Portland NAC

[catwood1]

Its not that the calling of names takes longer, its that if you call names, fencers DON'T hookup before you call the names. If you don't call it out, they hookup immediately.

[teacup]

What amount of time are we talking about, really? A minute? I don't see the big deal of calling out either names or numbers. I would imagine it even helps the ref know who is in front of him for score recording?

And refs can make mistakes too. I have seen refs mix up the correct order of bouts. On one occasion a ref had two fencers fence the same bout twice.

Mistakes can be made by both sides. A system of checks and balances is a good thing.

[hello?]

At my div 1 pool, the ref kept calling out numbers and warning the on-deck fencers to be ready. I think everybody was ready to hook up as soon as the fencers fencing unhooked. Calling out who's on-deck like that would not slow down anything, I don't think. And I agree about checks and balances.

[hello?]

An unrelated comment: any way the USFA (via THS, dare I say?) can make a deal with a host hotel to serve breakfast half an hour earlier than usual when most of the people staying at the hotel are fencers and there is nowhere nearby to have breakfast when events have 7-8 a.m. registration but breakfast is not served before 6:30?

[Mr.MightyMouse]

An unrelated comment: any way the USFA (via THS, dare I say?) can make a deal with a host hotel to serve breakfast half an hour earlier than usual when most of the people staying at the hotel are fencers and there is nowhere nearby to have breakfast when events have 7-8 a.m. registration but breakfast is not served before 6:30?

I gave up on hotel breakfast - missed room service, long lines at the restaurant etc - don't laugh but I always find nearest MikkyD's night before or online - and have EggMcMuffiin in the morn, usually make super strong GreenT meself.

[Mr.MightyMouse]

What was the black card in the L32 of DIME?

The story's right after your question.

[teacup]

An unrelated comment: any way the USFA (via THS, dare I say?) can make a deal with a host hotel to serve breakfast half an hour earlier than usual when most of the people staying at the hotel are fencers and there is nowhere nearby to have breakfast when events have 7-8 a.m. registration but breakfast is not served before 6:30?

Or have the first close of check in 9:00 AM.
Most people would rather have an extra hour sleep and breakfast than be done early.

[Dev]

Its not that the calling of names takes longer, its that if you call names, fencers DON'T hookup before you call the names. If you don't call it out, they hookup immediately.

And this kind of thinking is important why?

Pools do not exist to serve as a racing medium between referees to determine who can be "done" the fastest. How, exactly, are the fencers better served by being treated as though you're trying to be done with them as soon as possible? They're there to fence; for them, the pool is the point.

Too many tournament organizers get it backwards--they don't rush themselves to get pools out in a timely fashion or get referees assigned, or they don't push themselves to make seeding corrections quickly, or they don't put pressure on themselves to make the turnaround from pools to DEs in the most efficient manner.

Instead, they impel the referees to rush both the fencers and themselves and then feel as though they're acting with expediency for the benefit of the participants.

[mtarascio]

I wouldn't describe it as "unfortunate". I would actually describe it as "efficient." There is no doubt that this method of running a pool, not announcing bouts, expecting people to know when they are up, is the fastest and most efficient way to do it, and in NO way does it imply that the referee thinks the fencers are there for them. That's insane, what does that even mean?

It is much more efficient to announce the on-deck fencers. It takes no additional time for the referee to do so.

[whtouche]

hmmm....
I hope you are not serious
What is more efficient:
1) The ref, who is holding score sheet in his/her hands to write the score of the just finished bout, glances at it and pronounces who is fencing and who is on deck. Done.
.

I don't think you understand.

If you make it clear to the fencers you will not be calling bouts, they make sure to know when they are fencing in advance. You are picturing everyone in the pool crowding the score sheet after every bout. This is incorrect. Obviously if choice was between reading the on-strip and on-deck bouts or having the fencers, at the moment they should be hooking up, figure it out themselves, the former is more efficient.

But picture your scenario above, "The ref, who is holding the score sheet in his/her hands to write the score of the just finished bout, glances" up to see the fencers for the next bout already hooked up and on strip.

Now do you understand?

It is much more efficient to announce the on-deck fencers. It takes no additional time for the referee to do so.

You do not understand in a similar way. I hope this post illuminates things for you.

[catwood1]

Valid point, I think calling the On deck bout only is equally effective, more or less.

[mtarascio]

I don't think you understand.

If you make it clear to the fencers you will not be calling bouts, they make sure to know when they are fencing in advance. You are picturing everyone in the pool crowding the score sheet after every bout. This is incorrect. Obviously if choice was between reading the on-strip and on-deck bouts or having the fencers, at the moment they should be hooking up, figure it out themselves, the former is more efficient.

But picture your scenario above, "The ref, who is holding the score sheet in his/her hands to write the score of the just finished bout, glances" up to see the fencers for the next bout already hooked up and on strip.

Now do you understand?

You do not understand in a similar way. I hope this post illuminates things for you.

I think it is you that does not understand.

As a referee you are there for the fencer. It does not take the referee any additional time to call the on-deck fencer. It it much more efficient than not doing so.

[counterattack]

Yes, it is faster to not announce anything. Granted, I've never tried it at the Y14 level. In Cadet / Junior / D1, its DEFINITELY way faster.

Personally, I usually call numbers, but I've been repeatedly told not to do so by some FOCs. Its just an old habit I'm trying to break. I think you SHOULD call numbers with Y14 and below, or D2 / D3 groups, but thats just my opinion...

Yeah, I suspected this was happening since fewer and fewer refs call names and apparently some even don't call numbers. My pool refs called numbers but it was hard to hear, and given the pod setup it is also hard to check for yourself since they keep the score sheet on the table in the middle. Also our pool refs crossed out bouts that had yet to be fenced, put boxes around bouts, put stars next to bouts, and generally marked the heck out of the bout order section. It was very difficult to figure out where we were and even one of the refs was confused. I am with EDew here. It takes so little effort to call the numbers and it speeds things up to call the numbers. Until the level of organization is otherwise up to world cup levels then the argument "that is how they do it at the world cups" doesn't hold water. Call the numbers for "now fencing", "on deck", and "in the hole" and help everyone stay moving. Besides what else is the ref doing between writing down the previous bout score and testing the first fencer's weapon? And they are already hovering right over the score sheet and crossing out the last bout/current bout.

-ph

[whtouche]

I think it is you that does not understand.

As a referee you are there for the fencer. It does not take the referee any additional time to call the on-deck fencer. It it much more efficient than not doing so.

I don't even think you understand what the word "efficient" means. As for the referee being there for the fencer, that's obvious, but again your assertion that not calling the bouts indicates the referee is trying to make it about them continues to make no sense.

Maybe you should study my previous post more closely. Everyone but you seems to understand.

[Mr.MightyMouse]

Also our pool refs crossed out bouts that had yet to be fenced, put boxes around bouts, put stars next to bouts, and generally marked the heck out of the bout order section. It was very difficult to figure out where we were and even one of the refs was confused. Besides what else is the ref doing between writing down the previous bout score and testing the first fencer's weapon? And they are already hovering right over the score sheet and crossing out the last bout/current bout.

-ph

The crossing/non-crossing out of bouts supposedly kept the WS14 participants and then their parents hovering around the table etc..., despite 2 yellows the Ref continued not to call bouts, again - all told around dinner table. As far as checking weapons - not much of that in Saber.

[edew]

I don't think you understand.

If you make it clear to the fencers you will not be calling bouts, they make sure to know when they are fencing in advance. You are picturing everyone in the pool crowding the score sheet after every bout. This is incorrect. Obviously if choice was between reading the on-strip and on-deck bouts or having the fencers, at the moment they should be hooking up, figure it out themselves, the former is more efficient.

But picture your scenario above, "The ref, who is holding the score sheet in his/her hands to write the score of the just finished bout, glances" up to see the fencers for the next bout already hooked up and on strip.

Now do you understand?



You do not understand in a similar way. I hope this post illuminates things for you.

Picture your scenario: the ref, who is holding the score sheet in his/her hands to write the score on the just finished bout, glances and sees no one hooked up. Instead of calling out names, he waits, arms folded, with a disdained expression. Two minutes later, 4 fencers hover about the table, trying to figure out who's up next. Couldn't because they forgot who just fenced and don't know the referee's secret scratch marks indicating who's up/done/on-deck.

Net result: pissed off fencers, with yellow cards awarded to them, a ref with extra chips on the shoulders, coaches who are laughing at an ass of a ref, and two minutes wasted where the bout could have gone on along smoothly, just because the ego-tripping ref had a bug up his butt.

Your ideal case of fencers knowing when to fence is no better than the case when the referee announces the bouts. Your reality case of fencers forgetting and getting cards and such is far worse than the case when the referee announces the bouts.

[misha]

Everyone but you seems to understand.

I think you are the only one who advocates not calling who is on deck


.

[Inquartata]

In at least one respect, the USFA totally failed at the NAC - publicity. And this is in a city that has resident world champions, and an active fencing community.

I saw a bunch of posters for the NAC displayed at the bout committee station. Was there a contest of some sort? Most were quite good, and mentioned "Free entry" for spectators. Why were they not used anywhere?

Last year in Limoges there were small posters for the Vet World Championships in store windows all over town. Shouldn't be that difficult.

I could be wrong, but that sounds like some no-talent two-bit ref.

Waugh! Libelous!

Div 1 MS Final was beyond standing room only , with what seemed like 20 handcams. Mr.Rogers' win was never really in doubt.

Yes. He was amazing. I wish I had 1/10th of his footwork, let alone his read of timing...

[prototoast]

Picture your scenario: the ref, who is holding the score sheet in his/her hands to write the score on the just finished bout, glances and sees no one hooked up. Instead of calling out names, he waits, arms folded, with a disdained expression. Two minutes later, 4 fencers hover about the table, trying to figure out who's up next. Couldn't because they forgot who just fenced and don't know the referee's secret scratch marks indicating who's up/done/on-deck.

Net result: pissed off fencers, with yellow cards awarded to them, a ref with extra chips on the shoulders, coaches who are laughing at an ass of a ref, and two minutes wasted where the bout could have gone on along smoothly, just because the ego-tripping ref had a bug up his butt.

Your ideal case of fencers knowing when to fence is no better than the case when the referee announces the bouts. Your reality case of fencers forgetting and getting cards and such is far worse than the case when the referee announces the bouts.

It's like not negotiating with terrorists. In any particular instance it is better to call out the name than not, however the aggregate result of calling out the names every time allegedly results in fencers who are less timely to the strip, as they are simply waiting to hear their name called rather than remaining vigilant about knowing when they are supposed to be up.

Maybe you can dispute whether or not calling names vs not is actually more efficient, but don't talk as though the very notion of it is completely unreasonable.

[epeemike81]

Is it a standard way to run a Y14 pool?

Y-10? no. Y-12? Maybe. Y14? Absolutely. This is how I run all my pools. I'm not so quick to card fencers who don't hook up immediately with y-14, as we are there to teach, but I don't call bouts. It works tremendously efficiently.

-m