Animated Foil Presiding Tutorial

This article is designed to explain the basic principles behind refereeing foil fencing to a novice or non-fencer and to help them to understand why the president will decide to award a hit to one side in one case and the very next hit award a hit against in seemingly very similar circumstances.

With practise it is possible to learn what to look for and differentiate between the various cases one comes across. However the problem is that to begin with, the bladework is usually so fast that it is difficult to know where to start. In the most complex cases - where the fencers hit within 1/20th second of each other - multiple lights are lit on the box, and it since there is usually no 'slow motion' replay - the untrained eye is trying to appreciate subtle diferences between movements in 'real-time' which can be confusing.

The animation in this article repeats indefinitely and is approximately three times slower than reality. This gives the viewer the opportunity to see the action at a more reasonable pace, and to understand what is going on.

Simple Attacks

The easiest hits to preside occur when all the action comes from one fencer. There are four lights on the top of the electronic presiding equipment known as 'the box'. A coloured lamp will light when a fencer hits on-target - red for the left, green for the right. A white light indicates that the fencer has hit off-target. In the case above, the fencer on the right has lunged and hit on-target whilst the fencer on the left is unprepared. The result is a successful hit to the right.

Single White Light

So what is happening here then? As the fencer on the right steps forwards, his white (off-target) light is lit, but it is obvious he has not hit his opponent. This usually indicates a fault in the equipment. Typically dirt in the tip of the foil has caused the button to remain stuck in the down position. The president should call halt, get the equipment mended and resume the fencers engarde from where they were.

Attack - Counter Attack

Things become more complex when more than one light is lit. This occurs when both fencers complete their attack within 1/20th of a second each other. The question the president then asks himself is 'Who initiated the attack?' Foil and sabre fencing both contain the concept of right of way - that is, if your offensive action starts first and your action is successful, you will receive the hit.

In this case the fencer on the right extends his arm fractionally before the fencer on the left. Therefore the attack is from the right, the counter attack comes from the left. The second question asked is 'Did the attack succeed?' - that is were any lamps lit on this side for this action. In this case the answer is yes since two lamps (both a green and a white) have been lit on the right-hand side of the box.

Now, a white light indicates that the fencer has hit off-target, and a coloured light indicates that a fencer has hit on-target, so what has happened here? The fencer must have hit his opponent twice - initially off-target, then slightly later on-target, this usually occurs when the fencer catches his opponent's sleeve or bib on the way to hitting the chest. Therefore the attack from the right is off-target.

Since the action from the right has landed - even though it is off-target, the action from the left is not considered - it is said to be 'out of time'. The result is an attack off-target to the right. No hit is scored.

Parry Reposte

Both the red and green lamps have been lit in this case, and so the same two questions ('Who initiated the attack?', 'Did it succeed?') must be asked. Since there is only one offensive action - the attack, a fleche, comes from the right. However, the fencer on the left has seen the attack, steps back and parries (blocks) his opponent's blade - therefore the initial attack from the right fails. The parry now gives the fencer on the left 'right of way'. So the president considers whether the action from the left (a reposte) succeeds. This hits on-target, without any further defensive action from the right. The continuation of the fleche from the right is 'out-of-time'. The result is a successful hit to the left.

Compound Attacks

When the attack consists of a series of offensive actions (attacks, counter-attacks, parry-repostes and continuations). It is necessary to break up the attack into a series of individual actions. Find out who has right of way at each point and consider each of the actions in order.

1. Who initiated the attack?
   The initial extension comes from the right, therefore the attack is from the right, the counter attack is from the left.
2. First consider the attack - Did the initial attack from the right succeed?
   No, the first action moving the arm forward was flat, no lamps were lit until the fencer withdrew his arm and extended again.
3. Now consider the counter attack - Did the counter attack from the left succeed?
   No, the first action moving the arm forward was flat, no lamps were lit initially.
4. What happened next?
   There was a short pause, and both fencers withdrew and renewed their attacks. Note that since both fencers had failed to hit, and no parries had occured, neither has automatic right of way when renewing the attack.
5. Who initiated the renewal?
   Both fencers attacked simualtaneously, therefore neither fencer has priority.
6. Consider both renewals together, were they successful?
   Yes, lamps were lit on both sides due to this action. However since it is impossible to split the action, neither fencer will receive the hit.

Broken Time

Here the attack is initiated from the left, but during the lunge he inadvertently withdraws his arm. Therefore his attack is considered to consist of two actions (i.e. two periods of forward movement) Since the initial attack is no, the counter attack from the right is considered next. This is successful (on-target) so the continuation from the left is 'out-of-time'. The result is a successful hit to the right.

Beat Attack or Parry Reposte?

When both fencers are trying to initiate an attack, and are reacting to each other, this is where things start getting really complicated. Here, the initial action comes from the left, there is some interaction between the two fencers and the sequence ends with lunges from the left and the right. Several possibilities could have occured, depending upon how many times the blades meet:

1. An attack from the left with an attemped parry from the right, the fencer on the left avoids his opponent's blade and hits. In this case the attack would be silent and the point awarded to the left.
2. A beat attack from the left displaying the blade of the fencer on the right. In this case there would be one sound of blades meeting and the point awarded to the left.
3. A direct attack from the left which is parried by the fencer on the right. In this case there would be one sound of blades meeting nd the point awarded to the right.
4. An attempted beat attack from the left which is parried by the fencer on the right. In this case there would be two sounds of blades meeting and the point awarded to the right.

So if the attack is silent, or the blades clash together twice, the result is obvious, but how do we differenciate between the second and third cases? This is where the president must decide what actually occurred, given the definition of a beat and a parry.

This is a parry.	This is a beat.

With a parry, a fencer defends by holding the narrower front-end of the blade (called the foible) away from his body using the thicker back-end (called the forte.)
With a beat attack both blades clash together on the narrow part of the blade.

Looking closely at the animation above, it can be seen that the blades are well crossed when contact occurs, therefore the attack is parried. The fencer on the left may claim to have attempted a beat attack, but this was carried out incorrectly.

Beat Attack or Counter Attack?

Here, the initial action comes from the right, with the fencers engaging at a slightly greater distance than in the previous animation. Therefore if the blades made contact the action was on the lowest third of the blade. when contact occurs, hence the action is a beat. Several possibilities could have occured, depending upon how many times the blades meet:

1. A feint attack comes in from the right, the fencer on the left attempts a beat counter-attack but misses his opponent's blade In this case the attack would be silent and the point awarded to the right.
2. A beat attack from the right displacing the blade of the fencer on the left. In this case there would be one sound of blades meeting and the point awarded to the right.
3. A feint attack comes in from the right, the fencer on the left makes a beat counter-attack and hits his opponent's blade - this means the initial attack is no, the counter attack hits and the continuation from the right is 'out-of-time'. In this case there would be one sound of blades meeting and the point awarded to the left.
4. A beat attack comes in from the right, the fencer on the left makes a beat counter-attack and hits his opponent's blade - this means the initial attack is no, the counter attack hits and the continuation from the right is 'out-of-time'. In this case there would be two sounds of blades meeting and the point awarded to the left.

So again if the attack is silent, or the blades clash together twice, the result is obvious, but there is a problem differenciating between the second and third cases. Here it is down to the judgement of the president to decide who beat whom, depending upon when and how the beat occured. My opinion in this case is that the later in the action the blades clash, the more likely it is that the fencer on the left is counter attacking.

If you are really not sure what took place - say so and don't award the hit. Some times it really is too confusing - even for an experienced president.

And finally if all this is getting too much - take up épée, there is no right-of-way and no white lights so a hit is a hit is a hit.