With modern reffing, point at 4:06 is definitely attack left. Madrigal is simply ahead. These days, if one fencer does a waiting preparation (any kind of staggered tempo, hop step, slide step, ballestra, etc) while the other fencer commits to the attack (simple, smooth tempo adv lunge or double adv lunge) it cannot be simul. Refs will always call attack or AIP for the fencer waiting or attack-counter attack for the fencer attacking straight. In this case, Madrigal is doing a hop step (waiting prep) and is able to start ahead of Xu. It sort of looks like they're hitting at a similar time because Madrigal is lunging earlier and Xu's hand is extending earlier, kind of "cancelling each other out." But this is an illusion that happens pretty commonly on video. In person, its usually much clearer when someone is lunging first, esp with fencers at this level because there's so much power behind each lunge. Im sure that Xu doesn't seem bothered because he knows it should be against him. The very next touch was the exact same scenario with Madrigal using the hop step, but this time Xu commits even harder than before and is able to not let Madrigal get ahead of him. Simple saber stuff - you expect your opponent to wait so you choose to do strong attack off the line. I think the fact that Xu made that tactical decision shows that he more or less understood the situation I just explained.
7:20 Yes, stay up to date with what kind of calls are being made, because tomorrow, you can be sure no one will call them that way anymore, until they change the day after tomorrow.
Simul for the 8th hit. I think this is overturned if Xu calls for video. But one (minor) mistake in the first half is pretty good I think, I like Decker's refereeing. I love analysis videos like this, the more you can add about the tactical game, the preparations and decision-making the better.
Very useful. With point-in-line it ALWAYS looks too big on slo-mo. Everyone who likes defending through line will admit the point goes off target (very, very briefly) every single time you land one.
Technically at 1:38, Madrigal's foot had landed first, so no hit. BTW IMO such a stupid rule. At 4:06 agree that it's probably simultaneous. With the benefit of frame-by-frame I'd say it was Xu, arm first, but at full speed pretty hard to separate them.
Yeah hitting after foot landing has been mostly ignored for many seasons now, even though the rules haven't changed at all. Yet another example of where refereeing is broken.
THANKS.. my sabre refereeing is not as good as it was (i used to fence a LOT in the 90's... all three weapons... glutton for punishment) and the swing and miss makes sense as a failed attack.. hmm.. i will see if i can include this..as not too confidant re sabre refereeing .. question if one fencer has a line and the other fencer attacks into it then the person with the line lunges.. i would say they no longer have the line having made an attack and it is usually into preparation of the attacker... as when they lunge they lose priority of the line... is taht correct? i ref'd this recently and one of the more experienced fencers said i was wrong.. worried that I may be outdated in that call... what do you think?
As long as the point is on target they should be fine. It's quite common to present a line - and as your opponent attempts the beat to move forward. Their beat can end up in the guard (automatic parade-riposte) or you can hit with blockout.
@@iainmcclure416 i am still wondering about a call i made recently .. an experienced fencer said he had the line but he had the line yes but lunged into the other fencers attack.. so i calld it line then lost the line when attacked into opponents attack out of time.... he argued that he still had the line... he was winning (easily) anyway and only a club training bout.. he is a very experienced fencer and other fencer was a novice i told him what i saw - that he had the line then changed it to an attack.. but the other fencer was steadily advancing with hand extending (slowly) .. if he had stayed with the line extended and did a derobemont i woudl have given it to him... i just jokingly said to him (he laughed) that well i just didn't like him ... mind you he didn't try to be fancy with a line again
Explain sabre : 8 minute video, AKA the referee still gets to decide, three Refs in a room will get you 5+ interpretations, and the "the calls are evolving" Explain Epee : when the light comes on the fencer gets a point, unless he broke a few simple rules. Taking the scoring system away from the athletes and forcing the referee to decide who scores a point means the rules of sabre and foil fencing are massively broken.
Point in line must hit with the tip. Interestingly I can't find this explicitly stated in the rules. Although I guess that in order to hit with the edge the point would have to stray from the target so perhaps it is implicit in t.15
Can we stop bringing referees into the program if we have an awful system to begin with. I speak for Canadian fencing and I say the current referees need their licenses revoked and re-earned after a certain number of years and we also need more training for amateurs before putting them in competitions.
For the novice refs out there. Please also phrase the action is there is a single light. It helps the fencers understand how you call actions.
With modern reffing, point at 4:06 is definitely attack left. Madrigal is simply ahead. These days, if one fencer does a waiting preparation (any kind of staggered tempo, hop step, slide step, ballestra, etc) while the other fencer commits to the attack (simple, smooth tempo adv lunge or double adv lunge) it cannot be simul. Refs will always call attack or AIP for the fencer waiting or attack-counter attack for the fencer attacking straight. In this case, Madrigal is doing a hop step (waiting prep) and is able to start ahead of Xu. It sort of looks like they're hitting at a similar time because Madrigal is lunging earlier and Xu's hand is extending earlier, kind of "cancelling each other out." But this is an illusion that happens pretty commonly on video. In person, its usually much clearer when someone is lunging first, esp with fencers at this level because there's so much power behind each lunge.
Im sure that Xu doesn't seem bothered because he knows it should be against him. The very next touch was the exact same scenario with Madrigal using the hop step, but this time Xu commits even harder than before and is able to not let Madrigal get ahead of him. Simple saber stuff - you expect your opponent to wait so you choose to do strong attack off the line. I think the fact that Xu made that tactical decision shows that he more or less understood the situation I just explained.
loved it. Waiting for more
(please make these kind of videos ,it really helps)
7:20 Yes, stay up to date with what kind of calls are being made, because tomorrow, you can be sure no one will call them that way anymore, until they change the day after tomorrow.
I was geniunely expecting a satire video on how messed up it is, turns out it is a serious video on how messed up it is
Simul for the 8th hit. I think this is overturned if Xu calls for video. But one (minor) mistake in the first half is pretty good I think, I like Decker's refereeing.
I love analysis videos like this, the more you can add about the tactical game, the preparations and decision-making the better.
Very useful. With point-in-line it ALWAYS looks too big on slo-mo. Everyone who likes defending through line will admit the point goes off target (very, very briefly) every single time you land one.
Milenchev has been real quiet since this dropped🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️
Excellent video.
Thank you )
Technically at 1:38, Madrigal's foot had landed first, so no hit. BTW IMO such a stupid rule.
At 4:06 agree that it's probably simultaneous. With the benefit of frame-by-frame I'd say it was Xu, arm first, but at full speed pretty hard to separate them.
Yeah hitting after foot landing has been mostly ignored for many seasons now, even though the rules haven't changed at all. Yet another example of where refereeing is broken.
Ottimo video
Studying for my FIE exam. Could you do a video on when and how to accept bribes? Thanks!
Refereeing ASMR
It definitely looks like simul to me
She also could have been influenced by Madrigal's celebration
THANKS.. my sabre refereeing is not as good as it was (i used to fence a LOT in the 90's... all three weapons... glutton for punishment) and the swing and miss makes sense as a failed attack.. hmm.. i will see if i can include this..as not too confidant re sabre refereeing ..
question if one fencer has a line and the other fencer attacks into it then the person with the line lunges.. i would say they no longer have the line having made an attack and it is usually into preparation of the attacker... as when they lunge they lose priority of the line... is taht correct? i ref'd this recently and one of the more experienced fencers said i was wrong.. worried that I may be outdated in that call... what do you think?
As long as the point is on target they should be fine. It's quite common to present a line - and as your opponent attempts the beat to move forward. Their beat can end up in the guard (automatic parade-riposte) or you can hit with blockout.
@@iainmcclure416 but does lunging with the line mean that fencer no longer has the line but it has changed totally to an attack
@albertbresca8904 No
@@iainmcclure416 i am still wondering about a call i made recently .. an experienced fencer said he had the line but he had the line yes but lunged into the other fencers attack.. so i calld it line then lost the line when attacked into opponents attack out of time....
he argued that he still had the line... he was winning (easily) anyway and only a club training bout.. he is a very experienced fencer and other fencer was a novice
i told him what i saw - that he had the line then changed it to an attack.. but the other fencer was steadily advancing with hand extending (slowly) .. if he had stayed with the line extended and did a derobemont i woudl have given it to him...
i just jokingly said to him (he laughed) that well i just didn't like him ...
mind you he didn't try to be fancy with a line again
Explain sabre : 8 minute video, AKA the referee still gets to decide, three Refs in a room will get you 5+ interpretations, and the "the calls are evolving"
Explain Epee : when the light comes on the fencer gets a point, unless he broke a few simple rules.
Taking the scoring system away from the athletes and forcing the referee to decide who scores a point means the rules of sabre and foil fencing are massively broken.
first
second
Is a point in line attack valid if it touches a valid area but not with the tip? (i.e. edge of the sabre)
Cool video!
Point in line must hit with the tip.
Interestingly I can't find this explicitly stated in the rules. Although I guess that in order to hit with the edge the point would have to stray from the target so perhaps it is implicit in t.15
In practice - you have to land the point. Ideally with a nice bend in the blade as you hit to chest - that looks really cool
Can we stop bringing referees into the program if we have an awful system to begin with. I speak for Canadian fencing and I say the current referees need their licenses revoked and re-earned after a certain number of years and we also need more training for amateurs before putting them in competitions.