Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Tyrnhaw Refereeing Training 2015 - Krisztina Nagy
Transcript of Tyrnhaw Refereeing Training 2015 - Krisztina Nagy
Examples, ideas, questions
Timing; nerves and reactions
A Brief Tactical Theory of Fencing*
What to look for,
as a referee?
Moving on to the fencing salle...
what to expect; do-s and don't-s
Refereeing Training for HEMA - Tyrnhaw 2015
Conventional Systems, Principles and Practices
— Krisztina Nagy
– actions of the
Perception of the stimuli
(watching the opponent and expecting stimuli)
Noticing and interpreting stimuli
Sending efferent impulses to muscles
Execution of a chosen action
Diagram of a sensory – motor response (reaction)
Increasing the speed of execution is limited (innervation types...)
the latent period of high level fencers is especially short —
reaction to pre-signals, before the evident stimulus appears
'preloaded' muscles; faster execution
preparation is the key
(searching, limiting, provoking, anticipating, tactical schemes)
'Speed' in fencing...
Runs into the point held against him
countercuts against straight undisturbed attack
Attacker feints too much and defender counters too late
Enforcing 'safe tactics':
attacks must be dealt with before attempting to score a touch
Not always the first touch scores, if it was a 'suicidal' decision/reaction.
Does not find the opening, does too many feints and the opponent counters
Attacks with provoking action but instead of parrying the provoked action he continues to touch straight
Receives a stop cut and does not reach the opponent within time
Attempts to parry counterattack but then changes his mind and hits without parrying
Feints but accidentally touches the opponent's blade, who rightly riposts
Action on blade fails but he goes on regardless
Both at fault:
Both attack and touch at once
(except for proper renewed attacks upon missing initiative of the opponent)
(same intention, same execution, no one is superior, 'both died')
tries to evade instead of parrying, but gets hit
after parrying, he does not cut immediately, and only touches out of time after a renewed attack
– Kárpáti anecdote
Representing the 'sharpness' of the weapon
A 'serving' position (people make mistakes)
Helpful communication with fencers,
Dr. Łukasz Majewski (Lecture, Sensory Motor Skills and Reactions in Fencing; Tyrnhaw '12)
Feint of parry &
Real parry +
*as in, the general logical rules of tactics...
Feint in time
Parry + Riposte
A feint draws a parry, and then the parry is avoided with an indirect attack
(finishing in a different line/opening)
Hits while the opponent is feinting
(before the final movement of the attack has started —> single hit)
Provoke a counter-attack (2nd Int),
and then a counterattack into the counterattack
Counter action... (FIE terminology)
Parry-riposte; counter offensive.
(through footwork, body action, timing, or inviting pauses, etc.)
simple attack (could call N-th intention... the case is rarely that smart. Can be wrong tactic of the opponent. Often just like a simple attack, for the onlooker).
Stop-hit (arrest) into the feint in time, etc.
(in Hungarian terminology
is called 'countertime')
– rules applied to the actions
Preparation vs. attack
similar intentions of both fencers
start at the same time
no 'discussion' of the blades
neither action/tactics is more wrong
than the other
at start signal
after unsuccessful preparations
conventional systems penalise the
relatively wrong decision or execution
no points assigned
pretending ANY action or tactical situation in order to trigger the expected response
deal with the expected answer — 2nd, etc. intentions; jump around the
a superior intention outmaneuvers the inferior one
(e.g. feint in time against a second intention parry)
failure to deal with the provoked action / ongoing attack is always the provoker's / defender's fault
the referee is only interested in the actual outcome
the referee's job is to analyse what DID happen.
Premeditated fencing actions
Attack on preparation
moving forward without establishing right-of-way
vulnerable to an attack made during this time
e.g. 'Lunge' (attack) against step forward. Step-lunge against several steps. Moving forward but
pulling hand backward etc.
'The initial offensive action made by extending the sword arm and continuously threatening the valid target of the opponent'
actions executed in order to give an immediate hit.
any action that has a different purpose from
achieving an immediate hit
(provoking, expecting, creating/looking for situations, etc.)
precedes the actual launch of an attack
precedes the establishment of right-of-way
...The eye of a referee
the speed and accuracy of perception is limited
sinus-like pattern of attention; limited division
referees must know what / how to look for,
and where to expect hits
understanding of tactics
amount of time
required to execute
a simple fencing action; e.g. a cut from guard position
to execute a fencing action
physical or mental
inability to react
to a certain attack.
– due to the movement of the fencer.
Can be summoned by opponent.
– due to patterns of concentration
General patterns, individual abilities
Can't really be summoned by the opponent's actions.
A sense of mental tempo is mostly innate.
An impulse from the brain can't be taken back!
a fast, decided movement of an adult won't be stopped or changed before the movement ends
'change of intention during execution' only possible before start of the ultimate move/action.
Slower, controlled, smaller units, 'open eye', decision-making. (Differences in children)
determines the 'unit of fencing time'
The nature of movement
'In Time - Out of Time'
': an action precedes the conclusion of the attack with at least one period of fencing time.
Results in a single hit, with the attack arriving 'Out of time'; or not arriving at all.
Out of time
': the conclusion of the attack (the nervous command) started after the opponent's hit had landed.
The hit is irrelevant to the fencing phrase.
After the 'start' signal - is there an attack going on, or just preparations?
Does someone have the initiative?
Does the other fencer attempt to take over?
Is there an attack on preparation?
Does he manage?
Who started an attack? Was it successful?
If not, was there a parry? Was it successful?Was there a riposte?
The parry failed because of a feint attack? Was it a proper feint attack, or just a renewed attack?
1. where a hit SHOULD happen
2. whether the hit DID happen
3. whether the hit was VALID / RELEVANT
Objective scoring apparatus.... (not applicable ATM)
Visual signs (virtual contact, impact, bendig of the blade, etc.)
Audible signs (sound of a hit on the jacket, mask, glove or steel, etc.)
The assistant's confirmation
(The fencers' confirmation*)
Within time or out of time (Call 'Halt' at first hit... etc.)
Other rules, see next pages.
The Principles of Conventional Fencing
relevance of the hit
(in relation to the actual first hit)
Judging 'doubles' based on WHO CAUSED IT: whose decision and/or action were wrong (+unsuccessful), in the given situation.
attacks on the blade.
point in line.
attack touches the op.strong first, then both hit.
feint contacts blade.
Kn. Gusztáv Arlov (Sabre Fencing)
Krisztina Nagy (Lecture, Fencer in action: an athlete's view on combat)
Special thanks to
Dr. László Szepesi
Dr. Lukasz Majewski
'Microclimate' within the bout, fair ref. behaviour
bouts ahead. Goals:
focus on refereeing
creating situations; present both the fencer's and referee's perspective on a common ground
discussion and feedback
solving problematic cases for reffing practice and rule interpretation;
prepare participants for the use of a fairly new system
managing a competition with pen and paper. Forms....
the result will not matter, but do try your best mentally and technically :)
Łukasz Majewski's model
The Fencers: most important parts of the competition
invest a significant part of their lives
endanger their health; it hurts
they and their performance are the purpose of the 'sport'
Refereeing is a supporting function of the above
they need to be respected and encouraged
HEMA: a serious hobby; not to be spoiled by wrong decisions / treatment
their role is to
things that happen in the arena
works with an assistant
is the decisionmaker - final word
'Master of ceremony' in duels of honour - signals to start, stop, ensuring a fair fight according to the rules, and proper conduct
assigns points, able to describe he actions of the entire assault, or at least the last exchange
humans are prone to mistakes – no objective scoring
no arbitrary decisions; no negligent behaviour
The process of judging the actions
STOP the bout at the first hit - any
will have started before the signal and can not be stopped
Consult assistant; give an analysis;
If the fencers don't protest, the proposed score stays,
If both fencers agree with each other – disagreeing with the ref – the referee should make a decision according to their wishes (see point 2.1. above)
If the fencers disagree with e.a. – assign a point (if completely sure!!) or repeat the assault.
'Too much iron' or 'Damn nothing' – repeat, explain,
Decisions not to be contested after the bout
'I will not abandon the presumption, that the fencers recognize that honor is like a crystal and even ones’ breath can soil it.'
Attack – counterattack with opposition
'The referees are personally responsible for their mistakes and should live with the shame till the end of their days
(the organizers do not provide Prozac)' ;)
– a valid hit is valid, no matter the nature of the intention!
...we can't often see attacks at the start signal... yet.
But, many simple attacks or simultane actions after preparation-stop. Why? Coaches, explain this please...
Recount the actions of the last exchange, accurate judgments, explain the reasons
Ability to account for the decision
Precise management / intervention
Personal presence, moving with the fencers, accurate signals, safety
Assistance - efficient communication - 1 decision-maker
Ref's work is noticed mostly when they make a mistake
Influence in the fencers' style and behaviour
— indirect responsibility
The fencers and their results are in focus
Direct, decisive, one sided influence
in the match of two specially trained (professional) individuals;
high levels of noradrenaline, etc... (google it – or see the linked sources)
Building a system is a longer process,
the development never ends...
Slow-mo links in the Prezi description
(the riposte is controlled, even though it does not leave the contact. longsword speciality...)
Slow-mo link in the Prezi description: Video 2
Attack left – stop – immediate attack on prep from right.
Left fencer even stepped back as a consequence.
Can we consider this as a stop?
Slow-mo link in the Prezi description: Video 3
Attack right no – beat-cut left no – no response from right – renewed attack left yes.
Slow-mo link in the Prezi description: Video 4
First attack no; remise.
Slow-mo links in the Prezi description: Video 5
Left preparation; right still – left jumps back; right starts attack while he jumps forward.
Left had RoW until he jumped backward.
Further notes: If right started during these jumps, then right has ROW. If right started afterwards, from standing, then left wins. Should compound and simple attacks have the same RoW?
Slow-mo linkin the Prezi description: Video 6
Zbigniew Czajkowski – MOTIVATION AND AROUSAL IN FENCING
Lukovich - Szabó: Vívás, vívómesterség
Szabó István - A vívás és oktatása (Fencing and the Master)