Co-ed NACs?

[Peach]

People keep talking as if the classification really should have a stable meaning. Theoretically it should, but in practice it doesn't, whether you're male or female. I'm a good example.

I have earned a B several times, and an A once, and I trained like crazy for the A and reaped injuries ever since, but because the classification system is basically a rule of thumb rather than a state, I'm still officially an A. Sure, I can beat a lot of people, guys included, and it is fun at times to have somebody underestimate me because I'm a middle-aged woman. In open mixed competition as a female, I have earned a C a number of times by beating all or most of the fencers in the event, male or female, but most of the sabre events I've been in where that happens aren't strong enough to earn more than a C. On other occasions I have failed to make it into the top 8 in a mixed competition. On other occasions I have completely bombed in single-sex competitions, for that matter.

Hey, I'm 51, and I peak (I hope) for the competitions that matter to me. Those competitions happen to be with other women over 40, with the most important being the competitions with other women over 50.

I do like the idea of single-sex competitions, not because it makes it easier, but because it gives me a chance to compete against my peers. If you concentrate on finding out who the "truly best" competitor is, I always go for reductio ad absurdam--if you try to reduce competition to its most basic terms and look for the true winner, it's someone with a big gun who takes out his opponents the night before the event. Everything else involves a great number of rules intended to put restrictions on unfair advantage.

[BugabooX]

I think events should be separated by sex just so that guys can have the opportunity to stand aside and get a really good look at all the attractive fencing babes in action.

[Inquartata]

Wait for it...

( And use the pause to put on your Nomex! )

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by BugabooX
I think events should be separated by sex just so that guys can have the opportunity to stand aside and get a really good look at all the attractive fencing babes in action.

Is there some reason you can't check women out in mixed events?? there IS a LOT of downtime in fencing, after all.

-m

[Mo]

Originally posted by BugabooX
I think events should be separated by sex just so that guys can have the opportunity to stand aside and get a really good look at all the attractive fencing babes in action.

Oh, I am sure once all the "fencing babes" know this, they will worry more about how they look than they will about fencing. After all, the only reason women fence is so they can please you fencing 14 year olds.
Maybe it isn't about you.

[TheOnlyPorthos]

This is an interesting issue; but before we delve too deeply into the physical differences, we should take a look at how this will affect how things are run. For instance, at Greenville over two hundred competitors showed up for div 3 men's foil. The event took an excruciatingly long time, now add an extra hundred+ competitors and see what happens, multiple flights of pools and an extremely overwhelmed bout comittee. By the way, I am not a foil fencer, (may the notion burn in hell) I am simply using that as a reference point.
What I am trying to say is that these things take too long anyway. We don't need even more competitors bringing the state of progression from lethargic to catatonic.

I would also like to propose a friendly gentleman's wager. Bugaboo approaches a female saber fencer, a junior lets say, and tells her that she is fencing solely for his visual gratification. The wager is his hospital bill, the winner being the one who guesses within the closest margin. I wager it is somewhere around $2500, not counting reconstructive surgery.
Any takers?

[oiuyt]

It shouldn't affect the amount of time at all. Every person that is in an event gets a round of pools whether co-ed or not. Each person requires 1 DE to be eliminated. The number of total bouts is 5-6 pool bouts plus 1 DE bout times the number of people. Let's say we have 200 men and 200 women (numbers obviosuly arbitrary for simplicity).

Non-coed:
200 men require a round of pools, then 200 DE bouts.
200 women require a round of pools, then 200 DE bouts.
total: pool bouts for 400 people plus 400 DE bouts.

Coed:
400 people require a round of pools, then 400 DE bouts.
total: pool bouts for 400 people plus 400 DE bouts.

Scheduling is a bit more difficult, but there are half as many events to schedule so rather than having men's epee conflicting with women's foil on the same day, have only coed epee on that day. Effectively we already have the event double (at least) flighted, just with the flights seperated onto different days (ie the first flight is on Friday and invovles only the 200 men, the second flight is on Sunday and invovles only the women).

The one place where the argument breaks down is that we don't have equal sized events (epee vs. sabre) currently. Becasue of that the tournament committee can take advantage of the differences and do load balancing (which is one of the reasons ME can run opposite WF). Another advantage is that single-weapon refs can be more fully utilized (another reason to have multiple weapons on the same day and the same weapon (split by gender/ability/age) on different days).

Note: I am NOT arguing in favor of coed NACs, I think that they would be a mistake. But combining two events run the way NACs are run does not increase the total number of bouts required.

-B :)

[three_hundred_fifty_five]

The reason there is no co-ed NAC is because men are better and that would be unfair to the women.

[lochinvar]

Ah, enter the troll...

[three_hundred_fifty_five]

Originally posted by lochinvar
Ah, enter the troll...

Bonjour.

[135711]

I like the idea of having womens events and mens events separately. once in a while I like to fence the men in competition, but not too much. it's sorta weird, it really helps to fence them but then they can't check out the fencing babes, because most of them want to be stronger than the girls, so....... you can't beat the men in fencing that you like, or you can't go out with them, that's the story. no guy wants to date a girl that can beat them at a game or sport, be it fencing, baseball, chess or whatever. so girls, throw the game if you like him. sorry peach, i don't go in for the kill.....and i'm over the hill.

[Purple Fencer]

Originally posted by Catlady
Also, there is Ken Chilton, who I understand is pretty short, but who is not one to be sneezed at either. [/b]

Ken's about 5' 3"....maybe 5' 4". Used to do gymnastics before he got into fencing. Nice guy...even if he is a mutant lefty!

[Mo]

Men and women are different, one is not better than the other. That being said, there really is a danger for women in fencing to win bouts with men. Most men take it but some just cannot deal with losing to a female.

My kids have been in Airforce Academy meets in Colorado Springs. My daughter won some bouts and made some permanent male enemies on the AF Cadet Team. It was almost scary the way their "win at any cost" mentality would allow them to justify pounding on a young woman.

While some women are hard hitters, most are not usually vindictive. I've seen quite a few guys at NAC meets who use hitting excessively hard (IMO) as a tool in fencing.

Having male vs female is more an issue of the self control of the males and their need to be stronger and better than women than it is in fairness.

In local meets not that much is at stake. In National competitions a lot more matters. Points and seeding counts. It could get really ugly.

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by Mo
Men and women are different, one is not better than the other. That being said, there really is a danger for women in fencing to win bouts with men. Most men take it but some just cannot deal with losing to a female.

My kids have been in Airforce Academy meets in Colorado Springs. My daughter won some bouts and made some permanent male enemies on the AF Cadet Team. It was almost scary the way their "win at any cost" mentality would allow them to justify pounding on a young woman.

While some women are hard hitters, most are not usually vindictive. I've seen quite a few guys at NAC meets who use hitting excessively hard (IMO) as a tool in fencing.

Having male vs female is more an issue of the self control of the males and their need to be stronger and better than women than it is in fairness.

In local meets not that much is at stake. In National competitions a lot more matters. Points and seeding counts. It could get really ugly.

So, its not that men ARE stronger, just that they feel the need to use their strength more?? I suppose its also not that men are faster, just that they feel the need.... THE NEED FOR SPEED!

-m

[achilleus]

Originally posted by Mo
Men and women are different, one is not better than the other.

Great point that hasn't been made in this conversation yet.

Originally posted by Mo
While some women are hard hitters, most are not usually vindictive. I've seen quite a few guys at NAC meets who use hitting excessively hard (IMO) as a tool in fencing.

I was watching the SA Spurs play the LA Lakers during last season's playoffs. SA's point guard was a young rookie from France and he was causing the LA's point guard some serious problems. The kid was scoring at will during the first half of the game. After halftime, my girlfriend who was new to basketball asked how is LA going to stop that guy? He's younger faster, and better than they guy who guards him?

My response was, next the kid gets the ball and tries to do something with it, hit him hard. He'll get tentative, and back down.

Sure enough, opening of the 3rd quarter, kid gets the ball, drives to the basket and gets hit hard. He scored like 20 points in the first half, and only 2 in the second half.

Another great example is Mark Phillipousis, a large Australian tennis player. He was asked why he didn't play mixed doubles, and he replied that the double standard was too much. If he didn't play hard, he was told he didn't take them seriously. If he did play the way he normally played, hitting the ball hard and towards the body of the player, he was booed by the fans for being rude to the girls.

John McEnroe, statesman that he is, replied that well you're not a tennis player unless you got a tattoo (basically a bruise from the ball hitting you).

Being physically intimidating is a part of sports. It's a part of fencing. I've seen women use it against women, and I've seen men use it against men. But if a man uses it against a woman, you start to run into problems.

[swordsen]

Hmm. I have seen women use physical intimidation against men too. But that is beside the point. The issue of people getting upset if you go all out against an opponent is one that has bothered me for quite awhile. Usually when there are younger fencers entered int he event. Certain directors seemed to expect you to fence at half speed becasue they were young. the answer we came up with to that is simple. (and it applies equally well to mixed events)
If you don't want to fence me when I am fencing all out come fence me in practice. If you are on the strip in a tournament, well hey, you signed the same waiver I did.
As an aside, most women fencers I know would be highly offended if they even suspected that I wasn't going all out against them.

[Capt. Slo-mo]

Originally posted by swordsen
Hmm. I have seen women use physical intimidation against men too. But that is beside the point.

Could be true...but I suspect it goes the other way far, far more often. How many big burly male sabre fencers are going to be cowed by anything a woman fencer does? Get beaten, perhaps, but intimidated by force? I think the only intimidation is mental...as in being afraid of getting outfenced, not out muscled.

Originally posted by swordsen

The issue of people getting upset if you go all out against an opponent is one that has bothered me for quite awhile. Usually when there are younger fencers entered in the event. Certain directors seemed to expect you to fence at half speed becasue they were young.

I've fenced in tournaments with youth fencers mixed in, and watched a bunch of these multi-aged bouts as well. Most adults fence kindly with youth fencers, but occasionally, an older man (and by older I mean age in relation to the youth fencer, not older as in 50+ veterans!) having trouble with a youth--and especially a female fencer--will resort to extremely heavy hitting as a method of intimidation. This is reprehensible and the epitome of poor sportsmanship. I don't expect anyone to fence at half speed, but you don't need to cut a 12 year old in half with a monster parry-riposte.

Originally posted by swordsen

If you don't want to fence me when I am fencing all out come fence me in practice. If you are on the strip in a tournament, well hey, you signed the same waiver I did.
As an aside, most women fencers I know would be highly offended if they even suspected that I wasn't going all out against them.

First of all, I don't think there is a disclaimer anywhere on the waiver that reads: "Attention, youth and women fencers. Be advised that should you, at any time, threaten the emotional well-being of certain men entered in this tournament, you may be subject to vindictive, brutal touches resulting in contusions, broken skin, loss of nerve function and/or death."

By all means, we should go all out during a match. But all out doesn't mean open season for gigantic-behind-the-head-slashes on an overmatched opponent. The point of sabre fencing is not to beat the crap out of each other...it's to use brains and finesse and technique and strategy to score points. In sabre at least, a clever gossamer touch lights up the box just as brightly as an overhead hammer blow.

I think the point Mo was trying to make is that since some men have a well recognized problem with using excessive force for intimidation, that problem will only be magnified if a co-ed NAC is instituted. If it's a minor problem at a local tournament with little at stake, what happens when it counts for national points?

[oiuyt]

contusions

It's a combat sport. Bruises should be expected.

In sabre at least, a clever gossamer touch lights up the box just as brightly as an overhead hammer blow.

Frequently much more brightly. Attempt an overhead hammer blow, tag, stopcut is good, opponent is gone. Hammer blow never arrives.

I certainly do not advocate vindictive or violent hits (there's a reason they're on the penalty chart). Is physical intimidation a valid technique? Perhaps. Depends on how it's done. I'm a fairly big (well, tall at least if not that massive) guy. Will I use that fact? Sometimes. Does that mean I hit hard? No, not intentionally. In fact I don't believe I've EVER intentionally hit someone harder than I needed to. Will I use the fact that I can be a big person coming down the strip at you very quickly? If I think it'll help and I need it. Have I had bouts where an inexperienced opponent couldn't handle the fact that I was bigger/stronger/faster even before it got to issues of whether or not I was better? Yes. Have I had bouts where just by hooking up and being big intimidated an opponent enough that the bout was basically over before I did ANYTHING? Yes. Do I use these factors very often? No, of course not. Could they be used in most bouts? No. In fact the bouts where they CAN be used are nearly always against inexperienced fencers. I should be able to beat them regardless of whether or not I try to play mind games.

Another issue: rather than mind games the require physicality, how about games playing off of demenor or other issues. I come out and hit you and casually turn and walk back to my line. I do it again. Can this be a form of intimidation that can take you out of your game? Definately. After scoring touches I get visibly pumped up (yelling, fist pump, whatever). I pull off a string of these. Can this take you out of your game? Definately. You've just pulled off a string of touches. I retie my shoe to give you time to think (possibly to give ME time to think, but generally to give YOU time to think). Could that knock you off-stride? Definately. Are mind games a part of fencing (or basketball or baseball or football or ANY other sport)? Definately.

As mentioned I don't use hitting hard to gain strategic advantage. Could it be successfully used? Yes, of course. Can it be legally used? Yes, up to a point. Does that therefore make it a part of the game? Yes. When it crosses the line into intentional brutality, vindictive acts, or violent hits there are associated penalties. They should be enforced. Are they always? No.

A related question. You're at a local, fairly low-key event. One (or more) of the fencers in your pool is a relative newbie, possibly also young/small. Do you tone down your game and allow them to score a few touches to make them feel good and possibly help them learn something? Do you fence without going all out because you know you're going to win anyway and are still likely to record a shutout, and if not it'll only be a touch or two? Do you fence just to the level that will guarantee that each touch is yours? Do you fence them just as hard as you would the toughest other person in your pool hitting them with actions which they have no clue how you did?

Related question: If someone is in the first category (clearly in the first and not the second, sometimes a hard distinctin to make, sometimes very clear) do they deserve a black card for favoring an opponent? If not why not?

My answer to the first question depends on a host of factors including the event, the location, the day, my mood, how much I want top seeding and how hard I think it'll be to get, etc. Generally I'd fall into the third category with very limited exceptions.

My answer to the second question is yes although I've never seen anyone give one for that reason. It would also be hard (social acceptance-wise) to award one for that reason in a self-reffed tournament (generally the situation when it arises).

Think about the questions. Whether or not you answer them publically you should know how YOU act and why.

-B :)

[achilleus]

A couple of things:

Physical intimidation doesn't neccessarily mean hitting with intentional brutality. It could be taking the blade hard, hitting with some force, screaming in someone's face.

All those things, if a male did to a female would be considered a total jerk. All these methods of intimidation are a part sports, and a part of fencing.

And your list of questions are all fine and dandy, but to me the answer is quite simple. I train to compete. I compete to win. My competitions are NAC's and World Cups. If I go to a mixed tournament and go all out, I'll get a horrible rep. If I go to a tournament, and take it easy on somebody, I set my training back. I don't go to go to places like OH, KY, Hungary, Germany, and France to take it easy on a fencer regardless of sex, age, or apparent skill level. Other competitors feel the exact same way.

Local competitions are often co-ed, and considering the low importance of these events, people don't mind giving some touches up, or toying with less skilled fencers. It's not what I consider right, but for some reason, people in this sport think that men and women can compete equally.