PDA

View Full Version : Preference for awarding hits?



Robert
-15th February 2004, 09:49
Here is one that has sort of come up on the American Forum and I thought might be useful to hear opinions on. I don't think there is a right or wrong answer, so I'm really just interested in what peoples preferences are (and reasons).

If two lights come on, what is your default position?

Do you try as hard as you can to seperate them, even if both fencers are at fault, or the action is very close to simultaneous, OR do you prefer to not seperate the hit unless you are confident of the phrase?

Robert

Australian
-15th February 2004, 15:32
as much as possible... if i don't know, then i'll put the fencers en garde

uk_45
-15th February 2004, 16:09
Try and seperate as much as possible some hits tho can't be seperated. Oh the why can't all ref'ing be as easy as ref'ing epee?

Boo Boo
-15th February 2004, 16:19
Originally posted by uk_45
Oh the why can't all ref'ing be as easy as ref'ing epee?

Ah, but epee refereeing is boring! Foil (and I assume sabre) refereeing requires more of a brain and is more interesting :)

I agree, will try and split everything that can be done so reasonably. However, some things cannot be split, so it is unfair to do it. The better the standard of the fencers fencing, the easier it is to split normally...

Boo

uk_45
-15th February 2004, 16:34
Yeah i find sabre needs alot of brain power and being able to recall the exact sequence of events as us sabreurs tend not to stay still for more than 100th of a second on piste

Rdb811
-15th February 2004, 17:05
forthe umpteenth time - refereeing epee is not that easy - you get lulled into a false sense of security - then whoop ! flash, bang wallop - dodgy floor hit with a corps a corps and somebody going off pists.

Boo Boo
-15th February 2004, 17:23
Yes, sorrry, didn't mean to imply that it is easy - just a bit less challenging/stimulating on a second by second basis... :)

It takes all sorts - if we all enjoyed the same things it would be a dull world :)

Boo
(not even going to go into the joys of "floor spotting" ;) ).

Rdb811
-15th February 2004, 19:27
It's like keeping goal for a good team - you only have to make one save a match, but it has to be a blinder.

For a real corker, try reffing epee on one piste then turning round to ref sabre on the next piste - the first time I was bringing my hands up to call double when I realised I had to make a decision.

uk_45
-16th February 2004, 09:24
Be intrested to see who said every hit as what happens when one fencer goes over and one under at the same time and both start action at the same time how do you seperate that?

Boo Boo
-16th February 2004, 09:28
There are one or two presidents out there who do make a point of seperating every hit, but that seems unrealistic to me...

Boo

uk_45
-16th February 2004, 09:31
Just hope i dont get one presiding while im fighting!

randomsabreur
-16th February 2004, 09:45
Impossible to split every hit (remember the good old sabre passivity debate). There are times when even the best refs have nothing there to separate. So the aim is to split what is splitable, but if I know there is time there but I don't know whose it is, I will then abstain. Worst mare is fencers you know well who know each other so everyone knows what everyone is trying. You know what the fencers are trying to do, the question is have they succeeded by enough!

In club tho' if a hit is a complete mess and both people somehow hit each other after wrestling for a second, then you put them back on guard.

tigger
-16th February 2004, 13:10
Some actions are genuinely simultaneous. If you seperate those, you're making a mistake as bad as not seperating one that isn't simultaneous!

randomsabreur
-17th February 2004, 11:35
Don't we all know it, very tedious for all concerned when we girlies (usually) forget to do anything but step lunge with the same timing

Saxon
-17th February 2004, 12:12
t60.3 (foil), t80.3 (sabre)
The Referee must replace the competitors on guard each time that there is a double hit and he is unable to judge clearly on which side the fault lies.

One of the most difficult cases to judge arises when a stop hit is made and there is doubt as to whether it was made sufficiently in time in relation to the final movement of a compound attack. Generally, in such cases, the double hit occurs through the fault of both fencers concerned, which justifies the Referee replacing them on guard. (The fault of the attacker consists of indecision, slowness of execution or the making of feints which are not sufficiently effective. The fault of the defender lies in delay or slowness in making the stop hit.)

The fencers have no right to complain if the referee cannot split an action. Either it is genuinely simultaneous, or it's the fencers' fault, not the referee's. In which case, the rules state he must replace them on guard.

I'd rather it was not given at all than given through a dodgy guess. But then, I'm grateful for every hit I get.

Australian
-17th February 2004, 16:35
Originally posted by Saxon
One of the most difficult cases to judge arises when a stop hit is made and there is doubt as to whether it was made sufficiently in time in relation to the final movement of a compound attack. Generally, in such cases, the double hit occurs through the fault of both fencers concerned, which justifies the Referee replacing them on guard. (The fault of the attacker consists of indecision, slowness of execution or the making of feints which are not sufficiently effective. The fault of the defender lies in delay or slowness in making the stop hit).

beat me to posting that :tongue:

even the rules say that every hit does not need to be separated

Marcos
-18th February 2004, 16:19
I seperate when I can, but there is nothing worse than a president who insists on seperating when the hits were pretty much simultaneous

http://library.thinkquest.org/15340/youmake1.html

this game tho is good at helping you get your eye in for sabre and foil!

doobarz
-18th February 2004, 17:04
Originally posted by Marcos
I seperate when I can, but there is nothing worse than a president who insists on seperating when the hits were pretty much simultaneous

http://library.thinkquest.org/15340/youmake1.html

this game tho is good at helping you get your eye in for sabre and foil!

Well I got 3 fo rfoil and 3 for sabre, but I think I was stiched by my hard drive...

Really though, I'm sure one of the foil hits lands on the arm, and it is tricky to tell who is beating in sabre. Good stuff though!

Tubby
-18th February 2004, 17:36
4 and 4 but had to keep looking at it over and over.

Australian
-18th February 2004, 18:46
foil

Your score: 5
That last call went to the left. That fencer began the action first and hit first. Congratulations! You called all five touches correctly! That is excellent. Directing a bout is a tough job and some of the calls we asked you to make were difficult. Thanks for playing!



black and white 2d sucks....

i'll have a go at sabre later

Boo Boo
-19th February 2004, 00:26
5 out of 5 (foil) - phew! :)

(is easier when you can see the action more than once - wish you could replay live fencing occasionally... still, suppose it helps make up for the 2d/black and white deficiencies...)

Boo

uk_45
-19th February 2004, 09:36
thats game is rather fun in the sabre mode i think they just changed the sword graphic all hits are still with the point!

Jenrick
-19th February 2004, 22:38
4-4 all I can say is easier when looking at it a few times. good game though.
As for splitting. If unable to split, don't guess put back on guard.

uk_45
-20th February 2004, 09:00
Yeah it is nice to see a hit over and over and over again wish real fencers would do that for me!

PKT
-21st February 2004, 04:54
Originally posted by Boo Boo
Ah, but epee refereeing is boring! Foil (and I assume sabre) refereeing requires more of a brain and is more interesting :)

I agree, will try and split everything that can be done so reasonably. However, some things cannot be split, so it is unfair to do it. The better the standard of the fencers fencing, the easier it is to split normally...

Boo

If the fencers are good, then the actions are clear and executed with purpose.
It's with the beginners that most difficulties arise.

It all depend on the ref's ability, doesn't it? If he's good, then he can see and therefor call everything and the fencers can learn to execute the actions "properly".

Epee refing is NOT boring.
Epee refing is, as the politicians are so fond of saying these days, full of challenges.
It's long periods of bordom and sudden moments of panic from the viewpoint of a ref when all hell broke loose.
Did the attacker, who started with his point close to the edge of the piste, hit the tape first - i.e. cheat - before his point lands on his poopnent?
In a close-quarter fight, did that hit land on the opp't or did it land on the fencer whose light came on? [Don't laugh, I've seen it happen. In this one particular instace, the fencer who "scored" the hit was honourable enough to insist that he hit himself.]
In a fleche attack, did that attack or counter-attack land on the feners or was that on the table, or other surface?
So on an dso forth...

If you're not awake, woe be on you,
PK

gbm
-23rd February 2004, 16:28
4/5 for foil.
I got the last one wrong. I thought both fencers started to extend in the same frame! I would say that anything that's really close together (a bit less than human reaction time) is simultaneous, regardless of microsecond splitting.

PKT
-26th February 2004, 20:44
Originally posted by goodbadandme
...
I would say that anything that's really close together (a bit less than human reaction time) is simultaneous, regardless of microsecond splitting.

It depends on which humans you are using as reference, doesn't it?
if the humans are any of the finalists in the World champs you'd still have to call the action if there is an "attosecond" - latest word signifying the time it takes for an atom to get to the otherside of another atom - in the time difference of the actions.

PK

PKT
-26th February 2004, 20:59
http://www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=3033e30c-ccab-4837-a756-138873276973

OTTAWA -- A Viennese scientist has measured the shortest time interval ever -- billionths of billionths of a second, a time so brief it serves as a "freeze-frame" for viewing things that move at nearly the speed of light.

Partly developed in Canada, the new technique to measure "attoseconds" can show an electron travelling just part of the way around an atom -- an event that's almost instantaneous.

...

an electron, not an atom...
Talk about splitting hair...
PK

Rdb811
-27th February 2004, 00:01
Good job you're not splitting atoms.

Surely an attosecond would by 10^-18 of a second (or whatever the multiple is) ?

PKT
-27th February 2004, 00:16
Originally posted by Rdb811
Good job you're not splitting atoms.

Surely an attosecond would by 10^-18 of a second (or whatever the multiple is) ?

However "billionths of billionths of a second" is expressed it's still infinitessimal...

I prefer splitting skulls to splitting atoms.

Hey, even NASA can screw up on imperial vs metric...

PK

PKT
-27th February 2004, 00:20
Rdb811,
I guess you're right according to:
http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci211614,00.html

PK

attosecond


(This definition follows U.S. usage in which a billion is a thousand million and a trillion is a 1 followed by 12 zeros.)

An attosecond is one quintillionth (10-18) of a second and is a term used in photon research.

For comparison, a millisecond (ms or msec) is one thousandth of a second and is commonly used in measuring the time to read to or write from a hard disk or a CD-ROM player or to measure packet travel time on the Internet.

A microsecond (us or Greek letter mu plus s) is one millionth (10-6) of a second.

A nanosecond (ns or nsec) is one billionth (10-9) of a second and is a common measurement of read or write access time to random access memory (RAM).

A picosecond is one trillionth (10-12) of a second, or one millionth of a microsecond.

A femtosecond is one millionth of a nanosecond or 10-15 of a second and is a measurement sometimes used in laser technology.

Read more about it at:
> The laser physicist Sven Hartmann is interested in a topic known as "attosecond beats."


Last updated on: Jul 21, 2001



Isn't the internet fanatastic?
PK

Rdb811
-29th February 2004, 16:42
Originally posted by PKT


I prefer splitting skulls to splitting atoms.



you're not a foilist then, as they prefer splitting hairs.

Tubby
-29th February 2004, 19:38
Originally posted by Rdb811
you're not a foilist then, as they prefer splitting hairs. :grin: :grin: :grin:

oddball
-16th March 2004, 11:38
What do epeeists prefer splitting then?



..fingernails??????