NAC scheduling

[oiuyt]

The USFA just posted the event schedule for NAC B and C. Looking at the Palm Springs NAC I was dismayed to note that for the fourth consecutive Div I NAC Men's Epee and Men's Sabre conflict. I get that there aren't all that many epee/sabre fencers out there, but aren't they supposed to rotate who gets the shaft?

I get that with a 3-day NAC that SOME pair of weapons (within gender) needs to conflict (which doesn't explain why at the Greenvile and Reno NACs last year the same conflict happened... with 4 days conflicts are no longer unavoidable). But does it really need to be the SAME pair every time?

I was upset enough last year when I needed to choose between my weapons every time, now it looks as though it might just have become unofficial policy to keep shafting the epee/sabre fencers.

Anyway....[/rant]

I just went back through the old results and noticed that the same conflict occured for women's epee/sabre for all 4 NACS. I understand that it's the least popular of the 3 weapon pairs, but that's not a good reason to ALWAYS have the same conflict.

-B

[edew]

I think one needs to look at the numbers. Maybe use the results from Nationals, since many of the events are spread out.

However, suppose there are three epee/sabre fencers (at the Div I NAC level), but there are ten-twenty foil/epee fencers or foil/sabre fencers. Making the change, even for one NAC will negatively more people than keeping it epee/sabre. It's all about the numbers. I think you can make a valid case if you can show the numbers.

[oiuyt]

It would be interesting to see how many people compete in multiple div I events. I'd bet the the numbers for whatever the most popular pair is are small enough that it doesn't matter much and therefore there should be a rotation. In any case, even in a 3-day NAC you can still protect the most common pair (probably epee-foil) and still rotate between the other two pairings.

My point is still valid for the 4-day NACs.... last year 2 of the 3 NACs had 4 days which allows for NONE of the pairs to be in conflict yet epee/sabre was still conflicted both times (for both genders).

Granted this probably isn't much of an issue. I'd be surprised if there are more than just a few people that want to compete at a high level in more than one weapon. It just doesn't take much to make it fairer. I wouldn't mind if epee/sabre was conflicted more often given that I assume it's the least popular (and would be even if it were possible to fence both at a div I). But EVERY time?

-B

[oiuyt]

In order to actually bring some quantitative data to the discussion I pulled the results lists from the various div I men's events at Reno last year. I found 6 people in common in epee/foil, only 1 person in common foil/sabre. I did not attend this NAC. If epee and sabre hadn't conflcited I probably would have and would have entered both.

Given how few people the current system is helping why NOT rotate the conflicts the way the USFA used to? I only checked the one NAC, so it's possible that other competitions have more multiple-weapon fencers.

-B

[Peach]

At least this year they scheduled the Veteran WS on a different day than the Division I WS. Last year I was cursing all the way through the vets because I knew I had to fence the Div I later the same day.

--Delia

[Inquartata]

I'm with you, oiuyt. I fence sabre primarily, but I do epee on occasion. It would be something of a novel experience to do have the chance to do it at a NAC.

Of course, that's the least of my complaints with the way these things are scheduled. I'd almost rather have two events that I am interested in scheduled for the same day than days apart, like the upcoming Div II/III
...or Nationals ( it was---what?---four days between the Veteran MS and the next MS event? ).