Quote:
|
the idea that the USFA should review and revise its overall policies on the basis of three touches and a quirk of seeding is pretty bizarre.
|
Go back and read that again; I was expressing gratitude to the WF national coaching program for exceeding expectations, but doing it in a good manner, with a lack of drama. My (qualifier: not always firsthand) experience with other weapon programs has not necessarily been so positive.
Quote:
|
It's also pretty bizarre to criticize the WS for failing to exceed "expectations." The only reason that expectations were higher was because WS has established a record of international success over the past years.
|
At what point did I criticize WS? My connection to that specific event is near and dear. WS clearly had the burden of expectation, and I'm willing to excuse what happened to the WST as an outlier. I'm also willing to excuse what happened to Emily as an outlier too; the Chinese fencer was fencing on fire. I don't think there were any particular expectations for Hanna or Erinn. Did the US put their best foot forward for Seth and Kelley?
(In light of today, clearly the MS program has done well too, but I'm not qualified to speak about that.)
At the end of the day, the national coaching staff should be reporting back to the USFA. The HPC should be assessing how each weapon program does its work, and make sure that effective choices are made. Seems like a no-brainer, yes?
darius