New USFA rules vs new FIE rules

[mfp]

Does anyone have any background info on why the new rules adopted by the USFA seemingly differ somewhat from the new rules adopted by the FIE?

The only listing of the rule changes I can find on the USFA site is at http://www.usfa.org/Documents/Rules/New2002.asp

Is this an accurate version of the new rules as adopted by the USFA?

Not that it's probably used all that much, but notice item "4" on the USFA's list differs materially from the new version of the FIE's rule t.87. In both the USFA and FIE versions, the first violation is supposed to result in a halt and a warning (but no card) to both fencers. However during the first and second periods of a DE, the FIE and USFA treat the second violation differently. The FIE rule states the bout goes to the minute break period. The USFA version skips the minute break period and goes straight in to the next period of fencing.

[Chris]

Originally posted by mfp
Does anyone have any background info on why the new rules adopted by the USFA seemingly differ somewhat from the new rules adopted by the FIE?

The only listing of the rule changes I can find on the USFA site is at http://www.usfa.org/Documents/Rules/New2002.asp

Is this an accurate version of the new rules as adopted by the USFA?

Not that it's probably used all that much, but notice item "4" on the USFA's list differs materially from the new version of the FIE's rule t.87. In both the USFA and FIE versions, the first violation is supposed to result in a halt and a warning (but no card) to both fencers. However during the first and second periods of a DE, the FIE and USFA treat the second violation differently. The FIE rule states the bout goes to the minute break period. The USFA version skips the minute break period and goes straight in to the next period of fencing.

Yes, that IS VERY different!
Has anyone seen this called, anywhere?

[JEC]

Craig has posted in this site the 2002 USFA rules

2002 USFA Fencing Rules - Rev. A 9/02
It contains a few typographic errors.


Fencing Rules quizzes


In a previous thread, I posted the New Referee Study Guide.

[JEC]

(d)Fencing etiquette

t.87

The competitors must fence faithfully and strictly according to the rules laid down in these Rules. All breaches of these rules will incur the penalties laid down hereinafter (cf. t.114–t.120).

All bouts must preserve the character of a courteous and frank encounter. All irregular actions (flèche attack which finishes with a collision jostling the opponent, disorderly fencing, irregular movements on the strip, touches achieved with undue violence, touches made while falling) are strictly forbidden (cf. t.114–t.120). Should such an offence occur, any touch scored by the fencer at fault is annulled.

Before the beginning of the bout the two fencers must perform a fencing salute to their opponent, to the spectators and to the Referee. If one of the two fencers does not comply with this rule, he or she will receive a penalty touch (Red Card) from the Referee. If, after receiving the Red Card, he or she does not comply, he or she will be excluded from the competition (cf. t.114, t.118, t.120). If both fencers commit the offence, they will both be excluded from the competition(cf. t.114, t.119, t.120).

During the first and second periods of a direct elimination bout, when both fencers make clear their desire to stop fencing or show evident passivity, the referee will immediately call ‘halt!’ and the two fencers will take their regulation one minute rest. In pools and in the third period of a direct elimination bout, should there be passivity on the part of both fencers, the referee will warn the fencers (but without imposing a yellow card). If there is obvious repetition, the referee will call ‘halt!’ and proceed to the last minute of the time allowed for the bout. This minute will be decisive and will be preceded by a drawingof lots to decide the winner should the scores be equal at the end ofthe minute.
When the final touch has been scored, the bout is not ended until the two fencers have saluted each other, the audience and the Referee. To this end, they must remain still while the Referee is making his decision. When he or she has given his decision, they must proceed with the fencer’s salute, which is performed by lifting the weapon guard up to the chin, and must shake hands with their opponent, with the unarmed hand.

If the winner does not comply with this rule, the touch given to his advantage is annulled. If the loser fails to comply, he or she will be suspended for two competitions. If both fencers so fail, they will be excluded from the competition and suspended for two further competitions (cf. t.114, t.120).


[USFA variation: Before the start of the bout, the referee will instruct the fencers to salute. The fencers must salute each other, the referee, and the audience. After the last touch is scored, the bout is not ended until both fencers have again saluted in the same fashion. Any fencerf ailing to salute after the referee’s instruction is penalized by a Group 3 Red Card, followed by Black Card upon a second failure to salute.

The fencer, whether on or off the strip, must keep his mask on until the Referee calls halt. He or she may under no circumstances address the Referee until the Referee has made his decision (cf. t.114, t.116,t.120).

Under no circumstances may fencers remove their clothes on the strip, even to change their bodycord (cf. t.114, t.116, t.120).
Immediately after the end of a pool or a direct elimination bout the fencers must sign the pool or bout score sheet, under the responsibility of the Referee who must check the accuracy of the results on this score sheet. Before the score sheet is returned to the Bout Committee, the Referee must indicate in writing if a fencer refuses to sign it. No subsequent appeal relating to the results will be allowed.

[mfp]

Thanks for the links. I guess it's silly of people to look towards the USFA site for current USFA info. So in summary . . .

-- the USFA site prominently refers to some apparently incorrect version of the new rule changes

-- the USFA site doesn't include a full version of rules later than a year 2000 version labeled with a link calling 1999

-- the foc committee subdomain/site has been and still is broken

-- other groups have disseminated the USFA's incorrect list of new rules (such as the US fencing coaches assn. newsletter)

Yipes.

When did the USFA approve this change? The most recent meeting agenda available on the USFA site includes an agenda item to approve the non-FIE conforming version:

http://www.usfa.org/Official/BOD200207A.pdf

However the minutes of that meeting and any later meetings aren't on the website.

[JEC]

Bill Oliver (who signs the preface of the USFA rules) gave the Referee course at Greenville, when I took it. His statement as I recall was that a motion for the new rules was approved. In the Southwest Section website, there is an email from him also indicating the approval of the rules.

Bill Oliver's email

[magma]

I just downloaded the usfa rule book onto my desktop, i haven't seen what you're referring to, but, it appears we all need to have access to the most recent rule changes. I'd better watch the body cord thing, [it's uncanny, i'm guilty of that very thing!]

here's a question: why doesn't usfa just adopt the fie rule book, then we'd all be on the same page, especially for those who have an interest in fencing internationally, it can only benifit Usa fencing.

Keep us posted!

[DHCJr]

The most obvious reason is equipment. There are many who would hesitate to fence if they had to buy all FIE equipment, even for local tournaments. There are some good inexpensive boxes built in the United States, that are made to FIE specification, but would not be able to be used, because they didn’t take the expense of getting them homologated.

But there are some rules that simply do not work in the United States. Here is a bizarre example. If you hosted a tournament with 20 fencers you would have to run it as a round robin or direct elimination. You could not use pools. Check page 56, rule O-12. If you turn to the next page, it will show you bout order for pools of 4, 5, 8, 9, and 10. These did not come from the FIE rule book. There are others that we do not follow like only using batteries instead of power cords plug into the wall. How would you like to have to buy, maintain and lug around a number of car batteries. Be glad they do have differences.

[magma]

Compromise a bit! I've done round robin with 20 people, it's great! no pools, they go round robin, direct eliminations and that's it. we can do the same thing, and forget about the equipment thing, the equipment thing is reserved for later on when you absolutely must have it to fence in another country. but for our american fencers to get the kind of training they need to compete internationally, why not use their training plans? A box is just a material object it's not a big deal. i think it would be a good move for the kids, really i do.

[DHCJr]

Originally posted by magma
Compromise a bit! I've done round robin with 20 people, it's great! no pools, they go round robin, direct eliminations and that's it. we can do the same thing, and forget about the equipment thing, the equipment thing is reserved for later on when you absolutely must have it to fence in another country. but for our american fencers to get the kind of training they need to compete internationally, why not use their training plans? A box is just a material object it's not a big deal. i think it would be a good move for the kids, really i do.

It is also the same for 29 fencers, you can not find a combination where you will have just pools of 6 or 7. The FIE deals with Large international tournaments and their rules reflect that.

That is exactly what the USFA has done in choosing what rules will apply for USFA. Anybody can use European training plans if they want to. There is nothing in the rules, telling you how to train. As has been discussed in other threads, most people are not interested in fencing internationally, so why should they have to follow every rule of the FIE. Since I am an Armorer, I mentioned differences in equipment rules. There are other rules, that are that have been modified for U.S. fencing that have nothing to do with equipment. A glaring example is the use of French for everything. But there are others. Would you like some non-equipment differences? I gave you some examples to show why the USFA reviews the FIE changes. Will you accept that the USFA should review the changes or do you want as you stated originally to go strictly by the FIE rulebook?

You will find most of the rules where there is differences it deals with equipment. The one talked about above was not a difference but a typo. Before you say we should just post the FIE changes and go with that, how many are comfortable with French? Someone will need to translate and there will be bound to be typos. I have worked with the Modern Pentathlon and the fencing part of the rulebook is based on the FIE. One of the rules is the Piste must have a resistence GREATER than 5 ohms. It is a typo and it was in their international rulebook last year.

[magma]

the world is full of typos, we must learn to navagate around them. I feel many people would be upset if they didn't speak the french language, especially the fencers, not understanding what is being said by a french speaking director, but i'm really referring to the way the rules and regulations are set forth, if there are any differences between usfa and fie, in terms of the rules of play, I feel it would benefit fencers, especially youth, to have one set of regulations to follow. No not everyone is interested in international fencing, but, spectators are interested in watching and any significant variation would present a problem in analysis for the viewer, while the fencer would automatically be at a disadvantage. now where is the person who forgot to turn off their capitol letters? you know, i used to write in capital letters for fun, but someone told me it was really really rude of me. How did this happen?

[DHCJr]

Originally posted by magma
the world is full of typos, we must learn to navagate around them. I feel many people would be upset if they didn't speak the french language, especially the fencers, not understanding what is being said by a french speaking director, but i'm really referring to the way the rules and regulations are set forth, if there are any differences between usfa and fie, in terms of the rules of play, I feel it would benefit fencers, especially youth, to have one set of regulations to follow. No not everyone is interested in international fencing, but, spectators are interested in watching and any significant variation would present a problem in analysis for the viewer, while the fencer would automatically be at a disadvantage.

Do you know of a significant difference between the FIE and the USFA that would cause a problem? I don't know of any, but then I don't claim to be an expert on the rules, especially the T and O rules.

I do know of one that happened in the past, but that was only in the timing of the application of the rule. That was the reversal of the lights. The FIE made the ruling to occur in the middle of the season, which is against FIE rules. The USFA held up the rule till the next season. This was done so the audience and fencers would not be confused. There are collegiate fencers that compete under their own rules. They also had as part of their rules that changes would be applied at the beginning of the season, so they did not change the lights until the next season. Think what would have happened if the USFA had followed the FIE blindly. A referee might be at a college competition one day and the next a USFA tournament. Would they make mistakes because the lights are on different sides each day? I would expect they would, maybe not many, but some. If they would make mistakes, think of the audience who knows someone competing, but doesn't know the sport that well. Would that have presented a problem in analysis for the viewer? I am glad that the USFA did not follow blindly in applying that rule. That was a significant differences in rules between the FIE and the USFA. Since more audience would see collegiate then would see international, I think the USFA did the right thing. Would you have wanted the USFA to follow that rule and have two sets of rules going for many of the fencers and audiences in the USFA? Do you have some examples?

[sallearmourer]

There are mistake in both the french and the English book rule. For example the have change the rule for sabre mask lame mat to 5 ohms but the book still say 3 ohms. Joe Burns right now is going though both of them. So not even the French one is right


Tim

[magma]

usfa did the right thing in waiting, but, maybe usfa and fie organizations should have a meeting like the UN, and stay for about a week to go over the rules, we could help make an agenda for them:

meet and review the agenda
conferences on equipment standards
rules of play, item by item
an ad hoc committee of 4-5 people sit with rule books in hand and red ink anychanges
review the changes for print
agree to reprint both texts in english and french for international use, rough draft not to be used until the final draft is printed
final book goes into review
review
print


the lights thing was a major change, but did it help? i think it might have simplified things.
speaking of fie. in light of the sport of epee, my mask is going to fie very soon. after fencing a guy with an arm like brutus, i really don't feel like wearing a permanent eye patch because i couldn't buy an fie mask. which leads me to another logical prediction:

eventually, all protective gear will go fie, while weapons will stay standard fare.

[MikeHarm]

Wait a second.. isn't this Bill Oliver the same guy from the FOC that sent out the email saying you could use wristwraps with a french grip a while back?

Originally posted by JEC
Bill Oliver (who signs the preface of the USFA rules) gave the Referee course at Greenville, when I took it. His statement as I recall was that a motion for the new rules was approved. In the Southwest Section website, there is an email from him also indicating the approval of the rules.

Bill Oliver's email

[Chris]

Originally posted by DHCJr
Do you know of a significant difference between the FIE and the USFA that would cause a problem? I don't know of any, but then I don't claim to be an expert on the rules, especially the T and O rules.

I do know of one that happened in the past, but that was only in the timing of the application of the rule. That was the reversal of the lights. The FIE made the ruling to occur in the middle of the season, which is against FIE rules. The USFA held up the rule till the next season. This was done so the audience and fencers would not be confused. There are collegiate fencers that compete under their own rules. They also had as part of their rules that changes would be applied at the beginning of the season, so they did not change the lights until the next season. Think what would have happened if the USFA had followed the FIE blindly. A referee might be at a college competition one day and the next a USFA tournament. Would they make mistakes because the lights are on different sides each day? I would expect they would, maybe not many, but some. If they would make mistakes, think of the audience who knows someone competing, but doesn't know the sport that well. Would that have presented a problem in analysis for the viewer? I am glad that the USFA did not follow blindly in applying that rule. That was a significant differences in rules between the FIE and the USFA. Since more audience would see collegiate then would see international, I think the USFA did the right thing. Would you have wanted the USFA to follow that rule and have two sets of rules going for many of the fencers and audiences in the USFA? Do you have some examples?

Actually, Don, you are right, the USFA often implements rule changes in the beginning of its season in the fall (August), and sometimes defers things, (partly*, or completely) for a year, if there is expecte to be some sort of problem getting it done well; However, I beleive the reversal of the lights WAS implemented mid-season (at least it was in Minnesota). For a while, there were occaisions where people's immediate perception/response would revert to 'old-school' (when thye would get a little tired), but, even then, (in my experience) most of the times, they realized it didn't quite make sense, and they self-corrected, or fencers suggested it had happened, and this was acknowledged. In my experience most fencers were fairly understanding about this for quite a while (although I think that 'grace period' is over, now).

Likewise, locally, we did not require S2000 blades right away, either, as it was unreasonable to expect everyone could get them right away, especially when it was discovered a batch had been produced that did mot quite meet specification.

Originally posted by magma
usfa did the right thing in waiting, but, maybe usfa and fie organizations should have a meeting like the UN, and stay for about a week to go over the rules, we could help make an agenda for them:

meet and review the agenda
conferences on equipment standards
rules of play, item by item
an ad hoc committee of 4-5 people sit with rule books in hand and red ink anychanges
review the changes for print
agree to reprint both texts in english and french for international use, rough draft not to be used until the final draft is printed
final book goes into review
review
print

Unhhh, they already do this; I beleive it's called the FIE Congress, it has subcommittes and everything! (note that I DIDN'T say they do it well! )

Originally posted by MikeHarm
Wait a second.. isn't this Bill Oliver the same guy from the FOC that sent out the email saying you could use wristwraps with a french grip a while back?

I beleive so!
God help us if there TWO of them!

[oiuyt]

For the USFA the light switch occurred March 1st of that year. The NCAA held off until the next year, there was some time (granted only about 3 weeks until the NCAA season finished up) when they were operating under different rules.

-B :)

[135711]

Rule Book: okay. my version of it. in 1997, someone flew into a rage because the rule book was not available for him to look at the moment her wanted it: ergo : the rulebook is obviously important. In reading the rules again, I see several typos but i don't thing they change the meaning of the paragraph or sentence. The text is still understandable. It appears that every effort has been made to incorporate rule books.






----/----------->
Eat Twinkies!

[drayke]

Well, perhaps USFA could take a lesson from USARUGBY -- which has adopted the IRB (rugby equivilent to FIE) law (rule) book, however has variations notated when it wants a difference domestically or wants to try out what is termed 'experimental' variation; often changes being considered by adoption that are being tested by actual use during a season.

Overall, one rule book, with differences notated so the player is able to learn and apply the rules appropiate to their level/competition - domestic or international.

And for that matter, what's with not printing the book? Having to download the thing sucks with the cost of printer ink cartridges!

[Inquartata]

I think that a printed version is available. I've seen the old one for sale at NACs.