College Fencing

[MyrddinsPrecint]

IMHO - N-teen; if you see yourself fencing at a high level past college, and high meaning internationally - I can not see any club program advancing you properly during extremely important formative years; as probably 50-60% of NCAA ones as well; altho' as been pointed out, there are always exceptions to the rule.

If you plan on fencing internationally when you get out of college and aren't there yet, college is not the best/easiest way to get there, regardless of the program. Possible, but not optimal.

If you're already fencing internationally, you can't effectively train, compete, and take college classes--- that's why so many college-age Olympians take time off near the Olympics.

Anyone who's currently an E shouldn't be planning for international competition ANYWAY. It's putting the cart way before the horse.

[Mr.MightyMouse]

I've heard of elite fencers who think fencing NCAA will degrade their performance.

Correct - but we're talkin' cream of the crop, Junior World Champions and above.

[tchwojko]

Or you might pick a school that's a better fit for you with a great professional club nearby. I've heard of elite fencers who think fencing NCAA will degrade their performance.

I'm not sure, but I bet you would get more one-on-one training with a pro coach than with a collegiate coach (either club or varsity). The collegiate coaches have a lot of fencers to deal with. With the pro clubs/coaches, you're directly paying for their attention, and so will get more of it.

Training + competition makes you better, so you go where you can get the best training and best competition. Collegiate fencing has a lot of poor to mediocre fencers that you have to get through to face the top schools. Sticking to a pro club lets you be picky and choose your competitions more, and you'd get more focused training, making for more efficient use of your time. The trade off will be cost and possibly convenience.

[Wafath]

No club team is as good as even mediocre varsity teams at this point by any standard.

This I disagree with.

Since I get to define the standards (thanks, Mr Biggs! ), I will define a "mediocre varsity team" as one that fits roughly in the middle third of the varsity teams. This is a bit difficult to quantify, but typically these teams:

- Are not listed in the coach's poll (otherwise they would be top 10, and therefore upper third, yes?), or listed in the "other teams receiving votes" section at best, and rarely if that.

- Typically can send at most one or two fencers to NCAA championships.

- Or teams competitive with other teams in this category.

Sound reasonable?

So, two teams I have data at my fingertips for that meet this category are Steven's Institute of Technology & Haverford College (men's teams; I don't have the data for their women's teams.)

In the 2007-2008 season, both of them fell to two club teams, USMA & W&M.

I lack complete head-to-head data for all fencing in the US, but my gut feel is that at any given moment, there are about 10 or so club teams that could comfortably threaten the middle third of the varsity spectrum. Most of the next 20-30 club schools could easily threaten the bottom third of the varsities.

I think all I am trying to say is that the best clubs are at least par with mediocre varsity fencing programs. Maybe your definition of mediocre is different from mine, but I think many people forget that there are a number of varsity programs out there that don't look anything like Ohio State, Penn State, or even Wayne State.

W

[mrbiggs]

I think all I am trying to say is that the best clubs are at least par with mediocre varsity fencing programs. Maybe your definition of mediocre is different from mine, but I think many people forget that there are a number of varsity programs out there that don't look anything like Ohio State, Penn State, or even Wayne State.

W

I guess it depends on how you define mediocre. In any case, most NCAA teams are better than most club teams.

[Wafath]

I guess it depends on how you define mediocre. In any case, most NCAA teams are better than most club teams.

So, how do you define mediocre?

W

[MyrddinsPrecint]

So, how do you define mediocre?

W

Better than most club teams?


Mediocre in men's events in New England?

[mrbiggs]

So, how do you define mediocre?

W

This is entirely beside the point and doesn't matter to the thread.

My point is that most varsity teams are better than nearly all club teams. They usually have better coaching, better recruiting, and better funds. This is from a guy on a very strong club squad which has a decent amount of success against varsity teams. Club teams are nowhere near the level of Ohio State, Notre Dame, etc., and are usually beaten even by NCAA schools who only qualify a few fencers to NCAA nationals.

You can come up with individual exceptions from your own meets all you want, but I think that it's good advice to tell fencers who really want to get to the highest level they possibly can that NCAA schools are almost always their best choice.

[KD5MDK]

This is entirely beside the point and doesn't matter to the thread.

Not when you're argument is that they're better than something else.

If you took the NCAA final rankings and the USACFC final rankings, for example, there's probably some degree of overlap where the top Club teams are above the lower NCAA teams. How much of an overlap are you going to require before you say that some Club programs can hold your own?

[mrbiggs]

Not when you're argument is that they're better than something else.

If you took the NCAA final rankings and the USACFC final rankings, for example, there's probably some degree of overlap where the top Club teams are above the lower NCAA teams. How much of an overlap are you going to require before you say that some Club programs can hold your own?

...I DID say that some club programs can hold their own. However, I qualified that with the fact that NCAA teams are generally better.

I'll bet you any amount of money that the overlap is less than 50%. But then, that statistic isn't really easy to quantify, and certainly not worth the effort.

I'll put it this way: If an E fencer came up to me and asked where they should apply, I would say that a club team is more likely to be a good choice. If a D-weak B fencer asked, I would say that they should look both at strong club teams and weaker varsity teams. If a fencer with strong national/international aspirations asked, I would say that a strong varsity team is going to be a better choice for them in terms of pure collegiate fencing. This could obviously be mitigated if there is an extremely strong (non-collegiate) club nearby.

William & Mary has an extremely strong club team from what I saw of them at nationals, and they deserve to be respected as being every bit as legitimate as an NCAA team. However, in terms of strength of fencing, they're not going to be able to beat St. Johns, Notre Dame, etc. Frankly, I don't know their regular season schedule or results, and I don't know who they fence or how well they do against them. But I will say that it's very rare in the league I'm in for any club squad, much less entire club team, to beat any varsity opponent.

[electricepeeist]

This is going back in the thread a bit, but anyway...

Or you might pick a school that's a better fit for you with a great professional club nearby. I've heard of elite fencers who think fencing NCAA will degrade their performance.

Though I'm not sure exactly what you meant by "fencing NCAA," (the competition is weaker? the training is weaker?) I think that's a worry for fencers who aren't elite as well. I am definitely not an elite fencer, but fencing at my school has absolutely had a bad effect on my fencing. My club through middle school and high school was very good, and I had excellent coaches. The skill level of the other fencers varied, but there were always people a lot better than I was to fence. I might get better competition at school, since we're in an area with lots of top varsity teams. But the coaching, facilities, training, and fencing outside of meets is nowhere near as good or convenient as what I was used to. Even though my ratio of private-club-fencing years to college-fencing is 7:1 right now, it's already had an impact.

But going into whether college fencing makes you worse is probably a topic for another thread and has probably been done many times, so I'll end my digression here...

[usafencer]

Are there any statistics/does anyone know about the percent/amount of fencers who had previously fenced internationally who continued fencing internationally through college? Are there certain colleges (specifically with strong varsity teams) that are more or less willing to let fencers attend national and international events (not just NCAAs)? This isn't completely related to the OP's question, but it seems like if a fencer wants to continue fencing at a high level after college, it would be important for them to do so in college.

[Delta]

NCAA fencing means the fencers are STUDENT-athletes. Considering a full-load of classes, life, AND being a top 10 fencer in the program is a great and exhausting committment.
If doing well in college is an important goal, then you'll spend less time than expected for a professional/elitemightywhatever fencer training due to studies. There are some "joke" majors out there, but that's still time you have to spend in class or at least doing minimal amounts of working/studying and not training to be all you can be (ha!).
Like somone mentioned earlier, coaches in NCAA programs have A LOT to deal with. Beyond training the minimum 18-24 fencers every day, the paper work to be done is ridiculous. It's enough to make anyone in a cubicle go bonkers. Not to mention coaches have lives too....even if it's fencing related. Both parties have full plates and there isn't a lot of wiggle room unless something gives.
Hope this helped.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Though I'm not sure exactly what you meant by "fencing NCAA," (the competition is weaker? the training is weaker?) ]

Fencing at the practice of any NCAA school, fencing against any other NCAA school in competition.

We're talking the people who don't want to fence at the best NCAA programs in the country, not the people who don't want to fence at a random NCAA school.

[KD5MDK]

...I DID say that some club programs can hold their own. However, I qualified that with the fact that NCAA teams are generally better.

I'll bet you any amount of money that the overlap is less than 50%. But then, that statistic isn't really easy to quantify, and certainly not worth the effort.

I think it matters if it's 49% or if it's 12%. I agree it's probably less than 50%, but I think it does rather matter if the lower tier of NCAA fencing is below Club level. It suggests that 20-30% of NCAA fencers could have done better for themselves fencing-wise if they'd gone to non-NCAA schools. I wonder how many other sports that is true for.

I'll put it this way: If an E fencer came up to me and asked where they should apply, I would say that a club team is more likely to be a good choice. If a D-weak B fencer asked, I would say that they should look both at strong club teams and weaker varsity teams. If a fencer with strong national/international aspirations asked, I would say that a strong varsity team is going to be a better choice for them in terms of pure collegiate fencing. This could obviously be mitigated if there is an extremely strong (non-collegiate) club nearby.

When this question is asked, what do you think the breakdown is of {E & Under, D-B, strong national contender}? I think the majority of the inquiries come from Ds and below, and that club fencing may be their better option.

William & Mary has an extremely strong club team from what I saw of them at nationals, and they deserve to be respected as being every bit as legitimate as an NCAA team. However, in terms of strength of fencing, they're not going to be able to beat St. Johns, Notre Dame, etc. Frankly, I don't know their regular season schedule or results, and I don't know who they fence or how well they do against them. But I will say that it's very rare in the league I'm in for any club squad, much less entire club team, to beat any varsity opponent.

What % of fencers are at the level that St. Johns or ND will take a 2nd look at them? The vast majority of people in fencing, going to college, or looking at fencing in college are way outside that level and shouldn't care what the competitive level of the top tier programs are because they're not going there (for fencing).

[bigdawg2121]

Let's be honest, all programs have stronger and weaker fencers on them to some degree. Even OSU and PSU have a few fencers that are mostly fluff; their fluff tends to be better than average b/c you can only ut so bad while training with great fencers and coaches but fluff is still fluff. Someone did raise what seems like a good question a few posts ago though, which I'm basically interpreting to be the question of which programs have a history of making their fencers better over the course of the careers and which have a history of essentially using fencers as a resource to get replaced when the next class comes in. This is probably a good consideration to have regardless of whether you choose a NCAA or a club program. I'm not actually sure of what the answer is for club programs (I imagine that the variability many clubs have in personnel and commitment from year to year may effect this greatly)...for varsity squads it shouldn't be too hard to find someone with a reasonably well informed opinion on the topic.

[mrbiggs]

I think it matters if it's 49% or if it's 12%. I agree it's probably less than 50%, but I think it does rather matter if the lower tier of NCAA fencing is below Club level. It suggests that 20-30% of NCAA fencers could have done better for themselves fencing-wise if they'd gone to non-NCAA schools. I wonder how many other sports that is true for.

I don't know what the percentage is; I think it's fairly low. And among those who could have done better, I think it's very rare that they could have done much better. In other words, I think the weaker varsity teams are close in skill to the top club teams, even if they're not quite as good. And generally, a varsity team comes with more coaching, money, practices, etc., even if their teammates are not as good.

I think that this is more true for fencing because the programs get cut. This results in 1. old varsity teams turning into very strong club teams simply because it's the same team without the "varsity" status and 2. there are a lot of universities with fencing clubs because they have fencers and don't want to spend money on a team. I think it's pretty rare that a school doesn't have a football team but does have a football club, and I think it's even more rare that football gets cut and the players have to form a club team. I'm just making this up, but it seems like a plausible reason.

[KD5MDK]

And among those who could have done better, I think it's very rare that they could have done much better. In other words, I think the weaker varsity teams are close in skill to the top club teams, even if they're not quite as good.

Fencingwise, maybe not much. On the other hand, how much did having varsity fencing affect their choice of school? It's possible a school had a perfectly equal club to their team (so no benefit) but was a better match as a school, but the balance was tipped by the NCAA status.

[Cookeit]

I'm going to be on Indiana University's club team starting in the fall.

I've heard they are decent, but we are getting some guy (who shall remain nameless) who was on the Australian Junior National team as a foilist in the fall as well.

Oh yeah, since the team is getting me, that alone makes it awesome.

Haha.

[thekoby]

I'm going to be on Indiana University's club team starting in the fall.

I've heard they are decent, but we are getting some guy (who shall remain nameless) who was on the Australian Junior National team as a foilist in the fall as well.

Oh yeah, since the team is getting me, that alone makes it awesome.

Haha.

Yeah, IU's fencing team is amazing. I'm really hoping to meet a few of the team members next season when I travel down to Bloomington for their tournaments.