|
Post by schlager7 on Dec 17, 2003 21:04:07 GMT -6
The FIE recently voted on some fundamental changes to foil, to be tested in certain junior events next season. The changes include:
tripling the time the tip must depress to set off a light;
cutting in half the window your opponent has to cause a second light after your touch;
requiring foil tip springs to press back with 750 grams as opposed to the current 500;
reducing the maximum curvature of the blade to 1 cm.
How do Gulf Coast fencers feel about this?
|
|
|
Post by Kate Rogers TAMUFC on Dec 17, 2003 22:02:14 GMT -6
Disapprove! Any one of those changes might be okay, but all together they really alter the way foilists have to fence to score touches. If I wanted to fence epee, I'd fence epee!
|
|
|
Post by PisteOff on Dec 18, 2003 0:13:47 GMT -6
Aprove. Flicking should be its own weapon/event... Less double touches is always a good thing...
--PisteOff--
|
|
|
Post by Tom TAMUFC on Dec 18, 2003 0:45:06 GMT -6
Who cares! I fence Epee is the best option by far.
|
|
|
Post by Jason old Ag on Dec 18, 2003 11:01:10 GMT -6
/disapprove
As Kate said, these changes are too much like epee. 1 cm bend = epee. 750g = epee. Cutting the window for a second light = closer to epee.
I'm not sure if the timer for holding the tip down on epee is longer than foil or not. One of these changes might be ok, but it's still going to alter the sport tremendously.
And then of course there's the problem that every club in the section is not going to replace all their boxes with new "correctly timed" boxes. Fencing in the section will take a long time until it is fenced with these standards...and that will put our fencers at a disadvantage when they fence on the National level, because they won't be used to these changes.
|
|
|
Post by tango on Dec 18, 2003 11:17:34 GMT -6
Love the changes........death to flickers and powder puff fencers
|
|
|
Post by Grace Haberzetle on Dec 18, 2003 11:23:46 GMT -6
I see some very valid points here (pardon the pun). The only one that really concerns me is the fact that I recently purchased a new light box for my club. So, I'll probably have to replace it. That will be an expensive investment that I wish I could avoid. On the other hand, who cares? I fence sabre! *LOL*
|
|
|
Post by Tim Guerinot on Dec 18, 2003 11:37:11 GMT -6
I'm not opposed to the change. Although, I liked seeing the flicks. I thought they added a really exciting flare that I think will be nullified by taking it out.
One thing I think needs to be brought up is fencing is a sport. The flick gave it a more sport feel compared to a reenactor feel.
I'm anxious to witness the change and see if the new mandate works out.
Happy Holidays!
|
|
|
Post by Prudence Reardon on Dec 18, 2003 13:16:30 GMT -6
Well I fence Epee a lot more than I do Foil, but I thought the flick was what made Foil really cool. I agree with the others who said that there were just too many changes. Well, Merry Christmas everyone!
|
|
SirKermit
Scribe
ohayo[ss:In the Murk]
Posts: 34
|
Post by SirKermit on Dec 18, 2003 15:14:57 GMT -6
Why stop there lets remove the slamdunk out of basketball or the diving catch out of baseball. lets face it guys the flick is a cool move when performed properly, and even nicer when its is properly parried. The flick is that little bit of unorthodox flair that adds something modern, and appealing to the sport. Of course you are not going to win any sword fights with it, but you know what, your probably not going to get into a whole lot of sword fights out on the streets anyways. Its sad to hear people whine and cry about it. instead of whining maybe yall should find ways of defeating the flick on the strip. You know it can be done. If yall don't like it so much learn how to fight it, because you know what, once the flick stops working the flicker will stop using it, duh. So all you counter attackers out there get off you high horses and start learning how to defend yourselves instead of hoping some idiot will ban the flick. Long live the slam-dunk, long live the diving catch, and long live the freaking flick. PS oh and by the way that's one vote against the changes ;D
|
|
|
Post by so ho brothers on Dec 18, 2003 21:50:59 GMT -6
we believe that the changes are good. the new weight is better than changing the tips and unlike epee there is still the lame and right of way. althought the time for a second light would reduce the slow reposte. Beside to fence foil you are to first learn how to fence point not flick.
|
|
|
Post by Geezer on Dec 19, 2003 10:44:48 GMT -6
I think I will like these rules. Perhaps it will bring our Directors back from the glorification of this foppish and rhetorical imitation of coach whip fighting that haute gentlemen so enjoyed in the 19th century. Ah, to no longer be terrorized by the thrusting elbow, or the whistling swish of limp steel as it bends to touch, where no human can. This game is as related to the spirit of my ancestor's fencing as pro-wrestling is to traditional martial art. Sad. The exciting exhibition that Wows the public is about impressing the uneducated and the uninformed. I would prefer no spectators at all, but that'll never happen, vanity is to strong a force.
The "new" rules will only reinforce defacto skills anyway, control, accuracy, strength, timing, first more quickness...all good things. Target and Right of Way. This is not epee fencing. You just don't like having to change your style. It's back to basics, and some foilists suck at classical skills...to bad, take up Checkers.
Modern is "what's going at the moment". It has nothing to do with Quality, Aesthetics, or Truth.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Jon on Dec 22, 2003 21:37:24 GMT -6
I Approve;
The rule book says the tip must not be "thrown at the target" and a correct attack is "arm extending forward, tip THREATENING TARGET". the fact that these rules were for the most part disregarded is the main reason I took up epee...much to the horror of the US Olympic foil team I might add...but thats another story
|
|
|
Post by Dan Gorman on Dec 23, 2003 22:51:19 GMT -6
I don't really think these changes will make a lick of difference. I doubt anyone ever really makes a touch between 500 and 750 grams, the travel and the amount of time you depress the tip is something I doubt come into play very often, and it is very rare that I've seen the curvature enforced (I didn't see it done once at Div I Nationals -- just at local tournaments). The only thing left is the amount of time you get a double light on in, and that was so long previous to these proposed changes that you could about eat a sandwich during it.
In the end, I think the biggest impact of this will be the equipment guys getting a couple bucks of everyone dropping chips with the new timing into the scoring boxes.
Dan
ps The better fencers will still be able to flick as well as they do now.
|
|
|
Post by cowpaste on Dec 26, 2003 2:36:27 GMT -6
With the depression time set to 15 ms, I highly doubt there will be much flicking left. 750 grams, less curvature, more tip travel will not prevent flicking. It will just make it harder to do. However, all these things can be overcome by just getting stronger. There is nothing anyone can do about the 15 ms depression time though. It doesn't matter if you are the best flicker in the world and all your flicks hit perfectly normal to the your target. You cannot keep the blade from bouncing back in less than 15 ms.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Gorman on Dec 27, 2003 10:07:51 GMT -6
I've seen plenty of people stick flicks.
Dan
|
|
|
Post by Fencingfodder on Dec 29, 2003 9:38:45 GMT -6
The new lockout time puts me in mind of something I saw on TV. To quote a charactor from "The Simpsons", the Infamous Nelson, " Ha, ha!"
|
|
|
Post by Joe Fencer on Jan 1, 2004 11:07:28 GMT -6
Great. You can't tell me this isn't all just to make it harder to flick.
The prettiest move in foil will become much less frequent and foil will regress into an endless series of binds, envelopements and pris de fers!
|
|
|
Post by Dan Gorman on Jan 1, 2004 17:57:21 GMT -6
That's why God invented the disengage. Yup, He's pretty clever, God is. Besides, there's no reason you can't learn to flick right -- the prettiest move in foil is nothing but ugly when it hits along a foot or two of another fencer's back.
Dan
|
|
|
Post by Fencingfodder on Jan 2, 2004 10:54:03 GMT -6
Nothing will ever disparage Correct Timing or a Good Move. Even my stiff blade can execute a sweeping parry 7 and be thrown into my opponents outside underarm flank and stay there until the light comes on. The point is...it's not a flick per se, but it's close, and I don't expect to have to give up the move. It's timing and point control, and a really good fencer, whether classical style or not, is still going to whup me good!
|
|
|
Post by LC Foil on Jan 19, 2004 11:11:41 GMT -6
I agree completely. Also, you are correct that the move you described is not a true flick. In fact, a friend of mine who fences epee with a noticeably stiff blade has been known to execute that move with devilish speed.
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Jan 25, 2004 10:15:35 GMT -6
With all due deference to Joe Fencer...
I LIKE binds, envelopements and pris de fer moves!
|
|
|
Post by Geezer on Jan 26, 2004 10:55:52 GMT -6
As my Persona implies, I like to think of myself as...sort of "old school". which really dosen't reflect a prejudice towards modern trends and styles. Its just that I have an acute sense of the antecedence of this game, or " the horse it rode in on...." I can understand how a modern entertainment consumer might think it a little tedious to watch an endless reoccurrence of "binds, envelopements, and pris de fers", but I have to say, "Get a clue." A tourament is one bout at a time and a bout is one active "phrase" at a time, moment to moment...whatever it takes. Given the context for use, I think they do quite nicely. Their original intent was to keep you alive. Those who never consider the expectation of pain show an awfull lot of rhetorical bravado and think its really cool, and should really look at the past and fantasize that point being "really" sharp. If you'd ever had the experience you wouldn't be so eager. I'd even say that it would be hard to fence any other way except with great conservatism.
This used to be a way of confronting real danger and now it's a game and as such allows a lot of things. One can get alot of points and brag about it, but it dosen't mean much. Winning a game and fencing well aren't always the same thing. I'd like to fence well but I let winning take care of itself. It really dosen't mean a whole lot, considering....
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Feb 16, 2004 18:49:22 GMT -6
Yada, yada...where's the votes?
|
|
|
Post by Savien on Feb 25, 2004 11:06:59 GMT -6
Best I can tell, you gotta log in as a member (username plus password) to access it.
This board lets anyone just jump in and comment with any name, but for some extra functions (some we probably can't see) you'd have to register and go in under the username you select.
|
|