The Match That Changed Fencing Forever [Epee]
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 січ 2021
- How non-combativity changed epee fencing
Follow Slicer Sabre on Instagram: / slicersabre
2001 World championship final:
• 2001 Fencing World Cha...
2017 Hungary vs Switzerland:
• FE M E Team Leipzig GE...
2019 Israel vs Japan:
• Budapest 2019 ME Team ... - Спорт
![[柴犬ASMR]曼玉Manyu&小白Bai 毛发护理Spa asmr](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0TsXQ7z2Dh4/mqdefault.jpg)
After centuries of practice, training and competition, fencing has conclusively proved that the best strategy in a knife fight is not getting into a knife fight.
VERY INTERESTING TAKE INDEED!
Knife fights produce nothing but losers and corpses.
@@alloypaulson7520 that is why you always take a gun to a knife fight.
@Bill Bob I see what you did.😎
@@jusrobington A child abuser, a wife abuser, and a degenerate drunk walk in to a bar where they see Kyle Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse turns to them and says "shots are on me".
I love that Loit got a yellow card for fencing sarcastically
flag on the play, contestant is on too many levels of irony
Fencing sarcastically. My new favourite novel concept. Nice.
Loit loitered.
Imagine if they broke down and just recreated the duel from The Princess Bride!
@@LucianDevine You probably know this but the filmmakers went out of their way to make make that plausible, including using accurate terminology
Seems the solution is simple. Have the combat zone decrease as the match goes on till it is too small to avoid strikes.
I actually love this idea
@@SlicerSabreIf online games can do it, why cant we do it in real life?
That's some fortnite stuff right there. 🤣
And who said nothing good ever comes from online gaming ?
We could also have them parachute in and allow them to pick up their gear, as all they'll have when they drop is a fencing mask and some underwear
You always know its a top tier sport when you have to put a rule in place to stop people from falling asleep in the middle of play.
I have a joke with my old coach that goes something along the lines of "epee fencing? Never heard of it!" Because to sure and foil it's just so bad
This is as bad as how hitting someone too hard in karate gets you disqualified. Also, why isn't the crowd booing
@@goatymcgoatface3575 lol because it's the Olympics
@@mlzplayer9243 I don't care if it's a church sporting event where all the proceeds go to sexually abused orphans. At the end of the day, you want to see action in any sports event. (I'm being hyperbolic but my point stands)
@@goatymcgoatface3575 I agree entirely, sword fighting should be fun, your doing things wrong if it's not.
Ironically I imagine this is exactly how real life duels back then could have gone. No one wanting to die or get fatally wounded for getting hasty, waiting till the enemy got careless. I bet lots of battles went like this.
Check out the movie "the duelists." I think the first duel shows how non-cambativity would happen irl.
The main character knows his opponent is less skilled, so rather than attacking and risking a double hit, he just bides his time and waits for his oponent to become stressed until he makes an overcommittal attack. The fear of death on the actors faces makes the fight seem much more real than any sportfencing fight even if most of the fight is rather passive.
@@abicol6010 Good film.
100% agree
Today they're resolved around the press of a button
No, those guys didn't fight for money. Those guys fought because they were pissed.
The fact that dude gave an enthusiastic victory shout and cheer at the end is what makes it extra hilarious
Chess players at the high level do the same thing. You want to either win or draw and there are many ways to get a draw.
There should be a tiger on a leash at both ends forcing the fencers to the middle. If the don't fight the tiger gets more leash, if they fight the tiger gets pulled back a bit. And then if you lose you have to fight off the tiger to get out of the building.
Are you not entertained?
Dude this isn't gladiator combat
I guess you're missing the point. But watch gladiator again.. Read the comments again and re-evaluate your comment. :)
r/whoosh
this is genious
A fencing duel is a supervillain's worst nightmare
Because there, their plans could be foiled
This would be funnier if it wasn’t an eppee match but foil instead. 😭😂
You see this in kendo too. Two fencers standing tip to tip to run out the clock and then go to sudden death. I’m not surprised they introduced non-combativeness penalties for fencing. They do it in Judo and MMA too.
@WhyAmIWearing ARedShirt Hey, that’s still a first step to batsugan! 🤓
Right? I'll quit kenjutsu and go do kendo just so I can get shodan by loitering in public!
I remember Kimbo vs houston, they sure as hell needed that rule then 😂
Beyond actual combat sports, even fighting videogames have introduced timidity penalties. It's just a good thing to have to prevent incidents like this.
Whoever control middle zone most of the time during the fight should get nice chunk of extra scores. This would encourage both fencers to push their opponent back or perform risky lunges in attempt to get ahead whenever they realize they are losing by ground control scores.
Wrestling started doing something like that. Stalling became such a big problem that they started awarding a point if you pushed the other person out of bounds. Previously, you would reset to a neutral position, so if you started getting into a situation you didn't like, you could just run away out of bounds.
this is the best idea i have read so far
the only one that allows the player to do as they please
that can’t be abused
that has little to no impact in non-passive situations
I heard a story about a lacrosse player at Lehigh who changed the playing rules. He would hold the ball against his chest with the basket, run and score. A LeHigh? Graduate told me this story, he alledged that Jim Brown, pro football and actor was the "offender" who created the need for the rule that lacrosse players cannot cup the ball against the chess, run with it and score. I reply to you with an off topic response, because I think your post is a reasonable accommodation.
Obi-Wan: It's over Anakin, I have the high ground!
Anakin: Oh, um, I see.
When I was a kid, I used to do this with a tree when I was very bored, although it had more action from both sides than this video.
On the opposite end of the excitement spectrum, we could have fencing Battle Royale. Just everyone fences each other at once until one person remains.
Lets do this in a big arena with different maps that we can use. Why discriminate against other weapons? Let's include sword and bows! Let's also occasionally release genetically mutated animals to spice things up, as well as having a sponsor system for the contestants to receive extra supplies just in case this goes on for days.
Why can't we have cool things like thay
I feel like a saw a video that was basically that once
@@cheungjackjackt02006 why not make mandatory participation by country too?
@@cheungjackjackt02006 And we could call it something like the starving games or something
Easy solution, make them fight in an arena with stairs and a roped up chandelier to possibly cut down in the middle.
And make them change hands half way through.
Double bonus if they flick the opponents sword out of his hands while wearing a mask.
"Who are you?"
"No one of consequence"
"I must know"
"Get used to dissapointment"
Nope, just stop paying the looser.
Also, "En garde" wasn't even said once. Points deducted surely.
In Epee, everyone waits, then wakes up and one has won. In Sabre, everybody is zerg rushing and claiming hits. Whowever can outscream the opponent, convinces the ref. And in foil (former foilist here, now HEMA) everyone starts discussing right of way like they are in a test for a driving license. Love fencing, but the rulesets are just killing it.
Sounds like you sucked at foil.
@@eugeniobonello418 yeah, kind of did
Right of way really irritates me. I prefer to allow double hits and deduct a point from both. Allow scores to go into the negative too. Combine this with my passivity rule above and now they have to attack and defend.
Agreed. It's great for kids to learn, fun with friends, but it's just tag with sticks, not an Olympic sport.
I'm not asking for a bloodsport, but just slightly less restrictive rules in regards to something with clear "anything goes unless it's obviously bad" roots ie. Duels
The IOC has made changes. Now after 1 minute a rolling fire begins from each side forcing the combatants, now swaddled in gasoline-soaked lamé to strike before one or both combatants are flambé.
The audience: Booring! Bring something interesting!
The FIE: Introduces non-combativity penalties.
Fencers: Boooooo!
FIE: Why are you booing me? I'm right.
Non combativity bbn penalties seem dumb. I know nothing of fencing but the opponent behind should attack if he wants to win.
@@user-bl3si3kq6x the Estonian player WAS the one behind. It's a team event so he wanted to minimize risk and wait for his teammates to score points in the next rounds instead.
@@dantaehiruma5918 1v1 fencing is a team sport? That's the real issue
@@user-bl3si3kq6x actually, its a category, the same running 100m, 200m and 400m are different from 4x100/200/400m relays. Its individuals, but there's a sum. In fencing (this case), there is the 1v1 category and a team category in which they sum the total points won
@@edymiguel4247 if the points are totalled as a team, there shouldn't be a non combativity. Wouldn't it be strategic to not allow scores against you when outclassed? In real combat if you are outclassed, you would likely not attack.
The easy solution seems obvious to me: score each match individually then tally the number of wins and loses so fencers cannot rely on their teammates in team events. That's how it's done in tennis, badminton, and ping pong.
So fencers can't rely on teammates in team events... then it would be a team match.
@@willanrac wouldn't*
@@csquaredgaming Just like Tennis
@@willanrac
i came here to make that exact same quote....
a team even in which you cannot rely on your teammates, is not a team event XD
@@sabin97 you still rely on your teammates to win the entire event, but each fencer will have to rely on themselves to win your own matchup. It's how it's done in most other Olympics sports, I don't see why it can't be done for fencing. Sticking to outdated thinking like that & you'll soon find your sport dying with mediocrity and irrelevancy.
Playing competitive games online thought me one thing, often times its not how skilled a player is who decide the match but rather who makes the first mistake. Being defensive and waiting for the other players to make a mistake is easier than making a play to win a game. I can understand these guys wanting to play defensively so yeah.
waiting for the other guy to make a mistake IS the play to win the game
If the game design is shit, yes. Which is often is.
Well you just describe chess
Basically war thunder where you and another tank are facing off you know each other is round the corner and whoever fires first faces a ten second reload while the other has as long as they want (until you reload) to aim nicely and shoot wherever. So in truth stalemate only broken when someone gets bored or another teammate joins.
This happens in fighting games too, there's a really funny melee set where neither player moved for basically the entire game. It doesn't make much sense to me though, when the timer runs out you lose if you are behind. The person in the lead doesn't need to attack but the person who is behind just sitting there waiting to be declared the loser makes no sense.
Something you're not accounting for that is different from fencing is advantage as well as willpower. From a losing perspective, if you truly believe that you can't win, then you lost 100%... but to waste your opponents time as a petty revenge can still assist one's ego, regardless how small the revenge is.
what if neither are behind?
@@chaotixspark7934 uh, fighting games factor in willpower and advantages too. It’s literally the same situation. Just virtual bro
We used to "duel" with kendo practice swords in the backyard. To encourage the participants each had to do a shot of whiskey every bout. Winner of each point had to take a drink of beer. After a few rounds we had the opposite problem along with cuts, bruises, and jammed fingers.
Where there’s a rule, there are fencers taking advantage of it in unorthodox way.
It's like in any sport, if there's a loophole people will exploit it every time.
Like road cyclist aero positions/equipamient, when one gets banned another position/equipamient weirder that the previous one is invented (like the super man, spinaci, super light bikes, carbon blade wheels (except indoor), TT bars (except tt, triathlon, ultra endurance, indoor), super tuck, etc. ).
If people exploit loopholes, it's not the people's fault, they are just embracing a new meta, it's sports committees that have to put new rules in cases like these.
Stalling isnt unorthodox
This is the same energy as Smash Bros competitors stalling during a match
I've never had issues with non-combativity being abused at local tournaments, college tournaments, NACs, or Summer Nationals...seems to be an issue only with top tier international competition
yeh it seems the rules are changed as they are abused by the top 10% of fencer (and very few of those) ... most people just enjoy fencing
There was a question asked to olympians that if they could guarantee winning a gold medal in their sport but die one year later, would they take the chance? Their answer was almost always yes. Olympians train their whole lives to win one of the greatest awards in sports. Many cheat, lie, and would die trying. Yes the top 1% use tactics many consider against the interest of the sport. They want to win more then anybody and most don’t care if they seem like the villain afterwards.
Taekwondo has this problem too. On high level its so calculated thats boring. Its sometimes more exciting lower levels competition. They risk more, do more tricks and so.
In lower levels is harder to defend than to attack, so being in defensive is riskier. But the top players are way too good in defense, making attacking the riskier move.
@@MMarcuzzo Oh yeah, this is a problem for everything. When stakes rise too high, creativity is largely Squashed in favor of chasing points. a similar thing could be said for skill. people with a simpler understanding of the sport are much more prone to create their own interpretations and solutions to problems, while the masters are liable to fall back on tried and true strategies.
Redli's hurtbox is too large while Heinzer has fast start-up and is plus on block. Devs need to do some balance patches to make Redli viable in the meta.
Maybe some invincible frames on start up and a lot of recovery time after active frames to compensate it. Like a DP
@@doutsida6715 nah less recovery but just make it projectile invincible that should do it
He was just holding downback to charge his Sonic Boom and Flash Kick. Just gotta bait one of them out to waste his charge, or get him to standblock an overhead so he loses access to his invincible anti-air. Ya'll need to learn the game as is instead of instantly asking for nerfs, smdh.
all matches should just be heinzer only, no items, final destination
with the current heinzer nerfs i believe redli would have the upper hand against heinzer.
This (perhaps unsurprisingly) has similarities to "playing lame" in fighting games where you generally act very defensively and keep your distance. Some developers didn't like that so in Guilty Gear they put in a "Negative Penalty" for passive players that gets rid of all their meter (a resource that lets them do more damage (through various ways), and is tied to some defensive mechanics) I think it's cool that something similar happened in real life too.
If anything, the Swiss fencer just proved the point that aggressive fencing is the way to go
He's mostly playing like an asshole actually
@@dodehav hes an asshole because hes better than his opponent?
@@apracity7672 dude he's litterally pushing his opponent to the ground after each hits, now tell me he's better. There is no fair play here.
@@dodehav that literally didnt even happen once. Can you give me a timestamp as to when you see this?
@@apracity7672 i'm a bit hyperbolic, but after 5 minutes, the way heinzer is playing is really bothering me, my opinion may be biased but i dunno... I feel it like he's sorta playing with his opponent nerves, he's playing over agressively and i don't like it. But dude you should know that i don't know anything about fencing after all.
I bet the karate kumite match where a guy won gold by running face-first into his opponents kick and losing consciousness will live in similar infamy. Either that, or kumite will become a sport of trying to knock oneself out strategically. The FIFA event of martial arts.
That was disgusting. These should all be removed from the Olympics. They're fake sports that aren't indicative of athleticism nor any sort of actual combat proficiency. All of Iran should be ashamed to claim that win, and they should relentlessly mock the "winner".
@@Apostate1970 Too far. They may be a bit divorced from a pure martial art, but these sports definitely require athleticism. Kumite is a well-intentioned attempt to make the legit martial art of karate competitive. It’s not there yet, IMO, but it’s close. Fencing is even less of a martial art, but it’s ridiculously fun! Sabre in particular requires considerable athleticism. I strongly recommend trying each of the three fencing disciplines yourself. It is not easy. Also, the side-view does it no favors. Every aspect of fencing is intended to fool the opponent, who is in front of you!
You guys watch Kumite!?
Kata is the ultimate form of Karate competition. It's the eternal, asymptomatic chase for the perfection of the form.
(the comment is only partially a joke)
@@oniflrog4487 Asymptomatic?
@@cmw12 It was meant to be asymptotic 😂
For each x time of passivity the fencer furthest from their back line revives a point. Forces the passive fencer forward.
YES!!!! Best idea so I've read!!! This makes it realistic, because making ground is fundamental element of all combat!
I like it. It's simple, with clear consequences.
@@amjan i think you mean "drawing the opponent to ground favorable to you", which is the opposite of what is described here
Watching Heinzer vs Redli looks like I am watching a sabreur trying to take on a high level epeeist. This is comical on so many levels.
Your not wrong actually
1:00 "This time, the referee tried to explain to the fencers that they are supposed to fence in their fencing match."
1:25 "It was not very effective"
I think it should be handled much like a "stalling" call in wrestling is handled. If you're called for passivity the first time its a warning. Each subsequent call would result in a penalty touch for the opponent. If both are using this rule knowing that one has a higher score and can "double passive" until they are both awarded penalty touches, The rule should state you cannot win a match on a passivity penalty touch. Just spitballing. I also think that with the addition of reliable wireless touch systems, epee should be fought "in the round". In other words, in a ring, not on a piste, giving the fencers the ability to use any lateral movement. Stepping out of the ring would result in a warning the first time and penalty touches for subsequent violations.
Come on ref, I promise I'm actually trying, I'm just weak af and winded. it just looks like I'm stalling.
The rule exist now
Other than the round, literally everything you have described has existed for a while
Funny fact: the ref for the first match (Hun vs Est) is the same one in Sui vs Hun
The man must have had ptsd
Most sports break down when both sides decide not to play. That's why passivity is very often sanctionable offence, both in and out of the arena.
There is a rule now in epee fencing that if you stay passive for 1 minute straight then you get a yellow card and if you do it again then you get another yellow card which result in you getting a red card which gives the opponent 1 point so fencing is alot more interesting now i promise😄
Sabre fencing had always been interesting
Except, if 1 competitor is passive for a minute straight... wouldn't that also mean that the other competitor was as well? I mean, if one person attacked the other, neither would be passive because even the defender would be active at that point... Even in this video when the referee was issuing warnings/penalizing one player I was wondering why he didn't do the same to the other, when he too wasn't attacking. Very odd.
@@Nayazeta Sabre in one sentence : "Parry this you filthy casual !"
Épée and fleuret in one sentence : "which of us has the right of way, fellow gentleman ?"
@@RatingsMan it depends on who’s leading. For example if i lead 5:4 and the is a passive minute then he gets the yellow card. If i’m down a point or two then i get the yellow card and if the score is even the both fencers get a card.
@@chrisb9143 ??? Saber and Foil has right of way rules, not epee. Epeeist don't need to care about right of way because if a double touch is made then both parties receive a point. So that joke isn't completely on point nor on target.
What was really painful to watch for me in the first video is how unconditioned many fencers of the old times seem to be - no offense, but Loits moves, body fitness, etc are just not on the Olympic level... it looks terrible.
Fencing has definitely come a long way in terms of athleticism!
@@SlicerSabre and indirectly this has to do with the inability to construct a good attack pattern for both Loit and his vis-à-vis - attacking is usually much more demanding on your fitness skills. And btw, maybe in some form the new rules have also resulted in more fit epee fencers - cause sometimes you NEED to attack, even if you don’t generally want to
Fencers in all 3 weapons are more athletic these days, but don't judge a book by its cover. People have body shamed Seth Kelsey in youtube comments too, but his results speak for themselves. If you fenced these guys, or even watched them in person, you would know better.
I saw Loit in the the early 2000's - he is a beast of a man. He had his game and if someone came in to distance, he had an extremely quick hand.
@@markhecht3732 Well, some of them were really athletic, no question about it, I was talking more about a general fitness percentage then and now. And what exactly would I know better if I had fenced them then? - the fact that they were good or maybe even great at this sport? I know it now even without fencing with any of them in their prime - I was talking about a specific athletic aspect which is now much more developed. Cheers.
Is this where the term “sitting on the fence” came from? If not, they certainly were doing it!
Bruh
sky bound zoo you get the _point_ though…or not, because they aren’t fighting
I remember my fencing instructor tell me about this when he told me the rules of my first competition. It's weird how i've not searched for stuff like fencing but still this comes up in my recommended.
The Algorithm sees all.
The Algorithm knows all.
If you've ever "liked" comment or even read an article about fencing, if you've ever looked at the price of fencing equipment on Amazon, or if you're friends with someone else who is into fencing, the algorithm knows and will find you.
You probably Google it or used some other social media most of these social media share data with each other
UA-cam recommended this to me and I have never fenced, seen fencing or looked up fencing before. Not complaining,
I know we’re all talking about the video content, but I LOVE that fact that you put (Epee) in the title because as a Sabre fencer it’s so annoying watching tips n tricks for “fencing” but it’ll be a foil or epee video. It’s the little thing!
This is the main reason I got into HEMA as opposed to MOF. Not to say MOF fencers aren't great athletes or talented but rather that the art of fencing has become more a game than a martial art. We still have plenty of variance in scoring rules but in general the idea is to hit and not get hit, as receiving an after blow or doubling in a real fight would more than likely get you severely injured or killed. As far as I understand it this isn't much of a concern in MOF so long as you landed the first hit.
that's the main problem i have with epee
No right of way and double touches is what I loathe about Epee. But I'm a saberist so that shouldn't come as a surprise.
@@Aecusim I'm not 100% familiar with the difference in rule sets for each weapon, would you mind explaining? To me the entire concept is to avoid being hit at all costs so I'm a little lost on these specifics lol.
@@ultimomos5918 Foil and Sabre are similar because of Right of Way if you've known about fencing, their differences are the way the weapons are use, one being tip only (foil), the other being full blade length (sabre).
Epee is similar to foil because tip only, but it has no right of way which means whoever hits, gets a point. Since there is no ROW, simultaneous hit is possible, and that's double hit, both fencers get a point.
When I was a kid, I used to play this football video game where I was much better on offense than on defense....so, to win, I would opt to kick first, then I would score as quickly as I could and go for two points after each score. then, i would let the other team score so I could get the ball back. after the half, I get the ball back, then just try time it so I would always have more points and longer possession of the ball.
....to me, this is similar, with a huge difference: this seems to be a tactic that works, whereas my actions were me trying to play the odds, not learning to play the game.
Thank You, this is educational! :)
I knew nothing of fencing before this video, now I know something, thank you very much for this one, very informative
Thanks for educating me on this:)
This reminds me of the episode of "The Big Bang Theory", where Walawisz and Kuthrapali were having a wrestling match to see which one would be the sidekick if they ever became super heroes -- spent over a half an hour dancing around and never touched each other.
Damn, Max delivers really glorious moments)
In the high school foil league that I was in, there was a rule that if there was 1 minute of consecutive non-action (meaning no blade contact or serious attempts at earning a point), the match would end. The fencer with the most points at that time is declared the victor. If both fencers have the same number of points, there is a sudden victory overtime of 1 minute. One fencer is designated by coin flip to be the winner if no point is scored before the overtime period starts.
These are the official non-combativity and priority minute rules implemented as a direct result of this match in the video.
I dont even do fencing or know nothing about it, but the sports implications in general this have makes a lot of interesting to watch
I don’t know how the rules were back in day but not listening to the referee is cardworthy according to the rules, and if the referee sais they have to fence they have to fence or get penalised
In some ways, what is happening here is a microcosm of what happens in too many matches: needless posturing and willfully gaming the rules. That said, it takes three to do nothing.
In the early days of non-combativity, I had a guy at a local TELL ME he was going to go passive, just so I'd watch for it.
there's no such thing as gaming the rules. you can either maximize your competitive advantage, or you can lose.
I guess the saying is true " the master never fights"
that used to happen in the past with duels where neither of them attacked and putting a rule about being too passive can help prevent it from happening as much but you can use that rule to gain an advantage
I still want to give the priority-period system that was floated a bit ago a try, i thought it was fun
amico, la priorità con la
spada sarebbe una rovina
@@krszam4112 oh no, that's not what i meant. A couple of years ago or so there was this idea where epee fights would be split into 45 second periods or something. At the beginning of each period, priority would be assigned to one fencer and if no point was scored in the time, the fencer with priority would score a point. Doubles and single were scored normally.
This would encourage fencers to fight more and prevent one fencer merely defending a small lead and running out the clock and force both fencers to employ both offense and defense more evenly throughout the bout.
Apparently the idea was scrapped because it would have required too many timers keeping track if different things, but I think it could be made to work and would evolve the sport in an interesting way.
@@alessandrogiovannone3742 I don't see the problem with a fencer defending a small lead. They got that lead somehow; if the other side wants to win, it's on them to attack to overcome that lead.
I dont play fencing but I cant help but draw parallels to competitive gaming, specifically Smash Bros Melee where in their 1v1 ruleset a modification to reduce the clock to discourage stalling and camping and encourage more interesting play is being deliberated. I personally have no issue with it since most games end in less than 3 minutes but i cant help but think what ramifications this might have for the future seeing as how people are willing to go to great extents to win
This exact same thing happened in smash to be fair ahaha
Even if it's not the subject, the way how fencing relay work is just so great.
The fact the way to count points advantage the team which are behind, without feeling unfair (at least to watch) is so great.
[for those who doesn't know, the first relay stop after 3 min or 5 points. The second after 3 more minutes or first team to 10 points. That mean, if we are at 30-15, and if on a relay, a team is really in an excellent mood and win 75% of his points, if it's the team which is ahead he will gain 5 more points while the losing team will only gain ~1.66 (35-17), but if it's the team which are behind which win 75% of his points, they will gain 15 points while the other team only gain 5 (35-30).]
Hurts my brain.
US Men's Epee team has done it a few years ago at an international tournament, fencers coming on guard, saluting each other, and ref moving to the next encounter, over and over. I know it was Soren on the team, so I'm guessing Seth and Cody too. Should be on UA-cam, but I can't find that video again. Anyone has the link?
This is the kind of stuff that happens to martials arts when you take away the risk/damage factor and it gets reduced to point fighting, thank God for MMA for saving most of martial arts that are empty handed
In Judo you give points to the opponent if you aren't attacking until he eventually wins. And you can always win with an ippon, no matter how many points you are behind, so you always have a chance to turn the fight around
The men’s Olympic karate gold medal was a joke
MMA in the 90s had issues with matches where the fight went to the ground and nothing happened. Pride FC solved this by allowing the referee to stand up the fighters. UFC instituted a round system. Some the key fighters didn't like this like Royce and Oleg. They complained it turned took away the "realism" of the fight and made it more "sports" based. From what I heard, wrestlers were also used less as that style was deemed less entertaining.
@@jayaychare7318 I totally forgot about that but that's another great example
yup. I study HEMA and while we do wear a lot of kit to avoid injury we generally use scoring systems that impose penalties/losses for taking an after blow or doubling. It's also why I love my school so much. We train to NOT get hit because in an actual sword fight doing so meant you were probably going to die, which uh, is kinda the antithesis to being a good martial artist lol
A strange game. The only winning move is not to play.
The second match was intense
What a comeback fencing super aggressive only to have your opponent forfeit.
I think, the missed minute should be added to the rest time, so that they will get tired for the next round. Then it wont pay off ... Ten push ups would increase that effect
I think it should be a double black card. If you don't want to fence, go home.
Exactly. Black cards will change their attitude very quickly.
Kinda hard for the gold medal match.
@@ericdew2021 , send 1 and 2 home empty handed, no points. promote everyone else 2 spots. Refs go to the bar early.
@@ericdew2021 nah, just have the next two fencers fence it.
I mean should also footbal players get black card when they are wasting time? Its part of the game. Tactic if u want.
no sympathy for the Japanese team. I'm not against using the loophole (as long as it's not an infringement like yakimenko-ing during the bout) for winning the bout (in this case, using the new passivity rules p-black loophole) but I can't believe that (apparently) NO ONE in the Japanese team questioned something wrong with the Israeli team like... the Israeli team tried the exact same method against Japan but their FIE rank, which means they would lose the match if they continued to use this method so the Japanese team should question this question : "why is the Israeli team willing to lose intentionally? Are they trying something funny?" but apparently no one realize before it was too late.
It's completely the Japanese team fault for not questioning that. Also I like your infringement bit on "Yakimenko-ing", cause Yakimenko was such an arsehole for doing that in that sabre bout against that young french fencer.
someone in the management of the japanese team fckd up.....how could they not know they had already ran out of substitutes while the filthy yoos hadnt?
@@sabin97 hehe
israel playing fair. Lol nice joke
It’s like two seniors fighting in the grocery store parking lot, over a handicap space, throwing air punches from about ten feet away from each other while cussing 😂😂😂
Love how they raise their weapons pointing on each other sometimes, giving me some "No u" vibes
P-cards, like them or not, is keeping us an Olympic sport
I thought in the old fencing rules it says that if you don’t try your hardest you also commit an offense to the rules, so officially this was already illegal. I tried to look it up, but some people seem to be not just a little fed up with the old situation. The rules in the way they have been written come off as being way more stern and strict in supporting good sportsmanship. That actually gives me hope. Hurrah FIE.
Well that old rule is up for interpretation, "trying your hardest", it could be seen that these two were trying their hardest to win by not engaging as it was the most effective strategy for their end goal.
@@notan3144 The FIE is a fencing union. If you don’t want to fence, you’re not even allowed to become a member. It’s against the right to union if you become a member even though you don’t want to fence.
@@emilehobo Again interpretation.
@@notan3144 No. You are manipulating.
@@emilehobo you are arguing against the need for courts, appellate courts and Supreme courts.
If there are specifically written and agreed upon rules that are not so hyper specific as to remove all possibility of interpretation, then a human, seeking prestige and/or prize, will attempt, with all of their ability, skill, and professionalism, to obscure and obfuscate the interaction; such that they can attempt to gain an advantage.
This is why everybody worries about "wishing with a genie". Because the Genie's interpretation may not match the wishers intended interpretation.
The following will both ruin and solve all wishing issues and _also_ demonstrate my point:
(Standard genie rules apply; no additional wishes, resurrection, love, etc.)
1) I, the wisher of this currently being spoken wish, wish that: all wishes: past, present, future, and all increments both now and forever; with and without "time", act in accordance to how I, the currently wishing wisher, wish for all wishes to occur.
2) I wish for omnipotence, even such that it automatically corrects paradoxes and am capable, for example: to create an object that I, myself and current speaker and wisher of this wish, cannot lift; until such a time as I choose that I am now able to lift it, and omniscience, even such that it automatically corrects paradoxes and am capable, for example: to know contradictory knowledge simultaneously by compartmentalizing contradictory omniscience: such that I am capable of both know pure "evil" and pure "morality" simultaneously.
3) free the genie (this one is obvious)
But see _how_ nonsensical one has to go to eliminate loopholes with a hypothetical imagine creation aka Genie, just to protect ourselves from what we expect the genie to do. Granted it is of my opinion that we project our known human faults onto other non-human entities, because we have zero idea if a genie would screw our wishes.
_But we DO know, how another human would manipulate the rules in to THEIR OWN advantage in nearly every situation of hypothetical scenario._
And that is my entire point.
TLDR: humans _will_ find the loop hole and abuse it.
Are individual competitions referred to as bouts and team events as matches or is this a U.S. versus international term difference? I live in the U.S. and have attended many national tournaments up to the highest level as a spectator/parent and I am accustomed to bout. Granted, I only watched individual competition.
They are pretty much interchangeable but bout is more common for USA
0:35
That victory scream after doing nothing really sells this LOL
Just put there two walls like from a videogame pushing them towards each other slowly. You don't lose if you touch the wall.
This is the best fencing I've ever seen.
7:25.. IM JUST AMAZED. THATS SO MUCH ENERGY
This looks like a comedy skit. It's about a step away from being an actual Monte Python episode.
I want to see the olympic contest of Claymores!
Even chess between the GM is more interesting to me, although I hardly know what they are trying.
chess is the height of what sports should be.....you have to simultaneously play offense and defense. and your actions directly interfere on what your opponent can do.
@@sabin97 The only way it's not amazing is when Grandmasters purposefully play a known forced early draw in the opening like pussies.
The solution is really simple. Just introduce King of the Hill rules. The space in the center should only be large enough for one person, the one to hold the space for the longest time will win the relay point. Both combatants will now fight to dominate the space, while this is happening, the other points are counted as normal.
King of the Hill point can be more than 1 pt. Whatever is right to motivate the players.
Perfect example of Yoda "Do or do not; there is no try"
Why was the Estonian guy stalling in the first place? He was behind in points, so it naturally seems it was on him to initiate the exchanges to make a comeback.
Loit decided that his teammates would have a better chance at attacking and closing the gap but he didn't want to risk making the gap even larger.
@@SlicerSabre Ahh, so it was a team match. I thought it was individual for some reason.
exactly. team fencing make no sense.
"How do you think non-combativity should be dealth with?"
That really depends on a lot of factors.
Mostly regarding:
1) what the goals are
2) how any change would influence other things, and if those other things would also be a problem
For instance, you could add a rule that places a scoring value on the distance of each player's feet relative to the piste (the playing area). With the idea being to give a type of alternate scoring special points for the time each player spent as being the player the farthest from their own back edge of the piste. This scoring of special points could be what is used to determine the winner in a timeout. You could even change color of piste zones to create a more visual experience for this, etc.
But this type of change could have any number of unwanted things come out of it. It adds non-intuitive complexity to the sport. It changes the ways players play. It requires players keeping track of new things like lines on the piste, guessing who has gotten what points (unless there is some audible tracker, etc.), etc. Plus any other number of things, or how those things can then themselves influence further things.
For another example of a possible change, you could add a "shot clock". Where players alternate being designated in control ("possession") for set time interval. And if there is combat within that player's possession, then they get a special point, and possession changes to the other player. Also, possession changes anytime a regular point is scored. This scoring special points could be what is used to determine the winner in a timeout.
There are many more of such rules that could be created and tried out. It all depends on what is desired and what the subsequent outcomes are. It's likely that any change made will require ongoing re-visiting to ensure the change is good and that it doesn't need re-tuning or removal.
Even if these types of rules don't make sense for the sport (which is going to be the case for most possible rule changes), they could still be fun or interesting variations to try out. Which might lead to the develop of some interesting or useful alternate formats and player and audience experiences.
If you know anything about fencing that rule sucks
@@mdhcccc
Thank you for the feedback. It is appreciated.
I basically know almost nothing about fencing.
I don't know the goals of fencing for those who are into it. And I don't know how any change would influence other things for those who are into it. And if those other things would also be a problem for those who are into it.
I do have a background in game design. Which is why my emphasis is on a method for potential changes. And not the actual sample changes I listed. A method of identifying goals, and also in identifying and tracking how possible changes have subsequent impacts. Ideally, this method would be done by (or with) those with key knowledge in the sport and community. Or, also with those who represent any subgroups that the sport is interested in pleasing.
I have a general interest but very little knowledge or experience about the sport. My possible changes are just examples of playing around with variables.
What a stunner! I am especially enthralled at 2:10.
Force offensive and defensive rounds. So, if you're on an offensive round you have to win the bout with your opponent beyond the middle line; if your opponent pushes you back, even if you strike them you aren't awarded points. If you're on a defensive round, points are awarded as usual if you win from anywhere. Rounds can alternate even if a competitor has not yet scored, perhaps 30 seconds into a bout if nobody has been struck the rounds of Offense / Defense shifts. This can be easily portrayed by Green and Red lights beyond your opponent; if you see a Green light behind your opponent, you're on Offense and if you see a Red light behind your opponent, you're on defense. - This will certainly force teams that want to play passive and drag out their lead to an easy victory to have to keep fighting (giving the other team and more fair chance) because if they are pushed back when it is their turn for offense, even on a win or what would normally be a draw (1pt for each team), only the defending competitor could be awarded the point. Tada, easy fix.
Didn't they recently change this rule to force fencers to fight?
wait.... 4 minutes? (edit : I'm referring to 2001 Estonia vs Hungary bout, whose individual match is 4 minutes instead of 3)
Yeah they had 4 minute relays at that time
A excellent example on how the easiest solution is often the best, you can’t argue with next to flawless results, “skills” almost never win against a abuseable advantage, mechanical loophole or just logic
Have the floor lit up each side with LEDs, in 2-3ft increments. It starts all green, but the judge can turn sections red if the combat is to passive, until both fencers are fighting in the middle only afew ft apart.
Mini combat sports have a similar problem, what do you do when the audience wants action and one combatant is an expert counterpuncher?
It also happens sometimes in the group stage of the World Cup soccer tournament. Under that format for teams play a round robin with two teams advancing, and it is possible that the two teams scheduled to play each other last both come into the match with two wins. Under that scenario, if the final game ends in a draw, both teams advance. And since 0-0 is a draw, the optimal strategy is to play very tight defense and ignore offense.
I honestly really like that. I don't see a reason why strategic play should be penalized. It is just that I don't watch sports for action to happen but to see athletes try their hardest to win.
Still I see audience at sporting events more as a byproduct than something essential, I see how without audiences professional sports can't function, but not every sport needs to be treated as a profession, or a bussiness venture by sports governing body
As a foilist, the idea that fencing needs passivity rules seems bizarre
I grew up with Sabre but now have to admit that I'm better at Epee (as I've grown taller and slower....)
I still can't stand the pace of most epee bouts, so I enjoy mixing it up.
As an èpèeist, I can’t understand how people fence so aggressively. We’re so cagey.
@@mayonnaise2396 it's fun charging around the piste trying to hit the 'kill zones :)' and not tickling wrists. I do enjoy fencing a bit of epee though if I need to slow down
@@mayonnaise2396 épéeist is the correct spelling mon cher ;-)
Come at me bro.
No you come at me.
No you come at me bro.
And THIS crap is why I do sabre.
We are no better. In Epee, defence is really strong so people try to stay on the defence. In Epee, that results in non combativity because no one wants to attack. Its the opposite in sabre. Attack (having right of way) is king. So people try to attack. In Sabre, you end up with tons of simultaneous actions because no one wants to go defensive.
In epee they do nothing for a minute, then someone scores a touch.
In foil they hit each other off target for a minute, then someone scores a touch.
In saber they both hit immediately, then they review the video for a minute and award someone the touch ;-)
@@markhecht3732 You left out the screaming in sabre.
Shorter rounds with the default winner being the person who has taken the most ground?
or bonus ground points for when you scored would make it perfect
True masters of their craft
I don't know you, but I rofled watching this!
Unless they are all fencing at the same time, team fencing is stupid.
So anyway, only Loit that got carded by referee?
I have solution, contracting field(piste). There is main timer what counts round like it does now and there is another timer that is alot shorter like 30 seconds or so wich is contracting the field from 14m to 0m wich makes them to attack at some point, so you get atleast some action in 30 seconds. Ofc i have not put much thought to the optimal timer for contracting field but it just popped in my head.
This looks like a Monty Python skit
Why didn't the 2001 guys attack, they were losing?
Team matches are by teams of 3, each fencer going against each fencer of opposing team. Then there's 4th team member that's a substitute. Non combativity usually arises when a team doesn't want to end up losing by a large number of points, as this makes it harder to make a comeback. They would rather let all but the last bout pass without a change in score. Then try to win on last bout.
Epee is the most defensive of the 3 weapons. The lack of right of way rule means an attack might be cancelled by hitting the attacker before he scores. As such, even winning teams would rather just keep their small lead than risk reversing their lead by being greedy.
In the end, it's as if they want to convert the team match to just a single bout between their best members.
It's amazing how fencing can turn something as exciting as a sword fight into an absolute snoozefest. I would be happy to be proven wrong, but I doubt any of these fencers would last more then a couple seconds on an actual battlefield.
The reality is noone lasts more than a couple seconds on an actual battlefield. Skills dont be anything on a battlefield, only luck will save your aas.
@@williamakers1101 Funny, because people who were skilled at combat did better in war.
Civilian Hunters, swordsmen, boxers, etc. Where all found to be desirable in combat.
I must ask, what are you basing your conclusion off of?
@@supremecaffeine2633 Skill can get you through just about any scenario that's properly accounted for. However skill means nothing if you get unlucky, even the invincible Achilles died to a lucky shot. It can happen to anyone
Please stay quiet. Its a athletic sport not a martial art. Its like saying a football player wouldn't be able to survive a battle.
If you really wanna get into it fencing started a military thing for officers and for the rich. Like William said no one would last a couple seconds on a battlefield.
A slowly moving wall of death spikes behind each participant.
I like how they are moving up and down just like those sprite fighters in old arcade games when they are idle.
what do you think the animation in fighting games is based on
This is a joke, literally. I trained sport fencing for almost 6 years ( also epee) and things like this were something common at tournaments. And that's why I left it behind. I bet that fencing masters from past centuries would laugh at this so hard. Do you want to know how to swordfight? Check out YT tutorials by HEMA instructors or attend HEMA classes