Do We really need the Sections

[R. Exnicios]

I was wondering what people thought about the need for a section. The only thing they must do is Sectionals to qualify for Nationals.

[edew]

Sections were created in the old days when the nationals were always in NY and folks in California can't always travel (usually by train) to NY, which would take maybe 2 weeks each way. Who's got the time, then? So, the Pacific Coast Section was created to allow fencers to compete at a championship level closer to home. Then other sections were formed to make it equitable for other outlying areas.

Now that air travel allow people to go from one end of the country to the other within, oh say 10 hours, the original concept of the sections is now obsolete. However, I think the sections still provide a good steppingstone avenue for fencers to get good competitive experience as they train towards nationals.

I haven't voted, but I'm inclined to think that the boundaries are outdated and should be revised to something that would make sense. The new boundaries should be where there is sparse fencing concentration. And the boundaries should be reviewed every four years (while that might be rather frequent, I'm assuming that not too much changes will result from the review).

[KD5MDK]

I don't know about other areas, but I'm very pleased that the Southwest Section has managed, through the SS Circuit Championship, to assemble a series of tournaments within driving distance where the top fencers in the section will come to compete, throughout the year. I can't afford airfare around the country for more than maybe one event if I skipped all those.

So in my opinion, a properly organized section can be a significant boost to fencing in its area.

[Bayou Bum]

Originally Posted by KD5MDK

I don't know about other areas, but I'm very pleased that the Southwest Section has managed, through the SS Circuit Championship, to assemble a series of tournaments within driving distance where the top fencers in the section will come to compete, throughout the year. I can't afford airfare around the country for more than maybe one event if I skipped all those.

So in my opinion, a properly organized section can be a significant boost to fencing in its area.

That's because you have the best section in the country. You should try the Southeast section. It's mid March and we have just determined when and where our sectionals are going to be. And check out our website. We hate you in the Southwest everytime we log into askfred and see one of your tournaments and the results posted so quickly.

[mlr2fence]

What is the purpose of Sections? If its to provide top quality tournaments with a good turnout without major traveling then the boundaries need to be redrawn to make that feasible. In looking at the Southeast its impossible to 'drive' to tournaments within the section. I doubt if very many Miami fencers drive to NC or VA for weekend tournaments. Its much better to plan on traveling to a NAC where top competition is assured, than to risk traveling to a local one where its a gamble, if the cost and time considerations are the same(which it is, if one has to fly). If the purpose is just to have the current sectional qualifiers (jr and Div1A) then what we currently have is workable siince it means traveling to just one tournament a year. I like what SW Section does with their circuit championship and think it would be great if the other sections could do so likewise. To make this feasible, tho, boundaries would have to be redrawn with travel and number of fencers/clubs in mind. We would probably need to increase the number of sections. If all the sections had some type of circuit, this most likely would result in controlling the number of entries at NACs (which is growing out of hand) for people could satisfy their competitive goals closer to home. Many fencers travel to a NAC or 2 for the exciting atmosphere and to have the opportunity to fence someone other than the usual crowd that shows up at their local tournaments (those that are truly in easy driving distance). Even if I find a local tournament, say, a 4-6 hour drive away, I would hesitate to go without assurances that indeed there would be a good turnout. I would be very unhappy to get there and find only one pool of beginners.

[Bayou Bum]

The southeast section doesn't even do a good job of providing a qualifying path to nationals. One, for the same reason you listed against regional circuit ... many people will not travel a long distance just for an U19 or Div Ia event. If you qualify for nationals at divisionals and have to travel a long distance to nationals, why make an extra trip just for sectionals? And second, how can anyone make plans to attend when they don't know where or when they are going to take place?

Also, why are we so concerned with providing additional qualifying paths to nationals while at the same time we are limiting the number that can qualify at divisionals?

Sections are good for helping you find local tournaments withing driving distance.

[Schiavona]

Originally Posted by mlr2fence

In looking at the Southeast its impossible to 'drive' to tournaments within the section.

At least you don't have to drive through another country to get to a tournament in another division in your section! Whine, whine, whine!

[mlr2fence]

Just think of all the International traveling you get to do!!!! and the frequent flyer miles you get to rack up!!!!!

[rcmatthews]

However, in the Southwest Section, people from say Ole Miss are expected to travel to the large tournaments in Texas (well, maybe its hoped that we wont show up). A 10 hour drive is a little too much for me.

[Schiavona]

Originally Posted by mlr2fence

Just think of all the International traveling you get to do!!!! and the frequent flyer miles you get to rack up!!!!!

Canada is funny, before the traffic lights change from green to amber they start blinking! Oh, and the people are so polite it's creepy.

[Schiavona]

Our Section is kinda odd, we strech from Alaska in the north to Utah in the south. I've been a member of the PNW Section for about 25 years and I have no idea how the officers are elected, no one seems to be able to produce a copy of the section bylaws-even the section officers! So yeah, our Section is pretty useless.

[DHCJr]

Originally Posted by Schiavona

At least you don't have to drive through another country to get to a tournament in another division in your section! Whine, whine, whine!

I am using you as a point of reference for the South-East section members. As Eric says the Pacific Coast was created for the reason specified, but he forgot to mention the Pacific Coast is not what it is today. When it was created those in Alaska would most likely have to get to California as most of the PCC's were there. The section was split a number of years ago into the Pacific Northwest and the Pacific Coast.

If there is enough fencers and organization, the South-East could split in two. Maybe have a Gulf Coast Section with Florida, Georgia, Alabama and maybe you could get Mississippi to move from the South-West.

[Victor]

The U.S. Census and representative reapportionment ... Hmm....

I wonder if the USFA has the resources necessary to do a multi-aspect population density map of its membership? -- Number of clubs, current letter rankings, ages, resident refs, etc.

[flying foil]

I would say that the sections have served their purpose and are now pretty much obsolete- not to say that there doesn't need to be some kind of cooperative between the divisions. As for qualifiers, the Divisionals are a much more accurate depiction of caliber appropriate for the different events than the sections. Personally, I don't think you should be able to qualify for events when, say, there are 8 automatic qualifiers for a women's event and 7 women schlepp 12 hours or so in a car or have funds enough to fly just to show up. Can we say BOGUS?? Some of the men's events are large enough to be warranted a good competition, but for the gals - give me a break. You don't walk by the Div IA event and be bowled over by the caliber of the first round - I have fenced it - and compared to the men's event- should have in no way been in with that pool of "higher level" fencers - but was not alone with the riff raff that had just showed up at Sectionals.

I like the ties for the divisions, I like the point counting concepts that encourage attendance- but for qualifiers and admini-strivia- the sections are broken.

[fluidfencer]

Amen! People like Eric Dew have taken upon themselves to develop regional circuits that provide good competition. The "regions" are loosely defined and makes sense for a given area. The Southwest Section has done some of the same. This takes a coordinated effort.

The Southeast just hasn't developed enough yet. Bill Becker does what he can. I just don't have any more time to give fencing (I never have time to actually fence, for goodness sake). And the Section is still VERY spread out (although deferring to our freinds in Alaska).

The whole qualification system needs to be reconsidered, but it is part of the bigger questions that are not being addressed. What is a national tournament supposed to be, and who should be competing in them? This sjouldn't be such a complicated unmovable thing. I don't even think there is much resistance to changing things. The problem is making the effort to do it. Should my 10-year-old son who has been fencing for six months or so being going to a NAC?

This is too much for a fencing.net post *sigh*

Originally Posted by Bayou Bum

The southeast section doesn't even do a good job of providing a qualifying path to nationals. One, for the same reason you listed against regional circuit ... many people will not travel a long distance just for an U19 or Div Ia event. If you qualify for nationals at divisionals and have to travel a long distance to nationals, why make an extra trip just for sectionals? And second, how can anyone make plans to attend when they don't know where or when they are going to take place?

Also, why are we so concerned with providing additional qualifying paths to nationals while at the same time we are limiting the number that can qualify at divisionals?

Sections are good for helping you find local tournaments withing driving distance.

[fluidfencer]

I should add that the Sections "could" be an important part of an overall plan for qualification paths, but they don't seem to make sense under the current system. I guess that falls into the "broken" vote.

[Bayou Bum]

I appologize to those running the southeast section for any offense. The problems of the southeast section are not due to the lack of efforts by the individuals currently running the section. A section is too large for just one or two individuals to manage, in addition to their own fencing, clubs, divisions, work, and maybe even family. A section has to be supported by the divisions and have support from the members. Being a member of the southeast section, I am as much to blame as anyone for the shape of the section. We like to complain, but we are not offering to help improve it.

[Schiavona]

Originally Posted by fluidfencer

I should add that the Sections "could" be an important part of an overall plan for qualification paths, but they don't seem to make sense under the current system. I guess that falls into the "broken" vote.

I may be wrong, but I remember that the only way to get to Nationals from your division (when there was only the one Nationals) was to qualify through the Sectionals and instead of doing away with the Sectional Qualifying tournaments the powers-that-be came up with Division I-A. So, as I remember it, Sectionals was VERY important in the qualifying path!

[edew]

Originally Posted by Schiavona

I may be wrong, but I remember that the only way to get to Nationals from your division (when there was only the one Nationals) was to qualify through the Sectionals and instead of doing away with the Sectional Qualifying tournaments the powers-that-be came up with Division I-A. So, as I remember it, Sectionals was VERY important in the qualifying path!

Not quite. Previously, the main route to qualify to nationals was through the division qualifiers to nationals. The division qualifiers to nationals (which was usually also the division championships and sectional qualifiers) would qualify a specified number, determined by the USFA. The sections themselves set another number for those who would qualify to the sectional championships. Then, if someone isn't already qualified to nationals from the division, they may qualify to nationals via the sectional championships.

Div IA was created as part of the major "Summer Nationals" overhaul plan that was conceived in 1996 and implemented with the first Summer Nationals in 1997. The Div IA was to make the sectional championships more important by making it the only route to qualify to Division IA (with a very small number of alternate qualifying paths).

I personally think the Div IA is a great steppingstone for up and coming fencers. Many top national fencers now started by doing well (or just competing in) the Div IA at one time or another. For example, the last two years' MF Div IA champions, Scott Sugimoto and Andras Horanyi are both very strong Div I caliber fencers. I'm sure a cursory check of the other weapons will reveal a similar trend.

The Div II and Div III also are great steppingstones for fencers to advance. Many of the Div IA fencers came from being successful in the Div II/III categories.

[fluidfencer]

It's OK to complain. I'm sure Bill Becker would complain too. He or I or a number of other good managers could do a great job, but we would have to quit our jobs and live in a cardboard box to get it done, once you add in the other fencing related things. My wife and kids would likely object. I am genuinely hoping for a day when our club becomes self-sufficient and I can help on a broader level.

Your main point, however, is very accurate. The Southeast is not only to big geographically, but the number of fencers is relatively small. Our best fencers are having to travel all over God's earth to get good competition. Several came back from Texas last weekend saying we needed to go there more often because there were lots of As and Bs competing. For example, one of our 13-year-olds just earned her B. How many B-rated 13-year-old womens epee fencers are in the entire 600,000+ square miles that comprise the Southeast?

I don't think the idea of a Section is an inherently bad one but, as I said earlier, the USFA needs to make some tough decisions about the structure of our sport. I know they have other things to worry about but...

Originally Posted by Bayou Bum

I appologize to those running the southeast section for any offense. The problems of the southeast section are not due to the lack of efforts by the individuals currently running the section. A section is too large for just one or two individuals to manage, in addition to their own fencing, clubs, divisions, work, and maybe even family. A section has to be supported by the divisions and have support from the members. Being a member of the southeast section, I am as much to blame as anyone for the shape of the section. We like to complain, but we are not offering to help improve it.