PDA

View Full Version : Team Rules



Canis
-15th July 2004, 16:59
Folks,

what is the accepted new method of running a team match when one team has a member scratched? using the modern lap scoring method .

in the good old days it was easy, the team with the 3 fencers would start 3 victories up and the sequence of bouts would be changed so that the two fencers of the other team alternate.

the rulebook is no good, insisting that teams without 3 competitors will be scratched!

i ask because at the London youth games on saturday one of the ankle biter teams that i was helping mentor for the day (which consisted of 3 reasonable first compers came up against a team of 2 slightly better fencers.)

my ankle biter team where given a head start of 15 points and the order of bouts was organised so that the two oposing fencers alternated.

my team won, just, but i couldn't help thinking that my team where still being disadvantaged! - if the opposition had had to field a real nubie i think it would have cost our opposition more than 15 points !

the only other method i can think of though is playing the match starting at 0-0 and increasing the score to the maximum for that lap when the third fencer should be fencing ?


and if i havent confused you enough,

what would happen if two teams met that both had only two fencers.?

Could an individual enter, starting 30 down and having 3 fights to score 45 ?

3 Card Trick
-15th July 2004, 17:26
There are no rules to cover the situation you have described. The solution used allows the matches to go on.

You have to decide whether you want the team to take part or not, once you have let them in life continues imperfectly.

colliebeast
-15th July 2004, 18:14
I disagreed this has happened a number of times esp when i fenced in BUSA so we checked up on the rules...
basically the team fences in order and each time the missing fencer comes on they lose by what ever the margin was.

ie
Team A (3 Fencers)

Team B (2 Fencer)

team A after the first bout is losing 5-1
team b's missing fencer is up next. so team A wins automatically

therefore going into the 3rd fight the score is 10-5 to team A

I hope this is clear although i suspect it might not be.

Robert
-15th July 2004, 21:38
I think I've seen this method suggested.

Fence the fights you can, to a total of 30.

Once one side reaches 30 add 15 to the score of the full side.

Robert

Rdb811
-16th July 2004, 10:52
Usual solution (which I've seen applied at the London Youth Games) is twhat colliebeast said - the missing fencer should take the third last slot.

If it's a friendly you can adapt the scor sheets so that everybody fences everybody an dthe score is to 30.

gbm
-17th July 2004, 20:52
At the Welsh foil championships one year, we had one fencer fencing on two different teams at once...

stevejackson
-18th July 2004, 08:36
Just to add confusion what is the forum's answer to the question of how do you deal with a competition of teams of 3 when both teams are one short? Don't laugh it happened at Excalibur one year. Under the old rules it's easy each side starts with 2 victories and a double defeat. No body challenged this even when we wrote up the double defeat at sabre - shows how much people notice the bedspread score sheet.

My suggestion to both dilema's is find someone who can still remember how to run a team match as 9 fights of 5 hits, not the modern method, but more flexible ( and if you run it first to 5 victories on average faster)

Robert
-18th July 2004, 09:48
I'd do it the same way as mentioned above. Simply get both teams to fence to 20.

The new system is a far superior one in terms of making all of the members of the team feel involved.

Robert

Canis
-19th July 2004, 09:54
I'm not sure about the new system making all the members of the team feel involved.

Having captained teams under the former system and observed the new

whereas with the old system all the fencers mattered equally, The new system makes the best fencer on the team the most important.

an excellent fencer with two newbies can do well under the new system where they would have probably lost 6-3 to a team of three reasonable fencers under the old system.

randomsabreur
-19th July 2004, 16:49
But, under the old system, if someone on the team wins no bouts, they feel completely useless, especially if they have had a couple of 5-4s or so. But, under the new system, any hits they get can be really useful, as that is say 4 more the top fencer does not have to get.

I have spent the last year as top sabreur in my uni team, and was on last for my team at the nationals and would have to say that the new system encourages people who might end up having to do a catch up job at the end to get a lot fitter. I was really really really tired at the end of the nationals where I ended up getting about 26 of my teams 42 hits in the quarters. Much too much like hard work for someone as unfit as me.

Also, at weapons other than sabre, the weakest member of the team can use the time to their advantage, by trying to take as few hits as possible in the 3 minute period, so can again be useful (have had to do this at foil before now), where in the old days, they would have lost the bout.

I think it is definitely better for teams with 1 weaker fencer under the new system, tho' a team which is fairly even and average in strength will tend to lose out to a team with 2 weak fencers and 1 superstar

ihunter
-17th August 2004, 12:08
The rules are quite clear, in a competitive situation you can't start without a full team (3 people )and if, through injury, you become less than 3 then youv'e lost. o44.12

Rdb811
-17th August 2004, 21:49
Originally posted by ihunter
The rules are quite clear, in a competitive situation you can't start without a full team (3 people )and if, through injury, you become less than 3 then youv'e lost. o44.12

Which is correct, but not very helpful.

mendacious dog
-17th August 2004, 22:57
A slightly similar (although not very) situation happened in a recent international MS veterans team match. In this competition each team has to have three veterans but the TOTAL team age has to exceed (I think) 170 at all times (not including the age of any fourth fencer until he is subbed on).

Both the final two teams (Italy and Russia) unknowingly decided to use the same tactics, i.e. to fence two good younger fencers (ages of 45ish) and make up the difference with one old codger, the theory being that because the competition was run by simple fights to 5 and NOT the relay system then the two younger fencers could win all theirs and take victory.

As it turned out both the younger Italians killed the older Russian, both the younger Russians did the same to the older Italian and they shared the four fights between the young guys. Score is thus 4-4 in bouts and the last match is between an 82 year old and a 79 year old. Tremendous. Last bout went to 4-all too, although I cant remember who won...

Hope I'm still fencing at international level when I'm 80+!

:cool:

tigger
-18th August 2004, 12:04
5 more years to wait then :grin:

mendacious dog
-18th August 2004, 17:50
5 more years to wait then ??

Cheeky swine! Just you wait until the start of the season..

:tongue:

Coupe du Nord
-19th August 2004, 14:39
Tigger got it wrong then?