Your Section

[hpfencing]

WHat is the purpose, drive, and goal of your section? Is it just to run a sectionals event or is there more to it than that?

What do you think your section should be doing?

[smeric28]

Originally Posted by hpfencing

WHat is the purpose, drive, and goal of your section? Is it just to run a sectionals event or is there more to it than that?

What do you think your section should be doing?

To whine and bicker, oh wait you said section i thought you said divison

[mrbiggs]

Well, there's the sectional event, but we also have a (new) ciruit thing. Just like everything else in fencing, it doesn't really, I don't think, have a "purpose" more than allowing people to fence more.

Oiuyt's the head of my section, though, so he might have more insight into it.

[ZenEpeeist]

Originally Posted by smeric28

To whine and bicker, oh wait you said section i thought you said divison

Very amusing smeric. No need to explain the bickering in the NOD; I think most people in the Section already know (not to mention the people at the national office) !

What is the point of our section? I'm not entirely sure. I guess Sectional Qualifier, Sectional Circuit Events (usually well attended throughout the year), Sectional Points (based off of Sectional Events) and referee clinics. I guess the Sectional website is also useful for a fencing calendar for the area for the year. I would guess that it would also coordinate any national events for the Section.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

Well, there's the sectional event, but we also have a (new) ciruit thing. Just like everything else in fencing, it doesn't really, I don't think, have a "purpose" more than allowing people to fence more.

Oiuyt's the head of my section, though, so he might have more insight into it. :)

Pretty much all NAS does is run the two event (Senior Sectionals, Cadet/Junior sectionals). The circuit is something semi-independent of the section (despite the name). I plan to continue to administer it next year when I'm not a member of NAS.

The section is also one of the means of representation of the fencers at the national level.

-B :)

[FrankV]

I think that is a great question to ask.
Being the Pacific Coast Sections chair for the past 10, now going on 11, years I feel now, just as much as I did when I started, that the Section is much more than just the championships it is supposed to provide to it's members. I can only speak for our section but when I started we had nothing. No communication, no structure, no guidelines, no divisional coordination with tournaments, no sectional treasurer reports for the past two years and no money and worst of all no vision.
It was a bad as it gets and I was tired of being a part of it so I just decided to step up and try and change things. Each year I was fortunate to have great Sectional officers and we added more officers to the mix as the Section grew. We now have 7 officers that run different areas of responsibility within the Section and we -all- communicate well. That is the key to our success not to mention that we all get along well and we all share the same vision.
If you take a look at our sectional website (www.pcsfencing.com) you will see we provide more than just the sectional championships and Sr. section circuits. We also have Jr and Youth sectional circuits and we help to coordinate major division events with the section events so there is minimal overlap. We help with promotions of new and unique programs like 'Babes with Blades' (women’s events), donate money to worthy tournaments that promote college fencing and help with the development with high school fencing leagues. We help with having a sectional inventory that includes 10 brand new copper strips, 8 rubber strips, and 10 complete Favario machines. But our biggest key is the communication level we have with the section as a whole. Our Secretary (Midi Cox) is a wizard when it comes to creating informational lists and up to date information on the website. Our Youth Vice-Chair (Maureen Griffith) is another wizard who put together the first ever Super Regional Youth/Jr. Pacific Coast Sectional in our history, and it was a total success. I'm very proud of our officers and the dedication level they all provide.
I have read what others have said about their section and my heart goes out to them.
Bottom line, your section can be whatever you want it to become if you have the vision and tenacity to do the grunt work to make it a reality.

[lovetofence]

Pacific Coast Chair,

It's nice to see someone is willing to do the "dirty work" in order for the masses to enjoy the fruits of you and your staff's tireless efforts. To you and your staff I salute you. Being a vet fencer and moving from one section to another, due to my job, I have been following your section for some time and when the job came up for me to move to California I jumped on it. I love the communication level you talk of and I hear a lot of support from others that I fence with for what you are trying to accomplish. You and your staff have really changed the way the section is run and I fear if you or your staff move on in life, as we all do, that the incoming staff will not be able to handle the high standards you are presenting and we are being spoiled on.

[Larrison]

FrankV --

As a fencer who took a sabbatical from fencing for over 15 years, from when I was moderately active in SoCal -- there is a night and day difference in how things are organized and run. It's much better organized, communicated, and a much more dynamic and exciting operation now for fencers in the Pacific.

In the past, there were a few areas which were pretty active and organized, but now it seems much that is much more broadly based so that there are more opportunities to fence and compete, and a much broader and deeper range of activities underway.

As an example -- when I was moderately active years ago in the Orange County area, there was only one real fencing club in the region, working through the parks and recreation departments in 3 locations, other than the college programs at CSUF and CSULB There was only one real coach outside of the U's, who offered lessons a couple of nights a week in OC that I knew of. Now there are 2 major clubs, and several minor ones including a dedicated facility. And the parks and recreation offering has spread to about 3x as many locations. Clubs are much more active in tournments and hosting competitions, and I'm guessing there are 3-5x as many fencers, at least.

*Grins* but knowing that everything can be made better -- I would like to see a deeper and broader youth program down into the high school level. I applaud your efforts, and I'm noting more activities. I think it will come with time, but ....

[Purple Fencer]

AHHHH!!! Frank's on the board! Run & hide!!!!!

j/k Frank!

[edew]

Originally Posted by Larrison

FrankV --

As a fencer who took a sabbatical from fencing for over 15 years, from when I was moderately active in SoCal -- there is a night and day difference in how things are organized and run. It's much better organized, communicated, and a much more dynamic and exciting operation now for fencers in the Pacific.

In the past, there were a few areas which were pretty active and organized, but now it seems much that is much more broadly based so that there are more opportunities to fence and compete, and a much broader and deeper range of activities underway.

As an example -- when I was moderately active years ago in the Orange County area, there was only one real fencing club in the region, working through the parks and recreation departments in 3 locations, other than the college programs at CSUF and CSULB There was only one real coach outside of the U's, who offered lessons a couple of nights a week in OC that I knew of. Now there are 2 major clubs, and several minor ones including a dedicated facility. And the parks and recreation offering has spread to about 3x as many locations. Clubs are much more active in tournments and hosting competitions, and I'm guessing there are 3-5x as many fencers, at least.

*Grins* but knowing that everything can be made better -- I would like to see a deeper and broader youth program down into the high school level. I applaud your efforts, and I'm noting more activities. I think it will come with time, but ....

Not to take Frank's thunder, but the impact of the PCS on club development is basically negligible. The main factors are more fencers imply more fencers willing to start clubs, availability of a decent insurance program through USFA, and the availability of the internet to help starting clubs get a foothold with a website and learning about the ins and outs of running a club.

The PCS circuit events, while hugely successful, are not frequent enough (nor should they be) to be the factor in growing fencing clubs. What has helped has mainly been top-down from USFA national office on down through the sections and then to divisions.

Lastly, since club development should be a division-level issue, I think that the section really shouldn't have too much input on how clubs should operate or how to start and run clubs. Division-level administrators are better resource, given their supposed intimate knowledge of the area, as opposed to a more widespread section (Metropolitan division/section excluded, of course).

[lovetofence]

Originally Posted by edew

Lastly, since club development should be a division-level issue, I think that the section really shouldn't have too much input on how clubs should operate or how to start and run clubs. Division-level administrators are better resource, given their supposed intimate knowledge of the area, as opposed to a more widespread section.

Eric,

Maybe you don't know Frank very well but I just read his bio on this site as well as his own clubs website. Maybe you should read it too. This guy has been an officer in three different Divisions and then Section chair for over 10 years, has Organizational Development experience, and is an owner of a fencing club in Vegas. What more do you want? If anyone knows how to start a club and keep it successful I would put my money on him. Having him as Section chair would be an asset to any prospective new club owner.

[reffers]

FrankV sounds like a great guy and the PCS is lucky to have him and his adminstration. They're also lucky to have enough other people who realize the benefit such people bring to Section-level governance and organization and not to try and sabotage his efforts. I doubt he could get elected Section Dogcatcher in many other places though. Here in the Southwest Section, we had a group of administrators who were capable, and had done good things over the past several years. Unfortunately, the reactionaries and blowhards of the Section - people like Oscar Barrera, August Skopik, Brenda Waddoups, Doc Matthews, and Richard Exnicios, who prefer the stability of the good-ol-boy network, the leadership of the unproven and the vision of the unispired, got together to deliver a stinging blow to progress and forward movement. They got together and elected a Section chair who has done little if nothing over the past 10 years and a vice-chair who was in the adminstration the last time our Section Circuit fell apart. Note that no one showed up to the meeting to contest the positions that actually might require some work and accountability - Treasurer, Secretary and Representative to USFA Board of Directors.

Now we've got a Section Chair who has publically stated that he would prefer to do away with all Section-level coordination of our Section Circuit events, and has absolutely no recent experience with tournament operations, refereeing OR high level competing. Its not his fault, he's a nice guy actually, for the most part - just totally clueless and pushed into the position by the puppet masters without really knowing what he's stepping into. Well, I guess we can kiss the SSCC goodbye, cause its going to wither and die without someone dedicated to its continuation. So long, it was good while it existed.

All because of a few politically well connected idiots who think that someone who is "uncontroversial" is better than someone who actually has a small clue what they are doing.

To David Sierra, outgoing SSCC Commissioner (and probably the last, as the new adminstration wants to do away with that position) : Thanks for all your hard work over the past 5 years. Many of us support you. Those of us who can actually think for themselves appreciate everything you've done. Please, when the Southwest Section Circuit Cup dies again due to lack of coordination and effective leadership and you have to recreate it AGAIN, do so independant of the Section so that the reactionaries can't sink their tentacles into it and destroy everything the rest of us worked so hard to build.

[edew]

I know Frank very well. I'm not speaking of him in particular. I'm saying that a section is not the best place to check for learning how to run a club. A section, such as the Pacific Coast Section, is rather large. Frank lives in Las Vegas. He does not have insight to the local economies of, say, Stockton or Redding or even Elko or maybe Palm Desert. The division that covers that area would have a better feel for the local economy and the prospects of starting a club.

His ability to start a club may not be transferrable to other parties.

My feeling on whether a club will be successful or not is whether the club owner is fully engaged in the club. I've seen many clubs flounder because the club founder is doing it as a side business while holding on to a day job. On the other hand, I've seen many clubs succeed because the founder is in it 100%. Running a club takes time and effort. Can't be done with 50% effort or even 99% effort. That little tidbit is not something a section can help a potential club owner on. It's the club owner's dime to make it work.

[apoetic]

I don't mean to derail, but how would I determine which section I'm in? The summer nationals sign up form requests it. I'm in Northern California.

[edew]

Originally Posted by reffers

FrankV sounds like a great guy and the PCS is lucky to have him and his adminstration. They're also lucky to have enough other people who realize the benefit such people bring to Section-level governance and organization and not to try and sabotage his efforts. I doubt he could get elected Section Dogcatcher in many other places though. Here in the Southwest Section, we had a group of administrators who were capable, and had done good things over the past several years. Unfortunately, the reactionaries and blowhards of the Section - people like Oscar Barrera, August Skopik, Brenda Waddoups, Doc Matthews, and Richard Exnicios, who prefer the stability of the good-ol-boy network, the leadership of the unproven and the vision of the unispired, got together to deliver a stinging blow to progress and forward movement. They got together and elected a Section chair who has done little if nothing over the past 10 years and a vice-chair who was in the adminstration the last time our Section Circuit fell apart. Note that no one showed up to the meeting to contest the positions that actually might require some work and accountability - Treasurer, Secretary and Representative to USFA Board of Directors.

Now we've got a Section Chair who has publically stated that he would prefer to do away with all Section-level coordination of our Section Circuit events, and has absolutely no recent experience with tournament operations, refereeing OR high level competing. Its not his fault, he's a nice guy actually, for the most part - just totally clueless and pushed into the position by the puppet masters without really knowing what he's stepping into. Well, I guess we can kiss the SSCC goodbye, cause its going to wither and die without someone dedicated to its continuation. So long, it was good while it existed.

All because of a few politically well connected idiots who think that someone who is "uncontroversial" is better than someone who actually has a small clue what they are doing.

To David Sierra, outgoing SSCC Commissioner (and probably the last, as the new adminstration wants to do away with that position) : Thanks for all your hard work over the past 5 years. Many of us support you. Those of us who can actually think for themselves appreciate everything you've done. Please, when the Southwest Section Circuit Cup dies again due to lack of coordination and effective leadership and you have to recreate it AGAIN, do so independant of the Section so that the reactionaries can't sink their tentacles into it and destroy everything the rest of us worked so hard to build.

Well, I don't know who you are, but you certainly put your name on the line. While those you've name may or may not be blowhards (some of those names are quite well known to me, unlike yours), I think it's rather unnecessary to impugn on their potential until it's shown that they can't do the job.

On the other hand, I do agree with you about "privatizing" competitions. Competitions really shouldn't be placed in the hands of the sections. Especially sections. According to USFA by-laws, divisions have the say about events held within their borders, not the section. The section is only responsible for running the Senior Sectional Championships and the Junior Sectional Championships. All other "section circuits" and such are really dependent on the division where the event is held. Those divisions must bless the event for it to be a USFA event. A section can't just put one there.

That said, because of the varying quality of different divisions, it may be best if a private company run the tournaments and contract out with the divisions to bless the event. In this case the private company need not contact the section at all for the blessing; only the division will do.

A private business running competitions can be a profitable endeavor, and might actually do fencing a lot of good. Different companies can provide their own little bit of innovation and everyone can get the idea and make fencing tournaments better. Better in operations, better in attendance, better in prizes, better in competition level, better in innovative formats, better in everything else.

[edew]

Originally Posted by apoetic

I don't mean to derail, but how would I determine which section I'm in? The summer nationals sign up form requests it. I'm in Northern California.

You belong to the Pacific Coast Section. On the back of the USFA membership form is the list of all divisions, grouped within their divisions. Northern California division is actually just the following counties: Sonoma, Napa, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, Alameda, and San Mateo counties. If you don't live in those counties, you may be in a different division.

Central California division comprises of the Santa Clara county and southwards down to San Luis Obispo. I think I-5 is more-or-less the boundary for Central California and Mountain Valley, which stretches from Sacramento (and a bit north of Sacramento) down past Fresno.

North of Sacramento is the North Coast division, including counties containing Redding, Chico, Mendocino, and such.

The USFA website has a map of the USA and for each state, it breaks down the divisions.

[apoetic]

Originally Posted by edew

You belong to the Pacific Coast Section. On the back of the USFA membership form is the list of all divisions, grouped within their divisions. Northern California division is actually just the following counties: Sonoma, Napa, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, Alameda, and San Mateo counties. If you don't live in those counties, you may be in a different division.

Central California division comprises of the Santa Clara county and southwards down to San Luis Obispo. I think I-5 is more-or-less the boundary for Central California and Mountain Valley, which stretches from Sacramento (and a bit north of Sacramento) down past Fresno.

North of Sacramento is the North Coast division, including counties containing Redding, Chico, Mendocino, and such.

The USFA website has a map of the USA and for each state, it breaks down the divisions.

Many thanks.

[gladius]

Originally Posted by reffers

.... Here in the Southwest Section, we had a group of administrators who were capable, and had done good things over the past several years. Unfortunately, the reactionaries and blowhards of the Section - people like Oscar Barrera, August Skopik, Brenda Waddoups, Doc Matthews, and Richard Exnicios, who prefer the stability of the good-ol-boy network, the leadership of the unproven and the vision of the unispired, got together to deliver a stinging blow to progress and forward movement. They got together and elected a Section chair who has done little if nothing over the past 10 years and a vice-chair who was in the adminstration the last time our Section Circuit fell apart. Note that no one showed up to the meeting to contest the positions that actually might require some work and accountability - Treasurer, Secretary and Representative to USFA Board of Directors.

Now we've got a Section Chair ...... he's a nice guy actually, for the most part - just totally clueless and pushed into the position by the puppet masters without really knowing what he's stepping into.......

All because of a few politically well connected idiots who think that someone who is "uncontroversial" is better than someone who actually has a small clue what they are doing.

To David Sierra, outgoing SSCC Commissioner ..... Those of us who can actually think for themselves appreciate everything you've done. Please, when the Southwest Section Circuit Cup dies again due to lack of coordination and effective leadership and you have to recreate it AGAIN, do so independant of the Section so that the reactionaries can't sink their tentacles into it and destroy everything the rest of us worked so hard to build.

Originally Posted by edew

While those you've name may or may not be blowhards (some of those names are quite well known to me, unlike yours), I think it's rather unnecessary to impugn on their potential until it's shown that they can't do the job.

On the other hand, I do agree with you about "privatizing" competitions. Competitions really shouldn't be placed in the hands of the sections. Especially sections. According to USFA by-laws, divisions have the say about events held within their borders, not the section. The section is only responsible for running the Senior Sectional Championships and the Junior Sectional Championships. All other "section circuits" and such are really dependent on the division where the event is held. Those divisions must bless the event for it to be a USFA event. A section can't just put one there.

That said, because of the varying quality of different divisions, it may be best if a private company run the tournaments and contract out with the divisions to bless the event...

A private business running competitions can be a profitable endeavor, and might actually do fencing a lot of good. Different companies can provide their own little bit of innovation and everyone can get the idea and make fencing tournaments better. Better in operations, better in attendance, better in prizes, better in competition level, better in innovative formats, better in everything else.

I put both excerpted postings by reffers and edew to state that many of us in the GC Division and the SW Section disagree with reffers and agree with edew.

The strident comments made by reffers are uncalled for, lest he dismisses any and all discussions and difference of opinion which are essential in a democratic process. It behooves to gentlemen to accept the results of fair and untainted elections without recourse to insulting the winners because some don't agree with them, or belittling the intellectual capacities and deriding the decisions of those who voted for a change. There is always going to be a next time for anyone to run.

If however reffers wants to engage in a post election analysis of what went wrong for his candidate(s) who lost, maybe a reading of the thread in the rogue fencing site of the GC Division (all 5 pages of it) will offer some plausible explanations.

http://campechesteel.proboards15.com...4489684&page=1

1. The first announcement of David Sierra running for Chairman of the Section, together with a slate of other officer was published on that site April 25 (11:29 pm). A discussion followed between various parties, often with tangential topics as it is always the case in any thread, which raised objections and resentments among the various participants.

2. Until May 9 (11:01 am) no mention was made of any other candidate running opposit the announced slate, even though repeated posters were asking if anyone wanted to enter the political arena.

3. May 11 (1:09 am) a new candidate announced his position on some of the issues confirming that he and others were running.

4. On election day, May 14, the voters made their choice with which reffers disagrees.

Anyone reading through all the postings in the thread -- in particular the running and management of the SSCC -- is free to think whether the initial slate and its vocal members and supporters run a smart and effective campaign. The results seem to prove that they did not. All the rest is just sour grapes.

Best of luck to the new elected officers of the SW Section. Your task is not easy and we should all be grateful to you and your opponents, for willing to dedicate your time and energy to the SW Section.

I also agree with edew comments about who or what is best for running a tournament series/circuit at the divisional and/or sectional level. The experience we had in the GC Division this season with running the Houston Cup, modeled after the Pacific Cup, is very encouraging and points in the direction suggested and advocated by edew.

[oso97]

Since I'm one of those named in the above post, I guess I should reply. Yes, I was the SSCC Commissioner for 5 years, and worked hard, along with a number of others, during that time to put together a good Section Circuit here in the Southwest. It should be noted though, that the SSCC is very much organized at the Division level. The divisions that participate designate the events, provide logistical support (some better than others), help with equipment (again, some better than others) and fullfill a number of other functions. Its an structure that is very much organized from the bottom up. The SSCC Commissioners position is an ADMINSTRATIVE one, not a policy making one. The Section has essentially two roles in the SSCC, one to provide, through the Section Executive Council (composed of the officers and Division chairs), a forum for discussion, decision making and policy direction, and two, to provide some financial support (the SSCC was never intended to be an independantly financed operation). The SSCC Commissioner is appointed by, reports to and is held responsible by the Section Executive Council. The responsibility is upon the SSCC Commissioner for successfully executing policy as set down by the Executive Council. This includes holding people responsible when they either screw something up or violate the rules. Note to certain people: if you don't like the rules, work to change them, don't raise a hue and cry when you screw up and someone notices.

The new Section Chair and Vice-chair that have been elected have been mighty cagy about what exactly their vision for the SSCC is, but from the few public statements they have made, it appears that they want to consolidate power and responsibility for the SSCC in the hands of the Section Officers. Of course, to bring this off, they're going to have to get the rest of the Section Executive Committee to buy into their vision, which is going to require them to fully elucidate it. It remains to be seen weather or not they control enough votes on the EC to push though the changes they want.

Regardless, I wish them the best, and will not undertake any operations to publically undercut them while they are formulating their plan. If their vision of the SSCC is one that doesn't go totally counter to what I've been working on for the past 5 years, and they wish me to, I'll continue to serve as the Commissioner. If not, I hope they can find someone else willing to do it.

With respect to the question of privatization of circuits - this is an interesting idea, and there have been some notable successes - the Bay Cup for example, run by Edew. There is also the PCC which is run by the Pacific Coast Section, which is not private. There are advantages and disadvantages to both directions, and different goals that can be achieved. A private enterprise has the advantage that it is not accountable to anyone. However, this can be a disadvantage as well - it depends on the people involved. I'd submit though, that to transplant something that works well in one region directly to another without any thought for the specific circumstances is a recipie for failure.