08-01-2006, 11:13 AM
|
#1 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Indiana, PA
Posts: 1,629
| Nit Picking the Rules... Foil again...
OK, I've been doing my annual re-reading of the rules, and came across this gem: From Foil Rules t.54
(b) On the other hand, when the Referee has decided that a touch
made by a competitor has priority, this touch shall not be
annulled if subsequently it is found that a valid touch made
by the opponent is registered as non-valid or that the weapon
of the fencer against whom the touch was awarded is
permanently registering a non-valid touch. Is it just me or are they making this rule intentionally "thick?" Massive run-on sentence... Has anyone there ever heard of using punctuation?
| 
| | | And now for this message... |
| |
08-01-2006, 11:25 AM
|
#2 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Jyväskylä
Posts: 3,998
| A. Thank you for bringing it to our attention that you are re-reading the rule book. This is truly the mark of a quality individual Your mother must be very proud.
B. If you find that the language is excessively difficult, may I suggest enrolling in a remedial reading course (privately) before announcing it on this forum (publicly).
__________________
Quit touchin' me, ya freak
F.Net Rule #1: E. L. E. (everybody love everybody)
| |
| | |
08-01-2006, 11:31 AM
|
#3 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 6,607
| "if you don't have ROW it dosn't matter that your weapon broke"
Howzat?
__________________
lol wut?
| |
| | |
08-01-2006, 11:38 AM
|
#4 | | Admin
Join Date: Dec 1999 Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 5,362
| The rule is just explicit in that the fencer with right of way is not penalized for their opponent having a non-working weapon.
I wish more of the rules were this explicit. Would put down a lot of the rule debate threads.
Craig | |
| | |
08-01-2006, 11:40 AM
|
#5 | | Fencing Expert
Join Date: Apr 2000 Location: Pennsauken, NJ
Posts: 10,690
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by telkanuru "if you don't have ROW it dosn't matter that your weapon broke"
Howzat? | Less correct.
Specifically this rule covers cases where the scored-upon fencer's weapon is not correctly functioning, but in such a manner that it is not possible for that fencer to have lost a correctly scored touch. If a valid light doesn't stay registered on the machine or if a valid touch cannot be registered, for example, the touch against the fencer with the non-functioning equipment IS annulled.
-B
__________________
"Oh but you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you!"
| |
| | |
08-01-2006, 12:17 PM
|
#6 | | Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 10,822
| Actually, it sort of breaks down the opponent's weapon failures into several categories:
1) Can't turn a light on at all - Annul touch
2) Lights turned on do not stay on - Annul touch
3) Valid hit produces non-valid light - Touch stands
4) Opponent's light is constantly white-lighting. - Touch stands.
I'm not sure if you mean this to be #1 or #3: Quote: |
or if a valid touch cannot be registered, for example, the touch against the fencer with the non-functioning equipment IS annulled.
| | |
| | |
08-01-2006, 12:52 PM
|
#7 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Indiana, PA
Posts: 1,629
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by Mr Epee A. Thank you for bringing it to our attention that you are re-reading the rule book. This is truly the mark of a quality individual | Allways one that aims to please! Actually, I've been studying to try to get current for a Directors rating... Of course that also means that I need to find the time and $$$ to actually attend a directors seminar somewhere! *sigh* The tirals of a new*ish* parent! Your mother must be very proud. Quote: |
Originally Posted by Mr Epee B. If you find that the language is excessively difficult, may I suggest enrolling in a remedial reading course (privately) before announcing it on this forum (publicly). |  After about two hours of reading the rules, I hit this paragraph and spent about 2 minutes re-reading it trying to figure out what it was saying.... I guess that I should have taken a break earlier! 
Last edited by erik_blank; 08-01-2006 at 12:56 PM..
| |
| | |
08-01-2006, 03:25 PM
|
#8 | | gother than thou
Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 995
| Quote: |
I need to find the time and $$$ to actually attend a directors seminar somewhere! *sigh*
| You should try Hollywood. Quote: |
Your mother must be very proud.
| Why thank you she is 
__________________
Destroy everything you touch today
Destroy me this way
Anything that may desert you
So it cannot hurt you | |
| | |
08-01-2006, 04:33 PM
|
#9 | | Fencing Expert
Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: London
Posts: 2,895
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by KD5MDK Actually, it sort of breaks down the opponent's weapon failures into several categories:
1) Can't turn a light on at all - Annul touch
2) Lights turned on do not stay on - Annul touch
3) Valid hit produces non-valid light - Touch stands
4) Opponent's light is constantly white-lighting. - Touch stands.
I'm not sure if you mean this to be #1 or #3: |
heh, this is even more confusing imho.
t.54b is a reminder that even if your opponents weapon (or your lame or bodywire) is non conforming by too high resistance, and you make an correct attack registered on the apparatus, it won't be annulled. | |
| | |
08-01-2006, 04:41 PM
|
#10 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 1,297
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by downunder this is even more confusing imho. | I was utterly unaware that this existed. . .
Not that I disagree with the assessment of the rule in any way. . .
__________________
^^
| |
| | |
08-01-2006, 04:46 PM
|
#11 | | Fencing Expert
Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: London
Posts: 2,895
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by keropie I was utterly unaware that this existed. . .
Not that I disagree with the assessment of the rule in any way. . . |
brilliant. | |
| | |
08-01-2006, 05:10 PM
|
#12 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Way Out West
Posts: 6,102
| Is Erik critiquing the rule or the grammar? Seems like an entirely different family of nitpickers is needed. What, you want good English in the rules? Dreamer!
__________________
"In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different."
| |
| | |
08-01-2006, 05:14 PM
|
#13 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 1,297
| I think the grammar, in this case, or perhaps more specifically the wording. Though the current thought is that, more than anything else, he was simply tired.
__________________
^^
| |
| | |
08-01-2006, 11:13 PM
|
#14 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Indiana, PA
Posts: 1,629
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by downunder heh, this is even more confusing imho.
t.54b is a reminder that even if your opponents weapon (or your lame or bodywire) is non conforming by too high resistance, and you make an correct attack registered on the apparatus, it won't be annulled. | Ouch! Must have really glazed over that one..... gotta get more sleep.
__________________
"Rub her feet!" - Lazarus Long, Time enough for Love, Robert A. Heinlein
"Never moon a werewolf."
Mike Binder | |
| | |
08-01-2006, 11:14 PM
|
#15 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Indiana, PA
Posts: 1,629
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by keropie I think the grammar, in this case, or perhaps more specifically the wording. Though the current thought is that, more than anything else, he was simply tired. | Grammar... yes... grammar... in rules... What a concept. 
__________________
"Rub her feet!" - Lazarus Long, Time enough for Love, Robert A. Heinlein
"Never moon a werewolf."
Mike Binder | |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
| | | All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:56 AM. |
