Discussion of High School Fencing

[Craig]

To kickstart - Originally posted by 500gms:

By successful I do mean big. How many fencers have ever fenced in a tournament of any kind outside of a NAC with 500 fencers fencing? The Santelli was HS fencing at its present best, warts and all. Can it get better? Sure. But it ain't going to improve without imput from THE USFA.

I remember when women's basketball was 6 on 6
with zones now its a big time sport. Soccer, in the 50's 40 men played it in the US that weren't refugees who came to this country after WWII. Today, everybody plays. See I think fencing grows by building a base. I've seen whats happened in NJ, 5 years ago there were 29 HS teams. 4 years ago 34, this year 48 next year even more.

So, I like HS fencing, its not a NAC, but its a lot more fun and it exposes a lotta kids to the sport in NJ. Yeh coaching is mediocre at best and most directors suck, (not all of them though...Jeff Bukantz, Steve Sobel, Ivan Lee have all directed at NJHS events) But the sport gets weekly press coverage in the Star Ledger during the HS season
and many of the US junior stars fence for their HS.

NJ high school fencing doesn't really produce champions, however, Raz Davidson, Marty Williams, Caroline Vloka, Sammy Roberts, Abby Caparros-Janto, Brianna Martin and Alex Mills are all HS fencers. and it has started some fencers who became pretty good fencers in the sport. Some of the kids who begin as freshmen and discover how incredible fencing is, go on to clubs, NAC's and even world cups.

Lets have a dialogue, whats good about NJ and whats bad. Should the USFA have a roll if so what should it be? Finally how can the system be exported to other states?

So:
What's good about NJ High School Fencing and what's bad.

Should the USFA have a roll if so what should it be?

Finally how can the system be exported to other states?

And for those of us not in NJ - Can someone provide an overview to help frame the discussion?

[RITFencing]

500, you make some pretty salient points. NJ HS fencing DOES get a lot of kids involved in fencing, and that's wonderful. I don't measure success by the number of champions produced, necessarily, but (as I have said in the past) the big problem here is that these eager young fencers are then taught to fence really poorly, by coaches, referees and by other fencers, creating something of a vicious cycle. They come out of the program, through no fault of their own, with some pretty strange ideas about the nature of fencing, the rules of the game, what is and is not acceptable, how reffing should be done, even very basic fencing actions.

I look at HS fencing as a developing ground for fencers, much like a school. The fact that's turning out a lot of kids with interest is great... the fact that it's giving the majority of those kids a bad education, or at best a bad starting point for further education is less great. Considerably so. In any school, there are going to be some graduates who are just not going to do well. There are also going to be some that excell no matter what. I've found that a good indicator of success in such an institution can be the quality of the middle of the road people that it produces. Does the new jersey program produce a lot of fencers who have a solid grasp of the rules, can handle the pressures of competition with grace and sportsmanship (admittedly I've had no more problem with sportsmanship in NJ than anywhere else, which in the fencing world is saying that I've had almost no problem with sportsmanship there) can execute basic fencing actions comfortably and can think tactically? Have a good long look at the average fencers coming out of NJ HS programs. They need help. It's not necessarily their fault that they have these fundamental flaws; the vast majority have just been eating what their coaches feed them.

Should we scrap the whole thing? Hell no. That would be giving up on every kid involved, and that is something intolerable to me. Should we give up on large events like the Santelli/Cetrulo? Also no. They are, as you say, a wonderful chance to get kids exposed to large competitions and get lots of fencing in, as well as a lot of reffing experience for the developmental people.

What I think should be done is a great deal of education on the part of the coaches and refs. Some of them are simply people who have been forced into the situation with little or no fencing training (I'm sure no coaches or refs here can relate to that, though ) and I've found that those ones are generally very open and receptive. Some are local institutions, however, who have a great deal of sway in the community and seem to have a sense of momentum. They've been doing it this way for years, so of course it must be fine! The whole community agrees with them! I'm not going to get into the nitty gritty here (though if anyone wishes me to go into more detail, I will be happy to provide it through PM) but when the majority of the refs and coaches either have no clue what they're doing or persist in ignoring the existing rules and conventions and even worse, making their own up, then the fencers exposed to these conditions will develop thinking that these things are correct and that what they experince down the line is wrong. How many people here have been to a NAC and seen some kid there for the first time when his home refs never called covering target in foil? How many red cards did that kid get on the day? How about the kid who's coach and refs at home had truly odd ideas about what constitutes an attack? How many touches did that kid get? How many of you have BEEN that kid, or even adult? It sucks! Is it that person's fault that he has no clue what's going on? No. Is it the ref at said NAC? Not really. It's the people who provided a poor developmental experience for him. Maybe they didn't know any better. It happens. Maybe they should have known better. Maybe they should have sought out more education, or taken advantage of more opportunities around them to go to seminars and clinics, or to talk with experienced refs, coaches and fencers and listen what they have to say.

I admit that I'm a bit bitter on this last point here. I've had several talks with referees about RoW and rule calls, and I've been met with a lot of cold shoulders and in a few cases even a hand up to me and an "I don't want to hear it." Sometimes there's been some very thinly vield hostility. I have to admit that I'm not always great about holding my temper in these cases, but I generally think I do a pretty good job. I'm sure none of them like seeing a kid half their age come up and explain right of way to them when they think they've been reffing well for 10 or 20 years, or even longer. I tried holding a ref seminar in december, and I will be hosting another hopefully within a month or so. I sincerely hope that people will take advantage of what is there and maybe get their own ref ratings and get some NAC experience. Education is the best way to solve problems of ignorance... but if the ignorance is willful, then the best educators in the world can't do much.

Taken from my deleted elsewhere.

[500gms]

Both public and private schools field varsity teams and compete in NJ. Teams have 9 active fencers to a side; 3 sabers, 3 foils and 3 epees.
Each side designates an "A" strip, a "B" strip and a "C" strip in each weapon. Each fencer fences the opponent's 3 fencers in the same weapon making 9, 5 touch bouts in each weapon. 27 bouts to a meet. the meet winner is the 1st school to win 14 bouts.

Does everyone get it so far? No? lets go to the video tape: ButtF**k HS (BFHS) fences Numb Nut
High (NNHS).
Bout 1 BFHS saber A fences NNHS saber A
" 2 BFHS saber B fences NNHS saber B
" 3 BFHS saber C fences NNHS saber C
Bout 4 BFHS foil A fences NNHS foil A
" 5 BFHS foil B fences NNHS foil B
" 6 BFHS foil C fences NNHS foil C
Bout 7 BFHS epee A fences NNHS epee A
" 8 BFHS epee B fences NNHS epee B
" 9 BFHS epee C fences NNHS epee C

End of round 1. If BFHS won bouts 1,2,4,7 and 9
the sore at the end of round 1 is 5-4 BFHS ahead.

Round 2
Bout 10 BFHS saber A fences NNHS saber B
" 11 BFHS saber B fences NNHS saber C
" 12 BFHS saber C fences NNHS saber A
Bout 13 BFHS foil A fences NNHS foil B
" 14 BFHS foil B fences NNHS foil C
" 15 BFHS foil C fences NNHS foil A
Bout 16 BFHS epee A fences NNHS epee B
" 17 BFHS epee B fences NNHS epee C
" 18 BFHS epee C fences NNHS epee A

End of round 2. If BFHS won bouts 12,13,14,16,17 and 18 the score at the end of round 2 is (drum roll) BFHS 11 vs NNHS 7

and on to round 3
Bout 19 BFHS saber A fences NNHS saber C
" 20 BFHS saber B fences NNHS saber A
" 21 BFHS saber C fences NNHS saber B
Bout 22 BFHS foil A fences NNHS foil C
" 23 BFHS foil B fences NNHS foil A
" 24 BFHS foil C fences NNHS foil B
Bout 25 BFHS epee A fences NNHS epee C
" 26 BFHS epee B fences NNHS epee A
" 27 BFHS epee C fences NNHS epee B

If BFHS win bouts 19, 20 and 21 they win the Meet, 14-7 and substitute lesser fencers for the remaining 6 bouts.
The rules are FIE/USFA except for fleching. A fencer cannot cross their legs in NJ HS fencing so no fleching in foil or epee. Oh, and coaches call time outs and communicate with their fencer during a bout.

That's how we do it in New Jersey. the above example is called a dual meet. There are exceptions to this format however I'll let someone else tell you about the Santelli/Cetrulo, Districts and Squads formats.

[jeff]

A disclaimer, and then general observations.

First: I'm not an expert on how HS fencing in NJ is structured, as I'm not a coach, administrator, parent or participant. However, I do referee it, so I get a chance to see it first-hand, and at different schools.

Impressions/observations:

- There's a lot of it, as reflected in the big events like Santelli, Cetrulo, Denise O'Connor and the Yxx competitions. Some of them have enormous turnouts.

- To my amazement, schools are able to field boys and girls teams, 3 weapons each, and JV - and have equipment for all of them. In PSAL (NYC school system) Back In The Day, we were lucky to get through a boy's foil match with working equipment, and basically, we begged. Opportunities for fencing at low and high levels. Talked the other day with a parent complaining about hassles at a World Cup his kid went to - something I never would have dreamed of in my school days. So, that's a sticker-shock thing. Or, if you're a Marxist, a class thing. There are some affluent NJ suburbs.

- It's variable in quality. In some schools, you have very strong, very qualified coaching that would fit in nicely in any adult club, and very strong young fencers. In other schools, it's at a very low level. Sometimes when I ref I have to fight the temptation to stop the bout and tell them what they're doing wrong.(and as a ref, you get lip from both the strong and weak, right or wrong...) In other bouts, I'm looking at one or both of the fencers and thinking "Holy crap - if these kids are this technically proficient at 15 - what are they going to be like if they continue to advance?" We need that for future champions.

- There is a desperate need for qualified coaches for the schools that don't have them, and for referees. The first must be true for any school anywhere that doesn't have experienced coaching - not specific to NJ. The second is an NJ problem, perhaps circumstantial: with the dense competition schedule, there's really not enough referees to go around (I ref because I'm asked to repeatedly. hey, time I spend reffing means I had to leave work early, and I don't get to fence that evening myself. I'd rather fence than ref).

- There are good clubs in NJ, so there are places for kids to train and learn outside the school program. This ameliorates the problems of schools that don't have strong coaches (at parents' expense, hence for the better off). The serious kids go to one of the clubs, and it really brings up the average level. I figure this as "the way it has always been, everywhere". The only thing I see as NJ-specific is the question of whether or not the strong NJ kids will grow into NJ clubs or colleges, instead of being a farm system for the NY clubs as in the past. I don't know.

As far as "is this good or bad": My opinion is that you have to compare it to other programs at that level. When I was in NYC, there were very few "HS fencing coaches" that actually knew fencing. I just found out that the guy coaching my HS team in the Age Of Dinosaurs is still there - and I know he didn't know anything about fencing in my time. Yet, our team was one of the strongest in the city - showing how weak most were. There were only a few schools that had remotely competent fencing - and most of that was from going to one of the NYC clubs to learn "real fencing". So, NJ in 2007 looks pretty darned good compared to NYC 30+ years ago.

My impression is that you will always have a few gifted or skilled individuals who (for one reason or another) got access to qualified training, a middle ground of "okay to good", and a mass of weak fencers. Not everybody who goes out for fencing is going to be cut out for it or get minimal training.

What I see now, in contrast to the old days, is that the base population of fencers in the middle category has dramatically grown. I think that very important and very good: I believe the basis of a vibrant and strong fencing community is a wide base of talent and skill. If that middle group is good, then the best and most motivated will emerge from it, and the kids that stay in that mass will still be at a higher level than in the old days when there was a sharp fall-off from the top few.

My .02...

[500gms]

RIT coaches a HS team in NJ. I believe he was a HS fencer in NJ as well. I don't completely agree with everything he says about HS fencing although a lot he says about entrenched bad coaches, horrible directors etal is true, Its just not always true and its not true at all schools.

Some of the more successful programs have 150 or more kids in their programs and actively encourage newbies to join clubs and seek outside coaching. Columbia, Milburn, Bernards* are the premier programs. Ramapo, Voorhees, Hackettstown and Montclair Kimberley are programs that have had successes in the past but are not quite on the 1st level any more.

*All 3 schools are public HS

[jeff]

And, for completeness sake, so everyone has a picture of where perspectives come from, 500gms is a parent of an NJ fencer, and officer of one of the NJ clubs.

[RITFencing]

RIT coaches a HS team in NJ. I believe he was a HS fencer in NJ as well. I don't completely agree with everything he says about HS fencing although a lot he says about entrenched bad coaches, horrible directors etal is true, Its just not always true and its not true at all schools.

True, it doesn't apply in every case. However, it DOES apply to the majority of schools, coaches and fencers.

On a tangent: Some schools are making headway now by letting their fencers skip practice to attend various clubs... I'm of two minds about this. Private lessons from a competent coach are the way to go, and while I consider myself competent I don't have time to give lessons to all my kids. However, when fencers are skipping team practice to go fence elsewhere and then get started on varsity, it doesn't seem fair to those fencers who were there with their team. It can also be very bad for morale, ESPECIALLY in cases where fencers show up only for meets and just skip all team practices. At that point, the fencer is no longer part of the team. I don't have a problem with a fencer who decides that, for their own career they need to focus on club fencing. They'll improve faster at a good club than with just about any team. But when you're not willing to bust your metaphorical ass fencing alongside and helping your teammates... don't go to the competitions either.

We're looking at some sort of compromise situation at Central. We'll probably have a day of practice each week where the experienced people don't have to show up, so they can go to a private lesson or just get caught up on homework and the coaches can focus on the newbies, and one other day each week where the newbs can go off and get private work done so the coaches can focus on the advanced kids. It also helps alleviate the problem posed by a large variance in skill level across a group. It's just an idea right now, but I think it's a decent compromise. I don't want to prevent fencers from going to clubs and getting lessons, but neither do I want to let them treat their team as an optional thing. It's a team competition; a sense of commitment to your teammates is required.

That was a longer tangent than I expected, sorry. Do you have specific things you disagree on? I'd love to talk about any individual point, and as with anything I complain about, I'd love to be proven wrong and shown that the problem is, indeed on my end. Much easier to fix that way, and it means that the fencers there are in much better shape than I thought.

[RITFencing]

Not everybody who goes out for fencing is going to be cut out for it or get minimal training.

That's very true, but complacency here is dangerous. Just because there will always be someone getting the shaft doesn't mean coaches and refs shouldn't be trying to minimize and if possible prevent said shafting.

That's one of my major issues with NJ HS fencing (and NJ fencing in general, though that's another thread.) The sense of complacency with something that really, really needs improvement. Just because it's doing some things well, or that it could be worse, doesn't mean it couldn't be better. That's our job as fencers, coaches and referees. We owe it to ourselves, the people who trained us, the people we train (and fencers and refs, you DO train people, whether you realize it or not) and the fencing community as a whole to provide absolutely the best fencing environment we can, and I honestly do not believe that's being done.

[eac]

Living in Pittsburgh, PA, I interact with several fencers on high school teams. Even the least serious and least competitive of the fencers at the club blow off most off the HS practices and completely dominate the HS meets.
Given that you can't give private lessons to kids on HS teams, and that your fencers will invariably improve more if they go to a club, I think you have two choices, and a middle ground would be problematic:
1) You decide to care about the competitive performance of your team. In that case, you let the best fencers do what's best for their fencing, and don't require them to come to practices that aren't useful for them. You could occasionally persuade them to come to some practices to help out with the less-experienced people. You do have them come to the competitions, though, because as postulated you care about performance. This has the benefit of keeping the less experienced people on the high school team who don't go to clubs in touch with how real fencing works.

2) You decide not to care about the competitive performance of your team. In that case, you let the best fencers do what's best for their fencing, and don't require them to come to practices, and, since you care more about team elan or whatever than performance, you just tell them not to come to competitions either. Which is probably fine for them, since they can go to USFA tournaments.
The high school team then mainly exists as a minor-leagues for people to get exposed to fencing, and for some of them to graduate to club fencing.

[RITFencing]

Living in Pittsburgh, PA, I interact with several fencers on high school teams. Even the least serious and least competitive of the fencers at the club blow off most off the HS practices and completely dominate the HS meets.
Given that you can't give private lessons to kids on HS teams, and that your fencers will invariably improve more if they go to a club, I think you have two choices, and a middle ground would be problematic:
1) You decide to care about the competitive performance of your team. In that case, you let the best fencers do what's best for their fencing, and don't require them to come to practices that aren't useful for them. You could occasionally persuade them to come to some practices to help out with the less-experienced people. You do have them come to the competitions, though, because as postulated you care about performance. This has the benefit of keeping the less experienced people on the high school team who don't go to clubs in touch with how real fencing works.

2) You decide not to care about the competitive performance of your team. In that case, you let the best fencers do what's best for their fencing, and don't require them to come to practices, and, since you care more about team elan or whatever than performance, you just tell them not to come to competitions either. Which is probably fine for them, since they can go to USFA tournaments.
The high school team then mainly exists as a minor-leagues for people to get exposed to fencing, and for some of them to graduate to club fencing.

What I care about is sportsmanship. It's a competition between two teams; it should be between the members of those teams. This is like if three guys who fenced at the NYAC all the time decided to go to the team competition at nationals and fence for some little podunk club. That club didn't win jack; the NYAC did.

[RITFencing]

One thing to note, eac, is that the kids CAN still get private lessons, and many do, just not DURING team practice time.

[nahouw]

The high school team then mainly exists as a minor-leagues for people to get exposed to fencing, and for some of them to graduate to club fencing.

Or, perhaps, as the shcool district feels, that the team exists for students to learn teamwork, leadership, school spirit, etc.....

[Coldfire]

True, it doesn't apply in every case. However, it DOES apply to the majority of schools, coaches and fencers.

On a tangent: Some schools are making headway now by letting their fencers skip practice to attend various clubs... I'm of two minds about this. Private lessons from a competent coach are the way to go, and while I consider myself competent I don't have time to give lessons to all my kids. However, when fencers are skipping team practice to go fence elsewhere and then get started on varsity, it doesn't seem fair to those fencers who were there with their team. It can also be very bad for morale, ESPECIALLY in cases where fencers show up only for meets and just skip all team practices. At that point, the fencer is no longer part of the team. I don't have a problem with a fencer who decides that, for their own career they need to focus on club fencing. They'll improve faster at a good club than with just about any team. But when you're not willing to bust your metaphorical ass fencing alongside and helping your teammates... don't go to the competitions either.

We're looking at some sort of compromise situation at Central. We'll probably have a day of practice each week where the experienced people don't have to show up, so they can go to a private lesson or just get caught up on homework and the coaches can focus on the newbies, and one other day each week where the newbs can go off and get private work done so the coaches can focus on the advanced kids. It also helps alleviate the problem posed by a large variance in skill level across a group. It's just an idea right now, but I think it's a decent compromise. I don't want to prevent fencers from going to clubs and getting lessons, but neither do I want to let them treat their team as an optional thing. It's a team competition; a sense of commitment to your teammates is required.

That was a longer tangent than I expected, sorry. Do you have specific things you disagree on? I'd love to talk about any individual point, and as with anything I complain about, I'd love to be proven wrong and shown that the problem is, indeed on my end. Much easier to fix that way, and it means that the fencers there are in much better shape than I thought.

Hey RIT. You coach at Central High I assume? Well I am on Riverdale Ciuntry school fencing team in NY and we have similar problems with trying to balance team practice and such. All the best people with potential tend to run to FC and skip practice and its unfair to others who dont want to get lessons on their own. A fine balance is needed so that fencers who intend to continue to develop outside of school also support the team they have commited to be on. Sorry I had more to say but dont have time. Ill post again when I get the chance.

[Anotherfencingmom]

I never knew how big fencing was in NJ until my son started fencing, so for a small state, why is fencing big in NJ?

[RITFencing]

I never knew how big fencing was in NJ until my son started fencing, so for a small state, why is fencing big in NJ?

It's close to NYC, it has a very dense population, there's a lot of money there, and, though I am loath to admit it, the ever growing HS league brings a lot of fencers in. In some schools, fencing is one of the only sports without cuts and it appeals to a more nerdy type of kid (please don't take offense, I'm a huge dork myself) than most other sports. Kids looking for something easy (ha!) to pad their resume for college, kids who have fencing friends, kids who just think "huh, that's different" and give it a try, and probably all types of others. A whole fencing culture has grown up around these kids. That's where the NJ HS program succeeds, really. It does a wonderful thing in getting such a monumental amount of kids into fencing.

[sleepyweasle]

A word from the parent of Long Island HS fencers:

Long Island HS fencing sounds like a smaller version of NJ HS fencing. There are ~ 8 teams in Nassau County and, I think ~ 6 teams in the Suffolk County division. Coaching and practice styles vary drastically school to school as do rules concerning practice attendance. Both my kids fenced/are fencing for their HS teams (and both actually first picked up their weapon fencing for the HS team) however the scheduling of our practices and meets makes it absurdly difficult for my younger kid to really compete much on the team. (In fact last year, under a different coach, she was pretty much told to resign from the team or stop going to her private club and fencing in National events - she unfortunately had to resign). The directing on the HS circuit, at least in sabre, is - shall we say - not optimal - resulting in competative fencers having to revert to "Long Island" style fencing (as opposed to FIE/USFA style fencing) to win bouts. (my daughter's old coach used to yell at all the kids who fenced on their HS teams because they got so much worse during HS fencing season while fencing "Long Island style")

That said - my kid loves the team-spirit thing and enjoys coaching the "newbies" on the team so when she can (and when her private coach will let her) she fences for her HS team (also thanks to MUCH more understanding coaches this year). However, as a winter sport, fencing has to compete with basketball, wrestling and gymnastics, etc. so practices and meets are only held when the gym becomes available 5 - 7 PM again making it very difficult to attend both team practice and private class/practice.

The way the rules are on LI - it's extremely diffficult to fence in both worlds - and the HS fencing world, I believe, ends up losing out which is unfortunate for the other HS fencers as they continually lose the chance to fence better opponents.

[RITFencing]

As far as fencing being a winter sport... Why? Seriously. I think it should be a spring sport, so that it won't have to compete with all of the other indoor ones AND won't have to compete with all the NACs in the winter. If the sport is started in the spring after the march NAC, then it has only NAC F during the season, which is div 1/youth, which will have a much smaller impact than JOs, Div 1/Junior and Div 2/3. Sure, you have to deal with sectionals, and divisionals, but those are much easier to schedule around than 3 and 4 day NACs. You have much the same thing with referees, fewer events stealing the good ones away during the spring.

I know it's very hard to change an established sport shcedule, but for anyone starting up a new one, trust me on this... if you fence in the winter, you will compete for space, and you will be pushed into hallways and cafeterias, and it sucks. Do it in the fall or spring when you can get a gym every day and have more access to refs and fewer things to schedule around.

[Coldfire]

Then it just has to compete with baseball, softball, lacrosse, and tennis amongst others. Not a good idea in my opinion. The sport will trouble and problems whenever its scheduled. What good are mroe refs when there are far less kids due to them playing one of the aforementioned sports.

As for competeting for space...God I love how my school has a fencing room of its own

[Cerian]

Then it just has to compete with baseball, softball, lacrosse, and tennis amongst others. Not a good idea in my opinion. The sport will trouble and problems whenever its scheduled. What good are mroe refs when there are far less kids due to them playing one of the aforementioned sports.

As for competeting for space...God I love how my school has a fencing room of its own

None of those sports use indoor courts...

[MyrddinsPrecint]

None of those sports use indoor courts...

I think the point might have been that the kids who are used to fencing being a winter sport PLAY those sports during the spring, and wouldn't like to be forced to choose.

I'm not sure though.....