You Make the Call: Video Clip

[Artisan]

Here's a short clip:

From FAP's 2003 GALA Final bout: STANISIAUS GUTKOVSKIY from Belarus and NONTAPAT PANCHAN from Thailand, fencing for Penn State.

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze2nzjy/index.html
go to bottom of page and follow links.

Although the loser of the bout acknowledges the touch, how would you have called it?

** note, Windows media file 500k must be down loaded and named as .wmv

Quicktime file is 2.1M

[pkt]

Why is the clip so dark?

I hate judging foil for exactly this kind of thing.

My immediate call is
attack from right,
counter-attack from left.
Point for right.

Using Mr. Bill Oliver's words as quoted in another thread, the fencer on the right "collapsed the distance" and extended his arm first.

PK

[veeco]

If you play it in slow motion you will see that Gutovski's extension starts a hair before Notapat's.

Attack from left counter from right point left.

[onesandzeros]

I agree, attack left, counter right.

[C.J.]

If you'll look at it carefully, they extended their arms at the same time. GUTKOVSKIY moved his foil first(changing his line of attack), but not did not extend his arm first. If I were the director, I would call it a simultaneous.

But calling it for NONTAPAT wouldn't be completely unreasonalbe, since he started his advance first, and if the director had been consistant.

[edew]

The tempo feel looks like touch for Gutkovskiy (left).

Also, Panchan's action looks reactive, as if he decided to extend after the fact. He's stepping in, then suddenly Gutkovskiy's making a lunge, and whoa...what to do? That's what it appears.

Who was the referee at the event? I'm guessing Charlie Washburn.

[Strytllr]

Actually, what I see on scene-by-scene playback is that they begin their lunges simultaneously. I mean, both of their feet start at the same time, and even more remarkable, they both LAND at the same time. *blink* Amazing.

Anyway, it appears that, right after the lunging foot lands, Left has is blade already in threatening position (but not extended), while Right is still in a non-threatening position (and not extended). Both, again, begin the extension at the same time. But Left's blade already threatening would definitely make me judge it in his favor.

All in all, that would have been a tough call. My admiration to the judge!!

[Artisan]

Originally posted by edew
The tempo feel looks like touch for Gutkovskiy (left).

I think thats why one gets a different impression when you look at it a frame at a time or in slo-mo than from real time.

Who was the referee at the event? I'm guessing Charlie Washburn.

yup... & Pascal Cantin did the semi;

[Kodiak Kid]

The first time I viewed it and all 10 times after that it looks like
Attack left, touch left.

I thought maybe I was supposed to be looking for a parry or something? I didn't slow it down or any of that stuff as the director certainly doesn't have that luxury at his disposal when he makes the call...

Guy on the left has the attack.

[danp]

I poured over this a bunch of times... Tough call! It's really amazing to me that judges can see this stuff in such a short period of time. Well, some don't, but...

At first I thought that since Panchan (right) was coming forward and Gutkovskiy (left) gave up point-in-line, it would be point right. Then I figured simultaneous -- But the closer I watched it, I realized that Panchan's attack wasn't so much an attack as a reaction, and his actions weren't very overt.

It's a real testament to making an attack look like an attack. Which I often fail to do.

I sure wish there were more foil matches on tape or DVD. Seeing stuff in slo-mo is a killer learning tool...

-Dan

[C.J.]

Originally posted by pkt
Why is the clip so dark?

PK

Yeah, the place does look awefully dark. What's up with that?

[DanInMI]

Originally posted by C.J.
Yeah, the place does look awefully dark. What's up with that?

I think the problem is the bright lights on the wall behind them. the camera tried to automatically set brightness settings and those lights are throwing it off.

[DanInMI]

Looking at it frame by frame....
There is one frame in which the fencer at the left is still changing directions as the fencer at the right begins his advance lunge.
Neither fencer extends before initiating the lunge although the fencer on the left looks like he is more aggressive.
However, he does not extend. He first lowers his point and then extends.
At the same time as the left is lowering his point and advancing, the fencer on the right is extending as he is lowering his tip.
I think that in stop action it is an attack from the right, but I really don't think that a director could be faulted for calling it simultaneous.

I think this is a case in which the fencer that appeared to be exerting more energy got the call.

[Almightynoitall]

Simultaneous action... I'd throw it out in a heartbeat. IRL, you can't slow down most actions 'frame by frame'...

[DanInMI]

Originally posted by danp
I
It's a real testament to making an attack look like an attack. Which I often fail to do.

-Dan

exactly.....The guy on the left LOOKED more like an attack, and that's why he got the call. The guy on the right both closed distance and extended first.

[DanInMI]

Hey, let's see more clips! That was very cool.

[CarlKnoch]

This is a tough one! While my initial instinct was to say attack from the right because he was pressing the distance and had the left on the retreat, I then read something posted above by pkt about Bill Oliver...

The distance is collapsed by the fencer on the left, and that collapse begins before an attack starts from the right. So I would have to give the touch to the left on this one.

If I had to call it on the spot in real time, I would have probably called it simo nothing done.

[Craig]

That's a very difficult action - based on what I saw I would have called it attack for the right, touch right.

I looked at it full speed and made that call, then I slowed it down to look frame by frame and looked for why I would call it the other way. I waffled a bit, and I can make an arguement for left, but I would most likely (85%+ of the time) give that touch to Non.

I'm currently rated a "6" due to inactivity but my referee level is more of a "5" in foil. This action is what you feel good calling if you are a "3" or a "2", so it was really good to look at from a teaching perspective.

Get us more video clips and I'll compile a Q&A / teaching page for the clips on why the call should go a certain way and what the referee should be looking for on the touches.

I'll get a more detailed analysis of this action up later.

Thanks for the post - this is good stuff!

Craig

[C.J.]

I think if you look too hard into it, you get false positives.

[DanInMI]

Originally posted by CarlKnoch
This is a tough one! While my initial instinct was to say attack from the right because he was pressing the distance and had the left on the retreat, I then read something posted above by pkt about Bill Oliver...

The distance is collapsed by the fencer on the left, and that collapse begins before an attack starts from the right. So I would have to give the touch to the left on this one.

If I had to call it on the spot in real time, I would have probably called it simo nothing done.

I can see where you might say that the guy on the left closed the distance by changing direction......but the guy on the right DID extend first. And he began extending too soon after the other started changing direction for it to be condidered a reaction to that. All in all, I am with you, I would have called it simultaneous.