French grips suck!
Ryan Christian Nelson
be forced to use one again....
I just thought a subject line like the one above would start some lively
discussion....
Please no hate mail... replies to the net.
Ed Ellert
>I don't really think this, of course ( I learned on one ), but I would hate to
>be forced to use one again....
>I just thought a subject line like the one above would start some lively
>discussion....
Well...it depends on perspective. I haven't fenced in probably 8 years,
and my weapon was epee (using a Russian grip), but I remember that with
a French grip foil you could do some things you couldn't do with a
pistol grip. First, point control was enhanced at the expense of power,
providing the correct technique was used. Second, you could, provided
you didn't get caught ;^), extend your reach by a few inches. Third,
and this relates to the first, for teaching, it is much easier to teach
students how to hold a French grip correctly -- with a pistol grip there
is a tendency put a death hold on the pistol part as opposed to holding
the grip between the thumb and forefinger, the rest of the hand relaxed.
Ed Ellert
email: ell...@nu1.uh.cwru.edu
Mark Allen Kampe
>I don't really think this, of course ( I learned on one ), but I would hate to
>be forced to use one again....
Well, the truth be known I have Belgian grips on most of my foils and German
grips on most of my epees ... but I don't believe that French grips suck.
A Fench grip teaches you:
the appropriate pressure on the grip
it is too easy to squeeze a pistol grip, but a french grip
really won't work well unless you maintain only light pressure.
to use flexibility in your fingers and wrists
a french grip allows you greater freedom of hand motion
and greater precision of point control. If you learn on
a pistol grip you may never learn to use your fingers and
to do relatively little with your wrist.
to make strong beats and parries
anybody can make a strong beat when they grip the blade with
every tendon in their fore-arm and swing the blade from the
pects. A french grip does not "weld the sword to your arm"
and so forces you to use time, angle and relative positions
of the blades more effectively.
A french grip teaches us many things that we would not learn as well with
pistol grips. By denying ourselves the orthopedic advantages of the more
ergonomic grips, we are forced to develop technique - and the techniques
will remain (if you try to maintain them) even after you abandon the french
grip.
I obviously prefer the grips that I have mounted on my own swords, but I
don't complain about french grips when I get a borrowed weapon that has
one.
On a tangent, however, it is strange how attached we become to grips. One
day, for yucks, I put a German grip on a foil. The results were not pleasant.
A grip that I regularly use on an epee, seemed very difficult to use on a
foil. It is amazing how much difference it can make when you move a few
fingers 1/4 inch.
Dakin Burdick
I got into fencing to learn attacks with weapons (I do martial
arts), starting with foil and moving quickly into epee and sabre.
I love fencing because you can go all out and it is still very
safe. I use a french grip because that is the shape of a real
sword, and because the same shape relates well to baton work. I
don't whip the blade because a real sword won't do that. I don't
bend my blade because a real sword won't do that. And when I
do sabre, I always add a draw cut after a hit, because that is
the way to do damage to an opponent.
To my mind, fencing is an elegant, gentlemanly art that compares
quite favorably with the Asian martial arts. It also seems an
example of an ancient art where the sport aspect has gotten out
of hand.
Greg Dilworth
(good points of using a french in epee deleted.)
>Second, you could, provided you didn't get caught ;^), extend your
>reach by a few inches.
Just for drill...
It is absolutely legal to hold a french grip any way you want as long
as you have your hand behind the bell guard. You can hold it by the
pommel. You can change the grip in prime. You can hold it back on
the pommel and use your forefinger as a guide. All of this is legel.
The rule states that an _orthopedic_ grip must be designed so that it
can only be held in one way. It must also be designed so that the
thumb is a certain distance from the bell guard (I think 1/2 inch) and
no more.
The flexibility given to the changing of hand positions is why the few
top level fencers who use french's do so. At least this has been my
experience.
Yours,
Greg
Morgan Burke
|> To me, this subject line reflects all that is wrong with fencing.
|> I got into fencing to learn attacks with weapons (I do martial
|> arts), starting with foil and moving quickly into epee and sabre.
|> I love fencing because you can go all out and it is still very
|> safe. I use a french grip because that is the shape of a real
|> sword, and because the same shape relates well to baton work. I
|> don't whip the blade because a real sword won't do that. I don't
|> bend my blade because a real sword won't do that.
Real swords go through people. Do you do that, too? You should
bend the blade when you hit to prevent hurting your opponent.
A slight curve to your blade will make this easier, and may also
prolong the blade life by preventing awkward bends on clumsy hits.
I agree, though, that excessive curves to the blade are ridiculous
(and illegal...)
|> And when I
|> do sabre, I always add a draw cut after a hit, because that is
|> the way to do damage to an opponent.
Why don't you just use a gun. Really, it's a much more efficient
way of killing people. ;-)
|> To my mind, fencing is an elegant, gentlemanly art that compares
|> quite favorably with the Asian martial arts. It also seems an
|> example of an ancient art where the sport aspect has gotten out
|> of hand.
I feel that the sporting aspect of fencing is the truly timeless part
that can be appreciated in the absence of all violent and military
associations. Any concessions to realism or historical accuracy are
there to give the sport continuity and flavour, not because we are
actually learning how to kill people.
.................................................. Morgan Burke
mor...@sitka.triumf.ca
Mark Allen Kampe
>To my mind, fencing is an elegant, gentlemanly art that compares
>quite favorably with the Asian martial arts. It also seems an
>example of an ancient art where the sport aspect has gotten out
>of hand.
you should fence epee instead of foil. The "first blood" and "defacto
right of way" make it much closer to a real duel.
Brownbeard
Actually I rather like my french grip. I use it mostly as a backup weapon now
however. I learned on it, and this it taught me a lot about how to control the
foil. I still practice with it regularly, but don't really use it in
competition. Simply because too many of the people I fence use strong and hard
movements that would tend to knock it out of my hand - a LOT. So I went to the
pistol grip so that I had the stronger grip and wouldn't be disarmed as often.
I have a friend who swears by the spanish grip. So I think it is all a matte
rof personal taste and style, but while I was running a fencing group I really
tried to have everyone start out on a french grip. It was easier to get them to
stop trying to use (and hold it) like a broadsword they'd seen in the movies.
Eric
Edwin Wisse
burd...@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Dakin Burdick) writes:
> I always add a draw cut after a hit, because that is
>the way to do damage to an opponent.
>
>To my mind, fencing is an elegant, gentlemanly art that compares
>quite favorably with the Asian martial arts. It also seems an
>example of an ancient art where the sport aspect has gotten out
>of hand.
Damaging your opponent?????? Sport aspect gotten out of hand?????????
To my mind you were born a few hundred years too late :-)
In my view this does not have anything to do with fencing, fencing is
battle between two people but it is a *ritualised* battle. I agree very
strongly with whoever started the "Fencing is a sport" thread.
Better get back to work now, I spend a lot of time reading this group
these days :-)
--
Edwin Wisse | "Compassion? Get rid of it!"
ed...@dutlru.tudelft.nl | from "By the Sword"
Simon Rooney
>>Second, you could, provided you didn't get caught ;^), extend your
>>reach by a few inches.
>Just for drill...
>It is absolutely legal to hold a french grip any way you want as long
>as you have your hand behind the bell guard. You can hold it by the
>pommel. You can change the grip in prime. You can hold it back on
>the pommel and use your forefinger as a guide. All of this is legel.
The point of the post was that you can't CHANGE your grip in the
middle of a fight. It's counted as throwing your weapon which IS
illegal. (Hmmm. It'd be fun if it weren't *:) )
>The flexibility given to the changing of hand positions is why the few
>top level fencers who use french's do so. At least this has been my
>experience.
Do they? Why? Apart from small gains in distance (like an inch or
two) what are the advantages? Surely better strength, and accuracy
would overrule it... unless they're throwing.
>Greg
OSInmn
Greg Dilworth
>>Just for drill...
>>It is absolutely legal to hold a french grip any way you want as long
>>as you have your hand behind the bell guard. You can hold it by the
>>pommel. You can change the grip in prime. You can hold it back on
>
>The point of the post was that you can't CHANGE your grip in the
>middle of a fight. It's counted as throwing your weapon which IS
>illegal. (Hmmm. It'd be fun if it weren't *:) )
This isn't accurate. You _are_ allowed to change your grip in the
middle of an action. When I use a french and I go from a normal guard
to a prime my hand placement on the blade changes. Agreed you're not
allowed to throw the grip, but if you choose to slip your hand down
the grip some to give you a little more length, as long as you maintain
control you are allowed to do this also.
>>The flexibility given to the changing of hand positions is why the few
>>top level fencers who use french's do so. At least this has been my
>>experience.
>Do they? Why? Apart from small gains in distance (like an inch or
>two) what are the advantages? Surely better strength, and accuracy
>would overrule it... unless they're throwing.
Generally the arguments tend to be point control and flexibility in
infighting. Last year at nationals my friends and I noticed that Jack
Tahacic (I'm sure I've misspelled his last name - at any rate he ended
up fourth) used a french. It was our opinion, though we didn't ask
him, that he did this because it made him better at infighting.
Probably 1/2 of his touches in a couple of bouts I watched were primes
as his opponents were running by that he hit with stunning accuracy.
If you use a pistol grip, it is harder to do yielding parries such as
the prime that he was doing. Thus I think that this is the reason he
uses a french.
I have since switched from a french to a pistol grip and I like it
better, but I can still see the advantages of the other.
Yours,
Greg
Randell Jesup
>I have a friend who swears by the spanish grip.
My instructor forced all beginners to use french for a semester or
year or so (until they learned how to avoid the death grip), but for his own
use preferred spanish. His was the only spanish I've ever seen used (or in
person at all). Any comments on it from anyone? I tried his once or twice;
seemed nice, but I didn't use a pistol-grip of any kind at the time (or now).
> So I think it is all a matte
>rof personal taste and style, but while I was running a fencing group I really
>tried to have everyone start out on a french grip. It was easier to get them to
>stop trying to use (and hold it) like a broadsword they'd seen in the movies.
Exactly.
--
To be or not to be = 0xff
-
Randell Jesup, Jack-of-quite-a-few-trades, Commodore Engineering.
{uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!jesup, je...@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com BIX: rjesup
Disclaimer: Nothing I say is anything other than my personal opinion.
Theo Norvell
>
>>It is absolutely legal to hold a french grip any way you want as long
>>as you have your hand behind the bell guard. You can hold it by the
>>pommel. You can change the grip in prime. You can hold it back on
>>the pommel and use your forefinger as a guide. All of this is legel.
>
You were mislead.
Here's the gospel (from the FIE rules c.1989, I doubt it's changed)
30 If there is no special device or attachment or special shape
(e.g. orthopedic), a fencer may hold the handle in any way he
wishes and he may also alter the position of his hand on the
handle in any way he wishes on the handle during a bout. However,
the weapon must not -- either permanently [what the hell are they
getting at??] or temporarily, in any open or concealed manner --
be transformed into a throwing weapon; it must be used without the
hand leaving the hilt [handle] and without the hand being slipped
along the hilt from front to back during an offensive action.
So that's pretty clear. Frenchies can change grip, but not during an attack
or riposte.
Ortho grips on the other hand must be held with the thumb within 2 cm of the
guard. (But can I actually find that rule? ... No.)
As a side note: The same article makes it clear that you can not change
hands in the middle of a bout, unless the president gives you permission
because your sword arm is injured. There is no rule against changing
hands between bouts.
Theo Norvell
Sarah Anne Baker
>In article <ellert.7...@ds2.uh.cwru.edu> ell...@ds2.uh.cwru.edu (Ed Ellert) writes:
>(good points of using a french in epee deleted.)
>>Second, you could, provided you didn't get caught ;^), extend your
>>reach by a few inches.
>Just for drill...
>It is absolutely legal to hold a french grip any way you want as long
>as you have your hand behind the bell guard. You can hold it by the
>pommel. You can change the grip in prime. You can hold it back on
>the pommel and use your forefinger as a guide. All of this is legel.
Hey wait! I never was allowed to do that! I fenced with a French grip
for years and I was always told that you could not change where your
forefinger and thumb were placed on the grip substantially. Particularly
for epee. Perhaps the rules have changed on that. Somebody got a book on hand?
I tried once to slide my fingers from the back of the bellguard to the
pommel during a straight attack in epee once and got reprimanded. They said
that you couldn't change it within the bout, but if I had started that way
I could have stayed that way throughout.
So what's the rule?
-)-------- Sarah Baker --------(-
Jeffrey P. Vasquez
> be forced to use one again....
>
> I just thought a subject line like the one above would start some lively
> discussion....
>
I absolutely believe beginners should learn on French (an opinion probably
shared by most fencers), but I don't think I could ever go back to one.
M2C
Jeffrey
jvas...@netcom.com
Christopher Engdahl
--|> Path: news.duke.edu!duke!concert!uvaarpa!darwin.sura.net!wupost!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!usenet.ucs.indiana.edu!silver.ucs.indiana.edu!burdickd
|> From: burd...@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Dakin Burdick)
|> Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
|> Subject: Re: French grips suck!
|>
|> To me, this subject line reflects all that is wrong with fencing.
|> ... I use a french grip because that is the shape of a real
|> sword, and because the same shape relates well to baton work. I
|> don't whip the blade because a real sword won't do that. I don't
|> bend my blade because a real sword won't do that. And when I
|> do sabre, I always add a draw cut after a hit, because that is
|> the way to do damage to an opponent.
|>
|> To my mind, fencing is an elegant, gentlemanly art that compares
|> quite favorably with the Asian martial arts. It also seems an
|> example of an ancient art where the sport aspect has gotten out
|> of hand.
|>
|> Dakin
|> burd...@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
|>
IMHO, this opinion reflects the difference between the "recreationist" and
the "competitive" fencers. Modern fencing is an evolutionary outgrowth of
duelling, using many of the same rules. Soccer and basketball have similar
analagous sports in ancient S. American history...but we don't use the heads
of our enemies any more in those sports, eh?
Fencing is a sport. Fencing is not duelling. The idea behind fencing is not
to "damage an opponent," rather it is to score points using the rules. Any way
that you wish to implement those rules is valid...thus the "aesthetic" arguments
against whips, bent blades, choice of grips, etc. are all moot.
We can argue in circular-sixes all we want, but modern electric fencing now has
little room for those types of "controversies." Either you play the game well
and are a successful competitive fencer, or you enjoy the sport for its
recreational aspects and you do not impact the way the sport is played.
Basically, the worst way to fence is with words. Nothing matters until we go
onto the fencing strip. At that point, opinions about the way the sport
should be played matter not a bit. One wins, and one loses, and that's that.
ceng...@acpub.duke.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(no sig?)
RUSMISEL JASON DIRK
>
>Basically, the worst way to fence is with words. Nothing matters until we go
>onto the fencing strip. At that point, opinions about the way the sport
>should be played matter not a bit. One wins, and one loses, and that's that.
>
>ceng...@acpub.duke.edu
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>(no sig?)
THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!!!!
8)
Jason Rusmisel
UBC Electrical Engineering
Dakin Burdick
because I knew what kind of response I'd get. But let's go over them
anyway:
Mark Kampe told me to use epee (which is not a "sissy" weapon), even
after I pointed out that I did foil, sabre AND epee. Edwin Wisse
stalwartly proclaimed his support for fencing as a sport, while Simon
Rooney asserted that flicking was an "effective" technique (effective
for what?) even as Dick King pointed out that fencing was "less
practical karate." And Christopher Engdahl labelled me a
"recreationist", somehow connecting my interests with a disinterest
in the sport of fencing. Well, pish-posh I say, with my glass of
wine in hand, I am no "mere" recreationist. I can beat the local
fencers (ok, so that's not saying a lot) or at least most of them,
and I do enjoy playing the game. My point is that I see a different
emphasis for fencing.
Let's take another tack; Sarah Baker complains that the dropout
rate in Fencing is rather phenomenal compared to other arts
(including the Asian martial arts). Stan Yen blaims this on the
expense of the sport, but I ought to point out that the IU Fencing
club is really small, even though the club has a rather large stash
of equipment. In fact, they were pretty amazed that my wife and
I had our own equipment, so it must not be very common for people
to go whole-hog. Ken Lipka thinks that fencing is a refuge for
the weird, but I'd rather look for some OTHER explanation. That
brings me back to flicking and other sport techniques. Sure it's
legal by the rules NOW, but that doesn't have to be the way it is.
People are attracted to fencing by the swashbucklers in movies,
but what they get is people flicking little steel whips around and
getting all excited when the tip touches. Oh Boy. I can't contain
my excitement. Forgive me if I like to at least IMAGINE that
I'm in a real fight. It tends to keep my adrenalin running, and
I can't see that it hurts anyone.
Randell Jesup
>>>Second, you could, provided you didn't get caught ;^), extend your
>>>reach by a few inches.
[ comment that you can't change your hold on the grip in the middle of a
"fight" - is that a tourney, bout, touch, pass, ? ]
>Do they? Why? Apart from small gains in distance (like an inch or
>two) what are the advantages? Surely better strength, and accuracy
>would overrule it... unless they're throwing.
Not that I have any idea whether they do or not, but you could
start out with a grip further back and gain maybe 1/2" or maybe even 1"
without too badly comprimising you hold. If you can change holds during
pauses in the action, this might even be useful - without "throwing". I
know from experience that very small differences in distance can suprise
an opponent who thinks he knows your reach.
Randell Jesup
>IMHO, this opinion reflects the difference between the "recreationist" and
>the "competitive" fencers. Modern fencing is an evolutionary outgrowth of
>duelling, using many of the same rules. Soccer and basketball have similar
>analagous sports in ancient S. American history...but we don't use the heads
>of our enemies any more in those sports, eh?
Speaking of old fencing, has anyone ever fenced with pre-modern
sabres? I've held one - _bloody_ heavy compared to modern ones. I can see
why they had to have heavy padding, and why there were a lot of circles and
"flourishes" (missing the right word here) in attacks and parries.
Hmm. Maybe if we want the IOC to keep fencing in the olympics, we
should go back to them. They would be flamboyant at least... :-) (mostly
joking) We probably wouldn't need any of this electric stuff - touches would
be heavy enough no one could miss them, and right-of-way would become self-
protection...
Joe Kiniry
>rand...@cudnvr.denver.colorado.edu (Brownbeard) writes:
>>I have a friend who swears by the spanish grip.
>
> My instructor forced all beginners to use french for a semester or
>year or so (until they learned how to avoid the death grip), but for his own
>use preferred spanish. His was the only spanish I've ever seen used (or in
>person at all). Any comments on it from anyone? I tried his once or twice;
>seemed nice, but I didn't use a pistol-grip of any kind at the time (or now).
>
I, too, had an instructor who made all new students use a french for
at least a few months. Most, of course, moved to a pistol by the time
the first tournament came around, but that wasn't necessarily because
they _liked_ the pistol better, it's just all of our clubs electrics
were pistols! Anyway, I myself use either a french or a pistol, but
prefer the french. I find I have added flexibility, control, and finesse
with the french. Also, if you stick with it you find your hand and finger
strength improving over time, probably because at the beginning you were
always getting the foil knocked out of your hand by some tough sixty
year old! In any case, now all of my equipment has been 'passed down',
and if I get the chance to start again I'll just start anew...
(The reason I quit was because F.S.U.'s club stunk...there were maybe
three people with over a couple years experience. I hear now that UMass
might have a good club, so maybe I'll look into it. Are there any
other clubs in the central Mass area...?)
---joe
Simon Rooney
>>>top level fencers who use french's do so. At least this has been my
>>>experience.
>>Do they? Why? Apart from small gains in distance (like an inch or
>>two) what are the advantages? Surely better strength, and accuracy
>>would overrule it... unless they're throwing.
>like epee, rather than foil (where you get a continuation of action).
>That's all you need to turn all those double touches into singles and
>that can help a lot.
Yes. I know that, but if you've got those extra two inches, and
someone does a strong beat, or pris-de-faire, you're out. I've tried
it, and I find you just don't have the strength in your fingers that
others have in their hands (I mean to hold the weapon... not to
manouver it)and it's DEFINITELY harder to control... especially
since the balance of the weapon has just moved an extra 4 inches
forward.
>The fact is that people who use them often have very good strength and
>accuracy (they have thumbs about 2 inches thick :-).
Well, I suppose they'd have to, but then all you need is, as I say,
a stronger hand than they have a thumb.
OK. Let me put it this way. It's never worked for me, or on me.
>Dave Roberts
ISOnm
Patricia A White -- Oxford University Press -- MIS
any other types) of pistol grips? There was one guy in college who
claimed to be the only one who fenced with a Russian grip. Although
I never used his weapon, I did get the chance to handle it and it seemed
more comfortable than the Belgian grip I use (and then there's the
unknown pistol grip from Blade).
Is it simply a matter of different proportions or is nationalism
really on the rise? Will the US come up with a pistol grip that
automatically flicks if you pull the trigger. ;-)
-Patricia
pen...@rock.concert.net
Palit, Suman
>What's the difference between the Belgian, German, and Russian (and
>any other types) of pistol grips? There was one guy in college who
>Is it simply a matter of different proportions or is nationalism
>really on the rise? Will the US come up with a pistol grip that
>automatically flicks if you pull the trigger. ;-)
>
>-Patricia
I'm not sure of the nationalism bit, :-), but most grips do hav a national
origin, or had once upon a time. If you compare two orthopaedic grips, the
only difference is in how the grip splays your fingers/rests on your palm.
Of course, some grips have more metal than others. The Visconti and the
German look practically alike, except that the Visconti is slightly
offset compared to the German. On the other hand, it is enormously heavy, and
large, specially the ones made for epees. I had a Visconti for my epee, and
whoever used it, including myslf, complained of hand cramps....there was
just so much metal!!
BTW, there IS an American pistol grip. Don't like it too much, but I'm biased
towards the German anyways. I think Triplette and Colonial carry this grip.
It's almost a straight grip, and looks kind of like a Belgian, only a little
longer.
Suman
Mark Allen Kampe
>Is it simply a matter of different proportions or is nationalism
>really on the rise? Will the US come up with a pistol grip that
>automatically flicks if you pull the trigger. ;-)
Many years ago, during the (Montreal?) Olympic Pentathalon event, a Russian
was disqualified for having an excessively custom grip. I believe the
offenders name was "Onuschenko".
Dan DeChaine (an acquaintance who was an armorer for the US olympic team) got
to examine the grip. A piezo switch, a little battery and a custom IC to put
a spike on a loop of wire that surrounded one of the tip wires and created
an inductive spike large enough to trigger the scoring machine.
He got caught after scoring a touch that CLEARLY MISSED. He claimed that
he had made it himself in his kitchen. The Olympic commission demanded to
re-inspect the other swords on the Soviet team. They refused to submit their
weapons for inspection unless all other teams had to do the same, but did
agree to replace their weapons before further competition.
Norman Yarvin
>Many years ago, during the (Montreal?) Olympic Pentathalon event, a Russian
>was disqualified for having an excessively custom grip. I believe the
>offenders name was "Onuschenko".
>
>Dan DeChaine (an acquaintance who was an armorer for the US olympic team) got
>to examine the grip. A piezo switch, a little battery and a custom IC to put
>a spike on a loop of wire that surrounded one of the tip wires and created
>an inductive spike large enough to trigger the scoring machine.
Just one loop of wire? I'd imagine there to be a large coil. On the other
hand, perhaps making a corona and subsequently having a 10cm long arc of
plasma leap from his tip to his opponent would have been a little too
obvious.
On a related topic:
At the Aberdeen Proving Ground Ordnance Museum, they have a sample of a
Japanese pistol grip. That is to say, a katana with a 7mm Nambu automatic
built into the handle.
Primitive illustration:
\ \
\ \ <-------blade
\ \
\ \
\ \/
\_/%
=====/=%%%
(_'%%% <---- grip
^ %%%
| %%%
| %%%
|
barrel of pistol
The weapon on display was captured during WW2. It is thought to be the only
one of its kind.
--
Norman Yarvin yar...@cs.yale.edu
"Honesty is the rarest commodity in this university."
- V. I. Fabrikant, (ex-)Concordia U.
Pamela Catherine Forman
replicas of a setup where it looked like an early pistol was mounted
on a short sword. No doubt this was way-back-when when you got one
shot at best (if it didn't blow your own hand off) and then had to go
in and kill the guy with your sword if you missed (or even if you
didn't).
I want to collect cane-swords but what I'd really like to get my hands
on is a Poacher's Cane. This is a normal looking cane that has room
in it for one shotgun shell. Quite the handy little toy!
Anyone seen one?
Patricia A White -- Oxford University Press -- MIS
>In article 46...@rock.concert.net, pen...@rock.concert.net (Patricia A White -- Oxford University Press -- MIS) writes:
>>Is it simply a matter of different proportions or is nationalism
>>really on the rise? Will the US come up with a pistol grip that
>>automatically flicks if you pull the trigger. ;-)
>
>Many years ago, during the (Montreal?) Olympic Pentathalon event, a Russian
>was disqualified for having an excessively custom grip. I believe the
>offenders name was "Onuschenko".
Description of subversive technique deleted.
Okay. I may have opted to watch that 30 Years of Bond that was showing on
TBS this past weekend but I did catch about two full seconds of some
Inspector Gadget Xmas special. I have to admit that Inspector Gadget
was more on my mind when I referred to an automatic flicker. But, hey,
I'll be the first to admit that I'd love a Q-gadget for xmas (I'd pass
on that weapon if I could get the Lotus Esprit that doubles as a
submarine! ;-)
-Patricia
adel...@kentvm.kent.edu
>any other types) of pistol grips?
the Belgian being better for/ shaped for up and down motion, while the Visconti
was offset and better for circular motion. I prefer the Visconti, but my foil
grips are small and no one else has ever been able to use them. I've heard
some complaints about the large ridge across the Visconti (right between the
3rd and 4th fingers) but I've also seen said ridge filed off/down to make a
more comfy grip.
-anne
(adel...@kentvm.kent.edu)
William Nyden
>In article <ellert.7...@ds2.uh.cwru.edu> ell...@ds2.uh.cwru.edu (Ed Ellert) writes:
>
>(good points of using a french in epee deleted.)
>
>>reach by a few inches.
>
>
>It is absolutely legal to hold a french grip any way you want as long
>as you have your hand behind the bell guard. You can hold it by the
>pommel. You can change the grip in prime. You can hold it back on
>the pommel and use your forefinger as a guide. All of this is legel.
>
>can only be held in one way. It must also be designed so that the
>thumb is a certain distance from the bell guard (I think 1/2 inch) and
>no more.
>
>The flexibility given to the changing of hand positions is why the few
>top level fencers who use french's do so. At least this has been my
>experience.
>
>
>Greg
The rules also state that the weapon cannot be converted to a throwing
weapon. Most directors interpret this to mean that one may not shift
one's grip from the forward part of the handle to the pommel during an
extension. I've seen touches disallowed by sharp directors; and the
decisions supported by the bout committee.
--
Bill Nyden | I do not officially represent anyone
( ny...@wdl1.wdl.loral.com ) | other than myself on this network...
SSI DiveCon 0006DC | ...and sometimes not even me.
Nullum prandium gratuitum |
paul.t.dunfee
>In article <BypD...@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
> burd...@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Dakin Burdick) writes:
>> I always add a draw cut after a hit, because that is
>>the way to do damage to an opponent.
>
>To my mind you were born a few hundred years too late :-)
>
Jane Beckman
>IMHO, this opinion reflects the difference between the "recreationist" and
>the "competitive" fencers.
My opinion is that there is nothing wrong with "recreational"
fencing, those who do it for sheer enjoyment. What I find
annoying is an attitude that still pushes some hot-buttons.
Because I heard it in a different context, years back. When
there was also pressure not to be "controversial." Back then,
however, it concerned the forms female fencers were allowed to
practice, which was foil, period, exclaimation point. Inflexible
attitudes can force people out, which may be why new forms are
evolving outside the conventional fencing community. (In my
case, I was one of those who just didn't have the guts and
wherewithall, back when the conventional community wouldn't
let women learn sabre. I left and went elsewhere to seek
other forms, rather than continuing what was becoming a very
tiring and disheartening fight.)
>Fencing is a sport. Fencing is not duelling. The idea behind fencing is not
>to "damage an opponent," rather it is to score points using the rules.
I don't believe that anyone here is in this because we want to
damage opponents. Having a feel for origins, on the other
hand---well, frankly, this is one of the reasons I like
shinai and bokan. And I frankly always loathed electric
fencing, even though it has become pretty much standard. I
always was a rabble-rouser trouble maker, I guess. half ;-)
>We can argue in circular-sixes all we want, but modern electric fencing now has
>little room for those types of "controversies." Either you play the game well
>and are a successful competitive fencer, or you enjoy the sport for its
>recreational aspects and you do not impact the way the sport is played.
See my comments on women not being allowed to learn sabre,
back in the '70's, and why I left. I guess I hadn't
reconciled myself to being there purely for recreation, yet.
I wanted to be a competitive *female* sabre fencer. Maybe I'm
putting my own spin on this, but I heard a lot of this same
rhetoric, and was given the option of "like it or lump it."
And yes, I'm amazed that the old anger still has some very
bright and glowing edges, just under the surface.
On the other hand, I can argue that this is why I believe
fencing needs to spin off other "disciplines" where the rules
differ. Much the same way I prefer kung fu styles to karate
or judo or tai kwan do. The oriental martial arts community
continues to evolve, and I believe that it is possible that
conventional fencing may also, not in a linear fashion as it
has for the past century or so, but as the oriental arts have,
by developing different styles and disciplines.
I think we should let the "modern electric fencers" practice
"modern electric fencing" and evolve some new forms of
fencing, much the way aikedo recently evolved from the other
martial arts.
Not really trying to start a flame war...
--
Jilara [ja...@swdc.stratus.com]
"The field of pseudo-science hasn't progressed much in ten
years, except to gain access to the net." --from ca.earthquakes
Ryan Christian Nelson
>> burd...@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Dakin Burdick) writes:
>>> I always add a draw cut after a hit, because that is
>>> the way to do damage to an opponent.
I've ALWAYS hated people who do stuff like this. Unless I'm playing your
game WITH you, then I don't want you playing attilla the hun while I'm
trying to advance to the next pool.
I suppose that, in order to keep historical perspective, when playing chess,
when you capture your opponant's queen you always behead the piece?
Dakin Burdick
>>>> I always add a draw cut after a hit, because that is
>>>> the way to do damage to an opponent.
>
>I've ALWAYS hated people who do stuff like this. Unless I'm playing your
>game WITH you, then I don't want you playing attilla the hun while I'm
>trying to advance to the next pool.
Why not? Does it affect YOUR game in any way?
>I suppose that, in order to keep historical perspective, when playing chess,
>when you capture your opponant's queen you always behead the piece?
Nope. Obviously, I practice fencing for different reasons than you
do. Am I not allowed to play if I don't do things the way you want
me to? If I was really to practice finishing techniques on you
(the way I would want to), then I would:
draw cut
back spin kick to ankle
axe or side kick to ribs OR
follow you down as you fall (doing a correct breakfall of course) and
either do a knifehand to the neck (finisher) or a control move
rolling you onto your stomach and putting a jointlock on (add
a choke here for Judo afficianadoes).
BUT even if I want to do this, I don't because I'm not practicing
that stuff right now; I'm doing Fencing. I don't see that the draw
cut is not a part of fencing.
Dakin
burd...@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
PS: For those appalled at my apparent love of violence, please
remember that all those techniques would be faked or pulled, and
would not be done with someone who didn't know how to fall.
Liam O Forbes
> I suppose that, in order to keep historical perspective,
This in no way is related to the post I pulled it from.
How many of you feel there is or should be a connection between
what is now fencing and it's overall goal's (whatever you view those as)
and the historical use of the blade as a weapon? It seems many
'discussions' (and flames) come from comparisons of now and yesteryears.
Why?
Should we who use modern techniques (or techniques culled from
past fencers/shools) worry whether or not those techniques would actually
work for us in an actual dual? (Example: Is the whippy attack a valid
move? It probably would have scratched an unarmed opponent who then would
have a bit of time to set up an attack that could skewer you. In fact
would the whippy technique have even worked with the blades of the time?)
Or should we be concentrating on the competitive aspect of modern fencing
wherein the best is the guy who can win the most and biggest tournaments
as opposed to the guy who may be able to kill the first guy but not beat
him in a tournament style given actual duelling (or even battling)
weapons? E-mail and posted responces would be great. Who knows, I may
turn this into some sort of formal/informal paper someday. -Liam
fx...@camelot.acf-lab.alaska.edu
Patricia A White -- Oxford University Press -- MIS
I got into fencing about a year or two before I got into European
history but there are some interesting stories out there.
I had a professor who was intrigued by the duelling clubs that existed
(and are supposedly reappearing) in Central Europe. The premise is
basically the same as fencing but WITHOUT A MASK. The object is to
get a scar to prove your manhood and your class background. My prof
said the corresponding equivalent was an English school tie... and
he'd much prefer to wear a tie!
In 1936, the woman most favored to win the gold medal was a Jew who
had left Germany for the U.S. Hitler wanted to prove to the world how
great his country was and, since he wanted that gold medal to be
tallied up for Deutschland, this woman fenced for Germany. She won,
too. I believe she then went back to the States. (Although this
should be easy to verify in any book w/ Olympic stats, I haven't
checked it out. I just thought it was an amusing supposedly-true
anecdote.)
And with more WWII trivia... Himmler's protege, Reinhard Heydrich
(you know, the guy who came up with the Final Solution) was a sabre
fencer. He was in a competition one day and was so PO'ed at the
director's call, he broke his weapon and was disqualified. (Uh oh,
did I do something taboo by saying something nice about a director?)
That's all I can think of off-hand.
-Patricia
pen...@rock.concert.net
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Those who know that they are profound strive for clarity. Those who would
like to seem profound to the crowd strive for obscurity." --Nietzsche
Sarah Anne Baker
>I got into fencing about a year or two before I got into European
>history but there are some interesting stories out there.
>I had a professor who was intrigued by the duelling clubs that existed
>(and are supposedly reappearing) in Central Europe. The premise is
>basically the same as fencing but WITHOUT A MASK. The object is to
>get a scar to prove your manhood and your class background. My prof
>said the corresponding equivalent was an English school tie... and
>he'd much prefer to wear a tie!
True they are reappearing, I have talked to a couple of people who have
verified it. One person liked it, liked the thrill of the risk, but
others have considered it unwise. I think it is mostly the thrill that
draws.
>In 1936, the woman most favored to win the gold medal was a Jew who
>had left Germany for the U.S. Hitler wanted to prove to the world how
>great his country was and, since he wanted that gold medal to be
>tallied up for Deutschland, this woman fenced for Germany. She won,
>too. I believe she then went back to the States. (Although this
>should be easy to verify in any book w/ Olympic stats, I haven't
>checked it out. I just thought it was an amusing supposedly-true
>anecdote.)
Yes, I beleive her name was Helen Mayer (i think the last name may be
wrong). She was a very courageous person. There is quite a bit of
information on her if a person were to look.
>And with more WWII trivia... Himmler's protege, Reinhard Heydrich
>(you know, the guy who came up with the Final Solution) was a sabre
>fencer. He was in a competition one day and was so PO'ed at the
>director's call, he broke his weapon and was disqualified. (Uh oh,
>did I do something taboo by saying something nice about a director?)
Yeah for the director!
Jane Beckman
Funny thing, but I always actually appreciated the really
rough fencers. The guy who tried to put his foil through my
back from the front, "Mr. DoubleTouch" (who always added a
shuffle and *second* touch right after the first, just to
assure himself it was good), and various other Nasty
Customers. Why? They gave me *motivation* to get good.
Folks always said I fenced my best, when I was up against one
of these guys. If you think you might suffer an Unpleasant
Consequence, it gives you the extra motivation to parry, to
make sure you get *your* attack in before then start their
advance... Pain is an especially good motivator. It
certainly taught me the value of parrying, of keeping my guard
up in Chinese boxing, etc.
If you eliminate all the aspects along this line, do you get a
bunch of ho-hum fencers? I've always wondered, because I
always accelerated my skill level when I was fencing against a
somewhat menacing opponent. (I didn't say I *liked* it, but
it certainly kept me on my toes! And I liked the results.)
garry hodgson
How many of you feel there is or should be a connection between
what is now fencing and it's overall goal's (whatever you view those as)
and the historical use of the blade as a weapon? It seems many
'discussions' (and flames) come from comparisons of now and yesteryears.
Why?
Should we who use modern techniques (or techniques culled from
past fencers/shools) worry whether or not those techniques would actually
work for us in an actual duel?
Or should we be concentrating on the competitive aspect of modern fencing
wherein the best is the guy who can win the most and biggest tournaments
as opposed to the guy who may be able to kill the first guy but not beat
him in a tournament style given actual duelling (or even battling)
weapons?
Interesting question. Since I know little or nothing about fencing,
I don't have an answer, but thought I'd note that a similar dichotomy
is at the root of many disagreements in rec.martial-arts.
There are those who are primarily interested in the practical aspects
of street self-defense, who disdain tournaments and any techniques
which aren't maximally simple and economic. Others are more into the
"arts" part of martial arts. They may be more interested in development
of character, physical, or spiritual attributes. Others enjoy
the sporting aspects of martial arts competition. Still others
are in it for an ego trip, or a way to impress women, or make big bucks,
or whatever...
The majority incorporate several of these interests to some degree.
I would expect that would hold true here, as well. I do get the impression,
however, that fencing seems more oriented towards sport than real life
use, so perhaps the "useful in dueling" criteria is less important
in fencing than in other martial arts.
--
Garry Hodgson A slow winter day
AT&T Bell Labs A night like forever
ga...@alice.att.com Sink like a stone
att!alice!garry Float like a feather