If you could...

[I see dead people]

... change the fencing rules anyway you wish, what would you change?

[Inquartata]

Make everyone fence sabre.

[D'Artagnan1673]

1. Ban the flick
2. Ban Pistol Grips

[mifencer]

Ban people like D'Artagnan1673 <img src="graemlins/blah.gif" border="0" alt="[Blah]" />

[edew]

Allow advertising on uniforms like race car drivers.

Give only red cards for any infraction.

Teams of four, relay format with three-touch intervals (for a total of 48 points).
Allow mixed fencing at international and Olympic levels.

[Zelda]

Edew, I think U have been brainwashed by the FIE!

[Inquartata]

Possibly we should use Eric as a contrarian indicator...

[Sciurus Rex]

Ban people who try to ban the flick.

[damianip]

[quote]Originally posted by D'Artagnan1673:
<strong>1. Ban the flick
2. Ban Pistol Grips</strong><hr></blockquote>


Ban people under the influence of Nick Evangelista.

Actually, I'd like to see a consistent and clear exposition of right of way so we can all stop arguing about it.

Paolo

[edew]

Why do people think my suggestions are contrarian, or in line with the FIE (and how can I do both)?

The FIE does not advocate any of the suggestions I placed there.

The suggestions I placed there are not contrarian to most people's idea of fencing. My suggestions have more to do with how to make fencing more intriguing and marketable without having to change the "how to fence" fencing rules.

I mean, ban the flick, don't ban the flick...who cares? If it's banned, we won't use it (more likely, it'll continue to be used -- the only way to stop its use is to make weapons so stiff that flicking is impractical or impossible).

How will fencing really move to the next stage in terms of marketability? Slower actions? No flicks? No pistol grips? C'mon. None of those ever matter to people watching. What matters is how much money is at stake. And the amount of money at stake is dependent on how much companies can advertise.

The other suggestions, no yellow cards and four-man teams make for the following benefit: immediate red card gives the fencer who fouled an immediate penalty of value. The four-man team allows for more personalities involved in the sport.

[neevel]

Ban Rene Roch .

Seriously, I wouldn't mind tightening up the definition of the start of an attack to give more room for stop hit/attacks in prep into offensive actions with a widely removed point. The idea I've had is to specify some approximate maximum angle of deviation of the point from an in-line position (maybe 35 degrees, maybe 45 degrees)-- any time the point makes a maintained deviation beyond that angle, priority is lost and won't be regained until after the point comes back within the limit. This would provide a larger window for stop hits/A.I.P. than is currently the case.

Get rid of the reversing-shoulders rule in foil.

The idea of mixed international-level fencing could be interesting, and would be a logical development for the mixed gender 4 person teams that will compete in the Olympics.

-Dave

[Inquartata]

No, Eric, I meant "contrarian indicator" in the sense that maybe we should find out your preferences and then do the opposite. It was joke, I kid edew...

However, the whole idea of "increasing marketability" is in my view a pursuit of a will-o-the-wisp. Fencing will never be a popular, mass-appeal sport and we could accomplish a lot more if we would just recognize that and move on to other goals. To say nothing of the fact that I ratherlike being part of a small, esoteric sport where even duffers like myself get to compete against the best in the world---can we say that of any major "money" sport?

We may live in a capitalistic society, but not everything must be consigned to the tender ministrations of the market and sold, sold, sold in order to have worth. And mass audiences are not worth having if it means altering the basic integrity of the sport...

[peircer]

[quote]Originally posted by neevel:
<strong>

Seriously, I wouldn't mind tightening up the definition of the start of an attack to give more room for stop hit/attacks in prep into offensive actions with a widely removed point. The idea I've had is to specify some approximate maximum angle of deviation of the point from an in-line position (maybe 35 degrees, maybe 45 degrees)-- any time the point makes a maintained deviation beyond that angle, priority is lost and won't be regained until after the point comes back within the limit. This would provide a larger window for stop hits/A.I.P. than is currently the case.

-Dave</strong><hr></blockquote>

Gee Dave, who have you been fencing lately that makes you think that?

Actually, I would really love to see that myself. I'm as suprised as my opponents when I get ROW for some of the stuff I do...

[D'Artagnan1673]

ahem.......

I am not just under Evangelista's influence, but my coach's as well. That was the way I was tought.

And if I can go out and hold my own against veteren pistol grip flickers after only fencing 11 months, and during those 11 months only fencing once a week for the first 5 months and twice a week after that, I say that's pretty darn good. <img src="graemlins/fett.gif" border="0" alt="[The Fett]" />

I don't just read what Evangelista has to say and nodd my head, I go out and try it against my club. And if I find something that works for me, I continue to use it. I find that after careful study of the theory of parrying, coupe's, and disengages etc. I have a significant advantage on fencers who haven't but have fenced much longer than I.

I've tried flicking and it takes too long to master when I could be spending my time perfecting other facets of my game.

I also have tried various pistol grips over the past two years. My form immediately goes to pieces and I become a wild and eratic poker. I will acknowledge that if there is a weakness in the French grip, it is that if my blade is very forcefully hit, I have been disarmed, but I'll take my chances.

In last March, I was briefly conveted to the pistol grip arguments and went to a tournament in Houston with my brand new Spanish offset foil. Within a few bouts, my hand was turing to 12 instead of 3 my repostes were landing flat. I ended up losing my DE 9-14 when if I had used what works for me, I probably would have advanced.

[suregrip]

I'd like to see some fencing on TV. I don't mean in sitcoms or the like, but real tournaments or the like. I spoke to one TV station about a "special", but they declined saying that the general public:

1. does not understand fencing and/or its rules

2. can not follow the action.

I said that that's what replay and slow-motion are for - after all, both are utilized in all of the other sports. And DUH! The public would eventually begin to understand, just like students eventually understand, but they have to be exposed to it. That's the problem...no exposure. So sad to think that its a growing sport, but still unrecognized. Enough of my lamenting.... <img src="graemlins/crap.gif" border="0" alt="[Crap]" />

[D'Artagnan1673]

You are exactly right. The first time I watched Baseball, I didn't completely understand what was happening, but by watching and listening to the announcers, I eventually learned. They will just have to give it a try.

[Cutter]

How about enlarging the area of target for Sabre. Lets make it the whole body. Suit everyone up in metal knickers, socks, shoes, gloves, etc. Would make it more like a real sword fight. <img src="graemlins/jester.gif" border="0" alt="[Jester]" />

[lochinvar]

Dump all three weapons for foam bats, and everybody fences naked.

No points are awarded; you quit when you've had enough. Whoever remains on the strip wins.

Shots to the 'nads are outlawed completely; all such infractions, even if accidental, get an automatic black card.

[D'Artagnan1673]

Eek! okay okay, we can keep the flick! That foam bat thing just doesn't sound too appealing!

[Gav]

Not the, "lets get fencing on TV!" argument again.

---

I would change the rules to give me an advantage.

"Red card."
"Why?"
"You're not Gav"
"Oh"
"Red Card."
"Why?"
"You're not Left handed"
"Oh"
and so on...