Someone explain the "low hand" sabre attack rule

[NSXER]

What's this all about & what's different now vs the past?

Thanks

[annacattiva]

Well, philosophers have been asking "What is this all about?" for centuries and not really coming up with anything satisfactory. And depending on whether we think time is relative, the difference between now and the past is that the past has already happened.

Care to be more specific about what exactly you want explained about a rule which is most likely called something else in the rulebook?



Anna

[bigdawg2121]

Not really a rul at all but more of an attempted change in ROW interpretation that most refs have been loathe to even consider....

[erooMynohtnA]

Well, philosophers have been asking "What is this all about?" for centuries and not really coming up with anything satisfactory. And depending on whether we think time is relative, the difference between now and the past is that the past has already happened.

Care to be more specific about what exactly you want explained about a rule which is most likely called something else in the rulebook?



Anna

It's not in the rule book. It's an "interpretation," a largely ignored interpretation, I think.

Someone was worried that holding the blade low was too much of an advantage/ruining saber, so they attempted to remedy it.

In the case of a simultaneous attack in saber, a person with their blade held low and in absence does not get the touch. A person coming from a high hand position gets the touch. It's called taking the high road.

That could all be wrong. I don't fence saber.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

........ is it me, or is describing the hand as "low" misleading??????

[bigdawg2121]

Possibly not. At least as I've understood, one could arguable get away with making attacks to a low line, or under the hand etc. as long as the hand itself isn't down, resting on the thigh, below the waist etc. I think that this is the interpretation most of the refs have decided to go with more or less (assuming they pay it any attention anyway), I could be wrong though.

[annacattiva]

It's not in the rule book. It's an "interpretation," a largely ignored interpretation, I think.

Someone was worried that holding the blade low was too much of an advantage/ruining saber, so they attempted to remedy it.

In the case of a simultaneous attack in saber, a person with their blade held low and in absence does not get the touch. A person coming from a high hand position gets the touch. It's called taking the high road.

That could all be wrong. I don't fence saber.

My point was more that he was asking a very vague question. How am I supposed to know what he's heard lately about low-line attacks? Maybe someone told him that low-line attacks now automatically have priority over high-line attacks, unless of course the high-line attacker was already thinking about hamsters Before the low-line attack began.

OK, so that's a little extreme. But my point is... what's the question? What has the OP heard about low-line attacks that he wants clarified (or denied, as might be the case for my earlier example)? What level is he talking about?

Anna

[NSXER]

My point was more that he was asking a very vague question. How am I supposed to know what he's heard lately about low-line attacks? Maybe someone told him that low-line attacks now automatically have priority over high-line attacks, unless of course the high-line attacker was already thinking about hamsters Before the low-line attack began.

OK, so that's a little extreme. But my point is... what's the question? What has the OP heard about low-line attacks that he wants clarified (or denied, as might be the case for my earlier example)? What level is he talking about?

Anna

Sheesh........what a dork...... most caught on & without your drivel!

[Sabresque]

The new rule is that if the tip of the saber is lowered below the target area, it is no longer considered an attack.

Maybe the FIE should look at why these things are now an advantage instead of trying to make patchwork fixes that further turn sabre into the weapon called "counter-attack"

[keropie]

Sheesh........what a dork...... most caught on & without your drivel!

While the original response by anna was perhaps a bit sarcastic (not that it bothers me), it wasn't incorrect, per se. The OP was quite vague, and didn't specify much in terms of what he'd heard, what level, etc.

It would behoove one, however, not to attack people quite so quickly. Let's face it, the 'dork' quotient here on f.net and in fencing in general is fairly high compared to the general population. It's part of who we are. And anna's been around plenty long enough to be family, and, well, you haven't. So don't pick on the locals quit so quick.

Simply friendly advice.

As for the responses you've received, I'd just caution you to understand that at most local levels, it's completely and utterly ignored. At NACs, it might be 'enforced' somewhat, and at FIE events I know it's sometimes enforced.

[annacattiva]

Sheesh........what a dork...... most caught on & without your drivel!

I plead guilty as sin to the first count (I'm a grad student, after all), but I haven't drivelled since they let me stop wearing my mental bib.

Should I point out that you still haven't clarified whether you've been hearing murmurings about the latest FIE ideas about low-line attacks, whether your coach told you something you are surprised by, or whether you got burned by a ref with a bizarre explanation?

The answer to your question could alternately be: this is a new FIE idea and probably won't be applied at local competitions, and not systematically even at NACs; your coach may be entirely right or completely wrong; and all refs are right, but some refs are more right than others.*

Anna


*Just in case there was any remaining doubt about me being a dork- rep points if you can identify the reference.

[erooMynohtnA]

Terry Pratchett, Douglas Adams, or whoever said it before them.

[MHS Fencer]

You mean George Orwell - Animal Farm. "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." The latter part being appended by the pigs after deciding that the original "All animals are equal" was not quite sufficient to justify their special privileges. Four legs good! Two Legs bad!

[Capt. Slo-mo]

While it's not slavishly adhered to, I did see a couple of refs in St. Pete's actually calling the "low hand" fault a couple of times...usually after a video review.

The problem is, so many fencers attack from a low line, you could call it on virtually every action...so it becomes a matter of luck whether or not you draw a stickler on the video review desk.

It's the kind of thing that drives fencers nuts and leaves itself vulnerable to manipulation...not that that kind of thing ever goes on, of course...

[KD5MDK]

What's this all about & what's different now vs the past?

Thanks

The number of people on this forum qualified to answer this question is about 4. (Guessed) I would go to the top sabre ref you know and ask them to find out for you at the next NAC. Unless you're George K in disguise, in which case we have much bigger problems.

[Greg_D]

The new rule is that if the tip of the saber is lowered below the target area, it is no longer considered an attack.

Maybe the FIE should look at why these things are now an advantage instead of trying to make patchwork fixes that further turn sabre into the weapon called "counter-attack"

I hate to be contrary, but there is no "rule" change around what does and does not constitute an attack in sabre.

There is a rumor that at some FIE referee meetings prior to the beginning of tournaments certain individuals who were presenting said the following. Should one person make a high-line attack and another a low-line attack in sabre simultaneously the referee should give priority to the high-line attack. I have not heard at any time that a low-line attack, executed with clear priority, no longer has that priority. There is certainly the possibility that some message was, once again, sent out at the current world championships.

These interpretations of right-of-way appear in no rule-book or official document, either in the FIE (after a pretty careful review of all letters posted to the FIE website) or the USFA. Referees in the United States (if not everywhere else) should not interpret sabre actions any differently than they have in the past as a result of this rumor.

Should US athletes, referees, and officers come back from St. Petersburg with more or different information it will be discussed among the members of the FOC and information will be shared during morning meetings for NAC's and other events.

Regards,

Greg

[erooMynohtnA]

I hate to be contrary, but there is no "rule" change around what does and does not constitute an attack in sabre.

There is a rumor that at some FIE referee meetings prior to the beginning of tournaments certain individuals who were presenting said the following. Should one person make a high-line attack and another a low-line attack in sabre simultaneously the referee should give priority to the high-line attack. I have not heard at any time that a low-line attack, executed with clear priority, no longer has that priority. There is certainly the possibility that some message was, once again, sent out at the current world championships.

These interpretations of right-of-way appear in no rule-book or official document, either in the FIE (after a pretty careful review of all letters posted to the FIE website) or the USFA. Referees in the United States (if not everywhere else) should not interpret sabre actions any differently than they have in the past as a result of this rumor.

Should US athletes, referees, and officers come back from St. Petersburg with more or different information it will be discussed among the members of the FOC and information will be shared during morning meetings for NAC's and other events.

Regards,

Greg

Jeff Bukantz (Captain of the US Fencing team) in an interview from St. Petersberg is known to have said:
"We're seeing some issues right now--I would say--in saber, because once again, they're trying to teach the referees new ways to interpret actions the night before a world championship, which I think is incomprehensible because the referees are nervous too. And, the last thing you want referees to do when they're refereeing is to think. You want them just to see the action; call the action. And, now we have this thing where in saber if you start with your hand below the target--your point below the target, they're going to be very picky to call it. The fencers want to qualify for Beijing. The referees admittedly want to qualify for Beijing, and they're going to call it not what their heart says. They're going to call it what their superiors tell them to call it."

[KD5MDK]

There's also certain reports that have come back from the refereeing exam in Canada this year. Which is why I said to wait for word from the FOC.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

The number of people on this forum qualified to answer this question is about 4. (Guessed) I would go to the top sabre ref you know and ask them to find out for you at the next NAC. Unless you're George K in disguise, in which case we have much bigger problems.

I hate to be contrary, but there is no "rule" change around what does and does not constitute an attack in sabre.

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice Beetlejuice?

[oiuyt]

There's also certain reports that have come back from the refereeing exam in Canada this year. Which is why I said to wait for word from the FOC.

For what it's worth, nothing on the topic that was said in Canada was a surprise. The US referees had been told, in advance, what the instructions there on this topic would be. The teachings at that clinic cannot be considered a change, as they were the same at the equivalent clinic in Venuezuela the previous season.

That said, there were a couple of CALLS at the tournament in Canada (Pan-American Championships, for those playing along at home) that indicated a possible shift in referee behavior.

As Greg says, let's wait and see what comes from St. Petersburg (and other events moving forward). If/when there is consensus on a shift in refereeing behavior it'll be widely disseminated.

-B