Beats vs. parries-when is it?

[daeceg]

My class's tournament was held on Sunday, Dry fencing, since we're cheap here.

Anyway, here's the situation:

I've pushed my opponent to the back of the strip, when I execute a lunge in 4. He parries, but my point still lands on his right shoulder, on target. One judge raises her hand to call the point.

Before the judge is noticed by the director, my opponent ripostes in 4, catching my torso. The two judges on his side both raise their hands to call the point.

Now, according to the director, my opponent had a beat-go on me, even though my arm was extended and my point was on target. Even though the one judge protested in my favor, the point was still awarded to my opponent.

This feels like a bad call to me, but it brings to mind a question: when is it a beat, and when is it a parry?

In this case it seemed rather apparent to me that I had right of way through the attack, and that my opponent had a weak enough parry that I never had to replace my line. But, could it have been a beat and I'm missing something here?!

ARGH!

[whtouche]

Originally posted by daeceg
My class's tournament was held on Sunday, Dry fencing, since we're cheap here.

Anyway, here's the situation:

I've pushed my opponent to the back of the strip, when I execute a lunge in 4. He parries, but my point still lands on his right shoulder, on target. One judge raises her hand to call the point.

You just said yourself your opponant parried.
If I'm understanding correctly you're contending that it wasnt your opponants parry because it didnt knock your blade out of line.

There are a few things to consider. First of all, was the blade contact made before your touch arrived. If your point is on his target, then he beats and goes, it's obviously yours.However, if your arm is outstreched and you're making an attack as you stated, and that attack is parried (blade contact is made) and your opponant ripotes, your attack is parried, his riposte is valid, yours is a remise.

Back a few years/decades, a parry was a PARRY, as an old time fencer would tell you. It had to be strong enough to deflect your attack rather than just make blade contact. Now a days tho, if you attack and blade contact is initiated by the defender, it is a parry. If the director called it your opponants beat attack, the wording is wrong but it's still his touch. Parry riposte.

It's my understanding that blade contact properly initiated by a person defending (Without right of way) is a parry. Whether he makes a defensive beat attack or prise de fer, it should be called a parry if he is defending. If he were attacking, it would be his beat attack. This is my understanding of it.

Sorry for the jumbled though-cluster, I just woke up and it's mid-afternoon already so Im a bit disoriented.

[Artisan]

Originally posted by daeceg
.....I've pushed my opponent to the back of the strip, when I execute a lunge in 4. He parries, but my point still lands on his right shoulder, on target. One judge raises her hand to call the point.

You just said his action was a parry...he has one fencing tempo to make his repost, even if you finish and hit.

Before the judge is noticed by the director, my opponent ripostes in 4, catching my torso. The two judges on his side both raise their hands to call the point.

Again, you've admitted defeat by calling his action a repost. Instead say "he counterattacks."
Side judges only rule on whether there is a hit and if it is on target, they do not halt action or determine ROW. The director should Poll them, and the directors vote breaks ties. Judges alone do not "rule a hit."

Now, according to the director, my opponent had a beat-go on me, even though my arm was extended and my point was on target. Even though the one judge protested in my favor, the point was still awarded to my opponent.

Judges don't get to protest. They get to say "NO","Yes- on target", "no off target" and "abstain."
See the thread on extended vs. extending...exhaustively detailed. If he starts early, extenDING slowly and then you start and get there first, he still has row- unless you take his blade on the way -and sell it well or get "one light" (if it was electric)
If you started your attack first, its his parry repost since he found your blade. If he started first its his beat attack. If you started simultaneously it should have been thrown out - nothing done.

In this case it seemed rather apparent to me that I had right of way through the attack, and that my opponent had a weak enough parry that I never had to replace my line. But, could it have been a beat and I'm missing something here?!
ARGH!

If you want a parry to be a parry, fence epee where a good parry is rewarded with one light.
Most of the time referrees don't require that the parry displace the line completely - its hard to tell from their vantage point anyway. They go by the timing, position and sound, which is why it doesn't pay to make two beats on a beat attack. If your opponent makes a counterattack they will get credit for the second beat and get paid for the parry repost.

This feels like a bad call to me, but it brings to mind a question: when is it a beat, and when is it a parry?

Your not missing anything...timing and how the parry looked are important. With beginners it is more difficult. Generally, a beat is made with the arm a bit more extended accompanied by forward motion, and a parry is made with the arm a little more bent, and with a retreat.
The differentiation will be only told in the SEEING of the action, and not its recounting.
As you've explained the action, there is no doubt...your opponents touch. His parry-repost...
Unless:
a) his mal-parre, he parries your blade incorrectly (Foible to forte)
b) late parry...pretty much as you hit
c) after his parry he makes a multiple tempo action - feints or other preparations prior to his repost.


Most importantly, if you are fencing dry and this occurs again, what will you do to change your game to "accomodate" this combination of referree / opponent / action?

[hawaii kid]

So if all the above is true, what's a mal-pare`? (bad parry)

[three_hundred_fifty_five]

Originally posted by daeceg
...when is it a beat, and when is it a parry?...

A parry is when you are trying to stop their blade from hitting you during your opponent's attack. If your opponent is not attacking and your hit their blade intentionally, that is a beat.

[edew]

Originally posted by hawaii kid
So if all the above is true, what's a mal-pare`? (bad parry)

Mal-parries occur in sabre. In sabre, a parry may be a passive parry, meaning the blade is statically held in position. If that position isn't sufficient to prevent the sabre cut from hitting, then it's considered a mal-parry. In foil, it's very seldom one makes a statically held parry (with the possible exception of defending against flicks). In foil, one needs to make active parries. That is, the defender has to move the blade towards the attacking blade.

In sabre, it's not always required. One just needs to put the blade in the correct position and hope for the best. If the blade is put into a particular position and it doesn't do the job, then it's a mal-parry.

In foil, if the active attempt to make the parry doesn't do the job, then the referee just says that the attack arrives. So in foil, it's either the blades contact each other before the attacking blade hits with the tip, or the blades contact each other after the attacking blade hits with the tip. In the former, it's a parry; in the latter, the attack arrives.

[edew]

Originally posted by three_hundred_fifty_five
A parry is when you are trying to stop their blade from hitting you during your opponent's attack. If your opponent is not attacking and your hit their blade intentionally, that is a beat.

And in either case, the person who did either the parry or the beat can immediately take control of the right of way, if he should desire. Unfortunately, too many people don't bother to take control of the right of way. Advice: once you find your opponent's blade, take control of the right of way and don't let go!

[three_hundred_fifty_five]

Never, ever let go! NEVER!!!

[jeff]

I would add that the director can simply say "attack lands" without elaboration, regardless of weapon. There's no need to say mal pare', unless you feel like explaining why the attack landed. The parry can be by opposition or by beat. Being "hit through steel" (hit while executing the parry but not clearing the line, typically with an opposition parry) is a sure-fire way to demonstrate a mal-parry.

Back to daeceg's original situation and complaint. The director could (should) have broken down the actions and then polled the judges.

"Attack from my left, parry, riposte."
(points at the left side judges)
Does the attack land?
If the judges vote yes, then the initial attack landed, and it's daeceg's touch.

Or, the directory could make clear his/her opinion:

"Attack from my left, parry, riposte, and remise of attack" and then poll the judges, making it clear if he/she feels there's an initial attack and remise.

[daeceg]

I was using the term 'parry' because it was fairly obvious (at least to me, I must admit) he was attempting to parry. I guess I should have titled this "what makes a parry good enough?"

He did contact my blade with his, but he parried very late in my action. My attack, which would have hit on his right torso, landed right on his center torso. Then he riposted/remised/whatever you would call that action.

As to what I would do in the future with that director and opponent? Use the same sequence in my favor. Let him attack, then I'll go for the weak parry and strong riposte..or the late beat/go, whatever combination we call the scenario I listed first.

[daeceg]

Originally posted by edew
And in either case, the person who did either the parry or the beat can immediately take control of the right of way, if he should desire. Unfortunately, too many people don't bother to take control of the right of way. Advice: once you find your opponent's blade, take control of the right of way and don't let go!

Believe me....I've gotten very aggresive at establishing PIL immediately at the initiation of the match... That's one of the reasons I asked about PIL and right of way on that other thread...I was concerned I wasn't doing something right. 8-)

In this case, I thought I had ROW all the way on down the strip..it's just that last action (the parry/beat-whatever) that threw me for a loop.

But I had two other rounds that day that had some frustrating calls. One opponent leapt to the side to avoid my fleche...his feet were both off strip when he landed. The director ruled his counterattack valid. My opponent had to have initiated the action when he was in the air...don't know what to think about that since I don't know where in the process the attack has to be initiated to be valid. 8-)

Then another opponent, I kept attacking his back (a lefty who kept getting in so close and ducking down that I almost tripped him), and no one judging that round realized that my attacks were valid.

[frenzl]

Originally posted by whtouche

Back a few years/decades, a parry was a PARRY, as an old time fencer would tell you. It had to be strong enough to deflect your attack rather than just make blade contact. Now a days tho, if you attack and blade contact is initiated by the defender, it is a parry. If the director called it your opponants beat attack, the wording is wrong but it's still his touch. Parry riposte.

It's my understanding that blade contact properly initiated by a person defending (Without right of way) is a parry. Whether he makes a defensive beat attack or prise de fer, it should be called a parry if he is defending. If he were attacking, it would be his beat attack. This is my understanding of it.

this is a great explanation of a parry and all the other arguments
one must only make contact with the blade these days it seems, wich in my opinion is quite stupid.
-compliments to whtouche!

[Talyn]

Yea sometimes it just sucks when the guy BARELY touches your blade but he does

[daeceg]

Why even have such a term as 'bad parry' if it's virtually meaningless?

[Craig]

Originally posted by daeceg
Why even have such a term as 'bad parry' if it's virtually meaningless?

It is meaningless. "Mal parry" is not an official term, it's just a way of saying "Yeah, I know that you tried to defend yourself, but you didn't do a good job so the attack got through."

A referee should never say "mal parry", it's attack yes or attack no; riposte yes or riposte no.

Ask Jeff Bukantz or Bill Oliver about this and they'll go into a discussion of it. (I believe that it was the topic of one of the referee columns in American Fencing some time ago.)

I'll include this as another question for an upcoming "ask the ref" column.

Cheers,
Craig

[Capt. Slo-mo]

Sure, "distance parry", "mal parry", and my personal favorite: "butt parry" (for a low cut in sabre!) may not be official terms, but they're very descriptive of what happened in the action.

I don't mind hearing a ref call mal parry in a bout. It at least lets me know he saw me trying to close a line of attack, and was late or too shallow. If I think I've parried and been hit by a remise...at least mal parry gives you some indication of the ref's thinking--more so than a simple attack yes/no.

[edew]

Quite right. Stating the parry was a "mal-parry" is just to elaborate on the fact that the attack arrived. The referee need not call it, as it really isn't in the referee's official vocabulary. If fencer X makes an attack, fencer Y attempts a parry and makes a riposte, but X's attack arrives before Y's parry occurred, then the call is very simply, "Attack by X. Touch for X." No need to elaborate on why X's attack hit. It just did.

As for the jumping out of the way during a counter-attack and landing outside the strip afterwards, the referee could call that action as jumping off the side of the strip to avoid a touch. However, given that your opponent also tried to hit you (possibly successfully) with a counter-attack, the main motivation was to make a counter-attack and not to jump off the side. That is, if the only action the opponent made was to jump laterally off the side, and landed off the strip, then clearly it broke the rules. However, there's never a requirement that the person had to intentionally do something illegal for an infraction to be called. The referee, should he felt that the lateral jump was to also avoid a touch, may call that infraction. Some referees make that call, some don't. Some don't on occasions, some don't ever. Oh well.

Note that if your opponent can hit you with a counter-attack, then you can -- theoretically -- also hit him. Unless he's 12 feet tall with 5 foot arms or some such abnormal body sizes.

Work on your basic stuff and make sure you hit and stop B&M-ing about interpretations of actions. If you're really beefed about it, switch to epee.

[daeceg]

Look...yeah, I was a little upset about the calls...but the reason I'm posting here and asking these questions isn't to ***** and moan (okay, a little), but mainly to find out if I'm doing something wrong, or learned something wrong. I want to improve. I know that questionable calls are part of the game. I understand and accept that fact of life. Life and fencing aren't all that fair. <shrug>

[edew]

Sorry, but if you say, "he parried me, then I hit him because I was so close, and then his riposte hit me..." then I would have to consider that B&M since such actions pretty much follow the standard conventions for fencing. Indeed, Jeff Bukantz just wrote a column in the American Fencing magazine explaining how that call MUST go to the person who made the riposte.

[Peregrine]

These damn ROW rules need to be spelled out in detail for all to see, know, and not have to debate over. My father and my wife are referees for football (American) and basketball, respectively; their rulebooks are not only very comprehensive, but come with casebooks that explain nearly every situation. Referee conversations involve judgement calls for unusual situations. In fencing, ROW rules are so vague that ten different directors could give ten different responses to the same situation. ROW (for foil/sabre) is too important and too common to leave it up to loose interpretation. This thread is a good example, does a parry have to completely deflect an attack before a riposte gains right-of-way? I've heard three different answers so far to this question.

-breathe-

My instructors always told me to be careful about doing beat-attacks because the director might call it as a parry-riposte for the opponent...