 |  |
06-20-2008, 12:33 PM
|
#21 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Washington DC
Posts: 338
| Now I have responses from a good collection of experienced competitors and refs and the result is currently.... tied: 5 in favor of discarding the obvious shot to the floor and granting the valid counterattack from the opponent, and 5 in favor of counting the off-target hit with priority to the ungrounded strip and halting the action there.
Augh!  | 
|  | | And now for this message... |
| |
06-20-2008, 12:46 PM
|
#22 | | Fencing Expert
Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Angel, London
Posts: 2,439
| I was told by Keith Smith, FIE Arbitrage, that you take the floor hit as an off target.
That's what I do. | 
| | |
06-20-2008, 01:04 PM
|
#23 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Washington DC
Posts: 338
| OK, thanks.  As long as I know what the rule/policy is, I'm all set. | |
| | |
06-20-2008, 01:34 PM
|
#24 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 4,269
| Go not to the elves for answers, for they will say both no and yes. | |
| | |
06-20-2008, 02:43 PM
|
#25 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: George Mason Univesity and NJ
Posts: 264
| Thanks downunder. While I disagree with that interpretation, I'll call it as the important people say.
__________________
"Sir, didn't I parry"
"You didn't take advantage of his blade enough, so no."
(I guess i should have romanced it a bit more..."
| |
| | |
06-20-2008, 03:46 PM
|
#26 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Northern California
Posts: 281
| Quote:
Originally Posted by fencerchica  Now I have responses from a good collection of experienced competitors and refs and the result is currently.... tied: 5 in favor of discarding the obvious shot to the floor and granting the valid counterattack from the opponent, and 5 in favor of counting the off-target hit with priority to the ungrounded strip and halting the action there.
Augh! | I think the difficulty comes in being absolutely sure that the light came from hitting the floor. If you are sure then the off-target is annuled and a light by the opponent is valid. IF you aren't completely sure of the off-target then call the light off-target at face value.
__________________
- Wisdom is the knowledge of how much you don't know.
| |
| | |
06-20-2008, 04:01 PM
|
#27 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,530
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Hauptman I think the difficulty comes in being absolutely sure that the light came from hitting the floor. If you are sure then the off-target is annuled and a light by the opponent is valid. IF you aren't completely sure of the off-target then call the light off-target at face value. |
This is almost it. To be most precise, say it this way: Quote: |
Originally Posted by Hauptman, edited by me I think the difficulty comes in being absolutely sure that the light came from hitting the floor and the fencer definitely did not also hit the opponent after hitting the floor. If you are sure then the off-target is annuled and a light by the opponent is valid. |
All that said, it would appear from posts above that someone from FIE arbitrage says to call it "attack off target" regardless, so I'd say that's the way to go.
-p | |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:49 PM. |
| |
