Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hello? You are right, Brad: Five people qualified plus the one auto = six. Still a far way off from four out of five entrants qualifying...As to that five person qualifying event in the West Coast, if I remember right it wasn't three junior kids from the national team who simply hadn't managed to get their B's yet, it was four U's and one D....I happen to attend NACs for the experience and the "fun of it" and know a ton of people -- kids and adults -- from the New England area who do the same. If only people hoping to get on the national team attended, we could run all national events in two days or less! |
I'm not saying that there aren't people that attend NACs just for the fun of it or that they should be outright discarded. What I am saying is that the number of people willing to do it just for fun at an NAC is considerably smaller than the people that want to do a national championship even for the same reason. That's part of what makes the event unweildy. However, at the same time you have to consider what nationals are for. If it's a point event being contested (for these purposes one that decides a team so U16, U19, Div1) the purpose is largely to crown a national champion and start earning points for the next year's standings. Arguably these tournaments should be restricted more much like Div 1s are relatively restricted but there's still an acknowledged "for fun", and developmental aspect to these events. All I'm saying is that the USFA is trying to be fair, the minimum number of qualifiers is an effort to be fair (I've certainly seen situations where there were 3 qualifiers and 5 or 6 fencers that could all potentially win one of those spots), it wouldn't really be fair to only take the person that won. As for the 25% it get's rough sometimes but it's certainly not rougher than the tournament they're trying to qualify for. You just gotta fence and do what you have to do.
Linear Mode
