END OF SABRE FLECHE
ROBERT SPIERENBURG
that a STEP not in fact a fleche. As far as I can remember a fleche in
Sabre is EXACTLY the same as in Foil or Epee. So Sabre fleches are still
valid attacks whereas X-steps aren't.
Stan Yen - Sun BOS Hardware - Scan Grunt
In case it wasn't clear: they're outlawing the crossing of the back leg
over the forward leg, not the 'cross-over step' as an action itself.
Thus, since in *any* fleche the back leg does indeed pass the front leg,
the fleche is illegal. Same goes for Russian lunges, I expect.
Incidentally, there was a rumor going on around here that they might
consider extending this stupidity into foil as well, to make the rule
more 'universal'(ly stupid). Hope it stays just that. Then again,
it's still not supposed to affect epee.
-Stan, "first they changed the rules in sabre, but I didn't say anything
because I didn't fence sabre. Then they changed the rules in foil..."
STFZ
The new rules do not distinguish between "fleche" and "step."
The following is a quote from my circuit conformation packet:
(for Sabre)
Any forward movement with the rear foot crossing the forward foot is
forbidden and will result in an immediate halt. A fencer who crosses
the forward foot with the rear foot will be given a yellow card for
the first offense (unless a yellow card has already been issued) and
then a red card for all subsequent repetitions. A touch scored by a
fencer with an action during which such fencer crosses the forward
foot with the rear foot will be annulled. An action made by that
fencer's opponent will be allowed providing this action started prior
to the halt.
(end quotation)
I believe fleches are covered under this ruling.
-Mer
|| "Far better it is to dare mighty things,
|| to win glorious triumphs, even though
|| checkered by failure, than to take rank
|| with those poor spirits who neither enjoy
|| much nor suffer much, because they live
|| in the gray twilight that knows not victory
|| or defeat."
|| -Teddy Roosevelt
Susan Mullhaupt
>The following is a quote from my circuit conformation packet:
>
>(for Sabre)
>Any forward movement with the rear foot crossing the forward foot is
>forbidden and will result in an immediate halt.
Yeah this is the rule. I just got our division letter today and there is
no mention of it. Therefore our division tournaments will _not_ use this
nonsense, nor will our local tournaments, including the Stony Brook Club
events. I expect that the Empire State Games will fence under sensible
rules as well.
I'm quite relieved. For the moment.
Later,
Andrew Mullhaupt
hay...@maroon.tc.umn.edu
> But you must realize that in fact the cross-over step forward is just
The *current* interpretation by the United States Fencing Officials Commission
is that *any* fleche is illegal because the legs cross. Like everything else
in sabre this is subject to change without notice. I expect that the general
interpretation will evolve to be any fleche which lands before the the legs
cross, the ideal method, is valid, but if the legs cross first then yellow card
But they may decide this puts to much burden on the director. Poor overburdened
sabre directors.
gary hayenga
Jonathan Atleson
>The *current* interpretation by the United States Fencing Officials Commission
>is that *any* fleche is illegal because the legs cross. Like everything else
>in sabre this is subject to change without notice. I expect that the general
>interpretation will evolve to be any fleche which lands before the the legs
>cross....
>gary hayenga
My ex-coach, Frank Zoltan, who was a Junior World champion and Hungarian
Olympic Team member a long time ago, was chiefly a sabre fencer, and he taught
that the fleche was supposed to land before the left foot touched the ground,
that is, when performed with proper distance and timing. With this in mind,
one could conceivably still fleche under the new potential rules, providing one
didn't mind falling flat on one's face instead of catching the weight with the
left leg. Anything for that point.(I'd like to see a cartoon about this!)
A good Akido roll would work well too, providing the wires don't get in the
way.
But seriously, I think that the fleche per se is not what's being outlawed, but
rather the unskilled and irresponsible stampede down the strip that everyone
calls a fleche. Speaking of click-bang fencing, most sabre bouts I've seen
sound like: aaaaaaaaaaaargh-clunk-bang. Save the aaaaaaargh for Conan. It's
like fleche first, look for the opening later, instead of vice versa, that is,
saving the fleche to capture those moments where you need that extra bit of
speed.
Maybe sabre can split into two sports, fleche-jousting and fencing.
-Jonathan Atleson
Susan Mullhaupt
>My ex-coach, Frank Zoltan, who was a Junior World champion and Hungarian
>Olympic Team member a long time ago, was chiefly a sabre fencer, and he taught
>that the fleche was supposed to land before the left foot touched the ground,
>that is, when performed with proper distance and timing.
This is true. Technically, it depends on whether it is a simple or compound
attack, and whether it is a fleche or advance-fleche. You have correctly
described the situation for a simple fleche attack for a right handed
fencer. (Use back foor instead of left and you've got it right for both
handed fenceres...). However in the compound attack fleche, the hit is
requireed to arrive _before the front foot lands_ which means possibly
after the back foot has lended.
>With this in mind,
>one could conceivably still fleche under the new potential rules, providing one
>didn't mind falling flat on one's face instead of catching the weight with the
>left leg. Anything for that point.(I'd like to see a cartoon about this!)
>A good Akido roll would work well too, providing the wires don't get in the
>way.
Alas, no. If you fall in an action the touch can be annulled.
>But seriously, I think that the fleche per se is not what's being outlawed, but
>rather the unskilled and irresponsible stampede down the strip that everyone
>calls a fleche.
The irresponsible stampede which I have not yet seen. However, I am a little
curious at the use of the word unskilled. The problem, such as it may be,
is reported primarily at the highest levels of competition. Nobody is upset
at the unskilled practitioners of fleche attacks, because those can be stopped
by traditional means, (e.g. step back, step in, etc.). It is the _skilled_
running game which people in Europe seem to object to.
> Speaking of click-bang fencing, most sabre bouts I've seen
>sound like: aaaaaaaaaaaargh-clunk-bang. Save the aaaaaaargh for Conan.
The only fencers in my club who practice the 'kiai' are foilists. We
have one sabreur who says 'Oh-pa' when he hits, and our tournaments
do not have much yelling. You can be "awarded" a lovely yellow card
for disorderly fencing, so it is not a good idea to emulate Conan.
(Even nicer red cards for brutality...)
>It's
>like fleche first, look for the opening later, instead of vice versa, that is,
>saving the fleche to capture those moments where you need that extra bit of
>speed.
What you may be seeing, if these are indeed decent bouts, is the fact
that the fleche is part of opening a line. Remember the concept of line
in sabre fencing is much more fluid than in the point attack weapons.
As sabreurs get to higher and higher levels of play, the feints get
much more varied and psychological. Waving-like preparations _can_ be
important against opponents who favor certain parries too much but who
are smart enough to make them forward.
As an example, we have a very good left-handed foilist in our club who
also fences left-handed sabre. His thinking is dominated by the perception
that he has a big advantage as a left-hander, so he adopts the Italian
(high third) guard. I've seen a lot of lefties favor this. he is hoping
(against hope) that I will show him a little outside cuff now and then.
Now the way I fence this guy is very intellectual, but probably looks to
onlooking foilists and epeeists like mindless agression. I will explain.
(By the way, Joe, you will want to study this before our next bout if you
are able to access the Internet...)
Joe sets up in high third, hoping for outside cuff. In about ten or
twenty bouts he has hit is once or twice. Having some experience against
a similar but much more dangerous left hander (our three time state
sabre champion Herb Mones) who also adopts high third and absolutely
shreds myu outside cuff, shall we say that Joe is lacking the element of
surprise. Now what I do against Joe is what I have figured out against Herb.
I set my feet so that his front foot is in my four, and that my arm is
lined up just outside his cuff. Joe will have to move his hand to get any
of my outside cuff. Now even before the command fence, I am stopping
Joe's number one threat. This is important since Joe, as his foil instincts
probably require, will _wait_ for an opening before attacking me. This
is a mistake for two reasons. The first reason is that I am not going to
show him outside cuff unless I want to pull his stop cut. (Note to Joe -
this is not going to happen until you start stopping the second reason,
but it will, eventually.) The second reason is what I want to talk about
here.
Joe is susceptible to a very interesting preparation. From guard, I
launch forward using whatever footwork makes sense (often simply a lunge)
and at the same time I make a little circular motion with the blade.
Now I use the Hungarian "offensive-defensive" guard and this is where
this circular motion starts from and almost returns to. The blade
describes a foil counter-six in the middle of the air as the hand extends.
Then I land a cut to his undefended chest and oppose any action he may make
to my cuff. What Joe seems to interpret this wiggle as is as a legitimate
feint - but to a line he can't figure out. This is because it is not a
feint to any line. He seems to freeze and lift his hand a little
straight up, not making any kind of parry, and the damage is done.
He is being frozen by a preparation which keeps him from closing the four
line. I must have hit him with this two or three times in every bout.
Now the effect is a little like shooting deer who are mesmerized by
your headlights, but there you have it. If Joe is going to make a
predictable hand mistake when I make a preparation, you can bet
I am not going to waste time letting anything else happen, such as
Joe accidentally attacking me, etc. You could have watched me fence Joe
the last ten bouts and decided that all I knew how to do was wave
the blade a little, and run and hit him. But more is here than meets
the eye.
There are several factors which probably make this work. Although Joe
is left handed, and thinks he has a big advantage going for outside
cuff and arm, with me he doesn't because I am careful to line up
outside his arm. When he notices this, he may start moving over to the
side of the strip to prevent me taking this precaution, and so I will
need to think a little about how to keep him from hitting outside cuff.
I am not worried that he will abandon the outside cuff because it works
well for him against other sabreurs, and it is a staple of his very
much stronger foil game (replace outside cuff by six to the right-hander).
Although Joe fences sabre enough to have a five parry, I make him
need it on the run. It's a lot harder and scarier to parry five under
pressure, so I press it to expose his indecision. Even though I am
not feinting to head with the little circular motion, Joe would
probably not freeze if it was only a matter of defending one side or
the other. It is the possibility that he might need to parry five
which is probably responsible for his fatal hesitation. He would
be better off sweeping to prime, but I don't expect that since it
is a very un-foil-like feeling thing to do.
Now although I have talked to Joe about this, he has been pretty much
unable to correct it. One of the main reasons is that I am careful to
feint and hit head as well. At least once I started the little
circle and converted it into a head cut, and I have used second intention
to the head which I completed to the head _despite_ his lack of going
through the head parry. I am reinforcing the bad psychology that Joe
has about defending his head in order to keep the chest line open
when I want it.
Notice that nowhere in the strategy does there appear any successful
parry or riposte by Joe. Why should there? Joe is not actually a
bad fencer, and when he gets the attack he knows how to press it.
If he ever got much reinforcement to attack away from the outside
lines I could have my hands full. Joe has a pretty good sense of
distance, and good footwork. What possible reason should I let him
have the initiative? Joe will get out of this bag eventually, but
the longer I keep him bottled up, the more I will know what to expect
when he does break out and the better chance I will have to adjust
to his changes.
It is actually pretty normal for little ambiguous preparations to
mean a lot in sabre, since the concept of line is so fluid. You
usually need to create uncertainty as your attack develops, and
this means that un-knowledgable spectators may be easily confused.
Hell, _Knowledgable_ spectators are often enough confused. One
of the reasons we end up complaining about sabre directing is
that sabre directing is _damn hard_ to do well.
I for one do not want to make the rules for sabre based on what
it looks like. I want the rules to be based on what it _feels_ like.
As for television - surely with enough cameras - say little fiber
optic ones in the mask, etc., we can make sabre a very high profile
television experience. The fleche is one of the most photogenic
moves there is.
>Maybe sabre can split into two sports, fleche-jousting and fencing.
Actually, sabre has been three sports in the past. There was
for a long time in this century three sabre sports. The Italian
sciabola di terreno, the German schlager, and modern sabre. the
first two were fenced essentially standing still - (actually
in schlager, _no footwork whatsoever was allowed_) and neither
one of these survives today as a sport. We are talking about generations
of experience here. No footwork sabre is pretty intellectual to
do, _and_ to watch.
I would be amenable to re-introducing sciabola di terreno as a
sabre event (anyone know the real rules?). I would even go so
far as to support the pools being fenced in sciabola di terreno
and only in the DE using sabre.
Maybe that's an idea - ban fleche only in the pools, so the "unwashed
masses" can't get seeded highly, or maybe even move up, but fence
the DE's in full sabre, so that real sabre can be the deciding factor.
Later,
Andrew Mullhaupt
sl...@cc.usu.edu
> (for Sabre)
> Any forward movement with the rear foot crossing the forward foot is
> forbidden and will result in an immediate halt. A fencer who crosses
> the forward foot with the rear foot will be given a yellow card for
> the first offense (unless a yellow card has already been issued) and
> then a red card for all subsequent repetitions. A touch scored by a
> fencer with an action during which such fencer crosses the forward
> foot with the rear foot will be annulled. An action made by that
> fencer's opponent will be allowed providing this action started prior
> to the halt.
>
> (end quotation)
>
> I believe fleches are covered under this ruling.
>
> -Mer
What are the rules about foot crossing in foil? I was always told never to
cross your feet unless you are fleching, but another fencer in my club who just
started fencing after a break of several years crosses his feet constantly,
ususally while retreating (he doesn't ever seem to be off balance) and says
that he was told that this is a perfectly OK way to fence.
Tamora Miller
USU Fencing
SL...@cc.usu.edu
Ed Mou
As with most things in fencing, this seems to be a stylistic matter. Crossing your feet used to be quite popular, became less so in the recent past as footwork gravitated toward a more rigid engarde stance, and then most recently it seemed that looser footwork was on the upswing again. I've heard that loose, back and forth footwork is favoured by some top Polish fencers who almost seem to swing and dangle their legs every which way.
Cross-steps aren't taught much anymore, and some coaches actively discourage them. I heard one fencer claim that you should receive a yellow card, ANY time your back foot crosses in front of your front foot, even if there is no significant action happening such as if you're 20 feet away and simply decide to walk toward your opponent until he's in fencing distance.
Many older texts on fencing instruction (and I mean from the '60-'70, not the 1700's :) have sections detailing crosssteps forwards and backwards.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ Ed Mou +
+ ed...@wimsey.com (note new address) /+)-------------- +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Simon Rooney
>cross your feet unless you are fleching, but another fencer in my club who just
>started fencing after a break of several years crosses his feet constantly,
>ususally while retreating (he doesn't ever seem to be off balance) and says
>that he was told that this is a perfectly OK way to fence.
OK, so a lot of peeps are going to say this, but I haven't posted in
ages, so...
It's perfectly legal to cross your feet in foil, but it's often a
bad idea. Maybe you don't want to take my word for it coz I'm more
of a stylist than a competition fencer, but crossing your feet can
have it's bad effects. For example, there was a student of mine a
while ago who started using this after seeing it in a competition,
and every time he did so,I'd attack either with a fleche, a
ballestra, or a straight lunge if he was close enough. About half
the time he started running back, and literally fell over (in front
of a fair few other students.
I do actually cross my feet, generally when retreating quickly, but
I only reserve it for when I really think I'm getting too close, and
need to get out of there quickly. Just about any footwork is legal
in foil (so long as you're not a member of Monty Python *:) ), but
the stuff everyone's taught has had a lot of thought put into it
over the centuries, and seems to work... stick to it.
>Tamora Miller
OSISSMn.
Palit, Suman
>In article <18FEB94.13...@MUSIC.CC.UGA.EDU>, ST...@MUSIC.CC.UGA.EDU (STFZ) writes:
>
>
>What are the rules about foot crossing in foil? I was always told never to
>cross your feet unless you are fleching, but another fencer in my club who just
What's wrong with crossing your foot in foil. I do the cross-fwd-lunge quite a
bit, it throws a lot of people who don't expect an attack from what was
apparently an out-of-distance engaurde. Of course, if the FIE introduces the
no cross-over rule in foil as well, .... :-(
>
>Tamora Miller
>USU Fencing
>SL...@cc.usu.edu
Suman Palit
P.S. Of course, you are vulnerable to counter-offensive actions during
your cross-over, and most directors treat the cross-over as a preparation..
Morgan Burke
|> What are the rules about foot crossing in foil? I was always told never to
|> cross your feet unless you are fleching, but another fencer in my club who just
|> started fencing after a break of several years crosses his feet constantly,
|> ususally while retreating (he doesn't ever seem to be off balance) and says
|> that he was told that this is a perfectly OK way to fence.
There are no rules about foot crossing in foil. Do whatever feels good
and lets you cover ground quickly and on balance. Just remember that
crossed feet give you FAR less stability and power than a normal stance,
and you are effectively impotent in a crossed position (unless sprinting).
Do it too much and your opponent will take you to task.
If you cross your feet, do not rotate your shoulders to match, since it
is illegal to bring your back shoulder in front, in foil.
-- Morgan Burke
mor...@sitka.triumf.ca
Randell Jesup
>In case it wasn't clear: they're outlawing the crossing of the back leg
>over the forward leg, not the 'cross-over step' as an action itself.
>Thus, since in *any* fleche the back leg does indeed pass the front leg,
>the fleche is illegal. Same goes for Russian lunges, I expect.
Time to practice the continuous balestre (sp). Who needs to
cross their feet to fleche? ;-) (So it's a bit slower - it's still covers
the ground quickly...)
--
GNU Emacs is a LISP operating system disguised as a word processor.
- Doug Mohney, in comp.arch
Randell Jesup, OS Group Head, Commodore Engineering.
je...@commodore.com (preferred) or rutgers!cbmvax!jesup
Disclaimer: Nothing I say is anything other than my personal opinion.
Vincent J Coccia
electric sabre fencing before it was widely adopted. Just an odd feeling
of people being upset over stuff that is essentially already done. sigh.
There are a few problems with the way that sabre is dealt with under the
current rules:
1) No director is adequate. I have yet to see (and I have been
directed by the best two sabre directors on the east coast) anyone be
able to combine all the actions that are going on in a sabre bout into a
reconstruction that has more than passing regard to what happened for
real. That brings up the second point...
2) Under the current rules, sabre is fencing for one point and
doubling out the rest of them. It boils down to a run (because no one has
the stones to call a prolonged run a preparation like the rule book
says..) and hack strategy. There is some evidence of higher brain
function in sabre fencers who get past a certain point because the way
they (we actually) put together a run and hack changes. There are all
sorts of cool things to do to freak your opponent out without being so
declasse' as to yell at him...
What is there to be done? I would have thought that stricter
directing was the key, and maybe it is, but we don't have people who can
do it. Electric sabre took the committee out of directing, and personally
I like it that way. Bringing back judges to look for fine footwork points
(Is this an attack or a preparation?) is clunky and will lead to greater
confusion than clarity.
The fleche is not the only rapid ground-gaining move there is. (I
hear tell that the new hip Euro thing to do in a sabre bout is to do a
ballestra hop-two advances-ballestra lunge. Try it. It's wicked fast.) It
is the only one that has such little control (advances and lunges vs a
fleche. Stop both prematurely. Who has any semblance of balance?). What
the new rules *do* is not remove the mobility of the sabre fencer, but
his ability to make a flat run at his opponent, betting that he will
either cut or be past him before being reacted to. I think (of course
IMHO) that this means a subtle change in the phrasing of a bout. You
can't sprint five times and be done with it. You need to be fully in
command of each action for each touch you score. Personally, I don't
think that is such a bad deal. I think it means that I don't have to put
up with hackers in club running into me anymore. It also means the goon
who is 'directing' actually has some idea of what to call. I also think
that if you are a better technical fencer, you will defeat your opponent
regardless of the fleche and if you control the distance you just might
beat him 5-0. *That's* something you don't see, especially in sabre the
way it is now...
An earlier poster (gary hayenga maybe?) said that often when rules
changes come through, everyone goes into a euphoric "this is great"
phase, until the bugs become apparent. Maybe this is a case of that. I
hope the FIE lets the sport heal after making its new changes (and more
than the cursory six months), and if there are bugs, lets change them
then.
But anything has got to be better than the way things are...
Vince
(v...@kepler.unh.edu)
Liam T. Yore
> is illegal to bring your back shoulder in front, in foil.
>
> -- Morgan Burke
Why is this? I have always known of this rule (and in fact won a few
points on it), but I don't really understand the rationale behind it. Is
it to discourage infighting? To protect lousy directors from difficult
calls? Why?
Liam
**************************************************************************
Liam T. Yore * "Fury spat out of his eyes when he told
Northwestern University * of things he hated; great glows of joy
Medical School * replaced this when he suddenly got happy;
lty...@merle.acns.nwu.edu * every muscle twitched to live and go."
* -- Jack Kerouac
**************************************************************************
Grizzly Adams
>> If you cross your feet, do not rotate your shoulders to match, since it
>> is illegal to bring your back shoulder in front, in foil.
>>
>> -- Morgan Burke
>Why is this? I have always known of this rule (and in fact won a few
>points on it), but I don't really understand the rationale behind it. Is
>it to discourage infighting? To protect lousy directors from difficult
>calls? Why?
>Liam
This is off the top of my head (no rule book handy) but, I think the don't
turn the shoulders also applies in Epee. As near as I can recall, when this
rule was instituted, it was because turning the shoulders had a tendency to
result in turning the head, exposing the unprotected rear where you could get
seriously hurt. So I a have always understood it to be an extension of the
saftey based, don't turn expose the back of your head.
eric
--
------------------------------ Eric H. Anderson -------------------------------
BROW...@IASTATE.EDU | Science II room 339 | I sincerly hope that all
| Iowa State Univ. | my opinions are my own,
| Ames, IA 50011 | and not theirs.
Morgan Burke
|> >> If you cross your feet, do not rotate your shoulders to match, since it
|> >> is illegal to bring your back shoulder in front, in foil.
In <ltyore-23...@aragorn4.acns.nwu.edu> lty...@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Liam T. Yore) writes:
|> >Why is this? I have always known of this rule (and in fact won a few
|> >points on it), but I don't really understand the rationale behind it. Is
|> >it to discourage infighting? To protect lousy directors from difficult
|> >calls? Why?
In article <brownbrd....@pv0a0d.vincent.iastate.edu>, brow...@iastate.edu (Grizzly Adams) writes:
|> This is off the top of my head (no rule book handy) but, I think the don't
|> turn the shoulders also applies in Epee. As near as I can recall, when this
|> rule was instituted, it was because turning the shoulders had a tendency to
|> result in turning the head, exposing the unprotected rear where you could get
|> seriously hurt. So I a have always understood it to be an extension of the
|> saftey based, don't turn expose the back of your head.
The turning the shoulders rule is different from the turning rule.
Turning is illegal in all weapons, because it exposes the back of the
head and neck. Turning happens roughly when your left shoulder passes
to the right of your right shoulder (going either clockwise or
counter-clockwise).
Turning the shoulders is only illegal in foil, because it causes the
trailing arm to block target. Turning the shoulders only happens when
your trailing shoulder comes ahead of your weapon shoulder.
In principle you can avoid most of the blocking of target by keeping your
back arm up and out of the way, but there will still be some blocking
nevertheless. Since most modern fencers don't keep their trailing hands
up in a nice classical position, the blocking is usually quite significant.
I believe this is a relatively recent rule addition, probably added
because directors were tired of having to decide whether every such turn
also constituted covering target.
-- Morgan Burke
mor...@sitka.triumf.ca
Susan Mullhaupt
>There are a few problems with the way that sabre is dealt with under the
>current rules:
>
>the stones to call a prolonged run a preparation like the rule book
>says..)
I really don't understand why this is. I agree with you but am mystified.
> What is there to be done? I would have thought that stricter
>directing was the key, and maybe it is, but we don't have people who can
>do it.
This I also do not get. _Why_ don't we have better directors? Why don't
we all teach officiating as well as fencing? I know that perfect sabre
directing is impossible, but the footstep rules are not that hard to
enforce.
> I
>hope the FIE lets the sport heal after making its new changes (and more
>than the cursory six months), and if there are bugs, lets change them
>then.
I disagree. I hope the FIE conducts a long period of experimentation
before screwing up the rules as badly as this proposed change. It is
pretty hard to think of snything worse than 'limited footwork' other
than banning cuts.
Later,
Andrew Mullhaupt
Eas...@mendel.berkeley.edu
Suman) wrote:
> In article <1994Feb21.1...@cc.usu.edu>, sl...@cc.usu.edu writes...
>
> What's wrong with crossing your foot in foil. I do the cross-fwd-lunge quite a
> bit, it throws a lot of people who don't expect an attack from what was
> apparently an out-of-distance engaurde. Of course, if the FIE introduces the
> no cross-over rule in foil as well, .... :-(
>
> Suman Palit
>
> P.S. Of course, you are vulnerable to counter-offensive actions during
> your cross-over, and most directors treat the cross-over as a preparation..
Right, this preparation thing is annoying. A good way to circumvent that is
to sneak distance other ways. For example begin with a half step foward,
bring up your back leg all the way (till it touches the back of your
leading foot) and lunge out of that. It's a lot more explosive than doing a
cross step and takes just as much distance for the attack (minus a few
inches). The avoidance of the crosstep also reduces the chance of being
attacked into that "preparation".
-linus
STFZ000
>In article <2k8q9m$i...@news.cc.oberlin.edu> sja...@OCVAXA.CC.OBERLIN.EDU writes:
>
>> Speaking of click-bang fencing, most sabre bouts I've seen
>>sound like: aaaaaaaaaaaargh-clunk-bang. Save the aaaaaaargh for Conan.
>
>The only fencers in my club who practice the 'kiai' are foilists. We
>have one sabreur who says 'Oh-pa' when he hits, and our tournaments
>do not have much yelling. You can be "awarded" a lovely yellow card
>for disorderly fencing, so it is not a good idea to emulate Conan.
>(Even nicer red cards for brutality...)
>
some form of yell. I have never seen a yellow card given for it,
except once when the yell came BEFORE the touch to intimidate the
opponent. Not only is the yell a nice intimidation factor, it focuses
a release of energy and usually means a high degree of concentration
by the athlete (it occurs in a lot of sports). Our coach teaches us
to "give voice" during an action. It just feels good. Try it sometime.
Just out of interest, what other variety of yells have you heard? Here
are a few from my club:
et-LA! (classic)
o-pa-YO!
A-pa-pa-pa!
BA!
AY-yo!
EEEEEEEEE!
I have heard some interesting ones from other clubs, too!
-Mer
(rest of article irrelevant)
>.
>.
Morgan Burke
|> Just out of interest, what other variety of yells have you heard? Here
|> are a few from my club:
|>
|> et-LA! (classic)
-- used on the lunge or fleche, for best effect.
|> o-pa-YO!
-- balestra lunge with coupe', of course.
|> A-pa-pa-pa!
-- The taunt of the blade-play artiste, as he mimics the sound of
his upcoming contre-contre-riposte.
|> BA!
-- the sabre fencer, as he spits on the ground at the director's feet.
|> AY-yo!
-- For a perfect attack that misses (a favourite of mine).
Alternative spellings: "AY! oh...", or "AY! Oh shit."
|> EEEEEEEEE!
-- The choice of psycho women everywhere.
"RAAUGH!" (usually with a loud stamp, but no attack)
-- the choice of beginners who like the flamboyance of sabre, but
haven't yet figured out the point of kiais and balestras.
"Woo hoo!"
-- great for stop hits followed by frantic retreats.
"Ahhhhh!"
-- when your attack misses and you suddenly realize that you're too
close, and here comes the counter-attack...
"Yes!"
-- when you get the first hit against a fencer who you thought was
going to blow you away.
"AAAAAaaaaaaAAAAAAaaaaaaWOOOOOOooooooOOOOOOaaaaaaaHHHHH!"
-- when you get the last hit against a fencer who you thought was
going to blow you away. Often accompanied by throwing the mask
into the air and running off the far end of the strip without
unclipping first.
"A-LA! Whoa!"
-- when both fencers attack each other, stop, look at the box, and
there are no lights. Followed by both leaping backwards into
guard.
"Ha ha ha ha ha!"
-- usually accompanies the 10th remise of the attack that still
doesn't score. Useful when bout starts to resemble a game of
Twister.
"A-LA! Whoops, are you all right?"
-- when your opponent falls to the piste, clutching at his groin.
-- Morgan Burke
mor...@sitka.triumf.ca
Susan Mullhaupt
> I have never seen a yellow card given for it,
>except once when the yell came BEFORE the touch to intimidate the
>opponent.
Disorderly fencing is one of those director's discretion calls. As a director
I would consider it for a yell if I thought that the yell was intended to
distract or unduly influence me, although I have never given one. Now what
happens to me is when I run a lot in a foil bout and use really big balestra
combinations, there are two directors who like to tell both fencers to "take
it easy, gentlemen" while looking straight at me. I always ignore this
although it is usually followed by any hit against me given priority. What
I do in this situation is to try and hit clean (one light) and then take
the opponent's blade over our heads to make it obvious. I do this sharply
enough to ensure that the director _knows_ that I am not taking it any easier,
but so far it has _not_ resulted in a yellow card, and of these bouts I have
won three and lost one.
Can anyone explain why the directors express their displeasure at the style
of fencing but don't back it up with a real ruling? Either I'm within the
rules or I'm not. My belief is that a director should not comment on any
aspect of a bout which is not germane to his reconstruction, ruling, or
safety. If a director has a problem with how I fence, it has to be a problem
which the rules support, and therefore I should pull a yellow card if I keep
going, right?
If this happened in sabre, I would be pretty ticked off.
Later,
Andrew Mullhaupt
Eric Howard
lty...@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Liam T. Yore) wrote:
> > If you cross your feet, do not rotate your shoulders to match, since it
> > is illegal to bring your back shoulder in front, in foil.
> >
> > -- Morgan Burke
>
> Why is this? I have always known of this rule (and in fact won a few
> points on it), but I don't really understand the rationale behind it. Is
> it to discourage infighting? To protect lousy directors from difficult
> calls? Why?
I tried to keep quiet on this one (but I could not force my mouth closed).
From my understanding about 6 years ago it was very legal to turn the
shoulder. It is a very good infighting move. From what I understand of
the international events of the time it was very good for one of the German
teams. Done with the turn and flick. The main problem with this is that
the French were loosing to the Germans and therefore changed the rule for
safety.
This was at the time my best infighting move and still is in Epee.
Eric Howard
howa...@macpost.vanderbilt.edu /|
/ |\
) / | \
-- /--)--- \\\ / | \
/\ --====---- ----------------
/ / /// \____________/
mic...@janus.colorado.edu
fist-shaking, a quick turn to the lights and then the director. It
seems to be, usually, an attempt to influence the director. In
the right-of-way weapons, ESPECIALLY sabre still, directors can be influenced.
I have seen many 'yellers' while practicing, even in 'heated' practice, and
they do not yell; there is no director to influence then.
So, I have USUALLY found the yell to be unnecessary, annoying, obnoxious
and, thereby, a bit unsporting. The only time I have used 'the yell' is
when my opponent starts 'the yell' with an unsuccessful attack (he misses
or is parried). I finish his yell for him with a riposte.
I just don't see the need for all that theatrical noise. But this is just
my opinion. Other opinions are welcome, but no need to 'flame', as they say.
Michael Sharp
Eric Howard
wrote:
My favorite experience with my opponent yelling was in a final four bout
(15 touch) in Atlanta Open. I attacked (in epee) several exchanges and the
box went off. My opponent looked me in the face screamed at the top of his
voice (meaning he got the hit) I turned looked at the box saw that it was a
double hit, turned said double to him and offered the high five. The best
part of this was his expression when I did this. His face must have
dropped to the floor. By the way he did not win the bout.
--
Grizzly Adams
>-- Morgan Burke
> mor...@sitka.triumf.ca
Ok, so its partly for lazy direcotrs ;-)
Thanks Morgan - I always did wonder a little about my reason. Yours makes
much mroe sense (but I don't think I rememebr the last time rules changes
made much sense . . . )
Grizzly Adams
laughing so hard at liked it after I explained the fencing bits.
As for micahel's comments that it is only for influencing the director, well
maybe. I don't yell much, but when I do, it is usually becuase I am either
(a) very happy or (b) very mad at myself. I don't think I've ever yelled when
it wasn't internally directed, or undirected, and I know a few other fencers
who are the same way. i think for some of us its just a release of the extra
emotional energy.
Randell Jesup
>> (for Sabre)
>> Any forward movement with the rear foot crossing the forward foot is
>> forbidden and will result in an immediate halt. A fencer who crosses
Well, there goes the crossover-advance and -lunge.
>What are the rules about foot crossing in foil? I was always told never to
>cross your feet unless you are fleching, but another fencer in my club who just
>started fencing after a break of several years crosses his feet constantly,
>ususally while retreating (he doesn't ever seem to be off balance) and says
>that he was told that this is a perfectly OK way to fence.
You can advance or retreat by crossing your legs. You need to be
more careful, since if you've misjudged the distance (or the opponent's
ability to attack) he may attack into it while your feet are out of position.
The advantage (especially on retreat) is that they cover ground faster. The
trick is to keep the torso motion smooth, don't bob up and down or lean
forward or back while doing it.
Fergason
>
>>
>>et-LA! (classic)
>>o-pa-YO!
>>A-pa-pa-pa!
>>BA!
>>AY-yo!
>>EEEEEEEEE!
>>
My favorite was "eh-LAH---oops".
Kelly
Vincent J Coccia
England:
1) Eh-la-la-la-la-la-la-lo!: Sabre celebration used by an anonymous UMASS
Amherst sabre fencer. It sounds like a yodel, and is annoying when he
uses it and the call is against you. When he does this and the call is
against him, it is kinda funny....:)
2) POP-EYE!: A celebration used by a member of the Boston Fencing Club
foil group, it is singularly annoying. Yes indeed it is said as though
you were invoking the god of spinach. Counter celebrations used against
this have included: WIM-PY!, and SWEE'-PEA! Can't quite make OLIVE-OYL!
work though...:)
unfortunately those are really the only distictive ones...the rest run
more to the standard EH-LA! or OOO-PA!
Vince
(v...@kepler.unh.edu)
David Airey
: In article <1994Feb21.1...@cc.usu.edu>, <sl...@cc.usu.edu> wrote:
: >In article <18FEB94.13...@MUSIC.CC.UGA.EDU>, ST...@MUSIC.CC.UGA.EDU (STFZ) writes:
: >
: >What are the rules about foot crossing in foil? I was always told never to
: >cross your feet unless you are fleching, but another fencer in my club who just
: >started fencing after a break of several years crosses his feet constantly,
: >ususally while retreating (he doesn't ever seem to be off balance) and says
: >that he was told that this is a perfectly OK way to fence.
: >
: >
: Tamora Miller
: As with most things in fencing, this seems to be a stylistic matter. Crossing your feet used to be quite popular, became less so in the recent past as footwork gravitated toward a more rigid engarde stance, and then most recently it seemed that looser footwork was on the upswing again. I've heard that loose, back and forth footwork is favoured by some top Polish fencers who almost seem to swing and dangle their legs every which way.
:
: Cross-steps aren't taught much anymore, and some coaches actively discourage them.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Well- no, your average 7 year old can do them quite well.
I heard one fencer claim that you should receive a yellow card, ANY time your back foot crosses in front of your front foot, even if there is no significant action happening such as if you're 20 feet away and simply decide to walk toward your opponent until he's in fencing distance.
:Like most things, it's not what you do, it's when. Crossteps CAN be used to alter
the tempo. I don't think I would ever use them in a genuine attack (foil at least)
- particularly as they are now _BY DEFINITION_ prepatation.
But rushing forward in preparation can unsettle your opponent, who might throw out a
stop-hit which you, being cool and in control, parry and riposte. Classic 2nd
intention.
DAVId
: Many older texts on fencing instruction (and I mean from the '60-'70, not the 1700's :) have sections detailing crosssteps forwards and backwards.
STFZ
Aaaeeeyyy!
(Fonzie)
By the way, I heard that there is a "Happy Days" episode
where Fonzie DOES fence...
-Mer
>.
>.
I almo
Ed Mou
>Ed Mou (ed...@vanbc.wimsey.com) wrote:
>: In article <1994Feb21.1...@cc.usu.edu>, <sl...@cc.usu.edu> wrote:
>:
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Well- no, your average 7 year old can do them quite well.
>
Or were you suggesting that the "7 year old" was actually _your_ fencing master? :)
Jeffrey P. Bodner
In a previous article, ST...@MUSIC.CC.UGA.EDU (STFZ) says:
>I almost forgot one...
>
>Aaaeeeyyy!
>(Fonzie)
>
>By the way, I heard that there is a "Happy Days" episode
>where Fonzie DOES fence...
>
Yep. He fences the European master in foil.. or was that Richie? Anyway,
the stuck-up European insults America (gasp!) and so Fonzie, being the
all American guy he is, challenges the guy to a duel with Sabres.
They don't use masks here and there is a lot of ducking, swinging on
conveniently available ropes, etc etc. It's pretty amusing, but obviously
not text-book fencing style. :) But I digress!
Anyone here of something like "Koob-a-say!" as a yell?
--
Jeffrey Bodner, CWRU
jp...@po.cwru.edu
(216) 754-2053
Jack Campin
> My favorite was "eh-LAH---oops".
Paul Crawford (who I'm monitoring this group for) tells me that at his club
there's a new one:
"SHIT!!!"
...from old-timers when they forget and do a sabre fleche...
--
-- Jack Campin -- Room 1.36, Department of Computing & Electrical Engineering,
Mountbatten Building, Heriot-Watt University, Riccarton, Edinburgh EH14 4AS
TEL: 031 449 5111 ext 4195 HOME: 031 556 5272 FAX: 031 451 3431
INTERNET: ja...@cee.hw.ac.uk BITNET: via UKACRL BANG!net: via mcsun & uknet
Morgan Burke
|> From what I have seen of 'the yell', it is almost always acoompanied by
|> fist-shaking, a quick turn to the lights and then the director. It
|> seems to be, usually, an attempt to influence the director.
A good kiai should come *before* the hit, and it's purpose is to channel
the attacker's energy and concentration. It is very much a part of good
fencing. A yell that comes after the hit is a victory shout, whose purpose
is to influence the director, intimidate the opponent, cheer for one's self,
or to maintain focus through the halt, depending on the context. It's
sporting character can vary.
|> In the right-of-way weapons, ESPECIALLY sabre still, directors can be
|> influenced. I have seen many 'yellers' while practicing, even in 'heated'
|> practice, and they do not yell; there is no director to influence then.
Shouting in practice or in the early stages of a tournament is usually
unnecessary, since the outcome isn't that important, and the fencers have
ample energy and have no need to kiai to focus it. When fencers run out
of energy in practice, they usually stop fencing, or else stop worrying
about losing.
Tournaments are another matter, if the fencer really cares about winning.
In the late stages of a tournament, when your legs are choked with lactic
acid but you have to make a lunge to capitalize on that opening, a kiai
comes in really handy.
Even in lessons, coach won't let me wimp out when I get tired, so I
sometimes have to kiai towards the end of a long workout just to hit
him. No director, not even a score, but the kiai still comes in handy.
|> So, I have USUALLY found the yell to be unnecessary, annoying, obnoxious
|> and, thereby, a bit unsporting. [...]
|> I just don't see the need for all that theatrical noise.
A kiai is very UNtheatrical, since it is directed at one person
only: yourself. As discussed at the top, though, not all yells are
kiais.
-- Morgan Burke
mor...@sitka.triumf.ca
Chris Chung
: So, I have USUALLY found the yell to be unnecessary, annoying, obnoxious
: and, thereby, a bit unsporting. The only time I have used 'the yell' is
Then, it's working :)
Chris
C.M...@lut.ac.uk
opponent. To my knowledge there's nothing in the rules against it.
At times I have been a 4-4 in a bout. I wave the point around a bit, and
then make some sort of yell. Usually the opponent looks up at you instead
of your balde/body. Quite easy to hit them with a straight-thrust then! :)
I also use it to direct my energy, especially when getting tired. Ocasionally
I yell when I win something (thankfully that ain't often!!) :)
Chris.
+-----------------------------+-------------------------------+
| CHRIS LAW, Ergonomics U/G, | Loughborough University of |
| E-Mail: C.M...@lut.ac.uk | Technology, ENGLAND |
+-----------------------------+-------------------------------+
| "Jimmy felt like Neil Armstrong would have done if, when he |
| reached the moon, discovered it was made of cardboard and |
| sticky tape. It was a bit of a let down." R.Bitcliffe 1993 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Simon Rooney
>>>>o-pa-YO!
>>>>A-pa-pa-pa!
>>>>BA!
>>>>AY-yo!
>>>>EEEEEEEEE!
>>>Well, down here in Texas, we go "Hee-Hawwwwww..." :-)
>>My favorite was "eh-LAH---oops".
>I almost forgot one...
>Aaaeeeyyy!
>(Fonzie)
The most common ones I can think of are:
eeeeeEEEEEE-YA! (mainly women)
WOOOP-ayla.
Of course, there's always the good ole:
LOOK BEHIND YOU!
>-Mer
MNSIOS
Susan Mullhaupt
>A good kiai should come *before* the hit, and it's purpose is to channel
>the attacker's energy and concentration. It is very much a part of good
>fencing.
I think you can fence just fine without yelling in any way, but there isn't
necessarily anything wrong with yelling.
later,
Andrew Mullhaupt
Morgan Burke
Agreed, a yell can be a part of good fencing, but it's not a necessary part.
On the other hand, it can be neither good nor necessary. I've seen guys
on the Canadian Elite Epee circuit stand and scream incoherently in each
other's faces after each hit, even while following their opponents as they
walked back to their on guard line. This is intimidation, pure and simple,
and can easily earn penalties with an unfriendly director. I've never
seen these guys earn penalties for their screaming, however ... and the
fencing in between the screaming was damn fun to watch, so maybe it was
for the better. Nothing like watching two riled and furious elite epee
fencers try to beat the living daylights out of each other.
-- Morgan Burke
mor...@sitka.triumf.ca
David Airey
: st...@rodan.East.Sun.COM (Stan Yen - Sun BOS Hardware - Scan Grunt) writes:
: >In case it wasn't clear: they're outlawing the crossing of the back leg
: >over the forward leg, not the 'cross-over step' as an action itself.
: >Thus, since in *any* fleche the back leg does indeed pass the front leg,
: >the fleche is illegal. Same goes for Russian lunges, I expect.
: Time to practice the continuous balestre (sp). Who needs to
: cross their feet to fleche? ;-) (So it's a bit slower - it's still covers
: the ground quickly...)
There was a great tradition in Australian fencing in the early 80's (well
before my time before anyone makes any smart comments - a saw it on video)
where the flech never involved crossing the feet - before or after the action
Of course, you landed flat on your face, but the crowd loved it.
DAVID
: --
Kerry Anderson
In article 7620...@pv0a0d.vincent.iastate.edu, brow...@iastate.edu (Grizzly Adams) writes:
> In <ltyore-23...@aragorn4.acns.nwu.edu> lty...@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Liam T. Yore) writes:
>
> >> If you cross your feet, do not rotate your shoulders to match, since it
> >> is illegal to bring your back shoulder in front, in foil.
> >>
>
> >Why is this? I have always known of this rule (and in fact won a few
> >points on it), but I don't really understand the rationale behind it. Is
> >it to discourage infighting? To protect lousy directors from difficult
> >calls? Why?
>
>
> This is off the top of my head (no rule book handy) but, I think the don't
> turn the shoulders also applies in Epee. As near as I can recall, when this
> rule was instituted, it was because turning the shoulders had a tendency to
> result in turning the head, exposing the unprotected rear where you could get
> seriously hurt. So I a have always understood it to be an extension of the
> saftey based, don't turn expose the back of your head.
>
I've heard this come up at our club recently and I am dissappointed because when fighting in close, I will jump and switch my foot orientation, putting my sword arm
in the rear. This gives me a great deal more "close in" maneuvering ability.
Obviously, this would be illegal if the above rule were true. Also, doesn't this
rule make the "Russian lunge" illegal?
Kerry Anderson
Susan Mullhaupt
>Agreed, a yell can be a part of good fencing, but it's not a necessary part.
>On the other hand, it can be neither good nor necessary. I've seen guys
>on the Canadian Elite Epee circuit stand and scream incoherently in each
>other's faces after each hit, even while following their opponents as they
>walked back to their on guard line. This is intimidation, pure and simple,
>and can easily earn penalties with an unfriendly director.
I'd be tempted, but in epee the yell would not normally be an attempt to
intimidate me. But I _think_ (don't have the rule book handy just now)
I might yellow card a fencer for a vindictive act.
>I've never
>seen these guys earn penalties for their screaming, however ...
I'll admit I have never given a yellow card for screaming yet. But
I would consider that there could be circumstances in which I would.
Later,
Andrew Mullhaupt
Susan Mullhaupt
>In article <hbouchir....@unix1.tcd.ie> hbou...@unix1.tcd.ie (Paul Bouchier-Hayes) writes:
>>I <CM03I...@lut.ac.uk> C.M...@lut.ac.uk wrote:
>>
>>>Does anyone else use the yell with the specific aim of distracting their
>>>opponent. To my knowledge there's nothing in the rules against it.
You can be hit with Article 602, (red card then black card for second
offense) for not strictly and faithfully observing ... the traditional
customs of courtesy and integrity. So be careful to yell politely.
Suppose you _do_ yell politely, but then the director tells you not to
on the grounds that you are disturbing order on another strip. Then you have
to stop or else you can get hit with 602 for not obeying the instructions
of the officials.
Furthermore, you can get hit with 602 _by a director from another strip_,
(he is obliged to "stop immediately any activity which disturbs the
progress of the bout over which he is presiding.) You are entitled to
a warning in this case; but you can still get the red card/black card
even though you get it from a director on another strip.
>>>At times I have been a 4-4 in a bout. I wave the point around a bit, and
>>>then make some sort of yell. Usually the opponent looks up at you instead
>>>of your balde/body. Quite easy to hit them with a straight-thrust then! :)
Who do you fence? Where can I get some of these opponents?
>>Sorry, but this is quite, quite illegal any president that lets you get
>>away wityh this is not doing his job.
>Under what ruling? Which paragraph in the rules states that you can't
>try to distract your opponent in any way, shape, or form??
The director can do a lot using Article 602, as we have noted. There
are also remote possibilities for 607, if for example, you yell "now
let me hit you like we agreed so we can both move up to the next round..."
>Now why do you call this unsportsman-like?
I would certainly call it unsportsmanlike if your yell disturbed the order on
another strip, but don't worry about what we think is unsportsmanlike. You only
have to worry about the directors and the bout committee.
Later,
Andrew Mullhaupt
Eric Dew
In article <CM1qr...@lut.ac.uk> C.M...@lut.ac.uk (Chris Law) writes:
>In article <hbouchir....@unix1.tcd.ie> hbou...@unix1.tcd.ie (Paul Bouchi
er-Hayes) writes:
>>I <CM03I...@lut.ac.uk> C.M...@lut.ac.uk wrote:
>>
>>>Does anyone else use the yell with the specific aim of distracting their
>>>opponent. To my knowledge there's nothing in the rules against it.
You can be hit with Article 602, (red card then black card for second
offense) for not strictly and faithfully observing ... the traditional
customs of courtesy and integrity. So be careful to yell politely.
... deletia ...
*******
You can get away with any and all swearing if you know some choice words in
other languages. I've sworn using whatever appropriate language (ones
that the director doesn't know). It's really a way to release the
tension, but I don't need to get tagged with a yellow or red card.
My favorite is in urdu. Nice and obscure.
EDEW
William Davenant
Well, when I hear the _yell,_ I'm reminded of Danny Kaye in the _Court
Jester._ ;-)
Susan Mullhaupt
>There was a great tradition in Australian fencing in the early 80's (well
>before my time before anyone makes any smart comments - a saw it on video)
>where the flech never involved crossing the feet - before or after the action
>
>Of course, you landed flat on your face, but the crowd loved it.
You can't score on such a move - it's a fall, and you get a yellow card
for it. Just how did this get to be a tradition?
Later,
Andrew Mullhaupt
P.S. The rule against falling has been around forever, certainly since long
before the early eighties. When I fenced competitively (1976-1980) you
could not score in an action which caused you to fall.You still can't.
Susan Mullhaupt
> it's no wonder the french keeps
>relying on the rules to help them out.
Actually, the new hogwash for saber rules seem to have come from further
east in Eurpoe, including some Germans.
Later,
Andrew Mullhaupt
David Airey
: In article <2kr904$l...@dingo.cc.uq.oz.au> ai...@dingo.cc.uq.oz.au (David Airey) writes:
: >Ed Mou (ed...@vanbc.wimsey.com) wrote:
: >: In article <1994Feb21.1...@cc.usu.edu>, <sl...@cc.usu.edu> wrote:
: >:
: >: Cross-steps aren't taught much anymore, and some coaches actively discourage them.
: >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: >Well- no, your average 7 year old can do them quite well.
: >
: Heh. This is quite true. I think even a five-year old should be able to cross-step, really. However, of the four fencing coaches I have seen around here, all of them either actively discourage using the cross-step, or else dismiss it as a basically irrelevant movement.
:
: Or were you suggesting that the "7 year old" was actually _your_ fencing master? :)
As others of his students read this group, I had better not reply.
DAVId
Manuel Garcia O'Kelly Davis
Kerry Anderson <kand...@nofc.forestry.ca> wrote:
>I've heard this come up at our club recently and I am dissappointed because when fighting in close, I will jump and switch my foot orientation, putting my sword arm
>in the rear. This gives me a great deal more "close in" maneuvering ability.
>Obviously, this would be illegal if the above rule were true. Also, doesn't this
>rule make the "Russian lunge" illegal?
>
>Kerry Anderson
>
Well there is a legal way to do a Russian lunge. What you have to do
is twist your torso to keep your shoulders in the correct position.
The best way to do this is the throw your back arm out as you come
forward. This does take some flexiblity to do it often.
BTW. The reason I heard why you can't bring your back shoulder forward
was because of things like front close lame's. They didn't want to
have swords going in under the lame through the closure.
Gene E. Scogin, President , Baylor Fencing Club
Winnie-the-Pooh
&In article 7620...@pv0a0d.vincent.iastate.edu, brow...@iastate.edu (Grizzly Adams) writes:
&> In <ltyore-23...@aragorn4.acns.nwu.edu> lty...@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Liam T. Yore) writes:
&>
&> >> If you cross your feet, do not rotate your shoulders to match, since it
&> >> is illegal to bring your back shoulder in front, in foil.
&> >>
&> >> -- Morgan Burke
&>
&> >Why is this? I have always known of this rule (and in fact won a few
&> >points on it), but I don't really understand the rationale behind it. Is
&> >it to discourage infighting? To protect lousy directors from difficult
&> >calls? Why?
&>
&> >Liam
&>
&> This is off the top of my head (no rule book handy) but, I think the don't
&> turn the shoulders also applies in Epee. As near as I can recall, when this
&> rule was instituted, it was because turning the shoulders had a tendency to
&> result in turning the head, exposing the unprotected rear where you could get
&> seriously hurt. So I a have always understood it to be an extension of the
&> saftey based, don't turn expose the back of your head.
&>
&> eric
&I've heard this come up at our club recently and I am dissappointed because when fighting in close, I will jump and switch my foot orientation, putting my sword arm
&in the rear. This gives me a great deal more "close in" maneuvering ability.
&Obviously, this would be illegal if the above rule were true. Also, doesn't this
&rule make the "Russian lunge" illegal?
I think the rule about not bringing your back shoulder in front has nothing
to do with the unprotected rear (since the rule doesn't apply in epee)
but has to do with bringing off target area (the arm and shoulder) in front
of target area, which is forbidden in foil. So, jumping, switching feet and
putting your wield arm in the back results in bringing your empty arm in
front of targetting area. This results in a yellow card.
Haijo.
Ed Mou
>
>Irrelevant??? Perhaps moving forward in an attack, yes (setting aside the fact that the fleche is simply a cross-over attack), but as a defensive move, there is no way
>of getting out of trouble faster. I use it quite often (not that I get in trouble often :) )
>
>
Hey, I do it all the time. Easier than doing two or three quick shuffling steps, and better than jumping backwards. Who can know what goes on in the minds of coaches? :)
DOUGLAS W HIGGINS
Kerry Anderson <kand...@nofc.forestry.ca> wrote:
>
>Irrelevant??? Perhaps moving forward in an attack, yes (setting aside the fact that the fleche is simply a cross-over attack), but as a defensive move, there is no way
>of getting out of trouble faster. I use it quite often (not that I get in trouble often :) )
I quite agree, especially in American epee fencing. Epee (to me) isn't
a style in which the fleche is particularly effective, but in college
tournaments people are constantly fleching at me. I've won entire bouts
simply by doing a backwards cross-step stop-thrust.
If someone is fleching at you, the backwards cross-step is a life saver.
Probably even more so in a style with priority, because if would give
you more time to make your parry, but in epee it let's you get off your
stop-thrust to the wrist (and flechers are often lucky if they can even
get your arm, it's a real stupid attack in epee, again that's my opinion,
but I've enforced my opinion very successfully on the piste by doing
just as I mentioned above).
Doug
David Airey
: Eric (not me) writes in article 4378:
: >points on it), but I don't really understand the rationale behind it. Is
: >it to discourage infighting? To protect lousy directors from difficult
: >calls? Why?
: >Liam
: The shoulder rule was instituted soon after the 88 Olympics because the
: french were getting their ass kicked by the germans who were very
: proficient at doing a prime, stepping in with the turned shoulder and
: nailing the riposte while flailing the unarmed arm to block off all attempts
: at parrying their ripostes. Well, maybe no flailing. Still, the
: french, babies as they are, cried and fussed and the FIE (french organiz.
: as you know) adopted the new rule.
: As I mentioned in another thread about German and French duelings (re:
: Mark Twain's book, A Tramp Abroad), it's no wonder the french keeps
: relying on the rules to help them out.
: Mon dieu!
: EDEW
Err - yes, there was also the _slight_ problem of the tendency to do the
riposte behind the shoulder. Very spectacular, but it tended to rest
the guard on the shoulder, blocking out any hits from the oponent. Apparently
Mathias Behr was a great exponent of this. Including the classic action
done with 1.5 second remaining in a final of the 1984 olympics.
DAVID
ey
Paul Breckenridge Niles
(DOUGLAS W HIGGINS) wrote:
> In article <CMAws...@NoFC.Forestry.CA>,
> Kerry Anderson <kand...@nofc.forestry.ca> wrote:
> >
> >Irrelevant??? Perhaps moving forward in an attack, yes (setting aside the fact that the fleche is simply a cross-over attack), but as a defensive move, there is no way
> >of getting out of trouble faster. I use it quite often (not that I get in trouble often :) )
>
> I quite agree, especially in American epee fencing. Epee (to me) isn't
> a style in which the fleche is particularly effective,
Umm. I would have to disagree on that one. If you fence any good fencer
who utilizes the fleche effectively you will realize that the backwards
cross step is too time consuming. What I mean by a well executed fleche is
one where the attacker is in proper distance and you're only recourse is a
parry with a retreat. Because if you try to counterattack most likely you
will lose the touch as the person fleching is stretched out at full reach.
If you try the crosstep back you will have been hit in the middle of it.
Usually one cannot hit the arm on a well executed fleche because the arm is
extended by the time you are within thrust distance. Of course I have been
talking about a well executed fleche and most people don't do that very
well. However there are some fencers, not myself, but some especially on
the intercollegiate level that will fleche and hit you before you've even
thought of retreating.
HaroldBuck
Anderson) writes:
>Also, doesn't this rule make the "Russian lunge" illegal?
I always thought the "Russian lunge" was a saber move, although it is
now illegal in saber as well (back foot crossing in front of front foot).
-Harold Buck