changes to priorty interpretation?

Discussion in 'Rules and Referee Questions' started by anton_fairfax, Nov 12, 2018.

  1. ccadet

    ccadet Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2019
    Messages:
    52
    "According to Wittgenstein, philosophical problems arise when language is forced from its proper home into a metaphysical environment, where all the familiar and necessary landmarks and contextual clues are removed."
    You really need to understand that so we can move on.

    Familiar and necessary landmarks and contextual clues are :
    - Definition of what is an attack in the fencing context (that's the convention),
    - There is the logic of fencing (Try to touch without being touched),
    - "Réglement" (convention based and not common rules) .

    Your new familiar, landmarks and contextual are : How FIE referee do. That's not an argument. Because we don't care how they do, we care about why (but you don't) .
    But when language of fencing is forced from its proper home from FIE referee into their metaphysical logic (that's nobody really sure). We got problems.
    Some attacks are no more attacks, so some counter-attacks definition based on attack are no more counter-attacks.
    Some beats of blade are now parries. Some fentes without arm and weapon are now attacks... etc

    We don't talk about the same thing... Definition on what we are talking about, is crucial. (ex : When i talk about the rules, i don't talk about common rules. When i talk about convention, i don't talk about common rules)
    And you talk about attack with body and legs, you talk about fencing with incentives to make your opponent attack yourself before go, you talk about foil priority without talk about arm and weapon.
    That's the main difference, that's where is the problem. And if you even read and understand wittgenstein, that's an easy problem compare to some phisolophical problem.
     
  2. Michael Comte

    Michael Comte DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2019
    Messages:
    161
    Gender:
    Male
    Sorry, I am lost now, I quit the conversation.
     
  3. ccadet

    ccadet Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2019
    Messages:
    52
    Another wrong argument, that's not ad nausea, that's with logical stuff.
    ultimately, FIE referee (minority) decided what "fecing" is and how it's played.
    And they still get the power. xD
    I can argument it (and i did, i think).

    I love ad nausea, because it's the argument of referee (who don't), but we don't ad nausea, we use the convention (you don't understand the definition), we use the rules, we use a logical way of fence, we use the history. That's many good argument you just prefere ignore.
    FIE referee got none. And your only argument is that's new way of fence is now majority = common rules (that's another debate, that's a debate for follower (we say sheep in french)).
    Im really not sure who is ad nausea...
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2019
  4. ccadet

    ccadet Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2019
    Messages:
    52
    And if you want to talk about debate and logic. I propose logcal stuff

    You propose some rhetoric stuff (describe by schopenhauer in art of being right) :
    Stratagème XXXI : Je ne comprends rien de ce que vous me dites (Don't understand our argument and their
    strength
    )
    Stratagème XXX : Argument d’autorité (FIE referee/common rules > all)
    Stratagème XXIX : Faire diversion (You say, "Talk about this, it not the debate, because of XXX")
    Stratagème XIV : Clamer victoire malgré la défaite (Say that we do some "ad nausea" without argurment it, then claim victory on it)

    And if you want talk about "sophisme"
    What about :
    Argumentum ad populum ? (if majority do, that's must right)
    Pétition de principe ? (circular argument : If referee said it, that's common rules, and if common rules said it, referee have to follow it)
    And to finish about ad nauseam. then you can say Earth is flat. (Fencing is a leg and body and not a arm and weapon sport) that's ad nauseam. Then i can say Earth is round (Fencing is arm and weapon sport), if you don't understand convention (and say there is new one), don't understand the logic of fencing, don't understand how is build the rules, and how interpretate them, and you don't understand that's FIE refereeing failed to understand that too.
    I'm agree. If you don't understand my argument, and ignore it, that's an ad nauseam. But that's not I'm doing. I'm try explain point by point, why you logic is false, and why my argument are good. And i'm sorry that didn't work. I just want to call to people who understand foil. (I hope FIE referee do, then, work with them to understand there pb and find solution)

    I agree, there is no debate. There are people trying to open the eyes to other people. Not what I want...
    I want to talk with people who have the power and who know they are wrong. (FIE know they are. They said it from 20y. I don't understand why refereing still going the wrong way. They were some good FIE referee, some FIE tecnicals directors, and FIE directors tried to change that... And what's now ? We saw that's they failed, so that's all ? It's finish ? Ok, so, please say it. FIE director. (For the record, one director wanted to stop diffusion of saber and foil because of refereeing. Saying that's only Epee could be understand by public))
    And i will not answer to people who are just ignorant and don't care about what I'm saying.
    [email protected] if you want talk with me.
    Claim your win if you want (as you did), i will not try to debate anymore. Everybody have his own opinion and they're is no point to go further.
    The fight with absurd (because it is) FIE referee will continue, but no anymore here...
    (offensive Leg vs offensive arm and weapon at fencing)
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2019
  5. Quinn

    Quinn Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2013
    Messages:
    68
    Location:
    Slovenia
    I feel like all the arguments for both sides have already been made (too) many times so I'll just add that I too enjoy this game of electric stick tag as it is. It would be great if the written rules were updated to reflect refereeing convention as closely as is practical, as it's confusing to new fencers reading them.
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2019
  6. Michael Comte

    Michael Comte DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2019
    Messages:
    161
    Gender:
    Male
    Agree!
    Also, as so many people are stealing cars without going to jail, it would be good to update the law to reflect the fact that it is legal to steal a car. Let's be practical.
     
  7. keropie

    keropie Podium

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,554
    Location:
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Clearly, you're absolutely correct. The rules in this sport/game that many people are enjoying as they are (or wish for some changes that are not exactly what you want, which appears to be a return to the word of the rulebook and largely static fencing of the 40s and 50s), which isn't actually causing anyone real harm (again, feel free to start your own fencing federation and do it your way) is EXACTLY like letting people steal each other's property. 100% equivalence.

    /thread
     
  8. Michael Comte

    Michael Comte DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2019
    Messages:
    161
    Gender:
    Male
    No, it's not the same, right, stealing property is not sport.

    But look, it works for other sports:

    Many people enjoyed France beating Ireland with the hand from Henry:


    So why sticking to those written rules of soccer dating from the 19th century? Let's change the rules and score with the hand.

    People in Napoli enjoy this too:


    And Messi is also showing that he is not an old-fashion-sticking-to-the-written-rules guy:



    Or did I misunderstand what you mean?
     
  9. Belegur

    Belegur Made the Cut

    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Messages:
    176
    Location:
    Australia
    Can we just corral all the rules lunatics into this thread and then burn it down? At least it'll keep them from infecting the rest of the forum. Pro tip guys, if you can't make your point without a multi-paragraph word salad of incoherent ranting, your point isn't worth making. Stick to commenting on matters where you have some degree of knowledge.
     
  10. Michael Comte

    Michael Comte DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2019
    Messages:
    161
    Gender:
    Male
    When you post on forum, I ask yourself: "would I say that to those guys in front of them?"
    When the answer is no, don't post.

    Then you won't look like those guys who insult others online because the feel insecure in real life.

    About the topic (changes to priority interpretation), what I have to say is: yes, there are changes in priority interpretation in foil, there is a lot a debate about that (see the foil team final of the 2004 Olympics or the 300 cases shown by Malicia), and it is not over. (I made my point in 7 lines ;-)
     
    wwittman likes this.
  11. Inquartata

    Inquartata Podium

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    37,164
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Somewhere in your nightmares!
    At the least someone should notify Nick Evangelista that people are poaching on his territory over here.
     
  12. anton_fairfax

    anton_fairfax Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2017
    Messages:
    88
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Newcastle, Australia
    Not really. To follow that analogy, we’re discussing *should* it be legal to steal a car. I think pot legalisation is a better analogy, it’s like one side is discussing IF it should be legal, and the other keeps quoting the laws that say it’s not... which doesn’t really contribute anything.

    If there's one thing most seem to agree on, it's that it would be good if the rule book and current convention would be aligned so beginners read the rules, look at what the calls are, and see it all match up (what a dream…).

    So do you change convention, eg to insist bent arms don’t count as attacks as per the literal rules, or change the rules to reflect how calls are made as per current convention? And that's where I think saying "but that’s what the rule book says” completely misses the point.

    Besides, surely playing the sport the way the players want to play it counts for something right? Like, do we fence in order to follow the rules, or do we have the rules in order to enable us to fence? It’s not like actual laws. The rules are there to service us as players of the sport. so we can’t make stealing legal but we can improve our sport however we want ( collectively speaking)
     
  13. wwittman

    wwittman DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2019
    Messages:
    278
    Gender:
    Male
    along those lines, who 'benefitted' from changing the machine timing?

    did that "service us as players of the sport"?
    I think not.
     
  14. anton_fairfax

    anton_fairfax Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2017
    Messages:
    88
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Newcastle, Australia
    Well that issue is before my time, I’ve only been fencing 3 years, but I wouldn’t argue they always get it right! It’s not like there’s no problems in the sport... (non combativity)..

    But if someone wanted to debate what the timings should be, it be discussed on its merits. I wouldn’t just say “yes but that’s not the RIGHT timing... it says so here in the book?! Thats not what it’s MEANT to be... why, if you can just CHANGE the timing, why not just change it to be a million seconds.. after all, according to Friedrich Nietzsche .....” etc
     
  15. Michael Comte

    Michael Comte DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2019
    Messages:
    161
    Gender:
    Male
    Several times world champion explains it better than me:
     
    Stellan, Grey Sabreur and posineg like this.
  16. Malicia

    Malicia DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2019
    Messages:
    108
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    France
    Of course not.
    This subject was created by you, because you don’t really understand the referees's way to judge!
    No consensus, just a putsch many years ago: 20 years ago, and since, things are going worst. Some unexperienced fencers, like you, believe what they have learned: but this is false, this is the bad way.
    To received the blade in the belly, and to react afterward, is a very bad way (fortunately, double hits are quite rare, so foil doesn’t seem a total non-sense)
    Lots of people on this forum or elsewhere doesn’t agree with those referees (breaking the rules)..

    Sergei Golubisky, Ukrainian fencer who won three straight world championships in Men's Foil, etc.
    I'm very sad […]. I start to check out on the world's referee and I’m not happy about it at all because practically attack in preparation rapidly vanished. So there is a new way I would, call it new wave of a performing an attack. So basically it becomes marching and dancing on the spot.
    […] Many fences did actually in different countries but this is quite sad because they just stayed standing on the spot and pretend to advanced […]
    So fencing in the way has changed so since opponent doesn't finish his attack you can not take the blade, so you cannot parry it. So in the end if you try to make correct attacking preparation they won't give to you anyway. So in the end you have to do only some weird squirmy counter-attacks and then but people complaining all: “look at these these guys just squirmy and ugly fencing” …


    There are actual great fencers, who fence correctly: for example: Inna Deriglazova, Erwann Le Pechoux…

    Of course not.

    Referee have said left fencer has attacked (video 1H41min55sec)
    [​IMG]
    Same Referee have said right fencer has attacked (video 1H45min16sec)
    [​IMG]

    What is the difference ? Who understand anything ? Who can predict the referee's solution?

    Oh ! I can not really remember when I was fencing 3 years old. It was so a long time ago. But, I’m sure, at this time, I didn’t pretend to really know fencing.

    Since the 14th century, fencing time is the centre of the fencing theory. The official rules begin about fencing time!
    The real debate here, when I say that rules are broken, is in fact this question : to respect fencing times.
    But of course, the electronic timing are not the point.

    I don’t need any theory, or any rules to say that left fencer is right.
    [​IMG]
    But the referee has said the opposite (video 2H28min37sec)!
    Fortunately, the written rules agree with me, disagree with this referee.

    For years, we has complained and the answer was : it's not true OR it's a exceptionnal mistake OR that's just theory.
    Nowadays, thanks video, we can show the pratical problem.

    Just ask a non-fencer their minds! Try! Non-fencers don't need our rules to understand: foil is just ridicoulous, now, thanks to thoses referees.
    (respect the rules could be the solution... and it would be quite rational!)
     
    ccadet likes this.
  17. anton_fairfax

    anton_fairfax Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2017
    Messages:
    88
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Newcastle, Australia
    Actually this subject, which I created, was about comments I heard from high level fencers about possible changes to interpretations/conventions in actual refereeing - as it’s currently called. A general consensus and change over time are not mutually exclusive regardless.

    Although it’s been somewhat interesting to ponder how foil should be fenced and what the rules should be, I don’t think your contributions have in any way answered my original question, nor provided anything which will help me better understand refereeing in today's reality. What I want is to sit down to watch the Anaheim GP and when I see two lights, be able to correctly ascertain what the call will be. Not argue with the ref in my head.

    I also want to ref and fence better at my comps and club, and since we fence foil consistent with fie standards, I define "better" as consistent with how foil is fenced in reality.

    Thank you for your condescension. I guess will rely on the hundreds of years of combined experience of all of the refs that run world level comps who disagree with you. For the record, I like foil how it is. Being told that’s just because I’m too inexperienced and I'm pretending to understand fencing is condescending and not a helpful contribution either to my original question or the subsequent discussion.
     
  18. garyhayenga

    garyhayenga DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2004
    Messages:
    444
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, Michigan


    Sadly, several people here have decided to ignore your question and hijack your thread to rant about their pet peeve instead of starting their own thread.

    Unfortunately there are very few people who read this forum that are active in international refereeing and who might be able to give you an accurate answer. downunder, one of your countrymen actually, is possibly the only one, and he might be busy right now as he hasn't posted in a couple of weeks.
     
  19. Michael Comte

    Michael Comte DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2019
    Messages:
    161
    Gender:
    Male
    Hi,
    If I don't answer your question it is because I think that you ask yourself the wrong question.

    Personally, in many clubs I fenced, we have masters who fenced at a very high level, they know the rules, we apply them exactly how they are written. If you go training with Golubitsky in the Netherlands, he will teach you to follow the rules exactly.

    Unless you want to fence in the Olympics, in this case he will teach you ugly tricks like he says. If you play soccer as an amateur, do you ask yourself how to dive to influence the referee's decision?

    Trying to understand how they make their call at this level is like trying to understand Google algorithm: impossible, we don't have enough data.

    When Maradona scored with his hand in soccer for Napoli, soccer players all over the world didn't start to score with their hand. Why didn't this referee see the "hand of god"? Did he find a dead horse head in his bed that morning? I have no clue at all and don't care.

    Here is a non-exhaustive list of the factors which influence those decisions:

    -How was the referee chosen, because of his knowledge, nationality, relations?
    -Does he feel free to judge as he should or does he feel some pressure from coaches who are way more important than him in the fencing world?
    -What will bring the biggest TV audience, Fencer A from a 200 million people country winning or Fencer B from a 1 million people country?
    -What result will give more chance to get the biggest number of fencing medals in the next Olympics? (already the women team foil and sabre gold are not awarded the same year, other sports are complaining we have too many medals)
    -What decision will make the referee chosen in the next Olympics?
    -etc...etc...
     
  20. downunder

    downunder is a Verified Fencing Expertdownunder Podium

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,878
    Location:
    London
    Hi - always busy! Anton, come find me on social media or email if you want to chat.
     

Share This Page