Should there be a level of USFA tournament between the current X2 and X3 level?

[TooLoftheDeviL]

You guys and your miscommunication.

Dekko said most NAC's don't get B's and asked for an example of a Nationals that didn't have B's in it.

Inquarta gives the example of Denver, which had no registered B's. Clearly, he is talking about the NAC, and not Nationals -

Oiuyt points this out as an error - that Nationals usually have the B's, and NAC's usually don't - the question is restated for an example of a Nationals that did not have B's in it.

Are we all on the same page yet? :P

[dekko]

Guess we can try this again.

I asked if there has been a Div II/III event at nationals that didn't have a A/B fencer in it. Not that they don't they do and have for the past several years. I know how it happens but I said that the nationals Div II/III events usually have A/B fencers in them.

Guess folks at Clemson can't read either.

[noodle]

i read it like you asked it, dekko, though i'd like to point out that how you clarified above and how totd elaborated are pretty much the same thing.

but i think you guys are too busy making fun of each other to actually see what everyone is saying

[KD5MDK]

Hell, y'all have confused me.

[Aliera]

I believe Div III Women's foil didn't have any A/B fencers in it. It did have a few Cs though...

[oiuyt]

Not that they don't they do and have for the past several years.

Amazing how much more coherent this sentence could be with a bit of punctuation.... :) And Dekko wonders why we have trouble reading...

For reference, since apparently I was unclear originally, I read the original request the same way I believe it currently reads, which corresponds with Tool's restatement AND Dekko's restatement (with the exception that I read it as only talking about Div II, mostly because it did...). Hence the reason that Inq's post deserved a correction post. So I guess my reading comprehension skills didn't deteriorate too severely in the move afterall.... :)

Tool- I would rather characterize it as:
Dekko makes statement/question re: D II events at Nationals
Inq. responds with example from a NAC
Oiuyt points out this error
Dekko reiterates original point blaming Oiuyt for making an error
And then, of course, the several posts since Tool's recap.

-B :)

[oiuyt]

I believe Div III Women's foil didn't have any A/B fencers in it. It did have a few Cs though...

The original question was re: Div II. It wasn't until Dekko's restatement that Div III came into the equation. It would be reasonable to adjust his question to look for Div III events at nationals w/o any C's in addition to the original intent.

-B :)

[KD5MDK]

Anyway, what do people think of the parameters I outlined? If I did make a proposal based on this, do the figures I gave sound right? Would you change any?

40 fencers, 4X, 4Ys, 4Zs. Awards:

C2.5 - 1-C, 2-4 D, 5-12 E
B2.5 - 1-B, 2-4 C, 5-12 D, 13-16E
A2.5 - 1-A, 2-4 B, 5-10 C, 11-12 D, 13-16 E

[UTEpee]

Personally, I like things the way they are. As an epee fencer in a very top-heavy epee area (more A's than any other single group, except maybe U, at an average tournament) it shouldnt be easy to earn a rating. it should be something that you have worked for and taken the time to hone skills and perfect technique. It should not be something that falls into your lap because of the number of rated fencers at a tournament. If anything, ratings should be more difficult to acquire, so that they really show improvement, not that one has the ability to beat 5 other people who've never been to a tournament before.

then again i usually do like the "trial by fire" methods.....

[oiuyt]

Anyway, what do people think of the parameters I outlined? If I did make a proposal based on this, do the figures I gave sound right? Would you change any?

40 fencers, 4X, 4Ys, 4Zs. Awards:

C2.5 - 1-C, 2-4 D, 5-12 E
B2.5 - 1-B, 2-4 C, 5-12 D, 13-16E
A2.5 - 1-A, 2-4 B, 5-10 C, 11-12 D, 13-16 E

Having a 5-10 category (C-level of an A2.5) is fairly strange. Even the 5-12 bands are a bit weird. Not to mention giving out 3 B's, 6 C's, then only 2 D's (of course a current A2 is weird in a similar way). Perhaps:

A2.5 - 1 A, 2-4 B, 5-8 C, 9-12 D, 13-16 E (what I would prefer)
or
A2.5 - 1 A, 2-4 B, 5-8 C, 9-16 D

I like it. I think it improves the chart.

-B :)

[KD5MDK]

Well, I'm sort of constrained by the following concepts:
1) I don't want more than 16 letters given out, because I think anything that offers more than half is ripe for unintended results (the aformentioned A4 tournament with exactly 12As, 12Bs, 12Cs, 32 Us, and so 12 Us get Es simply because they beat other Us in pools.

2) Because only 12 ratings are Required to make the tournament, I didn't want to overstrengthen the bottom levels such that a fencer could get a D often without beating anyone nominally better. Still possible, but less dangerous.

However, your modifications make sense. Barring additional suggestions, I'll probably go with them.

[Decadence]

I was just looking at results from a recent local tournament and I saw that one kid beat a D and an E to get first place(this is a local y-14 sabre national qualifier fyi). This kid is still a U. Personally i think he deserves at least an E. what do you think?