Fencing.Net - Your Guide to Fencing & Fencing Equipment

_fence(1) · 02-27-2006, 12:38 AM

Here is another question: I have point in line, my opponent is trying to find my blade. While having my arm fully extended I raise my sabre with a quick wrist motion (Derobement?) so he missed my blade and hit him in the head. He hits me in the flank. Two lights.

Touch given to my opponent.

I'd argue that in the spirit of t.80 2(b) this touch should be awarded to me.

Am I right?

larkmaj · 02-27-2006, 12:44 AM

I would agree. PiL established, no beat. Though I've seen a lot of PiLs not called when they were WELL established (and properly), especially in sabre.

KShan5[PrFC] · 02-27-2006, 12:46 AM

Did you hit him in with the point or the side of the blade?

_fence(1) · 02-27-2006, 12:47 AM

Just one thing: hit to the head was a cut, not with point.

KD5MDK · 02-27-2006, 12:51 AM

Did his cut change at all between when it started and when it ended? i.e. is there some point at which you can say "here is the search, here is the attack"?
Did you hit with the point? That's one of the requirements of Point in Line in sabre. In fact, one of my pet arguments (only even imaginable under the old timing) is a fencer who deflects PiL with their arm during their attack.

If he's making a flank cut and you move the PiL out of the way of his blade but don't return immediately to PiL but make a cut, it's hard to say you derobed as opposed to just failed to interfere with his direct attack and removed PiL to boot.

Now, if he was clearly searching for the blade, then PiL or not your derobement gives you priority (as you cited). The question is whether or not it's clearly his search or his direct attack.

_fence(1) · 02-27-2006, 12:59 AM

No, I didn't hit him with the point, it was cut to the head. He was moving to fast and I had no chance to put PiL back without bending my arm.

I saw it as two separate motions - he is trying to find the blade, misses, continues with cut to the flank.

KD5MDK · 02-27-2006, 01:03 AM

If that is what happened, I'd say the derobement should give you priority. However, it is easy for a referee to not see a search, especially if it is entirely lateral.

Inquartata · 02-27-2006, 01:34 AM

The ref probably did not interpret his search as a search, but as a cut with a change of line, in which case your cut woulde have been a counterattack. If it was as you've described and the ref saw it that way it should have been your touch regardless of whether you hit with point or edge. In the former case, derobement of the search and PIL is still valid; in the second case he searches, you abandon PIL but the ROW is yours due to the search.

The ref has a bad point of view for seeing lateral blade motions. I'd put it down to misperception.

Gav · 02-27-2006, 10:16 AM

I have to say that, from the description, it sounds more like a cutover than a derobement.

D'Art · 02-27-2006, 10:26 AM

From the description it seems like it was called as PIL broken (due to the wrist motion, has to be done with fingers or the whole arm to be valid as a derobement with PIL?), then attack, counter. Attack touche. But then, I'm not a sabreur....

sabreur · 02-27-2006, 10:53 AM

The questions as to whether there was PIL or if the attack was with the point or the edge are moot if there was actually a search for the blade. If A tries to take B's blade and misses, B has the right to attack.

However, in real life, as Quart mentions, there are very few refs who can see a search for the blade, unless it is really obvious. To make it really obvious, there are some things you can do:

1. Establish PIL well out of distance. Out of distance in sabre means out of advance-lunge distance. That is a LONG way.

2. Stand still as your opponent moves into distance and maintain the PIL. Basically one of two things will happen.

A. Your opponent will rush forward. With a rusher, don't worry about a disengage, but rather try to time a lunge into their charge, with the line. If your timing is any good, they won't be able to beat your blade before you hit, or will drag the blade into them as they try to clear it. Or they may just ignore the PIL all together, at which point, since you clearly established it well out of distance, you should get the touch. Or you may get to make a really nifty point attack with opposition, if they try to beat too late and cut into your forte/bell.

B. Your opponent will slow down and creep close, with small steps, and beat your blade at some point to remove the PIL and gain right of way, then begin an attack. You want to disengage-lunge AS he tries to take the blade--not disengage, pause, think "oh cool, I just made a successful derobement, I've got right of way," then attack. You are showing the ref the action, and for the ref to clearly understand that you attacked after the failed take, you need to make your attack before the other guy slashes away in his fury at having missed your blade. It is most stylish to complete this action with a point attack, but if you've timed it right and made the other guy slow down and make a clear swipe at your blade, a cut should get you the point as well--Style points for cuts to the outside wrist or to the cheek--both of which are direct and more likely to get you the point. Note that a cut to head is indirect and can lead to director confusion.

Again, the trick is to make the action very clear for the director--to do that, you have to establish the PIL well out of distance, to force the other guy to make a clear attempt to take the blade.

Cheers, MR

keropie · 02-27-2006, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _fence(1)

No, I didn't hit him with the point, it was cut to the head. He was moving to fast and I had no chance to put PiL back without bending my arm.

I saw it as two separate motions - he is trying to find the blade, misses, continues with cut to the flank.

Alas, while you saw it that way the referee didn't. And often won't, unless his search is large or malformed.

***Craig*** · 02-27-2006, 12:26 PM

Editing my post. Got forwarded a ruling on this from FOC master Bill Oliver:

Quote:

This one is tough. The rules are clear:

If an attacking fencer abandons the attack to search for the opponent's blade, then priority passes. A search for the blade is always a preparation, and the opponent's action should have priority, regardless of what it is (cut or pil.)

I use this action, myself, whenever I can.

The problem is that tradition in saber holds that the line must be static, unmoving, and never, never turn into a cut. This is a holdover from the "steam" days, but it's hard to get some traditionalists to understand the concept.

If I'm the referee, I'll call the cut into a search everytime.

If I'm the fencer, I'll try it. Take it, if I can get it, and only give the ref the "hairy eye-ball" if I don't get it (and never do it with that ref again...)

It's certainly not something you can argue your way through on the strip. You might suggest buying the ref a beer after the competition, and discuss the action. I've actually found that to be a fairly successful method of winning refs over to my point of view...

Help?

Bill

KD5MDK · 02-27-2006, 01:23 PM

I know that's Bill asking if his answer helped, but it sounds as if he's asking for help, instead.

Fechter1 · 02-27-2006, 01:49 PM

Other possibility: Since you hit with the edge, the ref could have called the PIL to have missed, and the hit to be a remise...

Vaguely remember that from one of the ref seminars' Q&A sessions yeeeeears back...

rcmatthews · 02-27-2006, 02:29 PM

From the way the question was phrased, it is hard to tell, but could it possibly be that the ref saw the action this way?

You have PIL out, your opponent comes forward and does some kind of stutter step, causing what appeared to him to be you withdrawing your line. THen, the opponent hits you, and your hit to his head lands. If that is the way the action played out in the ref's head, then the touch is for your opponent, I think.