Interesting reference to old rules...

[Bingre]

Jeff, I believe that although there are plenty of "CF" associations, there is no central governing body for this movement. It might be interesting for national fencing federations to fill this gap.

By the way, I've just found these polish guys trying some sort of improvised CF electrical scoring:

http://youtu.be/xIeYmIQci8M

Surely they are not the only ones.

[Bonehead]

It might be interesting for national fencing federations to fill this gap.

Why would they do this anymore than they would act as the governing body for beach fencing?

[jeff]

Bingre, there is indeed no central governing body for CF, but none of the bodies and schools that exist have shown any interest in this. If they have anything in common, it's that they despise electrical scoring. Just how do you suggest your proposal can be successful if they all hate "the box"? Modern, sport, Olympic (using whichever term fits) has no interest, and CF hates it, so your proposal is unwanted by one and all.

The Polish guys don't illustrate any "embrace" either. In fact they look just like any sport fencing you might have seen in a club or gymnasium in the last 50 years.

[Bingre]

Why would they do this anymore than they would act as the governing body for beach fencing?

For the same reasons the foil governing bodies of around 1900 decided not to deride epée anymore, and simply embrace it: economies of scale. More practitioners, more salles, more sponsors, &c.

[Bingre]

The Polish guys don't illustrate any "embrace" either. In fact they look just like any sport fencing you might have seen in a club or gymnasium in the last 50 years.

Jeff, English is not my native language, so I might very well be employing the verb "to embrace" in an inappropriate way — sounding too emphatic. I mean it the the 3rd sense noted by OED: «including or containing (something) as a constituent part: "his career embraces a number of activities—composing, playing, and acting."»

What the polish guys are doing is not much different from modern epée, of course. But their video (and the webpage of their salle) shows that there are people already bridging CF and SF using electrical scoring gear. Give or take ten years more, these kinds of salles will have created a new fencing weapon, complete with rules, apparatus, physically demanding training, suppliers, &c.

[jeff]

"Embrace" certainly has a much more emphatic meaning for a native English speaker - suggesting that they endorsed or adopted a particular position or policy, and for that there's no evidence whatsoever. Your English is very good, but you may wish to add that meaning of the word.

The conclusion in the second paragraph doesn't follow logically from any data. The Polish guys are having fun (I hope) in a way you could have seen in 1960. There is no evidence that it will grow in influence to create a new fencing weapon for which fencing authorities would feel obliged to establish rules.

You haven't addressed the overwhelming distaste for electrical scoring in the CF world. Unless that goes away - and there's no sign that it will - then it's useless to speculate about CF-driven electrical scoring, because CF people don't want it. The rest of us don't want it either.

[bdavis]

There are people in the USA trying this out also, very close to the way this discussion has envisioned.

http://lancetfencing.wordpress.com/
http://www.daggerfencing.com/

Experimenting by curious individuals and interested groups is a good place to work on the possibilities.

[Bonehead]

There are people in the USA trying this out also, very close to the way this discussion has envisioned.

http://lancetfencing.wordpress.com/
http://www.daggerfencing.com/

Experimenting by curious individuals and interested groups is a good place to work on the possibilities.

Did anyone see that episode of dragons Den? With the Bulletball guy? Sometimes I feel like these "alternative" sports are invented just so that the inventors can be the best at them.

I dunno, it's probably really unfair to say, but I really get the sense that some of these (maybe not all), are invented because someone tried fencing, and didn't like that some strong opponent walked at them and hit them 15 times, and they said "It's not realistic enough, It's not fair, Flicking is stupid, Priority isn't real, I'm gonna go make my own sport!".

I dunno, I think it would say a lot more, if rather than a bunch of people who suck at fencing invented "new weapons", instead we had top fencers promoting them. I feel like this would lend a lot more respectability to these ideas.

[Gav]

It's not even the first. I remember, back in the 90s (yes I am that old), some D&Ders in the US invented a sport which if (I recall right) was called Target Fencing. Groups fought each other in "melees" in fields and wielded plastic swords. There were paper targets that could be slashed and some simple rules. It looked like a fun day out.

I'm not against experimentation but like Bonehead this desire to be embraced by the national bodies is ... bizarre. Do you really need affirmation? I don't think so. There are plenty of groups out there who do their own thing. Some of them are even interesting and worthwhile - yes I do think that - but really what does anyone hope to gain by hybridising our sport with classical stuff? All that is going to happen is that you don't please or interest us and ditto for the classicists.

I'm pretty much done with this aspect of this discussion now.

[Bingre]

There are people in the USA trying this out also, very close to the way this discussion has envisioned.

http://lancetfencing.wordpress.com/
http://www.daggerfencing.com/

Experimenting by curious individuals and interested groups is a good place to work on the possibilities.

Amazing work, BDavis! Thanks for sharing. I'll try these rules in my salle, just for the sake of experimenting. I wonder if they have considered to use one of those "hitmate" devices to block out slow ripostes.

I think this kind of serious innovation enriches a lot the world of fencing. I hope these guys manage to get supported by some important SF federation.

[Bingre]

Did anyone see that episode of dragons Den? With the Bulletball guy? Sometimes I feel like these "alternative" sports are invented just so that the inventors can be the best at them.

I dunno, it's probably really unfair to say, but I really get the sense that some of these (maybe not all), are invented because someone tried fencing, and didn't like that some strong opponent walked at them and hit them 15 times, and they said "It's not realistic enough, It's not fair, Flicking is stupid, Priority isn't real, I'm gonna go make my own sport!".

I dunno, I think it would say a lot more, if rather than a bunch of people who suck at fencing invented "new weapons", instead we had top fencers promoting them. I feel like this would lend a lot more respectability to these ideas.

This kind of "ad hominem" counter-arguments take us nowhere. Mangiarotti, Romankov, Omnès and even Golubtsky (!) have decried the use of flicks — and surely not because they blamed the trick as a scapegoat for defeats.

[Bingre]

You haven't addressed the overwhelming distaste for electrical scoring in the CF world. Unless that goes away - and there's no sign that it will - then it's useless to speculate about CF-driven electrical scoring, because CF people don't want it. The rest of us don't want it either.

Who is entitled to speak on behalf of the collective of fencers, be them classical or sportive? I believe the french and italian federations are, and they do seem interested in creating alternative weapons — even using electrical scoring. The french body has recently developed the "ludoescrime" for kids and the artistic/combat fencing; the italian has its own set of rules for "historical fencing". That represents a significant number of CFencers. Perhaps what happened with Beach Soccer and Veteran Fencing is now happening, sort of, with CF.

[jeff]

I don't think the French and Italian federations speak for everybody, and certainly the CF practitioners don't either - they've been very noisy for years in their disdain for the official fencing organizations, including the FIE and the national bodies you cite. It's much more likely these programs are only adopted by an insignificant number of individuals, and consist of people who either already fence and want to have a little fun on the side, or will graduate into mainstream fencing.

The leaders of CF, such as they are, continue to insist that the machine is evil. What makes you think there's a "significant number" of CF people looking forward to be on the box? I put that in the same category as your claim of "exponential growth" - unlikely to be true.

Gav's point is the right one: if you all want to have fun doing some hybrid game, go enjoy yourself. People have done this kind of thing for decades (I can remember another 20 years more than Gav), but it didn't turn into an "officially" sanctioned event then, and you shouldn't expect it now.

[Bingre]

The leaders of CF, such as they are, continue to insist that the machine is evil. What makes you think there's a "significant number" of CF people looking forward to be on the box? I put that in the same category as your claim of "exponential growth" - unlikely to be true.

I used the term "exponential" as a figure of speech. But I'd bet that the number of CF amateurs has increased fourfold or more in the last twenty years, at least in Portugal, Spain, France and Italy. In eastern Europe the same might be true. The number of clubs and suppliers has also increased, as the number of books printed or reprinted about the subject.

[Bingre]

I share my time between Portugal and Spain. In these two countries together you wouldn't find more than a few dozen practitioners of CF in 1990. Nowadays, you find many hundreds of them.

[jeff]

1990 is pretty much when the entire CF thing started, so it's not surprising there were fewer then than now. If it's "many hundreds" perhaps they can start their own organization along the lines of the "American Fencing League" so it won't be a matter of guesswork or wishful thinking how many they are, and what number of them would like to fence electrically but with their own rules.

[rudd]

Which set of classical rules would you have the FIE embrace. Do you think your proposed rules would please even a minority of classical fencers. As Jeff said the majority hate the scoring box. Why reinvent the wheel. Why not use the pre '56 FIE rulebook where only epee is electric and flicks will not be recognized by the president or jury.

Irrespective of the ruleset if you get enough people fencing your fourth weapon, or get enough people involved in historical or classical fencers the FIE will notice and will want to get involved. As it stands today their are scattering groups of people who have various gripes with modern fencing. It's not a cohesive group even within one country never mind internationally.

[bdavis]

...Thanks for sharing. I'll try these rules in my salle...

This is more in the historical fencing vein. I don't think the FIE will embrace this set of rules. I'm not sure you could practice in your salle either.

Battle of the Nations is a team competition focused on armored melee combat of 20 person teams. It’s dangerous, it has lots of rules, and they don’t compete with sharps.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifVBhKmBCt8
http://www.youtube.com/user/battleofthenationsTV
http://www.battleofthenations.com.ua

[OROD]

Battle of the Nations is a team competition focused on armored melee combat of 20 person teams. It’s dangerous, it has lots of rules, and they don’t compete with sharps.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifVBhKmBCt8
http://www.youtube.com/user/battleofthenationsTV
http://www.battleofthenations.com.ua

Never heard of this, but it looks pretty interesting. Also looks very dangerous. I wonder how many people walk away from that with broken bones and concussions.

[riceboy]

So I sit pretty squarely in all the camps that people are mentioning. I'm a classical fencer, I have Provost cert from the SJSU Fencing Masters Program (Gaugler's school). I'm a modern coach (I have a moniteur from the USFCA, and have been a student for both Prevot and Maitre exams and I coach at a small town club in Davis). I am a OK epee fencer (go E09!). I'm active in the SCA, where I do SCA rapier (and have my White Scarf). And I do HEMA rapier where I co-teach Spanish Rapier in Sacramento. (And I know at least 4 guys who are going to Battle of the Nations)

I'm not saying that any of those things are all that impressive, nor am I looking for praise. At the same time, I've got something of a unique perspective on classical fencing, modern fencing, and HEMA.

First some terms (I've tried to give examples from a wide swath of the community, these groups are not monolithic):
Classical Fencing:

An attempt to recreate pre-1950s style fencing. Classical fencing is not a monolithic block. (more on this later)

SCA Fencing/SCA Rapier:

Fencing done within the SCA using rapier simulators, repurposed mensur training blades and sometimes epees. Done in costume, contains elements of medieval/renaissance recreation. Also allows melee (group) combat.
Examples: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fNDRJgrB64
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvZRG0uMobo

SCA Heavy

SCA Heavy Fighting is a combat sport in armor using full intent attacks and rattan weapons. This is the main combat activity of the SCA.
Examples:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4e4SeISbI1E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrueFTheV-Y

HEMA/Historical Fencing

The recreation of "dead" martial arts from Europe. This include commonly includes the medieval weapons (longsword, arming sword, poleaxe, etc) as well as the renaissance weapons (sidesword, rapier, dussack)
Examples:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6919fC6Nck
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HAkzDIEin8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TzdtyMC7ek
Also the polish videos posted earlier.

While there is some overlap (like me) these four groups are largely separate. Your average Classical fencer is not a HEMA guy, nor does he play in the SCA as well and so forth. As a result combining all of these groups into one huge "Classical fencing" doesn't really make a lot of sense.

For example:
SCA fencers are by and large untrained (or self trained). I would argue that approx 75% would not know a good lunge if walked up an hit them in the face. That top 25% or so can be formidable, many of them train seriously, mixing gym time with up to 5 days of fencing per week. In some areas there are tournaments every weekend during the spring and summer, so there is a strong tournament circuit for these fencers. While there are no official rankings, there are fencers who are consistently at the top level during the tournaments at larger pan-SCA events like Pennsic.

HEMA guys are more complicated. HEMA is growing rapidly, and the Europeans have been hosting large international tournaments. The national coaching organizations in Germany, Italy and the UK have started coaching training programs for HEMA. The major fencing suppliers (Negrini, Allstar/Uhlmann, Leon Paul) already have HEMA equipment for sale. Closer to home, Absolute Fencing is coming out with an entire line of HEMA equipment in the next few months.
There, however, significant divisions within the HEMA "crowd." Broadly there are those who are more into the history and rediscovery parts of HEMA, and those who are more into tournaments and competition. There is space for both groups.

Further, it's easy to forget as modern fencers with a international governing body that all of these groups are highly regional, and not at all homogeneous. The Polish and Swedish are putting out really cool HEMA tournament fighters, the US less so. The SCA in CA will be completely different from the SCA in Washington.

Now back to Classical Fencing.

I want to make it clear that there is no one definition for Classical Fencing. The community is rather balkenized into a few camps. There is the Evangalista/Crown camp, the Martinez camp, and the SJSU FMP Camp (Gaulger camp)

I belong to camp 3. I too don't like the strange big actions favored by Crown and Evangalista. (Crown even banned me from his forum). I'm not a big fan of the very pretty, but tempo challenged fencing I've seen from the Martinez students I've encountered (with a few exceptions). And I think that classical fencers should be able to fence with modern fencers and not do too badly. I'm equally annoyed when classical fencers talk smack about modern fencing, as when modern fencers talk smack about classical/historical fencing, especially when neither side has done both.

I have a friend who recently moved to Atlanta. He's a SJ FMP Maestro, his exam was 7 hours long and had a board of 7 maestros. It's about classical fencing, not modern fencing. As there are virtually no classical fencers in Atlanta, he's picked up modern foil. He's new to it, unrated, fenced his second tournament last weekend, and he's having fun. He still hasn't told anyone about his classical fencing cert, because it shouldn't matter and because he's afraid of the backlash.

What do I want you to take away from this rant? (I can't sleep and am writing this at 3AM)

WE'RE NOT ALL CRAZY! Please don't assume that the more antagonistic classical fencers represent the whole community, they're just the people who won't shut up.

also,

Classical Fencing is not Rapier/Longsword/Fill in the blank The groups may seem similar, but they are very different communities. Lumping them in together makes it very hard to make valid conclusions about the activities.