Youth fencing: Too Competitive?

[Mr Epee]

There are many reasons/benefits of participating in youth sports, but do we spend too much time on competition. The article below is in cnn.com today, but it's similar to many other advice columns.

How can we adapt to the real needs/expectations of parents?

(Emphasis below mine)

Originally Posted by CNN.com

Find the right sports program for your kids
By Audrey Schewe
CNN

Wednesday, September 28, 2005; Posted: 3:34 p.m. EDT (19:34 GMT)

(CNN) -- When it comes to signing your child up for a sports program, look before you leap.

Ask yourself, "Why do I want my child to play sports?" Ask your child, "Why do you want to play sports?" And ask the program director, "What can you offer my child?"

A good program should provide children with all the positive values that sports have to offer -- and feed their reasons for playing.[/i]

There is no denying the benefits of participating in sports. Aside from the obvious health benefits that come with activity and exercise, research shows that there are strong physical, social and psychological rewards associated with competition.

Dan Gould, the director of the Michigan State University Institute for the Study of Youth Sports, stresses that when children participate in multiple sports at an early age, they can develop the "ABCs of sports -- agility, balance and coordination."

He adds that children can learn both fundamental motor skills, such as running or throwing, and sport-specific skills that will help them to stay active well into adulthood.

In addition to skill development, given the right environment, research has shown that sports can have a positive psychological impact on kids.

Dr. Darrell Burnett, a clinical psychologist and certified sports psychologist specializing in youth sports in Laguna Niguel, California, suggests that participation in sports meets the four basic needs that contribute to our self-esteem.

"When kids play sports, they can have the opportunity to feel that they belong, feel like they are worthwhile just for being kids, be treated with respect and learn about a sense of emotional control."

For those students who continue to play sports into high school, valuable skills learned on the field can be transferred to the real world.

Employers know that to be successful, student athletes must have developed skills such as self-discipline, decision-making, problem solving and time-management.

With all of the benefits to playing sports, how can parents motivate their kids to play sports year after year?

Experts recommend finding out what's driving the kids first.

Recent studies conducted at the Michigan State University Institute for the Study of Youth Sports reveal that kids are motivated to play sports by a variety of factors.

"Kids want to have fun, improve their skills, be with their friends, get some physical activity," says Gould. "They like to win, but it's not the top reason nor the only reason."

And while sports have real value for kids, experts caution that children will not just catch the positive effects by showing up for practices or on game day. To reap the benefits of sports, they say that children need to be a part of a youth sports program that promotes mutal respect and encouragement.

"In order to help develop and enhance positive self esteem, a youth sports program must make sure that every kid feels like he or she belongs on the team," Burnett says. "At the recreation level, the real value of sports is that everybody plays."

"Unfortunately, in many situations in America now, in youth sports, and recreational level especially, the less talented kids are being trained to be spectators -- to root for the handful of kids who will be the representative all-stars," he says.

Also, in many leagues, some experts are concerned that the focus is on winning, a team's place in the standings and making it to post-season play.

"At the real early ages until about the age of 10," says Gould, "you don't really need to worry about score. A lot of parents are forgetting this fun and fundamentals stage."

There are two ways to motivate a kid to play sports, Burnett says.

One negative method is an all-or-nothing approach:"You have to beat the competitor. You are only as good as the competitor you defeat. There is no place for second place."

He suggests an alternate philosophy that motivates kids to participate in sports by getting them to judge their success based on the skills they develop, regardless of outcome.

"Now you're competing against yourself. You focus on the skills," Burnett says. "The top athletes focus on tasks, not on trophies."

Regardless of what type of program you and your children choose, "When all the dust settles," Burnett urges parents, "You need to make sure that when you look at your child, that you relate to your child as a kid first and an athlete second."

[noodle]

suggested revised article title:
"don't live through your kids"

[Ordway]

I think also that explicitly teaching and reinforcing good sportsmanship is essential to working with kids in sports. Fortunately, 99% of the youth fencers I've come into contact with at tournaments or practices are very polite and well-mannered and are, in general, good sports whether winning or losing.

OTOH, there are the occasional jerks-in-training who are extremely talented and seem to think that this excuses them from behaving with courtesy toward clubmates or opponents (and a 15- or 16-year-old taking a patronizing tone toward a more experienced, if perhaps less innately talented, adult is a sight that's ludicrous to everybody except the kid). And in cases like this it's really the parents and coaches who bear a lot of the responsibility for letting "my kid is talented!! I must provide encouragement!!" outweigh "I need to teach my kid to be a good citizen."

But, as I've said, the majority of youth fencers and parents are really nice folks, and it's really pretty neat how many fencing *families* there are - not just several kids, but parents as well.

[lauralitz]

Interesting article.

My take on the youth fencers that I have met (my Y10 daughter completed her first season last year) is that for the most part the kids involved in fencing are there because they want to be and not because mom and dad want a little champion.

I am always asking my daughter if she is still interested in her sport and she always says she is. I NEVER have to make her go to practice, in fact it is quite the opposite, I USE fencing to get her to do other things like chores and homework .

At nationals my daughter had to go up against the #1 ranked girl and when she walked up to hook up on the strip her coach told her to have fun out there. If it was any other way, I would pull her out so fast.

Here is her first response to my asking if she still liked fencing:
"Mother, asking me if I like fencing is like asking me if I like to breathe."
(drama is next)

I guess she is hooked like so many members on this forum.

She does want me to take it up because I am left handed and she wants to practice more with a lefty (and I think that dueling with ones mother has some appeal )

LL

[pacer]

I've found that the need to compete can have a variety of sources. Some coaches encourage the new youth fencers into competition get them used to it or to expose the kids to fencers outside the club. I've known some kids who were just driven to win, and later when they started college they backed off the sport. But by and large the parents and coaches I've met really want the kids to have a good time. One coach told me that if my son wasn't enjoying fencing, it meant she hadn't done her job properly.
(As for fencing with your own child - it's a great way to practice drills at home. I couldn't get too mad when he was practicing a fleche in the hallway and hit the wall with the bell (that's what spackle is for, right?) But it all changed when he grew. He's now 6 inches taller than me and relies way too much on stop hits!)

[Amadeus]

but what about the ones that actually want to be competitive? y10 is somewhat young, although there are a few that young that care about fencing. i've seen many y12 and especially y14 fencers that really work hard at fencing and want to be competitive, and that should be allowed.

schools concentrate far too much on this whole noncompetitive crap. games that have a winner and loser are being allowed less and less, especially in elementary schools. God forbid that our kids actually have to deal with emotions.

we live in a very competitive society, and almost everyone leads a very competitive life. if you don't compete, you'll have a hard time getting a job...certainly not a decent one.

kids especially don't like this 'a for effort' sort of mentality. that's why young kids play sports. they enjoy competition. and the young kids who lose are going to have to accept that as part of life.

of course, it's another thing when parents drive their kids too hard, and intend to 'live through their kids' as has been said. but taking away competition is going to far.

[edew]

Certainly, youth fencing in the Bay Area is very competitive. We've been trying over the course of several years to tone down the hyper-competitive levels (mostly generated by some parents and coaches) while offering strong fencing experience that is clearly demonstrated at the national level:
from the 2005 Summer Nationals, 5 of the top-8 in the Y10MS were from the Bay Area; 4 of the top-8 in the Y10MF; 5 of the top-8 in he Y12MF; and former youth fencers taking first in cadet MF, junior MFT, and so on.

The solution, of course, is to offer different levels of opportunities so that those who want the strong competition can have them, and those who aren't quite ready and need the lower-pressured events can have them as well. Of course, it needs enough of a critical mass to offer different events.

In the meantime, always try to keep a lid on the coaches and parents to maintain civility. Our referees have been instructed to forcefully enforce the rules on abusive or obnoxious behavior by anyone, including fencers, spectators, coaches, and even other referees.

[Mr Epee]

There is obviously a demand for competitive events for youth fencers.

But I wonder if there is a much larger market for well run programs where competition is not the focus. Competition = exclusion, plain and simple. When I look at successful youth sports (read: profitable) many of them are not explicitly competitive. Ballet/Dance can become very competitive/political, but this doesn't occur for years, and most kids don't bother with that aspect. I watched some martial arts classes a while back and was impressed by how little material they covered. There is also a trend towards separation in youth sports. Some leagues/organizations are very competitive, others are decidedly recreational.

Most people are simply not genetically predisposed to become champions.

Their money can still keep clubs open, and coaches paid.

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

There is obviously a demand for competitive events for youth fencers.

But I wonder if there is a much larger market for well run programs where competition is not the focus. Competition = exclusion, plain and simple. When I look at successful youth sports (read: profitable) many of them are not explicitly competitive. Ballet/Dance can become very competitive/political, but this doesn't occur for years, and most kids don't bother with that aspect. I watched some martial arts classes a while back and was impressed by how little material they covered. There is also a trend towards separation in youth sports. Some leagues/organizations are very competitive, others are decidedly recreational.

Most people are simply not genetically predisposed to become champions.

Their money can still keep clubs open, and coaches paid.

You are dancing around a very well kept secret. Champions don't pay the bills by themselves, and recreational only clubs tend to stay small.

Champions draw in many others which does help pay the bills, but really, the bills are paid by the recreational fencers. I knew of one fencing coach who hated competitive fencers. His reason? Money. Competitive fencers paid the least amount of money, and spent the most time using resources at the club. Whereas the rec fencers spend little time using club resources (strip space etc...), and spent more money overall.

A well developed club needs both. Top flight competitors to market itself and attract more people, and rec fencers to swell the ranks and be profitable.

Youth programs need to be developed in the same way, which is to say balanced.

[Mr Epee]

And yet competitive results seem to be the primary, if not exclusive, focus for most coaches (many of whom are retired competitors themselves).

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

And yet competitive results seem to be the primary, if not exclusive, focus for most coaches (many of whom are retired competitors themselves).

Good fencing coaches are just that, good fencing coaches. They aren't finance gurus, nor do most have MBA's, or possess skills which can be vital for running a small business.

The successful clubs have smart business people in addition to top level coaches...

[Slim]

Its interesting that the article doesnt differentiate between team and individual sports. Perhaps because there are not that many individual sports for youngsters. Fencing seems to be an anomaly as an individual youth sport.
I dont fence, so my perspective is that of a parent of a young fencer. I was active in individual sports for quite a while as a child and as an adult.

In fencing, there is no real team aspect. It's you against an opponent. It's pure competition. No hiding within the ranks of a team. You either win or lose the challenge in front of you. All by design. But thats not the ultimate goal. The goal is to strive for personal achievement, and to experience both winning and losing and learn from both. To me, that's what sports should teach. But you need both. I think the individual sports drive this lesson home faster than the team sports. I think this lesson is more important than the teamwork aspect of sports because more often than not in life, you're on your own. Teamwork is important, but I think secondary and can be learned outside of sports.

It's a competitve world. They start competing for space on travel teams and spots in good schools or theater productions at the middle school level. The earlier kids realize this (I'd say around 10 or 11 is when the competitive aspect should start being introduced), the better prepared they will be to face what will follow in high school, college, and life.

From my experience, the Y10 age should be mostly for exposure to the experience of individual challenges, and that for each bout, there will eventually a winner and a loser, and it's ok to be either. Y12 is where they get really, really competitive and those kids who really like to compete should be allowed to work hard and reap the rewards of hard work and desire for success. And by rewards, I dont just mean medals.

[jBirch]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

And yet competitive results seem to be the primary, if not exclusive, focus for most coaches (many of whom are retired competitors themselves).

Well, they are the only publicly objective metric by which someone can judge the quality of a coaching program. Honestly, people want to pay for lessons that have the best value for them. A coach who encourages fencers to compete and has a knack for creating good competitive fencers from their club is generally considered a good coach. Good coaches get professional opportunities that average coaches simply do not get. Every professional coach wants to be a good coach because of this.

Now, a lot can be said for HOW the coach goes about doing that. Sometimes students will suffer through an abusive coach because that coach produces awesome fencers. Other times, students will suffer through an incompetent coach because that coach is just so much fun to learn from. It depends on the student and on the particular talents of a coach and on their benchmark for success. It depends on the coach's position within the overall fencing community.

Every coach that I know of any quality is looking to produce high quality athletes. This requires, above all else, a dedication on the part of the athlete to get better. How else does one measure oneself objectively but by adversarial performance against others? Be they other coaches or other fencers or other parents?

James.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

Give the champions a sport, and let everyone else do their own thing. Champions have a habit of forming themselves, to a degree.

[veeco]

Originally Posted by jBirch

Well, they are the only publicly objective metric by which someone can judge the quality of a coaching program. Honestly, people want to pay for lessons that have the best value for them. A coach who encourages fencers to compete and has a knack for creating good competitive fencers from their club is generally considered a good coach. Good coaches get professional opportunities that average coaches simply do not get. Every professional coach wants to be a good coach because of this.

Alright, so I am perhaps going to go on a limb here, but it doesn't have to be that the only objective metric is the success of a coaches students in tournaments.

There are other available metrics that one can use:

- How are the students and the kids doing in life outside of sports
- How are the students doing at school and what college they end up in

And finally it seems to me that developping some sort of -real, not USFCA style- learning how to coach program would help both the parents choose what's the best place for their child to fence in (those that went through the program are better prepared), and the coaches to be better at what they should be doing, i.e. building numbers for their club.

Learning the techniques and how to teach them is good, but if you have no idea of the most basic pedagogical concepts it's not going to help much. A coach giving a lesson who keeps on saying "No! No!" to her student while she's making mistakes will not produce champions, and will not grow a large membership. It's as simple as that, and the 2 are quite intricately related.

[striker]

Originally Posted by veeco

....................................
And finally it seems to me that developping some sort of -real, not USFCA style- learning how to coach program would help both the parents choose what's the best place for their child to fence in (those that went through the program are better prepared), and the coaches to be better at what they should be doing, i.e. building numbers for their club.

Learning the techniques and how to teach them is good, but if you have no idea of the most basic pedagogical concepts it's not going to help much. A coach giving a lesson who keeps on saying "No! No!" to her student while she's making mistakes will not produce champions, and will not grow a large membership. It's as simple as that, and the 2 are quite intricately related.

It is a bit off topic but since the issue of coaching came up I will
ask this question. I am curious to know what seems to be wrong with
the USFCA style coaching program. Which institution in United States
has a "real" program to train fencing masters? I only know of two
institutions. One is the USFA coaches college. The other is coaches
clinics from USFCA.

I do understand the point that teaching technique is not enough. I am
not sure who can prepare coaches for the other skill set called
coaching skills.

[Mr Epee]

The days of the "Fencing Master" are pretty much over... the future of fencing lies more in the hands of "Sport Professionals." The USFCA doesn't realize this and that's why they don't have a bigger following. They simply aren't capable of providing the education that is needed for becoming a good coach. They don't provide a sufficient education in the subjects of fitness/health/sport management/science... they are very good at arguing about obscure parries, and the validity of flicking as an attack... but this doesn't properly prepare people to become good coaches.

Fencing in the US is being propped up by in influx of foreign coaches who studied at universities with specific focus on sport training, coaching, and education. These types of degrees are available in the US... and can be an incredible resource, if people take advantage of them. No, the degree isn't fencing specific, but the information is still incredibly valuable...

Unfortunately, too often we find people who are computer hacks in the day, and coaching hacks by night. These people, who couldn't tell you the difference between a condyle and a trochanter, hang their USFCA Moniteur rating on the wall, pop on their doberman jacket, and begin foisting themselves as fencing coaches in a grand tradition... sorry kids, but that's not going to cut it as the sport becomes more professional.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

The fencing coaching programs in the US are like "coach in a box" kits. They suck the creativity from the coach, instead implanting a system. While they can be resources, I dont think coaches should base their teaching off what they learned at a coaching college.