> But Volf claimed that a line is
>> not abandoned by the lunge, and this directly contradicts what we
>> have heard from George K.
>Does this mean that we are talking epee here? If lunging invalidates
>a point in line why do people not establish a line as their oppanant
>lunges since, according to this (as _I_ understand it), they would have
>Help! What is going on? Could someone explain this in eppist's terms.
>(ie "A hit B and got the point 'cause he got there first!")
>Orde "confused epeeist" Saunders