New Look FOC Website

[Gav]

Because we aren't prepared to replace several thousand masks just because?

Neither were we, or the French, or the Hungarian or...

Rules change. They were opposed. The opposition failed.

[gladius]

In France, as of September 1, 2009, to compete in all cadet, junior and senior events you must have the electrified bib.

Anyone (don't know about veterans) who wants to compete in Italy or France in foil, must have the electrified bib as of September 1.

September 1, 2010.

Unless something has changed since mid-June.

-B

oiuyt is correct about the date of September 1, 2010 (next year) for France.

My mistake (sorry) was not to specify that in France, or anywhere else in Europe for that matter, all cadet competitions used in the European Cadet circuit this season--which are under the CEE (Confédération Européenne d’Escrime) rules (i.e., FIE rules)--require the electrified bib as of September 1, 2009.

Since these are really the competitions which interest US fencers going there, US foilists (cadet) better be ready and have the electrified bib or else they will not compete at these events. Ditto for WC events for juniors.

[gladius]

in France, or anywhere else in Europe for that matter, all cadet competitions used in the European Cadet circuit this season--which are under the CEE (Confédération Européenne d’Escrime) rules (i.e., FIE rules)--require the electrified bib as of September 1, 2009.

For the eternal doubting Thomases and the rest of the confused here is the official word sent to all national federations members of the European Fencing Confederation (emphasis added).

Fencing Confederation Confédération Européenne d’Escrime

12.06.2009
Information Letter no. 26-2009

Dear Member Federations,

After several requests from our federations with regard to the new foil mask with a conductive bib, the Executive Committee has discussed this at their last COMEX meeting and has now decided to follow the general rule of using this mask also in the new season.

It is therefore compulsory for all categories, and of course for the European Senior and Junior Championships 2009, and the Cadet Circuit 2009-2010, including the European Cadet Championships in Athens 2010.

Most manufacturers have developed solutions in different price categories in order to make the change from a normal mask to a mask with transparent bib as economical as possible.

Best regards,

Max Geuter
General Secretariate
Postfach 1138
D-82 179 Groebenzell-Muenchen
Email:  HYPERLINK "mailto:secretariate@eurofencing.info" secretariate@eurofencing.info



Why is our FOC still fighting this war adding to confusion? As gav rightly said, "Rules change. They were opposed. The opposition failed." Let's move on.

[RITFencing]

Brad,

I've been a CRE for about 2 years now, with the test and everything, and have proctored both written and practical exams, but I'm not on the list given. Does this mean that I am no longer (or never was supposed to be) a CRE or is there a record keeping snafu at work?

[oso97]

Brad,

I've been a CRE for about 2 years now, with the test and everything, and have proctored both written and practical exams, but I'm not on the list given. Does this mean that I am no longer (or never was supposed to be) a CRE or is there a record keeping snafu at work?

I'm in the same situation.

[SJCFU#2]

Why is our FOC still fighting this war adding to confusion? As gav rightly said, "Rules change. They were opposed. The opposition failed." Let's move on.

I was surprised by the FOC's decision and wouldn't be surprised if this decision were revisited at some point in the future. However I wouln't be surprised if availability was a factor in their decision.

The CEE letter states "Most manufacturers have developed solutions in different price categories in order to make the change from a normal mask to a mask with transparent bib as economical as possible." A quick survey of various manufacturers web sites found only one non-FIE mask with a conductive bib (and that wasn't even from a European manufacturer). This hardly sounds like the sort of range that would make the change "as economical as possible", especially for someone who doesn't even require CEN1 gear their domestic events (which is a separate issue unto itself).

In addition, the only options I could find for converting existing masks (an option which the FIE specifically states NGB's may elect for their domestic events) are the LP X-change mask (excellent mask but hardly a low cost option) and a couple of conversion kits which were buried so deep on their manufacturer's web sites that they don't even appear on the web sites of their exclusive US vendors.

It seems likely that other vendors have plans to make low cost masks with conductive bibs and conversion kits available as soon as they see a market develop, however until they actually become available they really can't be considered options, and without such such options I suspect this rule change would have been difficult sell to the majority of the USFA members.

[oiuyt]

A quick survey of various manufacturers web sites found only one non-FIE mask with a conductive bib (and that wasn't even from a European manufacturer).

The top entry on this page seems to be a non-FIE mask with foil bib from a European manufacturer.

I suspect that the CEE message more had the retrofit kits in mind than non-FIE masks. Do the CEE events even accept non-FIE masks? I would have guessed that they follow FIE uniform standards.

-B

[AllezCat]

Brad,

I've been a CRE for about 2 years now, with the test and everything, and have proctored both written and practical exams, but I'm not on the list given. Does this mean that I am no longer (or never was supposed to be) a CRE or is there a record keeping snafu at work?

I noticed I wasn't on the list either, so I asked Mark Stasinos about it. He said the FOC is doing some housecleaning to make sure that only active examiners are on the list. If you're active and current, they'll add you back to the list when you ask.

[oso97]

I noticed I wasn't on the list either, so I asked Mark Stasinos about it. He said the FOC is doing some housecleaning to make sure that only active examiners are on the list. If you're active and current, they'll add you back to the list when you ask.

I don't suppose he mentioned to you to whom specifically such inquiries should be addressed?

[oiuyt]

I don't suppose he mentioned to you to whom specifically such inquiries should be addressed?

According to the website, Gerrie is the chair of the "Grassroots Development, Referee Certification and Re-Certification" subgroup of the "Domestic Referee Development Committee" of the FOC. She seems like a reasonable first choice.

-B

[Superscribe]

Why is our FOC still fighting this war adding to confusion? As gav rightly said, "Rules change. They were opposed. The opposition failed." Let's move on.

I believe the FOC is saying "No, let's not move on, because there's no reason to move on."

The letter is saying "the changes are costly, and the effects of the changes in rules and equipment don't make much of an impact. if you fence internationally, you'll have to pay attention to different rules and pay for different equipment. however, these different rules and equipment will be similar enough to current U.S. rules and equipment, that if you don't go by international rules and buy international equipment, and train in the U.S., then you won't be at a significant disadvantage when you DO go compete internationally."

[keith]

The letter is saying "the changes are costly, and the effects of the changes in rules and equipment don't make much of an impact. if you fence internationally, you'll have to pay attention to different rules and pay for different equipment. however, these different rules and equipment will be similar enough to current U.S. rules and equipment, that if you don't go by international rules and buy international equipment, and train in the U.S., then you won't be at a significant disadvantage when you DO go compete internationally."

That seems a reasonable paraphrase. Although it does raise the question of whether the FoC is the best body to make that call.

[gladius]

I believe the FOC is saying "No, let's not move on, because there's no reason to move on."

If this were the FOC position expressed in a different way and for the reasons you mentioned, I'd agree. What I mean is that if the FOC said that they do not see any reason to adopt now these changes and that they prefer to let time pass for the old masks to be replaced by new ones and therefore not burden financially the large majority of foil fencers who will never compete internationally, this would be rather sensible.

But then we would have a gray area for any domestic qualifying competition for a spot on the national team if fencers were to use different equipment. In France, for example, where there is a similar resistance against this new bib rule, the FFE has decried that for all qualifying national competitions the new bib is de rigueur. Any other competition in France you can keep your old beloved mask sans bib.

Of course this is mainly a problem for the elite fencers or those who aspire to be such who would be much embarrassed if when checking their equipment at a tournament in Europe they will be asked to get a new mask or else watch instead of fence, making this a rather expensive form of tourism.

In my opinion this is not such a big deal one way or another but I really don't think that the FIE will reverse this bib rule at least until London or beyond, so it might be smart to do it here also, sooner rather than later.

I do feel that the other ruling on the 800 N fencing uniforms which are mandatory in Europe (with exception for Under 14 who must have 350 N) would be more important to adopt for the fencers' safety. We do not, and when any fencer goes to Europe he/she must upgrade (= buy a new uniform and plastron) to the CEE standards if they want to fence over there.

As to the observations of some FOC experts and local coaches that the bib does not really change that much the way to fence foil, there are rather informed Euro experts who think otherwise. But what the hell do they know that ours don't?

So let's buck this reform--adding confusion--for whatever reason...because our FOC big guns know best.

And like keith I also question whether the FOC is the best body to make this call.

[dcrocket]

And like keith I also question whether the FOC is the best body to make this call.

I believe that the BOD is going to make this call. The FOC's thoughts should be given weight, as should the opinions from various other perspectives...

[mdstasinos]

I believe the FOC is saying "No, let's not move on, because there's no reason to move on."

The letter is saying "the changes are costly, and the effects of the changes in rules and equipment don't make much of an impact. if you fence internationally, you'll have to pay attention to different rules and pay for different equipment. however, these different rules and equipment will be similar enough to current U.S. rules and equipment, that if you don't go by international rules and buy international equipment, and train in the U.S., then you won't be at a significant disadvantage when you DO go compete internationally."

If we were domestically doing everything in compliance with the rule changes for international competition, then we would need to require all our fencers to purchase FIE blades, FIE approved uniforms and FIE Masks with visors. We do not require this. One of this issues that was raised about the new mask was in the course of a pool of fencers how many touches landed on the bib target? The answer was 2 to 3 touches per pool. A follow up question had been solicited by international coaches in two parts. First, did tactics in training change as a result of the added target? The answer was No. Second, In the prior world cup season did this have a impact in results? the answer was again no. The discussion then turned to if the manufactures could supply the needed masks in bulk? The answer was no at this time. The question was raised about the retro fit kits that are being developed for the foil mask and it was pointed out that they would not be legal according to the FIE description of the Mask and likely will not be considered to be legal in international competition. So, if you only compete domestically do we disadvantage our fencers internationally by not using it nationally? I do not think so. Again, if we want to enforce all the FIE uniform rules, we would need to require uniforms, masks and blades be in compliance. Maybe, that is a topic for another discussion, but if you are the parent of a couple of kids who fence or a college student or just a competitor who from time to time attending a NAC it could add up to some very serious dollars quickly.

Mark Stasinos
Vice-President
US Fencing Association

[Inquartata]

One of this issues that was raised about the new mask was in the course of a pool of fencers how many touches landed on the bib target? The answer was 2 to 3 touches per pool. A follow up question had been solicited by international coaches in two parts. First, did tactics in training change as a result of the added target? The answer was No. Second, In the prior world cup season did this have a impact in results? the answer was again no.

As I suspected. So much for all the people who fretted about the safety issue, because apparently people are NOT aiming at the bib and coaches are NOT teaching fencers to do so, after all. So it's no more dangerous than the current accidental bib hit...

[gladius]

One of this issues that was raised about the new mask was in the course of a pool of fencers how many touches landed on the bib target? The answer was 2 to 3 touches per pool.

A follow up question had been solicited by international coaches in two parts. First, did tactics in training change as a result of the added target? The answer was No.
Second, In the prior world cup season did this have a impact in results? the answer was again no.

The discussion then turned to if the manufactures could supply the needed masks in bulk? The answer was no at this time.

The question was raised about the retro fit kits that are being developed for the foil mask and it was pointed out that they would not be legal according to the FIE description of the Mask and likely will not be considered to be legal in international competition.

... if you are the parent of a couple of kids who fence or a college student or just a competitor who from time to time attending a NAC it could add up to some very serious dollars quickly.

Mark Stasinos
Vice-President
US Fencing Association

To bib, or not to bib: that is the question ...

... I asked three international experts: Maestro Enrico Di Ciolo, Maestro Sergei Golubitsky, and Maestro Giancarlo Toràn

Here are their answers (translated for Di Ciolo and Toràn, actual text from Golubitsky)

Enrico Di Ciolo

The foil mask's bib was always a valid target up until the lamé vest was invented, therefore, this is nothing new. We really don't care one way or another and we always adapt to the new rules. Actually this is exciting. If you don't adapt to the new rules you fall behind.


Sergei Golubitsky

At some point I'm for this decision and against. At some point it's clear: the rules are changed, u gotta adopt yourself to it!!!! It's clear.

I don't agree with statement, that fencing with new bib would not bring impact on results. It's absurd! U can imagine, with the score at 14-14 or 4-4 each, u r touching non electrified bib - u r still in the middle of nowhere, instead of winning and qualifying yourself for the next round, or winning a tournament.

BUT! I think for the fencers of lower level this new rule makes no difference (or at least it seems so). What u get, it's one more wire on u, troubles of buying or getting new bib and, in the case this bib gets broken, u gotta fix it or even buy a new mask (!!!).

So, we gotta differ fencing for fun and professional fencing.

Greetz,

Sergei

PS. Notice: the number of hits against the bib in women's foil is much higher than in men's foil...


Giancarlo Toràn

This proposal was a compromise reached to prevent even more radical changes. But it was approved and now we all have to live with it.

I don't believe that the conductive bib (actually just the lower part of the bib) has changed much things from the point of view of what tactics to use now. It did reduce however the obvious injustice which short fencers, male and female, took advantage of for years by using at times masks with such a large bib to make it difficult to find the valid target between the armed arm, bib, and irregular position of the head. From this point of view things have improved a bit.

By increasing the total surface of the valid target (it increased albeit by not very much) the percentage of valid touches increases. So if you want to really nitpick, one could say that this brings the equilibrium back towards the attack which was severely penalized since the increase of the contact time. In WF I believe this is more noticeable. The rigid chest protector which affects negatively the contact time is now in part compensated by the bib which is soft and makes the scoring of the touches easier.

I doubt however that one can prepare for a bout in function of this specific target which is further back with respect to the shoulder and the forward part of the chest. It is true that with a horizontal flick to the bib (executed with the palm pointed downward) you would have a higher chance to score, but it's not easy to get there and a small lowering of the head--an irregular move, yes, but not often sanctioned--would be enough to neutralize it.

Basically, I don't disagree with the cited opinions. What remains to be seen (and here the American caution could be rewarded) is if this change will stay with the new FIE. But I doubt that the rules will be changed again in the short term.

I asked my girls who compete internationally and they did not indicate much of a change. One however told me about a violent act suggested by a coach to his fencer: a hit with the point to the throat with the grip turned, inflicted deliberately and with power which apparently caused the victim to fall. However, nothing would prevent doing the same thing on a regular bib if the goal is to inflict physical harm to the opponent. This is criminal behavior.

Regarding the statistics cited of 2 to 3 touches on the bib per pool this does not mean that the hits were aimed to the bib but maybe the touches were purely random. Ditto for the observation that this rule has not changed the tactics in foil and likely did not have a significant impact on the results this past season.

As far as the manufacturing capacity to satisfy the demand for the new masks on the part of the manufacturers of fencing equipment, if they see a possibility to make money, they will do it.

The kits to make the mask au courant, I don't believe they are acceptable in FIE competitions. But since this affects only the few foilists who compete abroad, the FIS takes care of them and we don't see this as a problem.

In Italy we adapt to the new rules since Roch got us used to realize how useless it was to protest even when the reasons behind were much stronger that in this case.


In conclusion, this is a problem only for the few international competitors for which the USFA (just like the FIS) will provide legal FIE foil masks free of charge.


The USFA dilemma in the eternal words of the bard of Avon:

To bib, or not to bib: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them?

Hamlet 3/1

Dream on...