XIV. Directing: The Right of Way (4)
Item
-
Title
-
XIV. Directing: The Right of Way (4)
-
Date
-
February 25, 1937
-
volume
-
2
-
issue
-
4
-
page start
-
5
-
page end
-
5
-
content
-
en
XIV. DIRECTING
The Right of Way (4)
In my last article, I indicated that the director can help develop American fencing to the European level by a strict observance of the International Rules of the Right of Way, especially as far as the stop-thrust, remise, and redoublement of attack are concerned. There is another paragraph in the F.I.E. rules which should be considered. It reads:
“One of the most difficult cases to judge occurs when there is a stop-thrust which has a doubtful time advantage against the final thrust of the composite attack. In general, in such a case, the double touch is the result of the simultaneous fault of both fencers, which justifies the director in placing them back on guard without a decision. The fault of the attacker is indecision, slowness, or the lack of efficacious feints; the fault of the defender is delay or slowness in executing the stop-thrust.”
In short, the touch must be annulled when both fencers are wrong — and the gist of their fault is slowness or delay. This paragraph does not appear in the American abridgment of the rules at the present time, with the result that an American director is often confronted with faulty attacks (delayed direct attacks, wide composite attacks, all of which are necessarily slow and indecisive movements), and with faulty stop-thrusts, remises, and redoublements of attack. His only basis for throwing out both hits is that he has no clear view of the right of way — and this basis is unsatisfactory because it assumes that the director is somewhat at fault in not being able to reconstruct the phrase d'armes clearly enough to make a decision one way or the other. Actually, of course, the fault is with the fencers, and the paragraph I have quoted should be included in our rules.
Consider then the effect of the application of this paragraph and of the other I have mentioned. Delay in the attack opens the way for a valid stop-thrust; delay in the riposte gives the right to the attacker to remise or redouble.
Consequently, the conventional sequence of play in the phrase d'armes must be rapidly and decisively executed in order to retain the advantage of the right of way. Likewise, even against a faulty attack, the stop-thrust, the remise, or the redoublement must be clearly and decisively executed; or else the worst that the first offender can get is a double touch.
The importance of decisive actions in the bout cannot be too strongly emphasized. All the members of the American Olympic Team agree that our team was practically the equal of the best European teams in technical development; the main difficulty our team encountered was the faster and more decisive tempo of their principal opponents. In foil, for example, only Joe Levis fenced with the speed and decisiveness of the Europeans, and he was by far our most effective individual star.
This brings up another question about directing which has a clear influence upon the manner in which a bout proceeds. The European directors, in addition to their adherence to the points previously discussed, practically compel the fencers to fence with speed and decision by their manner of giving the commands: On Guard, Ready, Play — AND by calling “Halt!” to the action whenever it lost its decisive character.
Perhaps the most colorful director in the world is the famous Italian, Anselmi, whose “snappy” and exciting method of conducting the bout does much to improve the quality of the fencing and the enjoyment of the spectators. Consequently, when I had the honor to officiate at the Olympic final in sabre, and he was in the audience, I was very much interested in his criticisms. The only unfavorable one was to the effect that I did not halt the phrase d’armes quickly enough — and this despite the fact that I had been calling “halt” much sooner than is the custom here. For this reason, I wish to take this point more in detail in my next article. It seems to be the chief point of divergence between the European and American customs of directing.
M. A. de C.
