US Veterans Team

[schlager7]

My apologies in advance if I missed it on this forum (I did run a search) or on the USA Fencing Site (Still don't have the logic down on some of that site's organization).

Has the US team for the Veteran World Championships been announced? If the answer is yes I would not be insulted to receive a link to it.

[Craig]

My apologies in advance if I missed it on this forum (I did run a search) or on the USA Fencing Site (Still don't have the logic down on some of that site's organization).

Has the US team for the Veteran World Championships been announced? If the answer is yes I would not be insulted to receive a link to it.

They were announced at Nationals and you can see who made the teams on the updated point standings here:

http://usfencing.org/national-points...nts/men-s-foil

(You'll need to navigate to each weapon/age sheet.)

[fencerbill]

Transferring from another thread (with minor corrections).

Unofficial Veterans World Championship team

My merging of results and previous points. In essential agreement with the points listings, although ties may be listed differently.

V50 ME
Dragonetti
Watrall
Schneider
Ameli

V50 MF
Biebel
Kaihatsu
Zelkowski
Bennett

V50 MS
Runyan
Kopylov
Milne
Gutman

V50 WE
Kocab
Fortune
Asher
Huang

V50 WF
Starks-Faulkner
Verhave
Walters
Marx

V50 WS
Eyre
Runyan
Mazoril
Bender

V60 ME
Ridge
Bothelio
Flint
Cochrane

V60 MF
Patterson
White
Hambarzumian
Sexton

V60 MS
Seuss
Sexton
Sbarbaro
Yung

V60 WE
Kallus
Bedrosian
Runyon (Declined)
Rubin
Estrada

V60 WF
Stevens
Cawthorn
Rosenfeld
Bedrosian

V60 WS
Turner
Nicolau (Unable to participate)
O’Leary
Hurst
Hiatt

V70 ME
Campe
Adams
Henry
Kocsy

V70 MF
Adams
Miernik
Chang
Sady

V70 MS
Adams
Terninko
Hall (Declined)
Bianchini
Kosow

V70 WE
Graham
Anderson
Annavedder
Abrahams

V70 WF
Graham
Maier
Evans
Jackson

V70 WS
Anderson
Jackson
Felty
Annavedder

NB. If I remember correctly, Pat Bedrosian has qualified for every Women’s Foil and Epee Championship since Siofolk in 1999!

[schlager7]

Thanks!

[fencerbill]

The several I checked are effective as of July 11, the Monday after SN finished on Sunday. Which is not necessarily the day they became available on the web site.

Would it have taken that much effort to announce that final rankings for the year were now available? Much less an announcement of the team. Although one might say the team announcement should not be published until everyone had confirmed whether they would participate or decline.

Sometimes it seems as if these things are considered none of our business. If we want to know come to SN and stand around for all of the medal ceremonies.

On the other hand, they have now published a score or so of pictures (identities not provided) of the hoi polloi standing or sitting around at a reception for the zonal championships. Whoopee.

[fdad]

I have a somewhat unrelated vets question that doesn't merit its own thread. Why can't V50s fence in V40 events, and V60s fence in V50 and V40s, and V70s in V60, etc.?

I know the answer isn't because the events would grow too large. Is it because V40s don't want to get out smarted by those crafty V80s?

[fencerbill]

I have a somewhat unrelated vets question that doesn't merit its own thread. Why can't V50s fence in V40 events, and V60s fence in V50 and V40s, and V70s in V60, etc.?

I know the answer isn't because the events would grow too large. Is it because V40s don't want to get out smarted by those crafty V80s?

Short answer: V50, V60 and V70 are qualifiers to highly coveted (limit of four) qualifying slots for Vets World Championships.

Longer answer: It used to be just about that for the two Veterans NACs. There would be one qualifier which included everyone over 40 for points to make the V50 and V60 squads. So we 60 plus (dating myself) would have to compete against as much as 20 years younger fencers to get qualifying points. There were only a couple in Sabre, typically Bill Georing and Ray Sexton, who would make it to the round of 16. The rest of us were squabbling for point differences less than 10 apart to make it to Vets Worlds. And you really had to go to all 3 qualifiers to be sure of making the team for Worlds. Summer Championships at that time did have separate age groups for V50-59 and V60 Plus.

There is in fact something like what you talked about for the two NACs. There are separate V50, V60 and V70 qualifiers. The other event is for 40 Plus. So many of us do choose to compete with everyone over 40 combined. But the V40 Plus is not a qualifier, just for bragging rights. Many do compete in it, but others, like Ray Sexton and Jim Adams, compete in all 3 weapons in their age bracket. Ray has qualified for all 3, but not this year. Jim Adams has qualified in all 3 weapons for the 3rd consecutive year.

[oiuyt]

I have a somewhat unrelated vets question that doesn't merit its own thread. Why can't V50s fence in V40 events, and V60s fence in V50 and V40s, and V70s in V60, etc.?

The suggestion was raised at the Vets meeting in Reno (not the first time the topic has been discussed). Greg Dilworth and David Sach were both present (as was I), so at least the message is getting passed along.

-B

[hello?]

The suggestion was raised at the Vets meeting in Reno (not the first time the topic has been discussed). Greg Dilworth and David Sach were both present (as was I), so at least the message is getting passed along.

-B

And, I seriously, seriously, seriously hope: IGNORED. I will personally raise all kinds of hell (and I can GUARANTEE you I will not be the only one) if certain fencers who are aging out of Vet W-50, "for example," are allowed to fence in that category next year in team-defining events. Just saying. (It is NOT apples to apples anymore and we're attempting to deal with it - but certain soon-to-be Vet 60 W-Vets are STILL an unfair opponent for MOST Vet 50s W-vets, thank you very much. Allow this and I can almost guarantee you an exodus from Vet fencing. In fact, I would really, really appreciate a notice as far in advance of December as possible if this is even considered to be a POSSIBILITY. It will make canceling my iSol reservation that much easier without having to pay a charge.)

[KD5MDK]

Was there any reason given why you should allow ineligible people to fence in a qualifier? I suppose it's similar to allowing foreigners into NACs, but it still seems very odd for someone to want to.

[oiuyt]

Was there any reason given why you should allow ineligible people to fence in a qualifier? I suppose it's similar to allowing foreigners into NACs, but it still seems very odd for someone to want to.

Not really. That was the counter-point I recall being made (both this time and at previous vet meetings I've attended). This year the topic covered both changing V50-59 to V50+ and the idea of replacing V40-49 Nationals with V40+ Nationals, to have the national championships match the event held during the rest of the season. More of the focus this season was on the latter than the former.

It's a long-standing issue/request with significant minorities on each side and a large, undecided, middle. It gets raised close to annually, but without a clear consensus driving a decision in either direction, which, generally, leaves us with the status quo.

-B

[hello?]

Not really. That was the counter-point I recall being made (both this time and at previous vet meetings I've attended). This year the topic covered both changing V50-59 to V50+ and the idea of replacing V40-49 Nationals with V40+ Nationals, to have the national championships match the event held during the rest of the season. More of the focus this season was on the latter than the former.

It's a long-standing issue/request with significant minorities on each side and a large, undecided, middle. It gets raised close to annually, but without a clear consensus driving a decision in either direction, which, generally, leaves us with the status quo.

-B

I can guarantee you that this year anything but THE RULE will raise serious issues. Who is deciding whether the rule is changing and WHEN? I really would like to know. If this is actually being discussed, I would like to alert those potentially affected (including myself -- I would absolutely withdraw from fencing).

I am sure this is true: "It's a long-standing issue/request with significant minorities on each side and a large, undecided, middle. It gets raised close to annually, but without a clear consensus driving a decision in either direction, which, generally, leaves us with the status quo." However, at least in Women's Epee, this year sure raised some non-status-quo issues. Again, I ask: is a change actually being discussed. If so, when and by whom?

[evaluna]

And, I seriously, seriously, seriously hope: IGNORED. I will personally raise all kinds of hell (and I can GUARANTEE you I will not be the only one) if certain fencers who are aging out of Vet W-50, "for example," are allowed to fence in that category next year in team-defining events. Just saying. (It is NOT apples to apples anymore and we're attempting to deal with it - but certain soon-to-be Vet 60 W-Vets are STILL an unfair opponent for MOST Vet 50s W-vets, thank you very much. Allow this and I can almost guarantee you an exodus from Vet fencing. In fact, I would really, really appreciate a notice as far in advance of December as possible if this is even considered to be a POSSIBILITY. It will make canceling my iSol reservation that much easier without having to pay a charge.)

Let me begin by saying that I think the Vet NACs & SN tournaments should remain separated by age in those events that are determining berths on the Vet team, i.e. Vet 50-59, Vet 60-69, and Vet 70+.

But let me also state that I am really tired of hearing about "certain fencers" and "certain soon-to-be Vet 60 W-Vets" being an "unfair opponent". The fact is that it is the international body that determines who qualifies to fence in a particular category and anyone who wishes to protest what they believe to be an unfair determination by that body can protest by boycotting the event. I am 5' 3" and any fencer 5'10" and taller has an incredible advantage over me. In the same manner I also feel that people that have 30 years of fencing experience (or who started fencing before they were 50) also have an advantage. Some people might say that is an unfair advantage, but as far as I know there are no height and experience limitations in the rules. So I go out and fence my best against the opponents that are eligible to fence in my event. IMHO it's time for us to let this go. It only makes us look small, intolerant, and bad sports.

As far as the Vet 40 event I feel strongly that it should become Vet 40+ at SN, just as it is at the NACs. At the NACs this event is incredibly strong and it would be nice to see it maintain that strength rather then get so watered down at Nationals. If the international body decides to have a Vet category for ages 40-49 this will be a mute point, but for now....

[catwood1]

I can guarantee you that this year anything but THE RULE will raise serious issues. Who is deciding whether the rule is changing and WHEN? I really would like to know. If this is actually being discussed, I would like to alert those potentially affected (including myself -- I would absolutely withdraw from fencing).

If 60 year olds are allowed to fence in your event, you're going to quit fencing...


Really?

[hello?]

If 60 year olds are allowed to fence in your event, you're going to quit fencing...


Really?

Really.

[Peach]

At the general veterans meeting, which is mostly an open forum for discussion of ideas and dissemination of information, Josh Runyan suggested the idea of holding an extra combined event at SN, and someone also mentioned the idea of "fencing down" for some who wanted more competition--in my weapon, for instance, there were only two in the Vet-70 event and eight in the Vet-60.

My sense was it was just a freewheeling, discussion--I didn't even realize at the time that Josh wanted it to be more formally considered, or at least get to the "show of hands" stage, which is what he told us after the meeting. We didn't have any time to go into the idea in any depth and put it on our list for general discussion again. It's one that keeps surfacing in various forms.

The agenda of that particular meeting was mostly focused on procedures for team members and FIE rules for world events.

He also suggested having a better seeding procedure for veterans moving into an age group, since currently a new age-group member loses the previous age group results. I'm an example of that - my 5th place finish in Vet-50 Vet Worlds last year and my NAC results last year did not figure in my seeding in the Vet-60 events this year.

[Peach]

I have a somewhat unrelated vets question that doesn't merit its own thread. Why can't V50s fence in V40 events, and V60s fence in V50 and V40s, and V70s in V60, etc.?

I know the answer isn't because the events would grow too large. Is it because V40s don't want to get out smarted by those crafty V80s?

In the WS combined event in Detroit, more than half the top eight were over 50 and at least one was in the vet-60 group. But one main point of the championships, like the age-restricted events in the NACs, is to choose world teams for veteran worlds.

[mfp]

in my weapon, for instance, there were only two in the Vet-70 event and eight in the Vet-60.

[...]

He also suggested having a better seeding procedure for veterans moving into an age group, since currently a new age-group member loses the previous age group results. I'm an example of that - my 5th place finish in Vet-50 Vet Worlds last year and my NAC results last year did not figure in my seeding in the Vet-60 events this year.

How would seeding an 8 fencer Vet-60 WS event really be improved by considering your Vet-50 Worlds result?

[dridge]

How would seeding an 8 fencer Vet-60 WS event really be improved by considering your Vet-50 Worlds result?

I don't believe that V60WS truly reflects the seeding issues created when a fencer moves from one age group to another without consideration of their previous "point standing."

This year I moved from V50ME to V60ME. My prior results were not reflected in the seeding at the first NAC. I found myself in a pool with Ray Sexton. I suspect that my presence there adversely affected his results - and the eventual constitution of "the team." Meeting him in the pool didn't help my indicators, either.

The situation is comparable to meeting a Canadian U with maple leafs running down both legs. He probably won't fence like a domestic U, regardless of his classification. We frequently see such things at NACs. Sometimes they can't be avoided.

Using my V50 results would have improved the seeding of V60 by diminishing the chance that two of the field's stronger fencers met early in the event. And that's the reason that we seed pools based upon prior results.

Thanks for reading.

Drew

[hello?]

I don't believe that V60WS truly reflects the seeding issues created when a fencer moves from one age group to another without consideration of their previous "point standing."

This year I moved from V50ME to V60ME. My prior results were not reflected in the seeding at the first NAC. I found myself in a pool with Ray Sexton. I suspect that my presence there adversely affected his results - and the eventual constitution of "the team." Meeting him in the pool didn't help my indicators, either.

The situation is comparable to meeting a Canadian U with maple leafs running down both legs. He probably won't fence like a domestic U, regardless of his classification. We frequently see such things at NACs. Sometimes they can't be avoided.

Using my V50 results would have improved the seeding of V60 by diminishing the chance that two of the field's stronger fencers met early in the event. And that's the reason that we seed pools based upon prior results.

Thanks for reading.

Drew

I totally agree with the fact that something should be done about seedings (but I don't know what). This year, for example, we had three As age up into Vet 50 WE (there were none before). Because the top 8 in points are "protected" (a number that seems excessive to me, even though I will benefit from this in December) and because they needed two results to make it into that number, the seedings were wacky until Summer Nationals (when everyone had fenced two NACs and the seedings were somehow normal again). In Detroit, I had two As (aside from the woman who had come in second the day before in Vet Combined - who also had no previous Vet results) in my pool but there were pools that didn't even have a B. I felt that my pool was a different tournament from those around us. (I wasn't the only one who saw the difference -- people were texting me from their pools.) Perhaps the top X from the previous age group should be given some consideration when they age up (like in dridge's case, for example).