|
Post by MTD on Sept 26, 2004 19:19:42 GMT -6
directors who award forward movement the attack against a perfect point-in-line suck. (Note: There are circumstances where referees commonly will award right of way to mere forward motion -- cases where an inactive fencer is hit by the weapon held en garde by a fencer who simply moves forward with a locked but bent arm. This message does not concern such "virtual" nonexistent extensions which are made in the face of a frozen defender who neither extends nor has a point already in line.) Jon -- there actually are still foil referees who do not consider the right of way to go with the point of the foot being extended toward the opponent. However, life is not too comfortable for us, I mean, for those foil referees with a classical leaning. Between the fencers who get furious for implementing what's actually in the rules and the pressure from above to conform with "the way things are done" (notwithstanding things the FIE has written in support of the classical style), it's enough to make one give up foil refereeing until and unless they make foil more like ... foil.
|
|
|
Post by August Skopik on Sept 26, 2004 21:33:19 GMT -6
Mauro, Andrey, Amgad and I discussed these rule changes last year, and came to several conclusions. The rule changing the timeframe on the double scores will be the most reaching. I personally would have greatly benefited, since I could have hit and then retreated out of distance causing a single light when I had two knees. My opponents were often preparing, but the directors would give them the attack even if they were pulling back there arms behind their heads.
As to the flicks, what is the timing of the epee touch? I flick in epee all of the time, and the tip has greater size and requires greater force. I have been told that often my flicks are not felt even when I hit in the hand and near the fingers. A proper flick is executed with fingerwork as well as wrist and arm, and it should not stop a fencer that practices this move.
I have been coaching a Hungarian student who often implements the flick, and I am becoming experienced in feeling a proper flick versus an improper flick. Based upon what I have seen in the top young fencers in the area, this rule will have little effect on them. They usually execute these moves properly and even when they score with the current rules, their coaches are working to focus their moves because the easiest way to lose in this sport is to be sloppy. The key to consistency is execution.
Foil tactics include the ability to take the blade and prevent being hit. I think Dr. Paul had this correct. There will be more conversation with the blade because of the change in box timing, but you will see good fencers employ flicks and blade takes.
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Sept 27, 2004 11:38:05 GMT -6
On a related note, there has been some conversation about adopting the new timing changes at the upcoming NAC in Atlanta. Richard Exnicios, from the Louisiana Division, recently asked the USFA, and posted the reply he got on Fencing Net. He quoted them as saying, "The USFA Board of Directors will be addressing the rule changes adopted by the FIE. The Board will be meeting on Saturday, October 2."
A coach in the North Texas Division got an equally non-committal answer. Now, MY calendar says that particular NAC begins on October 8th! If the USFA decides to go with the new times, there will be very little notice for some fencers, who may fence at clubs that have yet to experiment with the new times. The thread in question is here: www.fencing101.com/vb/showthread.php?t=13309
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Nov 4, 2004 14:26:45 GMT -6
I found this on a Fencing Net Thread. It was written by Eric Dew, who both fences and referees at NACs so some of you may be familiar with him. The full thread can be found here: www.fencing101.com/vb/showthread.php?t=13989Here are his recent observations after refereeing foil: Sorry to introduce a new thread for an already overplowed thread. But...
Yesterday, I officiated in the first new-timing foil competition. Yeah, I've done several weeks worth of fencing and refereeing at the club, but now it's at a competitive environment where people are at varying levels of skill and knowledge of each other.
First, the technology: the hard shell plastic underneath really helps. The attacker is at a distinct disadvantage because slowing down to hit may allow for a stop hit to register and the opponent to run away before the hit can arrive. So one possible tactic is to attack hard and fast to overcome a stop-hit. But then, the opponent steps in and stop-hits to the chest just plinks off. I've even saw a "hit" arrive where the blade was bent hard in the middle. No light.
Maybe this will be good for the sport in that it will force the attacker to hit with much more finesse: not too hard, not too soft. (As a coach, I'm constantly dismayed at my students who plow right into me. I certainly don't want weak fencers who don't want to hit. That's bad in its own right. But I really dislike those who hit and then use the blade and me to prop them up. Use your own legs dammit!)
Second, the tactics. I refereed junior men's foil (group A2 event) and open women's foil (group A1 event). Most of the junior men's foil fencers were big-time flickers before. Only one managed to keep on flicking and made to the top-8 (Ben Anderson). Almost all others kept their flick attempts in check. I think that's a bad thing. They're unnecessarily handcuffing themselves when an occasional flick can probably still arrive. Many were way too over-conscious about hitting straight and the result was lots of misses or off-targets. They should all fence more naturally. I don't think either the block-out time or the debounce time is that much of a factor in reality, just only in perception. These fencers think that the changes will cause their actions to not work, and so they don't work.
One woman, a well known flicker did lose because of the flicks. Well, she may have lost in any case because those flicks were kinda big originally. But I think what may have happened is that her opponent no longer worried about being flicked and actually moved in or out with confidence (instead of the scared frozen on the strip look) causing the hits to not register. Boy those actions were so big.
I think within 6 months, fencers will get back into the feel of the new timing and will do well enough. The fencers will end up where they normally will end up.
Third, refereeing. It was a bit hard only because most points were not awarded due to right of way actions. I'd say at least 50% of the calls were, "attack no, counter-attack yes." or "attack no, riposte no, remise yes." Here, I would say that the new timing (if the tactics don't change) has destroyed the game. There's no incentive to attack if the defender can just step in, get nailed in the chest and not have it go off, and then stick a counter-attack in. And that's what happened: a lot of waiting, even in the junior men's foil where the fighting is usually at a higher tempo and a bit more ferocious. I can imagine women's dragging on even slower than it is already. Again, I'm hoping some of the reticence will wash out over the course of the next few months.
My bet: new timings for next season will be 9ms debounce time, back to 350ms block out time. (Note, local club-level fencing use 750ms blockout time, but international had used 350ms for several years already. My Eigerteks were set for 350ms blockout time, but I had been fencing on various machines with various block-out time settings.)
Next week is saber with new timings. We'll see what happens there.
On a personal level, I think the new timings will favor folks like me, who don't make a lot of unnecessary flicks. I rarely flick to the back on attacks and most of my parries end with hits to the chest, even when flicked. I also like making simple disengage and simple one-two disengages. Now that I know my opponent can't run at me planning to flick, I can force them to attack to the front as well as make my usual slimey counter-attacks. Here comes A05 in foil!
|
|