Question on right of way in sabre

[monkeyfencer]

My sabre team was fencing at High School States this weekend and i came across a call that i didnt quite agree with. I was wondering on the proper interpertation of the call.

The situation is as follows(i'll try to be as clear as possible)

Fencer A quickly advances with a bent arm
Fencer B hasty retreats about halfway down the strip
Fencer B Stops, plants his feet, and takes a head cut that lands
Fencer A reacts with a cut that also lands but begins his attack after Fencer B begins his cut.
Fencer A is awarded the touch and the bout

I questioned the call and was told the call was givin to fencer A because he was moving foward and my fencer was stationary. I was always told that foward motion does not make an attack, the extended arm makes the attack. I could understand the call if my fencer was still retreating as he made the cut, but he was stationary and began his attack well before his opponent.

I was just wondering if anyone could give me some clarification on the rule and tell me if the call was correct.

Thanks

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by monkeyfencer

My sabre team was fencing at High School States this weekend and i came across a call that i didnt quite agree with. I was wondering on the proper interpertation of the call.

The situation is as follows(i'll try to be as clear as possible)

Fencer A quickly advances with a bent arm
Fencer B hasty retreats about halfway down the strip
Fencer B Stops, plants his feet, and takes a head cut that lands
Fencer A reacts with a cut that also lands but begins his attack after Fencer B begins his cut.
Fencer A is awarded the touch and the bout

I questioned the call and was told the call was givin to fencer A because he was moving foward and my fencer was stationary. I was always told that foward motion does not make an attack, the extended arm makes the attack. I could understand the call if my fencer was still retreating as he made the cut, but he was stationary and began his attack well before his opponent.

I was just wondering if anyone could give me some clarification on the rule and tell me if the call was correct.

Thanks

Without seeing the touch in question, there's no way I'm going to make this call...

-m

[KD5MDK]

Generally the understanding is if one person is advancing and the other retreating, the retreating person concedes that the advancer has priority. Now, if both advance and one person holds their hand still, that's going to not work.

Did Fencer B's stop hit (he's making a counter-attack here) land before Fencer A's cut begins? If not, it is not in time.

Also note that depending on where you're standing, it is hard for the fencer to see if their opponent is extending or not, just as it is hard for a referee to see lateral blade movements. If you were down at the end of the strip, the extension may not have been obvious.

[vooter]

It seems to me that it all depends on the director's opinion of A's bent arm. He obviously saw extension--if he hadn't, then B would have gotten the point for attacking into preparation....

[rcmatthews]

This is definetly one of those situations where you have to actually have seen the action. If I had seen it, it would likely be clear as day who had the touch. If the person initial moving backwards causes the other person to react, I think the touch is his. Just because you are moving forward does not mean that you are attacking (as a side not I think it also works the opposite way, i.e. you can attack while moving backwards).

It is important to know what sort of ref you have. Some refs are motion directors, some are arm extension, and some are in the middle (some change from touch to touch as well). In sabre, it is called tighter than in foil. In my opinion, if the touch by fencer A is the result of an obvious reaction to fencer b's action, B should get the touch.

[jBirch]

Don't forget that priority rests on the advance of an advance lunge so the ref might have interpretted Fencer A as having executed a simple advance lunge. Fencer A advance, Fencer B extend, Fencer A extend and hit. Touche A: advance lunge.

James.

[keropie]

Originally Posted by jBirch

Don't forget that priority rests on the advance of an advance lunge so the ref might have interpretted Fencer A as having executed a simple advance lunge. Fencer A advance, Fencer B extend, Fencer A extend and hit. Touche A: advance lunge.

James.

Though technically in order for it to be a simple advance-lunge attack, the extension must begin during the advance, not after. Not saying it's either called that way always, that it's not what happened, whatever, but just so you know.

Originally Posted by USFA Rules t.75(b)(2)

An attack with a step-forward-lunge is correctly carried out:
— as a simple attack (cf. t.8) when the arm is extending
before the completion of the step-forward and when the
touch arrives at the latest at the end of the lunge;

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by vooter

It seems to me that it all depends on the director's opinion of A's bent arm. He obviously saw extension--if he hadn't, then B would have gotten the point for attacking into preparation....

Yes, but it can be an illusory thing, that extension. The ref cannot be watching everything at once with the same degree of intensity.

I was watching a Div II WS bout last year. Fencer A does a long, fast series of advances, arm withdrawn and motionless. Eventually B begins a couterattack with point into A's preparation. The point counter had covered at least 3/4 of the distance between the two before A's arm finally began to extend. The call was still for A's attack, though. This from a fairly good referee...

As RC Matthews mentions, some refs do seem to ignore the arm almost entirely and award ROW by forward motion alone. Others focus on arm extension ( more properly IMO ). Woe betide the fencer who does not figure out pretty quickly which sort of ref he has at the moment...

[_fence(1)]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Yes, but it can be an illusory thing, that extension. The ref cannot be watching everything at once with the same degree of intensity.

I was watching a Div II WS bout last year. Fencer A does a long, fast series of advances, arm withdrawn and motionless. Eventually B begins a couterattack with point into A's preparation. The point counter had covered at least 3/4 of the distance between the two before A's arm finally began to extend. The call was still for A's attack, though. This from a fairly good referee...

As RC Matthews mentions, some refs do seem to ignore the arm almost entirely and award ROW by forward motion alone. Others focus on arm extension ( more properly IMO ). Woe betide the fencer who does not figure out pretty quickly which sort of ref he has at the moment...

Is there a way for someone to publish a memo on this subject in the next issue of American Fencing? Or send a note to all sabre directors?

I was trained under assumption that just moving forward does not make it an attack...

[KD5MDK]

However, retreating from an advancing fencer makes it look a lot more like an attack. Just like when someone trys to establish point in line and you attempt to beat it, you certify that they were making a valid threat, or two simultainous attacks, if one fencer ducks or turns away it looks like they believed they were counterattacking and didn't have priority.

Remember, nothing done by any one person can decide priority. It's always dependent on what the other fencer does as well.