Contradictory Rules

[DHCJr]

I have started threads on ‘Rules Urban Myths’ and ‘Obsolete Rules’. Now let us add ‘Contradictory Rules’.

Let us start with a fairly new rule M.5.5.a that was in the 2008 FIE rulebook. Let me quote from the second paragraph. “In order to make the identification easier, please note that a traditional pointe d'arrêt has two screws to fix the tip of the pointe d'arrêt to the base, the whole is in metal and there is no plastic in the base.” In French, it is “Pour faciliter l’identification, noter qu’une pointe traditionnelle comporte deux vis pour la fixation du bouton de la pointe d’arrêt à l’embase, le tout est en métal et aucun plastique n’existe à l’embase.”

I know this was to make illegal ZipTips, the problem is I have never seen a Foil or Epee Tip that didn’t have plastic in the base of the tip. It is required to insulate the tip from the barrel.

[TooLoftheDeviL]

Tangent, but I was irritated when this rule was passed and I'm still irked by it now. I can only read

In order to make the identification easier

as

In order to impede innovation and prevent change

New and different is inherently bad, the motto of the FIE

[foibles]

I know this was to make illegal ZipTips

I understand this isn't the reason for your post, but did they provide any explanations why they believed ZipTips should be illegal for international competition?

[DHCJr]

I understand this isn't the reason for your post, but did they provide any explanations why they believed ZipTips should be illegal for international competition?

Officially, No!

I have my own opinion, but that is what I have seen with my dealings with Dos Santos. If he doesn’t understand it, it is illegal. For example, the first time I met him was at the Worlds in 2001. He was the SEMI representative there. I turned in a Tokyo Sport Foil Body Cord and it was failed because ‘Incapable de contrôler’, Unable to Control. It met all the requirements, but he hadn’t seen it before.

He has also ruled illegal Blue Gauntlet’s Universal Body Cord after Chen took the time to consult first with Dan to make sure that it followed all the rules.

Addition: This also made screwless tips illegal, even though some were homologated for Epee when they were requiring tips that did not go out of travel.

There is nothing about why they are illegal either!


I was wrong about the date that this rule came out. It was in 2006.

Are there any other Contradictory rules or unenforceable rules? There are, let us see if there is anyone else who can find them.

[migopod]

I thought that the ban on screwless was because of the mistaken belief that a fencer could somehow sneakily adjust the lighting stroke during the bout. That and because Dos Santos is a counter-revolutionary running dog imperialist.

[DHCJr]

I thought that the ban on screwless was because of the mistaken belief that a fencer could somehow sneakily adjust the lighting stroke during the bout. That and because Dos Santos is a counter-revolutionary running dog imperialist.

You would have to take apart the weapon to adjust it. The Epee tips that were homologated, to adjust the travel you would have had to take apart the tips as well. How could they change the travel? Or are you saying, since they didn't understand they banned them also. I think that is what you are saying with the word mistaken.

Come on, let us hear of another rule!

[SJCFU#2]

It may not qualify as a contradiction (probably more an inconsistency), but Appendix B to the material rules calls for yellow grounding lights in foil and saber, yet for epee they are supposed to be orange.

[oiuyt]

I turned in a Tokyo Sport Foil Body Cord and it was failed because ‘Incapable de contrôler’, Unable to Control. It met all the requirements, but he hadn’t seen it before.

Note that I've had a Negrini Italian bayonet cord initially rejected at a NAC for the same reason.

Granted, the situation was fixed after I insisted on calling over the head tech.

-B

[SJCFU#2]

As long as we're harping on reactionary rulings by the FIE, does anyone know the justification for banning the diagonal elastic safety straps on the back of BG masks? (the word "horizontal" was added to m.26.7 after the fact)

I could understand such a decision if testing had shown that two diagonal straps were less secure than a single horizontal strap but the fact that BG's mask had been approved by the FIE a decade earlier and that EN1367 (the European standard for protective clothing) leaves the design of the restraint mechanism to the discretion of the manufacturer (they only specify the test procedures for mask restraint) suggests that this may have been another case of "I haven't seen it before therefore it can't possibly be legal."

[dcrocket]

2. The annulment of touches

t.66 1. In arriving at his judgement, the Referee will disregard touches which are registered as a result of actions:

— or which are made on any object other than the opponent, including his equipment (cf. t.36, t.67/e).

t.67 2. The Referee must take note of possible failures of the electrical equipment and must annul the last touch registered in the following circumstances: (a) If a touch made on the guard of the competitor against whom the touch was registered or on the conductive strip causes the apparatus to register a touch;


t.68

(g) The fact that the épée of a competitor has large or small areas of insulation formed by oxidation, by glue, paint or any other material on the guard, on the blade or elsewhere, on which his opponent‘s touches can cause a touch to be signalled, or that the electric tip is badly fixed to the end of the blade so that it can be unscrewed or tightened by hand, cannot justify the annulment of touches registered against that competitor.

[parrythis]

Blue Gauntlet’s Universal Body Cord

Do these still exist? I looked on BG's web-site and didn't see them listed. If you know where I can find them, please post a link.

Such a thing would be great for practice where there is a mix of weapons represented. I don't mind putting a lame on and off, but threading a new body cord is a PitA. More often than not I suit up with two. I have been thinking of fabricating either a universal body cord or a set of adapters.

[SJCFU#2]

Do these still exist? I looked on BG's web-site and didn't see them listed. If you know where I can find them, please post a link.

Such a thing would be great for practice where there is a mix of weapons represented. I don't mind putting a lame on and off, but threading a new body cord is a PitA. More often than not I suit up with two. I have been thinking of fabricating either a universal body cord or a set of adapters.

Just add an additional line with a 20 Amp clip to the A line at one end of an epee body cord and refit your foils with three prong epee sockets (the wire goes to the B socket).

CvilleFencer could probably provide more details (I know that he's built a few of these) but AFAIK the biggest problem (besides officials who tries to make up their own rules) is making sure that the epee socket doesn't extend beyond the edge of the foil guard (I've heard that Negrinni 12 cm guards helps with this).

.

[Druskin]

How about m.25.4, which states that

"The use of breast/chest protectors (made of metal or some rigid material) is compulsory for women and optional for men. In foil, this breast/chest protector must be worn inside the jacket."

Does this mean that in the other weapons you can wear it outside the jacket? That would seem to contradict with m.25.2 in Epee at least (not sure why the chest protector rules are different for foil and saber):

"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." [Emphasis added].

On a separate topic: one thing I've been wondering recently, after a question from a beginner at my club, has to do with the clothing v. equipment dichotomy, and masks. Masks are generally treated as uniform rather than clothing in the rulebook; they're not listed in m.25.3 (incl. note), and they have a separate section in Appendix A (A.2 as opposed to A.3). This makes me wonder about the bib, as it is part of the mask.

M.25.3 states:
"Fencers‘ clothing may be of different colors, apart from black.
Note: At USFA local, divisional, and sectional competitions, there are no restrictions on colors or decorations on uniforms, providing that the uniforms still comply with all other requirements."

Is there anything in the rules that would prevent me from treating the bib like a hockey goalie mask, and painting all kinds of stuff on it (non-offensive, leave off language entirely, just pictures)? As far as I could tell, the only requirement of bibs is that they don't catch the weapon (m.25.2) which might prevent embroidery or patches, and the strength requirements of A.2.2.4.3. On the section and below level, it specifically seems to allow it on uniforms, of which the mask would be a part. If we leave out FIE for the moment, is there anything that would prevent this even at Nationals or NACs?

P.S. Having to designate a section as A.2.2.4.3 is annoyingly long, the numbering really needs to get cleaned up.

[downunder]

2. The annulment of touches

t.66 1. In arriving at his judgement, the Referee will disregard touches which are registered as a result of actions:

— or which are made on any object other than the opponent, including his equipment (cf. t.36, t.67/e).

t.67 2. The Referee must take note of possible failures of the electrical equipment and must annul the last touch registered in the following circumstances: (a) If a touch made on the guard of the competitor against whom the touch was registered or on the conductive strip causes the apparatus to register a touch;


t.68

(g) The fact that the épée of a competitor has large or small areas of insulation formed by oxidation, by glue, paint or any other material on the guard, on the blade or elsewhere, on which his opponent‘s touches can cause a touch to be signalled, or that the electric tip is badly fixed to the end of the blade so that it can be unscrewed or tightened by hand, cannot justify the annulment of touches registered against that competitor.

That's not so much a contradiction - just an exception. If a fencer gets a light on the guard due to failure of the socket, wire etc then it's annulled. If there is rust or glue, it isn't.

[downunder]

How about m.25.4, which states that

"The use of breast/chest protectors (made of metal or some rigid material) is compulsory for women and optional for men. In foil, this breast/chest protector must be worn inside the jacket."

Does this mean that in the other weapons you can wear it outside the jacket? That would seem to contradict with m.25.2 in Epee at least (not sure why the chest protector rules are different for foil and saber):

The reason for foil was that there was an initial advantage having the protector as close to the lame as possible. As techniques change this is less relevant.

All your other points are nitpicking, not contraditions.

[noodle]

The reason for foil was that there was an initial advantage having the protector as close to the lame as possible. As techniques change this is less relevant.

All your other points are nitpicking, not contraditions.

i still think it would be funny to try and wear one outside your jacket in epee and cite that rule as proof that you're allowed to, just to see what would happen. worth a card, imo.

[Purple Fencer]

As long as we're harping on reactionary rulings by the FIE, does anyone know the justification for banning the diagonal elastic safety straps on the back of BG masks? (the word "horizontal" was added to m.26.7 after the fact)

Where the straps cross is FAR higher on the back of the head than going straight cross....there's not really a lot of material there to do the job. That's probably why. I tell people to move one of the straps down to the horizontal position and it'll be better.

[Morale Officer]

Where the straps cross is FAR higher on the back of the head than going straight cross....there's not really a lot of material there to do the job. That's probably why. I tell people to move one of the straps down to the horizontal position and it'll be better.

When I had my BG mask, the diagonal straps held tighter than one across the back, so it more than did the job for me.

[Purple Fencer]

When I had my BG mask, the diagonal straps held tighter than one across the back, so it more than did the job for me.

That might be a consequence of the strap placement...frankly, they're too far up.

I forgot who on this board did it, but he had HIS strap placed at the bottom of the mask frame....ended up sitting below the occipital curve and REALLY stayed on.

[DHCJr]

It may not qualify as a contradiction (probably more an inconsistency), but Appendix B to the material rules calls for yellow grounding lights in foil and saber, yet for epee they are supposed to be orange.

This is one of those I was thinking of, but it is not the best as the orange light it just say supposed to be and the short circuit light may be included, but it is still a good one.

As long as we're harping on reactionary rulings by the FIE, does anyone know the justification for banning the diagonal elastic safety straps on the back of BG masks? (the word "horizontal" was added to m.26.7 after the fact)

I could understand such a decision if testing had shown that two diagonal straps were less secure than a single horizontal strap but the fact that BG's mask had been approved by the FIE a decade earlier and that EN1367 (the European standard for protective clothing) leaves the design of the restraint mechanism to the discretion of the manufacturer (they only specify the test procedures for mask restraint) suggests that this may have been another case of "I haven't seen it before therefore it can't possibly be legal."

I want to think you are right. I know Leon Paul had problem with their system, when it first was sold. But that was before Dos Santos. Since this is two items that BG has come up with, it could be because it's an American company. Let us start another Conspiracy theory.

Also thank you. I didn't remember that new rule from 2008. Actually it is M.25.7

Do these still exist? I looked on BG's web-site and didn't see them listed. If you know where I can find them, please post a link.

Such a thing would be great for practice where there is a mix of weapons represented. I don't mind putting a lame on and off, but threading a new body cord is a PitA. More often than not I suit up with two. I have been thinking of fabricating either a universal body cord or a set of adapters.

I haven't seen them for a while, but they may have stopped when they were ruled illegal.

Hint: There is another rule in the Material section; Rules specific to Foil.