-
Possible improvement to FencingTime Not entirely serious.
I was in a small, local competition last weekend, and didn't do as well as I'd like, although given the competition it wasn't so bad after all. Anyway, I saw that the results were on Fred, and so I figured I'd take a look at the pool sheets and see how the other fencers had come out. As it was, I discovered a slight error in my pool results. Utterly minor, not the sort of thing to have any major effect. In fact, I just now checked and it had no effect on the rankings at all (Of the people with 4 pool wins, I still have the lowest indicator).
The error? I am marked V3 and my opponent D2 for a bout. I know the pool sheet does not say this, as this particular bout had been recorded wrong (D2/V5 for my opponent) and we'd had to correct it before I signed.
Anyway, the gist of my story is my Mixed Sabre pool was misentered and I unfairly derived of 2 touches. (Waah Waah!) I propose that FencingTime be updated with a box that pops up whenever a Sabre bout is marked as having gone to time that says "Are you REALLY REALLY SURE?". If they click "Yes", have it say "Liar! What was the real score?". 
This is the stuff software testing is made of
-
Senior Member
Array 
That actually would be pretty easy to add to Fencing Time, but I'm not sure if it's really a widely-desired feature!
To avoid data entry errors, after entering pool scores, we compare the FT-computed indicators for each fencer to the ones on the scoresheet. If there was a typo while entering a score, it almost always will result in the inidcators being different.
The problem is that occasionally the directors decide to not total up the indicators on the pool sheet and just "let the computer do it". I consider that a bad practice because it deprives the bout committee of the indicator check to find data entry errors. Plus, according to the USFA rules, the directors are supposed to total it on the sheet before the fencers sign...
Speaking of Fencing Time... the new version is currently in beta testing and will be released in early January. So far the testers are having a ball with it - they're really enjoying the seeding by point rankings and fence-off-for-third features. Other nice addtions include support for repechage and all-places-fenced rounds.
Dan
-
My guess is that they totally ignored anything you had about error correction. The bout committee called me in (from refereeing) twice to check on details of running the system.
I really enjoyed the points ranking, as it put me in 5th at the Longhorn, and that should only improve at future SSCC tournaments as my older results are replaced by newer nicer ones.
-
Senior Member
Array 
I'd say if you want to improve FT you could make it into En Guard... The only way to atone for being occasionally a little over-dressed is by being always absolutely over-educated. -Oscar Wilde
-
Senior Member
Array
 Originally Posted by telkanuru I'd say if you want to improve FT you could make it into En Guard... Why would I want to do that? FT already does everything En Garde does, plus a lot more...
FT supports the USFA rating system natively, En Garde doesn't. That alone gives it a huge edge for US tournaments. Also, I've responded to the US fencing community and added the vast majority of features that people have requested. I release new versions each year (at least) to provide these changes. En Garde just got it's first update in 3 years, and it doesn't look like much has changed.
It really boggles my mind why people in the US would prefer En Garde over FT at this point. Can you name a single tangible feature in En Garde that FT lacks?
Dan
-
Similar situation happened to us during one of the Nellya Fencers competitions this July (sabre, what else?), and this time it did result in rather nasty reseeding. We learned our lesson, but I'd vote for the warning message in that case anyway.
-
Just Joined
Array 
Well it would be harder to make that certain error if you had been using en guard. I don't know how FT has you enter scores but with en guard you have to hit "w" or click a button before a victory with time. So maybe if FT had a system like that, you wouldn't have this problem.....or, yeah you could just use en guard. 
-
Senior Member
Array
Umm... easier to search competators, ability to edit any data at any time, generic ease of use, HTML/XML output, distributed for free...
That's just off the top of my head.
Also, re: ratings, explain how this is in any way difficult?
Last edited by telkanuru; 11-12-2005 at 02:50 AM.
The only way to atone for being occasionally a little over-dressed is by being always absolutely over-educated. -Oscar Wilde
-
Senior Member
Array
Originally Posted by telkanuru Umm... easier to search competators, ability to edit any data at any time, generic ease of use, HTML/XML output, distributed for free...
That's just off the top of my head.
Also, re: ratings, explain how this is in any way difficult? The new version of Fencing Time allows you to sort competitors by club, division, etc, as well as alphabetically. How much easier do you need?
You can edit pretty much any data in Fencing Time at any time, except for things that would invalidate the tournament state (such as changing a pool score after the DEs have been seeded). Is there something in specific that you think should be editable that isn't?
As for HTML output, Fencing Time has been doing that since day one. Not sure why you think otherwise. XML data has also also always been available, although not officially documented.
I will admit that Fencing Time can't compete when it comes to being distributed for free. However, the $50 that I charge is paltry when you consider the number of hours of work I've put into the thing. Plus, if a club can't afford $50 for the software, I doubt they would be running tournaments. And, even if that were the case, the trial version of FT is completely free and can be used to run small events (<16 people) that follow the basic pools-to-a-DE format.
As for the rating conversion chart, sure it's not difficult to do the conversion, but why bother? It's an unnecessary extra step that complicates things. Also, will En Garde tell you that your event is a C2 event based on the fencers present? Nope. Does En Garde know how to apply the rules to a Div II/III qualifier to determine who's qualified? Nope. Fencing Time, on the other hand, does.
And I'm sorry, but the user interface in En Garde is absolutely horrific. It's difficult to navigate, and it's visually unappealing (apps haven't looked like that since 1992 or so). That may not be a concern to you, but trust me, a lot of people appreciate Fencing Time's simple interface.
I'm afraid you've failed to convince me (and the 150+ clubs around the country using FT) that En Garde is better.
Dan
-
Senior Member
Array
Originally Posted by tkrivosh Similar situation happened to us during one of the Nellya Fencers competitions this July (sabre, what else?), and this time it did result in rather nasty reseeding. We learned our lesson, but I'd vote for the warning message in that case anyway. Ok, I've gone ahead and added a warning popup whenever a saber pool bout ends with a score of less than 5 (or 45 in a team match). Look for it in the new version in January!
Dan
-
Originally Posted by dberke
You can edit pretty much any data in Fencing Time at any time, except for things that would invalidate the tournament state (such as changing a pool score after the DEs have been seeded).
Dan
This was exactly our problem, we had to start the tournament from scratch after the seedings for DE's were posted and were found to be erroneous (there might have been an easier solution, but at the moment and under tremendous pressure of having a great many fencers waiting to fence we could not think of any). Needless to say that with almost 70 fencers (who were initially seeded by hand) it was not easy: we had to recreate the pools, etc. Just a suggestion: it might be usefull to create an editable backup copy after the pools?
We had a russian national team coach with us who often runs world cups and he told me that the whole point of posting the seedings before posting DE tables is to catch the errors if there are some and be able to reseed for DE. Does not that imply that the pool results should be changable if needed after the DE seeding?
Of course it just as well might be us doing something in not precisely correct order in FT. Although we had a lot of fencing management/computer expertise at the BC table....
-
What do you mean by the seeding by hand?
-
Senior Member
Array
Originally Posted by tkrivosh This was exactly our problem, we had to start the tournament from scratch after the seedings for DE's were posted and were found to be erroneous (there might have been an easier solution, but at the moment and under tremendous pressure of having a great many fencers waiting to fence we could not think of any). Needless to say that with almost 70 fencers (who were initially seeded by hand) it was not easy: we had to recreate the pools, etc. Just a suggestion: it might be usefull to create an editable backup copy after the pools?
We had a russian national team coach with us who often runs world cups and he told me that the whole point of posting the seedings before posting DE tables is to catch the errors if there are some and be able to reseed for DE. Does not that imply that the pool results should be changable if needed after the DE seeding?
Of course it just as well might be us doing something in not precisely correct order in FT. Although we had a lot of fencing management/computer expertise at the BC table.... From what it sounds like, you went through a lot of work that could have been avoided... if a pool score was entered incorrectly and the resulting DE seeding was incorrect, the easiest way to fix this is to abort the DE round with the "Abort Round" button. That will rollback the tournament to the previous round (the pools, I assume)... at that point, you can edit the pool scores and make any necessary corrections. Once fixed, you then can start the DE round and it will re-seed the DEs with the corrected pool results.
Typically, we will print out the seeding after starting the DE round. This displays the pool results (victory %, TS, TR, indicators) and the seeding into the DEs. Normally we post the seeding along with the DE tables so that if any fencer finds an error, it can be corrected before the DE bouts start.
I hope that helps!
Dan
-
Yes, it does help. Thanks for the hint, although I hope we never get the same situation again.
As to the seeding by hand, it was a mixed event with some international fencers present and our coaches did not like the seedings by rating along, they wanted to take gender into account, and so on. So they came up with a modified seeding (based on their idea of relative strengths) that we tried to implement with moderate success since it would not allow us to move people accross ratings. Is there a special button for this particular situation in FT?
-
Senior Member
Array
Originally Posted by tkrivosh Yes, it does help. Thanks for the hint, although I hope we never get the same situation again.
As to the seeding by hand, it was a mixed event with some international fencers present and our coaches did not like the seedings by rating along, they wanted to take gender into account, and so on. So they came up with a modified seeding (based on their idea of relative strengths) that we tried to implement with moderate success since it would not allow us to move people accross ratings. Is there a special button for this particular situation in FT? There is an option in the program preferences to allow "Unrestricted manual seeding" which allows you to reorder fencers without the rating restriction. A lot of people haven't found that option since it's somewhat hidden, so in the new version, that option is present right there on the seeding form.
Dan
-
Offhand, is it possible to get your USFA tournament sanction removed for irregular seeding?
-
Originally Posted by KD5MDK Offhand, is it possible to get your USFA tournament sanction removed for irregular seeding? The tournament was run by Arkady Burdan,Ed Korfanty,
and the head coach of the russian sabre team Dmitry Ronzhin, so I would say they probably knew what they were doing since they insisted that regular seeding does not work for a mixed event, which is of course true.
-
Fencing Expert
Array 
does fencing time do world cup format for seniors/junior?
to be honest, i wouldn't use anything but engarde - and most of the big competitions/organisers outside the US feel the same way.
-
Senior Member
Array 
Originally Posted by downunder
to be honest, i wouldn't use anything but engarde - and most of the big competitions/organisers outside the US feel the same way.
Hey Dan, DU has a point. I have some 78's and 8 tracks I need to play too. Can FT help? Most of my old training videos are on Beta. Can FT import them?
Lets not even bring up NTSC and PAL.
Seriously, the big advantage to FT is that it comes with customer service. If a "big cometition/organiser" (sic) asked for something in FT, I rather suspect Dan would add it for them.
-
Fencing Expert
Array
coincedently enough, the relationship is already there with Jean-François.
Similar Threads -
By pkt in forum Armory - Q&A
Replies: 4
Last Post: 11-27-2003, 06:24 AM 
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
Forum Rules |
