The Rules of Fencing

Fencing, in the United States, is governed by the United States Fencing Association's rules of fencing. (Well, not always — an occasional FIE competition within the United States will be governed by FIE rules.)

The USFA has rulebooks. A rulebook is really helpful, but once in a while the rulebook itself might be wrong about what the rules of fencing are! Consider how the rules of fencing come to be, and how the rulebooks come to be.

Every once in a while, the USFA adopts completely new rules of fencing as expressed in a completely new rulebook. For example, the actual rules about how to fence in the 1999 rulebook were mostly the same as the actual rules in 1995 rulebook, but they were completely re-edited, with even the numbering system for the rules changing. Although I haven't found confirmation of this, I suspect that each time the rules undergo a radical editorial change, the USFA adopts the new document as being the rules of fencing. But, starting then, the USFA makes minor changes to rules — not changes to the rulebook, but individual resolutions about individual rules. For this reason, after each major rewrite of the rules there is a series of new revisions of the rulebook as minor changes get made. (Occasionally, a change to the rulebook is made which does not involve changing a rule, but involves editorial, typographic, or layout issues too.) It has happened that the USFA has changed a rule but the change did not get incorporated into the rulebook at the same time. So, sometimes it is impossible to possess a rulebook which is completely correct.

Contents:

• Getting Rulebooks
• The Rulebooks
• The Most Recent Rule Changes
• The FIE Rules

Getting Rulebooks

Paper Rulebooks

Historically, the USFA has sold rulebooks which were essentially loose-bound books. This is no longer available. The only printed rulebooks now are printed versions of computer electronic documents. The only choice is whether you print one yourself, or you pay the USFA $15 to print one for you.

Electronic Rulebooks

Currently, the master copy of the rulebook is a computer electronic document. It becomes available to the general public in one or another form containing limited illustrations and formatting of the text. Recently, it has also become available as only text, suitable for carrying in a personal digital assistant.

The Rulebooks

"The Rulebooks" Contents:

• The 2002 Rulebook, Rev. October 14, 2003
• The 2002 Rulebook, Rev. C
• The 2002 Rulebook, Rev. A
• The 1999/2000 Rulebook, 2000 Rev. C
• The 1995 Rulebook, Any Edition

The 2002 Rulebook, Rev. October 14, 2003

The most recent revision of the rulebook of which the general public is aware is 2002 Rev. October 14, 2003. It is not (yet?) available at the USFA Web site. It is available at the Web site of the USFA Fencing Officials Commission (FOC) at URL http://www.fencingofficials.org/Rules/2003%20USFA%20Rules%2010-14.pdf.

Includes

By and large, the 12 rule changes the USFA made for the 2002-2003 fencing season, with the exception that rule t.87 was not not changed to show no more penalty for scoring a point while falling — which is appropriate because this clause in rule t.87 was restored (effective with the 2003-2004 fencing year).

The July 2000 adoption effective October 2000 of the stiffer S2000 saber blade (which the USFA thereafter has not always enforced). However, this appears in a diagram which is illegible in the electronic version of the rulebook, Figure 12, associated with rule m.23.

Excludes

The October 2000 elimination of the prohibition in rule t.82 of coaching by a spectator of a bout.

The July 2000 (effective October 2000) elimination of the hand in the description in rule t.71 of valid saber target (note that the saber glove description in rule m.33 does include this change).

Problems with the document other than figures

In rule o.14, the bout order for the 36 bouts of a pool of nine fencers is missing the last five bouts (they should be 1-8 4-5 3-6 2-7 9-8). They are also missing in 2002 Rev. C, 2002 Rev. A, and 2000 Rev. C. The bouts do appear in the 1995 rulebook.

Problems with the figures in the document

Figure 1 ("Strip for Semi-Finals and Finals", associated with rule t.14) is too blurry to read the print in the electronic version of the rulebook. It appears to have been meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. C, which is almost too blurry to read. However, as best can be discerned, both are a corrupted version of the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where the diagram is barely legible, which in turn appears to be identical to that in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Rule o.21 refers to a Figure 7a (meant to be an illustration of a DE64 bout plan) on p. 74, and rule o.43 refers to a Figure 7b (apparently meant to be an incompletely filled DE bout plan), but the figures do not appear. One complete DE64 bout plan does appear as figure 7 on the page following p. 79 of 2000 Rev. C, but no later version.

Rule m.8 refers to a Figure 8 (illustrating various dimensions of the foil and flexibility test) on p. 80, but the figure is on p. 60, where it is almost too blurry to read the print in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is also blurry in 2002 Rev. C. It is meant to be equivalent to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Rule m.16 refers to a Figure 9 (illustrating various dimensions of the épée and flexibility test) on p. 83, but the figure is on p. 63, where it is almost too blurry to read the print in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is also blurry in 2002 Rev. C. It is meant to be equivalent to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure 10 ("Epee design of point", associated with rule m.19) is cropped on the right, losing "mm" as the dimension for a measurement. It is also cropped in 2002 Rev. C. It is meant to be equivalent to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is complete, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is complete.

Rule m.19(1) refers to a Figure 10 ("Epée: details of tip of point") on p. 85, but the figure is on p. 64.

Rule m.23 refers to a Figure 12 ("Saber dimensions and flexibility") on p. 87, but the figure is on p. 66, where it is too blurry to read the print in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is also blurry in 2002 Rev. C. It is not meant to contain the same information as any earlier clear version of the diagram.

Rule m.23 refers to a Figure 13 ("Saber dimensions (contd.)") on p. 88, but the figure is on p. 67, where it is too blurry to read the print in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is also blurry in 2002 Rev. C. It appears to be meant to contain a subset of the corresponding diagram in in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure 14 ("Foil: conductive jacket", associated with and immediately preceding rule m.28) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is also fuzzy in 2002 Rev. C. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure 15 ("Electric saber conductive jacket", associated with and immediately preceding rule m.34) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is also fuzzy in 2002 Rev. C. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure 16 ("Gauge for checking weapons", immediately preceding rule m.43) is too blurry to read the print in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is also too blurry in 2002 Rev. C. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram, immediately following rule m.43, in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure A.1 ("Design of masks", associated with and immediately preceding rules 2.2(3) and 2.2(4) of Appendix A to the Material Rules) is mis-captioned Figure A-1 and is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is also mis-captioned and fuzzy in 2002 Rev. C. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure A.2 ("High speed dynamometer for test of cloth resistance to perforation", associated with and shortly following rule 3.1(2.1) of Appendix A to the Material Rules) is mis-captioned Figure A.1 and is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is also mis-captioned and fuzzy in 2002 Rev. C. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure A.3 ("Fixing device for test of cloth resistance to perforation", associated with and shortly following rule 3.1(2.3) of Appendix A to the Material Rules) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook, and has its caption on the top of the page following the diagram. It is also fuzzy in 2002 Rev. C. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure A.4 ("Vital parts", associated with and immediately preceding rule 3.2 of Appendix A to the Material Rules) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is also fuzzy in 2002 Rev. C. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure A.5 ("FIE quality labels (not to scale)", associated with and immediately following rule 4 of Appendix A to the Material Rules) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is also fuzzy in 2002 Rev. C, where its caption is on the top of the page following the diagram. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure A.6 ("Test devices for traction and tensile strength", associated with rules 1(4.2), 1(4.3), 1(6.2), 1(6.3), and 2.1(4.1), and appearing at the end of Appendix A to the Material Rules) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is also fuzzy in 2002 Rev. C. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Usefulness of the penalty chart (t.120)

The penalty chart has been rearranged to conform to the layout of the current FIE penalty chart, and background colors have been added to correspond to the color of the card awarded. Exceptions:

1. No mention of first group yellow card for ready to fence with excessively bent blade.
2. No mention of a match-long team yellow card for a team member entering strip zone without permission.

A first group offense "Abnormal fencing action(*)" appears, citing no rules (rule t.87 should be cited).

A first group offense "Hits with brutality or while falling(*)" appears, citing no rules (rule t.87 should be cited).

Recommended additional material

1. The knowledge that the USFA removed the prohibition in rule t.82 of coaching by a spectator of a bout.
2. The knowledge that the missing last five bouts in rule o.14 for a pool of nine are 1-8 4-5 3-6 2-7 9-8 — or special pool sheets with the order for nine printed on it.

The 2002 Rulebook, Rev. C

2002 Rev. C is a more recent (although generally less current!) revision of the rulebook than 2002 Rev. A, but the book as a whole is worse formatted. There is some indication that there was more than one version of 2002 Rev. C, some of which might never have been intended for general release. It is available from the the USFA Web site. It used to be, but no longer is, available at the Web site of the USFA Fencing Officials Commission (FOC) at URL http://www.fencingofficials.org/2002%20rules%20Rev%20C.pdf. (It probably became unavailable because of the drawbacks enumerated below for "Excludes" and "Problems with the document".) However, there are electronic copies already in private hands. So, if one is desired, a copy can be located.

Includes

By and large, rules immediately before the 2002-2003 fencing season. (Ironically, it does not include the 12 rule changes the USFA made for the 2002-2003 fencing season, even though the earlier (?) 2002 Rev. A does!)

The July 2000 adoption effective October 2000 of the stiffer S2000 saber blade (which the USFA thereafter has not always enforced). However, this appears in an illegible diagram, Figure 12, associated with rule m.23.

Excludes

The 12 rule changes the USFA made for the 2002-2003 fencing season (of which only 11 1/2 remain, with the return for the 2003-2004 fencing season of rule t.87 prohibiting scoring a point while falling).

The October 2000 elimination of the prohibition in rule t.82 of coaching by a spectator of a bout.

The July 2000 (effective October 2000) elimination of the hand in the description in rule t.71 of valid saber target (note that the saber glove description in rule m.33 does include this change).

Problems with the document other than figures

For all pages before the penalty chart, the paper is portrait orientation, and for all pages after it, the paper is landscape orientation. Although free of spelling and text order errors in 2002 Rev. A, this revision is less current in content.

In rule o.14, the bout order for the 36 bouts of a pool of nine fencers is missing the last five bouts (they should be 1-8 4-5 3-6 2-7 9-8). They are also missing in 2002 Rev. A and 2000 Rev. C. The bouts do appear in the 1995 rulebook. This has yet to be corrected in any later version.

Problems with the figures in the document

Figure 1 ("Strip for Semi-Finals and Finals", associated with rule t.14) is almost too blurry to read the print in the electronic version of the rulebook. As best can be discerned, it is a corrupted version of the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where the diagram is barely legible, which in turn appears to be identical to that in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure 2 ("Standard Strip for all three weapons", associated with rule t.14) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook, and appears twice, differing by a 90 degree rotation. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is also fuzzy, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp. (It is also sharp in the later 2002 Rev. October 14, 2003.)

Rule o.21 refers to a Figure 7a (meant to be an illustration of a DE64 bout plan) on p. 74, and rule o.43 refers to a Figure 7b (apparently meant to be an incompletely filled DE bout plan), but the figures do not appear. One complete DE64 bout plan does appear as figure 7 on the page following p. 79 of 2000 Rev. C, but no later version.

Rule m.8 refers to a Figure 8 (illustrating various dimensions of the foil and flexibility test) on p. 80, but the figure is on p. 61, where it is almost too blurry to read the print in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is meant to be equivalent to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Rule m.16 refers to a Figure 9 (illustrating various dimensions of the épée and flexibility test) on p. 83, but the figure is on p. 63, where it is almost too blurry to read the print in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is meant to be equivalent to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure 10 ("Epee design of point", associated with rule m.19) is cropped on the right, losing "mm" as the dimension for a measurement. It is meant to be equivalent to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is complete, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is complete.

Rule m.19(1) refers to a Figure 10 ("Epée: details of tip of point") on p. 85, but the figure is on p. 64.

Rule m.23 refers to a Figure 12 ("Saber dimensions and flexibility") on p. 87, but the figure is on p. 66, where it is too blurry to read the print in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is not meant to contain the same information as any earlier clear version of the diagram.

Rule m.23 refers to a Figure 13 ("Saber dimensions (contd.)") on p. 88, but the figure is on p. 67, where it is too blurry to read the print in the electronic version of the rulebook. It appears to be meant to contain a subset of the corresponding diagram in in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure 14 ("Foil: conductive jacket", associated with and immediately preceding rule m.28) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure 15 ("Electric saber conductive jacket", associated with and immediately preceding rule m.34) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure 16 ("Gauge for checking weapons", immediately preceding rule m.43) is too blurry to read the print in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram, immediately following rule m.43, in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure A.1 ("Design of masks", associated with and immediately preceding rules 2.2(3) and 2.2(4) of Appendix A to the Material Rules) is mis-captioned Figure A-1 and is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure A.2 ("High speed dynamometer for test of cloth resistance to perforation", associated with and shortly following rule 3.1(2.1) of Appendix A to the Material Rules) is mis-captioned Figure A.1 and is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure A.3 ("Fixing device for test of cloth resistance to perforation", associated with and shortly following rule 3.1(2.3) of Appendix A to the Material Rules) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure A.4 ("Vital parts", associated with and immediately preceding rule 3.2 of Appendix A to the Material Rules) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure A.5 ("FIE quality labels (not to scale)", associated with and immediately following rule 4 of Appendix A to the Material Rules) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook, and has its caption on the top of the page following the diagram. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure A.6 ("Test devices for traction and tensile strength", associated with rules 1(4.2), 1(4.3), 1(6.2), 1(6.3), and 2.1(4.1), and appearing at the end of Appendix A to the Material Rules) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2002 Rev. A, where it is sharp, and to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Usefulness of the penalty chart (t.120)

The penalty chart has been rearranged to conform to the layout of the current FIE penalty chart, and background colors have been added to correspond to the color of the card awarded. However, in the electronic version, these background colors appear as white, grey, and black. (Apparently by error the illegality of scoring a point while falling was preserved in the chart, but reality has returned to what the chart says.) Exceptions:

1. No mention of first group yellow card for ready to fence with excessively bent blade.
2. No mention of a match-long team yellow card for a team member entering strip zone without permission.

A first group offense "Straightening weapon on conductive strip" appears, citing rules t.46, t.61, t.70/d, but the actual rules apply without regard to whether the strip is conductive.

There is no first group offense "Abnormal fencing action(*)" listed, although rule t.87 forbids such. (This did appear in a later version.)

A first group offense "Hits with brutality or while falling(*)" appears, citing no rules (rule t.87 should be cited).

Recommended additional material

1. The knowledge that the USFA removed the prohibition in rule t.82 of coaching by a spectator of a bout.
2. A copy of the 12 rule changes for the 2002-2003 season, and the knowledge that they are in force yet missing from the rulebook — except that scoring a point while falling is once again prohibited.
3. The knowledge that the missing last five bouts in rule o.14 for a pool of nine are 1-8 4-5 3-6 2-7 9-8 — or special pool sheets with the order for nine printed on it.

The 2002 Rulebook, Rev. A

2002 Rev. A is a less recent (although generally more current!) revision of the rulebook than 2002 Rev. C, but the book as a whole is better formatted. The USFA Web site does not offer it, and at one time a copy was spotted at the Web site of the USFA Fencing Officials Commission (FOC). It is available at fencing.net.

Includes

By and large, the 12 rule changes the USFA made for the 2002-2003 fencing season, with the exception that rule t.87 was not not changed to show no more penalty for scoring a point while falling — although this clause in rule t.87 in the meantime was restored (effective with the 2003-2004 fencing year).

Excludes

The October 2000 elimination of the specific prohibition in rule t.82 of coaching by a spectator of a bout.

The July 2000 adoption effective October 2000 of the stiffer S2000 saber blade (which the USFA thereafter has not always enforced).

The July 2000 (effective October 2000) elimination of the hand in the description in rule t.71 of valid saber target and the saber glove description in rule m.33.

Problems with the document other than figures

Spelling errors (omitted and mistyped letters) are quite common. Approximately page-length pieces of text around rule t.120 appear out of order.

In rule o.14, the bout order for the 36 bouts of a pool of nine fencers is missing the last five bouts (they should be 1-8 4-5 3-6 2-7 9-8). They are also missing in 2000 Rev. C. The bouts do appear in the 1995 rulebook. This has yet to be corrected in any later version.

Problems with the figures in the document

Figure 1 ("Strip for Semi-Finals and Finals", associated with rule t.14) blurry in the electronic version of the rulebook. It appears to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp.

Figure 2 ("Standard Strip for all three weapons", associated with rule t.14) is fuzzy in the electronic version of the rulebook. It is meant to be identical to the corresponding diagram in 2000 Rev. C, where it is sharp. (It is also sharp in the later 2002 Rev. October 14, 2003.)

Rules o.21 and o.43 refer to a Figure 7 (meant to be an illustration of a DE64 bout plan) on p. 79, but the figure does not appear. It does appear on the page following p. 79 of 2000 Rev. C.

Rule m.8 refers to a Figure 8 (illustrating various dimensions of the foil and flexibility test) on p. 86, but the figure is on p. 105.

Rule m.16 refers to a Figure 9 (illustrating various dimensions of the épée and flexibility test) on p. 89, but the figure is on p. 108.

Rule m.19(1) refers to a Figure 10 ("Epée: details of tip of point") on p. 89, but the figure is on p. 110.

Rule m.23 refers to a Figure 12 ("Saber dimensions and flexibility") on p. 93, but the figure is on p. 112.

Rule m.23 refers to a Figure 13 ("Saber dimensions (contd.)") on p. 94, but the figure is on p. 113.

Usefulness of the penalty chart (t.120)

The penalty chart reflects the 12 rule changes for the 2002-2003 season (including the deletion of the recently-restored illegality of a point scored while falling). Exceptions:

1. No mention of first group yellow card for ready to fence with excessively bent blade.

A first group offense "Straightening weapon on conductive strip" appears, citing rules t.46, t.61, t.70, but the actual rules apply without regard to whether the strip is conductive.

There is no first group offense "Abnormal fencing action(*)" listed, although rule t.87 forbids such. (This did appear in a later version.)

There is no first group offense "Hits with brutality or while falling(*)" isted, although rule t.87 forbids such. (This did appear in a later version.)

Recommended additional material

1. The knowledge that the USFA removed the prohibition in rule t.82 of coaching by a spectator of a bout.
2. The knowledge that the USFA restored the yellow card and annulment of point for scoring a point while falling.
3. The knowledge that the missing last five bouts in rule o.14 for a pool of nine are 1-8 4-5 3-6 2-7 9-8 — or special pool sheets with the order for nine printed on it.

The 1999/2000 Rulebook, 2000 Rev. C

2000 Rev. C is not a current rulebook. However, it is the version which is available at the Web site of the USFA, where it is described as being "1999 Edition". (In fact, the base document was written and adopted in 1999, but the version available at the Web site is the 2000 Rev. C revision of the 1999 rulebook (as shown by footers on the document pages), and the document itself says "2000 Edition" on the title page.)

Includes

By and large, the rules as of late 2000.

Excludes

The elimination in October 2002 of the specific prohibition of coaching by a spectator of a bout, the 12 rule changes the USFA made for the 2002-2003 fencing season (of which only 11 1/2 remain, with the return for the 2003-2004 fencing season of rule t.87 prohibiting scoring a point while falling).

The July 2000 adoption effective October 2000 of the stiffer S2000 saber blade (which the USFA thereafter has not always enforced).

The July 2000 (effective October 2000) elimination of the hand in the description in rule t.71 of valid saber target and the saber glove description in rule m.33.

Problems with the document other than figures

In rule o.14, the bout order for the 36 bouts of a pool of nine fencers is missing the last five bouts (they should be 1-8 4-5 3-6 2-7 9-8). The bouts do appear in the 1995 rulebook. This has yet to be corrected in any later version.

Problems with the figures in the document

Rule m.8 refers to a Figure 8 (illustrating various dimensions of the foil and flexibility test) on p. 86, but the figure is on p. 85.

Rule m.16 refers to a Figure 9 (illustrating various dimensions of the épée and flexibility test) on p. 89, but the figure is on p. 88.

Rule m.19(1) refers to a Figure 10 ("Epée: details of tip of point") on p. 89, but the figure is on p. 90.

Rule m.23 refers to a Figure 12 ("Saber dimensions and flexibility") on p. 93, but the figure is on p. 92.

Rule m.23 refers to a Figure 13 ("Saber dimensions (contd.)") on p. 94, but the figure is on p. 93.

Usefulness of the penalty chart (t.120)

The penalty chart does not reflect the 12 rule changes for the 2002-2003 season (of which only 11 1/2 remain, with the return for the 2003-2004 fencing season of rule t.87 prohibiting scoring a point while falling), making it questionably useful as a quick reference. However many tournament organizing committees supply clipboards accompanied by, or having permanently attached, penalty charts of this age.

A first group offense "Straightening weapon on conductive strip" appears, citing rules t.46, t.61, t.70, but the actual rules apply without regard to whether the strip is conductive.

There is no first group offense "Abnormal fencing action(*)" listed, although rule t.87 forbids such. (This did appear in a later version.)

There is no first group offense "Hits with brutality or while falling(*)" isted, although rule t.87 forbids such. (This did appear in a later version.)

Recommended additional material

1. The knowledge that the USFA removed the prohibition in rule t.82 of coaching by a spectator of a bout.
2. A copy of the 12 rule changes for the 2002-2003 season, and the knowledge that they are in force yet missing from the rulebook — except that scoring a point while falling is once again prohibited.
3. The knowledge that the missing last five bouts in rule o.14 for a pool of nine are 1-8 4-5 3-6 2-7 9-8 — or special pool sheets with the order for nine printed on it.

The 1995 Rulebook, Any Edition

The 1995 rulebook is sufficiently out of date that it should not be used for more than research. It is not known to be available electronically any more, but there are electronic copies already in private hands. So, if one is desired, a copy can be located.

Note that the rules in the 1995 rulebook are numbered, but the rules in the 1999 rulebook are broken into three major sections designated by letter (and corresponding to one of three different books in which the FIE writes its rules) followed by a number within the major section. There is no correspondence between 1995 and 1999 rule numbers.

Although useless in most practical situations, this older rulebook does have its uses for research. For example, people with good but old memories have suggested that there are rules pertaining to how saber can be fenced without electronics, or how women are allowed to wear divided skirts in lieu of fencing knickers. Trying to find rules on these topics in the current rulebook is fruitless; they just aren't there, but without knowing exactly where it is or exactly what words are in the rule, it can be very tiring to prove that no such rules exist. But, these rules can easily be found in the 1995 rulebook. The surrounding context for these rules in the 1995 rulebook can be located in the current rulebook, and the rules of interest are missing from those spots in their surrounding context.

The Most Recent Rule Changes

• Summer 2004: The USFA Board of Directors meeting in July, 2004 (minutes not yet officially available, but expected to appear at http://www.usfencing.org/Official/BOD200407M.pdf; in the meantime the Southwest Section has an unofficial copy at http://www.southwestfencing.org/USFABoardMinutesJuly2004.pdf) adopted approximately 10 changes to the rules effective August 1, 2004, which have not yet been mentioned herein as included or excluded in any specific versions of the rulebook. Summary:
  1. All remaining first group offenses without annulment of touch scored during the violation now do have the touch annulled (involved "simple corps-à-corps (foil and sabre)", "touching/taking hold of electrical equipment", and "covering/substitution of valid target") (t.20, t.22, t.72, t.120).
  2. Reversing the line of shoulders is no longer an offense (t.36, t.46, t.120).
  3. Judges are now required to switch ends between bouts of a team match (t.36).
  4. It is illegal for the fencer to have electronic communications equipment (t.43, t.44, t.45, t.120).
  5. The penalty for absence where compulsary of a satisfactory name or national colors on the clothing is a single red card for the bout, followed fencing the bout anyway (t.45, t.120).
  6. The rules concerning calling a fencer, or the balance of a team, to strip no longer specifies an initial yellow card, and no longer requires "an announcement" (t.86, t.120).
  7. Saluting is now required both before and after the bout, in addition to a handshake after the bout (t.87, should also involve t.120).
  8. Passivity is handled slightly differently. When the upcoming time expiration DOES NOT produce a final score, just pretend time expired already. When the upcoming time expiration DOES produce a final score, then 1) if it is too late to advance to one minute remaining, ignore, and 2) if it is still possible to advance to one minute remaining, issue a warning the first time and the second time advance to the one minute point with priority determined in advance just in case (t.87).
  9. When penalizing people not fencing in the bout for disturbing the bout, warnings and expulsions now have a display of a yellow or black black card respectively (t.118, t.120).
  10. A deliberate touch not on valid target has been moved on the penalty chart from a first group to a second group offense (t.120).
• Summer 2003: The USFA Board of Directors meeting on July 6, 2003 restored to rule t.87 the first group yellow card and annulment of point for scoring a point while falling, reversing half of the third of 12 changes made one year earlier. (This was motivated by a realization that the earlier rule change had been in excess of the actual rule change previously made by the FIE which had inspired the USFA to change its rule.) The USFA has not yet provided any online proof (like meeting minutes) for this change. However, the existence of this change was independently confirmed through personal correspondence with Jeff Bukantz. Note also that this change was mentioned in public by Brad Baker, head coach for U. Mass (but not a spokesman for the USFA), in a fencing.net posting.
• Summer 2002: The USFA Board of Directors meeting on July 6, 2002, adopted 12 changes to the rules (which were listed not in the published minutes, but in the agenda where they were described as targeted for September 1, 2002) effective August 1, 2002. Summary:
  1. Pool and team bouts change from 4 to 3 minutes (t.30, o.17 (b), o.44).
  2. First group yellow card for ready to fence with excessively bent blade (t.45 part (2)).
  3. No more penalty either for a fall or for scoring a point while falling in a situation where the referee does not penalize for disorderly fencing (t.87). (Note that the penalty for scoring a point while falling was restored one year later.)
  4. The "passivity rule" (t.87).
  5. Zone for team members during team events (t.92).
  6. Match-long team yellow card for team member entering strip zone without permission (t.92).
  7. Saber first DE first period ends immediately if either fencer reaches 8 points (o.23).
  8. Opponent gains a meter when a fencer crosses the side with one or two feet (t.28).
  9. A coup lancé from a fencer crossing the side with only a single foot causing a halt remains valid (t.26).
  10. The annulment of a touch from a coup lancé by a fencer crossing the side applies only if crossing with both feet (t.26).
  11. Advertising logos may be 75 (no longer 50) cm^2 "The surface area for advertising is increased to 75 cm2 per logo (Publicity Code, IV(C)(b)).
  12. "The life cycle of five years for the use of FIE blades is canceled, provided that the manufacturer has conducted periodic controls." It is unclear what existing rule this cancels.
• October 2000: The USFA Board of Directors meeting on October 21, 2000 approved a motion to repeal the words, "to give advice to the fencers" from the third paragraph of section t.82 of the USFA rules. The minutes further state: "This has the effect of permitting the giving of advice during a bout if it is done in a manner that does not disrupt the bout. Mr. Goering stated that the FOC would draft a replacement rule or policy to be presented to the Executive Committee for its November 10, 2000, meeting." The minutes of the next Board meeting, on Feb. 17, 2001, mention that the November 2000 Executive Committee addressed the matter and sent it back to the FOC to work further, and that the December 2000 Executive Committee meeting gave the FOC until January 9 to work further, but mention the January 2001 and February 2001 Executive Committee meetings without reference to this matter. In fact, there is no mention of this matter in Board minutes, either pertaining to the Board or reporting meetings of the Executive Committee, until the July 6, 2002 Board meeting, where a committee report was presented by the FOC where George Kolombatovich is stated to have referenced "the Board’s adoption of rules allowing strip side coaching". The minutes of the September 2002 Board meeting are not available electronically, there is no reference in the minutes of the February 2003 Board meeting, and the July 2003 Board meeting has only just occurred. In conclusion, the best available evidence is that the original October 21, 2000 action to strike the words "to give advice to the fencers" from the third paragraph of t.82 is still in force.
• July 2000: According to the minutes of the USFA Board of Directors meeting on June 30, 2000, the Executive Committee on June 30/July 1 (note the chronological oddity; the Board meeting might not have ended until a time on or after on July 1st) acted:
  1. "Approved a motion to adopting [sic] the FIE rule regarding the flexibility of sabre blades effective October 1, 2000. Text of the specific wording will be published in the Newsletter and on the USFencing web site." (This is the adoption of the requirement that saber blades be "S2000" blades.) Despite the wording of the motion, no wording appeared in the Newsletter. The minutes did not specify either the text of the old USFA rule or the text of the new USFA rule. The common term used for saber blades conforming to the new FIE flexibility requirement is "S2000", and the FIE change was to require saber blades to be at least as stiff as the stiffest previously legal blades, with the intention of reducing whipover. The current FIE Material rules ("règlement du matériel") (also available at a second, newer, URL) contains, in rule m.23, specifications for how to mount the blade being tested, where to hang what weight, and where to measure the resulting deflection. It gives an allowable range of 4-7 cm. Researching FIE documents further reveals a July 31, 2000 document (apparently no longer available from the FIE) containing both "Page 10 : remplacer le 5ème alinéa par “ La lame de sabre doit présenter une flexibilité correspondant à une flèche de 4 cm minimum à 7 cm maximum , mesurée de la façon suivante : ”" and "Page 11, figure 1 : remplacer “ minimum : 7cm et maximum : 12 cm ” par “ minimum : 4 cm et maximum : 7 cm ”.". This indicates that the FIE rule referenced in the minutes was one specifying an allowable deflection of 4-7 cm, and that the FIE had previously allowed a deflection of 7-12 cm. However, rule m.23 in 2002 Rev. C, 2002 Rev. A, and 2000 Rev. C (and rule 406 in the 1995 rulebook) specifies the same testing procedure as the FIE, but gives an allowable deflection of 7-12 cm. Evidently, the old USFA requirement was 7-12 cm, and the new requirement has yet to appear in any version of the USFA rulebook! This makes more sense when one notes that the USFA thereafter specified certain competitions where S2000 blades would or would not be requred (i.e., the adoption of this new USFA rule was actually only a partial adoption):
     • The minutes of the October 21, 2000 Board meeting report that on October 21, 2000 the Executive Committee voted: "S2000 sabre blades are mandatory for all team selection events except for the Divisional and Sectional qualifiers for the 2000-2001 season."
     • The agenda for the Feb. 17, 2001 Board meeting reported that in August 2000 the Youth Development Committee "decided that the new S2000 sabre blades would not be required for youth competitions during the 2000-2001 season."
  2. "Approved a motion adopting the FIE rule revising the target in men’s Sabre to exclude the hand effective October 1, 2000. The specific wording will be published in the Newsletter and on the USFencing web site." Despite the wording of the motion, no wording appeared in the Newsletter. The target described in 2002 Rev. C rule t.71 does not mention hands being invalid target, although the accompanying illustration shows them as invalid (this is consistent with the current FIE Technical Rules (règlement technique)). However, the situation is more clear in rule m.33, which describes the conductive cuff of the glove, and that it must "cover all the sleeve down to below the external cubital styloid (small prominent bone of the wrist)" (current FIE Material rules ("règlement du matériel")). The target described in 2002 Rev. A and 2000 Rev. C rule t.71 also does not mention hands being invalid target, and also the accompanying illustration does show them as invalid. But, rule m.33 describes the hand as valid target by stating that the conductive material must be "on the back of the hand as far as the fingers and on the whole of the gauntlet." Researching FIE documents further reveals a July 31, 2000 document (apparently no longer available from the FIE) containing "Page 16, article m.33 Remplacer le 1er alinéa par : “ Le gant réglementaire de la main armée du tireur doit être recouvert de tissu amovible ou fixé sur toute la manchette jusqu’au dessous du styloïde cubital extérieur (petit os saillant du poignet), aussi bien dans la position “ en garde ” que dans la position “ bras allongé ”. This indicates that the FIE rule referenced in the minutes was the one specifying that the conductive surface of the glove need extend toward the fingers no farther than the external cubital styloid. This does not make clear what the previous FIE requirement was, but one can infer that it was comparable to the previous USFA requirement. The new definition of the valid target has yet to be included in either a USFA or an FIE rulebook! The only change which has been made is the description of the glove which actually defines where a valid hit will register. And, that change was not made in any USFA rulebook except the extremely recent 2002 Rev. C. (Incidentally, it is somewhat unclear what the "external cubital styloid (small prominent bone of the wrist)" is! The French wording is "styloïde cubital extérieur (petit os saillant du poignet)", suggesting there was no error in the translation of the name, and the confusion is also present in the French. The problem is that "cubital" means of or pertaining to the elbow, not the wrist! There is a spot (on the radius bone) at the elbow known as the cubital styloid. There are two obvious possible bones which could actually be meant. Note how, in the wrist area, the width of the hand and arm vary as seen from the back side of the hand (more easily felt than seen). From the knuckles and adjacent part of the thumb, the hand narrows smoothly until an irregular spot where it suddenly gets a little narrower where the hand meets the arm (the radiocarpal joint), then suddenly widens again at the start of the arm, then smoothly narrows to the spot where a wristwatch band naturally sits. Note the two opposite spots at the aforementioned sudden widening. The spot on the thumb side is part of the end of the radius, at the radial styloid, and the spot on the finger side is part of the end of the ulna, at the ulnar styloid, the radius and the ulna being the two bones of the forearm. Actually, those two widest spots are not exactly the styloids, but the widest spots of the heads of the bones, from which the styloids extend, narrowing, toward the hand — but it is clear that the rule-writers intended to refer to a protruberance, easy to locate externally, in the vicinity of a wrist-area styloid, and accidentally referenced an elbow-area styloid instead. These two spots at the wrist, being about equally far on opposite sides, are the two logical candidates for what the rule-writers intended. All that remains are, first, whether they were meaning the thumb-side or the finger-side wrist bulge, and second, if any rulebook fanatic can ever insist that it is legal to wear a saber glove that goes past the elbow but has conductive material stopping at the elbow instead of the wrist!)
• The minutes of the September 19, 1998 Board meeting discuss extensively (although have no action relating to such) adopting USFA rule changes reflecting recent FIE rule changes. The "discussion" section describing the approval of the Executive Committee Report of Action from meeting held September 19, 1998 (Appendix R) has five paragraphs:

   

  Regarding item #1 (adoption of FIE rules effective January 1, 1999), Mr. Alperstein explained that item #1 of the Report of Action is the Executive Committees implementation of the rules as discussed in the September 1997 Annual Meeting of the Board of Directors, an excerpt from which was handed out prior to the meeting (See App Z).

   

  Mr. Massik advised that the new rules will be published in the November Newsletter. (This newsletter is not available in electronic form, and it is unknown if rules were published in it.)

   

  Mr. Alperstein explained the difficulty in obtaining the text of the new rules from the FIE and an approved translation. Mr. Kolombatovich, the official translator with responsibility for submitting to the National Office and Online Services Committee, explained the status and noted that the FOC, which only received the translation recently, expects the new Rule book to be available by October 1.

   

  Ms. Zimmermann suggested that the New Rules be published online. Mr. Massik advised that this is planned. (It is uncertain whether this ever occurred, but it is certain that a rulebook including the new rules did become available online.)

   

  Mr. Alperstein advised the Board that the full rule book will not be enacted until the full Board approves. The new rule book will be presented to the Board as a first Hearing item in February. (Apparently, no such thing happened at the February 1999 Board meeting, or at either of the other two (known) Board meetings in 1999. In fact, this leaves two possibilities: The 1999 rulebook was never adopted, or the Executive Committee decided not to offer it to the Board after all and enacted it themselves.)

   

  Later in the same minutes is listed a motion intended for possible adoption, "Motion (Mr. Kiss): To approve the new rules adopted by the FIE for implementation in the 1998-1999 season. The minutes continue by reporting that, apparently there was no action involving this motion because "The Executive Committee, acting upon the September 1997 directive of the Board, adopted the new rules effective January 1, 1999. (Ref. App. R.)" Appendix R is the "Executive Committee Report of Action, September 19, 1998". The first of three items listed is that the Executive Committee: Triggered the adoption of new FIE rules [see below] to be used in competition effective as of January 1, 1999 pursuant to directive of the Board from September 1997*. The Executive Committee instructs the USFA office to publish the new rules in the next issue of the USFA Newsletter. The asterisk points to a lengthy footnote:

   

  (*Sec. Note: The following is excerpted from the 9/97 Annual Meeting as a point of information for Members of the Board)

   

  Motion (Mr. Kiss): To call for a decision to allow recent rules changes, approved during the recent FIE Congress in Cape Town, South Africa, to take effect immediately for all USFA official tournaments, starting with the one in October. That these changes be widely publicized amidst the membership so they can be applied also in local events. (Apparently, that Cape Town FIE Congress was July 1997.)

   

  Discussion: There was lengthy discussion of the proposed rule changes including the viability of implementation at this time and the sensibility of some elements of the rule changes. The Board was advised that Dan McCormick will not be able to make the required changes to tournament software in time for upcoming circuit events. With regard to the newly promulgated rule stating that it will be forbidden to remove one’s jacket on the strip, there was no information as to the penalties that might be incurred nor was there adequate information as to the need for such a rule other than speculation that this must be a problem in Europe. Further, the FIE has not approved official language for the new rules.

   

  Motion to amend (Mr. Michanik): That the Board adopt the rules in principle but that the FOC must publish forthwith the rules. Motion not accepted by sponsor.

   

  Discussion: Mr. Masin pointed out that the reason we don’t have the rules is the FIE has not yet written them. Discussion confirmed the rules for operating tournaments will remain the same until such time as Executive Committee acts for the Board and sets a date for the adoption of the rules.

   

  Motion to amend (Mr. Masin): That the Board adopt the new FIE rules in principle and that the date of implementation be determined by the EC at such time as the rules have been clarified and the computer program is able to handle the new rules. Motion accepted by sponsor. Motion carries.

   

  Motion to further amend (Ms. Zimmermann): That we exclude item e (regarding removal of jacket on the strip) from our rule changes on the basis that it is unclear and has no apparent application in U.S. fencing.

   

  Discussion: There was general agreement that this rule change had little applicability in the U.S. and it lacks necessary punitive provisions.

   

  Motion carries. (Note that there is no clear indication whether this means the last-mentioned motion to amend carried, or the amendment and the then-amended main motion carried, or the main motion carried with the implication that the last-mentioned motion to amend had already carried, or the main motion carried with the implication that the last-mentioned motion to amend had not carried. However, the 1998 minutes strongly imply that the main motion in some form did pass; it only leaves ambiguous whether the Executive Committee is bound to legislate against removal of jacket on the strip or bound to leave in place the then-existing policy that such removal was not an offense.)

   

The FIE Rules

Almost all of the USFA rules of fencing are derived from the FIE's rules of fencing. Normally, the FIE makes a rule change, and after a suitable delay, the USFA sees the FIE change its rule back, or the USFA adopts an English version of the FIE rule, or the USFA deliberately decides not to follow the lead of the FIE for what it things is an appropriate reason (usually involving differences between the needs of the USFA and its fencing members and the needs of the FIE and internationally-competitive fencers). The FIE rules are binding on FIE competitions, and the USFA rules on USFA competitions. However, the FIE rules are useful to USFA members for two reasons.

1. Sometimes there is a discussion of some suggested future change to the USFA rules of fencing, but the actual suggested rule change isn't available for discussion. Typically, the rule is already an FIE rule, and it is available for reading in the FIE rules.
2. Sometimes there is something ambiguous or puzzling in the USFA rules of fencing where multiple meanings of an English word leave the meaning of the rule in doubt, or where the English text was borrowed from a British translation from the French and the meaning is clear only if one realizes that an English word is being used in a British instead of American fashion.

Since the English text in the USFA rules of fencing almost always is an American English translation of the French text in the FIE rules (and sometimes a British English translation instead), the intended meaning of the rule can often be found by reading the French text of the correspondingly-numbered FIE rule.

Copyright © 2003-2004 Matthew T. Delevoryas