymore because any time he would make a rules clarification he would get flamed.

That may be another reason why we don't see some of those fencers here.

Cheers,
Craig<hr /></blockquote>That really pisses ME off. Here we've all had an opportunity to talk w/top level fencers and all they get is flaming and *****ing contrary to what they were attempting to do: just being helpful from experience. I could go on and really speak my mind...but I'll probably get flamed as well.<hr /></blockquote>Me2

Has anyone ever thought that there might be one, trying to keep a low profile?

Fencing.Net - Your Guide to Fencing & Fencing Equipment

Thread: Olympic Fencers on these boards

Thread Tools

Display

Olympic Fencers on these boards

Similar Threads

Fencing FAQ (part 1)

Fencing FAQ (part 1)

Fencing FAQ (part 1)

Northern Colorado Fencers Pre National Camp

Olympic Rings program

Posting Permissions