USFA accepts Election

[dberke]

So what happened to the projector in Richmond? What stopped the BC from using projectors further on?

I thought that was answered in an earlier post...

The use of the projector was essentially a "proof of concept", and while it was a good test, I think the general feeling was that the lighting conditions at the NACs were so poor for the projector that it was (at the current time) not the best solution. That's what led to the discussion about using LCD screens instead.

Also, since the BC hasn't officially switched to Fencing Time, they don't get all the nice display features since XSeed doesn't support it. Until they switch, I expect use of the projectors to be limited to times when we're testing out new versions of FT.

Dan

[mgriff]

So what happened to the projector in Richmond? What stopped the BC from using projectors further on?

That big screen is expensive, as is the high-end projector we'd need, whether we rent or buy.

Projecting pools and tables and results would be nice--I don't know anyone who doesn't like the idea--but given the current cash flow problems, I suspect that paying honoraria and per diems to referees and other officials for tournaments they've already worked is a higher priority, as it should be. (Spoken, of course, as one who's still owed checks for Atlanta and Charlotte.)

And as Dan explained, there are still technical decisions to be made about the best options, not to mention that until the USFA figures out its cash flow, unbudgeted five-figure expenditures for new equipment are just not going to happen.

Mary

[KD5MDK]

In the threads here about the NACs where the projectors were tried, the general concensus always seemed to be "Nice idea, but it was impossible/too hard to read".

[teacup]

In the threads here about the NACs where the projectors were tried, the general concensus always seemed to be "Nice idea, but it was impossible/too hard to read".

Yes, plus they were only visible from a certain area. Monitors around the room would be much better.

[Capt. Slo-mo]

LCD monitors with a wi-fi connection could be the ticket.

A number of the Euro meets use either plasma or LCD (less reflectivity issues with LCDs)...but I think they normally use Engarde for their software. (?)

Even better might be if the hosting Convention Center A/V staff could be convinced to set it up for a reasonable price.

[KatyFencing]

Tracy was never considered very seriously as a candidate. I talked with several nominating committee members and before they even talked with her their response was she did not have enough experience.

On using screens for NACs, that was used for the NCAA championships hosted in Houston both years, and the screen was donated in one or both of these occasions.

There were several other ideas that were killed for the Houston NAC that were being provided as a service by the LOC. One was special handicapped vehicles for the wheelchair athletes competing. There was also going to be a live webcam of the event. These were being provided to the USFA at no charge by the LOC, and were not allowed by the USFA.

Please make certain that you clearly understand all of the issues directly having an effect on your fencing before making your choice. Be an informed voter.

[downunder]

What software do the Germans use for their extremely large and complicated two day cadet events? (These are not FIE events.)

A number of the Euro meets use either plasma or LCD (less reflectivity issues with LCDs)...but I think they normal use Engarde for their software. (?)

I refereed a cadet event in Jena last season and they had a few big plasma screens set up. They weren't using engarde but another program that i'd not seen before and another application to send it to the screens via wires.

The guy on the computer didn't speak much english or french so I couldn't get much out of him/steal his program.

[Allen Evans]

Even better might be if the hosting Convention Center A/V staff could be convinced to set it up for a reasonable price.

Better? Yes. Likely? Hmmm.....

[brtech]

You guys have clearly never worked trade shows.

Any proposal that involves an on-site vendor of any kind is laughably out of whack with financial reality. I don't have a typical price sheet handy, but as I recall, a 24" monitor of the sort we are talking about is probably $200 each per day, and may have something else for set up and tear down.

WiFi for example, for the events we hold, is probably several thousand dollars.

In most cases, we could get away with bringing our own, but we would need something pretty substantial to hold the monitors. You really do need 2-4 of them per location, and if you want 3-4 locations, you need 6-16 of them. Then you need something to drive them. The "right" answer is some small PC or mac with multihead driver, but that's probably more expensive than a standalone cheapo PC with wifi. Doubles the cost of the monitor of course. The stand is custom, so that's another hundred or two per monitor I suspect.
You need a case that can hold them in shipping, and of course we have to pay shipping.

I think we could probably pull this off for twenty grand. Maybe per year, maybe 20 the first year and 10-15K from then on. Still needs software. That's extra. If you pay for it to be developed, it's maybe another 15K. Also needs FT or something else new. Remember, with XSeed, the strip numbers aren't in the printout, they are handwritten.

I've thoroughly looked into Peter's SMS idea. I thought about it nearly a year ago. It's doable. It's even more expensive than the above, but its got so much value, we can probably charge for it.

[mfp]

Executive Committee Revised Election Procedures

http://www.usfencing.org/usfa/compon...tdown/id,1767/

[oso97]

Tracy was never considered very seriously as a candidate.

Incorrect. Tracy received the same full deliberation, consideration, interviews and opportunity to present her case as every other candidate.

Its not nice to lie. The members of the Nominating Committee are getting tired of the slanderous remarks. And none of us would have said this. Besides, what events have YOU attended where you've had the opportunity to speak to a member of the Nominating Committee, much less multiple ones? You didn't even show up to your own Sectionals.

[KD5MDK]

I refereed a cadet event in Jena last season and they had a few big plasma screens set up. They weren't using engarde but another program that i'd not seen before and another application to send it to the screens via wires.

The guy on the computer didn't speak much english or french so I couldn't get much out of him/steal his program.

Was it this Polish program? http://www.mat-fencing.com/MASKofferEng.html
It looks very pretty, but not so clear on details, like how it would integrate with our current procedures (like classifications, divisions and clubs, etc). Worth looking into, but last time I asked people no one I could reach had used it.

[lewis]

ok, I am not so in the know and a lot out of pocket for fencing and the issue of the big screens is not going to get my vote one way or the other. I am more concerned that the refs don't get paid, that the politics of reffing seem to me to have too much influence on the outcome of tournaments, that the 'performance enhancements' don't get paid, that fencing is becoming a rich kid sport and a paid ticket to an elite college, and that there is way too much 'luck' involved in fencing for the price and time committment. I also agree that the majority of the usfa athletes are not treated with respect by the usfa, and it also seems to me that not even the majority of the so called 'elite' athletes are treated with respect. It is easy to see why the college kids don't come back; first it is too expensive once mom and dad don't pay and second college tournaments are more fun, the fencers are treated with more respect and dignity, even those without olympic or team aspirations.

I see a lot of deep feelings, animosity and bickering right on this forum - as I understand it each candidate is stand alone - so that we are voting for each person for each position. I want to know how these candidates are going to deal with each other if there is a mix and match - I am tired of feeling that the usfa is black box into which I send money and hope for the best. The athletes handbook, the bylaws, the team selection criteria, the determination of who gets grants and who doesn't, the athletes who get reimbursed and those who don't, the choice of designated vs nondesignated world cups, the tournament modifiers, all these effect the fencers profoundly and yet there seems no logic or reason behind it. And as for the rank and file, those with no team or fancy college aspirations the far flung tournaments in expensive cities, the focus on the team 'points' events, etc. don't seem to me to foster the sport. I think there should be more DIVII, DIVIII and DIVIA events. I also think there should be team events associated with these at every NAC that has the events. I think there should be 'points' awarded for these events and a entry fee waiver for winner and team winner. Team events are fun. The team events should be less restricted - and go back to division or even section.

I am looking for a candidate or slate of candidates that will make me feel like there is some plan for the future and that the fencers, all of them, matter.

Of course I only have one vote.

[Faire]

In most cases, we could get away with bringing our own, but we would need something pretty substantial to hold the monitors. You really do need 2-4 of them per location, and if you want 3-4 locations, you need 6-16 of them. Then you need something to drive them. The "right" answer is some small PC or mac with multihead driver, but that's probably more expensive than a standalone cheapo PC with wifi. Doubles the cost of the monitor of course. The stand is custom, so that's another hundred or two per monitor I suspect.
You need a case that can hold them in shipping, and of course we have to pay shipping.

When would it be economical for the USFA to establish a fixed site for NACs and stop roaming the countryside like a travelling circus? The site that might also be used for year round training, workshops and camps. At some point the membership should be large enough to support such a site and allow the USFA to stop roaming and focus on fencing.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

You mean other than working through the system to help the USFA produce a Junior World Champion, a 2/3 of a World Champion Jr Team, and an Olympian?

Last I checked these sort of things were pretty important in the scheme of things.

Does those things alone mean that she's qualified? No.

But kick in a Doctorate degree in Business Mgmt with specialization in Knowledge Management in the non-profit sector... and I think you've got pretty positive traction.

So does that mean anyone who is a parent of a successful fencer (or 2) is qualified to run the USFA. I'm not saying that it doesn't take hard work to get your kids to the top but it is pretty unrelated.

[T]

In Miami last summer, I was ready to demo the new support in Fencing Time for projector systems. At the end of one day, I hooked it up to the projector that Blue Gauntlet was using to project some of their specials on the wall behind their booth. I set up a display cycling through a DE tableau and strip assignments.

Once set up, I went over to the BC and introduced myself to Kalle and told her to look at the wall. She said she had noticed the display and wanted to discuss it.

This sounds more like Dan's initiative and not Kalle's. I suspect that no matter who Dan approached about this they would have done similarly. There is no special talent in curiosity.

Over the summer, Kalle drove the organization and logistics required to get us set up in Tucson. I provided input on hardware needs and logistics, and everything was all set by October.

In a van? Drove? I assume the hardware was one of the computers that the USFA takes to all NACs, and you provided the software, and the projector. I still don't see how this special event was so special on the part of Kalle.

For the two days of the NAC that I wasn't fencing, I was on the BC platform shadowing an event or two each day in FT. XSeed still ran the events, and I just copied the scores into FT as they came in. It also gave us a chance to compare how FT did things (like seeding) to XSeed. In addition, I got training on working with XSeed and learned the current workflow so that I could see where FT would improve things (and where XSeed was more efficient.)

Again, this is product development for you. Perhaps a worthwhile endeavor (I'm not arguing that) but hardly something that requisites Kalle as having presidential qualities.

The point that should be clear is that changes are in the pipeline, and Kalle certainly has been instrumental in taking that first step.

Dan

Not that I want to rain on your parade because I sincerely think your parade to be worthwhile (so please don't take this comment as a reflection on your hard work).

What I see in your description is product development on your part. I have been to numerous world cups in Germany, Hungary, France, Italy that use either projection systems in a dark corner or LED screens strategically located in several corners. Some have used something besides a white background on a white screen to highlight the text a bit. Pool sheets are posted almost immediately (if not live), followed shortly by DE tables. These screens are rotated through every 20 or 30 seconds.

This is being done now with live results posted to the internet by Ophardt Team and other companies. Did anyone see the live scoring from the Jr. World Championships? You could see these screens at every strip and they were streamed live over the internet. I remember the Saber world cup held a few years ago in NYC that had their scores posted live (thanks, NY Fencers Club) at least in the finals and maybe earlier.

I applaud Dan for his efforts but perhaps I just can't make the same leap that he does that somehow Dan making the offer to Kalle and her being curious makes her necessarily presidential material. It seems to me that Dan took the "first step" not her.

I still have an issue with people stating all of the reasons why things can't be done. Quit stating the obstacles and quit wallowing in a bureacratic framework that is unresponsive to changes in our sport and changes in technology. This stuff has already been done in other countries and other sports. We may need to modify it to make it suit our purposes and our budget but it can be done. The USFA needs to update not only its technology but also its organizational structure, processes and how decisions are made.

We need to work on a marketing plan that raises awareness and helps the fundraising efforts. In a different thread, there were numerous ideas about this. Do they ever get transferred from a discussion board into a board room? We keep rehashing the same ideas year after year (although the specific technology involved has advanced). We don't need to keep re-creating the wheel. I have a sneaky suspicion that some other fencing federation has done this before. This time, let's try and take a second step and see what happens. We might actually get where we are going.

Do we need to plan? Absolutely. Try things out? Definitely. Make modifications? If necessary. Evaluate the effectiveness of our decisions and the plans implemented? Certainly.

I'm not advocating implementing anything that has not been thought out or anything that exceeds budgetary constraints. That would be absurd (although I think we need to start operating under a different model). But the thinking phase doesn't need to take 4 or 5 years (as with online registration and membership application process). (BTW, I heard the USOC story about online registration and some internet portal idea about 4 or 5 years ago.)

[T]

ok, I am not so in the know and a lot out of pocket for fencing and the issue of the big screens is not going to get my vote one way or the other. I am more concerned that the refs don't get paid, that the politics of reffing seem to me to have too much influence on the outcome of tournaments, that the 'performance enhancements' don't get paid, that fencing is becoming a rich kid sport and a paid ticket to an elite college, and that there is way too much 'luck' involved in fencing for the price and time committment. I also agree that the majority of the usfa athletes are not treated with respect by the usfa, and it also seems to me that not even the majority of the so called 'elite' athletes are treated with respect. It is easy to see why the college kids don't come back; first it is too expensive once mom and dad don't pay and second college tournaments are more fun, the fencers are treated with more respect and dignity, even those without olympic or team aspirations.

I see a lot of deep feelings, animosity and bickering right on this forum - as I understand it each candidate is stand alone - so that we are voting for each person for each position. I want to know how these candidates are going to deal with each other if there is a mix and match - I am tired of feeling that the usfa is black box into which I send money and hope for the best. The athletes handbook, the bylaws, the team selection criteria, the determination of who gets grants and who doesn't, the athletes who get reimbursed and those who don't, the choice of designated vs nondesignated world cups, the tournament modifiers, all these effect the fencers profoundly and yet there seems no logic or reason behind it. And as for the rank and file, those with no team or fancy college aspirations the far flung tournaments in expensive cities, the focus on the team 'points' events, etc. don't seem to me to foster the sport. I think there should be more DIVII, DIVIII and DIVIA events. I also think there should be team events associated with these at every NAC that has the events. I think there should be 'points' awarded for these events and a entry fee waiver for winner and team winner. Team events are fun. The team events should be less restricted - and go back to division or even section.

I am looking for a candidate or slate of candidates that will make me feel like there is some plan for the future and that the fencers, all of them, matter.

Of course I only have one vote.

Lewis, I couldn't agree more and my frustration with the kinds of things that you see occuring is exactly why I decided to run for president. Check out our website (address below), you will see most of the items that you want to see addressed mentioned in our top 5 priorities. Specific proposals are also suggested.

[CadetVet]

As someone said earlier - bigger font, more locations, but good, old-fashioned paper. We've got a lot better things to spend a few grand on.

CV

You guys have clearly never worked trade shows.

Any proposal that involves an on-site vendor of any kind is laughably out of whack with financial reality. I don't have a typical price sheet handy, but as I recall, a 24" monitor of the sort we are talking about is probably $200 each per day, and may have something else for set up and tear down.

WiFi for example, for the events we hold, is probably several thousand dollars.

In most cases, we could get away with bringing our own, but we would need something pretty substantial to hold the monitors. You really do need 2-4 of them per location, and if you want 3-4 locations, you need 6-16 of them. Then you need something to drive them. The "right" answer is some small PC or mac with multihead driver, but that's probably more expensive than a standalone cheapo PC with wifi. Doubles the cost of the monitor of course. The stand is custom, so that's another hundred or two per monitor I suspect.
You need a case that can hold them in shipping, and of course we have to pay shipping.

I think we could probably pull this off for twenty grand. Maybe per year, maybe 20 the first year and 10-15K from then on. Still needs software. That's extra. If you pay for it to be developed, it's maybe another 15K. Also needs FT or something else new. Remember, with XSeed, the strip numbers aren't in the printout, they are handwritten.

I've thoroughly looked into Peter's SMS idea. I thought about it nearly a year ago. It's doable. It's even more expensive than the above, but its got so much value, we can probably charge for it.

[T]

So does that mean anyone who is a parent of a successful fencer (or 2) is qualified to run the USFA. I'm not saying that it doesn't take hard work to get your kids to the top but it is pretty unrelated.

I feel like I am addressing a bunch of these posts all at once but...

First of all, the fact that my 2 daughters are at the top of the w.epee point standings is not irrelevant -- especially when you consider that I was not a passive parent that stood on the sidelines. I was intimately involved in coaching and management of their careers. This involved regularly attending RYC events (when RYCs were quite young), local tournaments, and almost every single NAC for the last 6 years and numerous world cups and world championships. I was able to do this primarily because I have been involved in fencing for 30 years - long before my kids were born and had a somewhat successful fencing career myself. In addition, I made a scientific analysis of the factors that go into creating successful athletes (I'll let their performance be the validation of the model).

Being president of the USFA takes a multitude of skills. Absolutely no doubt about it. Do you need to have intimate knowledge of the sport to do it? I would argue that you do. To not have that kind of knowledge means that you constantly have to rely on others to feed you information. The key word here is 'constantly'. One only needs to look as far as our current president to know what I mean. I'm not saying that a president shouldn't seek advice from others that have more specific knowledge about things like technology for instance, but by not having a well-rounded knowledge of the sport leaves you open to persuasion by political power plays from individuals that do not necessarily have the best interest of the sport in mind (again, I point to the current administration). This is also true with someone who has a relatively passive personality who works under a model of trying to get along with everyone so that everyone is happy. While this sounds like a great game plan, I have never seen it work effectively. The truth is that not everyone is going to be happy and there is nothing that you can do to make it so.

My experience as a Division Head in the College of Business where I control and maintain budgets, hire and evaluate staff, develop course schedules, and deal with classroom logistics, etc. is directly applicable to being a successful president. I have also chaired and participated in many committees that focused from course curriculuum to community service and marketing. In addition, in the past I was Director of Research & Technology for a local branch of a national nonprofit organizations where I was directly responsible for raising millions of dollars in program-specific grant money and contracts as well as responsible for overseeing the computer network, maintaining our customer database, and evaluating programs (that were funded by the grants). Top this experience off with my research background in Knowledge Management in the nonprofit sector (which is something that the USFA needs desperately) and it seems to me that fencing-wise, skill-wise, and knowledge-wise, I provide quite a dynamic candidate.

I have thorough knowledge of the sport from beginning to end. I do not claim to be an expert in the referee area or the bout committee area but I have put on those hats numerous times in my tenure and have a good grasp of the skills that it takes. Back before tournaments were regularly run on computers, I developed an Access database program to run local tournaments in the S. Texas Division. To say that just because I have not been involved in the political structure of the USFA means that I will not be able to 'hit the ground running' is to suggest that I've never heard of the sport before and couldn't possibly grasp the issues involved in online registration or NAC projection systems or whatever over a relatively short time period.

In fact, I would suggest that being involved in the political structure would be more likely to result in fixed ideas of how to accomplish things because that is the way they have always been done. It is not uncommon for big corporations to hire a CEO from outside the organization for just this purpose.

So while I have not been involved in the USFA political structure, I believe what I have listed above more than qualifies me for the office of President.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

I feel like I am addressing a bunch of these posts all at once but...

First of all, the fact that my 2 daughters are at the top of the w.epee point standings is not irrelevant -- especially when you consider that I was not a passive parent that stood on the sidelines. I was intimately involved in coaching and management of their careers. This involved regularly attending RYC events (when RYCs were quite young), local tournaments, and almost every single NAC for the last 6 years and numerous world cups and world championships. I was able to do this primarily because I have been involved in fencing for 30 years - long before my kids were born and had a somewhat successful fencing career myself. In addition, I made a scientific analysis of the factors that go into creating successful athletes (I'll let their performance be the validation of the model).

Being president of the USFA takes a multitude of skills. Absolutely no doubt about it. Do you need to have intimate knowledge of the sport to do it? I would argue that you do. To not have that kind of knowledge means that you constantly have to rely on others to feed you information. The key word here is 'constantly'. One only needs to look as far as our current president to know what I mean. I'm not saying that a president shouldn't seek advice from others that have more specific knowledge about things like technology for instance, but by not having a well-rounded knowledge of the sport leaves you open to persuasion by political power plays from individuals that do not necessarily have the best interest of the sport in mind (again, I point to the current administration). This is also true with someone who has a relatively passive personality who works under a model of trying to get along with everyone so that everyone is happy. While this sounds like a great game plan, I have never seen it work effectively. The truth is that not everyone is going to be happy and there is nothing that you can do to make it so.

My experience as a Division Head in the College of Business where I control and maintain budgets, hire and evaluate staff, develop course schedules, and deal with classroom logistics, etc. is directly applicable to being a successful president. I have also chaired and participated in many committees that focused from course curriculuum to community service and marketing. In addition, in the past I was Director of Research & Technology for a local branch of a national nonprofit organizations where I was directly responsible for raising millions of dollars in program-specific grant money and contracts as well as responsible for overseeing the computer network, maintaining our customer database, and evaluating programs (that were funded by the grants). Top this experience off with my research background in Knowledge Management in the nonprofit sector (which is something that the USFA needs desperately) and it seems to me that fencing-wise, skill-wise, and knowledge-wise, I provide quite a dynamic candidate.

I have thorough knowledge of the sport from beginning to end. I do not claim to be an expert in the referee area or the bout committee area but I have put on those hats numerous times in my tenure and have a good grasp of the skills that it takes. Back before tournaments were regularly run on computers, I developed an Access database program to run local tournaments in the S. Texas Division. To say that just because I have not been involved in the political structure of the USFA means that I will not be able to 'hit the ground running' is to suggest that I've never heard of the sport before and couldn't possibly grasp the issues involved in online registration or NAC projection systems or whatever over a relatively short time period.

Okay, sure being the parent of two very successful fencer is incredibly hard work and gives you a different perspective of the USFA and FIE. But does that honestly mean having parented an Olympian counts as a real qualifier for the job? Should Becca Ward's parents be considered candidates because of the success of their daughter?

In fact, I would suggest that being involved in the political structure would be more likely to result in fixed ideas of how to accomplish things because that is the way they have always been done. It is not uncommon for big corporations to hire a CEO from outside the organization for just this purpose.

So while I have not been involved in the USFA political structure, I believe what I have listed above more than qualifies me for the office of President.

So basically you're Barak and the NC Slate is Hillary?? Experience when trying to take over a poorly functioning system works both for you and against you. Either you don't have the experience to run the system or you're part of the problem. However, it's pretty obvious that the NC Slate are the select members working in the current USFA who have the experience to create meaningful change while also not being tied to the Old Guard.