reducing flicking by the FIE

[walrus418]

i have heard that the FIE has decided to reduce flicking in foil by increasing the point contact time requirement from 1 MS to 10 MS. does anyone have any experience with this or know anything about it?

[darius]

Wasn't that thrown out a while ago, because it would also annul some good straight attacks?

darius

[neevel]

That's correct. Also, it wasn't really all _that_ effective at getting rid of flicks. Eric Schlaepfer sent me firmware for the Eigertek with the longer debounce time so I could see what it was like, and it's not difficult to land flick shots with it-- only the really extreme, crack-the-whip, over the shoulder to the L2 vertebra sort of hits are affected.

SEMI is instead looking at possibly adopting a new foil point which incorporates a minimum travel (akin to epee) as a way of reducing flicks. The FIE Congress last month was only for the purpose of holding elections, so no decision has yet been taken regarding a new point that I know of.

-Dave Neevel

[Papa Blue]

Is talking about this here going to change anything? IF NOT, do you ever wonder why it is so important to talk about?

El Papa

[Lumberg]

Good point Papa Blue.
Whatever the FIE makes as a rule, we can't do anything about it and the USFA usually adopts new FIE rules.
Latest things the FIE have done at their own will.
1. stiff 2000 sabre blades.
2. the move toward clear masks and then back to mesh masks.
3. no more sabre manchette necessary
4. colored uniforms/lames allowed
All the little people (us) have no say unless somebody gets injured.
Peace out.

------------------
Lumberg.
"...yeah...did you get the memo about the TPS reports?"

[neevel]

Guys, the USFA isn't exactly voiceless in the FIE. Here is a list of all U.S. representatives on FIE committees:

Sam Cheris, Executive Committee + Legal Committee (President of Legal Committee)
George Kolombatovich, Refereeing Committee
Geraldine Baumgart, Disciplinary Committee
Peter Hammer, Medical Committee
Dan DeChaine, SEMI (equipment committee)
Jeff Bukantz, Rules Committee
Carl Borack, Promotion and Publicity Committee
Felicia Zimmermann, Athletes Committee

So there's a US representative on _every_ FIE committee. Only France, Italy, and Hungary share that distinction.

-Dave

[Papa Blue]

Excellent!

With the exceptiong of Felica that was a nice list of the USFA's top ranked self-serving a-holes

since we are so well represented at that level does that mean that the USFA itself is behind some of the moronic FIE initiatives like Clear Masks etc?


------------------
-----------
Shut up and do footwork!

[neevel]

The whole clear masks thing was more a matter of the FIE kowtowing to some misconcieved notions from the IOC as to what would make fencing 'telegenic' than anything else, as were the attempts to get some of the not-ready-for-prime-time wireless scoring systems running for the Sydney Olympics. The FIE's come up with it's share of dumb stuff in the past (remember the mask bib as valid target from four years ago?), but I doubt that lexan masks would've gotten started without the IOC's instigation.

-Dave

[veeco]

Originally posted by Papa Blue:
Excellent!

With the exceptiong of Felica that was a nice list of the USFA's top ranked self-serving a-holes

since we are so well represented at that level does that mean that the USFA itself is behind some of the moronic FIE initiatives like Clear Masks etc?

The USFA is a volunteer organization. They try to promote fencing in the US and the fact that the US are all represented at the various FIE comities is a proof of their dedication and the time they put into it.

I would not qualify clear masks a "moronic initiative". Fencing is an old sport and has not evolved much. On the one hand it is good because it keeps the traditions alive. On the other hand, if we ever want to attract more people to it, we have to diversify ourselves and broaden our horizons, otherwise the same kind of people will come fencing over and over and fencing will become and elitist sport were fencers will blame non fencers for not understanding them and nobody else will care about fencing.

I find that most people I talk to about fencing are interested at first but find it either too complicated or don't take the time to appreciate it. It's little things like that that can make people more interested and willing to try.

I agree, clear masks as they were developed sucked. But if no one had tried, who would've known? Hopefully the mistakes made this time won't be made again.

[Papa Blue]

Wiping my butt with your response!

------------------
-----------
Shut up and do footwork!

[Gabriel]

Anyhow BACK TO THE TOPIC.
Walrus- don't count on the flick being thrown out anytime soon. the FIE and the USFA have been saying for years that the attack will be nulled. Though just in case, I wouldn't rely too heavily on it, as the modern mess it has come to be is really unreliable when you start fencing really skilled people.

[Christopher J Umbs]

Veeco said "I would not qualify clear masks a "moronic initiative". Fencing is an old sport and has not evolved much. On the one hand it is good because it keeps the traditions alive. On the other hand, if we ever want to attract more people to it, we have to diversify ourselves and broaden our horizons, otherwise the same kind of people will come fencing over and over and fencing will become and elitist sport were fencers will blame non fencers for not understanding them and nobody else will care about fencing."

Veeco, I'm not trying to start an arguement, but another possibility is that fencing has already changed too much and the reason that member of the general public find it boring/silly/confusing is that it is no longer based on classical principles of self-defense. When two fencers are confining themselves to safe clear actions that are martially valid, I don't think the general public has any problems. But when fencers charge into each other, barely tap each other with quick flicks, and basically try to play the rules instead of what the rules are/were susposed to represent then the action gets too ugly for the public to follow. Combine this with the constant rule changes and it's easy to see why a lot of people shy away from it. If I were an electric sabre fencer, I'd be a tad pissed off from having to constantly change my equipment and tactics.

At any rate, perhaps more change is the last thing fencing needs.

Chris

[latenight]

I use flicks. The vast majority of my flicks would inflict an injury if sharps were used. That having been said, flicks are a part of the sport. Learn how to use them and defend against them and you will be ok. When I first started I hated the flick because it was used against me, yet I could not execute it. It made things feel "unfair". As a fencer develops flicks become less of an issue. That is just the evolution of a modern fencer.

some of Chris's points are valid. But, i have yet to see any of the clasical fencing tournaments televised to date. so it must be more than just the issues he puts forth.

maybe fencing is just not interesting to a large number of Americans. Perhaps, it will never be a "mainstream" sport. So what? Alot of us love it, and I think we should focus on what would make the sport better for us, the participants, rather than trying to wrangle in a viewing audience. Getting youth involved need not focus on making world champions. It, rather, should focus on intruducing kids to a great sport that they can participate in for a lifetime. Lets face it, it's tought to play football in your 50's.

So I guess, my point is that we are focusing on all the wrong things trying to make fencing everything to everyone.

[d8m2k]

Sports evolve and change constantly. Rules interpretation change as well. Basketball, for instance, when created, it was illegal to dunk. Also, the rules change every year depending on what the tv ratings are like and spectators like to see. The strike zone in baseball is similar to ROW, it changes with every umpire.
The difference with those sports is that they study their audience, they check the ratings, they know who watches and are able to adjust accordingly.
Change is neccessary to the life of any sport. It is not easy, it may not work, but it is neccessary.

[d8m2k]

Plus, I was just watching ESPN Sport Century about Karem Abdul-Jabbar. His first year of NCAA he led his team to a chamionship and was so unstoppable that the NCAA banned dunking for the next year. Kareem adapted and perfected his sky hook and still dominated the sportand the NCAA.
Change is a part of life.

[veeco]

I am not saying we need more change, nor am I saying that we should stay the same.

I think that we should keep looking for options. Clear masks did not make a difference and were not widely accepted. So be it. I think removing flicks will actually kill the coolness of foil.

When watching martial arts, the audience is amazed by the speed of the people practising it. Flicks are that extra thing that makes foil fast and good looking. Removing flicks is not one more change, it is a step backwards. Flicking is not playing the rules. Flicking has become more and more an option because the way the blades have developed basically. Just like in any other sports, like Formula 1, skiing, and so on, the equipment plays a significant part in fencing. Those who have the better equipment and know how to get advantage of it have an advantage. That's why so many people like to learn flicks.

As far as I am concerned (and I fence epee, so that's not a lot of concern :-). I think flicks are not necessarily a huge add-on to your repertoire. Flicks are and will be a gamble were you are not sure whether your hit will be registered, if the referee saw the action correctly, and so on. So removing flicks will actually make foil tasteless, because we won't see anymore people trying to gamble a few touches just for the pleasure of looking good :-).

Now, I am sure everyone will bash me for that, but that's my opinion. And I am sticking to it.

[d8m2k]

Veeco,
Practice your flick more and it won't be much of a gamble. Watch some of the good foil fencers, they don't miss when they flick. I too fence epee, but the flick is still a major and important addition of my(or anyone's) repertoire, provided they can hit it consistently.

[MikeHarm]

Flicks are useful technique towards winning, but my problem with it is it gets away from the concept that you're supposed to be *sword* fighting. The flicks turn it into more of a whip cracking contest it seems like in some cases.

Mike

[neevel]

Just a comment concerning what I know about the prototype "anti-flick" points that have been under consideration-- they would have a travel of about 2 mm (i.e., just a bit longer than an epee point), accomplished by having a travel spring between the collar and end-cap of the tip. As anyone who does epee can attest, this amount of travel will not eliminate all flicks, just make them more difficult to register and eliminate only very light flick touches. It probably would make more difference than the debounce timing changes would have, but flicks won't totally be removed from the game if a new foil point were to go ahead. At any rate, anyone who's got some modicum of depth to their game would have little trouble adapting to a reduction in the effectiveness of light flicks-- only lower-level one trick ponies would run into problems. You certainly wouldn't see any changes in the list of folks regularly making the top 48 at NACs.

-Dave Neevel

[tsalyards]

If flicks were made illeagal in foil by some technical means (which is doubtful), I wouldn't even fence foil any more; I'd go over to epee full time. Flicks have made foil faster, more aggresive and pleasing to the eye. If the FIE wants us all to fence like a bunch of handlebar-mustached geezers from the 19th century, it will be their loss. Enter the geeks and exit the athletes, that's what would happen.

-Tad