Discussion in 'Fencing Discussion' started by sdubinsky, May 8, 2019.
Seems like a simple fleche from Heinzer.
hit the ground?
that's what it looks like Fichera is asking for but I went through it in slo mo and it doesn't look like he gets anywhere near the ground.
If you play through at super slow motion, you can see at 3:00-3:01 Heinzer starts his fleche by dropping his point in an invitation or feint to the foot. His light registers a touch before he starts the primary fleche. It's possible that he hits the hand as he starts, but much more likely that he hit the piste and it registered.
I couldn't tell if they managed to recreate the fault. If they did, I'm fine with an annulment since Max clearly hits the piste during the phrase. But if they can't recreate, don't see how they can annul. The tip was above on the piste (ie not off to the side where it isn't grounded) and then Max does go high to the target.
If you 100% see the light on without having hit the opponent on the replay, don’t focus on exact reproduction of it. Just annul and make sure things are working now.
You better be certain though. It’s like an air touch, but the ability to go frame by frame allows you to be even more clear on when it was early.
I agree with you but when I did frame by frame analysis, the light isn’t on til the Max’s tip is at the hand or target. I’m not sure what kind of delay there is between hit and light going on, but there isn’t to me at least a clear floor hit and light on.
I agree and I think it may have been a bad call to annul the touch, but I think context is important here too. The referees and fencers at this level know each other well. If Fichera has a history of only pointing out floor hits or similar when they actually occur, the referee is probably going to give him a bit of the benefit of the doubt to know that he wasn't hit by the action that turned on the light. I'm not saying that this is the case here for sure, but that history definitely comes into play when deciding close calls.
The point that was nearest the floor when the lights went off was Fichera's. Heinzer's point was well up and near Fichera's hand and guard when each of three visible lights went off. Yes, three lights. The first red light to display was the one overlaid on the video. The second to light up was on the center box on the table. The third was the repeater on the pole above the center box on the table. There also was a 4th light on the fancy video screen but it was out of camera view.
Use the "." (period) key shortcut to step forward and the "," (comma) key shortcut to step back a frame on Youtube.
There is often a synchronisation issue with the light on the overlay so I wouldn't take that into consideration. Centre box on the table is your best bet - ideally it's always in the frame for tight video calls.
Do you know what kind of delay there should be? 1 frame? or a few? Because as we already established, the light on the center box doesn't illuminate until Max's tip is nowhere near the floor.
I wasn't aware of those shortcuts. Very useful.
I agree that it was a bad call. Does the video replay allow frame by frame analysis? I thought I heard at one point that the playback feed was fixed because the priority weapons get skewed if you slow the video down too much.
The rule is "There shall only be a maximum of 4 repetitions of the action. The referee can choose to review the action in real time or in slow motion, at any speed he wishes". It's pretty clear that the max of only 4 repetitions often gets ignored.
The FIE has spec'ed an adjustable video replay speed of between 10 and 100% as a minimum.
Since that's a minimum requirement (and an 8 year old document), some systems may permit slower playback.
I think they all have frame-by-frame now. Certainly all the major providers.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong (it's been a year+ since I've done foil video at any FIE level) but for the conventional weapons it was 100%, 30%, 100%. Epee much more likely to slow it right down as needed.
I don't think there should be really much delay between the touch and the light on the box (perhaps an electrical engineer could estimate!). The sync on the overlay is normally pretty good (it used to be terrible), but I wouldn't take it as gospel for frame-by-frame analysis.
What would happen to Charles Barkley's buzzer-beater?
In this video the overlay actually signals one frame _before_ the box! (Using the very useful frame by frame stepping shortcuts I wasn't aware of before this thread). Assuming the feed is composited in realtime that suggests the video sampling and encoding rate is the limiter in this case (rather than a post-production overlay just being out of sync).
I find the blades practically invisible in this replay but it is a least plausible to me a big downward 'flick' in the blade action caused a hit on the piste that was incorrectly detected.
Separate names with a comma.