Change for the better?

[El Chucko]

I am a fairly young man, but I am old enough to remember dry sabre. When I began competing in college in '91, they were trying out electric sabre for the first time with those darn capteurs and everything. Now, because of the nature of the current electric sabre technology, the game has changed completely.

Simply, sabre fencing has changed to fit technology, instead of the other way around.

I have since switched to epee, which seems to be much less succeptible to impulsive and short-sighted changes. But I digress. Anyway, my coach and I were discussing this, and I honestly wonder if anyone thinks that sabre as it is fenced today is better than sabre in it's pre-electric form? I mean, other than the convenience of electric scoring, is the actual style of fencing better in anyone's opinion?

[darius]

I've never fenced in a dry sabre competition, but hearing stories from folks who did, it seems wildly entertaining but not particularly conducive to things like, say, fairness.

Those stories, oddly enough, never seem to be about the fencing actions, but rather the gamesmanship folks would use to convince the refs/judges that they had hit or had not been hit.

darius

[HDG]

I don't know, but I do know that getting rid of the judges is an improvement -- so much less room for cheating.

[Feltan]

The scoring has gotten better, but the fencing has gotten worse.

As you stated in the original post, the game has changed to accomodate the scoring machine -- not the other way around.

Today, there are numerous points awarded to what used to be considered, at best, incidental contact -- or more likely just plain old cheap shots. Cheap in the sense that it isn't really saber fencing, it is the almost epee-like practice to nick someone on the hand.

The new timings are making parry-riposte obsolete. This is just a crying shame. The attacker usually prevails; the remise is king, and everyone knows it.

Lastly, while I never liked the running attacks, the prohibition against crossing one's feet during an attack eliminates most of the spectacular actions that used to characterize saber fencing. It would have made more sense to limit the steps....like in basketball....to prevent the running attack from covering the entire strip like it used to.

The past "dry" fencing was not perfect, and the advent of electric machines could have made things better. There is less drama. However, it seems they threw the baby out with the bath water.

Regards,
Feltan

[darius]

Today, there are numerous points awarded to what used to be considered, at best, incidental contact -- or more likely just plain old cheap shots. Cheap in the sense that it isn't really saber fencing, it is the almost epee-like practice to nick someone on the hand.

The S2000 blades and target change helped this a lot. If you nick somebody in the wrist with right-of-way, you had a mostly unobstructed line to the target and deserve the touch. If you do not have right of way and are nicking somebody's wrist, they are in a position where they can hit you. And should.

I have a few pre-S2000 blades still sitting around in my club's armory, and those things are in-SANE!

The new timings are making parry-riposte obsolete. This is just a crying shame.

Agreed. The changes seemed like a good idea on the surface (sabre's not my weapon), but having watched both as a fan of the game, I can see why the previous set of timings was better.

I think running attacks are fun in foil. But given how easy it is to set a light off in sabre, it just seems like the game was too imbalanced in favor of running attacks; why bother learning footwork?

darius

[AllenJ]

I agree that even though the scoring is more precise, the fencing is getting worse. The reason I stopped competing in sport fencing and started full time into historical swordsmanship was this idea of the lightest touch of a ultra-thin, uber-flexi, "blade" did not bode well with me. What we have now is basically a spit second drag race to see whose light goes off first. Almost all semblance of technique dating back to when sabers actually left a mark, is gone. Im in favor of stiffer blades that will result in actual bladework, but not many agree with me- thus my switch to the more historically accurate side of swords.

[Ordway]

I fenced in dry sabre competitions the first couple of years I fenced. IMO electric sabre is MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH (whew) better than dry. No freakin' comparision.

Electric sabre is cleaner. You can do actions and KNOW that if they hit, the hit will be recorded. You can use tempo. You can do light, clean, fast actions.

Dry sabre? Hah!

Gamesmanship? You bet. My first coach taught me to hit HARD on purpose to try to overcome the bias of "oh, that little blonde girl couldn't possibly have made that cut... her 6-foot opponent MUST have gotten the riposte". If you made a huge THWACK and left a line down the jacket it was harder (not impossible, but harder) for the side judges to miss seeing it.

Oh yeah, side judges. The ones who could TOTALLY MISS seeing actions. Or who could overrule the director if both happened to have the same illusion about whether a touch was good or not.

Off target? On target? Who can tell? Lots of fun being at the mercy of someone's judgment about whether you landed just above the waist or just below it...

At this point, I don't mind *practicing* dry with *good* teammates - we can tell who got the touch enough times to make it adequate if there's no box available. But competing dry? No freakin' way.

I admit that I didn't see high-level sabre fenced dry, but from what observations I've made over the years, the adaptations that sabre has made as it went electric (no forward crossover, stiffer blades, as the most important ones) have made it cleaner and much more tactically interesting and sophisticated.

[rcmatthews]

I have never seen a dry sabre competition live, but I have seen video. Westbrooks bronze medal bout and a few others associated with it. Not to take anything away from Peter, but I can't see how you could think that way of fencing is more enjoyable than the way sabre is fenced now. Its more like a ballet or kabuki theater than a fencing match. From watching the tape, it looks like the fencers know when they are supposed to give ground to the opponent. The strip warning was an insanely stupid rule. Also, I seriously doubt that American fencers would have any amount of success on the international level, due to the judges bias.

I agree that the new timings are too short, but I also think that the old ones were too long. I think a timing of around 200-250 ms would be just about right.

I also don't see the new timings as eliminating the parry/riposte from a fencer's vocabulary. later on today I will watch the 2005 MS world championships and try to give a count of the number of ripostes in each bout.

[leapyear]

I agree (almost) completely with AllenJ. I did nothing but classical foil for several years. People talked about how you need to "adjust" to the new game- but why? If what you enjoy is bladework, then modern fencing is just no fun at all.

The new timings in foil, however, make the game something worth doing again. It's not super-clean, but it's not as absurd as it was a few years ago. Now I don't have to "adjust" to someone leading their attack with their elbow, running onto my point while they flick to the back.

It looks like sabre is in worse shape. Here's hoping they fix things.

[the doc]

i have seen a video of a gb v usa team match from 1990. in it the sabre still had the running attack. let me tell you, the sabre was an incoherent pile of drivel. to me the no crossing rule is the best rule change ever.

i can't see how going electric is anything other than a good thing. it is still more than possible to parry riposte, you just have to be good at it.

oh, and gb won, btw.

[rcmatthews]

Ok so heres what I got from watching the WC dvd, and what I think it means.

Yakimenko v. Podzniakov
6/23 scoring actions are P/R

Shturbabin v. Covaliu
5/28

Covaliu v. Podzniakov
3/27

Russia v. Italy
10/89

Total: 24/167 which means about 14 percent of the scoring actions are parry/ripostes.

I would hardly say that the parry is obsolete. This data also does not factor in a parry with no riposte, or a parry followed by chasing the other fencer down and scoring (that would simply be attack).

[KD5MDK]

I believe the best description I heard of dry sabre was "four blind men and a liar".

[Inquartata]

Ok so heres what I got from watching the WC dvd, and what I think it means.

Yakimenko v. Podzniakov
6/23 scoring actions are P/R

Shturbabin v. Covaliu
5/28

Covaliu v. Podzniakov
3/27

Russia v. Italy
10/89

Total: 24/167 which means about 14 percent of the scoring actions are parry/ripostes.

I would hardly say that the parry is obsolete.

Now go back and watch a tape of same-level sabre fencing from a couple of years BEFORE the new timing. I'll bet you find a much higher ratio.

I started in the old dry sabre days. I resisted the electrification of it ( and the no-crossover rule ) vigorously. But I was wrong to do so. Sabre hasn't gotten worse, just different. That is, in some ways it's worse, and in some ways better. ( Though Holly makes a pretty convincing case, I have to say. )

The prohibition on the passe-avant and fleche, while IMO unfairly differentiating between weapons in being levied only on sabre, achieved its purpose: restoring the phrase. Those running attacks were so ridiculous it was sad. ( Limiting the number of crossing steps? The ref is supposed to count steps, in addition to all of the other claims on his attention? )

Electric scoring has been good and bad. One can now get the stop-cuts to the arm ( which were always a legitimate part of the sabre game ) to score; when I started I was fairly good at those, but had to quit doing them because human judges NEVER saw them. OTOH the last vestiges of the injunction that one must hit with the edge and not the flat vanished with the advent of the box. The passé hit call too has almost gone entirely.

The new timing is a separate question from that of "Is electric better or worse than dry?". That IMO has had the unfortunate effect of further reducing the parry-riposte game which was started down the road toward the rubbish heap by the box, and opening the door to the pick-pick-pick epee counterattacks and the fast remise. But I would not go so far as to say that they have made sabre notably "worse"...

At least not in comparison to foil and epee, which are still MILES behind sabre in the value department.

[FencingKitten]

You know what I hate, trying to do ANYTHING dry?

I bruise easily enough that I wear more protection for ANY bought than ANYONE I know. This means that I can almost never feel any hit. I either see it to know it happened, or catch his/her point at the weakest point in my gear, right above the chest protector - three layers instead of six or seven.

I hate dry, because not only do I not feel anything that doesn't qualify as too hard, but I don't have anything to confirm that it hit.

I found this weekend the disadvantage of the new timing, and I can definitely see how the game changes to fit technology rather than the other way 'round. It's an interesting discussion.

[Feltan]

...Electric scoring has been good and bad. One can now get the stop-cuts to the arm ( which were always a legitimate part of the sabre game ) to score; when I started I was fairly good at those, but had to quit doing them because human judges NEVER saw them. OTOH the last vestiges of the injunction that one must hit with the edge and not the flat vanished with the advent of the box. The passé hit call too has almost gone entirely...

Inq,

Indeed. I don't think we are far off each other's mark in our assessments.

One can make a real stop cut now, and not have to depend on eagle eyed judges. However, on the flip side of the coin, any little incidental brush of the weapon registers a point.

And even with the increased stiffness of the S2000 blades, whip-overs still occur. There is a junior fencer nearby that will hit a 3 or 4 parry with the flat of his blade on purpose with the intent of getting the whip-over -- kind of the saber version of the flick.

I do not lament the loss of the running attack. However, a running attack is not a true fleche -- and I do miss that. And what do we have instead? This ridiculous thing called a flunge!

Regards,
Feltan

[El Chucko]

The objective nature of an electric scoring machine vs. human judges that may be dishonest or just in error is a no-brainer. Of course, in this way sabre has improved. I also do not much mind the no cross-step rule (although it seems like addressing the symptom rather than disease). The whip-overs are also annoying, but not nearly as bad as they used to be.

Without a doubt, though, there is one thing that I absolutely hate about electric sabre: the ability to score with all blade surfaces. Referees have gotten ALOT better in my experience about recognizing a cutting action for R.O.W., but you can still score with the flat of the blade or the lower back edge. As mentioned earlier, passe contact also registers. There has got to be a way to insulate the back edge and part of the flat of the blade. Any ideas?

Ignoring off-target attacks bothers me, too. I truly hope this doesn't happen to foil, too, as has been proposed.

I guess my biggest fear is this: what if, someday, people figure out how to restore some of these more "traditional" elements to sabre, but it is too late? If everyone becomes comfortable with contemporary sabre, and these other elements become too old-fashioned (have they already?), how will people respond when it IS possible to eliminate flat-blade attacks, for example?

[rcmatthews]

To insulate the back edge, one could simply use tape. I have thought of doing it as a training tool to teach people to cut with the trenchant. However, I know a few counters that are completely intentional and use the back of the blade. I don't think the back should be completely eliminated.

I think that likely there were more parries called in the pre-electric days. But, it was a lot easier for a director to miss what was in fact an insufficient parry, or what was actually only a whipover. A lot of the parries probably weren't really there.

On a side note, it is very rare that I am unaware of when I have been touched. At least whether my opponents blade touched me (the validity is an entirely different matter), so I have no problem practicing dry. I think it makes you focus less on the score and more on practicing actions.

[darius]

I guess my biggest fear is this: what if, someday, people figure out how to restore some of these more "traditional" elements to sabre, but it is too late? If everyone becomes comfortable with contemporary sabre, and these other elements become too old-fashioned (have they already?), how will people respond when it IS possible to eliminate flat-blade attacks, for example?

As we've seen in the foil world, it's never too late to tinker with things in an attempt to restore some "traditional" elements!!

Sabre blades are set dimensions, you could make insulating sleeves that cover the back and a certain percentage of the flat of the blade. But ultimately, that horse has left the barn unless there is a mandate from on high to do such a thing.

darius

[KD5MDK]

I also understand it was traditional in dry sabre days to wear big rings you could hit your guard with to sound like a parry. That might explain why so many more were called...

Ignoring off-target attacks bothers me, too.

Off target attacks are ignored? Would you prefer they cause a halt like they do in foil? It seems to me with the sufficient sabre target area, that hitting a fencer below the waist is sufficiently incorrect that it shouldn't stop the action, whereas hitting non-valid in foil is much easier.

[rcmatthews]

Well, you could still wear big rings, Aldo Montano.