Impressions of the USFA

[Slavheart]

I'm somewhat new to fencing and I've been trying to join USFA. So far, I'm having some absolutely miserable impressions of this organization. I'm wondering whether it's just a temporary bad streak or whether other people have had similar experiences.

First, when I tried to fax my membership form and payment I got nothing but busy signals. When I called to inquire, the best they could say was that their machine stays busy. (Even the USFA website admits to having inadequate fax capabilities. Why don't they expand them?) So, I mailed a hardcopy of my application and membership dues a month ago...and they still haven't been processed. Now, their website has been inaccessible for two days. And finally, when I try to call them, their phone lines aren't working!

So...has anyone else run into this sort of thing with USFA?

Thanks.

-Slavheart

[Peach]

The USFA is a very small office with only a few people in it, and right now its fax machine is busy because people who waited until nearly the due date are faxing in their entries for the San Diego NAC. The fax machine is usually nearly unavailable for several days around the due date of NACs. I know I'm nuts, but I don't care if I end up not going due to acts of God or whatever, so I send mine in a month or two early.

It does take a while to process membership applications. You will get it. If you don't, I find that when I e-mail the office they are very prompt about getting back to me, especially if I am courteous about it.

The website is down because (a) it is maintained on a server at a remote server facility (b) something happened to the server and (c) it is maintained by a volunteer who has a real job. He has posted on rec.sport.fencing that he will get to it as soon as he can.

I've been to the USFA office, and ever since then I don't think of it as a monolithic bureaucracy but as sort of like the school office in the elementary school where I teach. Insanely busy, understaffed, underpaid, and surprisingly amiable considering what people expect from it.

[DHCJr]

You might also make use of your local division, since you will probably fence more at their tournaments then at the NAC's. Most fencers in the 4 divisions locally pay their dues at the division or at the LBI, which is the first meet of the season.

As was said before it has a small office staff, with even a smaller budget. A large part of the money comes from the USOC and they are not as interested in sending large amounts of money to the 'Minor' sports.

Also, as said before, people wait till the last minute. They do work very hard. Give them a chance and make use of the local divisions. They are there for you.

[oiuyt]

Not to mention that calling them is NOT the best way to get a quick response. They have few enough people and enough callers that you're likely to get shunted into voicemail at best. Send them an email, they're nearly always REALLY good about prompt replies in my experience.

When it's not right around an entry deadline the fax usually isn't busy. Even a few days before the deadline you shouldn't get a busy signal.

The national office does a fairly good job. The USFA is a well run organization.

-B :)

[Mo]

In our family we've had some special circumstances to deal with concerning fencing.
We have had to call the office or contact people working there on more than one occassion. I am amazed at the patience and consideration we had when dealing with them.
You just wandered in at a bad time Slavheart.

[three_hundred_fifty_five]

Patience is a virtue.

Secondly, if you are new to fencing, then a membership isn't something you REALLY need. If you are competing, you will probably enter novice events where you don't need a membership, or at least they'll let you in without one.

You get a magazine, a membership card, and a bunch of Hertz Rent-a-car coupons. That's it.

[DHCJr]

Originally posted by three_hundred_fifty_five
Patience is a virtue.

Secondly, if you are new to fencing, then a membership isn't something you REALLY need. If you are competing, you will probably enter novice events where you don't need a membership, or at least they'll let you in without one.

You get a magazine, a membership card, and a bunch of Hertz Rent-a-car coupons. That's it.

It is a little different in the U.S. If you want to compete, whether it be NAC's, local or even novice, you have to be a member. At a competition you may not be a member when you get there, but you will be a member before you fence. You can sign up at any USFA local competition.

Also there is more for the membership dues, insurance. All USFA sponsered competitions, even local, are covered by the USFA liability insurance, as long as the competition follows the rules and one of them is membership.

[epeemike81]

In addition, many clubs require USFA membership so that their practices are covered by the liability waivers.

-m

[135711]

usfa, as peach mentioned is too small. we need to improve it, why not move offices to Chicago? more fencers in the Midwest than in the Rocky Mountains, more of a pool to pick from in terms of officers, and more Staff!!!! Don't you feel better when you hear the sounds of a busy office......sort of an echo of all the bells and whirls of a good busy fencing salle. maybe they should have some cute "waiting sounds" like:
"halt, your call will go through in just a second"
and have little sounds in the background?

I'll say it.......We all imagine that FIE has this gigantic office of efficient germans sitting around answering the fencing phone and organizing bouts all over the world, with telephones ringing in the background and directors available for discussions. .....

am i right a-bout this?

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by 135711
usfa, as peach mentioned is too small. we need to improve it, why not move offices to Chicago? more fencers in the Midwest than in the Rocky Mountains, more of a pool to pick from in terms of officers, and more Staff!!!! Don't you feel better when you hear the sounds of a busy office......sort of an echo of all the bells and whirls of a good busy fencing salle. maybe they should have some cute "waiting sounds" like:
"halt, your call will go through in just a second"
and have little sounds in the background?

well, for one thing, if we wanted to move it to a place with more fencing, we'd move it to the Northeast.

Also, the reason it is in Colorado is that the OTC is in Colorado. until that moves, USFA won't either.

-m

[135711]

wht's otc, there' more fencing in the northeast, maybe so, but chicago is a great location first because it's a city that lot's of people can navagate easily, it's a newer city, more central to the nation in general, and that would mean people would feel more closely related to it's offices. there' good fencing in the mid-west, indiana, and illinois for example, kentucky, wouldn't mind....
but what's otc, first.

[epeemike81]

OTC = Olympic Training Center

As for Chicago being a better location, I would say NYC is just as easily navigable as Chicago. I would also say Boston is, but I think I'm in the minority in that belief.

There is such a large number of fencers in the northeast that a huge portion of the fencing population would "feel more closely related to it's national office" if it was in NYC rather than Chicago.

All of this discussion, however, is a moot point since Colorado Springs is the center of olympic sport governing bodies in the US.

-m

[135711]

otc is nice, but maybe it should be a separate body. the rest of us sort of aspiring, but tiring might feel more connected to fencing if it answered the needs of the basic fencer: that being a recreational, local fencer, who may decide to fence locally, in their divisions and fence in nationals on occassion; who may have kids who want to fence at higher levels, they could be 'referred' to otc, as it doesn't meet the needs of the average fencer in america. the us probably has thousands of fencers, but only a handful do olympic training, or have the need for it, unless of course otc wants to do some workshops across the country on divisional levels.

[DHCJr]

Originally posted by 135711
otc is nice, but maybe it should be a separate body. the rest of us sort of aspiring, but tiring might feel more connected to fencing if it answered the needs of the basic fencer: that being a recreational, local fencer, who may decide to fence locally, in their divisions and fence in nationals on occassion; who may have kids who want to fence at higher levels, they could be 'referred' to otc, as it doesn't meet the needs of the average fencer in america. the us probably has thousands of fencers, but only a handful do olympic training, or have the need for it, unless of course otc wants to do some workshops across the country on divisional levels.

But who is going to pay for this break away from the OTC? Much of the funding comes from the USOC and they are not altruistic. They want results (Medals) for their money. I don’t think the average recreational fencer is willing to pay more in dues, so the USFA will forgo the USOC money and focus on them. The office is small because of limited funds and the USFA is not going to be able to get a lot more if they focus on the recreational fencer. But if they are able to ‘Create’ and interest by medals especially Gold at the Olympics, maybe we will get more interest from the recreational fencers. It worked for Football (Soccer).

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by 135711
otc is nice, but maybe it should be a separate body. the rest of us sort of aspiring, but tiring might feel more connected to fencing if it answered the needs of the basic fencer: that being a recreational, local fencer, who may decide to fence locally, in their divisions and fence in nationals on occassion; who may have kids who want to fence at higher levels, they could be 'referred' to otc, as it doesn't meet the needs of the average fencer in america. the us probably has thousands of fencers, but only a handful do olympic training, or have the need for it, unless of course otc wants to do some workshops across the country on divisional levels.

I think that you may be misunderstanding my point. My point is not that USFA uses the training facilities. after all, our olympians don't train there. however, all of the beaurocracy surrounding Olympic sports in this country is located around the OTC.

-m

[oiuyt]

Not to mention that until recently we had free office space for our national office on the OTC campus. We traded the right for such office space for 42% (IIRC) ownership of a building in Colorado Springs (the rest of the building is owned by other NGBs that similarly traded the right to on-campus space for partial ownership of the building). So, among everything else -- our national staff live/work in CS, and we own (partially) a building there. Given that having the faxes go to random city A vs random city B adds nothing for most people, why would we WANT to go to the trouble and expense of moving? There are reasons to stay where we are and nothing compelling (no matter HOW easy Chicago is to navigate or how wonderful the El is) to make us want to move.

-B :)

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

135711 wrote:

>maybe they should have some cute "waiting sounds" like:
>"halt, your call will go through in just a second"
>and have little sounds in the background?

To make it really fencing:

Halt, the box will decide the right-of-way of your call in relation to others, unless you are an epeeist - in which your call will be answered at the same time as the calls of other epeeists calling now!

For comparison: The Sw. Fencing Federation has one employed secretary, and a few elected officials (who all have day jobs). When I have had reason to phone them, I have always got a prompt answer, and even this even just before the largest competition in Sweden. Membership info is always (IME) updated on the website. This secretary answers the calls of a 3000-member organization, and it has always turned out well for me.

Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[oiuyt]

Just ran some numbers from an old USFA membership report (June 1 2001, so the next to most recent).

Here are the top 10 divisions ranked by size:
New England 1451
New Jersey 819
Long Island 532
Metropolitan 486
Southern Cal 461
Philidelphia 457
Cen Calif 452
South Texas 433
Virginia 411
North Carolina 407

coming in at #16 and #17 (respectively) are:
Colorado 333
Illinois 308

So perhaps colorado DOESN'T have fewer fencers than Chicago. You might notice that the top of the list is dominated by divisions from the northeast. Overall in fact, the northeast (here defined as New England plus New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) had 5355 total members. The USFA as a whole had 15389. A third of the membership is what is geographically a very small area (our states don't grow quite as large as they do out west, or even in the midwest).

Epeemike has also run the numbers for which city people are closer to, NYC or Chicago. He uses the same report I had (June 2001) and has decided on a case-by-case basis which city each division is closer to. He found that 7676 members were closer to Chicago and 7656 members were closer to NYC. Of course most of those people were not CLOSE to Chicago, they were merely closER than they were to NYC.

That said I do NOT advocate moving the office to either Chicago or NYC. I have no problem with the office being in Colorado. But IF it were being moved, geographic centricity would NOT be a reason that I'd pick Chicago.

-B :)

[edew]

Since few fencers (if any) actually visit the USFA office, the solution is to put it where the rent is cheap, and where it has good (political) connections to the PTB (powers that be). Colorado Springs looks as good as any. Maybe they could consider Shreveport LA or Biloxi MS, but those lack in having connections to the PTB.

As for the response from USFA. I often have trouble getting new classification changes updated. I have to ping them several times, and ultimately, I have to talk to them personally at the NAC or wherever to make sure the updated classification change has been accepted.

["Fence like a Cat"]

Sometimes information is slow in coming and I wish they (info@) would at least acknowledge an inquiry. From a statistical point of view I've looked at the same numbers. I am more interested in a trend analysis with some qualitative factors, then trying to identify the success factors and how this information can be generalized elsewhere. You know, research. The statement that the USFA will suffer from a recreational focus in my opinion is incorrect.

I have gone through every issue of American Fencing since 1959 over the last month. I think the USFA has always focused on the high level competitor. I feel that the USFA would grow through promoting more recreational programs. The USFA used to publish stats about growth, division wise and club. It needs to popularize the sport itself in it's initiatives. That doesn't mean "dumbing the sport down" as I read somewhere recently. If the game changes too much it will be a different games altogether. You know the debates.

I don't personally believe gold medals will make that much difference (though having one would be pinnacle). Popular media exposure is a positive trend. Early polls say: mixed blessing, thanks to Bond and others.

Funny thing, in the early 60's the USFA (AFLA) was continually asking it's members to promote the sport in their own communities. That really hasn't happened in a while. What are you doing?

Money has always been an issue too. It goes without saying the organization has always been small. What would the USFA do with a sizeable donation?

It's probably premature to envision an EUSFA and WUSFA, or even an SUSFA in America?

The current leadership has a pure competitive bent due to their backgrounds and they are elected through the membership. I think it would be tough to get elected without a high level competitive background, legacy or named coach/Maestro. Having said that, I cannot understate my respect for the encumbent careers and efforts on US Fencing's behalf.

How many of the 14,000 plus members are stars?

There are some great regional models emerging, again.

More grassroots recognition and promotion has to occur like that in Fencing Quarterly Magazine (FQM). Having a clearly divergent nature, I'd like American Fencing and FQM to merge. In reality, only in their combined content do these magazines speak to the normal curve. Each persepective has value.

I can't say my opinions will be entirely the same or different on any other day. It's a love\hate thing and I am very thankful for two grant awards and the help I've been given by the USFA.

Going through the back issues of Amercian fencing was fascinating. I highly recommend re-reading, and the editorial staff revisiting for content or reflection.

For what it's worth.

Marty