Eugene Tsukhlo: «Horses were never exchanged for camels and I think they won’t ever be exchanged in future»

Eugene Tsukhlo got an international judging category 16 years ago. And Eugene is one of the few judges who has a judging category in all types of weapons – saber, foil and epee. In the years of the highest competition in saber fencing he had won the world championship and was considered one of the most promising young athletes. Serious injuries during a car accident didn’t allow him to continue his sport career. But as a judge, a member of organizing committees and panels of judges of competitions of various ranks - from the championships of Russia to the world championships - Eugene proved himself to be a top-class and sincerely devoted to his work specialist. That is why correspondents of the official website of the International Charity Fund «For  Future of Fencing» Tatiana Kolchanova and Alexei Sharshkov met with Eugene Tsukhlo to learn his opinion on the problems of modern fencing and possible ways out of the crisis. Eugene immediately warned that he will express his own opinion that may seem controversial to some people. But we would like this publication to become the starting point for discussion on the development of modern fencing, the introduction of innovations that would allow our sport not only to strengthen its position in the Olympic movement but also make it more attractive for millions of sports fans.

My position

Over the past 15-20 years fencing has undergone significant changes. Like all living things, this sport is constantly developing. There have been updates to the principles of competition, to the rules of competition; changes also have been made in the principles of judging fencing bout and in athletes’ fencing gear and others. In my discussions and proposals I will stick to two principles which, in my opinion, are the most important: First – not to harm, the second -to create conditions for the best way of conducting a fencing bout, for holding competitions at various levels in accordance with the technical task, the terms of the regulations and the rank and the conditions for the best perception of fencing bouts for sportsmen and coaches, as well as for spectators.

There are sports with a long history, popular and those that can’t be called mass sports. Tennis is a sport with a century-long history. Throughout history the rules of the competition in this sport has never changed. No one has ever had an idea to change the system for calculating the effectiveness of serve, the size of the field or the ball. Dressage is also a sport with a century-long history. Horses were never exchanged for camels and I think they won’t be ever changed in future. In the archery competition the modern paintball system is not used.

That is the bases of sports stayed the same for decades or even centuries. And in such type of sport as fencing tremendous changes took place. Please pay special attention: they took place in the last 15-20 years.

Yes, adjustments are necessary but they should be made very carefully and step by step analyzing all the actions because by introducing something new (small) we may affect and worsen the main (large).

About positive innovations

At the 1982 World Cup in Rome an outstanding fencer Vladimir Smirnov has tragically lost his life. The reason was the lack of fencing equipment security plus increased physique of athletes. For several years the FIE had been working hard under the improvement of protective equipment for fencers.  As a result of the FIE technical commission such innovations as masks with more rigid wire meshes, costumes made of a material called "aramid fiber " as well as blades of maraging steel appeared. Despite the fact that the equipment became more expensive it was a well considered and right decision. Methods of checking the quality of protective equipment were worked out. With the introduction of new equipment not a single serious incident was recorded.

 A few words about the use of wireless systems of hit fixation. «All new is well forgotten old». 1979 is a year of the first wireless fencing system appearance in the USSR. The idea is very good. What is important is its full realization. Taking into consideration the nature of the system it is important to make the rules and approve the concept of an electronic hit fixation machine used in wireless fencing. In the system developed by the STM Company it is put into a fencing mask. The electronic hit fixation machine situated near the track repeats signals. Clarification and confirmation is necessary.

About foil

Given the "logic" of foil fencing, I propose that in no case the "white light" should be removed from a fencing bout and the target areas increased by the peak of a fencing mask. As we already know starting from 1 January 2009 new masks are used in the official FIE competitions by adult athletes. It is necessary to increase the target area by the elongation of jacket sleeves of athletes. This is especially important in women fencing foil (unarmed arm up to hand). As a result, the number of attempts to hit with the fixation at the finish of the white lamp will decrease and the number of attempts to protect the target area by an unarmed hand will decrease.

About saber

Because of certain circumstances the most «injured» type of fencing is currently the saber fencing. Over the past 20 years saber as a kind of fencing has undergone tremendous changes. I’ll make not the first and not the last attempt to understand what has happened with it?

If veterans of epee fencing talk about changes in the maneuverability and mobility the veterans of foil fencing speak about the end of recession and the return to the traditional classical fencing, the veterans of saber fencing are unanimous in the misunderstanding of what is happening on the fencing track.

Saber is the latest type of fencing affected by electrification. Electrification process took about 8 years. Thanks to the hard work of the FIE it was extremely successful. All the principles of saber fencing were safeguarded. Undoubtedly, the objectivity in judging fencing bouts increased. The leaders maintained their positions. This process didn’t affect the balance of power in the world of saber fencing.

The FIE cancels flèche! According to the interpretation of the FIE, «races» harm the saber fencing and violate the logic of a saber bout.

Then there was a new blow - the abolishment of a hit sensor in saber. Saber is the only type of fencing where hits or cuts are allowed. (The principle of tangency of a target area by a blade is treated in the rules as PASSE and is not correct).

Probably these two solutions are the «poison» which gradually kills saber fencing. Sportsmen adapted to new conditions in a short time. Attacking actions were too simple in execution as a result the use of feints and protection actions virtually ended and action on the weapons became quite rare. They became difficult to perform. The repertoire of fencers reduced dramatically. In the absence of sensor recording hits, fencers started applying techniques similar to epee and foil ones. The logic of fencing phrases was lost and on the whole all the dialogues between saber fencers were stopped. Anthropometric features of fencer came at the forefront. Sportsmen even invented a jumping flèche (a jump that resembles a flèche, but without cross over).

All this led to the fact that judging of fencing bouts became extremely complicated. To whom should be given the preference? To the one who «fires» his hand with great speed while counterattacking his opponent or to the athlete taking the advantage of the attack?

The greatest number of conflicts and conflicting interpretations of fencing phrases was recorded during the period of 2001-2005. The FIE «professionally» intervened again and took the Solomon decision - to make the fencing more understandable and unbiased we changed the lock time of lamps lightening in saber fencing without changing the rules (clarified the FIE).

It is my deep conviction this is wrong way! Fencers are now in very strict conditions. Saber fencers have to adjust again. It is now the matter of the existence of saber fencing as a type of fencing.

What measures should be taken in my opinion? I propose to allow the use of flèche only during the strike with a single cross over. When moving forward by steps or by lunges, cross over is not allowed. And in the shortest time we should work out the technical ability to install the sensor for hit fixation in saber fencing.

About judging

In recent years we have witnessed a sharp debate in the fencing world about the interpretation of the rules, work of judges, video judging and the examination of judges - the whole range of issues headed by a judge of a fencing bout.
Fencing lives. It is diverse. This is a difficult technical sport. Fencing can bring many medals on the Olympics.

The judges and their work are an integral part of our sport. Our aim is to make their work maximally objective, transparent and absolutely identical in methodical plan. We have always demanded of them and will continue to demand the performance of their work with the maximum of professionalism and objectivity.

Still we do not fully understand why the interpretation of certain moments of fencing bouts doesn’t coincide with the interpretation of the same elements of fencing bouts by sportsmen and coaches.

In my opinion, the reason lies in the decisions that the FIE took in the past 20 years. I don’t mean that the majority of decisions are incorrect the ideas are good but the execution is not thought-out and professional.

Amendments and modification of rules and regulations in all sports are necessary. This happens everywhere and every time. If there is a foundation (base), something can be always added to it. But you can’t distort the foundation!

What do we have now? In three types of weapons and three types of fencing disciplines isn’t any unified.
1. Foil, epee. To fix the hit one has to make an exertion with a force of 500 or 750 grams-force and in saber fencing any grase without any exertions is fixed as a hit or a cut.
2. Foil, epee. The use of transparent masks in these types does not entail any change in the rules. In saber fencing it leads to a reduction of a target area (rules of saber fencing interpret mask as a target area). In the World Cup we can see the following: one athlete fences in a transparent mask and his opponent in a standard one, thereby creating unequal conditions.
3. Foil, epee. Advance steps with cross over and flèches - are allowed. In sabers - not!

I consider the process of new interpretation of the rules and terms of a fencing bout absolutely wrong. Everything that was written in the rules and was practiced the last 40-50 years receives a new interpretation and, thus, directly a new interpretation of the judges. In the interpretation the former FIE leaders reached the point of absurdity by showing by video some fencing techniques in their original performance. I think that in recent years the quality of judging became worse. The decision-making process reminds more and more a talk show on television.

Coaches and experts are now at a loss - how to train athletes in the future? A wave of new interpretations of rules, amendments and clarifications puts them at a deadlock.

About video arbitration

The use of video means in fencing in order to improve the objectivity is a very good idea. In many sports this technique has widely spread over the last 10-15 years. There is no need to list the sports that use it in one form or another. It is important to understand why it is necessary in fencing.

The position of the former FIE leadership was the following:  for the further objectification of fencing bouts’ results and for the improvement of spectators’ perception of the bout. Everyone agrees with it, but this problem has two aspects.

1. How is it done and how it (technical features) works. Unfortunately there is not a single technical document which describes the technical parameters, such as:
- What kind of camera is needed?
- How should it be fixed?
- At what altitude?
- At what distance from the pistes?
- What lighting should be there?
This is only a small part of technical questions.

2.  Video judging.

The manager of the bout (president of the jury) is the only one who makes decisions based on his own perception of events. He must do it quickly and clearly. Using video arbitration, the situation has changed fundamentally. Due to the fact that the arbitrator has a monitor, he can check himself. He may take a pause and consult with the assistant. In doing so, it is acceptable that the opinion of the member of the FIE Arbitration Commission who may insist on taking another decision can be taken into consideration.

His main assistant is video camera which tracks the fight from another angle and has another perception of the bout. Technically it is not yet possible to transmit on the screen the signal which coincides completely with what is perceived by the judge. For many years in many competitions I drew attention to cases when the camera wasn’t able to reproduce even 50% of occurring at the time of hit or cut - it was fixed at a wide angle and recorded only the attacker's back. The judge is always situated almost between fencers.

Another assistant is the judge sitting in front of the monitor. Unfortunately, this he sees everything that happens on the pistes through a screen of a monitor. In most cases he is situated at the edge the piste.

I believe his role should be different. Attacks, defense and counterattack actions should never be interpreted in a SLOW mode. This technical option is only the way to reproduce actions and it shouldn’t play the first role in fencing. There is a huge difference in perception of what is happening by arbitrator and by video.

Suggestions:

1. Minimize issues related to the technical side of video judging. Decide upon and approve technical parameters of video judging.
2. The president of the jury shouldn’t look at the screen during the decision-making process. The screen should be put away.
3. Assistant should be located only at the rear (behind the back of the president of the jury) and control the bout with the same visual angle as the president of the jury.
4. If there are some doubts (in extreme cases) the president of the jury may consult an assistant. The solution is taken only by the president of the jury.
5. Assistant shall have the right to invite the president of the jury to the screen and see the episode again (3 times in real-time, 2 times in a SLOW mode).
6. Assistant watches the bout like the president of the jury (screen should be used only in case of doubt).
7. Assistant can’t be a representative of the jury - only the representative of the Arbitration Commission.
8. A sportsman or a coach hasn’t the right to demand from the president of the jury or the assistant watching his video.
9. The audience has the right to view again the video in real time or in a SLOW mode (if there is a demonstration screen) only after the final decision of the president of the jury.
10. If there an assistant has doubts about the decision, he must immediately turn to the president of the jury (sound or light signal).