Rules Question: corps-a-corps in the 1-meter warning

[noahz]

Given the following situation in Epee:

- Fencer X is in the one-meter warning zone, with one foot off the back of the strip
- Fencer Y advances to close distance (so that his front toe is on the 2-meter warning line. Both fencers are tall enough that this is considered "lunge" distance)
- Fencer X fleches
- Fencer Y does not retreat, but counterattacks
- During the fleche, Fencer X causes corps-a-corps with Fencer Y. Fencer X remains on the strip during the attack. No jostling occurred.
- No touch is registered on the scoring machine.

What is the result of this scenario?

A) Fencer X remains in his "original" position, i.e. before the fleche with one foot off the back of the strip, and Fencer Y must take distance

B) Fencer Y remains in his position, and Fencer X must take distance. This results in Fencer X being positioned off the end of the strip and therefore Fencer Y has scored a point.

C) Is there some other infraction I haven't considered for the above scenario?


It seems clear that if Fencer Y is the attacking party (thus "causing" the corp-a-corps) and Fencer X holds his ground, then Fencer Y must take proper distance.

Other scenarios to consider:

- What if both fencers attack simultaneously, and therefore "both" cause corps-a-corps? Does Fencer Y score a point?

- What if Fencer Y fleches, but Fencer X clearly "causes" the corps-a-corps, i.e. reaches out with non-weapon hand and touches Fencer Y, who is clearly trying to avoid Fencer X?

[downunder]

t.25. However, if the bout has been stopped on account of corps à corps, the
fencers are replaced on guard in such a position that the competitor who
has sustained the corps à corps is at the place which he previously occupied;
this also applies if his opponent has subjected him to a flèche
attack, even without corps à corps.

I'll have your other answer in a second.

t.17. 8. The competitors may not be replaced on guard, at their correct
distance, in such a way as to place behind the rear line of the piste a
fencer who was in front of that line when the bout was halted. If he
already had one foot behind the rear line, he remains in that position.
9. If a fencer has crossed the lateral boundaries of the piste, he may
be put back on guard at the correct distance even if this places him
behind the rear line and thereby causes a hit to be awarded against him.



So your answer is: The fencer who causes the corps a corps can not be placed beyond the back line if he was not already there when the infraction occurred. Assuming the fencer caused the corps a corps whilst completely on the piste then the fencer places his back foot on the back line and the other fencer makes distance back. If the fencer was partially off the back of the piste then he remains in exactly the same position. SO i guess the answer is C.

[epeemike81]

btw, the warning line is at 2 meters...

-m

[noodle]

A.

Originally Posted by epeemike81

btw, the warning line is at 2 meters...

-m

i think he meant that he's in the last 1 meter section of the warning area, not that he's at the 1 meter line.

[downunder]

Originally Posted by noodle

A.

Noodle, the infraction takes places with both fencers completely on the piste.

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by noahz

Given the following situation in Epee:

- Fencer X is in the one-meter warning zone, with one foot off the back of the strip
- Fencer Y advances to close distance (so that his front toe is on the 1-meter warning line.

Seems like he meant on the 1 meter line to me, but either way, it could confuse people.

-m

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by downunder

Noodle, the infraction takes places with both fencers completely on the piste.

yep. the answer is actually not present. X is penalized as much as possible without placing him off the strip (back foot on the endline) and distance is set from there.

-m

[Fechter1]

Originally Posted by epeemike81

yep. the answer is actually not present. X is penalized as much as possible without placing him off the strip (back foot on the endline) and distance is set from there.

-m

Question: Does the fact that X had one foot off the back (prior to the fleche) make a difference, or is his position at the exact time of the halt counted? If the latter is the case, seems to me like a sneaky way to gain some ground... (pull your back foot back on and cause a halt, get reset with both feet on the strip...)

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by Fechter1

Question: Does the fact that X had one foot off the back (prior to the fleche) make a difference, or is his position at the exact time of the halt counted? If the latter is the case, seems to me like a sneaky way to gain some ground... (pull your back foot back on and cause a halt, get reset with both feet on the strip...)

no it doesn't matter. and, yes, it is a way to gain ground, but clearly not without risk of getting hit with a counter-attack or riposte, so I'm not sure I'd call it sneaky. If a fencer takes the risk to physically gain the ground, why should he not be allowed to keep it?

-m

[noodle]

Originally Posted by downunder

Noodle, the infraction takes places with both fencers completely on the piste.

oh. i read it backwards. i recall my answer and say that the correct one is not listed.

[noahz]

Originally Posted by epeemike81

btw, the warning line is at 2 meters...

Fixed.

[BraveHardt]

A.

If Fencer X goes off the side before the corps-a-corps, then s/he would lose a touch. Since s/he didn't, there is no distance penalty. The same would apply if fencer X had gone past fencer Y without leaving the strip.

Still, this can be a difficult call for an epee referee to make as they must watch 3 things simultaneously (feet, bodies, box).

[downunder]

Read the thread and you will see why A is not right.

[Fechter1]

Originally Posted by epeemike81

no it doesn't matter. and, yes, it is a way to gain ground, but clearly not without risk of getting hit with a counter-attack or riposte, so I'm not sure I'd call it sneaky. If a fencer takes the risk to physically gain the ground, why should he not be allowed to keep it?

-m

Then I will also choose D: X is placed with back foot on end line, Y assumes distance.

[RITFencing]

Originally Posted by Fechter1

Then I will also choose D: X is placed with back foot on end line, Y assumes distance.

Agreed, so long as the X's back foot is in front of the end line when the corps a corps occurs. If X's foot is still behind the line, then I believe X would stay one foot on one foot off and Y would assume distance. Of course, given the nature of a fleche, this is rather unlikely.

[noahz]

Originally Posted by RITFencing

Agreed, so long as the X's back foot is in front of the end line when the corps a corps occurs. If X's foot is still behind the line, then I believe X would stay one foot on one foot off and Y would assume distance. Of course, given the nature of a fleche, this is rather unlikely.

So to sum up, if X is almost off the end of the strip, he can attack with the hope that if no touch is scored he will at least force his opponent to give up some ground - even if he causes corps-a-corps during the attack.

In other words, there is nothing that can force him off the back of the strip other than physically stepping off the end with both feet or the lateral boundary with one or both feet?

[RITFencing]

Originally Posted by noahz

So to sum up, if X is almost off the end of the strip, he can attack with the hope that if no touch is scored he will at least force his opponent to give up some ground - even if he causes corps-a-corps during the attack.

In other words, there is nothing that can force him off the back of the strip other than physically stepping off the end with both feet or the lateral boundary with one or both feet?

That is correct. You can only be placed on guard behind the strip if you had one foot off when halt was called, in which case you end straddling the line, or if you cross the lateral boundary, in which case the opponent gains one meter and you assume distance from them.