Which safety rules should be strict?

[telkanuru]

Seems like we established in this one that they are....

Let's recap:

1) Generic sports socks are not designed to prevent lacerations or puncture wounds.

2) Generic sports socks do prevent small scrapes and metal splinters

3) Preventing minor injuries is not the point of safety equipment (FIE jackets protect against bruises etc. less well than padded cotton)

Therefore, socks are not required because they make people more safe.

The counter argument to this has been "Well if someone rubs a foil on your leg you might get metal splinters".


I stand by my conclusion that you are retarded.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

It's not universal, and I don't think it's a good thing, but in general a fencer can get away with quite a bit less than 10 cm (IIRC) of overlap so long as the referee doesn't see skin.

I can't promise you won't get carded or that it's a good idea, but it is a rule that tends to be on the lax side of enforcement. Certainly on the local level.

Well, let's think about this.

If the ref sees skin or a shirt, there's an underlap. Obviously a problem. If there are 9 cm of overlap, the only way a ref will notice is if the ref is measuring everyone's overlap. How do you go about doing that? Well, it would seem to me as if you would have to be pretty close, have a ruler, and in general be feeling and looking pretty close to some areas that many would prefer you be farther from. (even sides are still close to but and groin).

If you only have one cm of overlap, it might be observable without close inspection, but 6-9 probably wouldn't be blatant.

I think full enforcement of this one would be very difficult. What it helps is that when someone has an underlap, but pulls things such that there is again an overlap(but one that doesn't stay put), the ref can then say "this is not a regulation overlap" and force the fencer to get fear that actually covers the fencer.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Let's recap:

{Telk makes points}

No, you're totally missing the point of requiring socks:

This means that when girls wake up for competition at dumb o'clock in the morning, they do not have to shave their legs.


............. Not that anyone on my college team shaved their legs during the winter anyway.

[telkanuru]

I've already said that the purpose of safety equipment is not to prevent minor cuts

[Rockstar44]

Let's recap:

1) Generic sports socks are not designed to prevent lacerations or puncture wounds.

They are not designed to, but they do(to a degree).

2) Generic sports socks do prevent small scrapes and metal splinters

Congratulations!

3) Preventing minor injuries is not the point of safety equipment (FIE jackets protect against bruises etc. less well than padded cotton)

Yes, one of the functions of safety equipment is to prevent minor injuries.

Therefore, socks are not required because they make people more safe.

Yes, that is why they are required. As stated before, the reason that the rule exists is to allow the point or blade to slide off without causing an injury. Steel tends to stick to skin, allowing more of the force to be transferred to the fencer. Socks allow most hits to slide off without injuring the skin.

Most fencers I know would rather not fence with bleeding shins.

I stand by my conclusion that you are retarded.

And, I have it on pretty good authority that I am not retarded. Sorry.

[Purple Fencer]

dumb o'clock in the morning,

HAH!! That's one I had not heard.

In the military we said "O-dark-thirty"....and as Robin Williams said in "Good Morning, Vietnam "What does the "O" stand for? 'O my God, it's early!'"

[catwood1]

If the ref sees skin or a shirt, there's an underlap.

Not necessarily a shirt. The rules say a fencer must have 10 cm of overlap when standing, engarde, and lunging. You can see shirt/skin in a fencing action (crappy prime) that will often show skin/shirt with a totally legal jacket and knickers.

[catwood1]

HAH!! That's one I had not heard.

In the military we said "O-dark-thirty"....and as Robin Williams said in "Good Morning, Vietnam "What does the "O" stand for? 'O my God, it's early!'"

I like to refer to kick-in-the-crotch AM... because thats what its like to get up at that time.

[Superscribe]

Not necessarily a shirt. The rules say a fencer must have 10 cm of overlap when standing, engarde, and lunging. You can see shirt/skin in a fencing action (crappy prime) that will often show skin/shirt with a totally legal jacket and knickers.

I am able to cheat the system by wearing my kevlar camoflauge shirt.

[epeemike81]

They are not designed to [prevent puncture wounds], but they do(to a degree).

Just to reiterate:

"It's a sock. It's not an 800 Newton sock. It's not a 350 Newton sock. It's a Sock!" -DJ Apostrophe.

The degree to which a sock will prevent puncture wounds is so infinitesimal as to be essentially non-existent. as for minor scrapes, sure, which is why I'm not saying we should eliminate the requirements, but let's bring a little sanity to the application of the rule and not stop a bout mid-touch for a sock falling down one inch.

-m

[EldRick]

Better yet, let's change the stupid rules so that we can wear long pants like the grown-ups, while fencing.

[catwood1]

Better yet, let's change the stupid rules so that we can wear long pants like the grown-ups, while fencing.

Where in the rules does it prohibit you from doing this?

[Purple Fencer]

Where in the rules does it prohibit you from doing this?

Long pants may catch a point....same as REALLY baggy knickers or sweats.

[EldRick]

The rules don't actually prohibit long pants specifically - they just say that "breeches" must fasten below the knee.

Well, "breeches" historically included ankle-length, and 15" is certainly below the knee. It seems to be more in the interpretation and the practice, rather than the letter of the rules.

[KD5MDK]

Show me someone who would disallow long pants (of proper material and construction) so I can smack them.

[epeemike81]

"Fencing pants" are, in fact, perfectly legal and even sold by some vendors (Triplette, maybe?). They look really stupid, but they're perfectly legal.

-m

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Yes, one of the functions of safety equipment is to prevent minor injuries.

Yes, that is why they are required. As stated before, the reason that the rule exists is to allow the point or blade to slide off without causing an injury. Steel tends to stick to skin, allowing more of the force to be transferred to the fencer. Socks allow most hits to slide off without injuring the skin.

The point of safety equipment is to keep people from dying or suffering major bodily injury. As Telk has alluded to, FIE gear is great at preventing puncture wounds, but much of it is horrible at preventing bruises (and thus why some people wear more than one plastron, for example). The fact that the gear happens to prevent smaller injuries is good, but it is not the primary goal of the safety gear.

...... Where is the "steel sticking to skin" thing coming from? It wouldn't totally surprise me if it were true, but it's definitely a case of "citation needed".

I would also like to note that as a former Catholic School Girl, I amassed a LOT of knee socks. Eventually for competition, I settled on mostly comfy over-the-knee socks that were of appropriate team colors, but when I was in high school, I wore whatever was clean that I had grabbed, and some of them were made of nylon/tights type material, I had a pair that was more like lace than a sock.... All of these were determined to be legal, as far as I could tell, as long as they met my knickers. I bet the lace-like ones might have done me more damage than nothing at all-- but I was fencing sabre at the time, so I didn't really care so much.

Not necessarily a shirt. The rules say a fencer must have 10 cm of overlap when standing, engarde, and lunging. You can see shirt/skin in a fencing action (crappy prime) that will often show skin/shirt with a totally legal jacket and knickers.

..... If you can see a shirt or skin, unless the shirt is hanging out untucked, there is an underlap. It may be a LEGAL underlap, but there's still an underlap, and it calls attention to the issue.

The rules don't actually prohibit long pants specifically - they just say that "breeches" must fasten below the knee.

Well, "breeches" historically included ankle-length, and 15" is certainly below the knee. It seems to be more in the interpretation and the practice, rather than the letter of the rules.

It's difficult for many to find knickers that fit comfortably, partially because fencers often have unusual muscle development in thighs/butts compared to waists and hips, or are particularly tall, or whatever. And then, adding in calves? It's not that hard on normal pants but to make fitted pants that allow for flexibility at the knee, but are tailored enough to prevent excess fabric a point could get caught on? Challenging for a tailor, even more challenging for a vendor.

[catwood1]

The LP warm up pants are perfectly legal for competition, except maybe for the color.

Basically, its that almost all pants have pockets, or aren't made of a "robust" material. If it doesn't have pockets (other than 1 in the back), and I don't think I could stick a pencil through it, I'l let someone fence in them.

On a different note, why are knickers allowed to have that 1 pocket? It seems very likely to catch a point and break a weapon...

[MyrddinsPrecint]

On a different note, why are knickers allowed to have that 1 pocket? It seems very likely to catch a point and break a weapon...

My FIE Knickers have two pockets. One for my body cord, one for my MP3 player. (not while actually fencing, though, for either.)

[Inquartata]

You know, the material regs say:

m.25 The national clothing includes the socks, the breeches, the jacket, and the conductive jacket in foil and saber. (Cf. m.28, m.34).

and then

1. Protection. The equipment and clothing must provide the
competitor with the maximum protection compatible with
the freedom of movement necessary for fencing.
2. Safety. It must not be possible for the opponent to be
obstructed or injured by the equipment, nor for the
opponent’s weapon to be caught up in or deflected by the
equipment which, in consequence, must have neither
buckles nor openings in which the opponent’s point may be
caught up — except accidentally — and thus held or
deflected. The jacket and its collar must be completely
buttoned or done up.
3. Characteristics of the clothing. Fencers’ clothing must be
made of sufficiently robust material and be clean and in
good condition.
The material from which the equipment is made must not
have a surface which is smooth enough to cause the point
or the opponent’s touch to glance off (cf. m.30).
Clothing must be made entirely in cloth able to resist a
pressure of 800 Newtons. Very particular attention must be
paid to the way the seams under the armpits, if there are
any, are made. An under-garment consisting of a protective under-plastron covering the vital upper areas of the body (following the design
given in Appendix A to these Rules, ‘Safety norms for
manufacturers’) resistant to 800 Newtons is also
mandatory.

So the socks are included in the list of "clothing", and no exception to the strength requirements seems to be provided for them. Does this mean that the socks really SHOULD be 800N and we should not be allowed to fence in less where the FIE standards are not relaxed as in the US?

And the glove is not even listed as part of the "national clothing" ( though it's discussed later )!