SYC youth points list update-

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by fencerwallet

This means you are coming off like an over-bearing soccer mom. (With apologies to soccer moms).

LMAO!

MISTER Bower doesn't have any kids...

His complaint here is a general one about not using the best information available to seed a tournament. He believes (and I agree) that if you have valuable seeding info, you should use it.

-m

[DJ Apostrophe]

In the nebulous world of SYCs... this is the second year that SYCs have been around... in this form anyway. I think that's what bbower meant.

A while back when this whole "regional youth" thing started, each region was to have multiple RYCs, and one SRYC (yes, they were Super Regional Youth Circuit events to start)... Initially it was going to rotate as to which RYC was the super for each region each year, and then someone somewhere decided it was unfair.

The next year, it was the YDC who selected one RYC from each region to be the super.

The year after that, all RYCs were considered supers.

Last year was the first year of the current incarnation of bidding for SYCs and the YDC selecting a limited number of them (3-5).

As a result, this is the second year of this system of SYCs.

-w

[passata_sotto]

posted by fencer wallet :

Again, for what? So that a Y10 kid is seeded 12th instead of 15th? In any event, the primary youth event is Nationals (look at the relatively small numbers for the upcoming NAC-F). Does it really make a difference-- I mean, really? Jeez.


I am not sure how familiar you are with the youth program but there is no Nationals for youth. The NAC F and youth competition at Nationals are weighted the same and are equal in the results. The handbook makes it very plain that there are not Nationals for youth in Y10 and Y12.

page 36 of Athlete's Handbook:
"(At this time the Youth 10 and Youth 12 competitions held during the Summer National Championships are not designated as National Championships.)"

[fencerwallet]

Originally Posted by passata_sotto

posted by fencer wallet :

Again, for what? So that a Y10 kid is seeded 12th instead of 15th? In any event, the primary youth event is Nationals (look at the relatively small numbers for the upcoming NAC-F). Does it really make a difference-- I mean, really? Jeez.


I am not sure how familiar you are with the youth program but there is no Nationals for youth. The NAC F and youth competition at Nationals are weighted the same and are equal in the results. The handbook makes it very plain that there are not Nationals for youth in Y10 and Y12.

page 36 of Athlete's Handbook:
"(At this time the Youth 10 and Youth 12 competitions held during the Summer National Championships are not designated as National Championships.)"

I am very familiar with the youth program. And I appreciate (sincerely) that you are trying to be specific when you refer to the Handbook. But please note I have never used the words, "National Championship" when referring to any Y10 event. That said, I still stand by my prior statement: The primary youth event is Nationals- the number of parents who choose to have their child participate in that event as compared to the youth NAC speaks for itself.

As to your comment that they are "weighted the same" and are "equal in the results", by "weigh[t]ing" if you refer to the assessment of points/awarding patches/giving cool jackets... well, sorry, what's your point? Parental whining because Nationals will be seeded "more fairly" because SYC points are included? Really, so what.

[foildad]

Originally Posted by passata_sotto

...because he can beat every Y12 and Y14 in our division...

Well, at least he can beat all the boys.

[foildad]

Originally Posted by DJ Apostrophe

In the nebulous world of SYCs... this is the second year that SYCs have been around... in this form anyway. I think that's what bbower meant.

A while back when this whole "regional youth" thing started, each region was to have multiple RYCs, and one SRYC (yes, they were Super Regional Youth Circuit events to start)... Initially it was going to rotate as to which RYC was the super for each region each year, and then someone somewhere decided it was unfair.

The next year, it was the YDC who selected one RYC from each region to be the super.

The year after that, all RYCs were considered supers.

Last year was the first year of the current incarnation of bidding for SYCs and the YDC selecting a limited number of them (3-5).

As a result, this is the second year of this system of SYCs.

-w

It has never been the case that all RYCs were supers.

[fencerwallet]

Originally Posted by DJ Apostrophe

In the nebulous world of SYCs... this is the second year that SYCs have been around... in this form anyway. I think that's what bbower meant.

A while back when this whole "regional youth" thing started, each region was to have multiple RYCs, and one SRYC (yes, they were Super Regional Youth Circuit events to start)... Initially it was going to rotate as to which RYC was the super for each region each year, and then someone somewhere decided it was unfair.

The next year, it was the YDC who selected one RYC from each region to be the super.

The year after that, all RYCs were considered supers.

Last year was the first year of the current incarnation of bidding for SYCs and the YDC selecting a limited number of them (3-5).

As a result, this is the second year of this system of SYCs.

-w

Or, this is the 2nd year of the multiple "everyone's a winner" SYCs, vs. 3 actual SYCs representing literal "regions".

[oiuyt]

The current 12 region system was started in 05-06 (regions were designated at least by April 2005). This is the third season under the current format with minimal changes (other than bid deadlines and information coming out earlier and earlier each season -- a VERY good thing).

At the start of the 04-05 season there was a motion to make all RYCs points events. After much discussion[/understatement] it failed.

-B

[fencerwallet]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

The current 12 region system was started in 05-06 (regions were designated at least by April 2005). This is the third season under the current format with minimal changes (other than bid deadlines and information coming out earlier and earlier each season -- a VERY good thing).

At the start of the 04-05 season there was a motion to make all RYCs points events. After much discussion[/understatement] it failed.

-B

Good stuff.

[notalent]

Originally Posted by Soberin

The reasoning is as follows. The SYC events were conceived of as "one giant tournament," at least as the points are concerned. After all are completed, the best results count. The intent was for the points to be tallied in time for the SN, never for before the April NAC. Once again, we are also talking about events designed for youth fencing development, not for making a national team. Everyone should relax about any "missed opportunities" for a better seeding for their Y10, or even Y14s for April. The best fencers will do well regardless.

How dare you inject a sense of reality and perspective into other peoples dellusions

[bbower]

Originally Posted by notalent

How dare you inject a sense of reality and perspective into other peoples dellusions

Yes, it's just so delusional to expect an accurate seeding at an event that charges $100 for a 9 year old.

[fencerwallet]

Originally Posted by bbower

Yes, it's just so delusional to expect an accurate seeding at an event that charges $100 for a 9 year old.

Hey, $100 doesn't get you what it used to. I just spent $60 filling up a tank of gas... ... for this week.

[ThatGuy]

Yeah, I'd like to know where I am on the points list. I got to round of 16 in one SYC, finished 11th (Y12), got 24/75 is in the Y14, then got 3rd in the Y12 in another and 21st out of 74 in the Y14. I'm just interested to know, and I've been waiting for a while for them to post the list.

[notalent]

Originally Posted by bbower

Yes, it's just so delusional to expect an accurate seeding at an event that charges $100 for a 9 year old.

Considering that the seeding only sets the pools, yes. Let's look at the "accuracy". SYCs that are widely variable in stregnth. Its best of, so that in years like this one you can race across the country chasing points. This ignores the highly variable nature of youth fencing in the first place. So yes I do think many parents are delusional. No one is holding a gun to the parents heads to do this. 100 bucks too much for you to put up with less than optimal seeding for little johnny, Then stay at home, but considering how many of the parents seem to be trying live through their kids that won't happen.

[Dev]

Originally Posted by notalent

Considering that the seeding only sets the pools, yes. Let's look at the "accuracy". SYCs that are widely variable in stregnth. Its best of, so that in years like this one you can race across the country chasing points. This ignores the highly variable nature of youth fencing in the first place. So yes I do think many parents are delusional. No one is holding a gun to the parents heads to do this. 100 bucks too much for you to put up with less than optimal seeding for little johnny, Then stay at home, but considering how many of the parents seem to be trying live through their kids that won't happen.

Man, it sucks that I'm about to age out of Y10.

[KD5MDK]

Won't have those 7 year olds to beat up anymore...

[mgriffin]

The Youth Points list do not affect seeding for very many youth fencers.
This is from the Athlete's Handbook:
1. A specified number of Ranked Fencers in each weapon in the current national rolling point standings for a particular category shall be entitled to a seeded draw ahead of all other domestic fencers in USFA individual competitions of that category, as follows:

Youth 14 NAC, Nationals Top 12 in Youth 14 points
Youth 12 NAC, Open at Nationals Top 8 in Youth 12 points
Youth 10 NAC, Open at Nationals Top 4 in Youth 10 points

If you really want a better seed, your letter rating has more bearing than your youth points.

As I have pointed out to the parents who have emailed me, I think that it is important that we, as an organization, do what we said we would do (as published in the Athlete's Handbook). If we can reconsider the sections that pertain to youth fencing in the Athlete's Handbook, then why not revisit how we are selecting the Olympic team? And, what message are we sending to youth fencers when we change the rules that we published at the start of the season?

Maureen Griffin
Chair - US Fencing Youth Development Committee

[lauralitz]

One reason I think they should change when the SYC points are posted is for the kids who want to fence up.

When you are already going to an event, you want to get the most experience for your fencer. A couple years ago my daughter was not allowed to fence Y14 (even though the national office said yes, but on the day of the competition said no - they did reimburse me for the added expense since I specifically asked if my daughter was qualified to fence). She got Y12 points at the super.

Long story short - when she was 9 she was a different fencer - the year she was 10 she had an awesome year, but because the first opportunity to get "national" points is the NAC-F (other than the supers which are not posted till after the NAC-F), it is hard for a fencer who has a significant improvement to fence up because of the rule of being on the national points list. Because of this I think they should post points so the NAC-F fencers can fence up. I like that Maureen posted about the seeding depending on the letter more than the national point standing - which then opens up the whole fences at opens situation...

My DD leaves Y12 after this season and I will be happy for that. She just wants to fence. She loves this sport. Am I living through her? I don't know, maybe a little (she does have my eyes). Do I force her to fence? No - there are times I wish she had picked a different sport because of some of the politics until I remember that there will be politics in whatever activity she chooses. I am just happy she has found something she loves. Do I think that fencing will get her a free ride to college? No - but it has taught her how to work hard to achieve her goals. Do I think she will go to the Olympics? I look at how much the families that are on the Olympic path have to put out financially for their fencer and secretly hope my daughter does not choose that path. Will I support her if she does choose that path? Yes - but we will cross that bridge when we come to it.

LL

[berghouse]

I agree with MGriffin's post that we can't change the rules this year. I also agree with her point that the letter rating has more bearing than youth points.

I do perceive although, that SYC points are a very good secondary level of assessing a fencer's talent for purposes of seeding. This is very true for Y10 and Y12 fencers. I do not want to get into the debate of "well they are only 9 years old and who really cares," which is entirely true on the entire sport basis, but the parents of those 9 year olds and the 9 year olds care a lot. Why disprespect the future of US fencing (the 9 year olds and the parents who have the check books)?

If you look at all of the SYC's, RYC's and other Y10 and Y12 MF events in the United States this year, the only place to have a legitimate shot to get a rating in those events is in the San Francisco Bay Area. I did not look back to exactly confirm, but I believe that with one exception every Y12 MF Bay Cup, Bay Area RYC and San Jose SYC were rated events. I also believe that no other Y12 MF event in the entire United States was a rated event. Because of this fact, there are some very good Y12 MF fencers, outside the Bay Area, that do not have ratings equal to their ability. The above analysis is based upon my knowlege of youth mens foil, but the same analysis applies to the all the other weapons and includes the women. The best chance for those fencers to get a rating is at a NAC or the summer national's. Portland is the first NAC for the 10's and 12's. The logic is somewhat convoluted that "We will use your rating, which you will have an opportunity to achieve at Portland, as a seeding protocol to get your rating."

The other fact is that rating's are often times the result of "luck" as attested to the present 5 page thread on this site.

SYC points are actually very telling for youth fencers who have sudden and massive changes in their ability. The fact that we have more SYC's, allowing fencer's to show their ability without having to travel a great distance, also gives those fencer's a chance for a measurable statistic of their achievements. Not a perfect system, as each SYC had a different level of difficulty, but better than no measure. The present system for seeding at the spring NAC heavily relies on last years result for seeding, for Y10 & Y12 events, unless they have cheated and fenced in open events. But we all know that is a whole other thread.

I am the parent of a Y12 mens foilist. At the spring NAC in Sacramento, 3 of the top foilists were in his pool. This was a situation that would have been avoided if SYC points were used. Is this issue essentially a tempest in a teapot? Yes!!!!! But when you are a new parent with a new fencer, and you have yet to learn that sometimes you have to suck it up and accept the inequities inherent in any high level athletic endeavor, why abuse them with a system that could be greatly improved with an acceptable amount of last minute work.

I am all for keeping the present rules intact, but I am also for making reasonable changes that promote the welfare of the fencers.

It would be great for the sport if every person in a position of authority would ask themselves the following question, "Is this rule in the best interest of the fencers, and is it possible to initiate future changes (if able to be achieved with a reasonable amount of work) in the rule that would better serve the fencers?"