A general question to the group

[BB Boom Boom]

I would like to ask the group here how important World Championships are to them (whether it be the current Cadet/Junior, or later the Seniors and/or Veterans).
International elite fencing seems to be VERY important to the USFA, but does it really affect the backbone of the domestic fencing population. For instance: recently (and probably throughout the years) there have been significant rules changes. These changes seem to originate with the FIE and I'm wondering if they are welcomed as a symbol of America's inclusion in the international family, or are they resented since the rules changes are implemented by the USFA's conformance with international standards. Or, of course, you probably have your own opinion of elite fencing emphasis, rules, FIE, USFA, etc.
Thanks

[Gav]

Originally Posted by BB Boom Boom

International elite fencing seems to be VERY important to the USFA, but does it really affect the backbone of the domestic fencing population.

I'm not from the US but I would say that Elite fencing is very important. Success in sport is seen as important as it boosts the international image of your country. Whether your countries obsession with 'Eliteness' affects the rank and file is open to question. There are many reasons for people's involvement in sport.

Originally Posted by BB Boom Boom

For instance: recently (and probably throughout the years) there have been significant rules changes. These changes seem to originate with the FIE and I'm wondering if they are welcomed as a symbol of America's inclusion in the international family, or are they resented since the rules changes are implemented by the USFA's conformance with international standards. Or, of course, you probably have your own opinion of elite fencing emphasis, rules, FIE, USFA, etc.
Thanks

I don't fully understand what you are asking here. I'll have to make a few assumptions.

The FIE are the governing body of your sport. They decide the rules not the USFA. As a consequence any changes to the sport will, of course, originate with the FIE. It's their job after all. Whether you agree with those changes is a different matter ... and if you don't why not take it up with the USFA direct [they being your representatives to the FIE]? Like any other nation, the FIE want to ensure that the US takes part, but I doubt that they are all that concerned with the concept of the US feeling included [what does that mean anyway?]. Roch is on record as saying that he wants to attract a wider Fencing audience - which seems to be mainly fringe nations - to keep Fencing in the Olympics. They are always going on about that in Escrime.

Significant rules changes? There haven't been that many over the last decade or so. There have been the odd tweak (e.g. bout format and switching of the lights) which I think were sensible changes. There was the fundamental change to Sabre (banning the cross step) which, just about everyone agree's, made Sabre a much improved sport. Then there are the odd tweaks and changes that get made once in a while culminating with the substantial change to Foil. Rules changes are a fact of an evolving sport. I don't think that, in general, Fencing changes it's rules that often. Compare it with Rugby where, I swear, it feels as though the rules are changed weekly.

[lochinvar]

As I understand the question, Gav, it's this:

As a fencer in the United States, do I:

Resent the imposition of rules changes that originate with the FIE because they are seen as coming from a foreign entity that has no bearing on my personal fencing, OR

Welcome them as indicitive of belonging to the international fencing community and therefore allow our elite fencers to compete internationally.

Frankly, I can say for myself that I don't care a rat's patoot if the elite fencers in the USA ever compete internationally or not; it won't affect my fencing in any way, and I don't know of any other fencers in my acquaintance that would care that much, either.

That having been said, I don't resent the imposition of new rules in my sport. I just shrug and say, "Oh, well...that's how it is." I comply with the USFA rules because I couldn't fence otherwise. I may think they're foolish and/or unnecessary, but I don't resent them--I merely adapt.

[Gav]

Ok.

Originally Posted by Lochinvar

Resent the imposition of rules changes that originate with the FIE because they are seen as coming from a foreign entity that has no bearing on my personal fencing ...

That's kind of what I thought they were meaning - even if I rambled off on tangents. I don't see how it would make any difference if the rules were changed locally. They would probably still be unpopular, or just adapted to, with as much reticence. That's why I find the question confusing. Does it matter whether the governing body are seen as foreign?

[CvilleFencer]

For me, I think that top level fencing is great for our sport. I love the fact that the US is on the rise in all weapons as an international fencing power and I avidly try to follow the exploits of the US fencer’s abroad and relay them to my students. Since a good chunk of the funding for the USFA comes from Olympic sports related sources it is also very important financially as well. In my area I am lucky to have some fencers who are/have been on national teams and/or in the points list and I love hearing there stories from international competitions and, of course getting to fence with the elite level fencers.

I hate the current debounce time for foil, but I know that it is not just a thing that bugs us average joe state level fencers so I don't resent the elite fencers for it, or even the FIE really. Rouche I think should be spanked like a naughty schoolgirl but that is a different thread. The FIE sets the rules so like it or not we have to adapt to a certain degree. However the more international standing the US has as a fencing powerhouse the more that we can work with the FIE to get the rules fixed if they are broken. At least in theory...

[oso97]

I'd have to say that while I am not a member of it, nor are any of my students, I do follow the elite fencing community to a certain degree. I'm at least aware of when the World Championships are going on, who composes the US National Team.

Then again, there is a young fencer in my area who is on the Cadet Women's Epee team. I've known her since she started fencing, and have been an assistant coach at two different clubs that she has fenced at.

[lochinvar]

Originally Posted by Gav

Does it matter whether the governing body are seen as foreign?

Only insofar as the rules changes are seen as only being necessary so that our elites can fence in international competition.

In other words, do we especially resent the rules changes because the only reason they are being implemented (even though unpopular) is to permit some of our national fencers to do something that the rest of us really don't care about and that has no impact on our local fencing.

And I don't think the question was addressed to US fencers in particular, but to all fencers--is belonging to an international body important enough to you that you graciously accept whatever rules changes are promulgated by that international body?

[mlr2fence]

There are so many posts where fencers lament the lack of solid fencing opportunies in their area. What would it be like without any type of World Competitions/Championships? And the meager publicity it does get? It would become an even more obscure sport.

[Gav]

That's the point though. The rules changes don't enable the elite to do anything. They are normally implemented to change [or stop] them doing something. They have to earn their place - membership of said international body is a side issue to that. It could be argued that the current Foil rules have been implemented to make Fencing for the low and middle ranked Fencers more enjoyable [against the Elite?]. Certainly the environment has changed. That's another reason that I think the question is spurious. What's the alternative?

I think that it's irrelavent whether you or I [Mr Grassroots] accept the change, unless you have your own Tulip revolution. I suppose the alternative is to start your own organisation.

The point of the governing body is to decide on the rules that we compete or practise at - as well as wider strategy. Without some sort of governing body who decides the rules? You? Me? The guy down the street?

The question:

Originally Posted by Lochinvar

... is belonging to an international body important enough to you that you graciously accept whatever rules changes are promulgated by that international body?

Is an irrelevance to many.

[Insipiens]

Gav - you have failed to rise to the American-bashing bait so I will do it for you.

Clearly Lochinvar is implying that the USFA should set the rules and who cares what the FIE thinks - obviously that is what the Americans think about everything else as well.

So it becomes a realistic question whether you have an international body. After all who sets the rules in the US for American Football? Or Basketball?

[lochinvar]

Well, let's consider...If I were living in Europe, and I travelled in say, 4 hours in any direction by motor, I might cross how many national boundaries?

Say I flew for 4 hours in any direction...now how many boundaries might I cross?

Now consider where I am in the US; if I motored or even flew 4 hours in any direction, I would still be in the United States. (With the exception of flying east, where I would marginally penetrate into Ontario.)

Let's face it--in Europe, an international body is needed because fencers from different countries lie in close proximity and have numerous opportunities to fence each other.

In the US, on the other hand, the chances of my fencing under any aegis but that of the USFA is close to nil. So an international governing body benefits me...how?

I say, Isolationists unite! The time has come for US fencers to cast off the chains of the FIE and take responsibility for our own fencing! Remember the Maine! E Pluribus Unum! Novo ordis seclorum! Close cover before striking!

Freeeeeedooooommmmm!!

[Gav]

Originally Posted by lochinvar

Well, let's consider...If I were living in Europe, and I travelled in say, 4 hours in any direction by motor, I might cross how many national boundaries?

Say I flew for 4 hours in any direction...now how many boundaries might I cross?

Now consider where I am in the US; if I motored or even flew 4 hours in any direction, I would still be in the United States. (With the exception of flying east, where I would marginally penetrate into Ontario.)

Let's face it--in Europe, an international body is needed because fencers from different countries lie in close proximity and have numerous opportunities to fence each other.

In the US, on the other hand, the chances of my fencing under any aegis but that of the USFA is close to nil. So an international governing body benefits me...how?

I say, Isolationists unite! The time has come for US fencers to cast off the chains of the FIE and take responsibility for our own fencing! Remember the Maine! E Pluribus Unum! Novo ordis seclorum! Close cover before striking!

Freeeeeedooooommmmm!!

I suppose that would be one way for the US to host the World Fencing Series and proclaim themselves World Series Champions [without opposition].

Oh and Loch, the vast majority of European fencers don't cross their own borders to Fence. Just so as you know.

[JackSparrow]

Originally Posted by Gav

I suppose that would be one way for the US to host the World Fencing Series and proclaim themselves World Series Champions [without opposition].

Please don't put ideas in their head.

[lochinvar]

Originally Posted by Gav

I suppose that would be one way for the US to host the World Fencing Series and proclaim themselves World Series Champions [without opposition].

*shrug* Works for us in baseball...

Oh and Loch, the vast majority of European fencers don't cross their own borders to Fence. Just so as you know.

I assumed as much; the vast majority of US fencers don't go much further than 2-3 hours to fence, if that far.

[esskreemr]

I think that elite fencing is important and that most American fencer are interested in the results. The problem is that reading scores is about all we can do other than purchase $50.00 dvds of competitions that are a year old (I'm not knocking it, I've bought several). As a result of the somewhat less than ubiquitous fencing coverage, most American fencers only have a passing idea of what is going on in the International and elite world of fencing. For the majority of American fencing, the goings on in the FIE are of little concern until a major rule change filters its way down the ranks. I think American fencers would be more interested if there was more coverage. There are only a few elite fencers who I could match faces with names.

[haroldbuck]

Originally Posted by Gav

The FIE are the governing body of your sport. They decide the rules not the USFA. As a consequence any changes to the sport will, of course, originate with the FIE. It's their job after all.

This is in exactly the same way that FIBA sets the rules for NBA, NCAA, and NFHS basketball. Errr, wait. . . .

I think the point being made is that many fencers--perhaps the majority?--would be just as happy or happier if the USFA worried about what US fencers wanted and didn't care about what FIE wanted. This would certainly affect our international results, but maybe the rank-and-file fencer doesn't care about those results.

Personally, I think it's good for us to be part of international fencing because we do get some exposure for the sport, which gets (a few) more people into it. But I can understand the perspective of people who wish the USFA would just do what's best for US fencing.

[haroldbuck]

Originally Posted by Gav

I suppose that would be one way for the US to host the World Fencing Series and proclaim themselves World Series Champions [without opposition].

The "World Series" of baseball was named after the newspaper that sponsored it initially; it wasn't a claim that it was the world championship, although at that point in time I'm sure it was, since no other countries really played back then.

[oiuyt]

This sounds like the beginning of a position similar to that I heard espoused at a USFA congress meeting ~6 years ago... The USFA follows the USFA rulebook, why can't we have our own rules? Why do we follow the FIE in lockstep? Specifically the questioner wanted to reintroduce the cross-step to sabre in this country. :eyeroll:

-B :)

[JackSparrow]

Originally Posted by haroldbuck

The "World Series" of baseball was named after the newspaper that sponsored it initially; it wasn't a claim that it was the world championship, although at that point in time I'm sure it was, since no other countries really played back then.

Yes, I believe it was called the 'New York World', newspaper. Thats quite a skillful piece of editing there. Now if only I can get 'Universal Studios', to sponsor my fencing tournament then I'll be hosting the 'Champion of the Universe', contest in no time.

*update* Universal Studios have politely declined

[Gav]

You guys know that I was trying to make a little joke ... right?

I think that oiuyt's post says it all really.