Eliminate PIL from Right-of-Way?

[arc]

The step back with a line serves two purposes, 1 it shows to the ref your intent, and gives you more time to establish the line. At the Tucson NAC in april I was reffing D1 MF in the round of 12 Fencer A started an explosive double advance lunge attack Fencer B puts up a line without moving. In the length of time that B extends his arm A is begining his advance lunge. Touch for A, The next touch B steps back and has the time to get his line out, A seeing this takes a beat for the touch.

And in theory, the step back opens up the distance beyond that reachable through "advance lunge" and clearly establishes to the referee that the line is being established during the opponent's preparation. This was the theory as explained to me back in the days of alternating priority in sabre; the folks I learned from indicated that essentially, a line coming out against an attack with priority was a form of simultaneous action, and the attack with priority would therefore get the touch, but by opening the distance, the action is no longer simultaneous, and the line would have its ordinary priority ...

[Stormbringer]

This past weekend at USACFC's I had a referee argue with me that the attack in foil ends with the front foot.

The rules may be changing to make that true. I do not consider this a good thing.

darius

Just out of curiosity... why would this be considered a bad (or, at least, a not-good) thing?

[OROD]

Why does this thread exist?

.

[oiuyt]

Why does this thread exist?

Because Ian was bored.










And is a very effective troll... :)

-B

[Inquartata]

A PiL doesn't have RoW over an attack, the attack starts first,
Which I'm sure Inq will use as a basis for the poll being ...

You have done well, my apprentice. Now deliver me young Skywalker's head and our plan will be complete.

Ahem.

I am not for further dumbing down sabre. I am not for removing any more complexity from it. Bad enough that the parry-riposte game is all but moribund due to changes in the game ( thanks again, epeeists in the FIE and especially M. Roch ). We already lost the fleche, let's not go any farther down that path.

[emagdnim]

i think it should be eliminated.


but i fence sabre and this seems to be a foil thread......

[Mihail]

I am not for further dumbing down sabre. I am not for removing any more complexity from it. Bad enough that the parry-riposte game is all but moribund due to changes in the game ( thanks again, epeeists in the FIE and especially M. Roch ). We already lost the fleche, let's not go any farther down that path.

Huh? They're the ones calling for weakening the effect of the misnamed "distance parry." It seems to me that they're looking to place more emphasis on the bladework, including parry-ripostes.

I'm curious as to what makes you think otherwise.

[IanSerotkin]

Huh? They're the ones calling for weakening the effect of the misnamed "distance parry." It seems to me that they're looking to place more emphasis on the bladework, including parry-ripostes.

I'm curious as to what makes you think otherwise.

The shortening of the sabre lockout time down to 120 milliseconds has led to a preponderance of "in lockout time" remises over correct ripostes.

[Mihail]

The shortening of the sabre lockout time down to 120 milliseconds has led to a preponderance of "in lockout time" remises over correct ripostes.

I feel that's just a myth. The main thing the timing change has affected is the ability to make a slower attack, mainly in the case of a disengage around a parry. The new timing makes it really difficult to do this, since an out-of-time counterattack will get a one-light against an attack with a strong feint and disengage.

As a result, the attacks have become shorter and quicker, which in turn makes it easier to parry, not more difficult. The top fencers have an extremely quick riposte, so getting their light on is rarely if ever a problem.

At the least, this has been my experience: the attack has lost some strength while parries are more prevalent than before.

However, when dealing with very young kids or less competitive fencers, I agree that the timing is too distracting from basic fencing actions, including parry-riposte. That's why I want a machine with a variable timing to teach my beginner guys better: Could one of you build a machine with variable lock-out time?

[Dev]

Wasn't there a study that showed that the shortened blocking time in sabre is now faster than normal human reaction speed? And foil, where once there was plenty of "slop time," now rides right on the bleeding edge of human reactions?

[mrbiggs]

Wasn't there a study that showed that the shortened blocking time in sabre is now faster than normal human reflex response? And foil, where once there was plenty of "slop time," now rides right on the bleeding edge of human reflexes?

Well, that makes sense. It shouldn't be that someone can hit you, and you react to them actually hitting you by in then hitting them.

[arc]

Well, that makes sense. It shouldn't be that someone can hit you, and you react to them actually hitting you by in then hitting them.

Only if you're not concerned with the conventions. For foil & sabre, it's not a matter of who-hit-when, it's supposed to be a matter of right-of-way.

Just for comparison, for folks interested in such matters, the mechanical reaction time of a trigger (i.e, the time between when the trigger releases the sear and the hammer hits the firing pin) on an average firearm is approximately 60ms, about half that of the sabre lockout time.

[notalent]

I feel that's just a myth. The main thing the timing change has affected is the ability to make a slower attack, mainly in the case of a disengage around a parry. The new timing makes it really difficult to do this, since an out-of-time counterattack will get a one-light against an attack with a strong feint and disengage.

As a result, the attacks have become shorter and quicker, which in turn makes it easier to parry, not more difficult. The top fencers have an extremely quick riposte, so getting their light on is rarely if ever a problem.

At the least, this has been my experience: the attack has lost some strength while parries are more prevalent than before.

However, when dealing with very young kids or less competitive fencers, I agree that the timing is too distracting from basic fencing actions, including parry-riposte. That's why I want a machine with a variable timing to teach my beginner guys better: Could one of you build a machine with variable lock-out time?

That is not a myth. Want to measure just how fast that is in human terms? Take a stopwatch that reads in Hundreths then as fast as you can start and stop it. A good time is .12 A great time is under .10. For comparison the legnth of time to blink, under the perception level, .10 seconds. This is why almost all 2 light parry reposte are called for the reposte. It is also why epeeists have had more success since the change, they simply remise or counter attack and use the lockout to do the job that used to be filled by mediocre refs
The top level are faster in almost all cases, part of what caused repostes to arrive has nothing to do with the box and lots to do with the blades and manchettes, those changes prevented whipover hits from happening and being judged as attacks. The top level guys do plenty of long attacks.

[mrbiggs]

Only if you're not concerned with the conventions. For foil & sabre, it's not a matter of who-hit-when, it's supposed to be a matter of right-of-way.

It's a little bit of a matter of who hit when. I don't know exactly the conventions for dry fencing, but I strongly suspect that you did not have an infinite amount of time to finish an attack.

[Mihail]

That is not a myth. Want to measure just how fast that is in human terms? Take a stopwatch that reads in Hundreths then as fast as you can start and stop it. A good time is .12 A great time is under .10. For comparison the legnth of time to blink, under the perception level, .10 seconds. This is why almost all 2 light parry reposte are called for the reposte. It is also why epeeists have had more success since the change, they simply remise or counter attack and use the lockout to do the job that used to be filled by mediocre refs
The top level are faster in almost all cases, part of what caused repostes to arrive has nothing to do with the box and lots to do with the blades and manchettes, those changes prevented whipover hits from happening and being judged as attacks. The top level guys do plenty of long attacks.

I don't know, man. Those measurements don't really have a lot to do with it because there's no practical way to measure anticipation and preparedness.

I'm trying to track down an online video of the Olympics in 2004 to compare it with the championships of 2006 or 2007 because I'm fairly certain you'll find MORE parries in the latter. That's been my experience both in world cups and in domestic competitions. I'd love to put together some visual aids but I don't really have any Div 1 or WC footage from before the timing switch.

[notalent]

I don't know, man. Those measurements don't really have a lot to do with it because there's no practical way to measure anticipation and preparedness.

I'm trying to track down an online video of the Olympics in 2004 to compare it with the championships of 2006 or 2007 because I'm fairly certain you'll find MORE parries in the latter. That's been my experience both in world cups and in domestic competitions. I'd love to put together some visual aids but I don't really have any Div 1 or WC footage from before the timing switch.

Well lets look at why we parry. We parry because it gives us a defense, preventing a touch from ariving, and it gives us right of way. However it only does that when it is seen by the ref. Up to the 04 time change many 2 light parry actions were called for the attacker, because the refs felt that the parry was late. So taking a parry was a bit more of a risk if it wasnt a perfect one. After the 04 changes it became clear that a reposte take longer to go any distance, say head parry to head reposte, than was allowed by the lock out timing when the attacker simply remised. Seeing this caused an significant change in how refs saw those actions, the became repostes overnight. So there was an incentive to take the parry, with the understanding it had to fast and direct. Think about how parries have changed. Back when Inq first took up a blade (chipped flint no doubt) parries were deep, and repostes had forever to land. Jump to electric V1.0 stop hits suddenly started working alot more now that there was an objective way of determining it was valid. Captuers were flawed but did tell you if you parried. When we got rid of them with rubber blades and target up to top of the knuckles, well parries went out of fashion fast and distance was key. fast forward to 2000 and we loose the top of the hand target and get stiffer blades. Now we see more parries being taken because they start to work enough to make them worth the risk. In the time span mentioned parry posistions move farther away from the body and less contact is needed. In the early 80's when I started fencing parries were big to convince clueless jury members that yes that was my parry. Electric changed things a bit, you moved your hand away from the body, to lessen the chance of a whip over. Tough when you are fat lots more area to cover
Take out the captuer and you have to move the hand to catch the last 4 inches of blade with your guard or you have 2 lights which is bad. After 00 hands moved a little closer in because you wanted a one light reposte and .35 secs to make it. After 04 well now you dont take a head parry and expect a reposte unless your hand is well away from your mask and the parry is a foil style beat parry. 4 parry moves away from the body, again to give you time to reposte. How much of the top level guys actions are just because they are better? A lot, understanding the game allows you to make time with good anticipation, and correct technique.

Geeze I havent had to write up a multi page response to a question since college many moons ago

[Inquartata]

Huh? They're the ones calling for weakening the effect of the misnamed "distance parry." It seems to me that they're looking to place more emphasis on the bladework, including parry-ripostes.

Not by shortening the lockout timing they aren't.

BTW, have you heard the rumor that they are considering shortening it even more? I overheard some fairly well-placed referees talking about this recently.

I don't see how you give more weight to a riposte by shortening the lockout timing so that the remise---which has less distance to travel than the riposte---locks the box. How exactly do you think it does that?

That is not a myth. Want to measure just how fast that is in human terms? Take a stopwatch that reads in Hundreths then as fast as you can start and stop it.

I am nitpicking, but actually this does not measure reaction time. Reaction time is the amount of time it takes to respond to an external stimulus which is either unexpected or unpredictably given. In humans that tops out at around 3/10ths of a second.

If you want impressive, there are pistol experts who can draw, point and empty a revolver in less time than that. Essentially, you could be holding a gun on them, finger on the trigger, and they could draw and shoot you repeatedly before your brain could register the movement and direct your finger to squeeze the trigger...

[IvorDarcy]

Hey folks, try going to youtube.com and in the search bar type "fencing FIE sabre arbitrage" ( without the quote marks obviously ) and you may find the answer to your question there. I found it most informative even though I find sabre to be rather boring.

[Mihail]

Hey folks, try going to youtube.com and in the search bar type "fencing FIE sabre arbitrage" ( without the quote marks obviously ) and you may find the answer to your question there. I found it most informative even though I find sabre to be rather boring.

What's our question?

[Inquartata]

"Tricky..."