A question for those who have taken referee ratings...

[mfp]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

It's part of my secret plot to get more referees.

Getting more referees would be helped if someone produced a real "Study Guide" vs the one currently put out by the FOC. Yes, the current version contains all the possible questions (and answers) to the test. Yes, the questions are in order of the rules they ask about. But no, what currently exists really isn't a complete study guide.

What would make a better study guide would be something akin to the guides that Gleim produces for Aviation and Accounting exams.

For example, the FAA publishes every possible question you could possibly see on any FAA "written" test. But like the FOC, the FAA doesn't list the correct answers. However the Gleim guides reproduce all the FAA's questions and groups them into logical sections by subject matter, organizes related sections into chapters, and has an easy to study outline at the beginning of each chapter. After each chapter's outline, you see the actual questions on the left side of the pages and cover up the explanations on the right side. When you uncover the right side you see what the correct answer is and why it's correct. The explanations also typically explain why the other answers are incorrect and include references to the appropriate "rules" (Federal Aviation Regulations) or other relevant material. Now that's a study guide.

[oiuyt]

But the point is the FOC doesn't WANT to provide the answers (with or without explanation. The FOC WANTS potential referees to slog through the rulebook. The FOC would probably love it if they had a way to force current referees to do so periodically. The rulebook, combined with the current study guide, combined with the required referee clinics, and combined with the availability of experienced referees/FOCs for any additional questions are designed to cover the equivalent need that the Gleim guides cover.

With over 900 US fencers into the referee system (not bad out of a total membership of ~20,000) it seems like the current FOC approach is working. I'm amazed that they've gotten anywhere near 5% of the fencers to start becoming referees.

I don't know how much FAA documentation there is, but I suspect is considerably more than the approximately 100 pages (probably only 40 of which are needed for the tests, even if you test for all three weapons) of the USFA rulebook. Wouldn't be surprised to find out that it's a couple of orders of magnitude larger. Once you get above a certain amount of sheer material, having a guide written to reduce the amount of time required wading through it all might be desireable. It's easy enough to cover the required material to become a referee that such a guide is not required here and I tend to agree with the FOC that it would not be desireable.

-B :)

[mfp]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

But the point is the FOC doesn't WANT to provide the answers (with or without explanation.

No, my point wasn't about what the FOC wants or doesn't want. My point was that some referee candidates would prefer and be helped by a better study guide. Your opinion may (and apparently does) differ.

Originally Posted by oiuyt

I don't know how much FAA documentation there is, but I suspect is considerably more than the approximately 100 pages (probably only 40 of which are needed for the tests, even if you test for all three weapons) of the USFA rulebook. Wouldn't be surprised to find out that it's a couple of orders of magnitude larger.

Yes, the FAA certainly does require being familiar with several orders of magnitude of material more than the FOC/USFA/FIE. The FAA Private Pilot - Airplane written exam alone tests candidates on 50 to 60 questions selected from a possible 700+ in the question bank, but most candidates have studied all 700+ questions beforehand.

However while some people might be able to best learn whatever subject by slogging through material, others can do better with a different type of study guide. That was the point.

[D'Artag-NOT]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Why are so many people trying so hard to convince me to do something that doesn't interest me in order to get something I don't want and will never use?

'Cos it's Fencing.net, Inq. You know how we get . . .

[CsmaCD]

Originally Posted by mfp

What would make a better study guide would be something akin to the guides that Gleim produces for Aviation and Accounting exams.

For example, the FAA publishes every possible question you could possibly see on any FAA "written" test. But like the FOC, the FAA doesn't list the correct answers. However the Gleim guides reproduce all the FAA's questions and groups them into logical sections by subject matter, organizes related sections into chapters, and has an easy to study outline at the beginning of each chapter...

Sounds like a good project for fencing.net folks. Everybody, grab a question, find the correct answer, and explain why, citing the rules.

Just because the USFA doesn't produce a good guide doesn't mean that it can't be produced.

Craig, could this be done with the forum software? Like an exam category, with threads being questions?

Originally Posted by oyuit

The FOC would probably love it if they had a way to force current referees to do so periodically.

I'm surprised by this as well. Many professional certs require periodic re-certification or CPE (continuing professional education) credits to maintain the certification.

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Why are so many people trying so hard to convince me to do something that doesn't interest me in order to get something I don't want and will never use?

Actually, I would recommend at least getting one other ref rating. Just so your more attractive to the FOC when they are looking for refs to for national events.

Just think, with 2 or 3 ratings, you'll be whisked away to places like Atlanta, Fresno, Charlotte, South Bend, and many more. To hobnob with other refs, drink in cheesey hotel bars, and get yelled at on a regular basis by coaches, parents, and fencers who don't know the rules as well as you. You also get a pittance, a lunch, and just watch the frequent flier miles rack up. Sure you lose time from work, use up all your sick and vacation time...

But the women they'll throw at you...
Ah yes, the women.

It's good to be the ref.

[Craig]

Originally Posted by CsmaCD

Craig, could this be done with the forum software? Like an exam category, with threads being questions?

It could be done via the forum software or via the CMS (Mambo) running the content sections of the site. Once produced, it may be better to store the guide in the CMS areas as that allows for more formatting options.

Craig

[JEC]

We had discussed before to even take it a little further and in addition of showing the question, to show with a video the action being discussed. Thus, the exam becomes more practical.

[peet]

Originally Posted by edew

This year, it's simplified: if there's a card, the touch by the fencer receiving a card will be annulled. Thus, there won't be any "it's annulled if it's corps-a-corps to avoid a touch but not for simple corps-a-corps."

Yeah? I remember last year Bukantz saying they were going to do that this year, but then when i looked at the rules change PDF, it looked like they just added touch annullment to three 1st group offences. It seems like there were more than three 1st group-ers that didn't annul before this year.

lemme look....

OK, it looks like anything they didn't add annulment to is something you can't really do and hit at the same time (e.g. "deliberate touch not on opponnent").

Well, maybe you could commit "Crossing the side of the strip to avoid being touched" and hit at the same time. Looks like still no annullment asterisk on that one?

OK,OK i'm probably splitting hairs here.....
-p

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by mfp

No, my point wasn't about what the FOC wants or doesn't want. My point was that some referee candidates would prefer and be helped by a better study guide. Your opinion may (and apparently does) differ.

Given that the FOC provides the current study guide, what they want DOES matter fairly significantly. Of course anyone else could improve upon the guide. I strongly suggest that anyone planning to test to become a referee should take the study guide and rule book and mark the annotated answers. The resulting document pretty much is what you're asking for. I just think that there's significantly more value in creating such a document than in studying it.

It's 40 pages that you need to learn!!!! How much of a guide do you really want? If you're at the point where you're trying to become a referee you should know the vast majority of the rules already just from whatever other fencing activities you have done. Knowing whether the required overlap on the inside of the sabre overglove is 2cm, 3cm, or 5cm, yeah, that is something you'll likely need to look up, the average fencer just goes with whatever their vendor of choice hands to him/her. There are few enough questions at that level that this just isn't a significantly hard task. I suggest that would-be referees should also annotate their copy of the study guide with the applicable rule number for the "trivial" questions that every fencer knows the answer to.

Originally Posted by csmacd

I'm surprised by this as well. Many professional certs require periodic re-certification or CPE (continuing professional education) credits to maintain the certification.

Well, technically the USFA does this too, just on the practical rather than written side. To maintain one's rating as a referee one must referee at that level periodically or the rating will be degraded after a couple of seasons of inactivity.

-B :)

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by achilleus

Just think, with 2 or 3 ratings, you'll be whisked away to places like Atlanta, Fresno, Charlotte, South Bend, and many more. To hobnob with other refs, drink in cheesey hotel bars, and get yelled at on a regular basis by coaches, parents, and fencers who don't know the rules as well as you. You also get a pittance, a lunch, and just watch the frequent flier miles rack up. Sure you lose time from work, use up all your sick and vacation time...

You make such a compelling argument, who could resist?

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

You make such a compelling argument, who could resist?

Since I've been rated, I've been asked to and turned down many invitations to officiate at NAC's.

If you want to ref, or teach, then getting multiple ref ratings is a good idea, otherwise, it just gets you invited to tournaments that you have no interest in going to.

[Inquartata]

That's allright. As you might guess, I have no problem whatsoever with saying "No"...

[Drifter]

My appologies for butting in, I've been lurking on these boards for some time, I'd like to voice my support for some type of study forum where those of us who are in the process of getting certified can go and have significant, relevant discussions regarding the rules and the tests. Perhaps one or more of the more senior Refs would be kind enough to offer to Mod it. Something similar to the Armoury forum would be more than enough to start with.

I'll even go so far as to pose the first question.

There is a question in the study guide which asks:

What action should a Referee take if a fencer reports to the strip with a torn sleeve?

The possible answers include:
a. allow time for repair and Fencer gets a Yellow
b. allow time for repair and Fencer gets a Red
c. allow time for repair and Fencer is not penalized

Now from my perspective I'd suggest that the Fencer arrived on strip with non-conforming equipment and is deserving of a Yellow card, but I can not find an entry in the rules book which supports my belief. A forum for asking such questions and receiveing reliable answers in return would be of innumerable value to both the test taking dweebs like myself, and the fencing community in general as is increases the awareness of the ruleset in general. Plus it would provide a repository and archive for a multitude of ruleset conversations which can only help Fencers and the sport.

p.s. yes I'm taking all three weapon sections, though seeing as how I too am a sabreur, I must comissirate with Inq-s foil views.

[Schiavona]

Originally Posted by Drifter

Now from my perspective I'd suggest that the Fencer arrived on strip with non-conforming equipment and is deserving of a Yellow card, but I can not find an entry in the rules book which supports my belief.

Offhand I'd say look at rule T.45, which has a section on "defective equipment". T.45 deals with weapons and clothing. Not as definitive as one would want, but it should work.

[Drifter]

Originally Posted by Schiavona

Offhand I'd say look at rule T.45, which has a section on "defective equipment". T.45 deals with weapons and clothing. Not as definitive as one would want, but it should work.

I believe you are correct, particularly with m.25 used in support. Though with the "allow time for repair" part added to each answer I can see an argument for 'C No penalty' particularly if the fencer was unaware that his jacket was torn.

So the question becomes, which is it? And more importantly, what is the answer the powers that be want to hear?


This little conversation points out perfectly the value that I see in a Referee Forum. Simply by discussing it through with Schiavona I have become convinced that the answer is A. Yellow. Additionally, such a forum would help bring to the front the more difficult to understand rules which may help the USFA in future rules updates.

[wbowman]

Writing down the relevant rule number next to the question in the study guide (and FINDING it first) was a big help when I studied for my test.
And why get certified for a weapon you don't fence? Well, it gives you something to do on the days you're not fencing. (though I'll have to admit I don't take my own advice; I'm more comfortable reffing my primary weapon).
Also, don't dismiss epee as being too simple. The very simplicity of it can lull you into a false sense of security. You can sort of zone out with the inaction -- then something happens that you weren't watching for (e.g., "was that attack on or off the strip?"). and you suddenly have to make a decision you weren't prepared for.
That said -- there's probably more need for additional refs in sabre than the other two weapons. I know that tends to be the case in my Division. So adding at least one more to the total number has to be a good thing.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by wbowman

And why get certified for a weapon you don't fence? Well, it gives you something to do on the days you're not fencing.

Feh, as if I can't find anything to do! ( Sleep springs immediately to mind. )

Also, don't dismiss epee as being too simple.

No, we jest a lot about it, but epee can be trying to ref, and the higher-level the fencers the more trying. As you say, being mesmerized watching bouncing feet, then suddenly the "Oh s***! Did something happen?" moment.

[BOliver]

Howdy!

I'm always available to help with questions from the referee study guide!

I usually won't give you the answers, but I'll help you find them.

If anyone has questions, send me email, and I'll get back to you.


Bill Oliver
FOC

boliver@fencingofficials.org