Seeding Question

[MPL]

I have a question about how seeding works (or is supposed to work) in USFA competitions.

The USFA handbook explains seeding in 2.10.1. In the first part, it says that fencers who are top x on points lists are seeded above other fencers. Does this apply to all USFA tournaments, or just the ones on the list. My main problem is are the tournaments on the list in 2.10.1.1 tournaments who you use the top x points lists, or tournaments where you earn points, which are then used in seeding for even local USFA tournaments.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

check pages 2 and 3 of "are you a rating hound" that's current---- Are you a "rating" hound?

[Mr Epee]

National Points rank over all other rating criteria for ALL competitions sanctioned competitions.

An E03 with D1 National Points should ALWAYS be seeded above an A06 without National Points.

Extreme case there.

But then again watch out for the SW Circut.

They make up their own freakin rules down there. But what can you expect from a section that includes Texas.

[MPL]

Ah, ok, I think I understand now. My problem was that I didn't understand that you only use one points list corresponding to the type of event you are running. i thought something weird happened like you first looked at the Senior points list, then looked Vets points list and so forth down all the points lists.

[oiuyt]

National Points rank over all other rating criteria for ALL competitions sanctioned competitions.

An E03 with D1 National Points should ALWAYS be seeded above an A06 without National Points.

Mmmm, someone should mention this to the people on the national bout committee, it doesn't hold true at all national competitions.

Even leaving aside the non-senior events, which tend to use their respective points lists rather than senior (D1) points. And which frequently only fully protect a portion (top X) of their points list (the rest moving to the top of their major classification, but not to the top of the overall list), something which similarly happened at the D1 level prior to this season (last season only the top 32 points holders were fully protected in D1 NACs).

DIA does not (at least last season, haven't bothered checking for this season) use points in seeding. I don't believe D2/3 do, although with only a few C-classified points holders it's less likely to be an issue.

-B

[nyacfencing]

National Points rank over all other rating criteria for ALL competitions sanctioned competitions.

An E03 with D1 National Points should ALWAYS be seeded above an A06 without National Points.

Extreme case there.

But then again watch out for the SW Circut.

They make up their own freakin rules down there. But what can you expect from a section that includes Texas.

I don't understand. How would an E03, who cannot enter senior events, ever get national points?

[oiuyt]

I don't understand. How would an E03, who cannot enter senior events, ever get national points?

One can receive national points from any open competition in Europe. Assuming a strong enough competition one could gain enough points that way to be on the national points list (the USFA tracks points for people below a cut off (275 points) but one is not officially on the points list until that threshold is passed). This is generally a significantly harder way of obtaining points than from a D1 NAC.

But if someone left the country as a relatively inexperienced E03 and then improved dramatically over a couple of years it would be theoretically possible.

-B

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

One can receive national points from any open competition in Europe. Assuming a strong enough competition one could gain enough points that way to be on the national points list (the USFA tracks points for people below a cut off (275 points) but one is not officially on the points list until that threshold is passed). This is generally a significantly harder way of obtaining points than from a D1 NAC.

But if someone left the country as a relatively inexperienced E03 and then improved dramatically over a couple of years it would be theoretically possible.

-B

Another extreme hypothetical case:

Assume that a member of the French national ME team comes over to the USA, competes in a 6-person competition, smacks everyone 5-0, and promptly earns an E. Furthermore, assume that at least one of those other 5 was an A-rated USA fencer.

Next week, he turns up in an open. How should he be seeded for pools -according to his fresh E, or is these any opening for common sense in the rules?

Make it one step harder: Let´s assume that he is Eric Srcecki, and has not fenced for a few years, and is thus off the international FIE points list, and the national French list. Everything else as above. What then?


Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[mgriff]

Mr Epee said:

National Points rank over all other rating criteria for ALL competitions sanctioned competitions.

An E03 with D1 National Points should ALWAYS be seeded above an A06 without National Points.

Extreme case there.

-----

Actually, in Div I, it is only the top 32 fencers on the points list who are protected. So the E03 would have to be higher on the points list than the A06 in order to be seeded above him. If he were not in the top 32 on the list, the E03 with points would only be seeded higher than Es with no (or fewer) points. (Below the protected top 32, the criteria are letter, points, year of rating, in that order.)

The number of protected fencers varies according to the age level, with 4 protected in the Y10, 8 in the Y12, 12 in the Y14, etc., on up to the maximum of 32 who are proctected in the Div. I.

Mary

[Sciurus-Rex]

In the end, however, small seeding adjustments aren't really that important. Yes, I know it could be argued that a lower seeding has the potential to put you against one (or two?) tougher fencers in your pool, and that might just maybe have an effect on your indicators and DE placement. But seriously, the people who worry most about this are the top competitors who are good enough to shake out the differences in big tourney direct elimination anyway.

[oiuyt]

[QUOTE=mgriff]Actually, in Div I, it is only the top 32 fencers on the points list who are protected.[QUOTE]

This is how I remember both the rules and practice as having been prior to this season. I don't recall seeing any notice of a change (or having one discussed at the Board meetings), but in Pittsburgh I seem to remember the seeding lists not reflecting this, but rather protecting all points-holders.

As a side note, FIE points holders with 10+ points are seeded ahead of US pointsholders (without 10+ FIE points). In theory one could have FIE points from a non-designated, non-european world cup and not have any USFA points. Technically another means for someone without US senior points to seed ahead of someone with points.

-B

[dsapery]

I have a question about how seeding works (or is supposed to work) in USFA competitions.

The USFA handbook explains seeding in 2.10.1. In the first part, it says that fencers who are top x on points lists are seeded above other fencers. Does this apply to all USFA tournaments, or just the ones on the list. My main problem is are the tournaments on the list in 2.10.1.1 tournaments who you use the top x points lists, or tournaments where you earn points, which are then used in seeding for even local USFA tournaments.

There are two different seeding mechanisms in the USFA. One is used for National Division I events and is outlined in the Athletes Handbook. The other is for all other events, both national and local, and is in the Operations Manual.

Rather than quote the documents, I'm going to try and paraphrase.

For National Division I events, the top seeds go to the fencers with FIE (world cup) points in ranking order, as long as they earned at least 4 points in 2 or more events AND have at least 10 points total (i.e., top 32 at a regular world cup earns 4 points, as does a top 64 at a Grand Prix world cup). The next seeds go to the fencers with USFA points*, in ranking order. Then A06's without points, A05's without points, A04's, A03's, A02's, B06's, B05's, etc.

For all other events, the top seeds go to fencers who are in the top "X" on the USFA point standings* (X=32 for Seniors, 24 for Juniors, 16 for Cadets, etc.). The next seeds are A's with points, in order of their points. Then A06's without points, A05's without points, etc. Then B's with points, B06's without points, etc. And so on.

* The USFA maintains an unpublished "point standings" for fencers who aren't eligible for USFA rankings (foreign fencers and others who aren't eligible to represent the USA in international competition). These "foreign" standings are used solely to seed the fencers as though they were on the regular point standings.

[FencingKitten]

So we've seen you recently, have we, Mr. Epee?

Yeah, I'm willing to admit that there is some confusion about how seeding is supposed to work down here in the SW.

We run, as many know, a section circuit cup, and track section circuit points. I fence women's foil once in a blue moon, but apparently those always coincide with SSCC events, since I'm still 32nd on that list, so take it for what it's worth. We protect, somehow, some of the people on that list. On the relatively rare occasion that we have someone come in with National points, I don't think we really know what to do with it.

We're working on it, I promise. It's rather often and heatedly discussed, right, oso?

[oso97]

Actually, you can use any seeding system you want, so long as it is clearly published ahead of time.

The purpose of the SSCC seedings is to give finer graduations WITHIN a ranking in order to more accurately seed the tournament. As per National guidelines, we protect national point holders to 32 places, then use points to break ties within a ranking, first using national points below the 32 and then SSCC points to 32nd place.

Example (and I'll use WE because this exact kind of situation occurs quite regularly in that weapon)
•Fencer A is 15th on the WE National point list and 5th on the SSCC points and has an "A" rating.

•Fencer B is 35th on the WE National point list and 2nd on the SSCC points, and has an "A" rating.

•Fencer C is 20th on the WE National point list and is 8th on the SSCC points and has an "A" rating.

•Fencer D is not on the WE National point list and is 10th on the SSCC points and has an "A" rating.

•Fencer E is not on the WE National point list and is not on the SSCC points list and has an "A" rating.

•Fencer F is not on the WE national point list and is 5th on the SSCC points list and has a "B" rating.

Seeding would be:
Fencer A (highest amount of National points >= 32)
Fencer C (next highest amount of National points >= 32)
Fencer B (has an A, and highest amount of National points <32)
Fencer D (has an A, and highest amount of SSCC points >= 32)
Fencer E (has an A, and no National or SSCC points)
Fencer F (has a B).

Really the only difficulty would arise with someone like Fencer E, who has a high letter rating, but no National or SSCC points. Typically if they are from another region, and a high level fencer, then they're going to have some sort of national level result that we can track down and apply.

However, this is also why we utilize the resources of the national level Bout Committee folks we have available. But it boils down to this. If you have 5 to 10 A's all show up (not uncommon, especially in Epee, but the Foilists are starting to get there as well), then what is more fair, to rank them by a random seeding, or to use ACTUAL DATA that is available and already compiled?

Another reason why the current classification system is insufficent.