Is this an attack in foil?

[MdA]

Just found this photo...how do you feel about this attack...now this is an old photo...2006...I think...don't see to many of these anymore.

[forethought]

Originally Posted by MdA

how do you feel about this attack...

It makes my soul hurt.

...don't see to many of these anymore.

I saw Meinhardt use it at Beijing; it didn't score, but I saw him do it.

[noodle]

i feel like its fine. its clearly some sort of mid-action situation here. its not pretty and i wouldn't necessarily start an action like that, but it looks like it could serve a purpose, since it looks like the defender is searching for a parry instead of doing something that might work.

[OROD]

Originally Posted by MdA

Just found this photo...how do you feel about this attack...now this is an old photo...2006...I think...don't see to many of these anymore.

Well, the attack in foil is not a static situation, so we cant say that it's in an attack just from looking at the photo. On the other hand, I dont see anything there that makes it not an attack. Most likely it IS an attack, as long as he hits in the appropriate time/tempo/whatever.

.

[erooMynohtnA]

+1 to Noodle and Orod

[fleshbroiler]

Originally Posted by OROD

Well, the attack in foil is not a static situation, so we cant say that it's in an attack just from looking at the photo. On the other hand, I dont see anything there that makes it not an attack.
.

Your comment concerning evaluation of a purely static position is well made, however, to quote the rule book, "...Actions, simple or compound, steps or feints which are executed with a bent arm, are not considered as attacks but as preparations, laying themselves open to the initiation of the offensive or defensive/offensive action of the opponent (cf. t.8)...." Assuming we're talking about the guy on the right.

[catwood1]

If the opponent retreats 4 times while making windmill circle 6 parries, then finally makes a spin away counter attack while ducking, yes, it was an attack.

If the opponent extends and lunges, then it was not an attack.

[erooMynohtnA]

Originally Posted by fleshbroiler

Your comment concerning evaluation of a purely static position is well made, however, to quote the rule book, "...Actions, simple or compound, steps or feints which are executed with a bent arm, are not considered as attacks but as preparations, laying themselves open to the initiation of the offensive or defensive/offensive action of the opponent (cf. t.8)...." Assuming we're talking about the guy on the right.

So only the PiL is an attack.

/thread

[fleshbroiler]

Well, the arm needs to be extending and the point needs to threaten valid target. Advancing without threatening is preparation, not attack. Unless I completely misunderstand the rulebook...

[catwood1]

Oh god... I see this thread going baaaaaaaaad places....

Not....another...Attack in foil.... thread....
NOOOOOOOOOOO...

[fleshbroiler]

; )

Yeah, I'm done.

[erooMynohtnA]

Originally Posted by fleshbroiler

Your comment concerning evaluation of a purely static position is well made, however, to quote the rule book, "...Actions, simple or compound, steps or feints which are executed with a bent arm, are not considered as attacks but as preparations, laying themselves open to the initiation of the offensive or defensive/offensive action of the opponent (cf. t.8)...." Assuming we're talking about the guy on the right.

Originally Posted by fleshbroiler

Well, the arm needs to be extending and the point needs to threaten valid target. Advancing without threatening is preparation, not attack. Unless I completely misunderstand the rulebook...

So if I have a bent arm, but I am extending at valid target, is that an attack or a preparation?

[telkanuru]

IDK, it definitely looks like prep to me. It also definitely looks like FotL isn't going to take advantage of the prep before it becomes an attack.

[OROD]

Originally Posted by fleshbroiler

"...Actions, simple or compound, steps or feints which are executed with a bent arm, are not considered as attacks but as preparations, laying themselves open to the initiation of the offensive or defensive/offensive action of the opponent (cf. t.8)...."

Well, this is just one of those cases where the letter of the rules and the interpretation are at odds. Clearly, the idea that only a point-in-line type situation can make an attack valid is just silly. If this were true, almost all attacks would fail the test. In fact, there is no particular positioning that the weapon arm (or even the weapon itself) has to have to make an attack valid. You can have the arm bent, that's ok. You can be pointing at the floor or ceiling, that's fine too. What matters is the distance, the movement relative to the target, and the timing of the action if and when it hits. In the picture, the two fencers are clearly within distance. We cant judge the movement or timing. So, all we can say is that one of our criteria for an attack is met, but two others are indeterminate.

.

[Sean Butler]

Originally Posted by telkanuru

IDK, it definitely looks like prep to me. It also definitely looks like FotL isn't going to take advantage of the prep before it becomes an attack.

Without seeing it in action, I completely agree with that evaluation. At that split-second in time, if the FotL had done a stop-hit, it most likely would have landed in time. But, since he isn't, it's still possible for the FotR to complete the attack in time.

[Allen Evans]

I remember refereeing a bout a few years ago in which one of the fencers argued that his opponent had been preparing "the entire time" he marched down the strip.

"That's true," I replied, "he prepared all the way down the strip until he hit you. On Guard."


Allen Evans

[recycle]

and look what the oppenents doing.....? its was preparation (called incorrect attack now), but if the opponent went looking for the blade. what happened next would be interesting.

[MdA]

Originally Posted by Allen Evans

I remember refereeing a bout a few years ago in which one of the fencers argued that his opponent had been preparing "the entire time" he marched down the strip.
Allen Evans

I think I remember these two fencers...I am pretty sure that FotL was retreating before this thing got started...so it would require some type of change of direction footwork at the precise time to steal the ROW.

Or a well timed counterattack...with evasion...maybe a little ducking and covering with the mask would help...either way it is ugly.

The real solution is not to give ground while searching with such a wide parry...don't let the FotR get started.

Other good solution...with really good footwork is for the defender to break or open the distance far enough while retreating ....to cause the "preparer" to either finish his attack ...out of distance and fall short (attack over)....or take another step...with the arm still back. This would be an obvious preparation (which I hope the ref would call) and you could do a direct attack into it.

[fleshbroiler]

Originally Posted by erooMynohtnA

So if I have a bent arm, but I am extending at valid target, is that an attack or a preparation?

I hope that would be considered an attack.

[RITFencing]

Yep, it's an attack. The fencer on the left if trying to parry. If my opponent is trying to defend against my action, it can pretty much be called an attack (or remise, reprise, redoublement, prise de fer, counter attack, riposte, counter riposte, etc)

The context between the fencers is key. If the fencer on the left had started their own action while Khosh was still retracting his arm, I would give it to them. But if one fencer runs forward, even without extending their arm, and the other begins to back up whilst parrying, guess who's making the offensive action?

There is way, WAY more to right of way than the rules in the book. I know a lot of people won't like that, but it's the truth. The sections in the rulebook are an attempt to define what little the high level coaches, fencers and refs can agree on (and sometimes not even then.)