Should corps a corps in epee stop the bout?

[Sud]

Can someone please clarify this for me.

I was taught that corps a corps is not an offence in epee. In local competitions this is interpreted as meaning corps a corps is allowed, unless it infringes another rule such as brutality, jostling, avoiding a touch. So, bouts continue without interruption if a simple corps a corps occurs.

Article t.20 says that corps à corps is said to exist when the two competitors are in physical contact; when this occurs the Referee must stop the bout.

I understand the Article to mean that the bout is stopped when a corps a corps occurs in all weapons. In foil and sabre, a card for a group 1 offence would also be given to the offending fener(s).

So, which is the correct interpretation of this rule?
Is the bout stopped or not in epee?

Cheers,

[epeemike81]

The bout IS stopped in epee. as you have already noted, it is not a card, but it is a halt.

-m

[Sud]

Thanks, epeemike81.

[Bebop and Rocksteady]

It's a rule, by I wouldn't recommend it. Epee bouts are long enough as it is.

[rbryanm]

C. CORPS A CORPS AND FLÈCHE ATTACKS
t.63 At épée a fencer who either by a flèche attack or by advancing vigorously brings about a corps à corps even several times in succession (without brutality or violence) does not transgress the basic conventions of fencing and commits no fault thereby (cf. t.20, t.25).


i interpret the rule the same way the local competitions referenced in the first post do -- no halt. t.63 is referenced from t.20.

[veeco]

There is no fault, which means no card. But the action must be stopped.

This is the way it is currently being interpreted and the way I was taught at a referee clinic.

[Manjusri]

Corps à corps stops the action, no question about it. The only difference(s) from foil are that:
- as formerly noted corps à corps does not incur a penalty in épée, unless resulting in another infraction such as jostling or deliberately causing corps à corps to avoid a touch.
- bell to bell contact is not generally considered corps à corps in épée . While this is open to interpretation, experienced épée directors will allow the action to continue.

[edew]

Originally posted by rbryanm
C. CORPS A CORPS AND FLÈCHE ATTACKS
t.63 At épée a fencer who either by a flèche attack or by advancing vigorously brings about a corps à corps even several times in succession (without brutality or violence) does not transgress the basic conventions of fencing and commits no fault thereby (cf. t.20, t.25).


i interpret the rule the same way the local competitions referenced in the first post do -- no halt. t.63 is referenced from t.20.

You should read t.20. Here is what t.20 says:
"Corps a corps is said to exist when the two competitors are in contact; when this occurs the Referee must stop the bout (cf. t.25, t.63)...."

I believe that suffices to indicate that in ALL three weapons, corps a corps require the referee to call halt. Specifically, following the ellipses above, t.20 further explains that in foil and sabre, corps a corps incur a penalty to the person(s) at fault.

[Gav]

I was reading a recent briefing for FIE refs a couple of weeks ago:

"FIE sabre referees are considered to be the best at applying the conventions and rules correctly and in a standard way. Epee referees allow too much violence and foil is the worst refereed , because of confusion over the
attack."

Some of the comments on this board with regard to this basic rule bear this out. Corps a corps is a halt at Epee, but no penalty. End of story.

[rbryanm]

Originally posted by edew
You should read t.20. Here is what t.20 says:
"Corps a corps is said to exist when the two competitors are in contact; when this occurs the Referee must stop the bout (cf. t.25, t.63)...."

I believe that suffices to indicate that in ALL three weapons, corps a corps require the referee to call halt. Specifically, following the ellipses above, t.20 further explains that in foil and sabre, corps a corps incur a penalty to the person(s) at fault.

aye... i read it... and i read t.63, which seems to me to be clearly identifying an exception in epee concerning corps a corps, fencing conventions, and fault, eh?

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by rbryanm
aye... i read it... and i read t.63, which seems to me to be clearly identifying an exception in epee concerning corps a corps, fencing conventions, and fault, eh?

t. 20 is a rule which applies to ALL WEAPONS and states that corps a corps is a halt. t. 63 is a rule for epee which says it is not an offence. it does NOT say that corps a corps is not a halt, and thus they are NOT in conflict. it IS a halt, by t.20, it is NOT a card, by t.63.

-m

[swordsen]

Sorry Bryan, I'm with epeemike on this. It is a halt, but not a card. although we did discuss this one at a refree clinic where the FOC rep agreed with us after reading the rules. He also confessed that he had never called it this way. He had never connected the two rules in his mind and just let the epeeists go at it. (He was primarily a foil director)