NAC F - Portland, OR

[teacup]

Confirmed entries for the NAC in Portland, OR have been posted on the USFA website.
http://www.usfencing.org/usfa/content/view/2252/99/

[Capt. Slo-mo]

Wow...the Oregon Division isn't fielding a WS Div 1 team? There are enough qualified fencers registered for 3 teams!

[peet]

Wow...the Oregon Division isn't fielding a WS Div 1 team? There are enough qualified fencers registered for 3 teams!

I'll be there are still some entries in the works that haven't made it onto the website yet.

'Cause, umm, y'know, they ummmmm.... they kinda take the entries by fax and then enter all the data by hand. I know that sounds crazy, but believe me, it's true!

Now if only there were some other kind of telecommunications system they could use...

[happy]

Why do they have the DivI 'championship' early on olympic years? Apologies if it's in the handbook, I didn't see it there.

And is it just me or does it seem strange that the DivI championships are only attended by 30-50 people? I understand they all have points and deserve to go, but if you look at it another way, over half of fencers in most events (except WS maybe) will get DivI points from this event. A good day in the pools or one DE gets you DivI points? That's a great deal.

Seems like the USFA is excluding a lot of competent fencers that maybe haven't been able to travel during the year or maybe had a bad tournament when they did. Not saying that the people with points aren't 'elite' and deserve to be there - just that there are a probably a lot of good fencers that won't be there.

[peet]

Why do they have the DivI 'championship' early on olympic years? Apologies if it's in the handbook, I didn't see it there.

I believe the idea is that since it is the last event for olympic team selection, they want to have it done earlier so that the teams can have plenty of time to train for the Olympics.

And is it just me or does it seem strange that the DivI championships are only attended by 30-50 people? I understand they all have points and deserve to go, but if you look at it another way, over half of fencers in most events (except WS maybe) will get DivI points from this event. A good day in the pools or one DE gets you DivI points? That's a great deal.

Seems like the USFA is excluding a lot of competent fencers that maybe haven't been able to travel during the year or maybe had a bad tournament when they did. Not saying that the people with points aren't 'elite' and deserve to be there - just that there are a probably a lot of good fencers that won't be there.

The Div1 champs are the elite championships. In this case, "elite" is defined as anyone who has national points (at least 275, IIRC). It's not for merely "competent" fencers, it's for the tippy top. That's ok, there's the "other" nationals for the rest of us.

And if you're concerned that someone gets an "easy" ride to earning national points at Div1 champs, they all have points already, so no big gift there....


-p

[DJ Apostrophe]

I believe the idea is that since it is the last event for olympic team selection, they want to have it done earlier so that the teams can have plenty of time to train for the Olympics.




The Div1 champs are the elite championships. In this case, "elite" is defined as anyone who has national points (at least 275, IIRC). It's not for merely "competent" fencers, it's for the tippy top. That's ok, there's the "other" nationals for the rest of us.

And if you're concerned that someone gets an "easy" ride to earning national points at Div1 champs, they all have points already, so no big gift there....


-p

Not necessarily do all of them have points already...

• Be on the National Senior NRPS at the regular fee entry deadline for these Championships of
the current season OR
• Earn points at a Division I NAC in the current season OR
• Be in the top 8 of the adjusted* Junior (U-19) NRPS at the regular fee entry deadline for
these Championships of the current season OR
• Be in the top 4 of the adjusted* Cadet (U-16) NRPS at the regular fee entry deadline for these
Championships of the current season OR
• Placed in the top 8 in the previous season Division I-A National Championships OR
• Placed in the top 4 in the previous season Division II National Championships OR
• In men’s epee and women’s epee, be one of three fencers named by the U.S. Modern
Pentathlon Association.

So there can be at least 24 fencers in each event who don't have senior points, plus 3 in each of the epee events, as well as anyone who 'earned points' at a div I nac but isn't 'on the points list' (due to the strength factor fudging that they are doing now).

-w

[C.I.C.]

Not necessarily do all of them have points already...
So there can be at least 24 fencers in each event who don't have senior points, plus 3 in each of the epee events, as well as anyone who 'earned points' at a div I nac but isn't 'on the points list' (due to the strength factor fudging that they are doing now).
-w

Shouldn't that be "there can be at most 24 fencers who don't have senior points...plus 3..."?

Top 8 Juniors + top 4 Cadets + top 8 Div IA + top 4 Div II = 24

Doesn't "at least" denote categorical participation by all 24 of those non-Div I-point-holders (a circumstance that cannot be assumed)?

[KD5MDK]

Given I know of someone who was disappointed they made the 32 at Atlanta but didn't get 275 points, I hope they know this.

[DJ Apostrophe]

Shouldn't that be "there can be at most 24 fencers who don't have senior points...plus 3..."?

Top 8 Juniors + top 4 Cadets + top 8 Div IA + top 4 Div II = 24

Doesn't "at least" denote categorical participation by all 24 of those non-Div I-point-holders (a circumstance that cannot be assumed)?

I see what I said, I kind of tripped over my own words... what I meant is that you could have more than 24 people who weren't 'on the points list' in the event.

I was saying that by these qualification rules, assuming each category is a discrete set, you can add up to 24 people to the list of those who can fence who are not on the senior points list.

In addition to that, you can also have fencers who 'made points' at a NAC this season, but are not 'on the points list' (meaning they earned less than 275 senior points), those people would add to the 24 that we defined earlier.

It is an important distinction because any finish that earns you points at Div 1 national championships will keep you 'on the points list' as you can't earn less than 275 points at Div 1 Nationals (except when you earn 0).

-w

[teacup]

Shouldn't that be "there can be at most 24 fencers who don't have senior points...plus 3..."?

Top 8 Juniors + top 4 Cadets + top 8 Div IA + top 4 Div II = 24

Doesn't "at least" denote categorical participation by all 24 of those non-Div I-point-holders (a circumstance that cannot be assumed)?

The majority of these fencers have division I points already.

[teacup]

Wow...the Oregon Division isn't fielding a WS Div 1 team? There are enough qualified fencers registered for 3 teams!

Late registrations are still being accepted.

It is also surprising that there is no Div I WE team entry from NWFC.

Although having the WE team event on the Monday means one more school day to miss and many of those girls have already missed a lot of school.

[ToucheVerte]

Most of the entries for Div 1 correlate to the criteria mentioned above. There seem to be a couple of anomolies. For example, the Charles brothers are entered, but don't seem to have the results/points as specified. Is there an exemption for elite level fencers?

[foildad]

Most of the entries for Div 1 correlate to the criteria mentioned above. There seem to be a couple of anomolies. For example, the Charles brothers are entered, but don't seem to have the results/points as specified...

You're right. Neither qualified but both are on the confirmed entry list. Very strange.

Is there an exemption for elite level fencers?

There is not. There is also no appeal path.

[teacup]

Most of the entries for Div 1 correlate to the criteria mentioned above. There seem to be a couple of anomolies. For example, the Charles brothers are entered, but don't seem to have the results/points as specified. Is there an exemption for elite level fencers?

Maybe they didn't know it was by invitation only and the error didn't get caught at the National office.

(Of course, maybe they are eligible but their names were omitted from the invitation list posted on the website.)

[whtouche]

Seems like the USFA is excluding a lot of competent fencers that maybe haven't been able to travel during the year or maybe had a bad tournament when they did. Not saying that the people with points aren't 'elite' and deserve to be there - just that there are a probably a lot of good fencers that won't be there.

And what about the occasional fencer who only fences at club and doesn't go to competitions, but beats all the elite level fencers at the club regularly. Shouldn't such people with such skills be able to fence at the highest level by virtue of their ability?

Div 1 nationals is something you earn, if you want to compete you must have the requisite results. There are alot of good fencers who aren't able to come to every competition. I don't understand your point.

[Rockstar44]

Now if only there were some other kind of telecommunications system they could use...

Peet, can you think of one?

[T]

Why do they have the DivI 'championship' early on olympic years? Apologies if it's in the handbook, I didn't see it there.

And is it just me or does it seem strange that the DivI championships are only attended by 30-50 people? I understand they all have points and deserve to go, but if you look at it another way, over half of fencers in most events (except WS maybe) will get DivI points from this event. A good day in the pools or one DE gets you DivI points? That's a great deal.

Seems like the USFA is excluding a lot of competent fencers that maybe haven't been able to travel during the year or maybe had a bad tournament when they did. Not saying that the people with points aren't 'elite' and deserve to be there - just that there are a probably a lot of good fencers that won't be there.

Here is another twist. I know that the top 4 cadets and 8 juniors qualify automatically - even if they don't have any Div 1 points. The reason why that happens is because in most years, the Div 1 national-championships points are used as Group II points in the NEXT year's Cadet/Jr World Team selection (sometimes they are used 100%; sometimes they are cut in half; sometimes they are used as one of the options vs the use of cadet/jr world championship points from the previous season; sometimes they aren't used at all). However, in many years, no one knows whether these points will count for this or not - the cadets/juniors often find out after the event (often, way after the event).

I do not believe that these points should count for cadet teams (although use in the junior selection is acceptable) primarily because if you have a talented 13 year old (let's say they turned 13 on Feb 1 - after all of the Div 1 NACs are over) and they are not even on the radar screen in the cadet event because they have been concentrating on winning SYC, RYC and Youth events. And let's say that the upcoming season is going to be the year they break through on their way to being a top cadet fencer. The top 4 cadet fencers get a handicap and jump start on the next season - just because they got a free pass for entry into the Div 1 Nationals (now, if they have qualified because they have Div 1 points, that entry is earned and they deserve to be there). Note: in the cadet point standings, Div 1 points are Group II points, and count just as much as an international event and (which has already been pointed out above) Div 1 Nationals are a much easier tournament to get points at (than other Div 1 events) - simply because of the low number of entries.

IMHO, there are way too many point scores that count for the cadet fencers already. They are traveling to NACs/Nationals almost every single month for at least 7 months out of the year plus an international competition or three or four. Way too much travel and way too expensive. Now when they put the Div 1 National Championships in April, and if they count for the next year's cadet team, we have points that are nearly a full-year old being used to add to the point totals of an event that can dramatically change over the course of 6 months during these years for young fencers. And there is NO WAY that any cadet fencers that did not earn points at the Div 1 Nationals to make up these 'relatively easier' points.

[Soberin]

If the number of fencers is 64 or lower, do you really get points by winning only one DE as HAPPY states above? Did I read in the Handbook that points are awarded to a certain percentage of the field, which might not correspond to the "top 32" when the field is small?

[T]

If the number of fencers is 64 or lower, do you really get points by winning only one DE as HAPPY states above? Did I read in the Handbook that points are awarded to a certain percentage of the field, which might not correspond to the "top 32" when the field is small?

It's either 64 or the bracket which includes the top 40%. If there are 43 fencers, the top 40% is 17.2 which means that points go through the bracket which includes 17.2 fencers - which means the top 32. If, however, there are 42 people, 40% is 16.8. They drop the decimals (instead of rounding up) so that means the top 16 only get points.

Everyone who wants points should hope that there are at least 43 fencers!

[Soberin]

It's either 64 or the bracket which includes the top 40%. If there are 43 fencers, the top 40% is 17.2 which means that points go through the bracket which includes 17.2 fencers - which means the top 32. If, however, there are 42 people, 40% is 16.8. They drop the decimals (instead of rounding up) so that means the top 16 only get points.

Everyone who wants points should hope that there are at least 43 fencers!

Do you mean " It's either 32 or the bracket which includes the top 40%?"