Age identification of fencers

[the ancient one]

Perhaps tournaments for age ~15 and under should be set up some criteria other than age.

Perhaps:
Years of competitive fencing (can be included on the membership card)
or
Height
or
weight-like boxing and wrestling

Something that can be determined objectively on site and not rely on documents.

I was just wondering after looking at the photo at www.youthfencing.org

[lewis]

Could have the sticks and paint lines like for the roller coasters. No age info necessary.

[keith]

Originally Posted by peet

That's exactly what I'm suggesting. Earned rating reports* could be submitted through the system, which would spit them back out if they don't conform to the rules, before they even get in front of human eyeballs at the N.O.

Such a system would undoubtedly be a good thing - although what you do to offenders is still the issue.

Occasionally a better database/system is presented as being a solution, which it isn't*.

*It is a minimum requirement for a national organisation like the USFA.

[KD5MDK]

A better business process is frequently a solution, and many processes are impossible without certain enabling technologies.

[keith]

Originally Posted by KD5MDK

A better business process is frequently a solution, and many processes are impossible without certain enabling technologies.

My head hurts after reading that.

Edit: but to take it seriously. Enabling technologies are not free. While an improved USFA database would certainly make many things easier it is not a requirement for rules enforcement, and it certainly isn't a cost effective tool for rules enforcement.

[freerider258]

Originally Posted by the ancient one

I was just wondering after looking at the photo at www.youthfencing.org

Hmmm... maybe not the best picture to display youth fencing?

[peet]

Originally Posted by keith

Edit: but to take it seriously. Enabling technologies are not free. While an improved USFA database would certainly make many things easier it is not a requirement for rules enforcement, and it certainly isn't a cost effective tool for rules enforcement.

It could be cost effective depending on how strictly we want the rules enforced. For instance, it most certainly isn't cost effective to have the national office staff check the age eligibility of every participant in every (sanctioned) event around the country by hand. I estimate that could be as many as 100,000 records to check per year.

But, a computer can do that kind of volume of work for lots less money than it would cost to pay humans to do it.

Consider also that the system we describe would be used for lots of other things as well, so the money spent would buy more things than just rules enforcement.

I agree that technology is not a "solution" in the sense that it will relieve humans of responsibility. However, technology can be a tool to make a human's job easier, and when the job is easier, the human can do more, and do it better.

-p

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by peet

I agree that technology is not a "solution" in the sense that it will relieve humans of responsibility. However, technology can be a tool to make a human's job easier, and when the job is easier, the human can do more, and do it better.

With apologies to BASF:

"At askFRED, we don't make a lot of the tournaments you fence. We make a lot of the tournaments you fence better."

-B

[peet]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

With apologies to BASF:

"At askFRED, we don't make a lot of the tournaments you fence. We make a lot of the tournaments you fence better."

-B

LOL!

Now if only FRED could make you fence a lot of the tournaments you fence better!

-p

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

Originally Posted by teacup

Yes, you are totally correct some parents/coaches push some kids too much but some twelve year old girls are mature physically. I still think in most cases, it is preferable for a 12 year old girl to fence in a women's open rather than a mixed Y14 against six foot tall 14 year old boys that are all over the place.

Now, if JEC would weigh and state a professional opinion on the neurological development of kids/teenagers we would be greatly helped.

However, a different solution:
Let fencers of vastly different sizes fence in the same event at the same competition, but do not let them fence in bouts against each other.

One could have a Mix-Epee competition allowing all comers, irrespective of age, gender, rating, and competitive years. However, when the poules generate bouts which are mismatched then those bouts are simply not fought. Obviously, fencers will have different numbers of bouts in a given bout, but that is dealt with by ranking fencers according to wins/bouts (firstly) and touche differential/bouts (secondly). Run sufficient number of poules so that all fencers get at least 6 real bouts. If one age/gender/whatever combination constitutes the vast majority of all entrants, then one might use a cutoff rule stating that fencers that have fenced more than 8 poule bouts do not take part in the next round of poules. Then, separate fencers according to age/gender/whatever criteria, and construct DE tables for one group. Obviously, some fencers will be qualified to more than one DE table.

Mismatched in this context must be objectively defined somehow. How about not more that 2 age+gender slots difference? A male junior fencing against a senior male would be one slot difference, OK. A female junior fencing against a male senior would be 2 slot differences, still OK. A female cadet fencing a male senior would be 3 slot differences, not okay.


Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson