Change Is BAD!!!! (a rant)

[FoilyGeezer]

It's been interesting to note how some of the fencer's (particulary the younger crowd) are passionately vehement about changing any aspect of foil. As a fencer who fenced in the bad old days BES (Before Electrical Scoring), or at least before everyone had it, I've been lucky enough to see a good amount of the evolution of the sport.

Re-entering into the sport, after an absence of a couple of decades, it was amazing to me how much the nuance of the sport had changed, but the underlying basis for the sport has not. I've been required to adapt to these changes in order to maintain a degree of proficiency in the sport.

I think that people who have grown up with modern electric fencing have a tendency to think that it was born wholesale as it is now, and has remained essentially unchanged since it's implementation. Of course this is not the case.

Electric fencing equipment was developed to take much of the guesswork out of scoring. Anyone who ever drove 4 or 5 hours with a couple other fencers to enter a tournament where the judges were all peers of each other and the bulk of the fencers on the strip, and you were the outsider, knew what an uphill battle it could be to place well in dry bouts. But electrical scoring equipment also changed the sport. What was developed as a scoring aid to the bout director, has evolved into a regulatory device interpreted by the bout director. A subtle change, but an important one.

It seems to me that the FIE is attempting to de-emphasise some of that change and re-emphasise some of the pre-electrical and pre-orthopedic grip aspects of the sport. Having worked hard over the past couple years to master the flick, and having become fairly comfortable with it, I still find myself ambivalent to the idea that it might be rendered less effective as a tactic. Or if that's not the case, then so be it. I'm fine with the flick, I'll be okay without it. I know this because I was okay without it before, but I realize there aren't too many fencers out there in my shoes, having grown up with it.

Will it change your approach to the sport? Yes. But isn't part of any sport the development of an ability to adapt to changes? In fact, the development of the sword itself has been a constant adaptation to the changing environment of combat. Do rule changes upset some kind of Darwinian equillibrium? No more so than running into an opponent who's got your favorite attack shut down cold. The idea that any change to the current environment is going to "ruin" foil is one of senseless resignation. Adapt, Innovate, and most importantly LEARN.

Whilst sitting about and whining about how hard it's going to be to fence under the new rules may give us a feeling of community, maybe we'd be better served to figure out how to exploit the rule changes to our personal tactical advantage. Because when it's all said and done that's what we're going to have to cope with out on the Piste.

[Prometheus]

This post may end up in a frame on my wall.

[frenzl]

does any one know when the rules will go into effect?

[Delmont]

Very nicely put.

[Event Horizon]

Changes can be inevitable sometimes but doesn't necessarily mean that it is always good.

Just because some people whine (as you say) about the changes doesn't necessarily mean that their arguement is moot or unimportant. I'm glad to see that there are many in our "community" who care about which direction the sport should go and are concern with the results of what the changes will have in fencing.

To have the "shut up, and deal with it" attitude is the wrong approach to the changes in Fencing and hope that not many fencers subscribe to this.

[dreadfoily]

I understand your point. People who complain about change all the time are somewhat inflexible [little joke there], but another poster here noted that not all changes are always good. I think there have been so MANY new rules in the past 5 years, it's been almost incredible. I've always fenced electric so I don't know about 'pre-electric days' but I feel that those kinds of monumental changes have been good. It's all the little tweeking over the past few years that seem almost frilly, it's like a hemlines. Up one year, down another.


Some people go berserk if another subject is brought up on a thread, how can we expect them to cope with the changes in foil?

"The world of form will always change"
from a poem

[downunder]

Originally posted by frenzl
does any one know when the rules will go into effect?

some rules come in 1.1.04

i.e. deliberate hit not on target moving to grp 2.

and the one about not being able to win a match committing a group 1 offense


the rest that were agreed on at Lepzig will come in after the Olympics

[The0ne]

This post sums up what I will end up doing, but until then, I'll ***** about it as much as I can!!!!!

[FoilyGeezer]

Originally posted by Event Horizon
Just because some people whine (as you say) about the changes doesn't necessarily mean that their arguement is moot or unimportant.

To have the "shut up, and deal with it" attitude is the wrong approach to the changes in Fencing and hope that not many fencers subscribe to this.

You are correct. Criticism when well reasoned is a very useful catalyst for change. And I would gladly concede that most even the most egregious whiner has a point to make. It's just not always a constructive point.

I'm not saying "shut up and deal with it" as much as I'm saying that

a) Since we as fencers empower the FIE to regulate the format of our sport, we shouldn't jump to the conclusion that they're trying to "ruin" the sport by adhering to their mandate. If they're doing that bad a job then we should be changing things to ensure they don't in the future.

b) As far as the fencers go. I don't think the rule changes are so draconian that it will materially change our ability to enjoy and compete. In fact, I doubt that at the highest levels of the sport, you'll see much of a changing of the guard due to these particular changes. There will be some inconvenience to the individual fencer, but nothing that horrid. I'm not blessing the FIE for being completely on the ball here, I'm just saying that neither are they complete idiots as some would have you think.

c) If anyone has cause for concern, it's probably the USFA board members and the Salle owners, because either they're going to have to implement across the board, or every Salle having a sanctioned competition is going to have to have two sets of boxes in order to run the juniors, or the USFA is going to have to waive the implementation for a year so that it can be implemented across the board. To me, this is a more serious issue than that of replacing the tips on all our foils as it has the potential to be an event killer, should a Salle decide that they just won't hold such and such an event this year because they don't have enough equipment, or don't want to have two sets of boxes or be managing two different formats.

4) Heh heh heh! Dissention and complaining is good as long as it's productive. That's a different thing from whining. We've all seen pro athletes complaining that they only make an average of Half a million dollars a year...yadda yadda yadda. It's self serving, and ultimately doesn't contribute to anything to the advancement of the sport. Our sport isn't that big that we need to do that.

[neevel]

The mandated rules changes are for Junior World Cups _only_ initially, so no changes are technically going to be necessary for boxes used at local competitions. And you're not going to see any mandates for updating equipment at local competitions even after the JWC-only "test" period. Many of the boxes in use at local competitions already don't meet the latest FIE rules (they may not have antiblocking, or yellow lights, or have timings that are outdated by even current standards). I doubt the USFA-- or most other national federations, for that matter-- will move to update the boxes used at national tournaments until after the FIE gives the OK for the new specs at all FIE competitions. Remember, the USFA already does not require FIE homologated gear at divisional and national tournaments.

As for the overall effect of the new rules on people's results, let's just say that Brendan Meyers is in no danger of being bumped out of the top spot on the Junior points list by any kids trained by Evangelista or Gaugler.

-Dave

[danp]

Originally posted by FoilyGeezer
a) Since we as fencers empower the FIE to regulate the format of our sport, we shouldn't jump to the conclusion that they're trying to "ruin" the sport by adhering to their mandate. If they're doing that bad a job then we should be changing things to ensure they don't in the future

How would someone go about voicing a dissenting opinion to the FIE in any substantive way?

Regards,
-Dan

[J. A. Cisneros]

Originally posted by danp
How would someone go about voicing a dissenting opinion to the FIE in any substantive way?

Regards,
-Dan

That was what Italy and thirty some other countries did voting against FIE´s propolsals which are not definite and some I´m sure will never come into effect, yes they will be tested but once they realize that the changes aproved take away the spectacle of foil fencing for the TV, FIE will have to take a new look to the alternate proposal that was presented by the Italians.

We´ll see.

Jose A. Cisneros

[rvergara]

like i said in another thread, i recently read Aldo Nadi's "On Fencing", and his vision of the sport (obviously pre-electric) is quite different to what it is now. He says that the well timed beat-attack and strong parrying were the basis of the game.

The only top level fencing i've seen is a tape from the Sydney Olympics, two bouts: Bissdorf-Ferrari and Tchevchenko-Ferrari. On those bouts the only parry i've seen is prime. All the attacks are contretemps or flicks. Both leftys do a running attack with the arm bent that somehow succeeds. Timing is essential for lots of the touches, but there are no beats, just preparing the flick. There is one touch made by Bissdorf that is more like a saber cut made with the point, barely scratching the lame.

I think those are the things the FIE is after, but that's just what i think.

[Tireur]

once they realize that the changes aproved take away the spectacle of foil fencing for the TV

I'm confused, what spectacle is being removed? The flick??

That's the spectacle of foil?

[pkt]

You foilists should quit your complaining.

Sabre has ALWAYS been fiddled around with by the FIE the most of the 3 weapons.
The most recent change allowing the use of the "welder's mask" reduced the target on the head.
How about the 'no-fleche' rule?
How about the removal of the capteur/sensor?
How about the change from non-electric to electric?
How about the various changes in the "length' of the piste?
How about the "flipping-coin" rule?

Sabre went from the cheapest to compete in to the most expensive of the 3 weapons in one year. But since those changes were for the better no one complained.

The adage goes "Variety is the spice of Life". I disagree.
Variety IS the stuff of life.

If the change is for the better then no one will complain.

All these changes in foil is simply to bring the reality of foil fencing back in line with the rules.

If only the coaches, the fencers and, yes, the refs, will take the rules as they are. The reality of foil fencing is a vast deviant from the rules, cf. sabre and sabre rules: You pump your arm during an attack, then the attack becomes a preparation in however many fencing times the arm is pumped. In other words, the fencing time is called properly. The extension of the attack has to be clearly visible.

Go back to the rule book and apply the rules of an attack as per rule t.8 and t.56, not some deviation of it. That's what the rules changes are trying to achieve. You may call me a fundamentalist, a literalist or whatever, but without people following the rules as written in the rule book, whose rules would we fence under.

As a result, I agree with the changes. It's a good thing!

PK

[sabreur]

Foilygeezer hits a number of nails squarely on the head.

Change is not always bad. The changes in sabre, including electric scoring, have made it a much better weapon, IMNSHO. And I fenced for six years during the Dark Ages of steam sabre, so I know what's changed.

The changes in foil are aimed at restoring some degree of classicism to the weapon. I don't pay enough attention to foil to know, but my recollections of late 1970s foil involves a lot of stepping into attacks with a sweeping prime parry, then infighting. That was sort of the pop move of the time. The rule about reversing the shoulders was a direct result of the popularity of this particular action. My point is that "the good old days" rarely were the paradise of purity that they are made out to be. Fencing involves two people trying to control time and space at very high speeds. If their level of accomplishment is similar, it is inevitable that things will get messy.

The other thing is, as someone else noted, the changes aren't written in stone. Electric sabre began with the capteur--we have thankfully dispensed with that particular tetchy piece of equipment. So if the foil rules don't work, they will change again. I suppose if you are relatively young, ambitious and trying to really hone your game, it can seem like your entire world has changed. But I think if you are a student of the sport (and maybe not so ambitious), it is worth giving the changes a chance. I know that in the late 70s and early 80s, before the fleche was removed from sabre, there was a lot of discussion about how sabre had gotten away from its roots--very similar to the discussions about foil today.

I will be interested to see how the 0.12 second blocking time works in sabre. My fear is that it will favor the remise over the riposte, and that people will be taught to attack and remise immediately. But we will see.

Cheers, MR

[pkt]

I've been competing in both sabre AND foil since the 70s and I say Sabreur's first point is wrong.

But the gist of his post is correct.

It's interesting that it's mainly the young foilists that are protesting the proposed changes and not the old geezers. Why is that so?
Is it because the old geezers have seen changes come and go and simply got on with adapting to the changes and survived?
On the other hand, the young ones simply find adapting to the changes too difficult because it was difficult for them to get to where they are already?

Hmmm, that's an interesting phenomenon.

It's usu. the old geezers who fossilise, not the young ones.

PK

[danp]

Originally posted by pkt
Is it because the old geezers have seen changes come and go and simply got on with adapting to the changes and survived?
On the other hand, the young ones simply find adapting to the changes too difficult because it was difficult for them to get to where they are already?

Hmmm, that's an interesting phenomenon.

It's usu. the old geezers who fossilise, not the young ones.

There could be several reasons for the fact that younger fencers are protesting the changes more vocally. I'm not convinced that it's limited to an age group, but if so, it kinda makes sense.

The changes being enforced can be viewed not so much as forward progress, but as a regression. The evolution of the sport, namely the use of the flick resulting from electric fencing, was something that grew and became a big part of the scene. Some may not like it, and for arguably fine reasons. But it's understandable that to remove it can be viewed as stunting the natural course of what fencing has become.

Perhaps the ones who appear to fear change are indeed the ones who embrace and have adapted to it.

I can have fun with the flick or without - so I say this without much personal vested interest. But as a phenomenon, you have to put yourself on the other side of the argument. There must be an up and coming group of fencer's who have no doubt trained long and hard to master this tool, and use it to great advantage. To them, I'd imagine this change looks like a bunch of old fogies trying to dictate a change back to "the good old days".

Again, this is just a comment on the state of mind, not my own opinion on whether flicking is good or not. In the end I'm just happy that the FIE didn't make the toaster-oven masks mandatory gear. Yet.

-Dan

[FoilyGeezer]

Originally posted by danp
There must be an up and coming group of fencer's who have no doubt trained long and hard to master this tool, and use it to great advantage. To them, I'd imagine this change looks like a bunch of old fogies trying to dictate a change back to "the good old days".

Ah! Herein lies the crux of the matter. As has been mentioned, the good old days weren't all that good. If they had been, electric fencing apparatus would never have been developed.

Some of the changes seem aimed at slowing down the phrasing of fencing and making movements more deliberate (read deliberate as telegenic). Even in the days of classical dry fencing, there was always a premium on speed and dexterity. So this isn't really about returning to the way things were.

Electrical scoring was never intended to change the style of fencing, but it has. You could flick a foil blade before electical fencing became the norm. You might even get a point called you're way too, but it was an inconsistent tactic at best. Why? Because of the human error inherent in judging. Electrical scoring has given the sport a consistency that it didn't have before. Indeed it has become so consistent as to have become the culture of the sport. But consistency isn't the same as accuracy.

Case in point. I come in and beat your blade. No one notices at the time, but the end of my tip flies off. I then lunge at you. You cringe in abject terror at my manly prowess, throwing your hands up in supplication to the deity(s) of your choice, and my blade bends mightily forming a glorious arc in what would otherwise have been a single light touch, the barrel resting indisputably in the center of your lame for a good second for everyone to see. The director calls halt, the tip is examined and found to be faulty, I get my other weapon Hrothgar, and the bout continues onward to your eventual demise without a second though. But how often will a director award a touch in that case. Usually it's just deemed an equipment failure, and life goes on, even if it obviously was a touch. The culture of electrical scoring wins out over the use of electrical scoring as an aid to fencing, and expedience and consistency in judging the bout.

But there is never a level playing field, and indeed if we all did what the text books told us to do, fencing would be reduced to very predictable mechanics. Chances are these rule changes will have *some* unpredicted side effects. I, for one don't think the flick is going to die, or that it's meant to. It just won't be as prevalent. I suspect this is the intention of the rule changes. It would be easy enough to outright disallow it like the fleche has been disallowed in saber.

As some of the older members have pointed out, if you're in this sport for the long haul, better buckle in and get ready to see more changes as time goes on. Some will be good, some will be bad, but they will happen.

[Bonehead]

I like these changes. I haven't been fencing long enough to say this, but I'm that their not really "Changes" anyway, more of changes back.

I feel that the way presiding, and fencing is right now, we are giving far to much leverage to the offensive fencer. Because of this, the fencer taking the offensive role is allowed to make foolish actions, big searches, large "coupes", pulling the arm back, because s/he is granted a lot of freedom of what the "Attack" actually is. By reducing the possibilty of a flick landing (I don't believe that these rules will completely eliminate flicks) and by shortening the lockout time it means that the offensive fencer has to be more prepared before executing an attack. If the defensive fencer closes distance while the point is way out of line, its much harder for the offensive fencer to simply put the extra strength into the flick and turn a light on. If the offensive fencer retracts his arm and a stop hit/attack in preperation is made, it will be much more clear because it is less likely that the offensive fencer can turn a light on.

I admit that I use flicks way to often, and lately its been hurting my fencing. When I heard the rule changes I decided that I should start working more on my point control again, and I've noticed that its really gone downhill.

But luckily the ability to flick doesn't put a fencer in first place. Its control of distance, timing, the ability to perform a wide range of actions, and the ability to think on their feet. Just cus flicks won't go off as often doesn't mean Brendan meyers is gonna start losing. the reason that anyone can land a flick at all has to do mostly with timing and distance anyway, which he is very good at (hard to believe he is so young, nice guy too).

I think these rule changes will put more empasis on the tradional style of fencing, but we still use an electric box so bouting will still require a great deal of athletism.

Hopefully this will just force people to use more intellegent actions more often, like second intention (which was risky to use when a flick riposte was so easy to hit), or more compound actions using disengagements (because the benifits of retracted arm are lessned).

well thats my two bits