Placing back on guard

[erik_blank]

OK, this shuold be easy, but for some reason I've gotten my confidence shaken lately and I've been feeling odd putting people back on guard after a halt. Where do YOU place center after a halt that does not result in loss of ground or a point? When the halt is for an off target hit in foil and the distance between the fencers is 'large' I have no problem... but what about when the attacker closes distance to do infighting?

• Does the center get placed from (so to speak) where the point landed?
• From the center between the fencers at the end of the action (even though the defender did not move)?
• Place the center based on the defenders position because he/she did not give ground?
• Place the center based on ground gained by the attacker (as long as the defender is not pushed off the strip)
• Arbitrairly placing the center somewhere in the general vicinity of the Tropic of Cancer?

[swordsen]

I tend to go for the center being between where the two fencers were when I called halt. IF they were close together they both take a step back.

[epeemike81]

It's actually pretty simple. there are only two situations:

A) No fault or mutual fault:
The fencers set distance from the center of the action when the halt was called. If setting distance from the center of the action would push one fencer partially off the back, then that fencer is placed with his back foot on the line and distance is set from there.

B) Fencer X at fault:
Fencer Y holds their ground and X sets distance. if this would place X partially off the back, then X is placed with his back foot on the line and distance is set from there.

"At fault," in this context means passing (without leaving the strip) or causing corps a corps. Note that if X and Y start 3 meters apart, X fleches and covers 2.8 Meters of ground and Y steps in (thus covering the other .2 meters) resulting in a corps a corps, they are BOTH at fault and distance is set by backing both off from the collision point. there's no such thing as more at fault. you are or you aren't.

-m

[rsy]

t.17 says,

Competitors are always put on guard, whether at the beginning of the bout or subsequently, in the centre of the width of the strip. When placed on guard during the bout, the distance between the two competitors must be such that, in the position ‘point in-line,’ the points of the two blades cannot make contact.

After the scoring of a valid touch the competitors are put on guard in the middle of the strip. If no touch is awarded they are replaced in the position that they occupied when the bout was interrupted.

t.24 says,

When the order ‘Halt’ is given, ground gained is held until a touch has been given. When competitors are replaced on guard, each fencer should retreat an equal distance in order to keep fencing distance (cf. t.17).

t.25 says,

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.

-r

[Allen Evans]

Note that if X and Y start 3 meters apart, X fleches and covers 2.8 Meters of ground and Y steps in (thus covering the other .2 meters) resulting in a corps a corps, they are BOTH at fault and distance is set by backing both off from the collision point. there's no such thing as more at fault. you are or you aren't.

Is this correct? If a fencer steps into an attack and causes corp a corp, they are BOTH at fault? Or did you mean to imply that the attacker did not attempt to avoid the collision?

AE

[keith]

Is this correct? If a fencer steps into an attack and causes corp a corp, they are BOTH at fault? Or did you mean to imply that the attacker did not attempt to avoid the collision?

AE

May be an issue around the weapon;

In epee both fencers move back from the point of contact (if no jostling occured).

In foil it depends on who is deemed responsible for corp a corp. Or if both are held equally culpable.

[peet]

May be an issue around the weapon;

In epee both fencers move back from the point of contact (if no jostling occured).

In foil it depends on who is deemed responsible for corp a corp. Or if both are held equally culpable.

I don't think there's a weapon-specific distinction in replacing the fencers on guard after CaC. Note that rule t.25 quoted above on the subject is in the section that covers all three weapons (and a word search through the rulebook for "corps" did not turn up anything in the weapon-specific sections that contradicted or elaborated on t.25).

In all three weapons, we assign responsibility for the CaC (if we can tell who's responsible), even though in epee there's no card.

-p

[fencerbill]

Is this correct? If a fencer steps into an attack and causes corp a corp, they are BOTH at fault? Or did you mean to imply that the attacker did not attempt to avoid the collision?

AE

Perhaps it's better to think of whether both were active in causing the CAC. If one of the fencers does all the moving and the other stands still then only one is active in causing it. If one moves 2.8 m and the other moves 0.2 m then both were active in causing it, even if the activity was not balanced.

Also beware of leaning forward if CAC is imminent. Even the slightest lean can be considered to have been active in causing it. Hard not to lean when you are going to get smashed. I have heard this discussed by an FOC member.

[erik_blank]

While al this discussion on CAC is interesting, I rather feel that I have a pretty good handle on that aspect of it. Really I was more interested in issues where there is no fault from either individual, but a halt was called for off target or some other non penalty reason (In fighting where the action cannot be called, or in Epee where it is difficult to verify a fencer s not striking her/his own target area). Let's look at the later where distance collapses for one reason or another. Is it fair to force a defender to retreat if the attacker closes to in-fighting distance? What about if the defender is the one to step in for their attempt to parry?

[peet]

While al this discussion on CAC is interesting, I rather feel that I have a pretty good handle on that aspect of it. Really I was more interested in issues where there is no fault from either individual, but a halt was called for off target or some other non penalty reason (In fighting where the action cannot be called, or in Epee where it is difficult to verify a fencer s not striking her/his own target area). Let's look at the later where distance collapses for one reason or another. Is it fair to force a defender to retreat if the attacker closes to in-fighting distance? What about if the defender is the one to step in for their attempt to parry?

Like rsy quoted:

When the order ‘Halt’ is given, ground gained is held until a touch has been given. When competitors are replaced on guard, each fencer should retreat an equal distance in order to keep fencing distance (cf. t.17).

So yeah, the defender in your example would have to retreat (unless that would put them off the end, etc...). Keep it simple: unless there's CaC or a fleche past the other fencer, both fencers retreat equally.

-p

[epeemike81]

While al this discussion on CAC is interesting, I rather feel that I have a pretty good handle on that aspect of it. Really I was more interested in issues where there is no fault from either individual, but a halt was called for off target or some other non penalty reason (In fighting where the action cannot be called, or in Epee where it is difficult to verify a fencer s not striking her/his own target area). Let's look at the later where distance collapses for one reason or another. Is it fair to force a defender to retreat if the attacker closes to in-fighting distance? What about if the defender is the one to step in for their attempt to parry?

It is both fair and required. That fencer gained that ground and has just as much right to it as his opponent.

In the case of no fault, fencers both retreat from the center of the action when halt was called. Period.

-m