10-16-2007, 03:29 PM
|
#21 | | Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007 Location: SF bay area (ca-USA)
Posts: 360
| Eliminate subjectivity.
Just program the machines to alarm at 1 minute (or whatever) without registration of a hit, valid or invalid. In the Torino WC they took statistics from T32 onward: The average fencing time to award a point was around 18 seconds in foil and epee, either mens or womens, and about 3 seconds in saber.
Forget about criteria 2 and 3.
Even worse, can you imagine having to start a timer every time someone takes a little too much distance or lowers their blade?
__________________ entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem "a braggart, a rogue, a villaine that fights by the book of arithmatick. Why the dev'l came you betweene us?.." | 
|  | | And now for this message... |
| |
10-16-2007, 03:35 PM
|
#22 | | Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 10,151
| I don't think quality referees have a problem seeing non-combativity.
Can you imagine how bad it will look for both fencers to stand still for 50 seconds before they start fencing again? | |
| | |
10-16-2007, 04:14 PM
|
#23 | | Just Joined
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
| Quote:
Originally Posted by epeemike81  under the clarification, yes this is non-combativity. the rule is 2 of the 3.
so, 1 plus 2 or three IS non-combativity.
chrisod's point (which I disagree with) he feels 2 and 3 without 1 shouldn't be non-combativity.
-m | Actually, my point was that I don't think 2 plus 3 is automatically non-combativity. I can imagine a scenario in epee, and maybe even foil, where two particularly cautious fencers would be actively trying to gain an advantage yet not being doing anything aggressive enough to look like an attack. Unlikely for sure, and if it goes on for 60 seconds then the official may want to flash a card and get them moving. Extreme caution can be a legitimate strategy, and I don't think the rules should legislate it out of existence. | |
| | |
10-16-2007, 04:22 PM
|
#24 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Northern California
Posts: 380
| I have a different question: why is there a rule regarding non-combativity?
If this is really happening then one or the other fencer is still going to lose, and that is their own silly choice. Unless there is collusion of some sort going on, and then aren't there rules regarding collusion to cover that?
__________________
- Wisdom is the knowledge of how much you don't know.
| |
| | |
10-16-2007, 04:30 PM
|
#25 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 543
| The comedic value of the rule as written comes from the lack of a time element attached directly to the second and third items -- even the briefest of breaks in blade contact and distance trigger the penalty. ... So without the application of "common sense," such a state exists immediately after the ref's call to fence.  I love it. | |
| | |
10-16-2007, 04:32 PM
|
#26 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Dana Hall School, Wellesely, MA
Posts: 3,820
| Quote:
Originally Posted by epeemike81 chrisod's point (which I disagree with) he feels 2 and 3 without 1 shouldn't be non-combativity.
-m | Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisod Actually, my point was that I don't think 2 plus 3 is automatically non-combativity. | ??
How are these two statements different?
-m | |
| | |
10-16-2007, 04:38 PM
|
#27 | | Super Shoebie
Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: VA
Posts: 1,083
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Hauptman I have a different question: why is there a rule regarding non-combativity?... | Television! | |
| | |
10-16-2007, 04:38 PM
|
#28 | | Fencing Expert
Join Date: Apr 2000 Location: Pennsauken, NJ
Posts: 8,914
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Hauptman I have a different question: why is there a rule regarding non-combativity? | Because non-combativity makes for poor television.
Whether a couple epeeists have decided that gold medal bouts are more fun when fenced to a single touch, or whether foilists have decided to embarass R.R., to drive home the point that they didn't appreciate the change in the timings 3+ years (edit: ago).
-B
__________________
"Oh but you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you!"
Last edited by oiuyt; 10-16-2007 at 04:50 PM.
| 
| | |
10-16-2007, 04:42 PM
|
#29 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Indiana, PA
Posts: 964
| Quote:
Originally Posted by epeemike81 ??
How are these two statements different?
-m | Ask not about the makings of sausages... Or the replys to posts from people who THINK they know what they have read... just enjoy the results and move on.
__________________
"Delusions are often functional. A mother’s opinions about her children’s beauty, intelligence, goodness, et cetera ad nauseam, keep her from drowning them at birth. - Lazarus Long, Time enough for Love, Robert A. Heinlein
| |
| | |
10-16-2007, 05:16 PM
|
#30 | | Super Shoebie
Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: VA
Posts: 1,083
| Quote:
Originally Posted by epeemike81 ??
How are these two statements different?
-m | Actually, I think he was trying to clarify the situational application rather than rebut. | |
| | |
10-16-2007, 05:45 PM
|
#31 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: NY and OR... yeah... BOTH coasts :)
Posts: 160
| Anyone watch the WE final from St. Petersburg?
2 calls for non-combativity. The first of which I think was an excellent call. The second, however, I do not agree with at all.
Regardless of whether I agree with it or not, the non-combativity calls definitely picked up the action in the bout and within a single 3 minute period you got a pretty good final bout.
__________________
"To fight in another man's armour is something more than to be influenced by his style of fighting."
-C.S. Lewis
Secretary/Treasurer
RPI Fencing Club
| |
| | |
10-16-2007, 11:17 PM
|
#32 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Philly
Posts: 689
| Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisod Actually, my point was that I don't think 2 plus 3 is automatically non-combativity. I can imagine a scenario in epee, and maybe even foil, where two particularly cautious fencers would be actively trying to gain an advantage yet not being doing anything aggressive enough to look like an attack. Unlikely for sure, and if it goes on for 60 seconds then the official may want to flash a card and get them moving. Extreme caution can be a legitimate strategy, and I don't think the rules should legislate it out of existence. | Actually, this happened to me at a NAC... First DE, opponent and I are just feeling each other out, trying to jockey for a tempo advantage. No touches scored, but plenty of movement into and out of distance. Ref calls it after roughly 1 minute (maybe more or less... don't quite remember). Nobody I talked to afterwards thought we were noncombative...
Point is, this scenario is not as far-fetched or unlikely as you might think. | |
| | |
10-16-2007, 11:46 PM
|
#33 | | Fencing Expert
Join Date: Apr 2000 Location: Pennsauken, NJ
Posts: 8,914
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Fechter1 Actually, this happened to me at a NAC... First DE, opponent and I are just feeling each other out, trying to jockey for a tempo advantage. No touches scored, but plenty of movement into and out of distance. Ref calls it after roughly 1 minute (maybe more or less... don't quite remember). Nobody I talked to afterwards thought we were noncombative...
Point is, this scenario is not as far-fetched or unlikely as you might think. | Right, but your anecdote probably comes from the period of time when that behavior (by the referee) matched what was being given from on high as the appropriate metric to use. For a while it was stupidly rediculously -- a moderate amount of time without touches triggered it, regardless of how much activity was going on.
-B
__________________
"Oh but you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you!"
| |
| | |
10-17-2007, 04:55 AM
|
#34 | | Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 39
| Actually I'm just curious, since I had this problem recently. Was fencing sabre (I'm a foilist and so sabre's not something I'm familiar with) for fun against a guy who's never really fenced before.
On "allez", he basically camps at his en-guarde line and doesn't do anything, waiting for me to attack before trying a haphazard slash back or blocking. Would that be non-combative? I eventually got so fed up with the entire thing, I refused to be aggressive at all and advanced very slowly, sometimes even refusing to move. It got pretty tiring actually, me doing all the footwork and him just waiting for my attack.
Would I be guilty of non-combativeness? Or would he? | |
| | |
10-17-2007, 08:27 AM
|
#35 | | Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 10,151
| Non-combativity applies to both fencers. It cannot apply to just one. | |
| | |
10-17-2007, 01:50 PM
|
#36 | | Admin
Join Date: Dec 1999 Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,657
| Quote:
Originally Posted by oiuyt Yes, by the letter of the rules DE bouts are 1 minute long (with priority determined before the minute) and fenced to 13 touches.
*first period*
"On Guard!"
"Ready!"
"Fence!"
"Halt!" (fencers are 4 meters apart without blade contact)
"Non-Combativity" *yellow card to each*
*second period*
etc.
This, clearly, is not the intent of the rule change. Hopefully the FIE will fix their mistake and we'll follow suit. Or we'll fix their mistake and they'll follow suit.
-B | I'll remember the literal interpretation if I ever have to ref epee.  | |
| | |
10-17-2007, 04:06 PM
|
#37 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Paris, France
Posts: 1,099
| Quote:
Originally Posted by lanyingjie Actually I'm just curious, since I had this problem recently. Was fencing sabre (I'm a foilist and so sabre's not something I'm familiar with) for fun against a guy who's never really fenced before.
On "allez", he basically camps at his en-guarde line and doesn't do anything, waiting for me to attack before trying a haphazard slash back or blocking. Would that be non-combative? I eventually got so fed up with the entire thing, I refused to be aggressive at all and advanced very slowly, sometimes even refusing to move. It got pretty tiring actually, me doing all the footwork and him just waiting for my attack.
Would I be guilty of non-combativeness? Or would he? | He would lose. (hopefully. If not, you may want to reconsider your weapon of choice)
__________________
Ich steige ab, Hab keine Zeit, Muss jetzt zu den anderen Pferden, Wollen auch geritten werden
C'est pas la chute, c'est l'atterrissage.
| |
| | |
10-18-2007, 12:32 AM
|
#38 | | Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 39
| Heh, the match eventually ended in him being issued a yellow card, then a black card by my referee. He was slashing really hard and gave me a few cuts through my glove plus bruises all over.
I'll stick to foil for now xD. | |
| | |
10-18-2007, 01:00 PM
|
#39 | | Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005 Location: Indiana
Posts: 836
| Am I correct that the non-combativity rule does not apply in pools or in the Y10 and Y12 DEs? If so, what is the referree supposed to do if (for example) a couple of kids stand there, both determined that they're going to wait for the other one to attack and then parry-riposte?
I don't anticipate this occuring; I'm just going through the referee's study guide and experiencing a little confusion on questions related to this topic. | |
| | |
10-18-2007, 01:37 PM
|
#40 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,322
| Can ONE fencer be non-combative (and not the other)?
Oiuyt's response in the can one fencer be carded for non-combativity thread
oh and if it's a 5 touch bout and no one wants to fence what are you supposed to do? Suffer, hit them with your own weapon etc
Last edited by seak; 10-18-2007 at 01:41 PM.
| |
| | |
