Fencing.Net - Your Guide to Fencing & Fencing Equipment

Mergs · 09-07-2003, 07:22 PM

Just finished up doing the Referee clinic, with George K no less, and we discovered some pretty interesting things. Yes we already knew that the rule book was not the easiest set of rules to navigate around in, and yes, there are inconsistencies, etc. But what we discovered was, that depending on where you get the rule book from may cause problems.

One of the guys in the seminar (sitting next to me) downloaded the Rule book from the FOC page about a month ago and got Revision C. I downloaded it from the USFA website last monday and got Revision B. George downloaded it (we're not sure from where) the night before the seminar and got Revision A!!!!

BTW, the list of the rule changes are still from August 2002 ! and there have been some changes to those. Go figure.

The most notable is that if a fencer falls during an attack, the touch is annuled and a YELLOW CARD is given. There was also a change to the passivity rule. If during a DE fencers are not appearing to make a good faith effort to fence, you go the the next one minute break (which allows for talking to the coach, etc.) and then resume regular fencing. If it happens again, go to the next one minute break, unless you are in the final period. In that case you stop, determine priority, and fence for the next FULL minute. Whoever is leading at the end of that minute of fencing wins. In the case of a tie at the end of the minute, the fencer with priority wins. Key here is that you fence for the full minute, not until the first touch scored.

Anyway, just a warning to all you strip lawyers out there. Make sure you have the latest revision of the rules (right now that is Rev. C).

Have fun!

Dee EffEll · 09-07-2003, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mergs

The most notable is that if a fencer falls during an attack, the touch is annuled and a YELLOW CARD is given.

Ah, this is a change to the change in August 2002. IOW, things are back to the way they were before the 8/02 changes, I think. BUT, here's a strip lawyer question: What if a fencer falls while defending, not attacking? I step back, pare', and sumble over my own feet. My reposte lands as I fall on my butt. Anul the touch? Is a yellow card issued?

"During an attack" doesn't say whos attack is in progress, I suppose. But a riposte is not an attack... Anyone? Anyone? Buhler? EDew?

downunder · 09-07-2003, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mergs
The most notable is that if a fencer falls during an attack, the touch is annuled and a YELLOW CARD is given.

this isn't an fie change is it?

JEC · 09-07-2003, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by downunder
this isn't an fie change is it?

No, it is a USFA change because of the emphasis to the interpretation was corrected by FIE. The FIE change in 2001-2 was that a fall was not carded if it was accidental. The USFA extrapolated to the situation when a fall occurred and a touch was scored by the falling fencer that it was valid if not disorderly fencing. The last piece was kind of left out (emphasis wise) from the referee seminars. But if you are falling is either disorderly fencing (cardable) or accidental (halt).

R. Exnicios · 09-07-2003, 11:17 PM

So let me see if I get this straight. The FOC muckey muck didn't know that there was revision "C" out there. Ouch, Not surprising though.

It makes it hard to teach new fencers the rules when it is so hard to get a current set.

Revision A, B, C it really doesn't matter they are still a very poorly organized and inconsistent set of rules.

Mabe some day.

Cheers

pkt · 09-08-2003, 01:58 AM

JEC,

Thank you for clearing up Merg's partial language. [Hey shouldn't leave thigns unwritten, Merg.]

IOW,
1. If the falling fencer scores a hit while falling, the hit is annuled and he gets a yellow card in the case of a first offence.

2. If the falling fencer receives a hit while falling. The hit by the standing fencer stands. [Sorry.] AND the falling fencer receives a yellow card to boot.

Did I get that right?

PK

JEC · 09-08-2003, 02:17 AM

Pkt,
yes, but if the falling fencer is falling due to an accidental reason (i.e.: trip over on strip bump), the referee is suposed to call a halt and not card the fencer unless the tripping is due to disorderly fencing.

pkt · 09-08-2003, 02:37 AM

Thank you for pointing out the exception.

PK

oiuyt · 09-08-2003, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mergs
There was also a change to the passivity rule. If during a DE fencers are not appearing to make a good faith effort to fence, you go the the next one minute break (which allows for talking to the coach, etc.) and then resume regular fencing. If it happens again, go to the next one minute break, unless you are in the final period. In that case you stop, determine priority, and fence for the next FULL minute. Whoever is leading at the end of that minute of fencing wins. In the case of a tie at the end of the minute, the fencer with priority wins. Key here is that you fence for the full minute, not until the first touch scored.

That's not a change. That was clear in the wording of the original announcement. MANY people skimmed said announcement and took the assumption of a sudden-death minute, but it doesn't make sense. You do a priority flip and start the final minute regardless of the score at the time. You could be up 3-1, we're both passive, draw a warning from the ref, remain passive (let's say we're in the final period). The ref stops us, determines priority and we enter the final minute of the bout. You're still up 3-1. Sudden death just would be non-sensical (and NO WHERE does it say that you would immediately win because I was trailing and passive). This is the way the rule has been since it was added.

The passivity rule is fairly stupid. If as a fencer I don't want to commit to an action, I just have to APPEAR to make a good faith effort to fence. That's not hard. In pool bouts it's especially idiotic. By the time we've demonstrated passivity, been halted, warned about being passive, and demonstrated passivity again, the biggest penalty is moving to the final minute which we should already be fairly close to, if not in. Okay, it removes the possibility of an overtime minute if we're tied, but....

-B :)

edew · 09-08-2003, 11:52 AM

The best way to kill any overt passivity is to fine the fencers after the tournament. Really, it doesn't occur in the States, and only in the World Championships and such. Why not fine the fencers $5000 for failure to fence with conviction?

That should be a special green card. Green as in money.

***Craig*** · 09-08-2003, 01:00 PM

Revision C is now available from the fencing.net home page.

Just received it from the FOC. Updated the penalty chart also.

Cheers,
Craig

Mo · 09-08-2003, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by edew
The best way to kill any overt passivity is to fine the fencers after the tournament. Really, it doesn't occur in the States, and only in the World Championships and such. Why not fine the fencers $5000 for failure to fence with conviction?

That should be a special green card. Green as in money.

Why would a fencer be in a competition and not fence?

Mergs · 09-08-2003, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Why would a fencer be in a competition and not fence?

Well, as was put to us, let's say your getting your a** waxed by someone and you try to stall until the next period so you can get the "word of God" from your coach and make the spectacular comeback, or you are up 2-1 against the #1 seed in the world and you are trying to be able to brag for the rest of you life how you beat him (not that someone of that caliber would let you sit back or just let you take the bout that way! But it could happen!). Needless to say part of it is TV driven. Who wants to watch two guys just stand there until time runs out? Especially if it is in the first minute of a DE!

edew · 09-08-2003, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mo
Why would a fencer be in a competition and not fence?

The operative words are "with conviction." If the guy isn't guilty of something, he isn't really fencing

pkt · 09-08-2003, 08:49 PM

MO,

simple:
when all the eggs are in one basket, [--- fill in the blank with any sport cliches] and your opponent is your club/team mate...

To wit, the 2002 women's individual foil finals between two Russians... Boy, that was bad.

Eric, did those two get fined?

PK

Wizardly · 09-11-2003, 03:53 AM

I have a printed version of the 2000 Rev C rulebook. Just downloaded the 2002 Rev C version (thanks Craig for the file and the PSA).

In two years, the USFA...
...DID NOT CORRECT THE ERROR IN THE OPERATIONAL RULES FOR THE ORDER OF BOUTS FOR A POOL OF 9 FENCERS.

Sorry this steams me, but it actually comes up when you've got 9 kids and only one person to direct them and you wanna give 'em all a fair chance to fence each other with some organization.

I'm thinking a 5000 dollar fine would kill my competetive fencing days...one fine and it's all over. Maybe when I become a pro fencers raking in Shaq's paycheck.

Mo, I can't answer your question...only relate this anecdote: women's epee DE bout, 3-3, decided on coin toss.

R. Exnicios · 09-11-2003, 04:10 AM

I don't have the rule book in front of me at the moment (it is 3 AM); but if you go through it closely you can find all sorts of errors. I've aid it before and I'll say it again. The rule book is very poorly writen vague at best. If there is every a legal challenge like you see in track & field or gymnastics USFA is going to get spanked!

Still fun, fun, fun!!

Cheers

R

corinna2u · 09-11-2003, 02:35 PM

Why the blank is the 2002 Rev C 11x8.5in instead of 8.5x11in?...a 1/2 inch margin on the left and a 3 1/2 in margin on the right...there was a purpose, I'm sure...yeah right...

lochinvar · 09-11-2003, 02:56 PM

Uh, I hesitate to mention this, corinna2u, but did you check your Page Setup for printing?

It might be set to "landscape" instead of "portrait", which would cause it to print 11 x 8.5 instead of 8.5 x 11 even if it was formatted correctly in softcopy.

Just a suggestion.

***Craig*** · 09-11-2003, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by R. Exnicios
I don't have the rule book in front of me at the moment (it is 3 AM); but if you go through it closely you can find all sorts of errors. I've aid it before and I'll say it again. The rule book is very poorly writen vague at best. If there is every a legal challenge like you see in track & field or gymnastics USFA is going to get spanked!

Still fun, fun, fun!!

Cheers

R

Tell the FIE. The USFA version is mainly a translation of the FIE rules.