Foil/Saber Rule Changes Committee Report

[OCTAVIA]

Sounds like a whole bunch of new stuff. I'm not wild about any of it. I feel foil should have the fleche attack, it's classical fencing and I see these recent changes as a way for the opposition to gain more control of the sport.

I also absolutely don't like the bib as a target in foil, I think it's excessively dangerous, and doesn't make sence when you put it together with the fleche thing. If you're taking out a fleche attack because it created too much corp-d'corp, ie making a dangerous situation for fencers, then putting in the bib as target sounds dicey. Why take the chance. The issue is safety? How so?

With all due respect to the club: couldn't we keep everything in the sport if we moved the en garde line back a meter for each fencer, extending the piste by a total of three meters? I feel that the mass+speed thing is directly responsible for the many changes in the sport. The fencer has changed significantly over the years, adding more bulk to their frame, and the human has evolved into a larager being with denser bones.


Richard is absolutely correct except that the FIE doesn't seem to mind if the sport doesn't appear consistent, it's looking to create a newer generation of fencers.

[insert angry emoticon]

p.s., l don't even want to talk about the arm thing. They have the mechanics down about the vest for foil - the answer really is that the vest should be worn tightly and if the point bounces off, too bad.

[downunder]

Originally posted by OCTAVIA
I also absolutely don't like the bib as a target in foil, I think it's excessively dangerous, and doesn't make sence when you put it together with the fleche thing. If you're taking out a fleche attack because it created too much corp-d'corp, ie making a dangerous situation for fencers, then putting in the bib as target sounds dicey. Why take the chance. The issue is safety? How so?

it doesn't pose a problem in epee or sabre, why should it be a safety issue in foil?

[DHCJr]

Very simple. Most attacks with the Sabre are cutting, not thrust. Ask any Epeeist, do they try for the hand and arm or try for the body. If you eliminated the bib as target area for either of those two weapons, while keeping the rest of the valid target, it would not affect them.

[MyraTrue]

oh, I love this line-

9.2 Following the studies and tests that were carried out, we oberved that:
-the number of non-valid hits greatly decreased following the introduction of the proposed changes (increase of valid target area by adding the bib, removal of the fleche, decrease in blocking time of the lights, increase in the duration of the break in contact time) in the course of the tests.

I mean... gee... who'd have thought that if you pretty much removed all moving elements of foil, you'd get less off targets? Seriously, they sound like this is a surprise. They also make it sound like fleches and cross overs make life SOOOOO confusing, nearly impossible. If they can't direct a bout with a fleche of crossover, they shouldn't be directing!

I love this "its easier to ref, has fewer technical difficulties, and less breaks in fencing". WHAT'S LEFT??? You could stand at arm's length and poke each other and get the same entertainment value.

Honestly, I don't see a great fault with the idea of a valid hit to the bib. I always thought it should be. But the cost in getting a new mask is one no fencer wants to face. Not to mention, if you sweat at all, your bib is going to be soaked, and dead spots will quickly develop. "Sorry, your new FIE mask is no longer valid for foil." Geez.

Then again, I'm glad my primary is epee, and that they left epee alone. And of COURSE epee is perfect!

[swordsen]

The bib as target doesn't bother me. (except for the cost issue or replacing all the masks out there)
Let's face it. There isn't a legal foil mask being made right now. (according to the rules the bib cannot cover the collarbone in foil) It is annoying to fence some smaller person with one of there new masks where the bib covers half of their chest.

As for the rest. Leave it alone, it isn't broken.

[Inquartata]

Epee is as close to "perfect" as fencing can get: no ROW, everything target. What's to tinker with?

Of course, it's still BORING, but nevertheless...

I agree with those who are nonplussed by some of the changes to foil. I've never seen the fleche or crossover abused as they were in sabre at one time, so WTF? And that lame bit on the arm is just goofy. Make the arm target or leave it alone.

BTW, as a sabre fencer I expressly do NOT want the fleche back. It's loss has cleaned sabre up enormously. ( I opposed its prohibition at the time of its removal from sabre, but it turned out to be beneficial. So don't just reject all these proposals out of hand, folks---you might wind up being pleasantly surprised! )

[Ramrod]

Inq.
Did you just admit that you were wrong abuot something?

[Epeecurean]

The introduction of electric fencing (first in epee in 1936, then foil in the 1950s, and sabre just in the 1980s) transformed our sport in ways unimagined and unintended at the time. Overall it has been a very positive development for the sport, eliminating the unwieldy and subjective jury system and making it a far more physical endeavor. However, one of the unintended consquences has been very damaging: foil has degenerated into a bizarre whip-like weapon, characterized by running bent arm attacks and flicks, and the fencing phrase no longer seems to exist. The report puts it well:

"Hence, foil fencers sometimes look as though they are fencing sabre, or wielding an axe, that is when they are not simply 'casting' their hits as though they were fly fishing (flicks).”

Now I realize that fencing is just a sport and not a real fight with swords, but I believe that it fencing should ALWAYS be well-grounded in the principles of swordplay and remain true to its roots. I view most of the rule changes as technological refinements of electric fencing to make the sport better resemble fencing rather than combat fly-fishing. It is ironing out the wrinkles of a decades-old technology, a long overdue overhaul of fencing tech.

For instance, the bib apparently WAS target but then was eliminated because of the technological difficulties of implementation when electric fencing was introduced. Well now we can deal with that, and at the same time reduce off-targets and improve safety (bibs can now give better coverage).

Decreasing the time interval of the lights. Again a good change. It will help eliminate bent arm and marching attacks as fencing actions will have to have both ROW and be TIMELY. I think an objective measure of this (120ms sabre and 200ms foil) is a huge advance and will clean up fencing actions tremendously. No more attacks from outer space.

In regards to increasing contact time to reduce flickage, I had heard previously such a change would eliminate 95% of flicks, but the report says just 60%-70%. I wonder what the % when the additional modifications they discuss are included (750g spring, the 1cm max bend, and the max 20% grip tilt). Will foilists simply modify their flicks so they work under the new constraints? Maybe, but flicks will still be harder, riskier and less worthwhile to do. Sounds like additional mods are in the works too, so flick-hitters best start practicing straight attacks and good distance.

Elimination of cross-overs and the fleche. Don't think this is necessary at all. This really hasn't been as big a problem as it has been in sabre. Though this problem has been growing in foil, as the combination of a running attack with the arm back in an unparriable position ending with a flick to the back resembles sabre at the height of its bad ol' days, it should recede once foil is reestablished as a thrusting weapon. Once the balance between attack and defence is restored, running attacks and fleches will become foolhardy unless well timed and prepared. A well-executed fleche is beautiful and exciting.

Elimination of the off-target. I've flipped-flopped a bit on this. I DO like the idea of eliminating the white lights -- they are confusing, disruptive to the flow of the bout, and fencers do exploit it as a new defence (perhaps in response to mutated attacks?). However, just a simple elimination of the off-target lights would unfairly penalize an attack with ROW which lands off-target because of displacement or whatever. The sleeve might be a solution but I would like to see how it works in pratice before praising or condemning it.

Allowing reversal of the shoulders. Again a good change, though requiring refs to watch for covering with the back arm. It allows the action to flow plus you get some good infighting moves this way.

Starting en-guard just in front of the en-guard line (back foot touching) rather than behind it. Yep. Like this one too. Let’s just get right into the fencing action without the first dawdlingsteps. If fencers are tentative, they can just start with a step back instead of forward. In general I like changes that improve the flow of a bout. Remember the dreaded two-meter warning? How annoying was that! Also five-minute bouts, the one-minute warning.

Let’s see what they decide in November.

Epeecurean

[Aeric]

Amen, Epeecurean. I agree completely. Still not sure about the off-target either. I'd rather let it be, but if they make the change, you'd better believe many fencers will focus more on point control. This might make foil look like a dexterity weapon and not with huge, unneeded blade actions.

Also, I know that fencing is a sport first, and a martial art second, but:

Technology should adapt to fencing. Currently, fencing has been adapted to suit technology, which in my opinion, is very wrong. The flick should never have existed at all. It was repercussion of bendy blades (for safety) and electrical scoring (for precise judgement).

Fencing is fencing. We're not changing the rules, we're adapting technology to suit fencing, which is how it should be. We're going back to the way it was, and should have been.

[Inquartata]

Originally posted by Ramrod
Inq.
Did you just admit that you were wrong abuot something?

No. A much younger, callower me WAS wrong. Now I am wiser, and always right!

[OCTAVIA]

The bib is "allowed" meaning, if you happen to hit the bib it counts, but it's usually a Misfire, so the hit is usually light.

In training, the epeeist does not drill "to the throat". Could you imagine "okay, let's have 10 nice giant hits to the throat, right here".

In training, the epeeist is trained to the mask, the shoulder, the forearm, the bicep the knee, the foot, the hand in an orderly way.

THe whole body is included because your valid targets are from head to toe literally and you can't do a peice-meal elimination of little areas, so everything is included. When an epeeist gets really good they can nail the exact little spot on the hand that "counts" during a drill in a lesson. But in a pinch during a bout, if they're going for the hand or wrist and it pops up or down but is still very close, like part of the arm for example, then it counts.

[This is how I feel]

[Wizardly]

Originally posted by Aeric
...but if they make the change, you'd better believe many fencers will focus more on point control. This might make foil look like a dexterity weapon and not with huge, unneeded blade actions.

Foil already is a weapon about dexterity without huge, unneeded blade actions.

Originally posted by Epeecurean
...white lights... are confusing, disruptive to the flow of the bout, and fencers do exploit it as a new defence (perhaps in response to mutated attacks?). However, just a simple elimination of the off-target lights would unfairly penalize an attack with ROW which lands off-target because of displacement or whatever. The sleeve might be a solution but I would like to see how it works in pratice before praising or condemning it.

Confusing to who? Disruptive? Not really - it's a part of the sport. (Consider this: maybe there is a reason YOU fence epee. Don't make the foilists do it too. We'll lose off targets when you pick up right of way. ) My (foil) POV: not confusing, not disruptive. As for exploitation: if you have a problem, you ask for hand judges - covering target is illegal in foil; touches that land on covered target are valid touches despite the white lights.

Originally posted by Epeecurean
Starting en-guard just in front of the en-guard line ... let’s just get right into the fencing action without the first dawdlingsteps. If fencers are tentative, they can just start with a step back instead of forward. In general I like changes that improve the flow of a bout.

I don't see a problem here either. Where was starting farther away causing roblems in foil? Perhaps the FIE needed to look at this the other way: make sure the fencers return to en guard 4 meters appart no matter where the halt was called, irregardless of a touch being scored or not. Or they could just leave well enough alone. I rather liked the "a touch was scored, it's time to start all over / a touch wasn't scored, it's time to keep going" distinction.

[a517dogg]

Epee has no rules, which is why it's the perfect weapon. It's entirely self-regulating.

[MyraTrue]

epee has minimal rules compared to foil and sabre, but its got them alright. They're what make the difference between a really good director and a self directed pool. Mostly reason to anul rules and what not.

Not that I'm complaining. Epee's my weapon, and Inq, epee is not boring. You just fence it wrong!

[DanInMI]

Epeecurean-

<b>combat fly-fishing</b>



i love that!

[DanInMI]

I suppose if the bib WAS Target i would have no problem with that. (except the cost) I don't really think it would make it any more hazardous....it's not like it would become a focal point that we would all suddenly be directing out attention on.

Most bibs are way bigger than regulations allow. I fenced against a yound woman a couple of weeks ago in a mixed tourney that had a bib that completely covered her shoulder when she was en guarde. She was very thin and had such a good stance that when she was en guard there was just a sliver of target area showing on either side of her arm. I found most straight attacks were going passe....I sure would have liked to have that shoulder as a target.

If the bib was conductive then the size wouldn't be an issue....then they could make those things as big as they like and it wouldn't matter. Actually, wouldn't that make it safer?

[broncofencer]

I think the bib becoming on target will be a nice addition and cut down on off targets at least a little however, off target should still exist in foil as should the crossover and flesche. The spring change would make life a little easier as I can use the same springs for two weapons. The rest need to be looked at further before being implimented.

[DanInMI]

Originally posted by swordsen
The bib as target doesn't bother me. (except for the cost issue or replacing all the masks out there)
Let's face it. There isn't a legal foil mask being made right now. (according to the rules the bib cannot cover the collarbone in foil) It is annoying to fence some smaller person with one of there new masks where the bib covers half of their chest.

Actually the bib MUST cover the collarbone.

Item 4.3 in section 2.2 "Standards for manufature of Fencing Masks" (They really need a better way to organize the rule book)

"The mask must be so shaped that the bib reaches below the prominences of the collar bones (clavicles)."

Later, the rules go on to state that the bib should be 10 to 12 centimeters. (So I was wrong when i agreed that most bibs are not legal.) But on some smaller people That 10 to 12 centimeters does cover a lot of potential target. If the bib was conductive they could make them 15-18 centimeters and they would be safer. The biggest risk of a neck injury has got to be from slipping under the bib.

[veeco]

Regardless of the size you make them, there would still be a possibility of a blade going under the bib no? Except that if it was bigger the blade would potentially enter at a different point, but I would think the probability would be the same.

[Inquartata]

That's why you have high collars on jackets and lames...just in case.