Woody Cavenaugh

The most difficult part of watching foil and saber is dealing with the concept of "right of way". In principal it is very simple. Foil and Saber are modeled after dueling to the death. The target area is limited to places where you could die if run through in that location. For instance, torso where we keep our vital organs, and in saber head where we keep our brain, and arms which are prone to being loped off. The idea is that if two armed combatants came at one another with sharpened steal for truth and justice, one would attack, the other, (that one not wanting to die) would defend themselves (parry), then strike out on an attack of their own (riposte). The overriding goal is I kill you, you die, I go home alive with a cute woman (or man) on my arm.

If combatant "A" attacked combatant "B", and "B" did nothing but attack right back, then when the dust settled, both would be dead, but one of them would have been a bigger fool for not defending himself. Right-of-way attempts to reward the smart (with a point), while punishing the not so smart (no touch).

But modern right-of-way weapons are not lethal, and we've gone out of our ways to protect the fencer from accidents with the hot white clothing and blades that bend. In a modern bout you might see fencer "A" "have at" fencer "B", while fencer "B" goes back at fencer "A". As the spectator you see both fencers get hit, and the box indicates a double touch, yet the referee only gives fencer "A" a point. You and everyone around you saw the other light go off too, and if you were looking closely, it might have even gone off first. The referee is applying the rules of right of way, "A" attacked first, "B" didn't defend. Both hit, "A" was the attacker, and hit on target, both got a light, but only the attacker "A" got a point.

Both the federation of international fencing, called the FIE (Federation International Escreme, the world fencing org's official language is French), and the USFA (The United States Fencing Association) are constantly trying to do things to make the right of way weapons more understandable to the at home audience. Most of these attempts deal with the timing between the hit fencer "A" landed and the hit fencer "B" landed. The problem is this. If "A" starts first, he/she has right of way, but if fencer "B" lands first, their light goes off first. If the lockout timing on the box is too short the box shows fencer "B" having the only hit. If the lockout timing is long enough to acknowledge the slower attack, you have a bunch of double touches. Most people who have been fencing for a long time bemoan the new rules as watering down the right of way weapons into epee. While they are right in a sense, they aren't offering up any solutions to how to make the right of way weapons easier to watch by the non-fencers at home or in the stands. What seems to work best (for TV anyway) is the slow instant replay where the announcer can break down the actions showing right of way as they go. This is nothing more than wishful thinking when you are watching it live. Live you have to first listen to the referee's replay of the last action, and second also most important take his word for it. That is really the hardest part. The referee is only human and what you see might not be what they saw, worse yet, they might actually be wrong. However they are the referee and cannot be "wrong". Therefore a smart fencer is paying attention to the referee's calls. If the referee isn't seeing what the fencer thinks they are doing, they are responsible for trying something else. After the bout, the fencers, fans, etc can cry moan and complain about the blind referee. If the referee's reputation gets bad enough in the right circles, they will find themselves doing less and less refereeing. Refereeing is as political a game as being a Supreme Court Judge, only without the pay or real authority.

Now, to try and spot the right of way yourself. Look for the fencer whose weapon is moving forward threatening valid target first. The difficulty level is this it is independent of the body's movement. You can be on the attack and still be moving backwards. It takes training of the eye to see what is the attack and what isn't. It might have been easier if the blades started from some place of stillness, but no, that would be too easy, the weapons are waving all through the air in every direction fencers are moving up and down the strip and through it all you have to be able to notice the moment one of the fencer's weapons moves forward threatening valid target. But wait! There's more, I didn't even mention how the other fencer is reacting! Did they counterattack? Did they defend themselves? To see it, and get it, you have to break it down like you used to break down sentences in school.
Fencer "A" attacks, fencer "B" counterattacks. Two lights go off. Fencer "A" has the attack, because they initiated the attack. Point "A".

Fencer "A" attacks, fencer "B" uses their blade to parry the attack, and they immediately reposted. Fencer "A" had the attack, fencer "B" took it away when they parried, their immediate riposte gave them right-of-way, one hit, one light for "B", point "B".

Fencer "A" attacks, fencer "B" uses their blade to parry the attack, and they immediately reposted, fencer "A" continues in and hits anyway. Fencer "A" had the attack, fencer "B" took it away when they parried, their immediate riposte gave them right-of-way. There are two lights, because both fencers hit, but we can pretty much ignore fencer "A" continuation because fencer "B" had right of way, and fencer "B" hit. Point "B".

Fencer "A" attacks, fencer "B" uses their blade to parry the attack, and they immediately reposted but misses, fencer "A" continues in and hits anyway. Fencer "A" had the attack, fencer "B" took it away when they parried, their immediate riposte gave them right-of-way. But there is only one light because "B" missed. Since only "A" hit, "A" gets the touch.

Does your head hurt yet? Just wait!

Fencer "A" attacks, fencer "B" uses their blade to parry the attack, they immediately reposted but, fencer "A" parries back and counter riposte. Fencer "A" had the attack, fencer "B" took it away when they parried, their immediate riposte gave them right-of-way, but fencer "A" parried them taking right-of-way back. Fencer "A"'counter riposte misses, fencer "B"s continuation misses, Fencer "A" pulls back and tries again with a remise. Fencer "B" pulls back and tries again with a remise. Both hit. Before you go get two aspirin, the breakdown isn't all that bad. "A" had it and lost it. "B" had it and lost it. "A" had it and missed. "B" had it and missed. "A" tried again and hit. "B" tried again and hit. "A" gets the touch.

Don't forget, to take a full eight ounces of water with your headache remedy. While you're away, think about the poor referee who has to keep up with all that all day long during a tournament.

In an oversimplified way then, right-of-way is like taking turns, the difference is that instead of giving someone their turn, you are taking it from them. So foil and saber fencing is a lot like pre-school, only you are encouraged not to share, and no one gets nap time.