The Future of US Fencing

[teacup]

Currently the USFA is booking three to four day events in large convention centers until 2014, but what if due to higher energy costs and the current economic climate attendance declines instead of growing?

Americans are changing the way they travel and live due to higher energy prices, won’t fencing also be affected?

Will national events events be only those for those with unlimited funds or those striving for nationals teams? Fencing is an expensive sport but will it become even more of an elitist sport due to these higher costs? Will shipping and travel costs increase so dramatically that none of the national events are profitable?

Will those traveling to international events be only those with unlimited funds or drive? Should team selection criteria be reassessed to reach out to athletes who cannot afford to travel extensively?

Will economic conditions force the USFA to become more regionalized?

What is that future of fencing? No matter who is elected, will the USFA be forced to change?

[noodle]

Originally Posted by teacup

Currently the USFA is booking three to four day events in large convention centers until 2012, but what if due to higher energy costs and the current economic climate attendance declines instead of growing?

Americans are changing the way they travel and live due to higher energy prices, won’t fencing also be affected?

Will national events events be only those for those with unlimited funds or those striving for nationals teams? Fencing is an expensive sport but will it become even more of an elitist sport due to these higher costs? Will shipping and travel costs increase so dramatically that none of the national events are profitable?

Will those traveling to international events be only those with unlimited funds or drive? Should team selection criteria be reassessed to reach out to athletes who cannot afford to travel extensively?

Will economic conditions force the USFA to become more regionalized?

What is that future of fencing? No matter who is elected, will the USFA be forced to change?

you could make the same argument for any sport in which its competitions require it to travel. so, basically, most any non-mainstream sport, which also includes martial arts in general.

with respect to the booking times, the USFA has a while to go before its in trouble again. events are currently pretty large, and i for one wouldn't mind seeing smaller fields in d1 events, and wouldn't mind, if it comes to it, more events at d2/3 events. higher fuel costs will just make d1's more elite, *hopefully* make d2/3's more accessible because of more events, allowing more national-level bang for the buck

[Guymelef]

These are all good questions, which probably should have been asked earlier by more powerful people in fencing. Even before the cost of energy rose to its extent now, there were questions about the expense of tournaments and the economic squeeze on lower-income fencers.

At the same time the USFA has made some questionable decisions about tournament venues. In the six years I have been going to national tournaments, particularly the Summer Nationals, I have seen the sites change from places like Greenville, Charlotte, and Austin to Miami and San Jose. While the former may not be glarmous--certainly Greenville had its own unique problems--they were affordable for both the USFA and the fencers. Another likely contributing factor to the USFA's problems was the limitation of the Div II/III field at nationals. Not everyone starts as a squishy, I certainly didn't, and I thought that the open field was a way to get more teenage and adult fencers involved with the sport. While it may be a drain on the better fencers and the referees to eliminate all those 'cupcakes' they are still paying customers and may be potential high-level fencers or referees.

No matter the outcome in the election (USFA or national) there is a lot the powers at be could and should do to address your concerns, which are all our concerns. Very few of us have unlimited incomes. More centralized locations for national tournaments is one idea. Places like Overland Park are far from interesting tourist locations, but they are less expensive. I know a lot of fencers here on the east coast who will not attend this year's Summer Nationals because it is too far and too expensive.

I certainly support our elite fencers and wish them all luck in the Olympics. The better they do the more attention our sport receives and the less likely it will be eliminated from the Olympics roster. Notwithstanding, there is a fundamental limiting factor: it's not played with a ball. No matter what changes you make, there is no making fencing television friendly. From top to bottom fencing relies on fencers. To quote Heinlein: 'it is the only sport where the competitors pay and the spectators watch free.' I, like you, don't want to see it become a petit divertisement for the bourgeousie. We need a large, competitive proving ground of very different fencers with very different styles. This is the only way we can be prepared for our next international fencing rival: the very populous China.

[HDG]

Originally Posted by Guymelef

I, like you, don't want to see it become a petit divertisement for the bourgeousie.

Become? What is it now?

[teacup]

Originally Posted by noodle

you could make the same argument for any sport in which its competitions require it to travel. so, basically, most any non-mainstream sport, which also includes martial arts in general.

I could be wrong but I don't think all alternate sports have as much large equipment that needs to be shipped as fencing. Some may but others don't. Nor do all competitors have to travel with the same amount of equipment.

(I heard that pole vaulters pay $500.00 or more to ship their poles to competitions. Maybe we shouldn't complain about a $15.00 extra bag charge. )

All alternate sports do not set up in convention centers but rather use existing athletic facilities. This cuts down on shipping costs and set up times for the organization, though not necessarily diminishing travel costs for the competitors.

I realize that some of these things were researched by the tournament task force committee but I do not know if they were calculated with the current higher current energy costs.

[Mr.MightyMouse]

Originally Posted by teacup

I could be wrong but I don't think all alternate sports have as much large equipment that needs to be shipped as fencing. Some may but others don't. Nor do all competitors have to travel with the same amount of equipment.

(I heard that pole vaulters pay $500.00 or more to ship their poles to competitions. Maybe we shouldn't complain about a $15.00 extra bag charge. )

All alternate sports do not set up in convention centers but rather use existing athletic facilities. This cuts down on shipping costs and set up times for the organization, though not necessarily diminishing travel costs for the competitors.

I realize that some of these things were researched by the tournament task force committee but I do not know if they were calculated with the current higher current energy costs.

My friends in downhill are taken back by rising equipment costs and gas prices - yes they drive a lot since airlines do unspeakable things to the skis, 10 to 15 pairs of which you have to check in.
Ironically few of them are getting bumped from North American Juniour circuit, due to warm winters in Europe and a lot of EUropeans coming here.
Now, these are amazing kids whose parents have routinely paid upwards of $20K p/a for private boarding schools; altho' some had scolarships.
Their salvation is equipment sponsorships - sometimes turning to lesser companies for free stuff; adopting smaller hills as their home ones, and unimaginable carpool schedules involving r.v.'s, trailers, hatchbacks; etc.

[Peach]

San Jose is hardly a new venue for USFA sites. I remember going to one in San Jose over a decade ago.