ROW question -- extension vs. footwork:

[DBGlazer]

ROW Question: extension vs. footwork:

Does priority go to the fencer who extends first, or the fencer who both extends AND makes some sort of footwork? Consider the following:

Two fencers are at least advance distance apart.

Fencer A extends, but doesn't move forward.

After Fencer A begins his extension, Fencer B both extends and lunges.

As Fencer B is lunging, Fencer A lunges too.

Both hit valid.

Does priority go to Fencer A for beginning his extension first, or to Fencer B for beginning his forward motion (with extension) first?

Note: I'm assuming Fencer A doesn't have a point in line, because it was not established and held for at least one tempo.

Follow-up question: I'm generally confused about how footwork plays into priority. For instance, if someone has to take two advances and a lunge to hit target, does that turn the attack into a compound attack (regardless of any fancy bladework)?

[Inquartata]

At least in sabre, the rules invest 100% of the attack in the extension...though it's terminus is partially invested in footwork.

[Inquartata]

Not unless B is also extending, and began to do so first. If not, his lunging is to no purpose.

[jBirch]

What keith said.

The attack is something that happens in the context of an action (or inaction) on the part of the other guy as well as in the context of what we're doing oursevlves.

The key is to gauge BOTH feet and hand at the same time as having the same tempo. If Fencer A starts his feet and Fencer B starts his hand at THE SAME TIME, and both complete their actions correctly, the call is simultaneous. If one or the other starts moving AFTER the other fencer, then the call is for the fencer who started moving first.

In your example, fencer B started SOMETHING after fencer A and so does not have priority. Touche A.

It gets complicated in the context of a step-lunge or step-...-step-lunge in that PRIORITY rests on the action of the first step preceding the lunge. So if you start your hand at the same moment that I start my feet on the step of the step lunge, then we have EQUAL priority. If the timing is off, whomever started the forward action first has priority.

To answer directly the follow-up question, priority only starts to exist at advance-lunge distance. Anything that happens outside that distance is irrelevant unless the action is to establish PIL. So if you perform a step-...-step-lunge then the only thing that counts for priority is whether the initiation of the last step precedes or follows any forward action by the opponent. It should be impossible for you to be hit in the n-2 steps and still score a two light touche with a step-lunge.

Hope this helps.

James.

[Inquartata]

D'accord.

[downunder]

Originally Posted by jBirch

The key is to gauge BOTH feet and hand at the same time as having the same tempo. If Fencer A starts his feet and Fencer B starts his hand at THE SAME TIME, and both complete their actions correctly, the call is simultaneous. If one or the other starts moving AFTER the other fencer, then the call is for the fencer who started moving first.

Please clarify. Preferably using a rulebook.

[DBGlazer]

Originally Posted by jBirch

It should be impossible for you to be hit in the n-2 steps and still score a two light touche with a step-lunge.

I apologize for not getting this, but I need a little more explanation here. Thanks.

[downunder]

Ok mate: this is how a marching attack works.

B's attack begins at the start of the step lunge.

B is chasing A down the piste. If B sees A putting out a point in line or attacking into prep, by slowing down and changing direction, then the first thing B is going to do is, extend, finish step and accelerate into a lunge finish the action, and correctly score the hit.

You can see that even though A extends first, he does not recieve the hit.



It goes wrong when the marching fencer is hit before that final step, or hit before there is any extension for the marching fencer,

[umbrella]

Originally Posted by DBGlazer

ROW Question: extension vs. footwork:

Does priority go to the fencer who extends first, or the fencer who both extends AND makes some sort of footwork? Consider the following:

Two fencers are at least advance distance apart.

Fencer A extends, but doesn't move forward.

After Fencer A begins his extension, Fencer B both extends and lunges.

As Fencer B is lunging, Fencer A lunges too.

Both hit valid.

Does priority go to Fencer A for beginning his extension first, or to Fencer B for beginning his forward motion (with extension) first?

Note: I'm assuming Fencer A doesn't have a point in line, because it was not established and held for at least one tempo.

Follow-up question: I'm generally confused about how footwork plays into priority. For instance, if someone has to take two advances and a lunge to hit target, does that turn the attack into a compound attack (regardless of any fancy bladework)?

What weapon are you talking about. I have the feeling we shouldn't clarify this too much. But if we did clarify this, I think it would be best to try to emulate the rules of Europe. But one more thought on this is this post is exactlyl like a post of 2003, wherein we debated this issue a great deal, coming up with the following thoughts:
the Europeans look for the foot first in foil - I don't know about sabre. It's ingrained in them. If you move too far out of this in competitions with Europeans, you may have a hard time convincing the judge, who won't listen anyway if you're in a top competition. In Epee, there's no r.o.w. therefore, just go for it.

[jBirch]

Originally Posted by downunder

Please clarify. Preferably using a rulebook.

My understanding of the rules is that t7 defines an attack to be initial, offensive, threatening and continuous:

Originally Posted by USFA Rules 2005, t.7

— The attack is the initial offensive action made by extending the
arm and continuously threatening the opponent’s target,
preceding the launching of the lunge or flèche (cf. t.56ss, t.75ss).

With strict definition, no attack may occur without the launching of a lunge or fleche, and further the hand movement forward must start first. With strict definition, if both fencers are static and both start an action (one leading with the hand, the other leading with the feet), then the one who started their hand first wins. Both must execute either lunge or a fleche.

However...

With convention in foil, this has not been shown to be the case as practiced by the top refs. In particular, the curvilinear nature of the flick necessitates that the feet precede the hand in order for the attack to be correctly executed. This "modification" is justified by this:

Originally Posted by Footnote to 1.B

1 It is stressed that this section in no way replaces a treatise on fencing and is only
included in order to help the reader to understand the Rules

Further, the specific sections on foil and sabre specify that the hand must only precede the lunge or fleche. If the action is a step or a jump, the fencer is executing a step-lunge or step-fleche and priority rests not on the hand, but rather on the foot.

Originally Posted by USFA 2005, t56

Every attack, that is every initial offensive action, which is
correctly executed must be parried or completely avoided
and the phrase must be followed through — that is to say,
coordinated (cf. t.7).
In order to judge the correctness of an attack the following
points must be considered:
1. The simple attack, direct or indirect (cf. t.8), is correctly
executed when the extending of the arm, the point
threatening the valid target, precedes the initiation of
the lunge or the flèche.
2. The compound attack (cf. t.8) is correctly executed
when the arm is extending in the presentation of the
first feint, with the point threatening the valid target,
and the arm is not bent between the successive actions
of the attack and the initiation of the lunge or the
flèche.
3. The attack with a advance-lunge or a advance-flèche is
correctly executed when the extending of the arm
precedes the end of the step forward and the initiation
of the lunge or the flèche.
4. Actions, simple or compound, steps or feints which are
executed with a bent arm, are not considered as attacks
but as preparations, laying themselves open to the
initiation of the offensive or defensive/offensive action
of the opponent (cf. t.8).
To judge the priority of an attack when analysing the
fencing phrase, it should be noted that:
5. If the attack is initiated when the opponent is not ‘point
in line’ (cf. t.10), it may be executed either with a
direct thrust, or by a disengage, or by a cut-over, or
may even be preceded by a beat or successful feints
obliging the opponent to parry.
6. If the attack is initiated when the opponent is ‘point in
line’ (cf. t.10), the attacker must, first, deflect the
opponent’s blade. Referees must ensure that a mere
grazing of the blades is not considered as sufficient to
deflect the opponent’s blade (cf. t.60/2a).
7. If the attacker, when attempting to deflect the
opponent’s blade, fails to find it (dérobement), the
right of attack passes to the opponent.
8. Continuous steps forward, with the legs crossing one
another, constitute a preparation and on this
preparation any simple attack has priority.

Originally Posted by USFA 2005, t75

t.75 (a) Any attack properly executed (cf. t.7) must be parried, or
completely avoided, and the phrase must be followed through.
(b) The attack is correctly carried out when the extending of the
arm, with the point or the cutting edge continuously threatening
the valid target, precedes the initiation of the lunge.
1. An attack with a lunge is correctly carried out:
— in a simple attack (cf. t.8) when the arm is extended with
the lunge and the touch arrives at the latest when the front
foot touches the strip;
— in a compound attack (cf. t.8) when, with the arm
extending in the correct forming of the first feint (cf. t.77),
the touch arrives at the latest when the front foot touches
the strip or immediately afterwards.
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;
— as a compound attack (cf. t.8) when, with the arm
extending in the correct forming of the first feint (cf. t.77)
during the step-forward, the touch arrives at the latest at
the end of the lunge.
3. The flèche and any forward movement crossing the legs or
feet is forbidden. Any offence will be penalized as specified
in Articles t.114, t.116, t.120. Any touch scored by the fencer
at fault will be annulled. However, any touch correctly
executed by his opponent is valid.

Which means that the technical execution example ("by extending the arm and preceding...") is less important then the intent of the rule ("The attack is the initial offensive action ... continuously threatening the opponent’s target") for establishing initial priority. In this context, the term "offensive" is an interpreted meaning which implies that the action must be going forward, toward the opponent. So I've been told to interpret the word as. Coupled together with initial, threatening and continuous, so long as the action is going towards the opponent, priority rests with the individual who started it first. Meaning, that the hand and the foot are equal for establishing priority.

Now, I am not an FIE A ref. I am a "P" ref, which means that in foil, sabre and epee I can ref finals at the provincial level. I can not ref National level finals, nor can I ref International events. Others with more ref'ing credentials then I may certainly tell you that the official interpretation is different and I defer to their judgement in this matter.

James.

[downunder]

Originally Posted by umbrella

What weapon are you talking about. I have the feeling we shouldn't clarify this too much. But if we did clarify this, I think it would be best to try to emulate the rules of Europe. But one more thought on this is this post is exactlyl like a post of 2003, wherein we debated this issue a great deal, coming up with the following thoughts:
the Europeans look for the foot first in foil - I don't know about sabre. It's ingrained in them. If you move too far out of this in competitions with Europeans, you may have a hard time convincing the judge, who won't listen anyway if you're in a top competition. In Epee, there's no r.o.w. therefore, just go for it.

I just refereed an international 'european' foil competition, and i'll tell you thats absolute crap.

The hand makes the attack.

Hand hand hand hand hand.

If your opponent is flailing then it doesn't really matter what you do. But if your hand is not extending, and you get hit, then the first words you'll hear me say are "attaque non-correct, attaque"

[OROD]

Originally Posted by DBGlazer

ROW Question: extension vs. footwork:

Does priority go to the fencer who extends first, or the fencer who both extends AND makes some sort of footwork? Consider the following:

Two fencers are at least advance distance apart.

Fencer A extends, but doesn't move forward.

After Fencer A begins his extension, Fencer B both extends and lunges.

As Fencer B is lunging, Fencer A lunges too.

Both hit valid.

Does priority go to Fencer A for beginning his extension first, or to Fencer B for beginning his forward motion (with extension) first?

This is very simple to call. Extending your arm is not an attack, for an attack to occur you must be threatening. Extending your arm in the absense of movement is not threatening, hence not an attack. What A begins doing is establishing line, not attacking. Since, however, before A finishes establishing line, B begins an attack in earnest, the action is this:

-B begins an attacks (at same time A begins to establish line).
-after B begins the attack, A begins a counter-attack.

The call:

-B attacks, A counter-attacks. Touch B.

Originally Posted by downunder

The hand makes the attack.

Hand hand hand hand hand.

Sorry downunder, you are wrong. I can stand there and fling my arm and weapon around all I like, none of it is an attack until I begin moving. Like I said, you cannot be threatening unless you move towards to other guy. You cant just stick your arm out and hope the other guy will run into it, and call it an attack. That's just ridiculous.

.

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by OROD

This is very simple to call. Extending your arm is not an attack, for an attack to occur you must be threatening. Extending your arm in the absense of movement is not threatening, hence not an attack.

That doesn't seem to make sense. For example:

Fencer A begins an extension.

Fencer B advances after A began extending.

They both hit.

Touch B ?

[downunder]

Originally Posted by OROD

Sorry downunder, you are wrong. I can stand there and fling my arm and weapon around all I like, none of it is an attack until I begin moving. Like I said, you cannot be threatening unless you move towards to other guy. You cant just stick your arm out and hope the other guy will run into it, and call it an attack. That's just ridiculous.

.

you guys are absolutely unbelievable. No, you're wrong.

From the UK referee's guide, written by Keith Smith (FIE arbitrage commission) and Mike Thornton (very good euro referee):

The Attack

This is the initial straightening of the arm, with the point threatening the valid target of the opponent. In reality this means at foil the first offensive action, at sabre attacks can be with the point or cutting edge.

There was a heated debate at a recent FIE Referee’s Seminar (in Rome prior to the Cadet and Junior World Championships held in Hungary) about how you would attack the back shoulder and it was agreed that the point would need to be raised a little to allow this, but that if it was pointing at the ceiling, with the arm in a vertical position, then this was not an attack. It was added that the attack could be delivered with no foot movements, or with a step forward, a lunge, a step and lunge or a fleche (at foil).

[rcmatthews]

You dont have to move to make an attack. For instance, Fencer A advances forward and stops. Fencer B then Attempts to hit him without moving. A avoids, and then hits B. Attack A no, counterattack B yes.

[bigdawg2121]

huh? Didn't you just have A avoiding the counterattack...making for attack no, counterattack no, remise or simply a final attack from A?

[rcmatthews]

No sorry. There is a complete stop, a noticable pause, then B attacks without moving his feet. I just had a advance to come into distance to make it seem slightly more plausible.

[Philistine]

Originally Posted by rcmatthews

You dont have to move to make an attack. For instance, Fencer A advances forward and stops. Fencer B then Attempts to hit him without moving. A avoids, and then hits B. Attack A no, counterattack B yes.

I'm pretty sure you mixed up A and B between your explanation of the action and your conclusion of who hit.

If not, then I have no idea how you got where you did.

--Philistine