Dow We Need the Olympics - Rowing Perspective

[Moses]

The soccer example is a bit of a fallacy.

Note that soccer's a lot cheaper than fencing. Soccer requires a ball, two nets and willing bodies. There are plenty of kids on this planet who play soccer without shoes and shinguards. Would you ever fence without a mask?

Soccer is popular the world over because of economic factors (interestingly), because anyone, even the poor, can play it. Fencing doesn't have that sort of advantage, unfortunately.

-Da Mose

[Insipiens]

One of the problems with the Olympics is the inclusion of sports such as football (soccer to you lot), tennis and baseball for which the Olympics are not the pinnacle and the greatest achievement. The Olympics should preserve and persevere with those sports for whom it is the goal, not sports where they have to restrict the entries to U23 and still cause furore because the players' employers don't want them there.

That rowing should be worried, when it has produced in the last 20 years one of the truly great olympians, is remarkable.

Clearly the position in the US is different to that in other countries and the impact on fencing might well be different around the globe.

[oiuyt]

Yes, we did get the office, but that didn't end our use of the Olympic Training Center. Anyone going to Coaches or Armorers College? Yes, you are probably right about the 25% directly from the USOC, but that is not all the money we get from the Olympics. Does anyone remember the '84 games. We are still getting money from that. If New York gets the games, will they be another Los Angeles? Could there be money there.

The USFA's portion of the surplus from the LA games is what was used to create the US Fencing Foundation, which has preserved that capital (and other gifts over the past 20 years) while paying out to the USFA the gains that it has made through investing. The USFA originally got ~1.2 million (estimates from memory again, although these numbers should be in the recent BoD agenda in the first appendix or so), the USFF is currently worth ~$1.6 mil (including the other gifts) and has paid out ~$2.6mil over the 20 years. Expect it to continue doing what it has been and paying out gains while preserving all of the capital from the original surplus and all gifts received.

While I've pointed out the flaws/limitations in a couple of your facts, I'm fully on the same side of the issue as you are. I think that US Fencing needs the Olympics. I really hope that the IOC never drops us from the program. I suspect that fencing worldwide also needs the Olympics. I think we would be in a significantly worse position nearly immediately if we were no longer on the Olympic program and I think that that position would continue to deteriorate beyond that initial hit.

-B :)

[Captain Hook]

I though the olympic coverage of fencing was a disgrace, where I come from anyway.

They showed every sport but fencing, there was no news coverage of it and I would have had major difficulty in finding the results if I didn't have the internet.

I find it worrying that people would find something like trapshooting or sailing more interesting (and they say fencing has no televisual appeal)

It almost seemed there was a deliberate effort via the media and olympic organisers to prevent the public from watching it.

In my opinion fencing is a dying sport, it relies on an organisation that forces changes to improve 'visual appeal' to impress those who don't fence sometimes at the expense of the sport itself and those who do fence.

However as fencing is also an art, I think it will always exist in the hearts of those who practice it.

[BenTheEMOP]

Do we need the Olympics?

As fencing stands now, the answer appears to be yes, judging by the discussion on this thread.

But that is only as fencing stands now. If the Olympics were to go away, fencing would survive, as evidenced by all the classical and historical fencers out there. They don't have the Olympics, or even a national association, and yet they keep on fencing.

What we as the fencing community need to do is start to think about how we want our sport to be. People talk about making fencing more spectator friendly or getting more people involved. The best way to do that is to have enthusiastic participants who get their family and friends into the sport.

As Captain Hook points out, it doesn't make sense to change the sport at the expense of the participants for the benefit of the spectators.

BUt even though the argument seems to shape up as fencers versus their governing bodies and the IOC, we have some responsibility to make our sport enjoyable for ourselves and attractive to other people.

We need to be well organized in our tournaments so they run smoothly and fairly. We need to be well organized in our clubs, so people can enter the sport and learn and enjoy it. We need to be well behaved towards each other so that we can figure out what is best for the sport and make it better for all of us.

For what it's worth....

[tsalyards]

If fencing were to get kicked out of the Olympics, it might be the best thing to happen to the sport for the long term. No Olympics, no FIE, no USFA. Exit King Roche and all other fencercrats (new word). Enter new conversations about the sport's relevance, accessibility and fairness. The Olympics keep the "good ole' boys" running this sport.

We are seriously overestimating the importance and effectiveness of governing bodies such as the FIE and USFA. In the grand history of sword play, both are but a blip on the map. They will be outlived by the function of fencing itself.

As always, check the signature.

[Irensaga]

There's a larger issue here that nobody has addressed yet:

Do we want fencing to become super popular?

I've heard people on other threads contrast fencing's popularity with pro football and basketball. But those are not incredibly appealing role models in the first place.

The popularity of the NFL and NBA has resulted in some very destructive side effects:

-Harmful steriod use not just in pro athletes, but in multitudes of kids who are desparate to acheive the same degree of fame.
-College and even High School dropouts.
-Excessively coddled athlete "superstars" with absolutely wretched personalities. Going right along with this is the constant stream of sexual abuse, drug use, criminal activity and so forth committed by these prima donnas.
-The attention of organized criminals in the form of gambling and other extortion.
-A sport that is almost exclusively money and profit driven

These are realities that US fencing simply doesn't have to live with. I'm not sure I ever want to open the door to fencing becoming the kind of athletic community the NBA is currently.

On the other hand, I'm not sure I'd mind fencing becoming as popular as ... say ... golf or tennis.

Just thought I'd throw that out.