Epee glue in groove

Discussion in 'Rules and Referee Questions' started by JMazzoli, Dec 11, 2017.

  1. JMazzoli

    JMazzoli Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    15
    I am aware that under t.68(g) of the Fencing Rules, the fact that there is excessive glue in the groove of an epee that, when touched by an opponent's point during a bout, causes a touch to be signaled cannot be used as the basis for the annulment of a touch. So as a practical matter, it is not in a fencer's best interests to fence with a weapon where this is an issue. When recently presenting my epee, a Leon Paul blade with its characteristic wide groove, for inspection by the referee before a DE bout, the referee took exception with the glue on my blade. After several failed attempts at having my opponent's point set off the scoring light, he finally succeeded in having the light go off by taking the tip of my opponent's blade and causing it to come in connect with the base of my blade from an angle (almost directly above and behind) most unlikely (in my opinion) to be repeated in an actual bout. In fact, I used the same blade in all my pool bouts without incident, as well as in a subsequent DE bout with a different referee. Nevertheless, in the DE bout in question, I did switch epees following the referee's "test," though upon reflection, I cannot be sure he awarded me a yellow card, and he never came out and said that I could not use the weapon. So I have no quarrel with the referee, but for future reference, if a similar circumstance occurs, am I within my rights to say "Thank you for pointing this out Messieur/Madame Referee, but with the greatest respect, I think the likelihood of my opponent scoring by hitting the glue on my blade is extremely remote, so I will take my chances and proceed to use this epee, realizing full well that I have no right to have a touch annulled if in fact a touch is caused by hitting the glue in the groove? Apart from t.68(g), I could not find any other directly applicable provision in the Fencing Rules.
     
  2. Ionut

    Ionut Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Messages:
    94
    Likes Received:
    5
    If you try hard enough, you can pretty much do that for any epee. The rule is not clear, I had a referee at a youth NAC reject 3 weapons (new LP blades) for exactly this reason giving the fencer 2 red cards, even tho he could just let the touch stand and not annul it if it happened.
     
  3. InFerrumVeritas

    InFerrumVeritas DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    55
    If a referee determines that the weapon is non-conforming, then it is non-conforming. The only thing you can do is call BC for an appeal, which will probably result in you earning a card.
     
  4. jdude97

    jdude97 Podium

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,788
    Likes Received:
    193
    A weapon is either conforming or not under the rules. The referee's determination is just that, a referee's determination, not the end all be all as far as a rules forum is concerned. In practice, it's rarely appealed (although as you note appealable to the BC), but it'll only earn you a card (referring to the group I penalty for unjustified appeal) if the ref's call was wrong. With that said, this response is not helpful to the OP as the OP is asking if the ref was right and you're saying the ref is tautologically right.

    I don't know the answer to OP's question but do have an instance of relevant precedence. The rules say that if a fencer's body cord falls out during the fencing action, it is not grounds for the annulment of a touch. The rules also say that an epee must have a clip to hold the body cord in the socket. A fencer is not allowed to fence without the clip even though seemingly they could be allowed to fence with the risk that their body cord falls out and they lose a touch. Compare to the OP's scenario is which a weapon gets failed for the fencer's "own good."

    Question: if a weapon might be intermittent or late and otherwise passes inspection and the fencer chooses to change weapons before the fencing commences, is the weapon considered failed and the fencer subject to penalty?
     
  5. leo6556

    leo6556 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2012
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    1
    The rule is very clear about the blade being free of things that could make in nonconforming the Leon Paul blades are the worst because the channel is so large it is up to the person wiring the epee to not put to much glue.
     
  6. iktovian

    iktovian Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2006
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    7
    I would have thought that a fencer would need to ask permission to switch weapons after inspection. I do have a related question:

    Is there anything a referee can do if a fencer persists in using a weapon that is obviously intermittent? Maybe they're on their last weapon and they think they're going to win anyway, or something. Maybe they do this at their own risk and the referee should not become involved. But most epeeists will stop fencing out of habit if they think a hit occurred and this creates dangerous situations when a weapon is intermittent. Can a referee do anything besides waiting for somebody to turn and look at the scoring machine and then carding for it?
     
  7. Steve Khinoy

    Steve Khinoy DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2005
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    69
    Coming into this really late, but -- the rules require a clip, so if you don't have one, you're non-conforming. But you can also have a clip that doesn't fit well with your body cord and keeps falling off. Now you're at your own risk, right?
    Isn't that the same for glue in the blade? You're fencing at your own risk? OTOH, if touches register on a corroded spot on your guard, that's a no-no. So this is a question that someone should answer authoritatively.
     

Share This Page