Dumb rule. I agree that a stiffer blade, especially with the longer tip-depression times, is a better choice. Seems like a bulletin could have been put out to national armorers stating that blades would be so tested.
The big issues is consistency in application of the rules. If the rules to be applied, or the interpretation of them, changes at every competition, how do you train and equip appropriately? This is a problem at the Division level in the US, with referee created rules and interpretations that bear no resemblence to the technique of the weapon, and local armorer created rules that are not based in any of the FIE technical documents. It is disheartening to see that this is not just a local problem.
agreed its something i think needs to be adressed with the growth of the sport and change in fencing since the timing change.
Man, things change. Back when I fenced with the 90s we were all using veritable whips with big rainbow bends in them, and we were all jumping around like fools trying flick each other in the back. Not one tournament would go by without some kid falling on the strip crying because he took a flick to the back of the head. LOL. New Jersey High School Fencing=where technique goes to die. Fun times, though.
That is unfortunate. I mean, most cheap club weapons are pretty stiff.
I have to agree with you although I have very little knowledge about this. I started fencing foil last year so I am still very much a beginner, however I have remarked to friends as we watched the foil bouts that it seemed to me y'alls weapons seemed way more flexible/whippy than the ones we were using in our class.
@ William Cracraft @ Walter Green @Kari Strickland Mackey @ Curtis Scott - agree totally
@ Race Imboden rather odd things happened at this Olympics and I'm sorry to hear that you had to fence with unfamilar blades
Back when I used to fence, in the 70s, the foil blades were all stiffer than now. There were far fewer injuries then too. I'm wondering if there might be a connection?
Granted, the stiffer foil blade is potentially more bruising, but nobody got flicked on the back of the head with them... and y'know, flicking people on the back of the head is potentially dangerous. And granted, we had that freak accident with the breaking blade where the South African fencer died - but remember plastrons weren't compulsory then and he wouldn't have died if he'd been wearing one. It seems to me that breaking blades are less of an issue than "whipping" blades. If we want to encourage more kids to fence, this issue has to be looked at, or next thing you know we'll have an uproar about safety issues.
The consensus here seems to be that action must be taken, and it doesn't appear that there's much issue about what that action should be.
Isn't it logical then, to appoint a spokesperson to go talk to "the powers that be" since after all, they're us? I mean, we're all members, we can all vote, and if fencers put their concerns forward in a constructive manner to committee members - whom I'm betting you guys know personally anyway - why wouldn't you be listened to? Just my tuppenceworth....