[Eric Myers]

To touch a bit on some of Justin's comments, I think that directors and the FIE are as much to blame as coaches are, but agree that electric scoring is a huge problem. I'll start with the scoring first. The original idea of the electric scoring was simply to determine whether there was a touch or not, and reduce errors on the part of the director. I don't necessarily have a problem with this part. In my opinion, the problem comes in when an electronic close out is introduced, because that is a discrete measurement of time, rather than a relative measure of fencing tempo. This is particularly exacerbated in sabre, in which the close out is so short that the remise often closes out the counter parry and riposte. If you watch the Beijing sabre bouts, you can see that most attacks are first intention, with only a few parry ripostes.

As for coaches, directors, and the FIE, we need to look at each's role. The FIE set the rules, and tweaks them periodically in an attempt to resolve different problems. They have clearly moved fencing down the path of a sport, and away from it's martial heritage. The role of a coach is to help someone win the game, and since death or maiming is no longer likely, coaches have reasonably moved on to the goal of getting more points. They are doing their job. The directors are caught in the middle, between enforcing rules on one hand and keeping up with what fencers are doing on the other. Let's look at just one example: the flick. Many (if not most) directors will give a fencer the right of way, even with a bent elbow and the point completely off target because the fencer is threatening the opponent with a flick (and a flick is still technically an attack with the point). Remembering that modern fencing is a game, and that flicks actually work there, this is a reasonable judgment call. But it *really* changes the game, because now just about any movement can be considered a threat.

I prefer a fencing that is closer to its martial heritage, but have been involved enough in the sport to no longer believe that "there is only one fencing." The sport has moved too far away and changed to much. Martially, you want to hit and not get hit, but in the sport you just need to hit first. That's a big difference to me. On a closing note though, even though I no longer teach sport fencing, I still teach at a predominantly sport club, and I see a lot of kids and teenagers having a lot of fun, and getting to travel all over the country and the world to compete. That's pretty neat. Also about 3/4 of our team get some sort of fencing scholarship for college, which is nothing to shake a stick at. One of our former fencers (on the team before he left for college) is now the men's sabre alternate at the olympics. I'm not sure I've beaten him in a bout since he was 14 :-)

[Morgan Butler]

Here is a link to a little bit of "classical" fencing from Riefenstahls "Olympia" They show some saber in the last 15 seconds of the clip. If modern sabre looked like that I would have no complaints!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79EsZgZFZqA

[Shahril Dzulkifli]

My mistake. I thought this thread only discusses all the 2008 Olympic events in general. But it's about fencing. I'm not into that event.

[Chad Arnow]

[Bill Grandy]

[Chad Arnow]

Does anyone else really want to see Olympic longsword fencing and/or Olympic jousting?

[Justin B.]

[Jean Thibodeau]

[Eric Myers]

[Joel Chesser]

[Morgan Butler]

I'm all for Olympic cut and thrust and or Olympic Rapier and Dagger.

[Chase S-R]

I do not think any form of fencing is historical in any way. The point of medieval swordfighting was to kill people the point of fencing is to score a touch. I fence competitively and will say this it is a fun sport but is not medieval sword fighting. I would say American football is closer to medieval combat because you tackle people
Saber is my favorite and in my mind the most "medieval" because you can cut as well. Medieval rapier was %90 point work but a cut was not wrong and was also done. watching Guy Windsor train Rapier opened my eyes to its basis in street fighting it is really just about killing your opponent by executing perfect technique.
I say bravo to the fencers that won for there swift stick fighting, but i do not think it was or will ever be swordfighting.
One of the winners was only 18 Bravo! Bravo!
I really want to see the olympic archery as that has its basis back to before christ!!!!!

PLEASE NOTE: These are just my opinions and not meant to be facts or instigators of arguments.

[Steven Reich]

[Jean Thibodeau]

[Marc Pengryffyn]

I'll certainly second the idea of reviving singlestick as an olympic sport! But unless there's a bit more interest in it, or in longsword or any of the other more historical fencing styles, I think our chances are slim at best....

Many, many moons ago I was a competitive fencer in all three weapons, with saber my favorite. I loved the speed of it, the fact that it wasn't [then] electrified, and the fact that it included both cut and thrust. There was another sabreur I often fenced against who had the most exquisite style. I remember watching him once perform a magnificent double cut, the first a scalping cut across the top of the mask, followed on the backstroke with a disembowel across the stomach. I stood and applauded! (which got me some odd looks from the other competitors). It was pure backsword drill. Lovely to see, but it still only gets you one point.....

I joined the SCA while I was still fencing, and actually started using wraps in saber bouts. They were extremely effective! I only used them occasionally, and refused to explain to my opponents how on earth I was getting past their parries. I also started studying historical fencing, with the limited materials then available, and was able to incorporate the occasional bit of fancy work. I especially liked the passata sotto, and was ecstatic to see Mandy Potinkin use it in The Princess Bride! Sadly poor health brought my fencing career to a halt....

As others above have noted, the modern sport is about scoring points, not style. I don't know how that can be changed without introducing style judging, with all its accompanying politics and subjectivity, and IMO that'd be even worse. You can turn a martial art into a sport, but I think you inevitably lose a lot of the martial application in the process.

marc

[Edward Hitchens]