Under-23 European Cahmpionships in Debrecen, May 8-10, 2009

[gladius]

We had some discussions in the past about the merit or need to have an Under 23 category. While here this is considered unnecessary (there was a proposal for an Over-23 category given our crop of precocious or premature champions...), the European Fencing Confederation (CEE) thinks otherwise (see below). Since fencing is Euro-centric, we may have to adapt and adopt... (you might remember who the previous CEE President was, Alisher Usmanov)

This is what Dr. Jenő Kamuti, President of the European Fencing Confederation wrote on the official championships web site:

Remembering a great decision

Announcing the U23 Fencing European Championships, EFC wanted to provide new opportunities to those athletes who found themselves in an insecure position aged out from the junior group. Few of them had the realistic possibility to compete with senior rivals.

We created goals for a generation – and also for the trainers taking care of young talents – many of whom broke up with fencing as they felt they experienced setbacks and failures only.

Last year’s Italian debut of U23 Fencing European Championships could be considered an obvious success. It was soon realized that the initiative was a noble one and general feedback was positive accordingly. Getting closer to the second European assembly of the forthcoming generation behind the seniors, experts still think that this new continental event does fill the gap. Moreover, this tournament keeps youngsters on the piste who need a transition period and competitions where standard is not on an unrealistically high level.

It is also a pleasure for European fencing leaders and organizers that the second host of this new tournament is a Hungarian city that has never organized European Championships in this sport yet and a premier of this sort can push the momentum forward for local fencing life. We can be sure that U23 fencers will popularize this beautiful sport with struggling and delightful battles. We also hope some of the medallists will play a major role at the London Olympic Games in 2012.

As the Hungarian President of EFC, this tournament recalls unforgettable memories. This was the city where I chose this sport and this is where I decided to prefer fencing to boxing. My career proved it was the right decision…

Dr. Jenő Kamuti
President of European Fencing Confederation



For those interested in who the Italians are sending to these championships (they are the top of the junior fencers and the likely next generation of senior fencers), continue reading:

http://www.federscherma.it/news.asp?i=71514&s=7

The FIS is sending 24 fencers (six reserves on standby in Italy) for the six weapons. Seven fencers are veterans of the first 2008 Under 23 European Championships held in Monza, Italy, while 17 are the new names. The youngest one is the epeiste Rossella Fiamingo (born July 14, 1991). Last year Italy earned 5 medals in total (1 gold, 1 silver, and 3 bronze), finishing second in the medal count to Russia (2,2,2). Elisa Vardaro, Alessio Foconi, Rossella Gregorio, Giovanni Repetti, Rossella Fiamingo, and Massimiliano Bertolazzi were automatic qualified for winning the respective national titles Under-23[*].

Follows the complete list of athletes per weapon and names of the entire Italian delegation to Debrecen:

MF
Tobia Biondo, Alessio Foconi, Martino Minuto, Michele Pirrazzo.
Reserve in Italy: Matteo Iaconis.

WF
Martina Batini, Valentina De Costanzo, Maddalena Tagliapietra, Elisa Vardaro.
Reserve in Italy: Valentina Vianello.

ME
Massimiliano Bertolazzi, Stefano Cinotti, Edoardo Munzone, Matteo Trager.
Reserve in Italy: Roberto Bertinetti.

WE
Sara Carpegna, Rossella Fiamingo, Margherita Guzzi, Giulia Rizzi.
Reserve in Italy: Carolina Buzzi.

MS
Luca Iacometti, Luigi Miracco, Alberto Pellegrini, Giovanni Repetti.
Reserve in Italy: Massimiliano Murolo.

WS
Rossella Gregorio, Loreta Gulotta, Livia Stagni, Irene Vecchi.
Reserve in Italy: Lucrezia Sinigaglia.

CADRE: Luigi Campofreda (head of delegation); Andrea Borella, Simone Piccini, Enrico Di Ciolo, Mario Renzulli, Alessandro Di Agostino, Christian Rascioni (maestri); Michela Ballesio (physician); Ferdinando Margutti (physiotherapist); Salvatore Migliore (armorer).


[*] The Italian Under-23 championships were held the same weekend of the Moedling and Basel Junior WC in early February. The FIS, to promote this new age category, did not authorize any junior fencer to compete in Moedling or Basel. It would have made an exception for those chasing WC points, but I believe none requested the waiver.

This is how the FIS handles overlap in schedule between domestic and international events. A lesson to be learned, perhaps?

[mlr2fence]

I think it would be great if USFA added a similar category, with points. It seems the USFA starts losing fencers after they age out of JRs, with a hope that they return at some point. There is frequent talk of USFA finances and I can't but imagine that there would be greater attendance in U-23 category at NACs than Y-10. Maybe the Europeans would even let the US join in the championships.

[darius]

I know some people are really wedded to the idea of U-23, but for the American circumstance, the idea of Vet-20 (number is mildly arbitrary, but 20, 22, 25 stand out) makes more sense to me.

The elite path from Youth -> Cadet -> Junior is well-established. We do well there. NCAA is well-established, and pulls from that pool but you can make a case for it being detrimental to the Senior elite path for a number of reasons. The transition to world-level Senior results will always be difficult - if we can generate a pool of athletes with trust funds, willing employers (a la Ivan Lee), or some sort of professional sponsorships (Army WCAP), we can get elite traction.

However, there is a large pool of fencers who never made it down that elite path for whatever reason. They started too late, never were quite good enough, life got in the way, or they're currently coaching rather than training. Either way, this population could be open to competitive opportunities. Currently, D2/3 serves it - but not the ones who have dedicated the time and training to disqualify themselves from D2/3, or have no interest in fencing in the developmental paths. Ironically, these are the very people whom we want to most encourage to stick around - if their experience is positive, what sport will they introduce to their children?

In this case, Vet is a good model, because it's not really developmental (ask Ed Korfanty, Walt Dragonetti or Peach if their vet events are more like D3 or Div1 in intensity). With an age limitation, you're removing the pool of athletes who do nothing but go to high school and train, which is probably the biggest source of frustration for a newly-minted B who can't do much other than D1.

darius

[oiuyt]

We've already had this discussion at least twice.

The problem being solved by U23 in Europe (too many strong late-20's/early-30's types for the 20-23 cadre to be successful) simply doesn't exist here. If anything, our problem is exactly the opposite (too many strong late-teens for the 20-30 cadre to be successful). The same solution doesn't fit both situations.

Either present an argument that the problems faced are the same (or near equivalents) or acknowledge that they are different and then accept that adopting a solution to a problem in one environment into an environment where the problem does not exist doesn't make much sense.

they are the top of the junior fencers and the likely next generation of senior fencers

How many (if any) of the 24 are in the 20-22 age group? Shouldn't those being sent be the top of the (recently-made) former junior fencers (and likely next generation of senior fencers)?

-B

[gladius]

The problem being solved by U23 in Europe (too many strong late-20's/early-30's types for the 20-23 cadre to be successful) simply doesn't exist here. If anything, our problem is exactly the opposite (too many strong late-teens for the 20-30 cadre to be successful). The same solution doesn't fit both situations.

The problem, if this is a problem, is that if fencers >20 get beaten in US by too many strong late teens US fencers, the former will never even have the chance to compete internationally. I agree that in US we don't really have the same situation as in Europe, but when we compete internationally we may have to adapt to what they do over there.

While we have a tendency to stress cadet competitions (in Italy cadets are considered youth fencers with the Y-fencing category going from 10-17) because of the premature/precocious approach to elite fencers in this country (I'm neither for nor against, I just state the differences between the two worlds), in Europe they want to stress the 20-23 age bracket to ease promising aging out juniors in the senior category. It is within the realm of possibilities that the FIE may decide to suppress the cadet age bracket and shift to Under-23 for world championships, if the European U-23 championships gets traction.

Should this be the trend, we now have a rep in the FIE EC who can fight tooth an nails against it because it does not suit us. As to the outcome of this political struggle anybody's guess is just as good. However, one thing I'm ready to bet will not happen is an Over-23 or 25 category to give a chance to our Div II or III to compete abroad.

Either present an argument that the problems faced are the same (or near equivalents) or acknowledge that they are different and then accept that adopting a solution to a problem in one environment into an environment where the problem does not exist doesn't make much sense.

Obviously I have not made myself clear enough. I do not present this information as an argument neither pro nor con. It is just sharing of info on what is going on over there, a fact, I might add, which is often ignored here because the USFA does not deem important to keep us informed of these changes. Since some of these are not what we seem to want (e.g., bib in foil, etc.) it pays to know in advance what they do or plan on doing. I hope you'll agree that this makes sense for all of us.

How many (if any) of the 24 are in the 20-22 age group? Shouldn't those being sent be the top of the (recently-made) former junior fencers (and likely next generation of senior fencers)?

-B

I really don't follow all weapons so I would have to cross reference the names posted to answer your question (you'll forgive me if I don't). However, in WE, Rossella Fiamingo, the 2008 cadet world champion, and the 2009 Under-23 Italian national champion, is on a rapidly rising path, and she's got two more junior years to go. There might be others like her, albeit not as young.

Conclusion

If we (USFA) don't like this Under 23 category, unless we lobby effectively within the FIE, it will not matter one way or the other and in a couple of years we will also follow the leaders... So be prepared!

[oiuyt]

Feel free to generalize/replace the subject of my post to "people who are arguing in favor of such a program/level/series of competitions" in the US. Take it as directed at mlr2fence or any of the people who absolutely HAVE supported it in the previous threads.

If the leaders in the U23 category are 17 years old (Miss Fiamingo) then it's hard to see that it's achieving the stated goals in Italy either. If a significant percentage of the competitors are U20 then it's almost completely pointless. It's merely a slightly re-worked junior competition and not obviously of any value in helping transition the 20-23 year old athletes into success in the senior ranks.

-B

[gladius]

If the leaders in the U23 category are 17 years old (Miss Fiamingo) then it's hard to see that it's achieving the stated goals in Italy either. If a significant percentage of the competitors are U20 then it's almost completely pointless. It's merely a slightly re-worked junior competition and not obviously of any value in helping transition the 20-23 year old athletes into success in the senior ranks.

-B

Now this is a generalization. I don't know if a significant percentage of the Italian competitors are U-20 as is the case of Fiamingo, but even in her case you can see that she does well in the U-23 national category but still has some work to do to emerge (top 3) in the senior one. So for her, and people like her, there is indeed value (she gets to compete and gain experience in international championships) in the transition of a younger athlete into the senior ranks, no? At least this is what the FIS (and the European Fencing Confederation) think and why they support this age category.

However, the emphasis of my posts on this subject is (a) to inform, and (b) on the importance for the USFA and its rep to be part of the decision making process in the FIE EC, whether it involves the bibs in foil or the future of world championships for U-23 versus cadet. We have the example of an active federation (FIS). The suggestion, considering the remarkable successes of American fencers--juniors and seniors--on the international strips, is that our USFA should be more politically active and proactive inside the FIE, AND not be too shy in telling us what they do or plan to do, just like the FIS does for Italian fencing and how it keeps its members informed.

I hope we can all agree on this.

[Craig]

The elite path from Youth -> Cadet -> Junior is well-established. We do well there. NCAA is well-established, and pulls from that pool but you can make a case for it being detrimental to the Senior elite path for a number of reasons. The transition to world-level Senior results will always be difficult - if we can generate a pool of athletes with trust funds, willing employers (a la Ivan Lee), or some sort of professional sponsorships (Army WCAP), we can get elite traction.

This is the main challenge that Michael Pederson talks about in our interview (posted on the home page.)

Craig

[gladius]

It is interesting to see how the Euros respond to this new age category (which we find redundant).

The French, who in the name of budget restriction have decided for the past 2 years not to send any cadet fencers to the World Cadet Championships, will send a delegation to the Under-23 championships in Debrcen. http://www.u23fencingdebrecen.eu/en

Obviously, this raises legitimate questions on Escrime-info

http://www.escrime-info.com/modules/...orumpost247173


"I don't understand the logic of the national federation. Why send a delegation to this non official competition rather than cadets to the world championships?"

A reply:

"This competition is interesting for the young seniors and in any case the level is quite high and includes a good number of countries participating.

Now it is true that the question raised is a logical one given that we don't send cadets to make good results while to Debrecen we are sending fencers who did little or nothing this past year... and that there will be no team events but it seems logical to send deserving athletes at least as far as their results in world cup events."

[zéphirin]

This is the main challenge that Michael Pederson talks about in our interview (posted on the home page.)

Craig

It seems to me that Michael Pederson has many challenges ahead, this being one and not the greatest one.

I am really disappointed how he answered your questions in the interview. It's better to keep quiet if you got nothing smart to say or if you are not prepared...

Hopefully I'm wrong, but this is not a good start, and one year has already passed by for getting ready with an effective Olympic program for London.

[Soberin]

It seems to me that Michael Pederson has many challenges ahead, this being one and not the greatest one.

I am really disappointed how he answered your questions in the interview. It's better to keep quiet if you got nothing smart to say or if you are not prepared...

Hopefully I'm wrong, but this is not a good start, and one year has already passed by for getting ready with an effective Olympic program for London.

Can you be more specific in terms of where you feel that Mike did not have well prepared or intelligent answers?