|
|
1.1
What sports and martial arts comprise fencing?
The
Olympic sport of fencing is comprised of three weapons: foil,
epee, and sabre. All are fenced on along rectangular strip, and
electronic scoring aids are normally used to assist in the detection
of touches. The rules governing these three weapons are determined
by the FIE (Federation Internationale d'Escrime). Briefly, the
FIE weapons are described as follows:
Foil:
Descended from the 18th century small sword, the foil has
a thin, flexible blade with a square cross-section and a small
bell guard. Touches are scored with the point on the torso of
the opponent, including the groin and back. Foil technique emphasizes
strong defense and the killing attack to the body.
Epee:
Similar to the duelling swords of the late 19th century,
epees have stiff blades with a triangular cross section, and
large bell guards. Touches are scored with the point, anywhere
on the opponent's body. Unlike foil and sabre, there no rules
of right-of-way to decide which attacks have precedence, and
double hits are possible. Epee technique emphasises timing,
point control, and a good counter-attack.
Sabre:
Descended from duelling sabres of the late 19th century, which
were in turn descended from naval and cavalry swords, sabres
have a light, flat blade and a knuckle guard. Touches can be
scored with either the point or the edge of the blade, anywhere
above the opponent's waist. Sabre technique emphasises speed,
feints, and strong offense.
The
most popular of eastern fencing techniques is kendo, the Japanese
"Way of the Sword". Kendo is fought with a bamboo shinai, intended
to resemble a two-handed Japanese battle sword. Combatants wear
armour, and strike to the top or sides of the head, the sides
of the body, the throat, or the wrists. Accepted technique must
be observed, and judges watch for accuracy, power, and spirit.
See the Japanese Sword Arts FAQ for more information.
Other
martial arts that include elements of swordsmanship are:
-
Aikido -- self defence against armed and unarmed attackers.
Includes using and defending oneself against Japanese sword
techniques.
- Arnis,
Escrima, Kali -- Filipino stick and knife disciplines.
- Iaido
-- the Japanese art of the sword draw (also Iaijutsu and batto-jutsu,
more combat-oriented variants of the same).
- Jogo
do Pau -- a Portuguese stick-fighting discipline.
- Jojutsu
-- a Japanese stick-fighting discipline.
- Kalaripayitt
-- includes sword and weapons techniques from south India.
- Kenjutsu
-- the unadulterated Japanese martial art of the sword.
- Krabi
Krabong -- a Thai martial art that includes many sword forms.
- Kumdo
-- A Korean variant of Kendo.
- Kung-fu
-- a Chinese martial art that includes many sword techniques.
- La
Canne -- French Boxing, with a single-handed stick, using rules
similar to classical fencing.
- Le
Baton -- similar to La Canne, but with a longer, 2-handed stick.
- Maculele
-- Afro-Brazilian machete forms, related to Capoeira.
- Mensur
-- German fraternity "duelling", with schlagers.
- Modern
Pentathlon -- the "soldier's medley", a sport that recreates
demands placed on a pre-20th century military messenger: running,
swimming, shooting, equestrian jumping, and epee fencing.
- Pentjak
Silat -- Indonesian arts that include sword and stick forms.
- Single
Stick -- an ancestor of sabre fencing, fought with a basket-hilted
wooden rod.
- SCA
duello -- rapier-like fencing in the round, with off-hand techniques.
Additional info on the SCA can be found in the newsgroup rec.org.sca.
- SCA
heavy lists -- medieval-style heavy combat, with rattan weapons,
armour, and shields. Additional info on the SCA can be found
in the newsgroup rec.org.sca.
- Shinkendo
-- real-sword-oriented variant of Kendo.
- Tai
Chi -- another Chinese martial art that includes many sword
techniques.
|
|
|
1.2
How did fencing originate?
Swordfighting
as sport has existed since ancient Egypt, and has been practiced
in many forms in various cultures since then. Although jousting
and tournament combat was a popular sport in the European middle
ages, modern FIE fencing owes more to unarmoured dueling forms
that evolved from 16th century rapier combat.
Rapiers
evolved from cut-and-thrust military swords, but were most popular
amongst civilians who used it for self-defence and dueling. Rapiers
were edged, but the primary means of attack was the thrust. Rapier
fencing spread from Spain and Italy to northwest Europe, in spite
of the objections of masters such as George Silver who preferred
traditional cutting weapons such the English broad sword.
The
Spanish school, under masters such as Narvaez and Thibault, became
a complicated and mystical affair whose geometrical theories required
much practice to master. Italian masters like Agrippa and Capo
Ferro developed a more pragmatic school in the late 16th and early
17th centuries, introducing innovations such as linear fencing
and the lunge.
By
the 18th century, the rapier had evolved to a simpler, shorter,
and lighter design that was popularized in France as the small
sword. Although the small sword often had an edge, it was only
to discourage the opponent from grabbing the blade, and the weapon
was used exclusively for thrusting. The light weight made a more
complex and defensive style possible, and the French masters developed
a school based on defence with the sword, subtlety of movement,
and complex attacks. When buttoned with a leather safety tip that
resembled a flower, the small sword was known as le fleuret, and
was identical in use to the modern foil (still known as le fleuret
in French). Indeed, the French small sword school forms the basis
of most of modern fencing theory.
By
the mid-19th century, dueling was in decline as a means of settling
disputes, partially because victory could lead to a jail term
for assault or manslaughter. Emphasis shifted to defeating the
opponent without necessarily killing him, and less fatal dueling
forms evolved using the dueling sword, or epee de terrain, an
unedged variant of the small sword. Later duels often ended with
crippling thrusts to the arm or leg, and fewer legal difficulties
for the participants. This is the basis of modern epee fencing.
Cutting
swords had been used in bloodsports such as backsword prizefights
at least as far back as the 17th century. Broadswords, sabres,
and cutlasses were used extensively in military circles, especially
by cavalry and naval personell, and saw some dueling application
in these circles as well. Training was performed with wooden weapons,
and stick fighting remained popular until Italian masters formalized
sabre fencing into a non-fatal sporting/training form with metal
weapons in the late 19th century. Early sport sabres were significantly
heavier than the modern sport sabre and necessitated a strong
style with the use of moulinets and other bold movements. As with
thrusting swords, the sabre evolved to lighter, less fatal dueling
forms such as the Italian sciabola di terro and the German schlager.
Hungarian masters developed a new school of sabre fencing that
emphasized finger control over arm strength, and they dominated
sabre fencing for most of the 20th century.
Dueling
faded away after the First World War. A couple of noteworthy duels
were fought over disputes that arose during Olympic games in the
1920s, and there have been rare reports of sword duels since then.
In October 1997, the Mayor of Calabria, Italy, publicly challenged
certain Mafiosos to a duel. German fraternity dueling (mensur)
still occurs with some frequency.
The
first modern Olympic games featured foil and sabre fencing for
men only. Epee was introduced in 1900. Single stick was featured
in the 1904 games. Epee was electrified in the 1936 games, foil
in 1956, and sabre in 1988. Early Olympic games featured events
for Masters, and until recently fencing was the only Olympic sport
that has included professionals. Disruptions in prevailing styles
have accompanied the introduction of electric judging, most recently
transforming sabre fencing. Foil fencing experienced similar upheavals
for a decade or two following the introduction of electric judging,
which was further complicated by the new, aggressive, athletic
style coming out of eastern Europe at the time.
Women's
foil was first contested in the 1924 Olympic games, and Women's
epee was only contested for the first time in 1996, although it
has been part of the World Championships since 1989. Women's sabre
made its first appearance in the 1998 World Championships as a
demonstration sport.
|
|
|
1.3
How is modern fencing different from the "real thing"?
If the "real thing" is a duel with sharps, then aside from the
mortal danger and related psychological factors, the primary technical
difference is that the duelist can win with only a single good
touch, whereas the athlete has to hit his opponent as many as
15 times and so requires more technical and tactical depth. Many
inferior duelists have won their combats through sheer dumb luck.
This is far less likely in the sport. On the other hand, the sport
fencer takes many defensive risks that would be unthinkable in
a duel, since he has up to 15 "lives" to work with.
Some
purists equate "real" fencing with classical fencing, ie. the
prevalent styles of the traditional French and Italian schools
of fencing that predominated before electric fencing was popularized.
By comparison, modern fencing is more mobile and athletic, while
classical fencers were known for their more sophisticated phrasing
and bladework.
Modern
sabre fencing is performed with lightweight weapons and techniques
that do not translate well to military sabres and broadswords.
There is a certain amount of cross-over with lighter turn-of-the-century
dueling sabres, however.
Lastly,
it just seems apparent to some that sport fencing has evolved
away from its bloody origins. Tactically and psychologically,
it is true that the sport is a vastly different world from the
duel. The sport fencer's life is never in jeapordy, and with as
many as 15 hits needed to secure victory, there often isn't even
much figurative danger. Since the quality of a hit is immaterial,
fencers will naturally prefer an easy "wounding" hit over a difficult
"fatal" one, and so glancing hits will often win out over strong
thrusts. Technically, however, there have been few modern innovations,
and the sport fencer still possesses all the technical skills
necessary to fight a duel.
|
|
|
1.4
Which is the best weapon?
If
the question means "what kind of fencing is the most fun?" then
the answer is: it depends what aspects of fencing you enjoy the
most. If you are fascinated by technique, bladework, and tactics,
you will probably get a lot of satisfaction from foil fencing.
More visceral fencers who want to experience the adrenaline rush
of a fast, agressive sword fight will want to try some sabre.
Most epee fencers consider themselves practical, no-nonsense sword
fighters who rely on as few artificial rules as possible. Enthusiasts
of more medieval combat styles, involving armour and heavy weapons,
should consider kendo or the SCA heavy lists.
Perhaps
the question means "what is the best weapon for a beginner to
start with?" Foil is the most common starter weapon, and its skills
translate most easily to the other weapons. Sabre is less ideal
for students planning to try other weapons, due to the higher
cost of electric sabre gear, and the reduced use of the point.
Fencers who begin with epee may struggle with the concept of right-of-way
if they attempt to learn a second weapon later. However, if the
student is certain that they will stick with sabre or epee, then
there is no harm to starting with those weapons immediately.
On
the other hand, if the question means "which weapon is the most
deadly?" the answer will depend on a lot of factors, not the least
of which are the skill of the combatants, the presence of armour,
the military and cultural context, and the rules of the fight
(ie. is this a street fight, a gentlemen's duel, or open field
warfare?). Most swords are highly optimized for performance in
a specific environment, and will not perform well outside it.
Comparing two swords from completely different historical contexts
is therefore extremely difficult, if not downright silly.
Then
again, perhaps the question means "which style of fencing is the
most realistic?" It must be said that questions of realism have
little relevance to an activity that has almost no practical application
in the modern world other than sport and fitness. Historically,
however, epees have the closest resemblance (among FIE weapons)
to real dueling swords, and the rules closely parallel those of
actual duels (sometimes being fought to only a single point).
|
|
|
1.5
Is fencing going to be eliminated from the Olympics?
Olympic
fencing appears to be safe for the present, and was recently expanded
to include Women's Epee. Since the IOC perpetually changes its
roster of Olympic sports, nothing is certain in future games.
Although fencing is one of only four sports to have been involved
in every modern Olympic Games since their inception in 1896, it
has been mentioned in the past as one of the disciplines that
may be eliminated from future Games.
According
to Gilbert Felli, Sports Director of the International Olympic
Committee, the IOC plans to refine future games in various ways,
including:
- limiting
the number of athletes to 15000
- increasing
participation by women
- eliminating
"so-called artificial team events"
- limiting
sports of a similar type
- modernizing
the Olympic program
- encouraging
sports that provide a good television spectacle
Fencing
recently underwent numerous revisions to its rules and structure
to improve its value as a (televised?) spectator sport, perhaps
in the hopes of improving its Olympic viability.
|
|
|
1.6
Does it hurt?
Not
if done properly. Although executed with appreciable energy, a
good, clean fencing attack hurts no more than a tap on the shoulder.
The force of the blow is normally absorbed by the flex of the
blade. Reckless and overly aggressive fencers can occasionally
deliver painful blows, however. Fencing *is* a martial art, so
you should expect minor bruises and welts every now and again.
They are rarely intentional. The most painful blows tend to come
from inexperienced fencers who have not yet acquired the feel
of the weapon.
The
primary source of injury in fencing is from strained muscles and
joints. Proper warm-up and stretching before fencing will minimize
these occurences.
There
is a risk of being injured by broken weapons. The shards of a
snapped blade can be very sharp and cause serious injury, especially
if the fencer doesn't immediately realize his blade is broken,
and continues fencing. Always wear proper protective gear to reduce
this risk. FIE homologated jackets, britches, and masks are ideal,
as they are made with puncture-resistant fabrics such as ballistic
nylon. If you cannot afford good fencing wear, use a plastron
(half-jacket worn beneath the regular fencing jacket), and avoid
old and rusty masks. Always wear a glove that covers the cuff,
to prevent blades from running up the sleeve.
Fencing
is often said to be safer than golf. Whether or not this is true,
it is an extraordinarily safe sport considering its heritage and
nature.
|
|
1.7
How long does it take to become good?
There
is a saying that it takes two lifetimes to master fencing. By
the time anyone has come close to "mastering" the sport, they
are long past their athletic prime. Some may feel that this is
a drawback to the sport, but most fencers see it as a great strength:
fencing never becomes dull or routine; there are always new skills
to master, and new grounds to conquer.
In
times past, students often were not permitted to hold a weapon
until they had completed a year or two of footwork training. Modern
training programs rarely wait this long, and in many cases students
will be fencing (albeit badly) almost immediately. Novice-level
competition is feasible within 3-6 months. Competition at this
point should be viewed as a learning aid, not as a dedicated effort
to win.
Serious
attempts at competing will be possible after 2-3 years, when the
basic skills have been sufficiently mastered that the mind is
free to consider strategy. A moderate level of skill (eg. C classification)
can take a few years of regular practice and competition. Penetration
of the elite ranks (eg. world cup, international 'A' level) demands
three to five days per week of practice and competition, and usually
at least 10 years of experience.
Progress
can be faster or slower, depending on the fencer's aptitude, dedication,
quality of instruction, and the age at which they begin. Rapid
progress normally requires at least three practices per week,
and regular competition against superior fencers. With the increasing
emphasis on athleticism in the modern sport, fencers are getting
younger, and the champions are getting to the podiums faster.
|
|
1.8
What qualities make a good fencer?
All
of them.
On
the athletic side, speed and cardiovascular fitness rank foremost.
Other traits that can be exploited are strength (for explosive
speed, not heavy handedness), manual dexterity, and flexibility.
Quick reaction time is extremely important. On the mental side,
a fencer must be adaptable and observant, and have a good mind
for strategy and tactics. Psychologically, he or she must be able
to maintain focus, concentration, and emotional level-headedness
under intense conditions of combat.
As
far as body type goes, it is always possible to adapt your style
to take advantage of your natural traits. Even so, height seems
to be most useful in epee. Small or thin people are harder to
hit in foil. A long reach helps in epee, and long legs are an
asset in foil.
It
should be noted that left handers seem to enjoy a slight advantage,
especially against less experienced fencers. This may account
for the fact that lefties make up 15% of novice fencers, but close
to half of FIE world champions.
|
|
1.9
How much does it cost to get involved in fencing?
A beginner's dry fencing kit (cotton jacket, glove, dry weapon,
mask) will cost about US$100-200. A full set of FIE-spec competition
gear (FIE jacket, pants, mask, 2 weapons, wires, glove, shoes,
plastron, electric jacket) will run at least US$500-1000. FIE
equipment is recommended both in terms of safety and quality,
but clothing costs can be as much as halved by purchasing regular
cotton or synthetic knits. Do not expect such equipment to be
accepted at national or international levels of competition, however.
Used equipment can also be bought from retiring or upgrading fencers.
Club
costs vary widely, depending on the quality of the space, the
equipment provided to its members, and the amount of coaching
included in the club fees. Advanced lessons are usually purchased
separately.
|
|
1.10
How do I find a good fencing club?
Start
with your local Provincial or Divisional fencing association.
If you don't know how to find them, contact your national fencing
body (see section 3.1). Your national body may maintain a list
of known fencing clubs in the country. Otherwise, your local association
will be able to tell you about recognized clubs in your area.
Many universities and colleges also sponsor fencing clubs and
teams that will often accept non-students as members. You might
also check out courses or camps offered by local community centers.
Fencers
with Web access can find a list of U.S. fencing clubs at http://sarah.rsip.lsu.edu/fencing/fencing.clubs.html
or at http://www.usfa.org and a list of Canadian Fencing clubs
at http://www.fencing.ca/fra_dire.htm
Once
you have a list of potential clubs, you will want to evaluate
them and your needs. Desirable qualities vary, depending on your
skill level and what you want to get out of fencing. Look for
a good range of skill levels, decent equipment inventories, adequate
scoring sets, emphasis on your favourite weapon(s), a spirited
competition ethic, access to personal lessons, and a coach or
master with a good record (ie. successful students). If you still
have a choice, count yourself lucky, and choose the club that
makes you feel comfortable and relaxed without sacrificing the
athletic spirit that is essential to progress.
|
|
1.11
What kind of cross-training will help my fencing?
The
best training for fencing is fencing. Fencing development is asymmetrical
and few other sports use the same muscle groups, so this is a
difficult question whose answer depends largely on what aspect
of your training you really want to focus on.
Cardiovascular
fitness and leg strength always help, so anything that enhances
these will be beneficial. Cycling, swimming, aerobics, and skating
are good examples. Running, sprinting, soccer, basketball, and
similar sports can also be helpful, although some athletes dislike
the stresses they put on the knees. Racquet sports like tennis,
badminton, squash, racquetball, and table tennis are also excellent,
and will exercise your weapon arm in addition to your legs. Circuit
or period training (short bursts of high-heart-rate exercise followed
by brief recovery periods) has been put forward as particularly
relevant to the demands of fencing.
Many
martial arts have physical and mental demands that are similar
to fencing, and can improve both your fitness and your intellectual
approach to the sport. Technique and tactics very rarely translate,
however. Weight training can help, if done properly, but the athlete
must remember that flexibility, speed, and technique are more
important than raw strength--although proper strength training
(especially of the lower body and legs) can improve speed significantly.
Otherwise, endurance training should have priority over bodybuilding.
Some
fencers maintain that juggling improves reactions, hand-eye coordination,
and use of peripheral vision.
Many
coaches and fencers suggest occasional fencing or workouts with
your opposite hand, both to improve skill and balance your muscular
development.
|
|
1.12
How can I improve my technique without the help of a coach?
It
is very easy to acquire bad habits and poor technique if you do
not have the guidance of a knowledgable fencing master, coach,
or fellow fencer. If you are serious about improving your fencing,
quality coaching is always your best investment. However, a disciplined
fencer still has options if decent instruction is not available
on a regular basis.
Firstly,
a solid knowledge of fencing theory and regulations is a must.
Freelance fencers should study the FIE Rules of Competition and
a good fencing manual (see Section 3.3). They should test and
apply this knowledge by refereeing whenever possible. An appreciation
of good fencing style is also essential, so that they can readily
identify weaknesses in their own and other fencers' techniques.
Observation and comparison of skilled or accomplished fencers
will develop this ability. Training videotapes and videotapes
of high-level competitions (see Section 3.6) are also helpful
in this regard.
Freelance
fencers must be open-minded and critical of their own technique,
so that they can recognize problems before they develop into habits.
Discussion of their weaknesses with training opponents will help
them clarify the areas that need work. If possible, they should
videotape their bouts and review them to spot defects in their
tactics and technique.
Fencers
should seek out opponents who will strenuously test their weaknesses.
More experienced fencers, left-handers, those whose tactics are
particularly effective, and even those with annoying (ie. difficult)
styles should be courted on the practice strip. When fencing less
skilled opponents, fencers should restrict their tactics to a
small set that require practice, and resist the temptation to
open up if they should start losing.
The
opportunity to participate in footwork and line drills should
never be passed up. When they can find agreeable partners, fencers
can do more personalized drills to exercise their weak areas.
(Of course it is courteous to indulge the needs of your partners
when they in turn work on their own training.)
Lastly,
fencers should remain aware of their bout psychology and mental
state when fencing, and try to cultivate the mindset that in their
experience produces good fencing.
|
|
1.13
What is right-of-way?
Right-of-way
(or priority) is the set of rules used to determine who is awarded
the point when there is a double touch in foil or sabre (ie. both
fencers hit each other in the same fencing time). It is detailed
in the FIE Rules of Competition, Articles t.56-t.60 (old 232-237)
for foil, and t.75-t.80 (old 416-423) for sabre.
The
core assumption behind right-of-way is that a fencing bout is
always in one of three states:
- nothing
significant is happening
- the
fencers are conceiving and executing their actions simultaneously
- one
fencer is threatening, while the other is reacting to the threat
Since
no points will be scored in the first situation, we can ignore
it. In the second situation, the fencers' actions have equal significance,
and it is impossible to award a touch. Both touches will be annulled
and the bout will be resumed where it was stopped.
The
third situation is the important one. The first fencer to establish
a threat has priority (right-of-way), even if the other reacts
by making a counter-threat. Any hit from the fencer with priority
takes precedence over a hit from the other. The job of the referee
is to decide which fencer did not have right-of-way, and annul
his touch. If he cannot decide, the referee should abstain, annul
BOTH hits, and resume the action where it left off.
A
proper threat can be either an attack (see question 1.14), or
a "point in line" (see question 1.16) that is established before
the opponent attacks.
Right-of-way
is lost when the threat misses, falls short, is broken off, or
is deflected away from the target by a parry or other engagement
from the defender. The defender then has "right of attack" for
a split second; if he returns the threat immediately, he takes
over right-of-way and the tables have turned. If he hesitates,
however, it becomes a toss-up; the first fencer to establish a
threat will sieze the right-of-way anew.
The
right-of-way relationships between common fencing actions are
as follows:
- derobement
has right-of-way over attacks on the blade
- attacks
on the blade have right-of-way over the point in line
- point
in line has right-of-way over the attack
- the
simple attack has right-of-way over the stop-hit
- the
stop-hit has right-of-way over the renewal of the attack
- the
stop-hit in time has right-of-way over the compound attack
- the
riposte has right-of-way over the renewal of the attack
- the
counter-riposte has right-of-way over the renewal of the riposte
- the
remise of the attack has right-of-way over the delayed riposte
|
|
1.14
What constitutes an attack?
According
to Article t.7 (old 10) of the FIE rules of competition, "the
attack is the initial offensive action made by extending the arm
and continuously threatening the opponent's target."
A
threatening weapon is normally interpreted to be one that will
or could hit the opponent if no defensive action is taken. In
other words, a weapon threatens if it is moving towards the target
in a smooth, unbroken trajectory. This trajectory can be curved,
especially if the attack is indirect, compound, or involves a
cutting action. Hesitations and movements of the blade away from
the target will usually be perceived as a break in the attack
or a preparation of the attack.
One
common misconception is that a straight or straightening arm is
required to assert the attack. However, a straight arm is not
an attack, but a point-in-line. The attack begins when the arm
begins extending, not once it is fully extended. It is not even
necessary that the arm become fully straight, although that is
normal for attacks at medium and longer distances. Retraction
of the arm, however, will usually be interpreted as a break in
the attack.
Another
common misconception is that an attack does not threaten unless
the blade is aimed at the target. This is not generally true.
The definition of an attack is the same for cuts and thrusts,
so cuts and cut-like actions (including coupe's and "flicks")
must threaten while the blade is still out of line. Generally,
an attack threatens if it is moving towards the target as part
of a smooth, unbroken movement, regardless of where the point
is located when that movement begins.
Many
fencers are under the mistaken impression that a bent arm or out-of-line
point constitutes a preparation, and therefore that they can rightfully
attack into it. If the bent arm is extending and the out-of-line
point is moving towards the target, however, this assumption is
usually false under modern fencing conventions. A successful attack
on the preparation must clearly precede the opponent's initiation
of his final movement, or else arrive a fencing time ahead of
his touch.
Sabre
fencers must also consider Article t.75 (old 417) of the Rules
of Competition, which states when the attack must land relative
to the footfalls of a lunge, advance-lunge, (and fleche, historically).
Attacks that arrive after the prescribed footfall are deemed continuations,
and do not have right-of-way over the counter-attack. Sabre fencers
must also remember that whip-over touches can be interpreted as
remises, and not mal-pare's.
|
|
1.15
What constitutes a parry?
According
to Article t.7 (old 10) of the FIE Rules of Competition, "the
parry is the defensive action made with the weapon to prevent
the offensive action from arriving".
A
successful parry deflects the threatening blade away from the
target. It is normally not sufficient to merely find or touch
the opponent's blade; the fencer must also exhibit control over
it (although the benefit of the doubt usually goes to the fencer
making the parry). If the attacker must replace the point into
a threatening line before continuing, it is a remise (renewal
of the attack) and does not have right-of-way over the riposte.
However, if the parry does not deflect the blade, or deflects
it onto another part of the target, then the attack retains the
right-of-way (mal-pare' by the defender). In practice, very little
deflection is needed with a well-timed parry.
A
well-executed parry should take the foible of the attacker's blade
with the forte and/or guard of the defender's. This provides the
greatest control over the opponent's blade. In other cases the
parry can still be seen as sufficient if the attacking blade is
sufficiently deflected. In ambiguous cases, however, the benefit
of the doubt is usually given to the fencer who used his forte/guard.
For example, if a fencer attempts to parry using his foible on
his opponent's forte, it will often be interpreted in the reverse
sense (eg. counter-time parry by the attacker), since such an
engagement does not normally result in much deflection of the
attack. A foible to foible parry could potentially be seen as
a beat attack by the opposing fencer depending on the specifics
of the action.
At
foil, the opponent's blade should not only be deflected away from
the target, but away from off-target areas as well. An attack
that is deflected off the valid target but onto invalid target
can still retain right-of-way.
At
sabre, the opponent's blade need only be deflected away from valid
target, since off-target touches do not stop the phrase. Cuts
are considered parried if their forward movement is checked by
a block with the blade or guard. Contact with the blade or guard
may be interpreted as a parry, even if a whip-over touch results.
Avoiding whip-over touches altogether requires exceptionally clean
and clear parries.
At
epee, a good parry is simply any one that gains enough time for
the riposte. Opposition parries and binds are commonly used, since
they do not release the opponent's blade to allow a remise.
|
|
1.16
What constitutes a point-in-line?
According
to Article t.10 of the FIE Rules of Competition, the in-line position
is that "in which [the fencer's] sword arm is straight and the
point of his weapon threatens his opponent's valid target."
Properly done, the arm should be extended as straight as possible,
and form a more or less continuous line with the blade, with the
point aimed directly at the high lines of the target. Excessive
angulation at the wrist or fingers negates the point-in-line.
Superfluous movement of the point also risks negating the line,
especially in sabre. Derobements/trompements, however, are permitted.
In
foil and sabre, the point-in-line has priority over attacks that
are made without first taking the blade. With these weapons (but
not with epee) it is forbidden to assume the point-in-line position
before the command to fence has been given. In sabre, a point-in-line
that hits with the edge is passe'; if a touch is registered with
the edge, it is properly analyzed as a remise or counter-attack,
except in the case of a derobement.
There
are wildly differing opinions on the role of the feet in the point-in-line.
Some claim that any movement forward or backward invalidates the
point-in-line, while others claim that only forward movement obviates
the line. These interpretations are incorrect. It was widely held
to be an official ruling that steps or jumps forward or backward
maintained the point-in-line, but lunges or fleches obviated it.
This ruling, apparently based on a directive from the FIE, was
official policy in the USFA for a while. However, the rulebook
does not proscribe any footwork movements at all, and the current
interpretation holds that footwork, even a lunge or fleche, has
absolutely no effect on the priority of the point-in-line.
|
|
1.17
What is the scoop on "flicks" and "whips"?
Flicks
are whip-like attacks that can score against very oblique and
even concealed targets. Sometimes thought of as a recent corruption,
flicks actually have a long history that stems from coupe' (the
cut-over) and epeeists efforts to throw their points around the
bell. Properly executed and judged, they are effective and beautiful
attacks; poorly executed and judged, they can be painful and annoying.
One
common criticism of the flick is that it would cause minor injury
with a real weapon. The obvious, if flippant, response to this
is not to flick if you're trying to kill someone with a real weapon.
Another
common criticism is that flicks are difficult to defend against.
One must simply remember to parry them as if they were cuts, not
thrusts (using auxiliary parries like tierce, quinte, and elevated
sixte). The flick is also highly sensitive to distance, and a
well-timed break in the measure will cause it to land flat.
A
third criticism is that flicks are usually given the priority,
even though the attack often begins with the point aimed at the
ceiling. However, the definition of an attack (see question 1.14)
says nothing about where the point is aimed, only what it is threatening.
It is normally true that an attack that scores must have threatened
in at least its final tempo, no matter where it was pointed at
the start of that tempo.
Sabre
fencing has suffered from a related and more serious scourge,
the whip-over. In this case, the foible bends around the opponent's
blade or guard following a parry, to contact the target and register
a touch. The scoring machines attempt to reduce these false touches
by blocking hits within a certain time window following weapon
contact, but this is of limited effectiveness and also has the
unfortunate effect of blocking the occasional attack through the
blade. Referees have tried to help out by analyzing whip-over
touches as remises, but they still score over composed or delayed
ripostes. The FIE has been considering and trying various possible
fixes, including varying the timeouts and mandating stiffer sabre
blades.
|
|
1.18
What are the latest rule changes?
The
FIE Rules of Competition were completely revised for the 1998
season. Although the wording of the rules is for the most part
similar, the article numbers and locations of particular rules
are completely different.
DISCIPLINE:
- Leaving
the piste with one or both feet earns a verbal caution for first
offense, and group 1 penalties thereafter. (1998)
- In
sabre, any action in which the rear leg is crossed in front
of the fore is a group 1 penalty, with the hit annulled. A correctly
executed touch from the opponent is still valid. (1994)
- Salute
of opponent, referee, and audience is mandatory at the start
and end of the bout. Failure to do so is a group 3 penalty (if
by one fencer at start of bout), group 4 penalty (if by both
fencers at start or end of bout), suspension (if by loser at
end of bout), or annullment of hit (if by winner at end of bout).
(1994)
EQUIPMENT:
- 800N
underarm protector (plastron) is required in addition to the
regular 800N jacket. (1994)
- Clothing
may be of different colours, but those on the body must be white
or light-coloured. (1994)
- Minimum
width of the strip is now 1.5 metres. (1994)
- The
proposed rule extending the foil target to include the bib has
been dropped.
BOUT
FORMAT:
- Coin
flip to determine winner in the event of a tie shall be made
at end of regulation time, and one additional minute shall be
fenced. The winner of the coin toss shall be recorded as the
victor if the bout is not resolved by sudden death in the extra
minute. (1994)
- No
more 1-minute warning, although fencers can request the time
remaining at any normal halt in the action. (1994)
- Fencers
shall be placed at the en garde lines at the commencement of
each 3-minute period in 15-touch elimination bouts. (1994)
SCORING:
- When
time runs out, scores are recorded as is, rather than elevating
the winner to 5 and the loser by an equivalent amount. (1997)
- Following
pools, fencers are sorted by V/M, HS-HR, HS. (1997)
- In
sabre, simultaneous attacks that both arrive on the valid target
do not result in any points being scored. (1994)
- In
the team relay, the first pair of fencers fence to 5 points
or 4 minutes, whichever comes first. The next pair continue
from this score up to 10 points within 4 minutes, and so on
up to a total score of 45 points. (1995?)
|
| ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
Author: Morgan Burke (morgan@sitka.triumf.ca)
Contributors: special thanks to Suman Palit, Guy Smith, Greg
Dilworth, Kevin Taylor, Eric Anderson, Blaine Price, Steve Hick,
Kim Moser, David Glasser, Bryan Mansfield, Donald Lane, Ann McBain,
Hagen Lieffertz, Mark C. Orton, Mike Buckley, Dirk Goldar, Scott
Holmes, Arild Dyrseth, David Airey, Renee Mcmeeken, Marc Walch,
Eric Speicher, Anton Oskamp, Bernard Hunt, Francis Cordero, Kent
Krumvieda, David Van Houten, John Crawford, Kim Taylor, Brendan
Robertson, Ivo Volf, Kevin Wechtaluk, Frank Messemer, Benerson Little,
Mark Crocker, Eileen Tan, Mark Tebault, Tim Schofield, Peter Gustafsson,
Kevin Haidl, Peter Crawford, Camille Fabian, Matt Davis, Fernando
Diaz, Anders Haavie, Rüdiger Schierz, Todd Ellner, George Kolombatovich,
Padraig Coogan, Steve Lawrence, Bryan J. Maloney, Colin Walls (C)
1993-99 Morgan Burke Permission is granted to copy and distribute
all or part of this document for non-profit purposes. |
|
|