national competition format

[a517dogg]

why isn't NAC, JO, national championship etc competition format just pools --> DEs single elimination? it woudl be so much faster, simpler for both the referees, competition organizers and the fencers, everybody would know exactly when they are eliminated etc. I realize JO and national champ formats have been changed to be similar to FIE, but you still have this 80% cutoff thing. So, would having all tournements be pools --> DEs be a good thing or bad thing in your opinions?

[edew]

The NAC format is chosen by the HPC (High Performance Committee), which decided that LOTS of fencing is good for training. I personally disagree in what good it provides, but I'm neither a coach nor a member of the HPC.

The World Cups and World Championships use a straight DE, but with 80% up from the initial one-round of pools.

All junior (and cadet) NACs have repechage. Dunno why. Some National Championships in the past have used straight DE no repechage (2002's for example), and some have used DEs with repechage (2000 and 2001's for example). Others used pools all the way to a final of six (way back when, for example).

[Chris]

Originally posted by a517dogg
why isn't NAC, JO, national championship etc competition format just pools --> DEs single elimination? it woudl be so much faster, simpler for both the referees, competition organizers and the fencers, everybody would know exactly when they are eliminated etc. I realize JO and national champ formats have been changed to be similar to FIE, but you still have this 80% cutoff thing. So, would having all tournements be pools --> DEs be a good thing or bad thing in your opinions?

a-d,

In the 70's, a straight pool format, or at least a multi-round pool format was quite common, and has SOME advantage, and several flaws;

1. It doesn't quite have the pressure associated D-E, and meeting up with your nemisis doesn't have to end your day; you just have to do well enough to get 3rd, or 4th in your pool.

2. It does not quite rely so heavily on accurate data to start the event, since you have further rounds for 'the cream to rise to the top'. But they can STILL yield undesirable results when there is a 'ringer'. (i.e. someone relatively good treated as not very good, can still throw a pool out of balance: I once fenced a stragiht pool event of 4 rounds where a fencer had just earned a 'C' but this had not been input, so there were 3 'C's in my pool of 6, and only 1 on several of the others; I moved up from 1st round by 1 touch, only to go undefeated in round 2, 4-1 in 3rd, and 3-2 in final for third.)

3. The scheduling of pools is (maybe) a little easier to deal with for event manager, it compresses their work of making up the new pools into more concentrated periods, and then they are 'hands-off' while the pools run, as opposed to running a D-E table from start to finish.

1. One downside of pools all the way is that, if you do well, and make the final, you stand a good chance of fencing someone 3 times: 4 pools of 6 advances 3 from each pools into 2 pools, so there's 8 of the 12 people will be in pools with someone they fenced already; Obviously, in the final of 6, you MUST be in with 2 people you already fenced 1, and maybe even twice.

Some people may find this understandably undesirable, so a mixed format was used quite a bit at national level events, where pools of 6 were used down to 4 pools of 6, wherein the top 16 would fence DE, with a repechage, so that the 4 fencers 2-0 in DE made the final, and then 2 more would get a 'second chance' by winning in the loser's bracket to make a final pool of 6: the problem with THIS is that those 2 people are 3-1 in DE, and have exerted a lot more energy to get there, and are at an unfair disadvantage. (Or so goes the thinking...)

2. Another big down side of straight pools all the way, is that, if you are one of the better fencers there, and find yourself 4-0 in the first round pool, and advancement assured; you really have no motivation to exert yourself further, and in fact have a motivation to take it easy, especially when the events are large. This leads either to an unfairness, since you can be tempted to 'dump' a bout, or even to dishonesty, as some people might be tempted to buy, sell, or trade bouts*.
*(allegedly there was much tacit collusion against non-euro fencers.)

The qualification round and DE format, the FIE uses now (with, or without a 'cut'), is intended to motivate the fencer to fence their best at all stages of the competition; especially the big once, where losing a bout can cost 15-25 places in the seeding; thus, more fairly yeilding and accurate result.

The DE has the added benefit of being a little easier for people to understand: if the fencer loses they are out. This makes for better TV, which is a secondary concern of the FIE.

This leads to one 'down side' of DE: everyone leaves a loser, except, of course the winner...
I don't think this method is the best for beginners to get hit with right away.

Another downside of DE, especially at larger regional sized tournaments where they don't have 20 strips to play with, is that if you DO get 60-70 people, and employ the 80% promotion, #2 Seed gets a bye, and can find themselve waiting for 30 bouts in the A column, and then 15 bouts in the B column before they fence; if there is some other event going on at the same time, there might easily be only 5 or 6 strips available for this, which means, 8 or 9 DE bout cycles will have to go by before #2 fences, and this can take a while even under otherwise good circumstances.

Of course, the national/international events ususally don't have that problem...
===
Clearly, the 15 touch game is a very different, usually requiring a lot more physical and mental effort, as it gives a competent fencer a chance to make once, or even 2 'comebacks' in the course of the bout, which supposedly should result in the better athlete/fencer winning*.

* If you subscribe to the idea that fencing is about scoring touches, this makes sense, (I am not 100% convinced of this, myself), but if you beleive fencing is about defense, it is sure to rub you the wrong way.

It's important for USFA fencers to understand that other formats ARE allowed for local USFA competitions, (whatever foramts that are listed in the current Athlete Programs Handbook), and that the format should be published in advance of the event (i.e. so you know the format before you go there.), as well as announced before the commencement of the event.

Sometimes I contemplate the prospect of fencing 15 touch bouts in the pools, and 5 touch bouts for DE.

Any thoughts on this?
(Personally, I probably would not fare so well!)

Have Fun!

Fence!

[a517dogg]

I have fenced alot of different formats... the strangest was a one touch tournement, you fence everybody there for one touch, then have DEs that are one touch. I twas basically luck. Anyway, I think pools to DEs are the best, and here's why:

you meet the same person a maximum of twice
it is the simplest to understand both for fencers and for spectators
at the end of the day, the winner in all probability has won all of his bouts. in pool formats, the winner just has to win enough to advance every time, and so the winner will probably have lost bouts on the way to winning the tournement. that just doesn't sit well with me.

[Chris]

Originally posted by a517dogg
I have fenced alot of different formats... the strangest was a one touch tournement, you fence everybody there for one touch, then have DEs that are one touch. It was basically luck.

Well, I heard of 1 touch round robin, but I don't think I have heard of 1 touch DE before; I would think, that in foil and sabre the results could be a little 'erratic'; in epee, I am not so sure it was just be some much of a luck thing.

Anyway, I think pools to DEs are the best, and here's why:
you meet the same person a maximum of twice
it is the simplest to understand both for fencers and for spectators
at the end of the day, the winner in all probability has won all of his bouts. in pool formats, the winner just has to win enough to advance every time, and so the winner will probably have lost bouts on the way to winning the tournement. that just doesn't sit well with me.

Well, after fencing it the last 10 years, or so, I am certainly USED to it, but I can't say that A. the winner has probably won all of their bouts (though it happens a lot), Nor can I say that it guarantees that the winner has fenced/defeated the best' fencers; this is often just not the case.

That being said, I am not claiming I have another solution, nor that I even prefer one; though I WOULD say that fencers, both beginners, and experience CAN benefit from occasionally fencing in other formats, particularly to improve their 5 touch game.

Have fun!

Fence!