Armband Ranking in Canada

[RITFencing]

Originally Posted by CheekyCanuck

Begrudgingly I may agree with this, but I still worry about the separating factor of the higher "belts" from the lower "belts". I.e., kids with higher belts becoming belligerent or mean to kids with lower belts.

I personally think any decent coach would put a stop to that post haste. As for the club in my college, we don't care how skilled someone is; if they can't be civil, they are shown the door.

The fact that stuff like that happened where you used to take karate is a real shame, and I wonder about the character of your instructor if s/he allowed it to continue.

[RITFencing]

Also, while I personally don't think this system should be implemented for anything other than a children's program, I can see one major upside: fencers who have real trouble listening.

As a coach, I have a few fencers who are convinced of their own skill, when they really are very incompetent. These are the ones who have a lot of trouble listening, and often act like jerks toward less experienced fencers, which I have no tolerance for. Some days it would just be nice to say "Hey, goober, my stupid little badge is a better color than yours, so listen up when I'm talking to you!"

That said, I think the cons outweigh the pros, and I can definately see the possibility for abuse by those same fencers. I guess for adults, or at least older kids, it's like Capitalism vs. Communism. If you have really great people, it doesn't much matter which system you run, but if you don't, one of them handles damage control much better.

[kalivor]

Originally Posted by CheekyCanuck

Borrowing from another doesn't make it good.

I believe that there was originally a question along the lines of "does anybody else use this sort of system?" The answer is yes: Some of the most successful fencing federations use something similar.

Begrudgingly I may agree with this, but I still worry about the separating factor of the higher "belts" from the lower "belts". I.e., kids with higher belts becoming belligerent or mean to kids with lower belts.

Kids will find a way to be mean to each other -- it's a fact. If the armbands are there, they'll be used as such a reason, I have no doubt. If they aren't, it'll be a different reason.

Regardless, the coach should do their job, and make sure that everybody behaves in a sportsmanlike manner.

I do agree. Though I have not experienced this, I have heard of some people being taken by a coach that shouldn't have been coaches. But I don't think this new armband system will stop that. And to say that someone cannot fence if their coach is not of a certain level, only penalizes the fencer who is already being penalized by having a huckster for a coach. This should really be revised and revisited. I think a poor decision is being made here to penalize the victim.

Good point.

Is there documentation on what is covered for coaching exams, or is it the same documentation from the CFF that was made in the mid 80's? Perhaps a more up-to-date document that doesn't talk about women soon to compete in saber (among other things) would be a good step forward.

For the course that I've been to, we were asked to read the old coaching manuals, and also given a new one (which was, and probably still is, a work in progress), which concentrated on how to teach different age groups, and such. I'm assuming that the new one will eventually include fencing-specific information, and replace the old one.

Also I understood that you will need a certain level of arm band to compete (not just for your coach). This again, begrudgingly, may be a good thing. I do think some of the more wild/out-of-control fencers may be weeded out or given attention so as not to be so out-of-control. However; If a coach is too lenient on his/her student than this will not be corrected and you still have the same problem.

Most of the arm band camps/programs are offered (especially for coaches), are over a weeks period of time, which is not realistic for a lot of people. Taking a week off of work for a family vacation is one thing, but I think it is an unrealistic expectation to be had for many people. In a sense this can become an exclusion of older fencers who are not in school and not able to take extra time off.

No. Just adopting another country’s system doesn't necessarily improve our system.

No, but we definitely needed a new system, and copying one used by a successful fencing federation isn't necessarily a bad idea.

There are some things that just will not be corrected by this new system (lenient coaches, phantom fencing masters).

There is no system out there that can stop either of these problems. The CFF appears to be taking their new system, and seeing if it can be used to address these issues -- but I think that's a mistake, particularly in the latter case. A system to train coaches won't impact those who refuse to be part of the system.

I guess it all boils down to, “Is regulating coaching and fencing to this degree, improving the sport and its safety.”
I would say, no. I don’t think this program in and of itself will stop phantom coaches and I believe that safety is already taken into account quite well. Perhaps this will improve interest at the younger levels, but I still have some reservations.

To me, this system appears to have two goals:

i) To improve the training of coaches.
ii) To create more well-rounded fencers, who actually understand fencing.

Other things, like the fake fencing masters, etc, are just an attempt to put some (perhaps ill-advised) icing on the cake.

As far as the first two goals go:

The first seems likely. Training coaches, particularly at the lower levels, was horrible under the old system -- while the courses might have been well-taught (I know the ones I attended were), the grading standards were non-existant. The new system seems much improved to me, as a person who has been through both. Whether it turns out better coaches is something that will have to be seen down the road.

The second also seems likely. If people are trained armband-style, they might not become good fencers, but they'll have an understanding of the sport and the rules which is far too lacking, currently. To get a black armband, one will have to be certified as both a coach and a referee.

If I'm right, and these are the goals, then the system has the potential to achieve what it's designed for.

[Feraud]

Oh how terribly ridiculous….

I did a form of martial arts years ago (Kung Fu) and thought the belt ranking system was about the most meaningless thing I could imagine. So you take some test and demonstrate you know what a parry-riposte is. Big woop. It’s not the knowing that counts but the doing. Can you do a parry riposte when it counts in competition? Not just do it in a controlled situation with a coach.
I can’t speak for every M.A. school but from what I experienced, the practitioners had no concept that there was any difference between doing a pre-arranged kata and actually free fighting.
Rankings based on subjective observations or “belt tests” are not any indicator of anybody’s competitive ability or accomplishment. And from what I experienced the higher belt ranks simply went to the people who took more tests and paid the Sifu more money. I also never saw someone fail a test.
I for one am glad that Fencing is mercifully free of such silly conventions.
Fencing is a sport. You don’t see athletes in other sports with silly colored badges.
And what would be the point of this? Who would care? You couldn’t use such a system to ranks a fencers’ competitive ability and seed competitions because it would be so subjective.
If you want colored symbols of rank to wear and impress people with, just get a colored lame.
Or a bandana...

[Feraud]

Has anyone considered the cultural connotation of wearing colored armbands in public?

Black armband = Who Died?

Red armband = Heil mein Fuhrer!

Armbands are a terribly fascist idea…

Maybe colored socks would be less offensive.

[kalivor]

Originally Posted by Feraud

Oh how terribly ridiculous….

I did a form of martial arts years ago (Kung Fu) and thought the belt ranking system was about the most meaningless thing I could imagine. So you take some test and demonstrate you know what a parry-riposte is. Big woop. It’s not the knowing that counts but the doing. Can you do a parry riposte when it counts in competition? Not just do it in a controlled situation with a coach.
I can’t speak for every M.A. school but from what I experienced, the practitioners had no concept that there was any difference between doing a pre-arranged kata and actually free fighting.
Rankings based on subjective observations or “belt tests” are not any indicator of anybody’s competitive ability or accomplishment. And from what I experienced the higher belt ranks simply went to the people who took more tests and paid the Sifu more money. I also never saw someone fail a test.
I for one am glad that Fencing is mercifully free of such silly conventions.
Fencing is a sport. You don’t see athletes in other sports with silly colored badges.
And what would be the point of this? Who would care? You couldn’t use such a system to ranks a fencers’ competitive ability and seed competitions because it would be so subjective.
If you want colored symbols of rank to wear and impress people with, just get a colored lame.
Or a bandana...

I don't think anybody's claiming that an armband would be indicative of competitive success. That's why we have classifications, two different types of National rankings, as well as provincial rankings.

The armband program is merely a blueprint for skill development, with different levels and different goals for each level. It is not a seeding device.

As for other sports with similar programs: I do recall earning a number of swimming badges as a kid. None of them meant that I could swim fast, or save somebody's life if they were really drowning. I would have been a horrible competitive swimmer (or diver, or synchronised swimmer).

But I did learn a number of different strokes, and was quite good at treading water. I earned badges, without any competitive success ...

[CheekyCanuck]

So for those of you who have said that the arm bands are more for little kids, does it strike you as odd that these same kids will be in a far better position to direct and coach than the older people who would not be going up in the bands.

I'll try to say with a straight face, "Yes this is my fourteen year old coach, but no really he has his black arm band and he will be directing this weekend’s tournament."
This is probably close to reality since a lot of these kids have many years of fencing experience.

[kalivor]

Originally Posted by CheekyCanuck

So for those of you who have said that the arm bands are more for little kids, does it strike you as odd that these same kids will be in a far better position to direct and coach than the older people who would not be going up in the bands.

I'll try to say with a straight face, "Yes this is my fourteen year old coach, but no really he has his black arm band and he will be directing this weekend’s tournament."
This is probably close to reality since a lot of these kids have many years of fencing experience.

I don't think a fourteen year old would make a good coach (though they could be an excellent assistant for a class of little kids).

However, yes, this is the point. Far too few fencers are able to contribute to the sport beyond competition. When the results start to fade, they disappear. We lack capable referees (to be convinced of this, visit the next non-National event near you), and we lack coaches in sufficient numbers to have the sport continue to grow the way we'd like it to.

Currently, we hope people learn the rules, how to referee and how to teach others through osmosis. But it doesn't happen. Kids who are now starting in armband programs will be capable of coaching (competently, at least at a low level) and refereeing by the time they reach adulthood.

Many will realise that they'll never be an Olympian, and gradually reduce the amount that they compete, as is the case now. But if they're capable of contributing to the sport in other ways, more of them will be likely to do so, meaning that the following generation of kids will have the benefit of better coaching and better refereeing -- making them better fencers.

It's important to note that a black armband recipient needs to have Aide-Moniteur coaching status (ie, coach's assistant) and have taken the Provincial refereeing exam (ie, lowest level referee recognised by the CFF). They are not expected to coach highly competitive fencers and be refereeing the finals of National level competitions.