Foil ROW with point in line

[gatorjosh]

I checked the rule book and the only thing it says about point in line is that it is a "specific position in which the fencer's sword arm is kept straight and the point of the weapon continually threatens his opponent's valid target."

By this logic, as long as I extend with my arm first and continually threaten valid target (note, it says NOTHING about keeping it in the same line even, just that your sword arm is straight and threatening valid target), regardless of distance, it SHOULD be my attack?

Why are some directors telling me that I have to be a certain distance (step lunge?) in order to establish line? Its really bugging the heck out of me.

Or did I just miss that part in the rule book? I used the search feature as best I could :P

[RebelFencer]

They're probably telling you that you aren't establishing it before the attack starts. I know what you're talking about, but I can't explain it well over the internet. Where's downunder?

[gatorjosh]

what do you mean where's downunder? Is that a forum member? heh

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by gatorjosh

By this logic, as long as I extend with my arm first and continually threaten valid target (note, it says NOTHING about keeping it in the same line even, just that your sword arm is straight and threatening valid target)

It's supposed to be called as breaking the line when you change line/search for blade, but some coaches/refs/fencers are more lenient about this than others

Originally Posted by gatorjosh

, regardless of distance, it SHOULD be my attack?

Why are some directors telling me that I have to be a certain distance (step lunge?) in order to establish line? Its really bugging the heck out of me.

Point in line has nothing to do with distance. If the directors are telling you that you have to be within step lunge distance, they're wrong. That's the case to establish an attack, but not point in line.

EDIT: Except, of course, if breaking distance stops an opponent's attack. See keropie's post below...

[keropie]

It does indeed say just that. However, it is a 'specific position' which exists only in the line of six. I.e., there is no point in line in 4, 7, 8, etc. Additionally, the 'in line' position only has relevence if it exists before the attack begins, hence the distance issue. If I'm pushing you back at advance lunge distance, you stop and put up a 'point in line,' I finish my current advance, then lunge, your line did not exist before my attack. Why? Because my attack began with the advance of the advance lunge (assuming I correctly executed the action), and your point in line was established after that. Hence, 'attack, counterattack.' Additionally, some officials require you to break that distance to create the 'in line' position. This is nebulous in the rule book, as there is no particular reason that a compound attack might not have multiple pieces of footwork, and yet still be a single attack, so that the attack may actually have 'begun' six pieces of footwork ago. Your line did not exist at that time, ergo, the attack was begun without the opponent being in the 'in line' position.

[peet]

Originally Posted by gatorjosh

By this logic, as long as I extend with my arm first and continually threaten valid target
[snip]
regardless of distance, it SHOULD be my attack?

Others have touched on this, but let's make sure it is clear:
A point in line must be fully established before the beginning of your opponent's attack in order to have ROW over that attack. Merely extending first does not give PIL ROW. You must be extended. (And in practice, you need to be extended waaaay before the attack begins).

Also, this is just a terminology issue, but for clarity: Don't refer to PIL as an attack. Attack and PIL are two different actions, with completely separate definitions.

Now, on to the more important issue.
My recommendation would be: Don't try to score with the PIL. It's not a very high percentage shot, even with the most sympathetic of refs. The main usefulness of a PIL is to set up other actions, such as a parry and riposte (because you have a better idea when the attack is coming when the attacker beats the blade), or a counterattack (for similar reasons).

The only time you can have much chance of scoring with the original PIL is when the opponent searches for your blade (in a big way), and you successfully deceive that attempt to take. And let me tell you that is hard to do. Yes, it's super-sweet when it happens, and to tell the truth, those are some of my favorite touches, but the reason I love them so much is because they come so few and far between*!

HTH,

cheers!

-p

*Ok, I admit it: The "f**k you" factor is part of it too. A really nice PIL makes the opponent look kinda dumb!

[downunder]

Originally Posted by gatorjosh

I checked the rule book and the only thing it says about point in line is that it is a "specific position in which the fencer's sword arm is kept straight and the point of the weapon continually threatens his opponent's valid target."

By this logic, as long as I extend with my arm first and continually threaten valid target (note, it says NOTHING about keeping it in the same line even, just that your sword arm is straight and threatening valid target), regardless of distance, it SHOULD be my attack?

Why are some directors telling me that I have to be a certain distance (step lunge?) in order to establish line? Its really bugging the heck out of me.

Or did I just miss that part in the rule book? I used the search feature as best I could :P

The rulebook doesn't say a lot of things, but i applaud you for actually looking. On top of the definition in the rulebook for point in line, referees require you to be in the high line in sixte.

Originally Posted by RebelFencer

They're probably telling you that you aren't establishing it before the attack starts. I know what you're talking about, but I can't explain it well over the internet. Where's downunder?

I'd imagine this is exactly what referees are trying to say. I get the impression that your point in line is not established by the time the attack starts from the other side.

Originally Posted by gatorjosh

what do you mean where's downunder? Is that a forum member? heh

oh yes. Resident foil referee and arsehole.

[telkanuru]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

Point in line has nothing to do with distance. If the directors are telling you that you have to be within step lunge distance, they're wrong. That's the case to establish an attack, but not point in line.

If your opponent hits you with an advance-lunge as (or infintessimaly before) you estabish PIL you distinctly did NOT establish in time, since you were hit with a simple attack (ie. you just counterattacked). And that's silly, everything in ROW has to do with distance. Heck, everything in fencing has to do with distance

[noodle]

from the ref handbook:

THE POINT IN LINE

The point in line exists as the highest level of priority. If it is established correctly, the opponent must avoid it, remove it, or have the fencer with the point in line to no longer have the point in line.

A point in line exists when a fencer has the following conditions met prior to an opponent’s attack:
Ø weapon arm fully extended
Ø a straight line from the point of the weapon to the shoulder
Ø point aimed at valid target
Ø no movement of the blade except to derobe the opponent’s attempt to find the blade
Ø is standing still, moving forward, or moving back

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by telkanuru

If your opponent hits you with an advance-lunge as (or infintessimaly before) you estabish PIL you distinctly did NOT establish in time, since you were hit with a simple attack (ie. you just counterattacked). And that's silly, everything in ROW has to do with distance. Heck, everything in fencing has to do with distance

The point in line itself is not involved with distance. If I extend my arm a tempo before my opponent's attack (threatening target and so on), it's PiL no matter where we are.

But you're right in that distance can be used to nullify your opponent's attack.

So PiL can be established in step lunge distance, but it has to be done a tempo before the other fencer's attack. PiL established out of step lunge distance, on the other hand, always has priority against the compound attack necessary to hit.

[garyhayenga]

Originally Posted by gatorjosh

I checked the rule book and the only thing it says about point in line is that it is a "specific position in which the fencer's sword arm is kept straight and the point of the weapon continually threatens his opponent's valid target."

By this logic, as long as I extend with my arm first and continually threaten valid target (note, it says NOTHING about keeping it in the same line even, just that your sword arm is straight and threatening valid target), regardless of distance, it SHOULD be my attack?

Why are some directors telling me that I have to be a certain distance (step lunge?) in order to establish line? Its really bugging the heck out of me.

Or did I just miss that part in the rule book? I used the search feature as best I could :P

Did you really mean to say it should be your "attack"? A point-in-line is not an attack. It is a defensive posture that either exists prior to an opponents action or it doesn't. Distance is irrelevant.

The only time distance matters is if your opponent begins an action and either is more than advance-lunge distance away, or you subsequently pull distance so that the distance between is is more than advance-lunge distance. Then, if you can get your arm extended before the distance closes up again, your opponent either has no right-of-way, or no longer has right-of-way, despite making an action that if he were close enough would be an attack with priority. You are hoping to establish your point-in-line before he enters or re-enters advance-lunge distance while making an attacking action.

gary hayenga

[Chafunkta]

The ref handbook (see Noodle's post) says that one of the requirements for PiL is a "straight line from the point of the weapon to the shoulder."

Doesn't this mean that I could extend directly (without a break in my wrist) to my opponent's flank (8 target) and still have a point in line?

Basically I'm wondering where the "PiL must be aimed at 6" requirement came from.

[Craig]

Originally Posted by Chafunkta

Basically I'm wondering where the "PiL must be aimed at 6" requirement came from.

First, just accept that it is.

As for point in line being only called for high-line. I've had it called that way for about 20 years now, except for one bout (about 18 years ago) where the referee harkened back to some super old school days for his ruling.

The accepted interpretation for point in line is that it must be directed at the high line, straight arm and no unnecessary disengages.

Recently clarifications were made on the action to allow movement (forwards or backwards) once the PIL has been established.

I have very rarely seen PIL used to attempt to directly gain the touch. The more common (and effective) uses are to slow the attacker down and to set up a second intention action. In the Golden Bouts DVD, Golubitsky uses PIL very effectively, both to get touches and to cause havoc in his opponent's game.

Craig

[noodle]

i believe the idea is that if you aren't aiming in the high line, your tip and shoulder are not in a straight line. which probably is meant more as a "horizontal" line than "straight", since any two points make a straight line (tip and shoulder), no matter where they are.

[Chafunkta]

Originally Posted by noodle

i believe the idea is that if you aren't aiming in the high line, your tip and shoulder are not in a straight line. which probably is meant more as a "horizontal" line than "straight", since any two points make a straight line (tip and shoulder), no matter where they are.

Well the problem is you have two other possible kinks (points) in the line from tip to shoulder, specifically the elbow and the wrist. I can see where an extended arm with a bent wrist is not a PiL (per the referee handbook), but, as is written, a straight arm to the flank should be a PiL.

I don't disagree with the accepted "must be in 6" convention, but it really bugs me that none of the written rules clarify this. If we're sticking with the "must be in 6," at least write that in the referee handbook.

[dramamine]

I never thought about it before, but I get lines like this sometimes and I kind of wonder about it. Nobody has ever said that it wasn't my line.

I'm right handed. Left handed fencer comes forward and searches for my blade in, say prime or four, exposing his flank. I disengage and hit him there (in 8, really).

Did I just forfeit my point in line?

[annacattiva]

Originally Posted by dramamine

I never thought about it before, but I get lines like this sometimes and I kind of wonder about it. Nobody has ever said that it wasn't my line.

I'm right handed. Left handed fencer comes forward and searches for my blade in, say prime or four, exposing his flank. I disengage and hit him there (in 8, really).

Did I just forfeit my point in line?

No, your opponent's search "entitles" you to disengage. If you wiggle your blade around when your opponent Isn't searching, then you do forfeit your point in line.

EDIT: Actually, what you're describing is strictly using the PIL to draw a search from your opponent, upon which you are making an indirect attack. Slightly different than just disengaging the PIL and landing it.

Anna

[eac]

Originally Posted by dramamine

I'm right handed. Left handed fencer comes forward and searches for my blade in, say prime or four, exposing his flank. I disengage and hit him there (in 8, really).

I think the idea is that if you wave your point around for some reason other than to get out of the way of the blade, you lose your line. So if I stomp (to scare you), you drop your point, and I go while your point is down, it's mine, but if I search, you drop your point to disengage, and I go while you disengage, it's yours.

[RPI Epeeist]

Not unless it was a huge disengage. A single disengage is perfectly fine so long as your opponent did go searching for your blade. I believe it says it somewhere like "the blade does not move except to avoid being found by the opposing fencer's blade" or something to that effect.

That's pretty much the main purpose of point-in-line (or at least how I see it). Its to sucker people in like that, THEY forfeit their ROW and you are allowed to attack them. Please correct me if I'm mistaken, I'm an epeeist lol

[samh]

dramamine isn't asking whether he loses PIL by disengaging his opponent's search, he is asking whether its not considered a PIL anymore because he doesn't finish in the line of 6 (I think, correct me if I'm wrong man)