high school tournaments

[erooMynohtnA]

Originally Posted by Neinteen

At our regular meets we always have weight and shim tests with the traditional lame and mask of course.

But at large tournaments with ~100 schools we never have any of that. Sometimes we have bell checks and mask tests, but usually not because foil is slow and they just wanna hurry the heck up.

And like at last years states so many people knew that and fixed their play and weapons around that. Embarrassed to say more than half my team did that under the coach's disinterested eye.

I think they only checked weights in the semi-finals or round of 8.

Though I do know of one rather skillful and ranked Epee fencer from my area who followed in the footsteps of a champion and has like nail polish remover on the bottom half of the tip of her epee that passes bell check and still goes off. I thought she was a genius until I heard it's been done before.

Since like no directors around here check under guards or tips.

I can understand the nail polish, because that can get you a lot of touches you weren't going to get. But why would you futz with the weight or travel of your weapon? Not only are you a dirty cheat for doing it, but it's stupid.

I've fenced with a foil that could easily pass epee weight and one that could barely push up the weight of the tip, and it really doesn't make a difference.

Any touch you don't get because the spring was too strong isn't a touch you were going to get anyway. You're just fooling yourself by blaming your equipment.

[rsy]

Originally Posted by erooMynohtnA

I can understand the nail polish, because that can get you a lot of touches you weren't going to get. But why would you futz with the weight or travel of your weapon? Not only are you a dirty cheat for doing it, but it's stupid.

erooMynohtnA, I think you raise a great question; under these circumstances, why be the stupid cheat and just clip your springs when you can be the smart one and cover half your tip with nail polish remover? The answer is the stupid cheat doesn’t consider himself stupid or a cheat.

When the norm is not to test for weights and shims at a competition, then that means that any epee fencer in the competition could be fencing with a tired spring or too short a travel. The stupid cheat says to himself that since weights and shims are not important enough to be tested, then the rule is not really a rule, and if my opponent could unknowingly have the advantage of a light spring, I would be a stupid not to make sure that I have that advantage.

When he clips his springs to give himself what he believes is the same advantage that his opponents might have, he doesn’t see himself as cheating or stupid, he sees himself as smart and gaming the system. He doesn’t paint his tips with nail polish remover, because he doesn’t believe that his opponents are doing that, so that would be cheating and he is not a cheat. Of course, if he believed that the practice of painting the tips was common, he could easily rationalize his way into doing that too. After all, he isn’t cheating he would think, he is just responding to those who do and making sure that the playing field is level.

Now, I am not a shrink and I don’t even play one on TV, so maybe the mental health professionals or their more experienced patients can give their own, more informed insight into this behavior.

-r

[oiuyt]

Sounds like the rationales defending performance-enhancing pharmecuetical assistance for athletes.

"All the other riders take EPO, so it's not cheating, it's merely 'leveling the playing field'"

I find it hard to believe that people adjusting the travel or pressure springs on their weapons don't recognize that they are, in fact, cheating. No matter how infrequently tests are conducted. Or who else they believe is also cheating.

-B

[schlager7]

I believe testing all the weapons by the same criteria is a more expedient way to level the playing field.

Oh, and I'm sorry, it just doesn't take that much time to weight test and check a foil. It doesn't even take that long for all the epee tests.

In fact, as much time as pre-fencing weapons checks take at the armory table at the start of an event, it sure speeds up the fencing once the fencers are called to strip.

Not all, but a large number of our local events pre-test body cords, masks (always) and lames. It is not odd for referees at just a local E & Under event to get handed an index card with the armorers' marks to show the equipment passed before calling their pool.

You want an event to flow smooth and fast, and keep the playing field level and fair? Do the checks.

[Cookeit]

Originally Posted by schlager7

Oh, and I'm sorry, it just doesn't take that much time to weight test and check a foil. It doesn't even take that long for all the epee tests.

Sure, you be somewhat right...
but the real time adds up is when every weapon fails the test, and a new one needs to be found.

Maintaining equipment for a high school team is incredibly hard, unless it is sabre.

[jeff]

But, if the weapon should fail, then it should not be used (even if it "works" in the sense of "it turns a light on"), regardless of whether it causes a delay. Otherwise, it's unfair to the opponent. Letting someone fence with a weapon with a light weight spring or other defect makes the contest unfair.

And, if nobody tests weapons to ensure they are legal, they probably aren't testing them at all - so they'll be more likely to be shorted out or have intermittent off-targets or other problems that will only be troubleshooted at the strip. Checking weapons in advance saves time.

[schlager7]

Originally Posted by Cookeit

Sure, you be somewhat right...
but the real time adds up is when every weapon fails the test, and a new one needs to be found.

Maintaining equipment for a high school team is incredibly hard, unless it is sabre.

Actually, it can still move pretty fast.

Yellow card for first weapon to fail the test.

Red card for the second (score is now 1-0).

Red card for the third failure. (score is now 2-0).

See how fast this bout is moving?

[zeig]

uhmm we don't have varisty buut our HS club does test weights and all the tournys we go to have weights, not sure on shimys. The directors on the other hand tend to be allright, i've just had personal probs with bad calls and stuff, worse when they admit it was a bad call after u lost the bought 14 14. haha no grudge

[SJCFU#2]

Originally Posted by zeig

uhmm we don't have varisty buut our HS club does test weights and all the tournys we go to have weights, not sure on shimys. The directors on the other hand tend to be allright, i've just had personal probs with bad calls and stuff, worse when they admit it was a bad call after u lost the bought 14 14. haha no grudge

If you're fencing foil then I'd be surprised if you ever saw anyone perform a shim test. Foil does have minimum and maximum stroke requirements (they're listed in m.11.4) however there's not a whole lot you (the fencer) can do to change them short of replacing the tip and or barrel, and most manufacturers don't even bother to include a 1-mm shim in their shim sets these days.

[Goldgar]

Originally Posted by SJCFU#2

If you're fencing foil then I'd be surprised if you ever saw anyone perform a shim test. Foil does have minimum and maximum stroke requirements (they're listed in m.11.4) however there's not a whole lot you (the fencer) can do to change them short of replacing the tip and or barrel, and most manufacturers don't even bother to include a 1-mm shim in their shim sets these days.

I don't think it has a minimum stroke, only a maximum of 1mm. The rule says "The course or stroke of the pointe d’arrêt required to cause the
electrical apparatus to register a touch, called the lighting stroke,
may be infinitesimal".

[parrythis]

Originally Posted by Cookeit

but the real time adds up is when every weapon fails the test, and a new one needs to be found.

In the roles of both competitive fencer and of ref, I would much rather take that time before the bout starts than after.

[SJCFU#2]

Originally Posted by Goldgar

I don't think it has a minimum stroke, only a maximum of 1mm. The rule says "The course or stroke of the pointe d’arrêt required to cause the
electrical apparatus to register a touch, called the lighting stroke,
may be infinitesimal".

There is a minimum, just not one that is measurable (which raises the question, "Why did the FIE bother to include it in the rules to begin with?").

In truth I suspect the minimum stroke actually required to register a touch with most tips is significantly greater than "infinitesimal" due to the tendency of mechanical components to distort under load and the ability of electricity to jump over small gaps (and even not so small gaps if the potential difference is great enough). However I wouldn't care to measure it.

[Miglin]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

Incident, not accident.

Accusations being hurled about team X cooking their pressure springs to make them lighter, etc. LOTS of claims of cheating where simple neglect, incompetence, or lack of care would easily explain everything.

Hint: just because a school has lots of weapons that fail inspections when those inspections are unplanned doesn't mean that they were cheating. But good luck trying to convince hundreds of fencers from other schools of that fact.

-B
*who wasn't in any way involved with the incident(s)*

I think I was a freshman or sophomore when a very prominent epee squad was disqualified for all of their epees being deemed illegal; it was after this that I noticed all the directors being real sticklers about testing. It's a shame that the kids were booed out of the gym in such an unsportsmanlike manner because I would wager that the vast majority of the kids on the team were unaware of any wrongdoing.