Extremely Early Entry Deadlines for NACs

[Jason]

That people don't read their email is USFA's fault how?

I missed this earlier.
I appreciate what you're saying, TBean. The USFA could very well just post deadline changes deep in its horribly organized website and consider itself relieved of any responsibility in getting the word out.

But the fact is that one of the big problems with the organization right now is a loss of credibility resulting from several years of mismanagement. While many of the current people in charge are not to blame for it, they are still responsible for fixing it.

My point is not actually that the USFA is trying to connive more money, but rather that they are not dealing with their communications issues appropriately--leading to unnecessary suspicions on the part of the membership. While it may be "enough" to send out some emails that many people don't read and say, "Well, if they don't read the newsletter [a communication format which is brand new for the organization], that's their problem," the greater issue of credibility isn't at all being helped.

It behooves the USFA to do more than what's simply enough, because--along with a financial deficit--the organization is dealing with a trust deficit. In order for the organization to improve its image with the membership, it needs to be going beyond what a healthy organization would do. Is a year's worth of grace excessive? Maybe. Maybe not. Certainly a period that covers the first few NACs seems reasonable and no doubt would be appreciated by the membership (and might, in fact, result in a larger number of registrants).

The new administration is supposedly working on improving a lot of things. Reasonably, it will be a long time before many of these things are apparent to the membership. Effort should therefore be made toward creating positive feelings with the membership while they wait for "things to change". That, alone, would result in a tremendous and necessary sense of improvement.

[Jason]

The close of registration was a month earlier than last year, yet there were still significant delays at NAC-B (pools for Y14 MS started about 2 hours after close of check-in).

Has there been any actual positive organizational affect in pulling back the registration deadline?

[teacup]

Not sure by exactly how much but close of check in times were posted earlier, compared to in the past when they were posted only a week or ten days before the event.

[fdad]

The close of registration was a month earlier than last year, yet there were still significant delays at NAC-B (pools for Y14 MS started about 2 hours after close of check-in).

Has there been any actual positive organizational affect in pulling back the registration deadline?

I can think of some possible ways moving the registration deadline so far ahead could make things go more smoothly, but none of those things have happened.

One possibility would be making the draft seedings available shortly after the registration deadline. Early on the day of an event, the pre-checkin seeding are posted. This week they produced many surprises. Due to the recent changes in how the points lists are computed (undocumented in the handbook), combined with the fact that the points lists had not been updated online since after SN, the seedings were dramatically different from what many expected. This led to many questions for the BC which may or may not have led to some of the delays.

Why can't the initial seeding be posted before the day of the event? Obviously some people might withdraw, and some might get new ratings, but once the late registration and ratings deadlines are passed the initial seedings should be available.

Also, once the BC knows that the start of an event will be delayed, why can't an announcement to that effect be made. In the absence of informaiton, fencers are left with a need to warm up in time for scheduled start, and stay warmed up indefinitely since once pools are posted they have to immediately report to strip and fence.

[fdad]

Not sure by exactly how much but close of check in times were posted earlier, compared to in the past when they were posted only a week or ten days before the event.

But if checkin closes two hours before the event starts is that really better?

[telkanuru]

The close of registration was a month earlier than last year, yet there were still significant delays at NAC-B (pools for Y14 MS started about 2 hours after close of check-in).

Has there been any actual positive organizational affect in pulling back the registration deadline?

I was actually going to ask about this

I stand by my previous assertion that some people have no idea what they're doing.

[teacup]

But if checkin closes two hours before the event starts is that really better?

Nope.

(Or having to flight the first 3 pools.)

[Lefty Belgian]

Who determines late registration fees? Are these mandated by the USFA or at the discretion of the tournament organizer? What discretion, if any, do tournament organizers have in waiving these fees for late registrants?

[oso97]

Who determines late registration fees? Are these mandated by the USFA or at the discretion of the tournament organizer? What discretion, if any, do tournament organizers have in waiving these fees for late registrants?

Are you referring to events hosted by the national office, SYC/RYC events, ROC events or local division events? Different rules apply for each...

[Lefty Belgian]

Are you referring to events hosted by the national office, SYC/RYC events, ROC events or local division events? Different rules apply for each...

I am most interested in the rules governing SYC/RYC events. But am also interested in JO and SN qualifying events. Thank you.

[oso97]

I am most interested in the rules governing SYC/RYC events. But am also interested in JO and SN qualifying events. Thank you.

Well, the general idea is - register on time, and you don't have to worry about it.

[Lefty Belgian]

That's really helpful. More to the point, however, it has been my consistent experience to observe that despite such deadlines, fencers are constantly added to the registered lists up until the date of the actual tournament. I understand that these additional fencers may simply be paying the applicable late registration fee, but find it hard to believe that so many fencers subject themselves to such penalties apparently unnecessarily. Hence why I am specifically wondering whether these penalties are mandated by the USFA or rather are controlled by the tournament organizer such as to leave room for leniency, e.g., when the latecomer is from the club hosting the tournament.

[dberke]

That's really helpful. More to the point, however, it has been my consistent experience to observe that despite such deadlines, fencers are constantly added to the registered lists up until the date of the actual tournament. I understand that these additional fencers may simply be paying the applicable late registration fee, but find it hard to believe that so many fencers subject themselves to such penalties apparently unnecessarily. Hence why I am specifically wondering whether these penalties are mandated by the USFA or rather are controlled by the tournament organizer such as to leave room for leniency, e.g., when the latecomer is from the club hosting the tournament.

Tournaments not run directly by the USFA - i.e. everything that isnt a NAC, JOs, or SN - are run by local organizers in the hosting division. As such, there are no rules regarding how registrations should be handled. It's up to each organizer to decide. Larger events such as SYCs and ROCs may have guidelines to follow, but I don't think they are hard and fast rules - just suggestions.

Most events, do have a cutoff date for registration, but nearly every event (especially qualifiers) will allow fencers to attend if they show up and pay the entry fee (plus any possible late charges.)


Dan