Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [E_Rapier] Re: ealdormere-rapier Rules Version 4

Expand Messages
  • Aaron Gormanshaw
    ... Gerard, was this a safety question? I did not perceive it as such, so I may have headed off on a wrong tangent. If not a safety question, what is the
    Message 1 of 15 , Apr 4, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      > I am in a tournament and facing someone with a
      > longer blade. ( This is all they have ) . I do not
      > wish to fence them . How is this scored ?



      Gerard, was this a safety question? I did not perceive it as such, so I may
      have headed off on a wrong tangent. If not a safety question, what is the
      reason for this you not wishing to fence them?



      Hoskuld





      On the one hand, if we say conceding the bout leads to
      a loss all the time, we are giving someone a moment of
      doubt as to whether they should walk away from what
      they perceive as an unsafe situation. Perhaps it's
      not a very big moment of doubt, but when the
      adrenaline's up and competitiveness is at it's
      height, the smallest thing could tip the scales and
      things could turn bad.

      The flip side of this was well put by Hoskald.

      So... what do we do? I say it's the MiC that has
      pervue in this decision at each given instance. The
      reason: she/he is the person directly responsible for
      the safety of all combatants on the List. It's up to
      them to:
      a) Determine if this is a personal issue between two
      people or whether it is a problem for other Combatants
      as well?
      b) What is the best way to handle this situation that
      is fair to ALL? Not just these two combatants. If
      you read this email thread you have a sense of what
      the general Rapier populace thinks on this topic, and
      I suggest you keep it in mind, but you have to make
      the call on the field. Keep safety paramount in your
      mind and I'll back you on whatever call you make.

      Now talking to the MiC for the given tournament AS
      EARLY AS POSSIBLE if you have an issue fighting
      someone IS KEY! Gives them more time to make
      arrangments in the tournament that can be fair to
      everyone. If you wait until you're called to the
      List, you've tied the MiC's hands on what she/he can
      do.

      In Service,

      Mateo de Merida_._,___



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Gerrard
      Actually I am asking on behalf of someone else. So I m not 100% certain. I believe they were more interested in the scoring. Gerrard ... From: Aaron
      Message 2 of 15 , Apr 4, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Actually I am asking on behalf of someone else. So I'm not 100% certain.
        I believe they were more interested in the scoring.
        Gerrard
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Aaron Gormanshaw
        To: E_Rapier@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 1:06 PM
        Subject: RE: [E_Rapier] Re: ealdormere-rapier Rules Version 4


        > I am in a tournament and facing someone with a
        > longer blade. ( This is all they have ) . I do not
        > wish to fence them . How is this scored ?

        Gerard, was this a safety question? I did not perceive it as such, so I may
        have headed off on a wrong tangent. If not a safety question, what is the
        reason for this you not wishing to fence them?

        Hoskuld

        On the one hand, if we say conceding the bout leads to
        a loss all the time, we are giving someone a moment of
        doubt as to whether they should walk away from what
        they perceive as an unsafe situation. Perhaps it's
        not a very big moment of doubt, but when the
        adrenaline's up and competitiveness is at it's
        height, the smallest thing could tip the scales and
        things could turn bad.

        The flip side of this was well put by Hoskald.

        So... what do we do? I say it's the MiC that has
        pervue in this decision at each given instance. The
        reason: she/he is the person directly responsible for
        the safety of all combatants on the List. It's up to
        them to:
        a) Determine if this is a personal issue between two
        people or whether it is a problem for other Combatants
        as well?
        b) What is the best way to handle this situation that
        is fair to ALL? Not just these two combatants. If
        you read this email thread you have a sense of what
        the general Rapier populace thinks on this topic, and
        I suggest you keep it in mind, but you have to make
        the call on the field. Keep safety paramount in your
        mind and I'll back you on whatever call you make.

        Now talking to the MiC for the given tournament AS
        EARLY AS POSSIBLE if you have an issue fighting
        someone IS KEY! Gives them more time to make
        arrangments in the tournament that can be fair to
        everyone. If you wait until you're called to the
        List, you've tied the MiC's hands on what she/he can
        do.

        In Service,

        Mateo de Merida_._,___

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • John Enzinas
        ... I agree that this is a potential situation so, given that you have said this is the responsibility of the MiC I d like to know under what circumstance you
        Message 3 of 15 , Apr 4, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          On 4/4/07, John Wyatt <jwyatt2@...> wrote:
          > On the one hand, if we say conceding the bout leads to
          > a loss all the time, we are giving someone a moment of
          > doubt as to whether they should walk away from what
          > they perceive as an unsafe situation. Perhaps it's
          > not a very big moment of doubt, but when the
          > adrenaline's up and competitiveness is at it's
          > height, the smallest thing could tip the scales and
          > things could turn bad.

          I agree that this is a potential situation so, given that you have
          said this is the responsibility of the MiC I'd like to know under what
          circumstance you would allow THL Pointjock to refuse to fight an THL
          Wireweenie and not lose the bout and also not require THL Wireweenie
          to retire from the field as being unsafe for anyone else to fence.

          I must admit that I cannot think of a circumstance where I would do that.

          --j/g
        • Gerrard
          Most blades are standard length and longer... 98.8% of the time the blades are the same length. I am asking on behalf of someone else. Gerrard ... From:
          Message 4 of 15 , Apr 4, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Most blades are standard length and longer... 98.8% of the time the blades are the same length. I am asking on behalf of someone else.
            Gerrard

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: Aaron Gormanshaw
            To: E_Rapier@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 10:12 AM
            Subject: RE: [E_Rapier] Re: ealdormere-rapier Rules Version 4


            ***There is nothing in the rules designating what a standard length blade
            is.***

            If for any reason you do not want to fence your opponent, you have the
            right to yield the bout and not fence it.

            I am uncomfortable with the answer below which seems to say that if you have
            the agreement of the MiC, you can take a 35" blade onto the field in a
            tournament and refuse to fight anyone who brings a longer blade, which means
            that you win the bouts in the tournament without having to fight them.

            Let's rephrase the question:

            I am in a tournament and facing someone with a shorter blade. (That is all
            they have). I do not wish to fence them. How is this scored?

            As per below, with the agreement of the MiC, I can "not wish to fence" all
            of my opponents because they do not have a blade to match my length and thus
            I can win the bouts in the tournament without fighting if all my opponents
            bring short blades.

            Let's rephrase the question:

            I am in a tournament and facing someone without a swept hilt (using a saber
            guard). (That is all they have). I do not wish to fence them. How is this
            scored?

            As per below, with the agreement of the MiC, I can "not wish to fence" any
            of my opponents who do not have a period hilt.

            You can see how ridiculous this can easily become.

            If you do not want to fence someone, then yield.

            I personally use a blade longer than 35", and that is what I train with and
            what I am comfortable with. Why should I have to use a shorter blade which
            will mess up my style and training? Obviously, it would be to your
            strategic advantage to have your opponent use a blade shorter than they
            train with. I think that this would be abusing the system.

            Hoskuld

            > I am in a tournament and facing someone with a
            > longer blade. ( This is all they have ) . I do not
            > wish to fence them . How is this scored ?

            As others have said, you do not have to fence them. I
            understand that in the past this has been scored as a
            loss for you... even in a single elinimation
            tournament. The final answer though: Talk to the
            MiC, it's their call. Just ask them before the
            tournament so they're ready if the situation comes up!

            Mateo

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Kelly Wyatt
            I would have to agree with you on that. It s putting the MiC in a terrible position and I really can t conceive of being able to bring myself to do that. It
            Message 5 of 15 , Apr 4, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              I would have to agree with you on that. It's putting the MiC in a terrible
              position and I really can't conceive of being able to bring myself to do
              that. It would seem to make a mountain out of a molehill.

              If I choose not to fight someone, assuming that the reason is NOT one
              pertaining to the potential safety of others on the field, I would reserve
              the right to keep my reasons as personal and not have to tell anyone I don't
              wish to know. I wouldn't want to risk damaging anyone's ego or potentially,
              reputation. A simple "I concede." should be all that's necessary.

              Needless to say, if I felt that ANYONE else's safety were in question, I
              would not hesitate to call it to the MiC's attention.

              This is a very sticky soup indeed.

              Cainder

              @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
              MKA - Kelly Wyatt kgarlow@...
              SCA -Bantiarna Cainder ingen hui Chatharnaig
              Seeblatt Herald, Kingdom of Ealdormere
              @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
              Justus, Fortis, Patiens - Per chevron argent and sable, two sprigs of witch
              hazel and a snowy owl counterchanged.





              >From: "John Enzinas" <jenzinas@...>
              >Reply-To: E_Rapier@yahoogroups.com
              >To: E_Rapier@yahoogroups.com
              >Subject: Re: [E_Rapier] Re: ealdormere-rapier Rules Version 4
              >Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 13:22:58 -0400
              >
              >On 4/4/07, John Wyatt <jwyatt2@...> wrote:
              > > On the one hand, if we say conceding the bout leads to
              > > a loss all the time, we are giving someone a moment of
              > > doubt as to whether they should walk away from what
              > > they perceive as an unsafe situation. Perhaps it's
              > > not a very big moment of doubt, but when the
              > > adrenaline's up and competitiveness is at it's
              > > height, the smallest thing could tip the scales and
              > > things could turn bad.
              >
              >I agree that this is a potential situation so, given that you have
              >said this is the responsibility of the MiC I'd like to know under what
              >circumstance you would allow THL Pointjock to refuse to fight an THL
              >Wireweenie and not lose the bout and also not require THL Wireweenie
              >to retire from the field as being unsafe for anyone else to fence.
              >
              >I must admit that I cannot think of a circumstance where I would do that.
              >
              >--j/g
            • Bob Roberts
              What exactly is the issue? Is it that a sword is longer than the other? How about if a fencer with realy short arms has to fence someone with really long arms?
              Message 6 of 15 , Apr 4, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                What exactly is the issue? Is it that a sword is
                longer than the other? How about if a fencer with
                realy short arms has to fence someone with really long
                arms? Do they automatically win? Is not everyone who
                fences at a tournament authorized? Has not the sfety
                issue already been decided previously? Has not the
                kingdom already decided that x blade length is
                allowed? I know that I have been hit hard by both
                short blades and long blades. It is not the blade that
                hits hard, it is the fencer. By the way, were there
                not swords of differing legnth way back then as well?
                If you went to a duel and faced an opponent with a
                longer sword, could you say that you did not want to
                fight and yet still "win"? Back to what I wrote above,
                if the kingdom has decided that a blade is acceptable
                and that a fencer is authorized then where is the
                problem? Could it lay in a fencer who is unsure of
                themselves and is scared? Should they actually remain
                authorized since they are not ready to fence
                psychologicaly and in fact pose a danger to the fencer
                with the longer sword?
                There is accomodation for limitations and then there
                is just plain sillyness.

                --- Kelly Wyatt <kgarlow@...> wrote:

                > I would have to agree with you on that. It's
                > putting the MiC in a terrible
                > position and I really can't conceive of being able
                > to bring myself to do
                > that. It would seem to make a mountain out of a
                > molehill.
                >
                > If I choose not to fight someone, assuming that the
                > reason is NOT one
                > pertaining to the potential safety of others on the
                > field, I would reserve
                > the right to keep my reasons as personal and not
                > have to tell anyone I don't
                > wish to know. I wouldn't want to risk damaging
                > anyone's ego or potentially,
                > reputation. A simple "I concede." should be all
                > that's necessary.
                >
                > Needless to say, if I felt that ANYONE else's safety
                > were in question, I
                > would not hesitate to call it to the MiC's
                > attention.
                >
                > This is a very sticky soup indeed.
                >
                > Cainder
                >
                > @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
                > MKA - Kelly Wyatt kgarlow@...
                > SCA -Bantiarna Cainder ingen hui Chatharnaig
                > Seeblatt Herald, Kingdom of Ealdormere
                > @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
                > Justus, Fortis, Patiens - Per chevron argent and
                > sable, two sprigs of witch
                > hazel and a snowy owl counterchanged.
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > >From: "John Enzinas" <jenzinas@...>
                > >Reply-To: E_Rapier@yahoogroups.com
                > >To: E_Rapier@yahoogroups.com
                > >Subject: Re: [E_Rapier] Re: ealdormere-rapier Rules
                > Version 4
                > >Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 13:22:58 -0400
                > >
                > >On 4/4/07, John Wyatt <jwyatt2@...> wrote:
                > > > On the one hand, if we say conceding the bout
                > leads to
                > > > a loss all the time, we are giving someone a
                > moment of
                > > > doubt as to whether they should walk away from
                > what
                > > > they perceive as an unsafe situation. Perhaps
                > it's
                > > > not a very big moment of doubt, but when the
                > > > adrenaline's up and competitiveness is at it's
                > > > height, the smallest thing could tip the scales
                > and
                > > > things could turn bad.
                > >
                > >I agree that this is a potential situation so,
                > given that you have
                > >said this is the responsibility of the MiC I'd like
                > to know under what
                > >circumstance you would allow THL Pointjock to
                > refuse to fight an THL
                > >Wireweenie and not lose the bout and also not
                > require THL Wireweenie
                > >to retire from the field as being unsafe for anyone
                > else to fence.
                > >
                > >I must admit that I cannot think of a circumstance
                > where I would do that.
                > >
                > >--j/g
                >
                >
                >




                ____________________________________________________________________________________
                Don't get soaked. Take a quick peek at the forecast
                with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut.
                http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather
              • Kelly Wyatt
                The original question posed to the list (not by me) was regarding if a fencer with a shorter blade chooses to yield a tournament fight to a fencer with a
                Message 7 of 15 , Apr 5, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  The original question posed to the list (not by me) was regarding if a
                  fencer with a shorter blade chooses to yield a tournament fight to a fencer
                  with a longer blade, does he/she lose the bout.

                  I believe that it's been determined that it's ultimately up to the MiC to
                  make that decision.

                  I agree that blade length alone is not enough reason to yield a fight. In my
                  opinion it's certainly not enough to grant anything other than a loss. On
                  it's own, that is.

                  I'm sorry if I got things muddled. I still choose to reserve my right to not
                  voice my reasons for yielding if it's anything other than a safety issue.
                  What is silliness to you may not be at all to someone else. A gentleman
                  shouldn't make assumptions.


                  Cainder

                  @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
                  MKA - Kelly Wyatt kgarlow@...
                  SCA -Bantiarna Cainder ingen hui Chatharnaig
                  Seeblatt Herald, Kingdom of Ealdormere
                  @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
                  Justus, Fortis, Patiens - Per chevron argent and sable, two sprigs of witch
                  hazel and a snowy owl counterchanged.





                  >From: Bob Roberts <maskkasm@...>
                  >Reply-To: E_Rapier@yahoogroups.com
                  >To: E_Rapier@yahoogroups.com
                  >Subject: Re: [E_Rapier] Re: ealdormere-rapier Rules Version 4
                  >Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 14:00:17 -0700 (PDT)
                  >
                  >What exactly is the issue? Is it that a sword is
                  >longer than the other? How about if a fencer with
                  >realy short arms has to fence someone with really long
                  >arms? Do they automatically win? Is not everyone who
                  >fences at a tournament authorized? Has not the sfety
                  >issue already been decided previously? Has not the
                  >kingdom already decided that x blade length is
                  >allowed? I know that I have been hit hard by both
                  >short blades and long blades. It is not the blade that
                  >hits hard, it is the fencer. By the way, were there
                  >not swords of differing legnth way back then as well?
                  >If you went to a duel and faced an opponent with a
                  >longer sword, could you say that you did not want to
                  >fight and yet still "win"? Back to what I wrote above,
                  >if the kingdom has decided that a blade is acceptable
                  >and that a fencer is authorized then where is the
                  >problem? Could it lay in a fencer who is unsure of
                  >themselves and is scared? Should they actually remain
                  >authorized since they are not ready to fence
                  >psychologicaly and in fact pose a danger to the fencer
                  >with the longer sword?
                  >There is accomodation for limitations and then there
                  >is just plain sillyness.
                  >
                • John Enzinas
                  ... What would be a reason to allow someone to yield a bout without loosing and still allow their opponent to continue in the tournament? --j
                  Message 8 of 15 , Apr 5, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On 4/5/07, Kelly Wyatt <kgarlow@...> wrote:
                    > The original question posed to the list (not by me) was regarding if a
                    > fencer with a shorter blade chooses to yield a tournament fight to a fencer
                    > with a longer blade, does he/she lose the bout.
                    >
                    > I believe that it's been determined that it's ultimately up to the MiC to
                    > make that decision.

                    What would be a reason to allow someone to yield a bout without
                    loosing and still allow their opponent to continue in the tournament?

                    --j
                  • Kelly Wyatt
                    ... Honestly, I can t think of ANY reason that fits those parameters. I will let it roll around a bit and see if I can think of something. Cainder
                    Message 9 of 15 , Apr 5, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      >From: "John Enzinas" <jenzinas@...>
                      >Reply-To: E_Rapier@yahoogroups.com
                      >To: E_Rapier@yahoogroups.com
                      >Subject: Re: [E_Rapier] Re: ealdormere-rapier Rules Version 4
                      >Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 09:37:04 -0400
                      >
                      >On 4/5/07, Kelly Wyatt <kgarlow@...> wrote:
                      > > The original question posed to the list (not by me) was regarding if a
                      > > fencer with a shorter blade chooses to yield a tournament fight to a
                      >fencer
                      > > with a longer blade, does he/she lose the bout.
                      > >
                      > > I believe that it's been determined that it's ultimately up to the MiC
                      >to
                      > > make that decision.
                      >
                      >What would be a reason to allow someone to yield a bout without
                      >loosing and still allow their opponent to continue in the tournament?
                      >
                      >--j

                      Honestly, I can't think of ANY reason that fits those parameters. I will let
                      it roll around a bit and see if I can think of something.

                      Cainder
                    • Nicholas J. Corkigian
                      Is it just a matter of boycotting longer blades out of a personal preference (or displeasure)? If so, then I would say that s a personal choice to make that
                      Message 10 of 15 , Apr 5, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Is it just a matter of boycotting longer blades out of a personal
                        preference (or displeasure)? If so, then I would say that's a personal
                        choice to make that has no bearing on the actual rules. The penalties
                        should go with it. In this case, it's a choice to not fence an
                        opponent, therefore it's a choice to take the loss.

                        -Nikolai


                        >
                        >
                        > > > The original question posed to the list (not by me) was regarding if a
                        > > > fencer with a shorter blade chooses to yield a tournament fight to a
                        > >fencer
                        > > > with a longer blade, does he/she lose the bout.
                        > > >
                        > > > I believe that it's been determined that it's ultimately up to the
                        > MiC
                        > >to
                        > > > make that decision.
                        > >
                        > >What would be a reason to allow someone to yield a bout without
                        > >loosing and still allow their opponent to continue in the tournament?
                        > >
                        > >--j
                        >
                        > Honestly, I can't think of ANY reason that fits those parameters. I
                        > will let
                        > it roll around a bit and see if I can think of something.
                        >
                        > Cainder
                        >
                        >


                        --
                        -Nicholas J. Corkigian

                        "Sacred cows make the best burgers"
                        -Robert Kriegel



                        This E-mail contains privileged and confidential information intended
                        only for the individual or entity named in the message. If the reader
                        of this message is not the intended recipient, or the agent responsible
                        to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
                        any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication
                        is prohibited. If this communication was received in error, please
                        notify the sender by reply E-mail immediately, and delete and destroy
                        the original message.
                      • Ross Weaver
                        ... Yeilding to an opponent is to give them the win. If my opponent legs me and I choose to yeild rather than fight from my knees I m offering them the win,
                        Message 11 of 15 , Apr 5, 2007
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On 4/5/07, Kelly Wyatt <kgarlow@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > The original question posed to the list (not by me) was regarding if a
                          > fencer with a shorter blade chooses to yield a tournament fight to a
                          > fencer
                          > with a longer blade, does he/she lose the bout.
                          >





                          Yeilding to an opponent is to give them the win. If my opponent legs me
                          and I choose to yeild rather than fight from my knees I'm offering them the
                          win, rather than to keep fighting. It does not matter why you yeild,
                          choosing to yeild is choosing to lose.

                          To refuse to fence some due to safety is a different issue. If someone is
                          unsafe they should be removed from the field. If equipment is unsafe it
                          should be removed from the field. But that is obviously not the question
                          here.

                          ~Wilhelm


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.