FIE Congress 2018

Discussion in 'Fencing Discussion' started by downunder, Dec 8, 2018.

  1. K O'N

    K O'N Podium

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    3,930
    Likes Received:
    689
    I think double elimination is a disaster. That alone makes me think this can't stand.

    Aside from that, symmetry is the enemy. It baffles me that the rule-making body for an international sport can't figure out that they can't use a symmetric penalty to penalize a tactic rising from a symmetric game situation. It won't work. And that's aside from the other problems here.

    Good idea.
     
    jdude97 likes this.
  2. iktovian

    iktovian Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2006
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    9
    I hadn't thought about how this would affect finals bouts and how that would reflect on the sport as a whole. I was mostly thinking of how to approach this as a referee and also how it's going to affect me as a fencer when I'm (for example) facing someone on the national team who has more to lose from a black card than I do. But in the real world those guys are probably just going to get me with the attack.

    I don't think there will be mutual eliminations. That's my reading of t.124(1)(b) (individual DEs) and t.124(2)(b) (team matches) where it says (using the same words in both subsections) 'In case of absolute parity of score and simultaneous black card, the fencer with the highest ranking wins the bout.' (I'm guessing they mean ranking after pools?) So there will always be a winner. But you could still have someone win a final without scoring any hits, which I'm guessing is the sort of outcome these rule changes were designed to eliminate.

    (It also seems to mean that someone could get six black cards in a single day and go home with a gold medal, which strikes me as not what black cards were supposed to achieve originally)

    I'm glad they've decided that the cards won't follow a fencer from match to match. If they did you'd see people colluding to make sure the strongest fencer in a competition didn't make the finals. I like the idea of assigning priority at the start of every bout though- I think that would make things happen a little faster without changing the game too much.

    My guess is that the potential complexity is you speak of is really going to rear its head in team bouts. Nine periods is a long time to fence when nobody wants to attack. Thats a lot more opportunities for NC than in an individual DE but teams get the same three strikes as individuals do.
     
  3. posineg

    posineg DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    329
    Likes Received:
    37
    Wouldn't this give one fencer a advantage during the bout over another? The fencer with the known priority only needs to tie through the entire bout rather than win and in Epee this knowledge could be a huge advantage.
     
  4. Gav

    Gav is a Verified Fencing ExpertGav Moderator!!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2000
    Messages:
    3,522
    Likes Received:
    554
    No. It's only a notional advantage.

    Priority only matters at the end of time. You need to be working on points before time runs out. This is the issue.
     
    InFerrumVeritas likes this.
  5. Gav

    Gav is a Verified Fencing ExpertGav Moderator!!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2000
    Messages:
    3,522
    Likes Received:
    554
    That's the thing though. Rule changes are about more than you or me.

    IMO: This is a stupid way to fix things..

    As I've said elsewhere. It's us (the epeeists and coaches) who have brought this on ourselves. It'll affect us the most and it's because of our behaviour that we're even talking about these rule changes. It might be positive though, I could be wrong and it might be what we all want.
     
  6. InFerrumVeritas

    InFerrumVeritas DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Messages:
    666
    Likes Received:
    84
    If epeeists brought the NC dilemma on themselves, who brought the off-target concerns on foilists?
     
  7. Gav

    Gav is a Verified Fencing ExpertGav Moderator!!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2000
    Messages:
    3,522
    Likes Received:
    554
    Probably also the epeeists!
     
  8. K O'N

    K O'N Podium

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    3,930
    Likes Received:
    689
    While it's admirable to face one's own responsibility in such things, you can't blame game players for finding optimal strategies under a ruleset. This leads to things that are legal but frowned on, which is a terrible thing to have in a game.

    If the ruleset is producing gameplay we don't like, change the ruleset. Incentivize play you like. The problem with these changes is not that they are changes, it's that they're dumb.
     
    AStoddard, Mac A. Bee and jdude97 like this.
  9. mfp

    mfp Podium

    Joined:
    May 10, 2002
    Messages:
    2,190
    Likes Received:
    415
    Epeeists', coaches' and teams' reaction and behavior after the previous set of NC rule changes was reasonable and sensible -- they worked through it and figured out how to best use the new rules to their advantage. Expect them to do the same with the new NC rules. Expect them to do things the FIE didn't expect.

    The FIE's response to how the epeeists, coaches and teams have been using non-combativity was to come up with these new NC rules, committee style, without thinking them through or properly testing them. There will be consequences they didn't expect or want. There are ways the FIE could have uncovered some of the shortcomings and consequences of the new rules, but apparently they didn't want to bother. Oh well. They'll reap what they sowed.

    There are lots of examples from other sports, games and contests about how poorly thought out rule changes produced unintended consequences. A favorite is the 1994 Caribbean Cup when scoring an own goal was the only way to win:

    https://theconversation.com/when-scoring-an-own-goal-is-the-only-way-to-win-video-7982
     
    AStoddard, dberke, K O'N and 2 others like this.
  10. Gav

    Gav is a Verified Fencing ExpertGav Moderator!!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2000
    Messages:
    3,522
    Likes Received:
    554
    Chrissake. I'm not defending the FIE.

    Epeeists, and let's face it this rule change has been aimed at us, have to bear some responsibility for the way people react to it. In the seniors.. They're adults.

    There's a wider issue with the FIE, it's a bunch of old men sat in a room responding to how they want the sport and external pressures from externals who want the sport to be a certain way.

    But that doesn't absolve us.
     
  11. Gav

    Gav is a Verified Fencing ExpertGav Moderator!!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2000
    Messages:
    3,522
    Likes Received:
    554
    I dont disagree and yet here we are
     
  12. iktovian

    iktovian Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2006
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    9
    I don't think individual epee needed fixing. I can see the argument for assigning priority at the start of the bout but that's it, and I don't think that would have that would have been a big change. I think it's fine for people to skip periods and I'm not in favour of that being penalised. One minute is a long time to go without a hit though- from a spectator's point of view forty seconds might be better, and I don't think that would affect the athletes much.

    As a spectator I don't like people skipping periods in teams bouts. It often makes tactical sense but as a spectator I'm watching teams bouts because I want to see what the whole team can do. I'd be fine with penalising people for not chasing early when they're one or two down.

    I wonder if anyone thought of randomly assigning penalties when scores are level? I think it could work provided the coin flip was done at the start of the bout.
     
    InFerrumVeritas and Gav like this.
  13. Mihail

    Mihail Podium

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Messages:
    659
    Likes Received:
    104
    Sabre fleche test, courtesy of Sydney Sabre:



    and seminar



    I'm still to watch it in more detail, but on first scrub-through it seems like they want you to use it only as part of the "finish" of an attack or as a simple attack, and not for a compound attack.

    And that honestly makes me think that, like in the case of the Box o' Death, the motivation for this is "Hey, those Korean guys can lunge really long! Not fair!!"
     
  14. Inquartata

    Inquartata Podium

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    37,135
    Likes Received:
    1,417
    I think the problem may be that no sabre fencer under 30 knows how to fleche, or been trained to fleche, or has ever seen a fleche in person. So this awkward passe avant is the result when a young fencer is asked to fleche for the "test". They are just doing the finish without the fleche itself.

    If it is allowed again they will learn, and it may become a standard again, but for now sorry that just ain't it kids.
     
    InFerrumVeritas likes this.
  15. Purple Fencer

    Purple Fencer Podium

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2001
    Messages:
    16,583
    Likes Received:
    622
    According to Sydney Sabre, the Koreans are VERY pleased with the idea.

    You’d think after the last time they tried to game the rules, the Russians might’ve thought this one through a bit better...they WANT to give the fastest team on the strip the ability to go Usain Bolt on them? Daryl Homer is probably smiling a bit as well.
     
  16. Mac A. Bee

    Mac A. Bee is a Verified Fencing ExpertMac A. Bee Podium

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,972
    Likes Received:
    211
    *Strip layout drift:* Notice the strips laid out along the court's boundaries with the center reserved, versus cross-ways and outside reserved?
     
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2018
  17. Inquartata

    Inquartata Podium

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    37,135
    Likes Received:
    1,417
    Isn't that just the finals strip? I see 4 strips laid out side by side in the usual fashion beyond it. Unless there's another set of strips off to the right there may not be a "center" so much as an "admin and spectator area occupying most of the gym".
     
  18. Gav

    Gav is a Verified Fencing ExpertGav Moderator!!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2000
    Messages:
    3,522
    Likes Received:
    554
    All that's going to happen is that everyone will start fleching and the Koreans, who are already athletic and have great footwork will be excellent at it.

    If the motivation is "defeat the Koreans" then it's the wrong way to go about it. Get better at fencing and work hard - that's how you do it. I think it's a bit pathetic actually
     
    Peach and InFerrumVeritas like this.
  19. Purple Fencer

    Purple Fencer Podium

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2001
    Messages:
    16,583
    Likes Received:
    622
    On the other hand, if the idea is "get DEFEATED by the Koreans," this is probably a good way to do it.
     
  20. sdubinsky

    sdubinsky DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Messages:
    330
    Likes Received:
    84
    Well they do say to stick to what you're good at.
     
    Purple Fencer likes this.

Share This Page