On Covering With the Mask

[oiuyt]

That list seems awfully incomplete... For example, it doesn't list the referee we sent to World Championships this year...

She hasn't, apparently, renewed yet for the new season. World Championships were the end of the 08-09 season.

Here's a more complete list:
http://www.fie.ch/Competitions/Fence...x?type=Referee

-B

[Insipiens]

That list seems awfully incomplete... For example, it doesn't list the referee we sent to World Championships this year...

-m

I did say "should" It's longer for 2008/9 than 2009/10 (32 US refs rather than 17) so maybe it doens't have people who haven't got round to renewing their license for the new season yet but are still qualified? Or maybe it is just incomplete

Edit - I see that I have been beaten to it with the right list

[epeemike81]

She hasn't, apparently, renewed yet for the new season. World Championships were the end of the 08-09 season.

figured. For the record, 43 on the non-date dependent list.

-m

[Cookeit]

Okay. Fine. Your opponent attacks, you step back (displacing backward). You substituted empty space where your chest would normally be. Empty space is also not target.

Card?

Only if the attack into empty space turns on a white light.

[Fiat Slug]

In foil and saber, it is forbidden to protect the target area or to substitute another part of the body for the target area, either by covering or by an abnormal movement (cf. t.114, t.116, t.120); any touch scored by the fencer at fault is annulled.

This is something that has always baffled me. What is an "abnormal movement" that is not already considered "covering"? Is there a list of "normal" movements?

[kapunga]

This is something that has always baffled me. What is an "abnormal movement" that is not already considered "covering"? Is there a list of "normal" movements?

I'd imagine some kinds of silly walking would be both abnormal movement and cover target.

[Dev]

Only if the attack into empty space turns on a white light.

Okay; here's another question for PF:

Your opponent attacks. You (somewhat implausibly) attempt a leaping circle-six with a flick riposte and whiff on the parry; while you are in mid-air (stay with me here, it's hypothetical) your opponent's point lands on your leg off-target.

But you put your legs where your chest would normally be. If you hadn't made the (miraculous) leap, you'd have been hit in the chest. Substituting valid target? Covering? Card?

[Purple Fencer]

Okay; here's another question for PF:

Your opponent attacks. You (somewhat implausibly) attempt a leaping circle-six with a flick riposte and whiff on the parry; while you are in mid-air (stay with me here, it's hypothetical) your opponent's point lands on your leg off-target.

But you put your legs where your chest would normally be. If you hadn't made the (miraculous) leap, you'd have been hit in the chest. Substituting valid target? Covering? Card?

As I've botched anything I've posted here...I'll leave that one to Downunder and Omar.

[catwood1]

Okay; here's another question for PF:

Your opponent attacks. You (somewhat implausibly) attempt a leaping circle-six with a flick riposte and whiff on the parry; while you are in mid-air (stay with me here, it's hypothetical) your opponent's point lands on your leg off-target.

But you put your legs where your chest would normally be. If you hadn't made the (miraculous) leap, you'd have been hit in the chest. Substituting valid target? Covering? Card?

I fail to see what is implausible about this.

[Dev]

I fail to see what is implausible about this.

I don't think Purple Fencer has that much of a vertical anymore.

[Superscribe]

I fail to see what is implausible about this.

In about the 6 times i've seen this in competition, it has always been attack off target.

[Purple Fencer]

I don't think Purple Fencer has that much of a vertical anymore.

Not when you're 5' 4 1/2"!

[Mike Ross]

Okay; here's another question for PF:

Your opponent attacks. You (somewhat implausibly) attempt a leaping circle-six with a flick riposte...

But you put your legs where your chest would normally be. If you hadn't made the (miraculous) leap, you'd have been hit in the chest. Substituting valid target? Covering? Card?

Imagining the scenario as you have described the following picture comes to mind:

http://printroom.com/popupImage.asp?...463&effectRGB=

The fencer on the right has made a leap that has moved his entire torso. Assuming that the attempt at the parry was unsuccessful by the fencer on the right, the left fencer's offensive action started and was Non-Valid, this would not be worthy of a YG1.

At foil and sabre, it is forbidden to protect the target area or to
substitute another part of the body for the target area, either by
covering or by an abnormal movement.

The fencer on the right clearly has open target for the opponent to score. No other parts of the body are being substituted as valid target, and he is not performing an abnormal movement.

The Call:
Halt. Attack. Off Target.

Omar and Dave have given the discussion good advice on how this rule should be applied.

I would reccomend that you listen to their positions.

[RkfdFencer]

Okay; here's another question for PF:

Your opponent attacks. You (somewhat implausibly) attempt a leaping circle-six with a flick riposte and whiff on the parry; while you are in mid-air (stay with me here, it's hypothetical) your opponent's point lands on your leg off-target.

But you put your legs where your chest would normally be. If you hadn't made the (miraculous) leap, you'd have been hit in the chest. Substituting valid target? Covering? Card?

With no credentials at all, I'll jump in.

If, while leaping you brought your knees up to your chest, I would say you were covering (based on what I see in my head from your text); if you jumped and your legs stayed mostly straight, no covering.

I would not card for substitution on this either - as I picture it in my head from your text. Up, down, left or right, it sounds to me like displacing target as part of normal fencing action (circular parry/flick riposte). Maybe a jump with no blade actions would more likely be seen as a substitution.

[RkfdFencer]

Doh! Mike Ross beat me to it, and with a picture.

Also, aren't we now getting in to previously discussed territory? Wasn't there a recent thread with a theoretical about one fencer jumping completely over the other? Maybe it was a point in line thread.

[wwalkerjr]

Okay; here's another question for PF:

Your opponent attacks. You (somewhat implausibly) attempt a leaping circle-six with a flick riposte and whiff on the parry; while you are in mid-air (stay with me here, it's hypothetical) your opponent's point lands on your leg off-target.

But you put your legs where your chest would normally be. If you hadn't made the (miraculous) leap, you'd have been hit in the chest. Substituting valid target? Covering? Card?

What happens if you just move left or right to avoid the point and get hit on the leg or arm?

[catwood1]

Does everyone here think Dev was serious in his question?


...really?

[Purple Fencer]

Does everyone here think Dev was serious in his question?


...really?

Given the picture posted, and the Trillini poster from a few years ago with a similar body placement (although both fencers were hitting off target), it was certainly plausible.

[Dev]

The fencer on the right clearly has open target for the opponent to score. No other parts of the body are being substituted as valid target, and he is not performing an abnormal movement.

The Call:
Halt. Attack. Off Target.

Omar and Dave have given the discussion good advice on how this rule should be applied.

I would reccomend that you listen to their positions.

Mike,

I wasn't serious. I was just having a little fun at Sam's expense. Also, the mental image of him pulling a Jon Tiomkin was something I thought everyone would appreciate.

I agree with Omar and Dave (and you).

[Omar Bhutta]

And just for the OP's information, DownUnder and Omar Bhutta are two of the highest rated foil referees that regularly post here. 1 is an FIE ref, and the other is a 2.

(If Omar has his FIE license and I don't know about it, I do apologize...)

No FIE license yet because I have no time to travel. Hopefully will have time next year or so once my fellowship has slowed down some...

That list seems awfully incomplete... For example, it doesn't list the referee we sent to World Championships this year...

That said, Omar is not an FIE ref: http://foc.askfred.net/Referee/refDe...id=67&page_id=

He's easily that caliber of referee, though.

-m

Very kind, Senor Eskin. Gracias.