FIE change to foil target for 2009

[andy-h]

.....

[erik_blank]

The FIE determined that they are going to include some part of the foil bib, but at this point no one has managed to decide just exactly how much, nor how to attach it to the rest of the target.

[Warrior Princess]

::bangs head on desk:: Hopefully it won't go USFA and I won't have to deal with it. I just bought a new mask. How do other people feel about this?

[Gibbo]

Hi,
Attaching it to the rest of the target is easy enough - that's assuming you own a Leon Paul Xchange mask. All that needs to be done is replace a non-conductive bib with a lame one.

I'll declare at this point that I'm a sabreur not a foilist, but I think the rule change(s?) make sense. Your neck is already target, it's just covered by your bib. In terms of an actual duel (yes, I know this is Olympic fencing we are talking about) then a hit to the neck would certainly be lethal. On that note I have heard some concerns about safety, but this doesn't seem to make much sense given the fact that the bib is already target in epee and sabre.

Must be a pain if you just bought a new mask though.

Gibbo

[Medinilla]

Has this been officially confirmed??

[tdwg83]

Has this been officially confirmed??

It will happen internationally. FIE Madrid Congress - preliminary report The first major question is how will it be done. I think the committee responsible will find a prototype they like then build the material rules to describe it.

The second is when will USFA adopt it. Assuming FIE doesn't change their mind in the next couple of years I would expect trickle down to happen by the 2011-2012 season (conforming before the NEXT Olympics), if not sooner.

[GypsyScot]

There's a manufacturer's meeting in Italy next week as I said in my other thread, there is a prototype I don't who made it or what it looks like. And from rumors in the USFA material, maybe 2010...

[brtech]

I heard that the target is going to be defined as a straight line across the bib and down. The line was just below the mesh I think.

Armorer's hate straight lines on curved surfaces (see prior threads on "french cut" lames), but it seems reasonably straightforward (no pun intended) to interpret.

The discussion is underway on how the bib is connected to the lame. LP says just have the conductive part go all the way around the bib, and it will remain in contact with the lame in normal fencing. There are other discussions on some sort of wire between the bib and the lame, somewhat like a mask cord. I worry a little about the LP proposal only in that I wouldn't want fencers to deliberately tilt their heads in a way which attempted to lift the bib off the lame, thereby exposing the neck.

[Purple Fencer]

I remember looking at Chris Dollar with his LP X-Change mask and thinking that it's already perfectly designed for where it sounds like the line is....pretty much straight back across his neck in a horizontal line. hat wold serve the purpose perfectly....presuming it was the same for every fencer.

I agree that a mask cord would be preferable...and for the same reason you mentioned...the idea of a passive connection doesn't strike me as very reliable.

'Course, not ALL lames would have that tab on the back.

I highly suspect that is FIE approves a design like the LP X-Change, Barry's going to be licensing the design out to the other makers...it woudl only make sense.

I don't LIKE the idea of making bib target myself, but if it HAS to be, the LP X-Change is the way to go.

I'll take the bib as target happily if the lexan masks go buh-bye...

[Barry Paul]

I I worry a little about the LP proposal only in that I wouldn't want fencers to deliberately tilt their heads in a way which attempted to lift the bib off the lame, thereby exposing the neck.

It one of those things in life which when written down seems possible, but if you actually try fencing with a lame bib the time you have to try and react to a foil point about to hit your bib is so short as to be impossible to react by lifting the head. Even if successful in lifting the bib slightly off the jacket the point pushing with 500 grams (plus the 15 mil second it which no hit registers )will push the bib onto the jacket and a valid hit will be registered. Fencers just need to practice/give it a trial and I will be proved very quickly either right or wrong.

[fencerbill]

With all the touches being lost because of Roch's timing changes, will anyone even notice touches lost because of intermittent passive contact?

It does give the fencers another alibi.

[oiuyt]

With all the touches being lost because of Roch's timing changes, will anyone even notice touches lost because of intermittent passive contact?

Yes, the wrong color light is fired.

Good luck convincing some foilists that having grazed off of the arm on the way in is the fault, rather than intermittent passive contact of the bib, however...

-B

[CvilleFencer]

After a few hours of fencing foil, my non-lame and theoretically non-conductive bib will consistently register as valid target. I gotta think the lame covered ones would work even better!

[Medinilla]

So i guess,with the new lame material on the mask, it will increase the foil mask's price quite a bit...

[D'Art]

Probably, but remember that the manufacturers overheads will probably increase by more (in comparison) than the actual selling price will go up by.

[fencerbill]

So i guess,with the new lame material on the mask, it will increase the foil mask's price quite a bit...

The extra cost to manufacture is moderate, the problem is the low volume and stocking complications for vendors since the requirement to use them would probably start with Grand Prix, then World Cup, then NACs, then down to local events.

The gradual schedule for requiring them can be used as an argument against the passive connection to the Lame. Fencers would NOT want a passive connection until a positive connection was required.

The FIE has always, in principle, allowed alternatives to alligator clips. Such as "poppers" in English translation of the rules (snaps to Yanks). A snap could have an insulating cover when no connection desired which is then replaced by a connecting wire when connection is required. This implies allowing a non-conducting rim for at least a transition period.

The worst situation would be for a requirement that would mean fencers would need one mask for international and domestic high level events while also needing a separate mask for local events. But since when has the FIE worried about that?

[Medinilla]

Three different types of masks?!, that's going to be hillarious!!
Really hope that this thing gets done properly.

[SJCFU#2]

Really hope that this thing gets done properly.

I wouldn't count on it. In the past the FIE has not proven overly competent when making changes to the material rules. Usually it ends up being something along the lines of "Never mind what we said when we wrote the change - this is what we meant".

[Medinilla]

Is there any reason for such behaviour?
Is FIE conciouss of the thousands of fencers around the globe?
i really dont understand

[RenegadeStorm88]

...CUT...

I agree that a mask cord would be preferable...and for the same reason you mentioned...the idea of a passive connection doesn't strike me as very reliable.

'Course, not ALL lames would have that tab on the back.

...Snip...

Couldn't one just clip the pigtail to the back of the collar of their lame? not perfect, but workable until you have to buy a new lame when you could get one with a tag on the back.