Not entirely sure how much more useful it is than a database and ticking names off a page....
Well, it'll still use said database, just a piece of software will tick the names. This will, thus, cut down on the possibility of somebody clicking on the wrong row by accident.
Besides that moderate advantage, it's just ****ing cool.
Well, it'll still use said database, just a piece of software will tick the names. This will, thus, cut down on the possibility of somebody clicking on the wrong row by accident.
But they'll have to be entered into the computer anyways.... even if it does link up with en garde or whatever, seems a very expensive proposal for relatively little gain.
But they'll have to be entered into the computer anyways.... even if it does link up with en garde or whatever, seems a very expensive proposal for relatively little gain.
they already have, I'm sure, a national database with identifying numbers for each fencer. the two pieces of infrastructure that would be required are 1) cards with the id number encoded and readers for said cards and 2) a lookup service into that national database.
neither of these is that expensive.
hell, we've thought about doing something similar on a smaller scale at our club (allowing self checkin).
edit: Actually, I take it back. you wouldn't need a lookup service, since this would be used at national events which probably require pre-reg. what you'd need is to pre-load an extract of those fencers who have registered.
I can see many benefits to having such a system, though it would take a little money to do. With a smart card system for large events you could streamline the entire registration process, letting people not have to stand in line for 20 sometimes 30 minutes to go through the process of giving thier name card and USFA number to the registration desk. Just swipe in and get confirmed. If you bought just a few machines for division tournaments imagine having 50 fencers signed in just a few minutes.
It would take away from a lot of the "Hurry up and wait" process that happens at most tournament. Add a pin number or some other safeguard and you take away most of the the threat from identity theft at events. If it's a local event most people will know you anyway. You could have more people workign the armory than worrying about the registration table. Since most events tend to go longer than scheduled anyway I think it could be a worthwhile investment if handled correctly.
I'm not too sure what I think about the super pool system as I've never competed in Canada and doubt I will.
__________________
I'd like you to feel that your doing well- Fezzik
Regardless my point stands. While at national level tournies and such it sin't the case in my experiece but most of the tournies I go to arround here are short on staff and the people running one are usually helping at the other as well.
__________________
I'd like you to feel that your doing well- Fezzik
PdF recently held a canadian elite style open, and it was a deal of fun. The pools were also not particularly unbalanced, as well. I'm not sure how it would work for nat'l team selection, but it's a fun tournament format that gives you a lot of fencing.
I thought I would offer some thoughts -- my son fences in Canada at the Cadet, Junior and Senior levels -- and super pools have been used for at least three years at the Jr and Sr. competitions. And he fences as well as in Cadet, Jr and Div 1 here in the US.
Generally, the use of super-pools means that one focuses on getting into the top 16 -- since the results from the first set of pools is generally irrelevant unless one does EXTREMELY poorly, and has to fence one of the top seeds in the first or second rounds of DE's. Once one is in the super-pools, it is a new ball-game..with significant benefits of being one of the top 2 (gets a bye in the first round of DEs after the super-pools), and significant costs associated with being in the bottom 2 (will only rank from 12-16).
One justification for the use of the super-pools in Canada is the (relatively) small size of the competitions -- perhaps 35 - 60 fencers - which seems small, but is more than proportionate given the population of Canada. So, in any event, there is not much fencing in the DEs, prior to the super-pools. So Craig is right...the use of super-pools gives the stronger (top 16) fencers a chance to fence a lot, in relatively small competitions. It is also a test of stamina -- the seven super-pool bouts are fenced on double-strips...virtually non-stop fencing. So, there may be some applicability of the Canadian system to smaller US competitions. PS....I read somewhere that Brazil uses the same system.
In three years of competition, there has been only one case of a serious imbalance in the super-pools (at least in the Jr and Sr. foil competitions). One fencer went 7-0 in the weak pool (+28 indicator), got a bye into the second round of post-super pool DEs, but then had to fence the number 3 fencer in the country (who came out of the stronger super-pool ranked 3-6). So....everyone agreed that it would be better, if the two super-pools were extremely unbalanced, to be in the STRONGER super-pool, so long as you came out in the top 6.
The real impact of the 2006 changes are, first -- to create a powerful incentive to fence extremely well in the first set of pools, and get a bye into the super-pools; and second -- to use repechage for the remaining 12 fencers in the top 16, so that one poor bout does not eliminate a fencer from the competition.
Because then the name might be in some unbearable way flawed?
I like the Panamanian format (that I made up). DEs to the 64, 8 superpools of 8, then repechage to the 32, then 8 mini-pools of 4, then 50% promotion to a DE from 16 to Gold.
Linear Mode
