referee exam questions

[smee]

I've been studying up for the referee exam lately, and even after scouring the rule book and the internet a few questions are still stumping me (doesn't help that I typically read way too much into questions ). Any nudges in the right direction would be greatly appreciated!

52. Is starting an action after the opponent passes considered “immediate?”
65. Is going off the end of the strip a hard halt for the opponent (card + touch)? Generally, if a fencer incurs a red card and the opponent’s action begun before the penalty lands valid, are two touches awarded?
85. When two fencers in the same pool are absolutely equal it would seem fairer that the winner of the bout between them is seeded higher, rather than by drawing lots (o.19.f). In pool ranking, the winner would be higher, no?
90. Is the referee’s not noting a card on the scoresheet grounds for a justified appeal, or is this one of those cases of “fact?”
202. Some sources imply that, when attacking with a double advance lunge, the opponent’s extension takes right of way if begun before the advance lunge; t.56.3 and t.75.b.1 seem to corroborate the point somehow, but it seems contrary to the definition of an attack…
203. If there is no official “weapons check” (perhaps I shouldn’t assume this is general equipment check) should a competitor be penalized for a non-conforming lamé?
323/342. In epee, if a fencer appropriately tests his weapon and no touch is registered, the referee must test it himself to annul a touch?
326. I never was too good with electrical circuits – once perspiration grounds out an epee fencer, would taping the handle (though illegal in the first place?) achieve anything?
336. A fencer is touched and presents the epee for testing – a missing tip screw is under the fencer’s control, so the touch stands – is a yellow card awarded too?
415. If a fencer with RoW hits a fencer whose mask-lamé cord is unattached, what happens? t.73 suggests the touch is annulled, but I feel like I’m reading too much into the question.
433. If a non-insulated pommel nut on a saber results in a touch not actually on target, t.73 necessitates the touch be awarded, but is a yellow card also applied?
434. I’ve heard recent rumors that the waist-length jacket is now illegal for all weapons – any authoritative confirmation or dismissal?

[noodle]

http://14meters.com/test

52. Is starting an action after the opponent passes considered “immediate?”

in what context?

65. Is going off the end of the strip a hard halt for the opponent (card + touch)? Generally, if a fencer incurs a red card and the opponent’s action begun before the penalty lands valid, are two touches awarded?

card?

85. When two fencers in the same pool are absolutely equal it would seem fairer that the winner of the bout between them is seeded higher, rather than by drawing lots (o.19.f). In pool ranking, the winner would be higher, no?

what makes it more fair?

90. Is the referee’s not noting a card on the scoresheet grounds for a justified appeal, or is this one of those cases of “fact?”

if it is not on the scoresheet, it does not exist.

202. Some sources imply that, when attacking with a double advance lunge, the opponent’s extension takes right of way if begun before the advance lunge; t.56.3 and t.75.b.1 seem to corroborate the point somehow, but it seems contrary to the definition of an attack…

what is the definition of an attack?

203. If there is no official “weapons check” (perhaps I shouldn’t assume this is general equipment check) should a competitor be penalized for a non-conforming lamé?
323/342. In epee, if a fencer appropriately tests his weapon and no touch is registered, the referee must test it himself to annul a touch?

you're not asking for a hint on these, you're asking for the answer, which is found in the rulebook.

326. I never was too good with electrical circuits – once perspiration grounds out an epee fencer, would taping the handle (though illegal in the first place?) achieve anything?

no.

336. A fencer is touched and presents the epee for testing – a missing tip screw is under the fencer’s control, so the touch stands – is a yellow card awarded too?

this is not a tough one to find in the rulebook.

415. If a fencer with RoW hits a fencer whose mask-lamé cord is unattached, what happens? t.73 suggests the touch is annulled, but I feel like I’m reading too much into the question.

that depends on what else happens.

433. If a non-insulated pommel nut on a saber results in a touch not actually on target, t.73 necessitates the touch be awarded, but is a yellow card also applied?

does the rulebook say it should?

434. I’ve heard recent rumors that the waist-length jacket is now illegal for all weapons – any authoritative confirmation or dismissal?

this one's a tough question that gets a lot of people. don't feel bad for not knowing. but its in the rulebook, too.

[MBalderson]

Nudges on a couple

52. Is starting an action after the opponent passes considered “immediate?”

Did the halt occur before or after the action started?

85. When two fencers in the same pool are absolutely equal it would seem fairer that the winner of the bout between them is seeded higher, rather than by drawing lots (o.19.f). In pool ranking, the winner would be higher, no?

If they ended up equal in ALL respects, why are you introducing a new factor to differentiate them?

336. A fencer is touched and presents the epee for testing – a missing tip screw is under the fencer’s control, so the touch stands – is a yellow card awarded too?

Does missing a tip screw effect the testing of the weapon? And can you prove that the screw was not lost during the fencing action?

Also, look at noodle's test...it's quite thorough

[smee]

eep. I really do appreciate you getting me back to looking at what's right in front of my face - like I said, I'm good at making the simplest things difficult. btw, 14meters, though helpful in most cases, is what made me doubt the obvious on some of these (not trying to make excuses, avoid the pillory, etc). Anyhow, thanks for your patience!
The density of my skull astounds me.

[noodle]

eep. I really do appreciate you getting me back to looking at what's right in front of my face - like I said, I'm good at making the simplest things difficult. btw, 14meters, though helpful in most cases, is what made me doubt the obvious on some of these (not trying to make excuses, avoid the pillory, etc). Anyhow, thanks for your patience!
The density of my skull astounds me.

naturally, take the answers on 14meters with a grain of salt, as they're user-provided (i know for a fact that there are a few questions that have the majority submitting wrong answers). but if you're looking for direction, the questions with an overwhelming majority voting in one direction are most likely correct.

the best advice for the ref test is this -- do not read into any of the questions. read it at face value and answer it at face value.

[dberke]

52. Is starting an action after the opponent passes considered “immediate?”

Nothing that starts after the opponent passes matters.

65. Is going off the end of the strip a hard halt for the opponent (card + touch)? Generally, if a fencer incurs a red card and the opponent’s action begun before the penalty lands valid, are two touches awarded?

There are no cards for leaving the strip except for one case and this certainly is not it.

Awarding a touch for pushing the opponent off their end of the strip is not the same as a touch given as the result of a penalty (red) card.

85. When two fencers in the same pool are absolutely equal it would seem fairer that the winner of the bout between them is seeded higher, rather than by drawing lots (o.19.f). In pool ranking, the winner would be higher, no?

It would seem that way, but that's not how it's done. You've already cited the rule that tells you the proper procedure.

90. Is the referee’s not noting a card on the scoresheet grounds for a justified appeal, or is this one of those cases of “fact?”

Here's a fun twist on this one: If the card was not noted on the scoresheet, but the referee did note it on the scoring machine, does that count as being "noted on the scoresheet"?

202. Some sources imply that, when attacking with a double advance lunge, the opponent’s extension takes right of way if begun before the advance lunge; t.56.3 and t.75.b.1 seem to corroborate the point somehow, but it seems contrary to the definition of an attack…

Think of it this way - what if it were a triple-advance-lunge? Quadruple-advance-lunge? Would either of those cases change your opinion?

203. If there is no official “weapons check” (perhaps I shouldn’t assume this is general equipment check) should a competitor be penalized for a non-conforming lamé?

Just because there is no official equipment check, it doesn't absolve the fencers from making sure their equipment conforms to the rules.

323/342. In epee, if a fencer appropriately tests his weapon and no touch is registered, the referee must test it himself to annul a touch?

I believe the rule says the test must be done under the referee's supervision, which allows him some leeway there. If the fencer holds up his weapon and presses the tip and gets no light, if the referee is satisfied with that test, he can annul the touch. That said, most refs will also test it themselves just to make sure.

326. I never was too good with electrical circuits – once perspiration grounds out an epee fencer, would taping the handle (though illegal in the first place?) achieve anything?

Nope.

336. A fencer is touched and presents the epee for testing – a missing tip screw is under the fencer’s control, so the touch stands – is a yellow card awarded too?

You're mixing up failures that occur before the bout starts with failures that could have happened during the fencing. For example: if a fencer's weapon breaks during the action, do you give him a card for nonconforming equipment? How about if he shows up at the start of the bout with a blade broken in two? (Hint: only one of those situations is cardable.)

Dan

[smee]

Again, can't say thanks enough. A big beam of clarity is shining down on me.
I got my words mixed up on "52." Basically I meant to ask if a fencer could have two touches awarded against him at once - for penalty and his opponent's touch occurring simultaneously (I really do know going off the end isn't a card, I swear). But again, I'll probably find this under my nose in a moment.

[edew]

[...]

There are no cards for leaving the strip except for one case and this certainly is not it.

(hint: sides)

It would seem that way, but that's not how it's done. You've already cited the rule that tells you the proper procedure.

And what does one do when two fencers are exactly the same in all indicators, but fenced in different pools (which happens far more often than two fencers from the same pool).

Here's a fun twist on this one: If the card was not noted on the scoresheet, but the referee did note it on the scoring machine, does that count as being "noted on the scoresheet"?

I think it has to be placed on some recording device, same as for the scores themselves. (I use a Palm device where I can record the penalty. Although I also write it down on the paper, I can see it would suffice to have it recorded on the Palm device.)

Think of it this way - what if it were a triple-advance-lunge? Quadruple-advance-lunge? Would either of those cases change your opinion?

But a double axel with a triple toe loop and a camel followed by a forward double-turn tuck and half somersault garners 10 points right there. And don't forget to factor in the difficulty level.

On the other hand, what weapon is smee referring to?

Just because there is no official equipment check, it doesn't absolve the fencers from making sure their equipment conforms to the rules.

Otherwise, at all local competitions, I'll be wearing my "1984" Olympic special (saber) lame. It's a bit tight, but it seemed to be the top-of-the-line equipment back then.

I believe the rule says the test must be done under the referee's supervision, which allows him some leeway there. If the fencer holds up his weapon and presses the tip and gets no light, if the referee is satisfied with that test, he can annul the touch. That said, most refs will also test it themselves just to make sure.

I recommend that the referee ALWAYS check. Otherwise, geez, that dratted tip always seem intermittent (when tested).

[K O'N]

326. I never was too good with electrical circuits – once perspiration grounds out an epee fencer, would taping the handle (though illegal in the first place?) achieve anything?

You're talking about a sweaty glove grounding out to a grounded epee grip?

If it's a pistol grip, taping is illegal. If it's a french taping is not. It's possible to ground to the bare pommel of a french, if you're very sweaty. The better remedy is to change gloves, I think.

BUT, why have two people told you that taping the grip wouldn't help? It's not a good idea, but it would fix the problem. If you break all contact between the grounded grip and the sweaty glove the glove won't ground anymore. Not practical or legal for a pistol, but both practical and legal for a french.

K O'N

[jjefferies]

http://14meters.com/test
in what context?
card?
what makes it more fair?
if it is not on the scoresheet, it does not exist.
what is the definition of an attack?
you're not asking for a hint on these, you're asking for the answer, which is found in the rulebook.
no.
this is not a tough one to find in the rulebook.
that depends on what else happens.
does the rulebook say it should?
this one's a tough question that gets a lot of people. don't feel bad for not knowing. but its in the rulebook, too.

Hello Noodle,
Consider for a moment that others less educated than yourself and the OP do read these threads and it can help educate them. One understands that RTFM is in many instances a sobering attitude. But here we do like to facilitate discussion?

[noodle]

Hello Noodle,
Consider for a moment that others less educated than yourself and the OP do read these threads and it can help educate them. One understands that RTFM is in many instances a sobering attitude. But here we do like to facilitate discussion?

i'd much rather correct a misconception so that they can read the rulebook and see the right answer and why -- not tell them the right answer so they don't have to look at the rulebook and can just take the test off of the study guide with the answer key. that would be why there's no public answer key for the study guide.

beyond that, i gave him a link that most likely has the right answers for the questions he's asking about. if there's a question about why i'd answer that straightforwardly, but not a "what is the answer to X" type of direct question.