PDA

View Full Version : Slough Open



The Little Un
-10th January 2004, 09:53
Can anybody enlighten me about this tournament.
How open is it?
What are the Kit regulations?
I anybody entering it?

Best wishes,
Judy

Rdb811
-10th January 2004, 14:54
It's an Open so anyone can enter (over 13 and full BFA membership) - you standard kit (ie. jacket, plastron,beeches etc) but not 800N - and a spare weapon / body wire (although most fencers are pretty generous about the rules when it comes to kit failures). Same applies for any other Open.

It's one of the bigger ones on the calendar. The men's epee is the last qulifying event prior to the Epee Club Trophy (an international nowheld in Rickmansworth, formerly the 'Martini'), so pretty serious.. The sabre though is pretty small, as it's imediately after the Corble Cup (another international, now held in Brentwood or Brentford - the one in Essex)

And it's held in Bracknell. Short cab, probably walkable from the station.

I'll be there or the epee. I might just do the sabre to keep my hand in.

Boo Boo
-11th January 2004, 15:49
For all women's events it doesn't tend to be the strongest of Open competitions.

Although it may be different for Women's Foil at Slough this year - I believe that, unusually, it doesn't clash with any Senior/Junior International competitions this year...

Boo

The Little Un
-11th January 2004, 21:05
Dear Boo Boo,
I know what you mean about field sizes. For the South East Regional today there were ten in Epee and nine in the Sabre, after our captain agreed to stay on and fight Sabre. I was happy with my day though because though I did not do great, the women there were all of good quality.

Best wishes,
Judy

Boo Boo
-11th January 2004, 22:44
Field sizes are not hugely small for women's foil and epee (48 competitor in each last year). Women's sabre was pretty small (26 competitors).

Its that the NIF (i.e. number of fencers ranked in the top 10, 20 and 50) for each of the women's events is often not as high as some of the other Open competitions).

Still, it is a good event to do - you should enjoy it :).

Women's foil and sabre on Saturday, Women's epee on Sunday. So you could do a couple of events, if keen enough.

Information at http://www.slough-open.com/

Boo

Rdb811
-11th January 2004, 23:14
Originally posted by The Little Un
For the South East Regional today there were ten in Epee and nine in the Sabre,

Not suprising if it's held in Canterbury just after the Christmas break - I don't have the run up to get anyone organised for it.

Checking the results last year for somebody else - the Slough WF NIF count didn't seem too bad.

Exgeordielass
-12th January 2004, 09:17
Originally posted by Boo Boo
For all women's events it doesn't tend to be the strongest of Open competitions.

I believe that, unusually, it doesn't clash with any Senior/Junior International competitions this year...

Boo

It does clash with the British Youth Epee and Sabre though which is the same weekend. We usually do the Slough, it's a good local competition but I think we will be giving it a miss this year, though son did toy with the idea of doing the Slough on the Saturday then racing up to Stoke for the Sunday event. Usually reasonable standard of fencers entering it's not one of the weakest opens either.

Exgeordielass
-12th January 2004, 09:19
Originally posted by The Little Un
Dear Boo Boo,
I know what you mean about field sizes. For the South East Regional today there were ten in Epee and nine in the Sabre, after our captain agreed to stay on and fight Sabre. I was happy with my day though because though I did not do great, the women there were all of good quality.

Best wishes,
Judy

Only 11 in the men's sabre but 28 in the men's foil. Do you know who won the ladies sabre, Judy?

The Little Un
-12th January 2004, 13:44
I do not know what her name is, I do know that Laura Callagan came second, though as my team captain I would know that. I was personally happy with my Sabre perfromance considering that the last time I trained or fought in Sabre was twenty-five years ago.

Best wishes,
Judy

PM1
-12th January 2004, 18:44
Slough is the final domestic ranking event for Male cadet epee before the Worlds, so expect quite a few there. The bummer is that it's the day after the BYC epee, and he wants to do that one, too. Oh, and the BYC sabre.

Choices, choices.....

Chris Morgan
-14th January 2004, 11:46
Tell me about it PM1 i got the BYCs on the sat then slough the next day.. why couldnt i pick a less complicated sport?!

Marcos
-27th January 2004, 15:19
well there are a few of us coming over from Ireland to fence in Slough including myself - so, see you a week Saturday

:fight: :chat2:

Exgeordielass
-27th January 2004, 15:30
Originally posted by Marcos
well there are a few of us coming over from Ireland to fence in Slough including myself - so, see you a week Saturday

:fight: :chat2:

Hope to see you there Saturday, Marcus. C. has now decided to enter the Slough on the Saturday, So we will be hot footing it up to Stoke for the BYC Sabre on the Sunday. Very considerate of Slough to have the sabre event on the Saturday.:rambo:

hokers
-27th January 2004, 15:45
Its getting a bit silly the number of competitions in consecutive weeks at the moment. I've done 4 so far this year and its only January. Next two weekends are booked (Surrey and Slough) and there's options for the last two weekends in Feb as well! But then a massive gap, maybe Invicta, then nothing till Ridley Martin in May.

Marcos
-27th January 2004, 15:50
gets crazy doesn't it - the amount I spent last year travelling to comps I could have gone for 2 weeks in the Maldives...

London to Stoke and back again is a fair old journey - but Chris is in flying form at the mo


btw...can we go to that Pizza place again, Hokers? the one with the pretty waitress...:girl1:

Exgeordielass
-28th January 2004, 11:48
Originally posted by Marcos
[B]gets crazy doesn't it - the amount I spent last year travelling to comps I could have gone for 2 weeks in the Maldives...

London to Stoke and back again is a fair old journey - but Chris is in flying form at the mo




Thanks Marcos, fortunately we have a hotel booked in Stoke for the Saturday night so will travel straight on from Slough. Journey should only be 2 and a half hours (according to Auto Express). We'll just have to find somewhere to eat on the way so no visit to the good Italian in Stoke this time around. Hotel says we can arrive as late as we like which is pretty civilised of them!

:rambo:

Gav
-28th January 2004, 12:10
Looks like I'll miss the lot of you lot. I'll be fencing on the Sunday with the rest of the boring Epeeists.

hokers
-28th January 2004, 12:14
Originally posted by Marcos

btw...can we go to that Pizza place again, Hokers? the one with the pretty waitress...:girl1:

lol

Have to be careful not to have too much pizza else you'll end up :sumo: for the competition. Looking forward to it anyway

Rdb811
-28th January 2004, 17:40
If anybody is going the Men's Sabre and passing my way (Streatham) I'd be very grateful for a lift.

(There's club mate in Mitcham who would also apprecaite a lift for the Women's Foil)

Dave Hillier
-31st January 2004, 15:06
Does any one know who will be running the equipment stall at the slough?

Rdb811
-31st January 2004, 16:10
Leon Paul

srb
-6th February 2004, 14:28
Originally posted by Gav
Looks like I'll miss the lot of you lot. I'll be fencing on the Sunday with the rest of the boring Epeeists.

See you Sunday

srb

hokers
-7th February 2004, 18:01
Had a good day today in MS, did MUCH better than last year. Made L16, knocked out by NLSC Sabreur who was seeded 1, but gave him a run for his money ;)

Marcos was about 19th and also showing good improvement on last year, EGL's son got L16 before the BYCs tomorrow.

How did it finish, anyone got the final results?

hokers

UglyBug
-7th February 2004, 22:08
1st Neil Hutch
2nd Aitken
Joint 3rd Adam Waller, Clive Galliano
L8 Simon Donald, Steve Moore, don't know the others

Well done Hokers - what about some new breeches to celebrate?! :grin:

Rdb811
-7th February 2004, 22:18
Women's Foil was still going when I leftat 7ish.

UglyBug
-8th February 2004, 10:10
WF had Claire Bennett in the final with Lois Chang and Dom Stowell battling it out in the semi. Dom was ahead when I left, but it was still quite early in the bout.

What happened to Little Un? She didn't turn up for the WS. (Which Emma Hynes won again)

hokers
-8th February 2004, 11:41
Originally posted by UglyBug
1st Neil Hutch
2nd Aitken
Joint 3rd Adam Waller, Clive Galliano
L8 Simon Donald, Steve Moore, don't know the others

Well done Hokers - what about some new breeches to celebrate?! :grin:

Thought it would be those two first and second, probably a close final I expect?

Cant believe how many people are going on about my breeches, which are a bit grey after getting in a dark wash by mistake! That's it I'm off to bleach them!

Boo Boo
-8th February 2004, 18:38
Women's Foil:
- 1st Dominique Stowell
- 2nd Clare Bennett
- 3rd Hannah Bryars
- 4th Lois Chang
- Last 8 was Anna Bentley, Kate Gardner, Miasie Jenyon and Jo Walton.

Women's Foil had 85 fencers in it - the largest I have seen at an open for YEARS! Have a foil list of results for WF, so if anyone has a specific question...

When I left 5pm tonight, Men's foil was down to the L4, Men's epee was still on the L64!!! Long night for some ahead...

Men's Foil:
- Still in (L4): Dave Mansour, Sam Johnson, Phil West and, I believe, Mikey Barnett
- Out (L8): Matt MacKenzie, Kola Abidugon, Steve Glaister and, I believe, Alistair Brooke.

Boo

UglyBug
-8th February 2004, 21:10
Peter Wright invoked the passivity rule while refereeing a WS L16 fight yesterday - the two girls were step-lunging together repeatedly and neither would do anything else. I can understand why he did it - otherwise, they would still be there now - but surely the rule is only for when people won't attack. These girls were perfectly happy to attack repeatedly, they just wouldn't break their timing. Is this a legal application of the rule?

Other question - isn't Dom Stowell still under 16? Were the other top senior foilists getting results like hers at that age?

Marcos
-9th February 2004, 08:27
what is the passivity rule??

yeah, happy with my day's fencing which was miles better than last year.

Didn;t get the rub of the green in the L32 - presiding was fine, just had a shade of bad luck which the other guy took advantage of. Good bout tho.

Women's foil had a great entry - unfortunately that meant the MS from L64 onwards was down to 2 pistes which really dragged the day on.

ps hokers, not only are your breechs grey - they...er...leave little to the imagination? best get some new ones.

Epeecurean
-9th February 2004, 09:52
Passivity? That sounds more like repetitive activity! Don't think there is a warning for that...

Rhubarb
-9th February 2004, 10:12
I wouls suggest that, on the reported'facts' the referee does not know the concept or execution of the passivity rule and he/she should consult either Keith(smith) or Ian(hunter) to be put right on it.:cool:

randomsabreur
-9th February 2004, 12:04
I suspect, that given his profession as a lawyer, he will be able to find a possible interpretation of the rules that will mean that the interpretation of the rules is justifiable. What I heard him say to the fencers was that neither of them was attempting to gain priority so he was calling passivity. Neither of them was doing anything but step lunge, there was not even a mutual attempt to do something different at the same time

If I had been in his position, I would probably have run away after the fight and got very very drunk,and probably never again reffed WS. I have been guilty of a similar type of fencing in the past, and eventually succomed to exhaustion so tried something and lost. Will never do it again, while such fights happen, men will continue to abuse WS and will refuse to referee.

Incidentally, WS results

1 Emma Hynes
2 Shelley Gosher
3 Roz Hull
3 Jane Hutchison (good day for vases for the Hutchisons)
L8, can't remember the Order: Nicole Abdul, Claire Monger, Nicola Gathercole

I was dead pleased with my fight against Emma, never got so close before 15-14, went into the fight with the memory of a painful defeat 15-5 or so at the Shropshire, so my main aim was to get more than that!

colliebeast
-9th February 2004, 12:31
Originally posted by UglyBug
Peter Wright invoked the passivity rule while refereeing a WS L16 fight yesterday - the two girls were step-lunging together repeatedly and neither would do anything else. I can understand why he did it - otherwise, they would still be there now - but surely the rule is only for when people won't attack. These girls were perfectly happy to attack repeatedly, they just wouldn't break their timing. Is this a legal application of the rule?

Other question - isn't Dom Stowell still under 16? Were the other top senior foilists getting results like hers at that age?


right i think i should said one of the girls in question was me. It's true there was repeated togethers this happend through out the fight but espically at 14-14 (fairly understandably). I was not perfectly happy to carry on doing this, i just had not fought a tactical fight and by this time i had mainly caught her out on tempo, and haden't tried out more things at an earlier point. I had tried moving several times but had been hit on each. She never moved backwards, which is a fair enough tactic because it was working. It was therefore, i feel approprate for something to be done. In the long run it did lead to me losing this fight, but the decision was made, and I as one of the fencers in question feel it was fair.

Australian
-9th February 2004, 12:55
Originally posted by colliebeast
right i think i should said one of the girls in question was me. It's true there was repeated togethers this happend through out the fight but espically at 14-14 (fairly understandably). I was not perfectly happy to carry on doing this, i just had not fought a tactical fight and by this time i had mainly caught her out on tempo, and haden't tried out more things at an earlier point. I had tried moving several times but had been hit on each. She never moved backwards, which is a fair enough tactic because it was working. It was therefore, i feel approprate for something to be done. In the long run it did lead to me losing this fight, but the decision was made, and I as one of the fencers in question feel it was fair.

thats not the point tho - the rules in this case were applied incorrectly.

Boring fencing is not passive fencing

NLSC Sabreur
-9th February 2004, 16:58
Originally posted by hokers
Thought it would be those two first and second, probably a close final I expect?


No, not particularly. When Neil is near his best he's a lot better than my near best. I fenced well, controlled some of the points driving him back and got away with a couple neatly timed parry/ripostes and the odd making him fall short. Despite being a couple of inches taller than Neil his athleticism gives him huge reach in his attacks negating my reach advantage over most people. Because he can be wild I can sometimes break down his timing and move into to hit him on his preparation but not on Saturday. It was good fight I maybe gave away 3 soft hits to his 1 and the rest were mostly quality.

I had predicted that victory would go to Neil or my clubmate Santiago Vila Moreno (aka Santi). After his losing DE, I convened a kangeroo court (which as NLSC Chairman I claim the right to do) and promptly sentenced him to 100 press ups. Sentence is to be served Thursday night.

randomsabreur
-9th February 2004, 17:09
As an interested spectator (winner was my opponent provided I won my next fight) I would say that something had to be done. I understand the tactical reasons for not going back and trying stuff if it hasn't worked but there has to be a limit to how long a sabre bout can last. Although if the fight had gone on a little longer, it would have made my next match easier (I doubt either or the two fencers involved would have had much energy remaining and would have been likely to just stand there and let me hit them, if they could actually stand at all, and it seemed to me that the winner did not have much left as it was) most people at a fencing competition want to get home at a moderately sensible time, and as the WS from the L32 was done on only 2 pistes (ditto the MS from 64) I'd had a fair amount of time between the poules and my first DE (Bottom of 2nd page) and between my first and 2nd DEs . As it was the WS did not finish until about 7:30 or so.

Frankly I think that an actual coin toss giving a fencer priority is far better than a metaphorical coin toss by the referee saying something along the lines of "&%?* it" and arbitrarily splitting a together perhaps because he would prefer to lift his left hand! I am not accusing anyone of doing this, but there are times when I feel that it could be very tempting, just to get the fight over and done with. Tossing a coin is at least a 50/50 chance and I'd take that over an arbitrary decision any day!

In my opinion, this issue should hopefully cause the BFA or FIE to issue guidance to refs on what to do in this scenario. Either to direct sabre refs to use a stopwatch in all fights and cause organisers to go mad in attempting to provide them, or to allow refs to use their prerogative to estimate the time elapsed (some rule, applies where the timing device is reset accidentally or mid period, or fails to function. (Stuck buttons on many competition provided stopwatches is a common problem, and many a time the thing either refuses to start or to stop!)

Anyone got any suggestions on what should be done in the future?

In my opinion, after 20 simultaneous actions executed only by a step lunge from the play, where there have been no attempted actions like parry or make fall short done by both fencers at the same time, and the referee has not abstained where there was time but they weren't sure who's it was, (and no hits have been scored) (goes without saying I suppose but would exclude simultaneous where there is a block out) there should be a rule that kicks in saying that the old priority rule (3 simultaneous then toss a coin, winner gets priority, if there is another simultaneous the person with priority gets the hit, then priority is reversed to the other fencer with the same result) This would either force people to sort out means of doing other things from the simultaneous, or curtail a fight which was getting ridiculous.

I would justify this on several grounds: 1) Fencers are not as exhausted. 2) Fewer major bruising issues (constant simutaneous, hits tend to get harder as fencers get more desperate) 3) Fights are not so ridiculously boring so men's sabreurs stop despising WS so much, and may actually be easier to convince to referee. 4) Fights are limited in length stopping referees getting bored and splitting stuff arbitrarily (perhaps there is a case for reducing the no of simutanous required to trigger the rule to 10?)

I won't take offence if anyone criticises this so feel free!

Apols for the length of this post, if only I took this much effort with my homework

UglyBug
-9th February 2004, 17:19
Originally posted by colliebeast
right i think i should said one of the girls in question was me. It's true there was repeated togethers this happend through out the fight but espically at 14-14 (fairly understandably). I was not perfectly happy to carry on doing this, i just had not fought a tactical fight and by this time i had mainly caught her out on tempo, and haden't tried out more things at an earlier point. I had tried moving several times but had been hit on each. She never moved backwards, which is a fair enough tactic because it was working. It was therefore, i feel approprate for something to be done. In the long run it did lead to me losing this fight, but the decision was made, and I as one of the fencers in question feel it was fair.

I thought it was fair too - I saw most of it - I was just wondering what it said in the rule book about that sort of thing. As for WS - it's not just particular to that, I think it was Peter's luck. He went on to ref a L8 fight in the MS where the same thing happened! Don't think he went as far as invoking the passivity rule. I didn't mean to start off such lengthy discussions - just me thinking out loud really!!

PM1
-9th February 2004, 18:46
WELL - WE had a knackering and very mixed w/e, one that didn't go as we thought it might but hey !! brill in the end.

BYC's a dissapointment for boy(but not us - he went down fighting and still finished 5th), but Slough was a revelation: talk about fighting on adrenalin......late start, 3 hours between end of poules and L128(bye thru L256), about an hour to L64, and he gets thru that. THEN he gets thru L32, and L16, and ends up 8th. He almost didn't get his 10 mins between each of his last 4 fights, but going awol sometimes helps.......loads of water, infrequent isotonic and scooby snacks, half a tuna sandwich AFTER he'd finished fencing...lots of support from certain bods (thank you)....and a 4 hour drive home with a motorway dinner in there somewhere.

And a lovely long chat with Boo, and Brett and a Hi to Gav and rdb, 3CT, 2 happyhippos, Pinky etc. I obviously missed a load of you, but there we go. Got CONNED by Barry at BYC's, but he's a nice fella......I'm about to give him the chance to prove it.....

It was some xperience being in the same hall as some mighty high powered MF plus WE and ME. VERY audience worthy, I thought....

I guess all who gave their email addresses no have the results. If not, I'll willingly pm them - I guess they might be on the site now anyway.:grin: :grin:

Boo Boo
-9th February 2004, 19:52
Originally posted by PM1
about an hour to L64, and he gets thru that. THEN he gets thru L32, and L16, and ends up 8th.

Well done Richard - what a great result (am sure that the Slough result more than made up for the BYC disappointment...)! And well done PM1 - for surviving a very long weekend...

Boo
(who spent most of Sunday wondering around in a rather tired, achey daze and didn't see anyone apart from PM1 and the foilists... :( ).

doobarz
-9th February 2004, 21:52
Originally posted by randomsabreur
I would justify this on several grounds: 1) Fencers are not as exhausted.

Fencers should have better fitness.

2) Fewer major bruising issues (constant simutaneous, hits tend to get harder as fencers get more desperate)

Fencers should develop better technique.

3) Fights are not so ridiculously boring so men's sabreurs stop despising WS so much, and may actually be easier to convince to referee.

I would suggest that if the two above things happened, then it would be less 'boring'. Men's sabereurs shouldn't have to ref it, referees should.

4) Fights are limited in length stopping referees getting bored and splitting stuff arbitrarily (perhaps there is a case for reducing the no of simutanous required to trigger the rule to 10?)

Fights are limited in length technically, perhaps this needs to be applied more in sabre...

DonnCarnage
-9th February 2004, 23:09
result for mens foil?/ anyone know?

Rdb811
-9th February 2004, 23:40
Originally posted by PM1


And a lovely long chat with Boo, and Brett and a Hi to Gav and rdb, 3CT, 2 happyhippos, Pinky etc.

Sorry I didn't come over and chat but I was feeling very anti-social and I trying to encourage the club's fencers.

Rdb811
-9th February 2004, 23:45
Originally posted by Marcos


ps hokers, not only are your breechs grey - they...er...leave little to the imagination? best get some new ones.

As you can tell by David Allbeury's reaction when he won the Surrey Sabre the week before.

Boo Boo
-10th February 2004, 08:50
Originally posted by DonnCarnage
result for mens foil?/ anyone know?

As I posted earlier (in case you didn't see):

Men's Foil:
- Still in (L4): Dave Mansour, Sam Johnson, Phil West and, I believe, Mikey Barnett
- Out (L8): Matt MacKenzie, Kola Abidugon, Steve Glaister and, I believe, Alistair Brooke.

Am afraid that I can't give much more detail than that. Hopefully they will post the results soon...

Boo

hokers
-10th February 2004, 08:56
That is one of the worst pictures of me I have ever seen, in my moment of triumph as well! ;)

OK dammit I get the point, I'll get some new breeches! Can we change the subject please?!? :o

whizzkid1982
-10th February 2004, 09:18
nope. in fact i think it deserves its own thread!!!

Marcos
-10th February 2004, 10:54
http://fencingforum.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=1522

dito:

Gav
-10th February 2004, 16:21
It was nice seeing everyone at the Slough. Hi, to everyone that I met there.

randomsabreur
-10th February 2004, 16:46
OK, how do you quote and write your own comments?

In reply to Doobarz, the first 2 are wishful thinking, this rule is not meant to affect the very top fencers, just those of us in the middle who are having a 'mare in a fight!

3. The best referees are generally male sabreurs, who may be easier to convince to attend a competition as a referee, thus solving the refereeing shortage!!!!!! I would imagine that you would class yourself a sabreur, even if you have come to a comp in refereeing kit rather than fencing kit and are reffing all day. I still think of myself as a fencer, even if I go to something like the BYCs and referee all day!

4. 3 minutes of fencing time at sabre is pretty hard to get to, it takes more time for the fencers to get back on guard after the together than to hit each other. I would imagine that a simultaneous hit takes max 2 seconds of fencing time, that makes potentially 30 in a minute of fencing time, and 90 in a period! cut off at 10 would be a lot more fun!

PM1
-10th February 2004, 18:25
Johnson
Barnett
Mansour
West
Mackenzie
Brooke
Glaister
Abidogun

anyone for anymore/else??

Insipiens
-16th February 2004, 16:59
lots of updates and new results on the BFA website but still no sign of the full results for the Slough. :(

PM1
-16th February 2004, 21:11
I'm fairly cetrtain O was sent a full list by email - are they still not up on BFA/Slough's site?? DO you want me to put them up here??

rory
-17th February 2004, 06:58
Yes please :-)

clockity
-17th February 2004, 11:05
Originally posted by PM1
DO you want me to put them up here??

That would be appreciated by us mere mortals... :)

PM1
-17th February 2004, 18:30
give us a mo and a cuppa (just got in ) and I'll see what I can achieve.....

PM1
-17th February 2004, 18:57
ME -
KELLY
TAYLOR
BIRD
BUZWELL
cHALMERS
HOWSER
BURKHALTER
LLOYD-JONES
LEAHY
TREDGER
GEE
BARTLET
TOWNSON
HEWITT
GERRARD
DOMEK
PERRY
AUSTIN
MACFARLANE
LISTON
STANBURY
LEE
MACENZIE
LEE
BUCHANAN
THIRD
BENNETT
ORGE
BOWRAN
TAYLOR
DAZELEY
CEYNE
WEST
BUIST
LAVINGTON
AINSLEY
TWOMEY
NORTHAM
DODWELL
POLLARD
MCDONALD
STEINBERG
ROBINSON
AYCOCK
KINGSTON
MILLER
BROWN
RAJ
GATES
ORME
MILNER
MACFARLANE
TATNER
PAVADAY
BARBER
PRYME
HYDES
SHEFFIELD
MCMENEMY
MORGAN That's the first 60 - can anyone tell me an easier way to do this, please ?? I have an Excel file attachment that I would just LOVE to attach to something.......

PM1
-17th February 2004, 22:05
WE
BEADSWORTH, FERRIS, LAMBOURNE, cORMACK
CROOK, STEWART, MATTHEWS, WALKER
pAYNE, LAWRENCE, PERROT, MAYNARD
FLOUNDERS, HIGHTON, OWEN, MOI
SMITH, SMOULDT,KHUMLEY,ASHTON
DAVIDSON, MANSON, HOLLOWAY,THORNTON
MORRISS, KAY, TAYLOR, MEASURES
AJIBODE,EISENBACH, WILLEN,HANEY
HALL,FELL,LEE,HALSTEAD
BOUMARD,DAY, BOTTLE,HYMAN
GLANVILLE,MURRAY,TSIRLINA,LEONARD
VAREY,ROTHWELL,SMITH,MACDONALD
ARNOLD,YEATE.JOHNSON,WHEELER
HOLMES,BADENOCH, HUGHES

MF (9 ON)

ARRON,MCCAFREY,MEPSTED,KENBER
QUESTIER,ROSOWSKY,WILLIAMS,REID
SHAH,JENYON,WRIGHT,GIBSON
ROBINSON, STOCKLEY,ALEXANDER,KINGSTON
COOPER, TRESTLER, ROSOWSKY (A),ALLOTT
SUTTON, CHANG,DOOTSON, KEITHLEY
MEPSTEAD(a),O'MAHONEY,BLEEKER,NAMDAR
MORT,SMITH,POTTERTON, CALDWELL
WATKISS,EAMES,WIGGINS ,RUGMAN
SACHARIEW, LOOKWOOD, CRANWELL, BRADLEY
CAVALARI,ADEBO,RIGBY,PETERS
HAINES,ROWCLIFFE, THURSTON, LOGGIE
PERRETT,POGGE,MOORHOUSE,PINTO ++

Exgeordielass
-18th February 2004, 13:45
Gosh that must have been hard work. Thanks for the info.

Do you have the results for the Mens Sabre PM1? (especially l16?)

PM1
-18th February 2004, 17:53
ah.....pm me with your email address and I'll forward the resultys, but you gotta do it quick cos i'm going on me hols in a min.....

Chris Morgan
-23rd February 2004, 21:06
Haha i like the way you stopped the list just on me PM1, makes me feel like i did well :) does anyone have a full set of results yet tho? i looked on the british fencing site but it isnt up yet

Insipiens
-26th February 2004, 12:37
results are finally up on the BFA website