Straps and buckles no longer allowed on (back of) lamés

[oiuyt]

Important Equipment Information for Columbus and Beyond

Lames constructed with straps and buckles on their backs have been determined by the Technical Committee not to conform to M25.2 in the current rules and therefore will not be allowed for use in competition unless the owner of such a lame has removed the straps and buckles before submission to equipment control.

I think it's the Negrini foil lamés that have the two straps and buckles on the back (for cinching in the fit a bit).

-B

[edew]

I thought it was the old russian (ussr?) lames.

[CvilleFencer]

I am glad that the USFA is circulating this finally. I have been getting into arguments with college club "armourers" and very old school fencers over this (well, over my not letting them use them on my strips or approving them when I am armourer) for a while now...

Why? I was refereeing at a college tourney and one kid bid a huge flickto the back, blade slides down the back and under one of the straps and the other kid twists around and tries to counter. No lights. Flicker jerks his blade out which had somehow hit the buckle hard enough to break or got twisted up and snapped, primes the remise of the counter and tries to flick to the body, only to find that he was missing the last 8 inches or so of his sword. About this time they both also realize I am yelling halt at them. If the flicker had went for a remise to flank instead of a prime and a flick (he was fencing a lefty) it could have been very bad...

So, I have been death on those things for a while but all the ones I have seen have been ancient Russian or (I think) Santelli ones, not the Negrini.

[brtech]

It is the Negrini lames that are the current source of problems. We (USFA tournament armorers) have been inconsistently interpreting M.25 with regard to whether the strap on the Negrini is a safety hazard. There was an argument in one recent tournament where the armorers were enforcing "no straps" and a protest was lodged, and the Bout Committee overruled the armorers. This caused the technical committee to examine the issue and come to a consensus opinion which, I expect, will be consistently enforced from now on. There could be a change in the rules at some point, as the current wording leaves quite a lot to be desired.

I personally agree that the strap constitutes a safety hazard. It always seemed obvious to me that the blade could ge caught, although my most likely scenario was an "in close, twist, reach behind and try to get the point" maneuver that has the blade point towards the floor and on the back of the opponent. Cville's actual report of just the kind of problem the rule is supposed to prevent is further evidence that the technical committee interpreted M.25 correctly. Dan DeChaine, a SEMI member, was quite emphatic that the Negrini lame does not conform to M.25 regardless of who wore it in which international competitions.

I find the wording in the announcement to be a bit unusual. One of the ways to make a Negrini acceptable, in my opinion, is to tack or sew, or even staple the strap down so that a blade cannot be caught, and the buckle is removed, or held INSIDE the lame. The announcement says "remove". The simplest fix is, of course, to cut the strap off.

In my opinion, this is a really important step: the technical committee realized something had to be done, made a decision, and the whole of USFA was informed how we will interpret the rule going forward.

[oso97]

I'm a little confused. Pictures would be nice. Where is this strap and buckle that is illegal?

A number of my fencers have Estoc Sabre lames. The groin strap is connected to the back of the lame with a buckle. It is, in their and my opinion, a significant improvement over the "double ring" attachment. Is this now going to be illegal? Or is the strap and buckle that is being referred to in a different spot? If so, this needs to be clarified immediately, because the way that rule is written:

"Lames constructed with straps and buckles on their backs"

these style lame's could be disallowed.

[brtech]

I don't have a picture, but the strap in question is horizontal, and on the back of the lame. It's purpose is to allow adjustment to get the lame to fit well. It's more common with female fencers, mostly foilists (I can't remember seeing a saber lame with the strap, but it could exist). A lot of them were being sold by Absolute.

While I don't think there are any armorers who work NACs who would try to apply the "no buckle" rule to a buckle on a croissard strap, it is a technical violation of the current rule's wording. I think it probably would be no worse than the D ring, and maybe somewhat less likely to catch a blade.

[HDG]

While I don't think there are any armorers who work NACs who would try to apply the "no buckle" rule to a buckle on a croissard strap, it is a technical violation of the current rule's wording.

No, it's the local level, know-it-all "armorers" who are going to start doing this...

[oso97]

While I don't think there are any armorers who work NACs who would try to apply the "no buckle" rule to a buckle on a croissard strap, it is a technical violation of the current rule's wording. I think it probably would be no worse than the D ring, and maybe somewhat less likely to catch a blade.

It doesn't matter what you think (as you armoury types have esposed OVER and OVER) its a matter of what the rules can be interpreted to disallow.

The new rule needs some modification to either explicitly allow buckles on the croissard strap, or they're going to be challenged.

[brtech]

The interpretation says "back", not "bottom" or something else. I really don't think there will be a problem, but I'll point it out and see if subsequent renditions can get changed. For every rule, there is a way to misinterpret it, and this one is no different.

[Coach]

The risk of a blade getting caught on the back strap is extremely minimal, considering the flick has all but disappeared. There is more chance of a weapon getting caught in the body cord as it comes out of the glove, or as mentioned earlier in the groin strap or D ring. This is clearly a case of the armourers flexing their muscles on a relatively unimportant issue. Perhaps they should be more concerned about how to eliminate the huge lines at the armourers tables at NACs, that would be a truly worthwhile endeavor.

[CvilleFencer]

considering the flick has all but disappeared.

Um, where do you fence? For that matter, what do you coach?

The flick is no longer the right answer to wrong distance on a march and since it now has to be done correctly and in correct distance to get a light you no longer have legions of newish fencers doing it for almost every attack thinking it is some sort of silver bullet, but it has far from disappeared...

As to the eliminating long lines at the armory table here are some good ways to start (not specifically directed to Coach, but in general...):

Make sure your gear works BEFORE you get to an event
Unwind the freaking body cords before you plop them down
Have your gear out of your fencing bag and ready to present
Show up at something other than the last minute, like the night before or just get there early and go straight to the tables instead of having a coffee and BSing with friends

Those four things, if done across the board, would seriously cut down on the line/wait time...

[Purple Fencer]

This is clearly a case of the armourers flexing their muscles on a relatively unimportant issue.

Given that an armorer's FIRST concern is safety....no, it's not.

The chance of a blade catching in the back strap may be minimal....but so is a broken blade penetrating a mask.....oh wait....that happened to Smirnov.

CvilleFencer just posted how he personally saw it happen...I'm sorry you have a problem with armorers looking out for the safety of our sport's participants.

Perhaps they should be more concerned about how to eliminate the huge lines at the armourers tables at NACs, that would be a truly worthwhile endeavor.

The long lines are caused by the fact that there are a lot of fencers showing up at the indicated time....not because the armorers aren't already working their asses off to check gear that the fencer should've checked the night before.

It's not our fault if the line is slowed by teh jr member of the team who brings up 8 masks and 36 body cords because he's been designated the team "weapons *****" for the day.

[edew]

The risk of a blade getting caught on the back strap is extremely minimal, considering the flick has all but disappeared. There is more chance of a weapon getting caught in the body cord as it comes out of the glove, or as mentioned earlier in the groin strap or D ring. This is clearly a case of the armourers flexing their muscles on a relatively unimportant issue. Perhaps they should be more concerned about how to eliminate the huge lines at the armourers tables at NACs, that would be a truly worthwhile endeavor.

Funny, I made two very nice (IMHO) flick ripostes yesterday to the back. One squarely on the back where the buckles might be and one on the back shoulder blade. I think I tried one other but overshot and hit his back arm, flat.

[DHCJr]

The risk of a blade getting caught on the back strap is extremely minimal, considering the flick has all but disappeared. There is more chance of a weapon getting caught in the body cord as it comes out of the glove, or as mentioned earlier in the groin strap or D ring. This is clearly a case of the armourers flexing their muscles on a relatively unimportant issue. Perhaps they should be more concerned about how to eliminate the huge lines at the armourers tables at NACs, that would be a truly worthwhile endeavor.

I agree with others on commenting on this. At the international level the Armorers are required to check things that they have no business checking, but because of inconsistency in the referees checking. This is much more a safety issue then the letters on the back of an Epee jacket, the national logos on the breeches, the color of the lame' and socks, the advertisement on the sleeves. The trouble is all of these are now part of control at international events.

[erooMynohtnA]

Funny, I made two very nice (IMHO) flick ripostes yesterday to the back. One squarely on the back where the buckles might be and one on the back shoulder blade. I think I tried one other but overshot and hit his back arm, flat.

I had a couple flicks yesterday myself. One was a riposte while I was jumping. It could easily have become tangled in an extraneous strap, and being airborne, I wouldn't have had an opportunity to do much about halting my momentum.

[KD5MDK]

Well, you might have dropped the weapon. But it is sometimes extremely tricky to do that if your hand gets tangled.

[erooMynohtnA]

The blade breaking is pretty unlikely, but it was a pretty intense bout. Given the mutual jockeying for position, I could have easily caught my blade and been at a disadvantage while my opponent riposted (or vice versa). Honestly, I could see that or an off target on a strap being pretty likely.

[edew]

I liked Madonna's coaching jacket she had for the Die Another Day James Bond scene. That had lots of buckles and such.

[Frank Pratt]

I liked Madonna's coaching jacket she had for the Die Another Day James Bond scene. That had lots of buckles and such.

It wasn't a jacket; it was a tank top that provided no protection to her arms. Unquestionably illegal. Then again, who's going to compain about that outfit on that person?