A5 Tournament level?

[mrbiggs]

If someone makes national points, and they're a B, or a C (atleast in mens epee) it was a fluke. Go cream some people at a local open and get your A, if you deserve it.

I'd say that it's alot more of a fluke to get an A at an open than at a NAC. At an NAC, you have to get through the first round of pools, which is not easy by any means. Then it's reseeded with the top 40% of the previous round. I don't think you could get through two rounds of an NAC through luck. A 15 person A1, on the other hand...

[mrbiggs]

Can you explain that math to me please? With a field of at least 128 I am not sure how you could bye into the top 24...

He meant an E, it was a typo, I think.


Though his original comment was wrong. 12 Es ARE given out in an A4 tournament. I'm guessing that the assumption is that an A4 tournament will contain huge numbers of highly-ranked fencers, and therefore, there will never be a weak A4 tournament.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

I'd say that it's alot more of a fluke to get an A at an open than at a NAC. At an NAC, you have to get through the first round of pools, which is not easy by any means. Then it's reseeded with the top 40% of the previous round. I don't think you could get through two rounds of an NAC through luck. A 15 person A1, on the other hand...

Its totally possible to get out of 2 rounds on luck... I was just a couple points here and there from making it to DE's at a div 1 NAC. A good DE matchup and I'd have sr points. It was a TOTAL fluke though, and I'm not even good enough to make top 128 at a NAC consistantly. We need less ratings, not more.

[keropie]

Its totally possible to get out of 2 rounds on luck... I was just a couple points here and there from making it to DE's at a div 1 NAC. A good DE matchup and I'd have sr points. It was a TOTAL fluke though, and I'm not even good enough to make top 128 at a NAC consistantly. We need less ratings, not more.

Alas, the fact that you ALMOST did it doesn't prove it possible, and certainly not likely enough that we need to concern ourselves about spurious A's being given out because someone MIGHT somehow make it out of the two rounds of pools, into the DE, and 'luck' into an A. However, I've definitely seen people with A's, B's, C's, D's, and E's that I thought were inflated. Well, ok, so an E doesn't really mean anything to me, so maybe I haven't seen any inflated E's. But the rest I've seen, and they have earned them at local events in every case. So I don't see the NACs as the source of inflated ratings, but rather I see the most egregious source as clubs that manufacture tournaments with relatively high ratings (A1, B1, even C1 in some cases) on a consistent basis to give ratings to people who don't deserve them.

[mrbiggs]

Its totally possible to get out of 2 rounds on luck... I was just a couple points here and there from making it to DE's at a div 1 NAC. A good DE matchup and I'd have sr points. It was a TOTAL fluke though, and I'm not even good enough to make top 128 at a NAC consistantly. We need less ratings, not more.

You've gotten your B four or five times now, right? I don't think it would be all that bad if you got an A.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

You've gotten your B four or five times now, right? I don't think it would be all that bad if you got an A.

No way. I've earned it once, and had it swiped out from under me a few times.

[telkanuru]

More specifically, DFP, we need fewer ratings.

[KD5MDK]

He meant an E, it was a typo, I think.


Though his original comment was wrong. 12 Es ARE given out in an A4 tournament. I'm guessing that the assumption is that an A4 tournament will contain huge numbers of highly-ranked fencers, and therefore, there will never be a weak A4 tournament.

In addition, because the Es awarded at an A4 tournament go down to 48th place at a tournament which requires 64 fencers, it is possible to earn your E already without winning a DE. If you're at a weak 128 member tournament, I think that's decent enough.

[oiuyt]

But the rest I've seen, and they have earned them at local events in every case.

I have seen a number of inflated classifications due to national results and used to be the holding of one. When I first earned my A there was no WAY I deserved to be one, I knew basically three actions. I could create simuls (mostly), I could step in, step out, and twack my opponent who had just missed on the head, and I could do the same thing, run away from my opponent who had NOT just missed, raining stopcuts to his wrist until one caught a piece of cuff, at which point I would accelerate away. Now, while much of my current sabre game STILL resembles what I've described above, I've added enough real sabre actions to round it out a bit.

And I've seen considerably more eggregious cases (I had, at least earned a B previously, going through someone on the points list, and I re-earned the A slightly over a year later). Long-time fencers who are active competitors with well-earned C's jumped up to A's off of an L8 finish is a weak A4 (and yes, there are such). Particular person I have in mind consistently continues to finish about where a mid-level C would be expected to even now that he's had his A for quite a while.

That said, I've seen WAY more people jumped up from local events. Generally weaker events that marginally make A1 or B1 status. I can think of a number of B fencers, and at least 1-2 A's, across all three weapons that have their current classifications as a result of fortuitous seeding, random chance, and a lucky DE draw at such local events.

I haven't witnessed any cases of people artificially rigging tournaments for such purposes, but you certainly hear the stories about club X or students of coach Y doing so. I have an acquantance who was at a tournament where a group of friends allowed another of their number to win with the express purpose of creating another D (which the rest of the group already had). He was a member of the cabal and freely admitted afterwards what they had done and that there had been premeditative discussions of how best to accomplish their goal.

I think that there should be no place in our sport for such actions and that peer pressure should be brought on any who engage in such activities to realize that what they are doing is, quite simply, wrong.

-B

[Feraud]

As the sport grows it’s only logical that there will be a necessity of having classification charts that go beyond 64 fencers.
If it’s done correctly it’s not going to make earning classifications any easier since you’d still have to win the same # of bouts to get to the finals.
In the current system, if you place 9th in a field of 200 including 50 A’s, you’ll still just end up with a “B”.