One person that would be sure to have good information is Phil Karnesis (sp?) at the CAAFC in chicago. Sorry I don't have an email address for him, but the manager, available through their website link, would be happy to put you in touch with him. He took the time recently to explain it to me, in an abbreviated fashion, and it seemed like it would be a lot of fun. He would certainly have, or be a good resource for you.
I'm a foil fencer, and I can change, if I have to, I guess.
^ that might be a usefull sugestion if they didnt have as many silly rules as sport fencing.
There are a myriad of groups that exist for those seeking to do accurate rapier play. It's not really a new idea- I've been doing it for years. Look up groups like ARMA, Tatershall School of Defence, Chicago Swordplay Guild and stuff like that.
Lancet was never a real thing- just someone trying to reinvent the wheel.
My name is Phillip Karnezis, Director of the Lancette Fencing program at the Chicago Athletic Association Fencers Club, the CAA. Professionally I'm a Creative Director for a Brand Design and Structural packaging firm. I have been an avid student and practitioner of Fencing for over 28yrs.
My interest in the history of fencing as a martial art and my love for the modern sport led me to endeavor to design a dynamic sport that has regard for modern sensibilities and respect for the mnemonic of fencings rich history. With 8yrs of collaboration and insight from my teammates, colleagues, and coach at the CAA, We believe we are moving toward a really viable system. In this way Lancette promises to become the first “Open Source” Fencing sport.
My hope is that this new weapon classification will appeal to the fencing historian, the Martial Artist, and the traditional sport fencer who’s only interest in fencing is the sport for it’s own sake.
With the realization that there are many ideologies about fencing out there and that I could not possibly hope to address every one of them combined with my own belief that the best way to ruin a good time is to make too many rules I've attempted to design a simple scoring structure that is fun, strategic, and dynamic but does not dictate technique.
It is for this reason that we describe Lancet as "Free Form"
Lancette fencers are encouraged to use techniques from past and present to suit their individual style within the context of a game.
To cut a long story short Lancette is basically a redesigned scoring structure that relies heavily on the concept of tempo and the location of hits delivered to award touches.
When you hit is classified as follows:
Simultaneous = A hit delivered from both combatants in a single tempo.
Subsequent = A hit delivered on the second or third tempo
Singular = A hit by a single combatant
The weapon is called a Lancette and it's basically a modified Epee.
All Lancets have a pummel and as you'll see from the examples even pistol grip weapons have been fitted with a pummel. Using parts left over from broken tangs and readily available fencing components. The commonality in the weapons is overall blade length and the fact we use a 4 lbs. Pressure spring. The weight of the spring was chosen based on research historical groups have done based on the amount of force required to pierce light leather and skin.
The examples show variation and at some point there will have to be some regulations for them but at this point customization is fun. The easiest way to make a lancette is to simply fit a French epee with the 4lbs spring and your done.
That’s pretty much it in a nutshell.
I'm very happy and excited to hear that there has been some discussion about Lancette in this forum so I have logged on here to provide some clarification on the subject should there be any continued interest. We are currently finishing up our full rules listing.
Please direct all Questions concerns to Phil@lancetfencing.com.
Kind Regards,
Phillip Karnezis
______________________________________________
Program Director Lancette™ Fencing
Chicago Athletic Association phil@lancetfencing.com
Last edited by Lancette™actual; 04-08-2006 at 09:38 PM.
i wonder how many times a thread on a subject has been created, and shortly after, the creator of the subject at hand comes in and says a few words. that was crazy.
Archaic ghostly echoes breathe like thunder of the storm. A tempest fools miscall divine as they crouch awaiting dawn. Their ignorance has forged for me, over centuries a sword. Burnished to flash like lightning on the precipice of war. The wolves are dead in Albion whilst the passive flocks roam free. This, my penetrant spearhead shalt pierce these foul, trespassing breeds!
HOSTISNHUMANISNGENERISN
Here's a slightly obnoxious, but I think logical question. What's with all the things coming off the guards? Sabre has guards that cover the side of the hand, but that's because you can cut. Why do these need them? Also, I can't imagine a use for the bars coming off the sides.
Inasmuch as a pressure spring is mentioned and a body-cord socket is visible in the photos of the guards he posted, I'd say that dry refereeing with a jury is probably ruled out, Carlos.
MrBiggs, quillons were standard on most swords throughout history. They were an aid to parrying and in some cases momentarily immobilizing an opponent's weapon. In this case I suspect they are intended more to differentiate the weapons from regular épeés than to be practical, but there is at least a theoretical usefulness there...
They were also used offensively in infighting on occasion. Hopefully this application is not being reproduced here!
MrBiggs, quillons were standard on most swords throughout history. They were an aid to parrying and in some cases momentarily immobilizing an opponent's weapon. In this case I suspect they are intended more to differentiate the weapons from regular épeés than to be practical, but there is at least a theoretical usefulness there...
Yeah, but why parry with a tiny quillon when you have an entire blade in your hand?
Leverage. The blade is used as well. Rather than just having an opponent's blade glance off the guard as with a regular epee, there's another projection to catch and redirect it, or to hold it. Unlike an epee guard, a crosshilt provides a 'corner' for an opponent's blade to be held in...
It's tough to explain. Maybe one has to learn by feel.
Yeah, but why parry with a tiny quillon when you have an entire blade in your hand?
when you bind or envelop it is useful for preventing the opponent's blade from coming off the guard... couple that with a short sword or dagger hooked up to the same body cord and you could have some interesting fencing.
about this "open source" idea, though... wouldn't you and your opponent have to be on the same version in order for it to work? I guess anytime somebody calls you on a rule (clocking with bell-guard, eye-gauging, etc), you could just say, that isn't in the version of the rules I'm using...
ps... wouldn't the wires get all tangled up whilst dancing around in the diamond?
Never do today what can be put off until tomorrow.
Coming from a western martial arts perspective...
I'd say that if you want pommels and quillions, then get rapiers and smallswords. Ditch the silly pistol grips and get an actual sword. If you do that and have any kind of decent blade there wont be the need of electric scoring. With my years of rapier fencing there has never been a discussion of who hit first. It's either very obvious or you both hit eachother near enough that you would both be screwed. Without seeing the proposed list of rules it's hard to comment further. A good point was made about wires getting in the way is it is indeed "free form". Not to mention the rules about hilt strikes, grasping the blade, grappling, use of the off hand ect. The quillions and guards are usefull if used in a style where they are needed.
Hopefully Phillip Karnezis will post his rule list to help clear up the questions.
Originally Posted by Joe biebel 
I've attempted to design a simple scoring structure that is fun, strategic, and dynamic but does not dictate technique.
