NEW JERSEY Division Politics- Division Separation

[counter riposte]

As some of you may have noticed, New Jersey has come into some considerable political problems, flame wars included.

As I have been flooded with some 100+ messages of E-mail traffic over who said what and pleas from several confused parents to knock of the bickering, at least away from thier e-mail, I have decided to start this thread, hopefully to move the discussion forward from where it currently is and keep the discussion away from people's mailboxes, where it shouldn't be.

This is a public forum, which all can read, so your opinions and writings become public property. We have also had occasions here in which the moderators have closed discussion threads down due to the flame war occuring on their screens. As a result, I believe the moderators on this board to be fair and impartial, so if this thread is closed due to flame wars, you have noone to blame but yourselves.

Ground rules:
1. No Flaming or personal attacks on one's character, this includes attempts to defame other parties. A flame war will only result in the thread being closed by a moderator, and NOONE in NJ has a say as to whether the thread will be closed or reopened (Hence, the referees here are impartial). The thread can however be reported as being a bad post by anyone. Closing the discussion does noone any good, so behave.

2. Stay cool. Stay on the issue. Your input is valuable, in fact necessary.

3. Preface any new thread with "NEW JERSEY Division Politics--(Issue)". It will allow those who wish to contribute to the discussion to go to the thread they are interested in reading.

4. Stay substantive and discuss your issue, or why you feel there is an issue.

5. Good Luck. Fencers Engarde...

[counter riposte]

The NJ Division shold not be split.

NJ has some of the toughest qualifiers in the country, producing quality fencers due to the numbers that Jersey produces. Breaking up only causes scarce resources to be even more scarce which results in higher expenses for lower quality than would be reasonably expected.

[750gms]

Let's keep the NJ bull$#!7 where it belongs. In NJ. Please do not pollute this forum.

[500gms]

Whats your real name and are you a member of the NJ division?

George Janto

[nahouw]

Originally Posted by counter riposte

The NJ Division shold not be split.

NJ has some of the toughest qualifiers in the country, producing quality fencers due to the numbers that Jersey produces. Breaking up only causes scarce resources to be even more scarce which results in higher expenses for lower quality than would be reasonably expected.

I absolutely agree!! A split NJ Division would only cause the overworked referees to be either more overworked or cause some qualifiers to not have enough referees.

[nahouw]

Originally Posted by 500gms

Whats your real name and are you a member of the NJ division?

George Janto

Hi George,

I know who he is, and he is, in fact, a member of the NJ Division. But then again, quite frankly, as counter riposte has said, please keep the discussion on track -- let us talk about the topics at hand. Questions as to who counter riposte is and whether or not he is a member of the NJ Division are irrelevant. I applaud counter riposte for taking this discussion thread here, as some on the NJ message board were asking for impartial moderators -- here is the place, as long as Craig and the other moderators deem the discussion appropriate. I hope that you will keep to a civil discussion of the issues.

[qatet]

Do we get to vote if we're not from NJ?

[piste off]

I am suprised it is even a question, although I get the sense it is driven by politics, not what is in the best interest of the fencing.

One side has fielded the following arguments against this proposal, which are summarized here (these are a direct copy from a yahoo post, since I think they are well stated):

1. Competition and coaching conflicts due to the impossibility of
coordinating schedules of two competing Divisions.

2. Dilution of the quality of competitions.

3. Difficulty in procurement of directors, and, undoubtedly, decrease
in the availibility of quality directors, due to the inevitability of
scheduling conflicts between the Divisions.

I have no association with any candidate or anyone on either side of the political argument (never even met them). I'm a fencer, and all I care about is the quality of the fencing.

Counter Riposte met me, and can vouch that I am a member of the division.

Rick

[counter riposte]

In the interest of keeping the discussion in one area or place... From the NJ Division message board...

Originally Posted by acsraj@att.net

Hello Everyone,

I would like to know the geographic details of the proposed split.
Which counties would go to the new division and which would be in the
old division? Has anyone prepared a report that replicates a proposed
split ie how many additional fencers would qualify (if any), if there
was a proposed split? If not, are there any plans on doing so?

As far as qualifying for nationals, it should not be more difficult to
qualify from NJ then it is from other areas of the country. If a
split in the division would make it easier for NJ fencers, thats a
good thing. The fact that there are too many fencers at nationals is
a seperate topic. There might be many fencers at Div 3 and Div 2
events but not at Div 1. Approximately 50 fencers qualify and it is
quite an honor to do so.

There is also a comment that events would not be as competitive.
While all tournaments should be competitive, the purpose of division
qualifiers is to qualify for nationals. Again, it should not be more
difficult to qualify in NJ.

If there is a split, I would hope that there would be more non
qualifying tournaments and I would hope that club owners in both
divisions would review the other division's schedule prior to
scheduling an event. For example, if one club in a division has a "U"
and under men's foil event, perhaps a club in the other division would
have a Senior Mixed Event. As a parent of a fencer that is in High
School, fencing during the week is difficult due to academic
commitments and there is more flexibility on the weekends. It would
be great to have more tournaments on Sunday since most clubs are
closed on Sundays.

There are many extremely intelligent people in our division. Managing
multiple tournaments at mutiple venues can surely be accomadated. If
there would be a shortage of directors (which I doubt), should we
focus on pushing to get more directors or limiting the number of
tournaments? I have encouraged my child to be a director and I see no
harm in it. Mr Bukantz has shared his thoughts on this topic and how
beneficial it is.

Whether there is a split or not, I hope the participation of fencers
or clubs in tournaments would not be based upon politics. I think
everyone would agree it would not be in the best interest of the sport.

Finally, I think all parties would agree there has been too much
negativity and counter productive activity. Somehow I feel we have
lost focus on the mission of the division and we all should try and
move in a direction that is positive. I attended the annual meeting
and I was quite shocked by the behaviour of people on both sides. It
must stop. As a result of a split, if all things remain equal and the
only benefit would be for everyone to work together positively, then
that is a huge benefit in itself.

I welcome positive, constructive comments.

Regards,
Raj Singh
Parent of 2 fencers (one is in the present division)
I am also currenly a member of the division.

[counter riposte]

The petiton to split, including related county boundaries can be found here:
http://www.njfencing.org/NJ_PETITION_2_18_07.pdf

Previous discussion regarding this topic can be found here:
NJ Division wants to fission

[LongleggedEpeefencer]

People have worked so hard over the years to grow the Division. Our fencing calender has some of the strongest tournaments and qualifiers in the Nation. What is the motivation to take that apart?

[oiuyt]

* Notes amusedly that this thread was put into the "Water Cooler.Politics" area, rather than "Fencing Discussion" *

-B

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by 750gms

Let's keep the NJ bull$#!7 where it belongs. In NJ. Please do not pollute this forum.

Originally Posted by 500gms

Whats your real name and are you a member of the NJ division?

George Janto

Originally Posted by nahouw

Hi George,

I know who he is, and he is, in fact, a member of the NJ Division. But then again, quite frankly, as counter riposte has said, please keep the discussion on track -- let us talk about the topics at hand. Questions as to who counter riposte is and whether or not he is a member of the NJ Division are irrelevant.

I think George was trying to ascertain the identity of "750gms", who appears to have selected his/her moniker as a direct reference to his own, rather than the identity of CouterRiposte (who posts using both that moniker and his real world name on the NJ Board).

-B

[ysbadadden]

The arguments against the split deserve an answer, since they turn out to be flimsy. N.B. I am not a member of the division.

[quote=piste off;586075].... One side has fielded the following arguments against this proposal, which are summarized here (these are a direct copy from a yahoo post, since I think they are well stated):

Originally Posted by piste off

.... 1. Competition and coaching conflicts due to the impossibility of coordinating schedules of two competing Divisions. Rick

See below.

Originally Posted by piste off

.... 2. Dilution of the quality of competitions. Rick

All tournaments except qualifiers should be coordinated by the clubs that sponsor them. Since it is in their economic interest to have the biggest turnout possible, they will cooperate in producing a strong schedule. So if Club A in the NJ-A Division is scheduling a strong foil competition, Club B in the NJ-B Division will schedule a different weapon or level. This should avoid the problem of dilution. The supposed impossibility of cooperation is a temporary illusion caused by the current ill-will in the Division.

Originally Posted by piste off

.... 3. Difficulty in procurement of directors, and, undoubtedly, decrease
in the availibility of quality directors, due to the inevitability of
scheduling conflicts between the Divisions.Rick

This may well be a problem, but it doesn't override everything else. Note also that the argument rests on the supposed impossibility of avoiding conflicts.

...plus Dilution of the quality of qualifiers.}
If you want more non-automatics to qualify, then you have to dilute the quality of the qualifiers. Instead of "strong" qualifiers limited to NJ fencers, hold really strong opens that will draw fencers from Philly, NY-Metro, Westchester, Long Island, etc.

[500gms]

From: "Stephen B. Sobel" <ssobel4@...>
To: Frank Mustilli <FENCER0901@...>, Vince Paragano _PARAGANO@..._
(mailto:PARAGANO@...) >, George Janto <gjanto@...
Subject: Proposal to split the NJ Division
Date: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 9:14:06 PM
Frank, Vince and George,
I know this has been a difficult period for you and I appreciate your efforts
and cooperation in working with me to enable us to reach an understanding. I
am also aware that while we all agree that the division needs to be split,there is no way that everyone will be 100% happy with any proposal. It was a
good meeting last night, but apparently there is still much work to be done to
get others in the Division to support the proposal as amended last night and
discussed today.
I just wanted to summarize what I understand to be the current status of the
proposal following the meeting last night and follow up phone calls today.
1. The Northeast NJ Division will consist of 5 counties - Bergen, Passaic,
Essex, Union and Hudson.
2. The Northwest NJ Division will consist of the following counties: Sussex,
Warren, Morris, Hunterdon, Somerset, Mercer, Middlesex and Monmouth.
3. Ocean County will be in the South Jersey Division.
4. Vince will secure the votes necessary to approve the placement of Bergen
and Passaic in the Northeast NJ Division.
5. There will be no further Division changes to the counties listed above.
.
Steve

[500gms]

One weekend in April the following tournaments took place with a 100 mile diameter circle in the north east:

1. NJ division Div iii qualifier, Somerville NJ all weapons
2. SYRC Jersey City, NJ all weapons and age 10-14
3 Philadelphia Div Y-14 SN qualifier all weapons
4. Cherry Blossom open, College Park Md all weapons
5. Epee open, NYC

Well over 1500 fencers, ABSOLUTELY no shortage of referees.
SYRC was called best in country. Div III we were told by NJ tournament chair was superbly run and refereed.
I"m sure Phila and MD events went off well.

PS. I forgot to check NCAA events on the same weekend. also the following weekend the Tucson NAC took place.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by 500gms

One weekend in April the following tournaments took place with a 100 mile diameter circle in the north east:

1. NJ division Div iii qualifier, Somerville NJ all weapons
2. SYRC Jersey City, NJ all weapons and age 10-14
3 Philadelphia Div Y-14 SN qualifier all weapons
4. Cherry Blossom open, College Park Md all weapons
5. Epee open, NYC

Well over 1500 fencers, ABSOLUTELY no shortage of referees.
SYRC was called best in country. Div III we were told by NJ tournament chair was superbly run and refereed.
I"m sure Phila and MD events went off well.

PS. I forgot to check NCAA events on the same weekend. also the following weekend the Tucson NAC took place.

Fairly well guaranteed that there weren't any NCAA [fencing] events that weekend, we were out of season.

ysbadadden- You've refuted (or attempted to refute) some of the arguments against a split, but you haven't provided any reason why a split is GOOD.

The competition schedules would NOT be well coordinated. You've suggested that they could be and, moreover, that due to competitive economic pressure they would be. If that were true then the current NJ division would coordinate schedules with Metro NYC, which certainly doesn't appear to take place. For that matter, on the weekend cited by George immediately before this post, there wouldn't have been a national qualifier and SYC in the division on the same weekend (not to mention a tournament in each of two bordering divisions and a large regional event two divisions away).

For reference, and so we're working from the same information, here's the petition that was written up last February:
http://www.njfencing.org/NJ_PETITION_2_18_07.pdf

The rationales listed in that document include:
* Splitting will make fencing in the area grow faster.
* That NJ Division is under-represented on the divisional level, compared to other states of similar size/population.
* That splitting will add to the resources available and that added resources are currently necessary.
* Qualifiers are currently difficult to run due to limits on facilities and number of referees.
* Long distances are involved in travelling to events.
* The new divisions split the state geographically and demographically.
* Previosuly under-developed regions of the state will receive more attention.

Feel free to add to that list if I missed (or mis-characterized) something from the petition...

Most of that list looks irrelevant at best. Some of them I'm not even clear what is being argued (the under-represenation rationale. Is the problem that NJ, as a state, has only two divisions, while other, comparable states (which?) have more?).

The only one that seems reasonable is that availability of large venues does not scale with fencing population. It could be significantly harder to find a venue capable of hosting X athletes than two venues each capable of hosting X/2, as might be possible with two divisions.

-B

[larkmaj]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

* Long distances are involved in travelling to events.

This one always makes me laugh, and I'm not even from a large division/section.

I'm not quite sure how splitting the division will increase the qualifiers from the division(s) or the ease in qualifying. The number of qualifiers is relative to the size of the tournament. So unless the size and level of these qualifiers are turning away a large number of fencers that a smaller tournament (with a similar level of competition) would attract. Having 1 qualifier with 100 fencers qualify the same number, and be just as difficult to qualify in as 2 qualifiers of 50 each (well, not completely true, the latter will qualify 1 more overall). (wow, qualifier overuse)

[counter riposte]

Looking at the USFA website, there are few states that would have multiple divisions. They are:

OHIO (Great Lakes)
TEXAS (Rocky Mountain/Southwest)
PENNSYLVANIA (Mid-Atlantic)
NEW JERSEY (Mid Atlantic)
CALIFORNIA (Pacific Coast)
NEW YORK (North Atlantic/Metropolitan)
FLORIDA (Southeast)