Board Meeting - February 14, 2010

[heretic]

FYI - Kate Hannah is really Ro Sobalvarro (one of his many alter egos).

[Capt. Slo-mo]

#7 (National team oversight committee): Withdrawn

So who is overseeing all the elements that were to be covered in the committee's oversight? The non-existent Director of Sports Strategery?

[hello?]

The meeting ran from (roughly) 9:30pm to 2am. Here's a quick summary:

Thank you so much for the detailed report!

[edew]

So who is overseeing all the elements that were to be covered in the committee's oversight? The non-existent Director of Sports Strategery?

Instead of muddling with all the unnecessary arcana, the Nat Office should be focused on that one thing: national team oversight. That's what the national office should be doing. Have your politically correctly sized BoD of 6 or 7, eliminate control and/or interest in local and regional issues, and just focus on determining and overseeing the national team. All other issues should be relegated to the ether.

[Inquartata]

FYI - Kate Hannah is really Ro Sobalvarro (one of his many alter egos).

I've heard that you too are one of his alter-egos. The self-loathing one.

[heretic]

I've heard that you too are one of his alter-egos. The self-loathing one.

Ro would disavow that association. He has nothing but love for himself. IMO, a little self loathing is healthy; keeps you from becoming smug and full of hubris. You should give it a try ;-)

[notalent]

Ro would disavow that association. He has nothing but love for himself. IMO, a little self loathing is healthy; keeps you from becoming smug and full of hubris. You should give it a try ;-)

Inq has his fencing for that

[Inquartata]

Indeed.

[teacup]

At the board meeting, how was it explained that hosting a Div I in October would conflict with fewer junior world cups and cadet designated than a Dec Div I would?

In other words, am I missing something?

Board Meeting - February 14, 2010
International designated events from the calendars:
- ME Oct - Jr/Cdt 2, Dec. - 0
- MF Oct - Jr/Cdt 2, Dec - Jr 1
- MS Oct - Jr/Cdt 2, Dec - 0
- WE Oct - 0, Dec - Cdt 1
- WF Oct - 0, Dec - Jr 1
- WS Oct - Jr/2 cdts 3, Dec - 0*
Total Oct - 9, Dec - 3

[eac]

#2 (reports from committee researching rating systems): Moved to urgent and passed

What happened with this? Are the reports available somewhere?

[dberke]

What happened with this? Are the reports available somewhere?

The motion that passed was just a directive that the committee working on new rating systems would provide status reports at each board meeting. No reports have yet been produced (to my knowledge), but we should expect to see one in July.

Dan

[eac]

(characters)

[gladius]

At the board meeting, how was it explained that hosting a Div I in October would conflict with fewer junior world cups and cadet designated than a Dec Div I would?

In other words, am I missing something?

Board Meeting - February 14, 2010
International designated events from the calendars:
- ME Oct - Jr/Cdt 2, Dec. - 0
- MF Oct - Jr/Cdt 2, Dec - Jr 1
- MS Oct - Jr/Cdt 2, Dec - 0
- WE Oct - 0, Dec - Cdt 1
- WF Oct - 0, Dec - Jr 1
- WS Oct - Jr/2 cdts 3, Dec - 0*
Total Oct - 9, Dec - 3

Ah teacup you are not missing anything.

The USFA (TC task force and the national coaches if you believe that they provided their input) are those who can't see the picture and couldn't miss another opportunity to prove their incompetence.

In a system with checks and balances this and any other incongruence would not have passed without a serious discussion or a logical justification...

[mdstasinos]

Ah teacup you are not missing anything.

The USFA (TC task force and the national coaches if you believe that they provided their input) are those who can't see the picture and couldn't miss another opportunity to prove their incompetence.

In a system with checks and balances this and any other incongruence would not have passed without a serious discussion or a logical justification...

It is truly amazing to me how easy it is for you to criticize anything that is presented. Are you even a member of the Association? Lets look at your assertion that December has less conflict internationally than October...true, because October has more weekends in which domestic as well as international events can be held, where as in December there are only two possible weekends, not three, not four and the conflicts with international, school, finals, the holidays and holiday travel do create dramatic limitations both internationally and domestically.
Your assertion that the National Coaches did not have input into the process, is again surprising. You have contact with one of the National Coaches because of your daughter and did he say he had no input...I know he did not say so. The NAC in October is for the NC to have not only a competition before the worlds but in addition a camp for the top point holders for that weekend as well. This is now being organized, for example, for both Men's and Women's foil. So, are you then saying the National Coaches are incompetent for making this decision? And yes, serious discussion did take place with this on many levels. If you recall we even asked input from the membership and the Div.1 NAC was on the first schedule released to the membership in September/October of 2009. It is simple to criticize and belittle those who serve the membership, but remember we asked for input and we did weigh everything, including the international calendar and yes, this is now the schedule for 2010-2011 and beyond.

Mark Stasinos
Vice-President
US FEncing Association

[KidLazy]

But... what is the reason for the schedule change? Why is this schedule become urgent and passed?

[Capt. Slo-mo]

It is truly amazing to me how easy it is for you to criticize anything that is presented. Are you even a member of the Association?

Mark:

With all due respect, this question is borderline sanctimonious. Since I've had similar brickbats tossed in my direction--people in senior positions of authority in the USFA attempting to deny or restrict my ability to speak based on the temporary status of my USFA membership--I find this kind of attitude disheartening.

Gladius has consistently proven to be a cogent and thoughtful analyst of many different facets of fencing. For you to intimate that his opinion should have any less weight just because he might not currently be a member of the USFA is unacceptable. I would suggest an apology is in order.

Your assertion that the National Coaches did not have input into the process, is again surprising.

You need to read his comment more carefully. Gladius is not saying the NAtional Coaches did not have input, he is saying that if Teacup believes they DID have input, then the National Coaches are guilty of the same errors in judgment as the TC Task Force, and the USFA hierarchy in general...in Gladius' opinion.

Somewhat different.

[mdstasinos]

But... what is the reason for the schedule change? Why is this schedule become urgent and passed?

For the changes necessary for the National Coaches to develop their pipelines and to run their programs, the schedule would have to change this coming season. If it had not changed then, then there would be no change till the end of the Quad and The National Coaches would have to go back to the drawing board for their weapon programs and components they wish to develop. If it had changed in the 2011-2012 would mean changing in the Olympic selection year which would not be a good thing to do at that point. I hope this gives you some further insight to what was done and why it was moved to urgent.

Mark Stasinos
Vice-President
US Fencing Association.

[gladius]

Lets look at your assertion...<snip>

Your assertion that the National Coaches did not have input into the process, is again surprising. You have contact with one of the National Coaches because of your daughter and did he say he had no input...I know he did not say so.

Try to understand what I write then criticize me for my opinions with cogent arguments if you wish. Also, don't make assumptions about what direct or indirect feedback I get from any of the national coaches or anyone else I am in contact.

It is simple to criticize and belittle those who serve the membership, but remember we asked for input and we did weigh everything, including the international calendar and yes, this is now the schedule for 2010-2011 and beyond.

I recognize the efforts of all volunteers who try to help the association, and this includes you. However you must also accept that a difference of opinion is not to be taken as a personal attack.

Regarding the new calendar as you know, I have two objections:

• that it was done now BEFORE knowing what the FIE "new" calendar will be;
• the NAC in October having a Div I event and the NAC in November having cadet and junior events.

As you remember I had suggested switching between the two. You justified the USFA choice as one requested by the National Coaches who apparently consider a NAC Div I event in October a necessary "fine tuning" for the senior world which this year will take place in November.

I also wrote many times here in this forum and to you in private that the task to come up with a new calendar is a very daunting one, one which cannot please everybody or every sub group, therefore the outcome has to be a compromise. This is quite different though from what you seem to imply that the result of your efforts produced the best possible solution and that we should believe you took everything in the proper account.

You need to read his comment more carefully. Gladius is not saying the NAtional Coaches did not have input, he is saying that if Teacup believes they DID have input, then the National Coaches are guilty of the same errors in judgment as the TC Task Force, and the USFA hierarchy in general...in Gladius' opinion.

Somewhat different.

Exactly.

[hello?]

It is truly amazing to me how easy it is for you to criticize anything that is presented.

Mark Stasinos
Vice-President
US FEncing Association

The tone and condescension of all your posts, Mr. Stasinos, it what is always truly amazing. The next time you run for office, you should perhaps take into account that people will not always agree with your opinions or decisions. It is not a sign of stupidity or disagreeableness on their part; it is simply a sign that they disagree (as many do). If you are to answer back, please show some respect. These are the people who, rightly of wrongly (or regretfully), elected you.

Lets look at your assertion that December has less conflict internationally than October...true, because October has more weekends in which domestic as well as international events can be held, where as in December there are only two possible weekends, not three, not four and the conflicts with international, school, finals, the holidays and holiday travel do create dramatic limitations both internationally and domestically.
Mark Stasinos
Vice-President
US FEncing Association

From the agenda:
"1. In review of the National Schedule it was apparent that there were events that were being held that created a consistent deficit. North American Cup C, held in December, has consistently lost money for the past 5 years, up to the tune of $30,000."

- According to the committee chair report, the NAC C had the greatest increase, 32%, of all the NACs. Did it lose money this year?

"It was determined that this calendar month created some very difficult combinations of conflict. First, in the month of December there are only two possible weekends to hold the NAC because of the Christmas Holiday and the semester break. In the past it has come in direct conflict with a Junior World Cup or a Cadet International Event, which have a direct relation to the event for the fact of how many Junior and Cadets fence in the Div. 1 NAC’s."

- Isn't moving the Div I to the October NAC creating more international conflicts? (Not to mention SAT and PSAT weekends.)

International designated events from the calendars:
- ME Oct - Jr/Cdt 2, Dec. - 0
- MF Oct - Jr/Cdt 2, Dec - Jr 1
- MS Oct - Jr/Cdt 2, Dec - 0
- WE Oct - 0, Dec - Cdt 1
- WF Oct - 0, Dec - Jr 1
- WS Oct - Jr/2 cdts 3, Dec - 0*
Total Oct - 9, Dec - 3

*And this is only the first two weeks of October, there are more later in October.

It seems to me there are fewer Junior WC conflicts in December. There was only one cadet event in December, WE, which wasn't even in conflict and this was the first year it was designated. And if there are cadet conflicts, with 7 - 9 cadet designated tournaments in the ECC, perhaps other tournaments could be designated. (Do cadets really need three cadet designated events in Europe?)

- Also now that Div I points don't count for cadet Group I points, there is less of an incentive for cadets to go to Div I events anyway, making a conflict between a cadet designated or Div I domestic event less of a concern.

- There are conflicting Senior epee world cups in January, what about those conflicts?

"In addition, Universities and Colleges are giving or preparing to give Semester finals, which has impacted our numbers as well. As a result it was determined that the calendar should be adjusted to eliminate the December date and relocate the events."

- An October NAC may conflict with mid term exams

- There are high schools and universities with finals in January. Should the January NAC be moved to accommodate these fencers?

- (there is no perfect date which doesn't conflict with someone's exams)

Anyway, I am not commenting about whether there should or shouldn't be a December NAC, just wondering about the reasons presented in the agenda as why not to have one in December.

If the goal is to not lose money, then something right was done this season. Perhaps to raise more revenue, return to awarding group II points to cadets for Div I placement, have fewer international cadet designated events. This would draw back some cadet fencers. Or maybe add additional events, veteran team, Div II or cadet individual events, instead of adding cadet events to the January NAC.

If the goal is to not conflict with junior world cups, then moving the Div I to October would conflict with a greater number of junior world cups.

If the goal is to not conflict with cadet European events, then designate some of the other ECC events, fewer or start a domestic cadet circuit which awards domestic points.

If the goal is to not conflict with exams or the holidays, then consider the last weekend in November or the first weekend in December. But NAC D still conflicts with those who have exams in January or SATs in October/November/December.

But if the goal is to run one fewer NAC then cancel one.

Many good points. In my estimation -- and that of many – the questions raised here were never addressed.

There are obvious problems with the 'new' schedule. More -- in my mind and that of many -- than were present in the schedule “we” just dismissed. There was never any coherent or convincing explanation as to why the change was necessary to the detriment of so many. Just piecemeal answers that seemed to benefit, perhaps, a very small percentage of the membership.

How many people will benefit from the now-in-the-works camps for the "top points holders" in men's and women's foil? (I know I won’t – and can think of perhaps only a handful from my entire division who will.) Will it offset all those who are now hurt by having the Div 1 and Veteran tournament in October instead of December?

The October NAC will probably not make any difference to me personally. However, it totally dismisses the concerns of the Veteran fencers who did the USFA proud in Moscow last fall. And, as was pointed out in the post I quote before, it seems to not have avoided as many conflicts for juniors and cadets as it alleges to have done.

If you recall we even asked input from the membership and the Div.1 NAC was on the first schedule released to the membership in September/October of 2009. It is simple to criticize and belittle those who serve the membership, but remember we asked for input...

Mark Stasinos
Vice-President
US FEncing Association

Yes, Sir, you did. And many considered that their input was summarily ignored. I realize, of course, that some of the membership’s input was taken into account – and am indeed grateful for that. I am also aware that it would have been impossible to please everybody (although, again, I do not understand why we needed to replace the schedule that we had with one that seems to have created more problems than it solved – whatever all those problems were, of course). However, for you to dismiss any complaints now by saying “we asked for your input” when the people who are making the complaints gave that input before and their comments were ignored is, well, “simple.”

Mark:

With all due respect, this question is borderline sanctimonious..

Shocking, perhaps, coming from an elected official. However, just the tone I have come to expect from the source.

Mark:

Gladius has consistently proven to be a cogent and thoughtful analyst of many different facets of fencing. For you to intimate that his opinion should have any less weight just because he might not currently be a member of the USFA is unacceptable. I would suggest an apology is in order.

I would agree.

[teacup]

Lets look at your assertion that December has less conflict internationally than October...true, because October has more weekends in which domestic as well as international events can be held, where as in December there are only two possible weekends, not three, not four and the conflicts with international, school, finals, the holidays and holiday travel do create dramatic limitations both internationally and domestically.

Mark, are you suggesting that in the future, in order to avoid conflicts with international events, SAT test dates, etc, that the October NAC could be held on any of the weekends in October rather than continue to be held on the Columbus Day/Canadian Thanksgiving weekend?

(Columbus Day isn't a holiday here but Halloween could be a much bigger conflict for many. )