Question about carding for intermittent equipment

[seven6ty]

So, say you present a bodycord or weapon for testing upon the start of your bout. Say that 50% of the time, the equipment works, and 50% of the time, it doesn't. Do you get a card for presenting malfunctional equipment? If it works even once, in my mind, you shouldn't get a card, since you did indeed present functional equipment. However, obviously, not everyone agrees with me. Is there an official rule about this? Does a piece of equipment have to work only once to be considered functional, or 100% of the time? If a weapon fails to go off only once, but does the rest of the time, do you still get a card?

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Originally Posted by seven6ty

So, say you present a bodycord or weapon for testing upon the start of your bout. Say that 50% of the time, the equipment works, and 50% of the time, it doesn't. Do you get a card for presenting malfunctional equipment? If it works even once, in my mind, you shouldn't get a card, since you did indeed present functional equipment. However, obviously, not everyone agrees with me. Is there an official rule about this? Does a piece of equipment have to work only once to be considered functional, or 100% of the time? If a weapon fails to go off only once, but does the rest of the time, do you still get a card?

Depends on the situation. But how many times have you seen an foil fail weights, have the fencer flick it on the grounds under their foot, put the guard on the table and have it pass? That seems like a legitimate pass to me.

[seven6ty]

Why does it depend on the situation? Even in that situation, it's easily said that the fencer initially presented a malfuncational piece of equipment, right?

[bigdawg2121]

If it passed inspection and you fenced a touch with it you're pretty much good. At that point any malfunctions could have ocurred during the course of fencing and must be given the benefit of a doubt. If you can't get it to pass or if you can't manage to even fence a touch with it, well you're probably just SOL.

[bigdawg2121]

Originally Posted by seven6ty

Why does it depend on the situation? Even in that situation, it's easily said that the fencer initially presented a malfuncational piece of equipment, right?

Not necessarily. The ref could have tested incorrectly. Someone might have accidentally bumped it. The foible might be a little weak and the point might need to be stabilized closer....etc, etc. The goal is not to give cards, it's to facilitate the fencing.

[seven6ty]

Well, the question arose because of an intermittent body cord. It worked the first time I depressed my tip on the floor after hooking up. Upon presenting my blade for testing, it wasn't going off, after jiggling it a bit, it did go off, and then didn't, and then did, etc, etc. The ref gave me a yellow, for presenting malfunctional equipment, however, I defended and said that it did indeed work, just not 100% of the time, and he asked if I wanted to fence with it, which I was certain I could begin fencing, and simply ask to change it out, the same way you would with a weapon, if the grip was loose and you had nothing to tighten it with, if something was hanging off of it funny, or any other of a million reasons you could come up with to choose not to use a weapon, after fencing has begun. I don't see how you can card somebody, when the equipment can be demonstrated to be working.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Originally Posted by seven6ty

Well, the question arose because of an intermittent body cord. It worked the first time I depressed my tip on the floor after hooking up. Upon presenting my blade for testing, it wasn't going off, after jiggling it a bit, it did go off, and then didn't, and then did, etc, etc. The ref gave me a yellow, for presenting malfunctional equipment, however, I defended and said that it did indeed work, just not 100% of the time, and he asked if I wanted to fence with it, which I was certain I could begin fencing, and simply ask to change it out, the same way you would with a weapon, if the grip was loose and you had nothing to tighten it with, if something was hanging off of it funny, or any other of a million reasons you could come up with to choose not to use a weapon, after fencing has begun. I don't see how you can card somebody, when the equipment can be demonstrated to be working.

I gave that exact card at Junior Sectionals yesterday. You can't fence with an intermittent body cord. It didn't become intermittent due to fencing. Thus you get a card.

[seven6ty]

Originally Posted by KShan5[PrFC]

I gave that exact card at Junior Sectionals yesterday. You can't fence with an intermittent body cord. It didn't become intermittent due to fencing. Thus you get a card.

Where is the rule that says so? Evidently, you can fence with an intermittently legal weapon, as the example given previously clearly illustrates. Weapons only have to pass inspection once, where is the rule that states differently for body cords?

[downunder]

If a piece of equipment is intermittent then it is clearly non-conforming. In the case of an epee bodywire that is intermittent then it is clearly not always under 1 Ohm, so it fails and you receive a yellow card.


edit: I don't understand the argument. As a referee, I don't want functional equipment (partially or not), I want conforming equipment.

[tbryan]

Originally Posted by seven6ty

I don't see how you can card somebody, when the equipment can be demonstrated to be working.

From the referee's perspective, a single, demonstrated failure is a failure.

Imagine if I let you fence with the body cord. After any touch received, you can ask for a weapon test on the hope that your body cord will now be failing. I would then have to annul your opponent's touch.

I might be more lenient with a failure that can be corrected quickly at strip. (Body cord making poor contact with the socket, but the fencer has a screw driver nearby and spreads the prongs a bit.) I may also be more lenient with problems that won't cause me to annul touches later. If a foil tip is sticky, we'll get off targets during the bout, so it'll be obvious. If the fencer can get it unstuck during weight testing, then I'll probably let him fence with it.

Mysterious, silent failure of your epee body cord, not so much.

[peet]

Originally Posted by seven6ty

Where is the rule that says so? Evidently, you can fence with an intermittently legal weapon, as the example given previously clearly illustrates. Weapons only have to pass inspection once, where is the rule that states differently for body cords?

In the case of the weapon, the rationale for the "second chance" is that the test itself may have been flawed (the weapon wiggles, so on the second try we rest it on the table, etc). Many times, the ref lets you thwack it just to be nice. This is unlikely to have any measurable effect on the proper scoring and smooth running of the bout.

In the case of the body cord, the equipment is flawed. It fails now during testing, and probably will fail again at any time during the bout. That's pretty sure to ruin the proper scoring and smooth running of the bout.


-p

[peet]

And then there's the fact that it's just one yellow; not likely to be a big deal in the bout outcome.

-p

[KD5MDK]

I could argue, but I already told you when I gave the card: It didn't work when tested.

Consider the opposite case: If you ask me to test in case of annulment of a touch, and it goes off once but not on a second test. Would you want me to keep the touch against you "because it worked once"? You can't have it both ways, but the rules explicitly state that even one failure is sufficient to justify the annulment of a touch, even in the course of multiple tests.

[acaba]

Originally Posted by seven6ty

Where is the rule that says so? Evidently, you can fence with an intermittently legal weapon, as the example given previously clearly illustrates. Weapons only have to pass inspection once, where is the rule that states differently for body cords?

If the referee finds that you have an intermittent bodycord, you must be carded by t.45 "...with a weapon or a bodycord which does not work or which does not conform with the Rules;..." and m.29 "...The electrical resistance ... must not exceed 1 ohm." Not 1 ohm sometimes, but 1 ohm always.

If you equipment only works intermittently, you would gain an advantage over your opponent. If your opponent scored a touch, you could say that your equipment was not working 100% of the time and have his/her touch annulled. That's why your equipment has to work 100% of the time, and you get the card.

Your bodycord situation is different than the weight situation mentioned earlier. I have often seen fencers hands shaking from adrenaline/low blood sugar/nerves/etc. so much that they fail the weight test. So placing the foil on a table is not because the foil is "intermittently legal", but because the human holding it causes the test to be conducted incorrectly. If both fencers have foils that light at 503 g, the one with the shaking hands should have his equipment penalized for his human failings

Aaron

[notalent]

Originally Posted by KD5MDK

I could argue, but I already told you when I gave the card: It didn't work when tested.

Consider the opposite case: If you ask me to test in case of annulment of a touch, and it goes off once but not on a second test. Would you want me to keep the touch against you "because it worked once"? You can't have it both ways, but the rules explicitly state that even one failure is sufficient to justify the annulment of a touch, even in the course of multiple tests.

You test a weapon more than once? I wouldn't let Geri see you do that.

As for the OP, it failed you get a card.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Originally Posted by notalent

You test a weapon more than once? I wouldn't let Geri see you do that.

As for the OP, it failed you get a card.

Really? If you test an epee weight and it doesn't pass you wouldn't give them the chance to put the guard on the table and hold the blade stiff and retest?

[KD5MDK]

From my memory, he was doing the jiggling.

[telkanuru]

Originally Posted by KShan5[PrFC]

Really? If you test an epee weight and it doesn't pass you wouldn't give them the chance to put the guard on the table and hold the blade stiff and retest?

That's not a test "for the anullment of a touch" as specified. If you're testing an epee multiple times when an fencer asks for it in the middle, you're just asking for trouble.

[KD5MDK]

Ah, that's what you meant. No, I don't generally test more than once for the annulment of a touch.

Edit: My rule citation was to reinforce the point that a single failure among multiple attempts is recognized by the rules as a failure.