Agenda - Board of Directors Meeting, July 5th 2009

[erik_blank]

Quick summary of the motions:

2nd hearing:
4. (Foil bib) Tabled until September pending more review by the FOC

So it still could be pased this year?

1st hearing:
1. (Changes to D1 events): Moved to urgent and passed effective Aug 1, 2009

And this becomes effective for the start of this year, yes?

Meeting adjourned at 1:30am!

Dan

Ouch! Thank you all for your work!

Great! This will save us some money for awhile...but I bet the equipment vendors are mad$$$$$$$

We still have to worry about September!

[MdA]

....
We still have to worry about September!

Yes....but I bet they shipped a lot of new masks to Grapevine.$$$$$...but your right...they may make it up in September.

[dberke]

The Age 13 rule and Fiscal year motions were withdrawn..why?

The age 13 motion was withdrawn because it needs some work - some people felt it was too complicated and had a few other concerns. My plan is to work on it and present a revised version in September.

According to Greg Dilworth, the fiscal year motion was withdrawn because the USOC was changing its fiscal year, and that happens to align with ours, so it makes the issue moot.

Dan

[Inquartata]

So it still could be pased this year?

Per Bill Oliver earlier tonight, it probably will be. We've been resisting because of the cost of the new masks, but with the creation of retrofit kits will probably, if reluctantly, go along...

[KD5MDK]

I believe it was the USOC might be changing its fiscal year, but even if it didn't there were accounting reasons not to do it in the middle of the coming fiscal year.

[Craig]

Great! This will save us some money for awhile...but I bet the equipment vendors are mad$$$$$$$

< Sarcasm >
Yeah, we're really excited about having to stock another SKU and have one product only fit one weapon. Does great for our inventory planning, and the reduced volume of any single SKU really helps our volume pricing negotiations with the factories!
< / Sarcasm >

I would still expect this to pass in September. My understanding was that this was not deemed an urgent matter since a vote in September could still impact the NACs for the 2009-2010 season.

Craig

[dberke]

< Sarcasm >
Yeah, we're really excited about having to stock another SKU and have one product only fit one weapon. Does great for our inventory planning, and the reduced volume of any single SKU really helps our volume pricing negotiations with the factories!
< / Sarcasm >

I would still expect this to pass in September. My understanding was that this was not deemed an urgent matter since a vote in September could still impact the NACs for the 2009-2010 season.

Craig

I doubt the motion, as it currently is written, will pass in September. I would expect that it will require some amendments before passing. I personally don't think the requirement for electric bibs at national events and qualifiers for them is workable - that would include JO qualifiers, divisional and sectional qualifiers. Requiring everyone to have bibs for those events, when at most only the top 25% will actually qualify for the national event, seems a bit daunting.

Another proposal I've heard is to require the bibs only for Division I NACs events next season (and possibly Junior/Cadet)... The people who fence international events where the bib is required will be fencing those events.

Regardless, I expect that the bib adoption for everyone (at all levels, local and national) will wind up being adopted for the 2010-2011 season at the latest. (Unless the FIE comes to its senses and realizes how dumb the whole idea is and drops it before then.)

Dan

[Craig]

(Unless the FIE comes to its senses gets rid of hard chest protectors, making the bib change less necessary.)

Fixed that for you.

Craig

[Soberin]

I doubt the motion, as it currently is written, will pass in September. I would expect that it will require some amendments before passing. I personally don't think the requirement for electric bibs at national events and qualifiers for them is workable - that would include JO qualifiers, divisional and sectional qualifiers. Requiring everyone to have bibs for those events, when at most only the top 25% will actually qualify for the national event, seems a bit daunting.

Another proposal I've heard is to require the bibs only for Division I NACs events next season (and possibly Junior/Cadet)... The people who fence international events where the bib is required will be fencing those events.

Regardless, I expect that the bib adoption for everyone (at all levels, local and national) will wind up being adopted for the 2010-2011 season at the latest. (Unless the FIE comes to its senses and realizes how dumb the whole idea is and drops it before then.)

Dan

I believe that the FIE did not come to its senses regarding the "new" foil timing, or the rules for visor masks, both of which have added nothing to the sport.

[Barry Paul]

Great! This will save us some money for awhile...but I bet the equipment vendors are mad$$$$$$$

As Craig posted the new lame bib regulation is great news for fencing suppliers, twice the stock, fencers not replacing masks for another season because they don't know what to buy, last minute chaos when the change over is finally agreed.

Compared with the total cost of fencing this not in the long term going to make a huge difference to the affordability of fencing.

But the good news is that I #think it is a very good idea and will result in better more watchable fencing. (# and so do all our top foil fencers.)

[Soberin]

As Craig posted the new lame bib regulation is great news for fencing suppliers, twice the stock, fencers not replacing masks for another season because they don't know what to buy, last minute chaos when the change over is finally agreed.

Compared with the total cost of fencing this not in the long term going to make a huge difference to the affordability of fencing.

But the good news is that I #think it is a very good idea and will result in better more watchable fencing. (# and so do all our top foil fencers.)

Why do you think an electric bib will make foil fencing better and more watchable? Most top ranked US foilists I have spoken with think the rule is absurd.

[Inquartata]

Well, it should fit right in with the rest of foil, then.

As you yourself noted, the Lexan visors, too, are absurd---yet they had their share of advocates who bought into the Roch "it will increase spectator appeal" line. This strikes me as just more of the same even though Roch is gone. The more things change...

[Barry Paul]

Why do you think an electric bib will make foil fencing better and more watchable? Most top ranked US foilists I have spoken with think the rule is absurd.

What we see is in some fights many hits on the bib (before electric fencing the bib was part of the valid target.)

The problem has been made worse by manufacturers enlarging the bibs sideways and covering what is a large part of the valid target nearest the opponents point.

The new lame bib makes fencing better to watch with less non valid hits and harder for some fencers to hide behind the bib.

[Soberin]

What we see is in some fights many hits on the bib (before electric fencing the bib was part of the valid target.)

The problem has been made worse by manufacturers enlarging the bibs sideways and covering what is a large part of the valid target nearest the opponents point.

The new lame bib makes fencing better to watch with less non valid hits and harder for some fencers to hide behind the bib.

Why not just have stricter enforcement of the rules regarding bib size, rather than the complexity and expense of electric bibs?

[edew]

And why not make the WHOLE bib on-target, instead of that little swatch of lame material? That way, it would be much easier for manufacturers to produce the bibs: make them the same way they do for saber bibs. Heckuva lot easier than to make an epee bib, a foil bib and a saber bib.

[oiuyt]

And why not make the WHOLE bib on-target, instead of that little swatch of lame material?

The fear is more instances where the rest of the mask becomes target. The theory is having a space of non-lame cloth creates the equivalent of a firebreak, preventing that.

-B

[erik_blank]

And why not make the WHOLE bib on-target, instead of that little swatch of lame material? That way, it would be much easier for manufacturers to produce the bibs: make them the same way they do for saber bibs. Heckuva lot easier than to make an epee bib, a foil bib and a saber bib.

For that matter, why not make the whole head AND bib target? That way we could go back to only having two different masks, one for foil and saber, and another for Epee.

[SJCFU#2]

I personally don't think the requirement for electric bibs at national events and qualifiers for them is workable - that would include JO qualifiers, divisional and sectional qualifiers. Requiring everyone to have bibs for those events, when at most only the top 25% will actually qualify for the national event, seems a bit daunting.

Probably not much more daunting than changing all scoring machines needed for qualifiers during the 2004-2005 season.

At least this time there is ample advanced notice - IIRC the decision to require new timings for all national events wasn't made until October 2004 - back in July the new timings were only supposed to be impacting FIE Junior events.

[edew]

For that matter, why not make the whole head AND bib target? That way we could go back to only having two different masks, one for foil and saber, and another for Epee.

Might as well... I can live with that.

[Empty Wallet]

Various international groups are having lots of fun with the foil bib.

New Zealand maintains a wait and see position.

Australia was to introduce them from earlier this year at national events, but has now decided to wait until at least the beginning of 2010, with a 6 month notice period to be given prior to implementation

The Commonwealth Veterans Championships currently in Jersey do not require them.