Current Points List

[Clammermom]

Can someone please explain why the Div 1 points awarded in Atlanta do not match what is printed in the current athlete handbook in the Domestic Point Table on page A-15?

[koorsgirl]

The Div1 in Atlanta was a weighted tournament. On page 57 in the Handbook it says that it had a weight value of 0.7

[oiuyt]

Some weapons have a 0.7 multiplicative factor being applied to the D1 events in Atlanta. Helps compensate for the top fencers being off qualifying for the Olympics at World Cups.

Let me guess, you're looking at senior points for either epee or men's sabre?

-B

[Clammermom]

and womens epee. I guess I misinterpreted. In reading page 57, the weighting was to determine team points standings not rolling points. I believe MS and ME had record number of fencers at this NAC and only eight fencers off in Europe.

[KD5MDK]

But the important part is WHICH 8 fencers were in Europe.

[Clammermom]

What does that mean to the 7 MS, 7 ME and 5 WE fencers who did not receive 275 points and cannot then be considered on the senior points list. Can they fence in Oregon in April or not?

A fencer only received 245 points for finishing 17th - 30 points below the minimum to be on the senior points list. In WE, only 4 Americans were fencing in a world cup. In ME, 6 of the top 16 were not American so only 11 out of 259 fencers received viable points. 16 fencers denied because of 8 fencers at world cups.

[Craig]

I know we all like to get the highest level bouts that we can, but given that that those fencers were so close to the minimum, wouldn't they be better served focusing on Div IA this season, especially since both Div I and Summer Nats are on the west coast?

Craig

[DJ Apostrophe]

I know we all like to get the highest level bouts that we can, but given that that those fencers were so close to the minimum, wouldn't they be better served focusing on Div IA this season, especially since both Div I and Summer Nats are on the west coast?

Craig

False dichotomy.

Why fence one if you have the means to fence both?

I'd be disappointed if I made the top 32 in Atlanta and then couldn't fence the Div I champs.

Not to mention the skill gap between IA and I championships is HUGE. There are a lot of fencers who fall in that gulf.

There have been some years where fencers who 'have points' but aren't 'on the points list' (i.e. below the 275pt minimum) have been allowed to fence Div1, there have been other years where they haven't. I do not know which way is 'correct' (my guess is those 'on the points list'), or which way will be used for Portland. The national office should be able to answer.

-w

[Craig]

False dichotomy.

Why fence one if you have the means to fence both?

I'd be disappointed if I made the top 32 in Atlanta and then couldn't fence the Div I champs.

Point taken.

Craig

[T]

I know we all like to get the highest level bouts that we can, but given that that those fencers were so close to the minimum, wouldn't they be better served focusing on Div IA this season, especially since both Div I and Summer Nats are on the west coast?

Craig

This is probably an important factor for Cadet and Junior fencers who would like to try to get valuable points at the Div 1 Nationals in a relatively small field. In most years, the Div 1 Nationals count as a Group 2 score for Cadets and a Group 1 score in Juniors for the next season. There is no opportunity at the summer nationals for any Div 1 points (which are the most valuable points available for cadet and junior fencers because they count for all levels).

[Kyle Wolfson]

Well, the handbook indicates that anyone earning points at a NAC is eligible for the April competition, so that at least is good news.

That being said I'm quite unhappy with the situation if the point reduction counts for anything other than the Olympic Team selection, as the only indication that the event would be weighted was an obscure footnote in the Olympic team selection section of the Athlete Handbook. There was NO publicity of the fact that the event would be weighted differently, which strikes me as a bit ludicrous.

They ought to give out points to the 64 in ME anyhow, it's ridiculous that a 260 person event gives points out to the same placement as a 90 person event, and the seeding could use the help as well due to the broken rating system, especially when foreign fencers are involved. (A Canadian in my pool was seeded 247th at the start of the event and finished in the 64. That ought to be reflected in his seeding in the next US event he enters, but as it stands he'll still be using his shiny C rating for seeding).

And yes, I'm one of the 7 ME fencers stuck off the chart. (How does a finish in the 24 with the top 8 gone not equal a finish in the 32 with them here? 24 + 8 = 32...)