Rating for Division I-A

[sabreuse]

I looked all over the USFA web-site and couldn't find an answer to this. Do you have to be rated D or higher to fencing in the Division I-A at Nationals?

I'm an E-rated fencer. I already qualified for Division II and III at our Divisional tournament. Sectionals are an 8-hour drive away. I'm trying to decide if its worth my while to go if I may not be able to fence Division I-A anyway.

[edew]

The primary path to Div IA Summer Nationals is through your sectional championships: the top 10 are qualified to Div IA. You also qualify to Div IA through other means:
* Top-8 in last year's Div IA
* Top-4 in last year's Div II
* Winner of the U-19 Sectional Championships

There are no requirements for minimal ratings. There are also no requirements for minimal ratings for the Div I Nationals either. But to get there, you need to:

* be on the senior national points list, or
* top-8 in the junior national pts list, or
* top-4 in the cadet national pts list, or
* top-8 finishers in last year's Div IA, or
* top-4 finishers in last year's Div II, or
* the three fencers named by the US Modern
Pentathlon (in men's and women's epee).

Thus, it is possible to be among the top-4
in cadet and still not have a D or higher rating. However, it's highly unlikely. To get on the senior national points list, you need to compete in the senior NACs, which means you need a D or higher (starting this year). The top-8 in all juniors are at least C's. Similarly with the top-4 in the cadet. The top-8 finishers of last year's Div IA have at least a B, and the top-4 finishers from last year's Div II also have at least a B.

[Peach]

If you qualify for the Div I-A (by competing in sectional championships and finishing high enough) you can have any old rating or none at all. It's a different kind of animal, basically originally designed as an elite event to draw strong fencers to Summer Nationals when Division I Nationals were fenced at a different date.

And can anybody tell me why we are now having the Division I National Championships combined with Summer Nationals this year and last?

[neevel]

It had to do with the schedule for the Sydney Olympics and this year's World Championships-- they were/are sufficiently late in the year that there wasn't a need to hold Div. 1 Championships earlier than Summer Nats. to select the teams and give them time to prepare.

-Dave

[Stryder]

Peach-
Another purpose of Div 1a was to draw elite fencers to sectional tournaments. Most elite fencers don't bother to spend their precious few weekends when they are not at a World, or North American cup, fencing at a local event. Where they would probably be the only good fencer their and so get no practice.

The USFA was trying to get these fencers to "give something back" the the division.
It didn't really work. Until there are points awarded for Div 1a, the real top guys won't make the trip.

They should do away with ALL auto-qualifyers to Div 1a and award the same points they do for NAC's or Div 1

Then Cliff and co. will have to go compete hard in that High School gym where Sectionals are being held. Division level fencers would get to see them in action and even fence them once. Briefly.

[Purple Fencer]

Originally posted by Stryder:
Then Cliff and co. will have to go compete hard in that High School gym where Sectionals are being held. Division level fencers would get to see them in action and even fence them once. Briefly.

VERY briefly

------------------
Sam Signorelli -- Boldly going forward...'cause I can't find reverse!

[d8m2k]

Stryder,

I totally disagree with you. It is not the right of the membership to fence Cliff. You have to work hard, compete hard, and earn the chance to fence him (and other Olympic athletes). If you want to watch Cliff (or others in action), then do what all other fans do, go to a tournament that Cliff has entered and watch.

Only in US fencing do people expect the top athletes to fence everyone and anyone, why? It doesn't happen in any other sport, why should fencing be different.

[sabreuse]

Thanks for the info about ratings for Div I-A. How do you guys find this stuff out anyway?

I'd be surprised if there are more than 10 women sabre fencers at our Sectionals this year. There were only 9 last year and I know of a few of them who won't be there this year.

[Peach]

Oh, I remember the justification for putting the IA in the Summer Nationals, and as an incentive for me to come to them at all they are great. I can't do the II or the III, and though the Veteran's is getting bigger it wouldn't be enough for me to bother.

I like the IA because it gives me another good competition besides the NACs, and I always have the hope that I'll finish in the top four and get my A (it's tough for a woman sabre fencer to get an rating if she's not one of the absolute top).

It's just that it's a little weird to have that event AND the Division I both in Summer Nationals, because it means I have to fence two high-intensity events a few days apart.

Hmm . . . since the last couple of years women's sabre had the I and the IA at separate places and times, maybe some of the elite elite will skip the IA and I'll stop having to meet up with a top junior who screwed up her pool in my second or third DE. That would be nice! Anybody know what the pattern was like last year in the other (Olympic) weapons? Did the same people fence in both or did people choose one or the other?

[d8m2k]

Peach,
Most top level fencers did not fence Div. 1a. There were exceptions, of course, but on the average that was the case.

Div 1 and Div 1a were originally held separately, partly because of the scheduling of the world championships. They pushed them together to encourage more Div 1 fencers to attend the 1a event, but it didn't happen. Rumor has it that the events will be separated once more.

As far as the creation of Div 1a, I think it is a fine event. Just don't expect to draw the Div 1 fencers it.

[This message has been edited by d8m2k (edited 04-18-2001).]

[edew]

At the Sept '96 USFA BoD meeting where the Div IA was given its dues, it was never intended that the Div IA is another event for the top level fencers. It was understood that the Div IA was intended strictly for those who are competitive, but not at the top level. That was why the qualifying path for Div IA used the sectional championships route. It was intended to help bolster the sectional championships, given that many people qualified to the Div I via other routes, the sectionals were somewhat ghettoized.

The Div I Nationals were grouped with the Summer Nationals in the past few summers because of
1) inability to get an appropriate venue for the Div I and
2) convenience of holding the two together, given that the World Championships (and the Olympics) were not requiring the various countries to select their competitors by May or June.

Bunching the Div I and Summer Nationals together was not intended to encourage Div I fencers from competing in the Summer Nationals as well.

As for Div I fencers attending the Div IA, actually a great many of those who compete in the Div I do compete in the Div IA as well. d8m2k's perception is probably filtered to include just the Cliff Bayers and such in his view of what a Div I fencer is. I would say that those who finish in the top 10 of the Div I would not attend the Div IA. But those who finish below the top 10 may attend. It's just a matter of going over the results.

[d8m2k]

Edew,

Reread my post.

Most of the top level fencers did not attend. That is what I said, and amazingly enough, we agree with each other.

Sure, people fence both, especially some of the Junior fencers who at the Summer nationals anyway, and looking for an extra competition. There are also those like Peach who welcome an extra national level tournament. My comments were brought about by Stryder commenting on seeing Cliff at a sectional event.

Sorry if my original post was not clear.

[oiuyt]

I like the IA because it gives me another good competition besides the NACs, and I always have the hope that I'll finish in the top four and get my A (it's tough for a woman sabre fencer to get an rating if she's not one of the absolute top).

Peach- Are you kidding???? WS is undoubtedly the EASIEST of the 6 weapons in which to get rated. It's not as bad a few years ago, but what are you comparing to? It's tough for ANY fencer to get an A, that's kinda the point.

-B

------------------
"Oh but you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you!"

All your music are belongs to us- RIAA

[Peach]

oiuyt--Nope, it's not yet easier in WS to earn an *A*. It's comparatively easy to earn a B or a C, I agree. In other weapons, you can earn an A by winning an open tournament that is large enough and strong enough(or, of course, place in the top 8 of Div I, top 4 of Div I-A, or place really high in a strong enough NAC).

The strength is the point - until only a few years ago it was impossible for WS fencers to get an A unless they won a strong mixed open, because there were no A's and there was no Division I or Division I-A in which anyone could earn an A. There are still relatively few A's, and the WS A fencers are spread out all over the country. Also, the women's tournaments tend to be small in number, and frankly most sabre tournaments are small. So (as I did recently) if I beat a woman who is an A to win a women's tournament, there are only 8 fencers and the most I could earn is an E. When I win a women's tournament with enough numbers for a higher rating (which I have done), most of them are U or E. When I fence an open event and win it, it's either too small or there aren't enough ratings. I have a B'00 (earned in a national competition) but the best I've ever done in a mixed open event is a C. Women in sabre still mainly earn their A's in national competitions with the top fencers in the country. It's kind of bad--When they closed NACs to fencers with E's and U's, they eliminated some fencers on the national points list in WS.

Next year, maybe. When I re-earned my B, I earned it beating an A fencer in a strong veteran's competition. If you have enough ratings in veteran's events to make it a B, it's getting there.

[Chris]

[quote]Originally posted by Stryder:
[b]Peach-
Another purpose of Div 1a was to draw elite fencers to sectional tournaments. Most elite fencers don't bother to spend their precious few weekends when they are not at a World, or North American cup, fencing at a local event. Where they would probably be the only good fencer their and so get no practice. "

NEWBIE ALERT!

(first of all, in the USFA, Fencers are classified, tournaments are rated - and eric, come on, you know better!)

The Div1 is BACK in the summer, like it used to be!
The whole point of the having Div1 and Div 1A was so that the Elite wouldn't have to bother fencing the schmucks from the hills: The Summer Div1 Event used to be a BIG deal for Team selections!

THe timing of Worlds the last couple years was just an excuse; Now that the separation of schmucks out of Div1 to Div1A has been acheived, everything can be put back into the same week again, especially since holding the Div1 Championships was a big money loser!

(The Div1 Champ's are attended by quite a smaller number of competitors, than Div1 NAC's, which are usally combined with other events to begin with, to spread out the cost.)

(Know your game!)

Fence On.

[edew]

Starting next season and (supposedly) forever after, the Div I Nationals will be held in mid May or whenever, while the Summer Nationals will continue to be held over the 4th of July weekend.

[Chris]

Originally posted by edew:
Starting next season and (supposedly) forever after**, the Div I Nationals will be held in mid May or whenever, while the Summer Nationals will continue to be held over the 4th of July weekend.

Well, that's how it was supposed to be when they first split...The other 'reason' for the split was that, allegedly, the national coaching staff (of the moment) felt that the 6 week interval between National Team selection and the World's, or Olympics, (which had previously been the case), was not enough time to prepare, and they wanted team selection 4-6 months or so ahead of event; if this were true, there was never a need to 'piggy-back' Div1 onto Summer Schedule simply because Worlds, or Olympics were later: the More time, the better!

While I really liked being able to go to Sectionals and Qualify for THE national Championships, and wasn't particularly pleased to see tha cahnge come about (maybe it IS time for the change), what really burns me up is that I am expected to beleive the stuff they throw at me about why.

Know your Game!

Fence ON!

**PS: I will beleive that when I see it!!! CLH

[This message has been edited by Chris (edited 04-20-2001).]

[space_cadet]

Originally posted by Chris:

The whole point of the having Div1 and Div 1A was so that the Elite wouldn't have to bother fencing the schmucks from the hills: The Summer Div1 Event used to be a BIG deal for Team selections!

How many people on this message board are qualified to fence in Division I? Do you consider yourself as a schmuck from the hills?


------------------
Cadet à Space

[Stryder]

D8m2k- Whoever said it was someone's right to fence Cliff? I just said that was what the USFA was after. They wanted the higher-ups to support and encourage grass roots development by encouraging them to go to Sectionals if they wanted to.

I love Div 1a! I got my first medal in it.
It irritates the crap out of me that there are no less than 12 men's foilists who can claim to be the 1999 National Champion! PLus wheelchair events, plus team event (of which there are two! don't get me started.)

12 people in each weapon!
4 National champions in each weapon not age limited!

Silly.

And by the way, what the heck is Chris talking about? I qualified for Div 1 in foil and sabre my first year of competing. By todays rules and the rules of that time.
Don't make me smack you.

------------------
www.geocities.com/strydermike

[Chris]

Originally posted by Stryder:
D8m2k- Whoever said it was someone's right to fence Cliff? I just said that was what the USFA was after. They wanted the higher-ups to support and encourage grass roots development by encouraging them to go to Sectionals if they wanted to.

I love Div 1a! I got my first medal in it.
It irritates the crap out of me that there are no less than 12 men's foilists who can claim to be the 1999 National Champion! PLus wheelchair events, plus team event (of which there are two! don't get me started.)

12 people in each weapon!
4 National champions in each weapon not age limited!

Silly.

And by the way, what the heck is Chris talking about? I qualified for Div 1 in foil and sabre my first year of competing. By todays rules and the rules of that time.
Don't make me smack you.

(Sorry, didn't mean to slight you - not sure how I did...Congratulations on your rapid success; How long did you fence before you competed, and where?)

Anyway, Stryder, you seem to be missing the point; the 'powers that be' couldn't really care less if the top fencers fence at the sectional level (there is actually pressure to elimniate/replace the sectional system, because some sections don't work very well - like that would change people's behavior...).
The whole idea was to make it so top fencers didn't have to go to the National Champ's, and fence the North Dakota Champion (who is a nice guy, but I can school him in all 3 weapons, with my good hand tied behind my back! - and I'm not so good that the Div1 guys want to bother with me, either!), or whoever showed up because the rules allowed someone from EVERY division, no matter how sparsely filled with fencers.

However, since they had already setup div 2, restricting A's and B's, they couldn't separate the elites with creating a new category for A's and B's that didn't have points. (for several reasons).

This process has been over 20 years in the making, with various comprimises, and decisions of debateable wisdom, so you may have to do a little research before analyzing the current developments.

Originally posted by space_cadet:
"How many people on this message board are qualified to fence in Division I? Do you consider yourself as a schmuck from the hills? "

Well, let's just say that, while I scored (junior) points as a junior (way back when, before the advent of the NAC...I think lessons would have helped.), and my best performances in Div1 (before 1A) weren't total embarassments, I am not wont to brag about them, either...At this point, I am almost happy if people view me even as a second-rate fencer, (although, I am sure I'd be a little better, if I had good partners on a day-to -day basis - and lost 30 lbs ;-).

My definition of 'schmuck' is someone who doesn't really understand what is going on when they are 'fencing' - they are doing actions in the presence of another; not interacting with an opponent. So, while I was, for about a year and a half, in my opinion, I'll never be a schmuck again. (at least, not until the Alzheimer's kicks in!)

But merely having gained insight into the opponent doesn't put me on an elite level, and I don't mean to imply that is ever did; it takes a lot more than that, and neither do I think that I have the right to fence Cliff Bayer (or Nickie Bravin), but that doesn't mean I don't want the opportunity to, nor that I don't deserve some degree of respect, and fair play, if/when I do get it.

Know your Game!

Fence On!

[This message has been edited by Chris (edited 04-20-2001).]