PDA

View Full Version : Definition: Fencing with Excessive force



Ice'Cold
-27th January 2005, 01:45
Okay so I was fencing a bout and my opponent was repeatedly complaining that when he did a running attack (fleshe I think its called) that when I extending in to counter it I was hitting him with my bell guard. This guy had a sizeable advantage on height and reach on me, and I wasnt moving my feet, just kind of leaning in and extending with the reposte. I was just wondering what the definition on fencing with excessive force it, and when a collision occurs when someone performs a fleshe who's is at fault? Our judge said that it was his fault because he being on the offensive has the duty to aviod me, not the other way around. I guess he may have just been used to his opponent getting out of his way but I'm not like that. One that note

Second question, when someone attacks toward your feet and you jump with both feet off the ground, if they move their feet under yours while you are in the air, and you step on their feet, would there be a penatly, and if so who would it be against?

Thanks guys
~Ice

Epeecurean
-27th January 2005, 10:26
There's no firm definition on excessive force but it is described in the rules as brutality or jostling. I call it if someone uses his body to knock someone back or punches someone with his bell guard. In the case you describe it sounds like the flecher is mostly at fault -- his body mass is providing most of the force. One question though, are you missing with your point and hitting with your bell guard?

For the second question, I would deem this as incidental corps-a-corps and wouldn't give either fencer a penalty. Deliberately stomping on someone else's feet (rather than just landing on them) would be a penalty though.

Gunslinger
-28th January 2005, 12:33
Excessive force! What excessive force fencing with two epees and a sabre strapped to your back isn't excessive...Just Prudent!!!:tongue:

Saxon
-28th January 2005, 16:52
If your opponent fleches at you, and you bash him while doing nothing out of the ordinary, it's his fault. It's his responsibility to make sure you don't come into contact. Of course, if you step into his line (usually towards your left if you're right-handed, then you could be at fault too.

As far as stepping on feet goes, I'd call what you describe just about even. Penalise both or neither.

Demonic
-28th January 2005, 17:58
Ive always had problems when fleching against left handed fencers as i dont like going round the left hand side as opens me up to much for possible double so i always go to the right however if their sword arm does not draw back i have know where to go but through them.I always try to avoid this but has happened on some occasions.I always say sorry btw.

Ive only been red carded once in a international i was up against a fellow metal head from GER and it was a fight of metal hounor.He fleched me and kneed me in the stomach so i retailiated by fleching him and punching him in the head with my guard unfortunatly i was spotted and carded :tongue: doh

Ice'Cold
-29th January 2005, 03:14
Well, I dont remember *very* well but im sure on all of the touches by point went well past him. On at least a few I probably missed him completely. I really belive he just didnt like that way I was defending and counter attacking him. It's an interesting situation, because while he is running at me I am also extending and when we both pass he is comming at me pretty fast while my arm is extending through, so I can see where he would have had a problem with my guard hitting his torso. Another problem was the height difference, I am of an average height for most of the male epee fencers but he was definitely alot taller than me, which brought the point of my on guard right parallel with his stomach.

I really didnt think I was doing anything out of the ordinary, certainly not fencing any differently than I normally do, I have to say though I really have a habit of getting real close quite often.

Epeecurean
-29th January 2005, 07:19
Originally posted by Ice'Cold
Well, I dont remember *very* well but im sure on all of the touches by point went well past him. On at least a few I probably missed him completely.

OK I think missing him is the bigger problem! Once you start hitting him he won't be running into your bell guard, you'll be getting the point, and he'll probably stop doing it as much as a result.

Chris Morgan
-29th January 2005, 09:02
I once had an opponent who complained that i was hitting him too hard!

hayleyjade
-29th January 2005, 10:34
some people do hit excessivly hard, my last fight at byc's i got trampsed, (was clear from before the fight this was going to happen) yet the girl still hit me with full force, still got the bruises! was a bit unfair, cos she hit my shoulder, which made it painful for me to fight back for the rest of the fight, :(

Boo Boo
-29th January 2005, 13:02
Originally posted by hayleyjade
was a bit unfair, cos she hit my shoulder, which made it painful for me to fight back for the rest of the fight, :(

I think that's the idea - why she has been coached to hit hard: she is trying to either intimidate or injure you so you wont fight back...

...still it could be worse - last time she fenced me she was punching with her guard... :rolleyes:

Boo

hayleyjade
-29th January 2005, 13:51
owwwwwww, not nice! yeh. was thinking it was a sort of good tactic, but not a good way to fence really (ie a bit unfair)

telkanuru
-29th January 2005, 19:05
Originally posted by Chris Morgan
I once had an opponent who complained that i was hitting him too hard!

There's a local coach who is of the opinion that if you hit your opponent hard, and no lights go off, they probly have a justafiable reason for being angry at you. However, if you hit them hard, and your light goes off, tough cookies (biscuts to you :confused: ).

Threestain
-29th January 2005, 20:09
the harder you hit, the worse the hit is going to be - besides isn't it far more impressive to leave your opponent completely confused as to why you've run off celebrating?

Demonic
-29th January 2005, 22:16
i must admit ive been known as a hard hitter in the past.I was always tought that if you are gonna hit someone make sure the hit will register however some times guess i dont know my own strength :rolleyes:

Ice'Cold
-30th January 2005, 02:42
Fencing really hard can be a good intimidation tactic. If your opponent is afraid of getting hit too hard they will most likeley go on the defensive. Though I dont think intentionally trying to hurt your opponents is the most sportsman like thing to do.

vil
-30th January 2005, 12:40
Originally posted by Ice'Cold
Fencing really hard can be a good intimidation tactic. If your opponent is afraid of getting hit too hard they will most likeley go on the defensive. Though I dont think intentionally trying to hurt your opponents is the most sportsman like thing to do.
I'd rather intimidate my opponent with my skill in hitting precisely as hard as required and no harder. :rambo:

Rdb811
-30th January 2005, 13:15
I realise I am no saint no thismatter, but hard hitting s just plain rude and bad sportsmanship - in any event you are wasting energy - ieffectively the point is going beyond where it needs to and tis makes it harder to recover if the attack misses.

In any event, the little hit that the oppopent does not feel is much more effective at demoralising them.

Robert
-30th January 2005, 18:33
I think it is important to distinguish intent from action. I am covered in bruises from fencing at a comp today, I cannot move my arm without pain (and wasn't able to from the L16 onwards) due to several hits on my collarbone, and my fingers have numerous cuts. The cuts are my fault, the other fencer was thrashing slightly, but like I said to him that only resulted in cuts because my distance was wrong. Again the collarbone are due to both myself and my epee oponents misjudging the distance.

No-one should try to hit hard, but I think it is important to accept that the way the modern sport is fenced bruises and hard hits will happen when fencers make mistakes.

Robert

gbm
-30th January 2005, 18:59
And hence chest protectors will be used...

Threestain
-30th January 2005, 19:23
to be fair there is a school of coaching that teaches to hit about 3 inches behind the target, to ensure a hit. However, I think this is silly for two reasons...

1. When you're actually fencing, be it in training or in competition you are going to be more pumped up than in a lesson. This means you're going to hit harder and faster anyway. Therefore if you aim to hit 3 inches past the target whilst pumped up its going to feel like 5, meaning more broken blades, more bruises and less people going to fence you in training as it hurts too much.

2. if you're constantly trying to hit three inches beyond your target your distance is wrong.

What you should be aiming for, especially in a lesson is to hit very lightly - 750g is all that's required after all. Then if you can do all your coach wants with light hits, but at speed you will do a million times better.

Just my opinion, having been coached by British, Hungarian, French and Russian schools of thought.

Oh and believe me, using sheer brute force doesn't work to intimidate people - it'll just get them angry... leading to pain for you and most likely a better opponent.

Gunslinger
-30th January 2005, 19:29
Far more elegant to land a deftly placed light hit than a hard brutal hit. Agreed with the sentiment mentioned earlier about leaving your opponent frustrated when you score your point that way.

Ice'Cold
-30th January 2005, 20:32
Originally posted by Rdb811
I realise I am no saint no thismatter, but hard hitting s just plain rude and bad sportsmanship - in any event you are wasting energy - ieffectively the point is going beyond where it needs to and tis makes it harder to recover if the attack misses.

In any event, the little hit that the oppopent does not feel is much more effective at demoralising them.

Ah that I completely agree with. When your opponent is skilled at landing a soft blow you dont feel at all over and over again that gets frustrating because you cannot even tell that you are being hit. Demoarlising, very much so, something I would love to be able to do but that takes speed and very precise point control which I still do not have.

StuartL
-31st January 2005, 13:05
Have to agree, there is nothing more satisfying than backing away pointing at the box to remind your opponent that they've been hit and didn't notice it. Of course its just as much fun seeing the look of confusion when the ref calls a halt and awards a hit for just the same reason. :D

As for the original question, the person performing the Fleche is in the wrong and from how you've described it not doing it correctly anyway, if they were you wouldn't have time to acknowledge they were 'running towards you' you'd have been hit and they'd be going past you. Just my thoughts... :D

randomsabreur
-31st January 2005, 13:32
I agree, the worst (and best) feeling is when you (or your opponent) is busy inspecting their overlay for the obviously sticky out bit that they must have accidentally caught.

However, there is also great satisfaction when your opponent has been hitting you hard, so you decide to parry instead of hit on the preparation, and you do a nice solid riposte...

on the pointly weapons, I tend to hit a bit hard, and go flat rather too often, but I am very apologetic... Basically the main cause of hard hitting at lower levels of fencing is general incompetence, while at higher levels it is more likely to be tactical. Better fencers should be able to control their swords to a degree that less experienced fencers cannot so I am more likely to get annoyed by a better fencer hard hitting me than a novice. There is of course the additional consideration that I am good enough, if I am fencing well and am fairly energetic on that day, to ensure that anything that looks painful will not come into contact with me.

I think I was at the same competition as Robert (I was the girly sabreur who had a play at all 3 weapons, wearing the go faster stripes etc (due to not owning any breeches without)) I keep on discovering bruises today, pretty well all due to bad distance control on my part, and inability to hit with pointy sticks.

Tarmac
-31st January 2005, 13:47
I hit Bill O. very hard with a flick to his hand which landed flat which i apologised profusely about... he was very good about it and started fencing again after a moments break and quite happily sliced a two inch piece of skin off my right shin a couple of moments later...
oooo.. a real stinger...
but fair enough..

Leonie H
-31st January 2005, 13:48
Originally posted by Threestain
Oh and believe me, using sheer brute force doesn't work to intimidate people - it'll just get them angry... leading to pain for you and most likely a better opponent.

Absolutely. I once took part in a friendly match during which the opposing captain instructed one of his fencers, a bloke several inches taller and wider than me, to 'just bully her': result 5-0 to me.

You can fence aggresively without hitting hard.

Leonie

Epeecurean
-31st January 2005, 15:42
Originally posted by Threestain
to be fair there is a school of coaching that teaches to hit about 3 inches behind the target, to ensure a hit. However, I think this is silly for two reasons...

1. When you're actually fencing, be it in training or in competition you are going to be more pumped up than in a lesson. This means you're going to hit harder and faster anyway. Therefore if you aim to hit 3 inches past the target whilst pumped up its going to feel like 5, meaning more broken blades, more bruises and less people going to fence you in training as it hurts too much.

2. if you're constantly trying to hit three inches beyond your target your distance is wrong.

What you should be aiming for, especially in a lesson is to hit very lightly - 750g is all that's required after all. Then if you can do all your coach wants with light hits, but at speed you will do a million times better.

I agree entirely and would add that a corollary of 2 is that if you miss or are parried, you are 3 inches closer than need be and easier to hit. In fact, I'd wager that if you aim for 3 inches past target you are more likely to overlunge and be off-balance as well, making you even easier to hit.

aao
-31st January 2005, 16:44
Hitting hard is unfortunately something that still crops up from time to time, Domestically i tend to find its something which some of the 'older' generation of fencers tend to do far more (by no means all of them) but for example even our good president Keith has been known to hit a bit over enthusiastically on occasion. More irritating though are some of the older fencers who come out of the woodwork at small local domestics or at the exalibur, who seem to take active pleasure in trying to inflict as much pain as possible on their opponent, and lauch off any complaints of agressive hitting as their opponent being a wimp.
Its needless as far as I'm concerend, yes of course you will occasionally hit your opponent hard because of mis timing/distance but once you reach a certain standard there really is no call for it. Also what tends to happen if they try it against a reasonable fencer is that after a few goes they will end up being hit in far more painful ways themselves.

Internationally its a different story, the Germans for example tend as a general rule to flick very hard indeed, they will (at least at A-grade standard) be genuignly be going for the hit and mostly score with it, but losing a point and having a numb feeling creeping up your arm is not the most fun!

Anyway basically all i'd say is don't bother, in none of the weapons is it called for, or against any kind of a competent opponent effective.

Rdb811
-31st January 2005, 16:59
Originally posted by aao

More irritating though are some of the older fencers who come out of the woodwork at small local domestics or at the exalibur, who seem to take active pleasure in trying to inflict as much pain as possible on their opponent, and lauch off any complaints of agressive hitting as their opponent being a wimp.


Especially sabre e.g. the E***m Carpet Beater.

Ice'Cold
-1st February 2005, 02:57
The thing you have to understand is when you are in a bout you are fencing, accidents can happen. I definitely know even in pratice that you can sometimes overestimate the force at which you drive your point. Last week I acidentally hit some poor girl on my team quite hard in the collarbone, I didnt mean to but it was off of a strong beat parry and I came in with the same force. And even older fencers can mess up...just sometimes.

vil
-1st February 2005, 10:18
Originally posted by Ice'Cold
The thing you have to understand is when you are in a bout you are fencing, accidents can happen. I definitely know even in pratice that you can sometimes overestimate the force at which you drive your point. Last week I acidentally hit some poor girl on my team quite hard in the collarbone, I didnt mean to but it was off of a strong beat parry and I came in with the same force. And even older fencers can mess up...just sometimes.
Absolutely. But there's a difference between doing it accidentally (and apologising) and doing it deliberately.

Demonic
-1st February 2005, 10:53
alot of the time i lunge to deep or my opponent will step forward at the same time causing the hard hit but im always a sportsman and apologise.
The worst i find is when people are learnign to flick hit and just constantly smash the blade into my hand (it already been broken twice)...
I guess at the end of the day they gotta learn just wish it wasnt against me :upset:

Robert
-1st February 2005, 11:00
Originally posted by vil
Absolutely. But there's a difference between doing it accidentally (and apologising) and doing it deliberately.

I can think of only one case in which I felt somebody was deliberate in using excessive force. And that is out of a lot competitive bouts. So I would say 99.9% are accidents.

Robert

Demonic
-1st February 2005, 11:25
Ok so maybe i have used a excessive force on one occasion but he deserved it as he knew i hit his foot and would not admit it so the next time i attempted to drill his foot into the piste :tongue:

strawberry
-1st February 2005, 15:48
I can only think of one occassion where I accidentally made someone bleed and I think that was just because we both simultaneously fleched. Nothing deliberate about it.

vil
-1st February 2005, 17:46
Originally posted by Robert
I can think of only one case in which I felt somebody was deliberate in using excessive force. And that is out of a lot competitive bouts. So I would say 99.9% are accidents.
I don't disagree with you. :)

aao
-1st February 2005, 17:58
Definately have to disagree, although probably because I've been to waay to many comps over the years, I have far too often at the smaller comps come across people trying to knock lumps out of me and others they have fenced :dizzy: this has almost always been the older gen. fencers though who thought it was 'acceptable' in their day (i had quite an enlightening chat with one or two of them about how they would intimidate their opponents)

Out of the current crop of fencers would agree though mostly its accidents (although tris does seem to be on a one man mission to paralyse my arm! :upset: )

Demonic
-1st February 2005, 20:05
and alp is on a mission to break both my knee caps!! :tongue:

cesh_fencing
-3rd February 2005, 13:46
Fencing is by its nature a physical sport and accidental collisions do occur..

However if someone repeatidly has these accidents it as to be called bad technique.... i.e. if a fencer flesches and the opponent stands his ground, the attacker must go around... If not the attacker should be carded.

Some people do not ever stand their ground so never get run into, more comfortable, but predictable and usually beaten..

Over the last 15+ years i have fenced epee i actually think fencing is less brutal than it used to be, however intimidation is a tactic still used espeially at international level and between top level fencers at home, generally by the phsically bigger fencers..

Part of the game I am afraid

Rdb811
-3rd February 2005, 14:43
Originally posted by cesh_fencing


However if someone repeatidly has these accidents it as to be called bad technique.... i.e. if a fencer flesches and the opponent stands his ground, the attacker must go around... If not the attacker should be carded.



Err - could you quote me the rule number for this ?

randomsabreur
-3rd February 2005, 14:53
Um - the one dealing with hitting the guard, the one dealing with corps a corps for the priority weapons, and the one on jostling for epee. That enough... before we get on to the deliberate brutality, violent or vindictive action if we are trying to be nasty

Demonic
-3rd February 2005, 15:09
all i can say really is fencing is considered a contact sport so if sometimes you get hit hard then its all part of the game..

BRING IT ON!!!! :grin:

Rdb811
-3rd February 2005, 15:29
Originally posted by randomsabreur
Um - the one dealing with hitting the guard, the one dealing with corps a corps for the priority weapons, and the one on jostling for epee. That enough... before we get on to the deliberate brutality, violent or vindictive action if we are trying to be nasty

All of which might be applicable; but -


t.63 At épée a fencer who either by a flèche attack or by advancing vigorously brings about a corps à corps even several times in succession (without brutality or violence) does not transgress the basic conventions of fencing and commits no fault thereby (cf. t.20, t.25).

Canis
-3rd February 2005, 15:44
Originally posted by Rdb811
Err - could you quote me the rule number for this ?

roger -its implied by t20-

t.20 Corps à corps is said to exist when the two competitors are in contact; when this occurs the Referee must stop the bout (cf. t.25, t.63).

At foil and in sabre it is forbidden for a fencer to cause corps à corps (even without brutality or violence). Should such an offence occur, the Referee will penalise the fencer at fault as specified in Articles t.114, t.116, t.120.) and any hit scored by the fencer at fault is annulled.


At all three weapons it is forbidden for a fencer to cause corps à corps intentionally to avoid being hit, or to jostle the opponent. Should such an offence occur, the Referee will penalise the fencer at fault as specified in Articles t.114, t.116, t.120 and any hit scored by the fencer at fault is annulled.

essentially a fleche that can stop instantaneously isnt a fleche !

therefore its very unlikely that you will be able to fleche into corps a corps with someone at epee without jostling - therefore the need to go round them. or suffer T114 ,T116, t120

ceprab
-7th February 2005, 16:30
I've seen a fleche straight into an opponent that occured without jostling - you could tell because the person landing on the floor on his bottom was the flecheur - he bounced.

I've also seen a couple of good epeeists manage to flatten each other and both receive a knee in the inguinals at the same time from a fleche with no-one at fault.

I recently dinged an oponent around the head with my guard while fighting at close quarters and trying to reach prime - I wan't even aware of it until he told me, and naturally an apology was forthcoming (I didn't feel bad about it because he got the point).

It's quite hard to cause most corps à corps offences when you are using an epee, since it would be unusual to deliberately hit your opponent - these examples were of an attack that went wrong.

strawberry
-10th February 2005, 22:52
Can I just ask if something is legal?
I tend to do a kind of weird half-fleche where I'll do a slow run (well it's more of a jog) towards people but not run past them, just chase them down the piste. I've never been told that I shouldn't do this by anyone but I was wondering if there was an actual rule against it?

gbm
-11th February 2005, 10:49
Originally posted by strawberry
Can I just ask if something is legal?
I tend to do a kind of weird half-fleche where I'll do a slow run (well it's more of a jog) towards people but not run past them, just chase them down the piste. I've never been told that I shouldn't do this by anyone but I was wondering if there was an actual rule against it?

Provided you don't run into them, it would be fine...

strawberry
-11th February 2005, 14:05
Well that never happens so it's ok. :) I'm glad about that because people find it really off-putting.

Insipiens
-11th February 2005, 14:48
unless of course you are fencing sabre .

statements of the obvious, my speciaility :)