01-21-2003, 01:17 AM
|
#1 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 204
| Scoring Box Setting Something is really bothering me: almost all of the boxes in every club I have been to were set to 700ms for foil and 500ms for sabre for the cut-off time between touches.
Most fencers simply shrug it off and thinking it doesn't effect their games. But I think it matters!! They all should be set according to the FIE specification of 300 ms for both foil and sabre. For sabre it is almost 50% of difference, and for foil it is more than 200% of difference!!
For foil, I don't think the fencers in the US are even playing the same game as the other fencers in the rest of the world. And, maybe that's why we are not doing so well in international competitions.
So for you club armourers, please update your machines already. If your machines are not updatable, then it is probably time for a little upgrade. |
| | | And now for this message... | |
01-21-2003, 02:24 AM
|
#2 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 247
| Uhhh, last time I heard anything, setting foil and sabre to 300ms was simply a recommendation being acted upon by an exploratory commitee - not at all an FIE rule.
-Alexander |
| |
01-21-2003, 12:01 PM
|
#3 | | Armorer
Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Long Beach, CA / Las Vegas
Posts: 3,331
| Re: Scoring Box Setting Quote: Originally posted by I see dead people Something is really bothering me: almost all of the boxes in every club I have been to were set to 700ms for foil and 500ms for sabre for the cut-off time between touches.
Most fencers simply shrug it off and thinking it doesn't effect their games. But I think it matters!! They all should be set according to the FIE specification of 300 ms for both foil and sabre. For sabre it is almost 50% of difference, and for foil it is more than 200% of difference!!
For foil, I don't think the fencers in the US are even playing the same game as the other fencers in the rest of the world. And, maybe that's why we are not doing so well in international competitions.
So for you club armourers, please update your machines already. If your machines are not updatable, then it is probably time for a little upgrade. | I think you should be sure of the rules before you complain. From the A) Foil section for Apparatus, rule 1a7 the cutoff must be set for between 700 and 800 milliseconds. If the box had been set for 300 as you suggested then it would be wrong. Now the Sabre circuit is a problem. From the C) Sabre section, rule a8 the cutout should be set at 300 to 350 milliseconds. These rules are in both the latest USFA and FIE rule books online.
__________________
Donald Hollis Clinton, Jr. DHCJr@juno.com
To Teach is to Learn (Japanese Proverb)
Knowing the rule book by heart means nothing, if you don't understand the rules.
|
| |
01-21-2003, 05:27 PM
|
#4 | | Armorer
Join Date: Jan 2000 Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 1,624
| The FIE has not yet made any actions on the proposal of shortening the lockout time-- the values that Don qouted from the rulebook are the current specification. There are lots of proposals that get put up to the FIE for consideration, the majority of which never come to pass.
There are some recent boxes (e.g., the Eigertek) on which that lockout time is adjustable to accomodate any changes to that parameter that may end up being made, and to allow people to experiment with it. Having done so, I can tell you that it really doesn't make all that much difference-- you will not be able to "time out" your opponent's attacks with a conterattack substantially better than with the current timing. An effective stop-hit/AIP against an opponent making a good attack has to be set up properly-- if you simply jut-and-lunge into your opponent's final motion you will be too late, regardless of whether the lockout time is 0.3 second or 0.7 second.
The two main effects I've noticed from the shorter lockout time are:
1) Late remises will be blocked out-- this really doesn't have much of an effect on bout outcomes, but it could be argued that it makes things a little clearer for spectators since it'll be less likely that both sides will have a light on due to someone taking a last jab after already being touched.
2) When not on grounded strips, referees will have to start remembering the "voluntary touch not on opponent" rule, since it will be easier for those so inclined to block out an incoming compound attack by dunking their point into the floor.
-Dave |
| |
01-21-2003, 05:57 PM
|
#5 | | Admin
Join Date: Dec 1999 Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,406
| Quote: |
2) When not on grounded strips, referees will have to start remembering the "voluntary touch not on opponent" rule, since it will be easier for those so inclined to block out an incoming compound attack by dunking their point into the floor.
| That will be an interesting thing to look out for... |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:28 AM. |