Rules Regarding Withdrawals

I have not been able to find the exact paragraph on this in the rulebook
(presuming there is one), and the USFA has not yet replied to my query
(admittedly, I emailed them just yesterday), but since we have a meeting Friday
night, I am wondering if anyone can cite for me a rule dealing with the
following situation:

1) Fourteen fencers appear up for a scheduled open event.
2) The manager decides he wants to get 15, to raise the rating to a C-1, so
phone calls are made to various fencers around town.
3) A 15th fencer does show up, after the scheduled closing time. It is made
clear to him -- and apparently everybody else, too -- that his sole purpose is
to raise the rated level of the event. He is requested to register, fence just
one bout, and withdraw.
4) This is exactly what he does. There is no pretense of illness, injury, or
any other valid reason for withdrawal. Needless to say, his withdrawal has a
negative affect upon the indicators of the four remaining fencers in his pool,
but that is a minor quibble.

Where in the rulebook does it say this cannot be done? We would like to
discourage both our managers from doing such a thing in the future. Quite
frankly, I was stunned to be told this had happened. The least he could have
done was fallen down on the floor and insisted his ankle was twisted. I won't
even address the behavior of the manager.

Thanks,
B.C. Milligan

In article <20030129165826.20373.00000534@mb-fo.aol.com>,
remise@aol.com (Remise) wrote:

>
> 1) Fourteen fencers appear up for a scheduled open event.
> 2) The manager decides he wants to get 15, to raise the rating to a C-1, so
> phone calls are made to various fencers around town.
> 3) A 15th fencer does show up, after the scheduled closing time. It is made
> clear to him -- and apparently everybody else, too -- that his sole purpose
> is
> to raise the rated level of the event. He is requested to register, fence
> just
> one bout, and withdraw.
> 4) This is exactly what he does. There is no pretense of illness, injury, or
> any other valid reason for withdrawal. Needless to say, his withdrawal has a
> negative affect upon the indicators of the four remaining fencers in his
> pool,
> but that is a minor quibble.
>


I think this is a great idea! Maybe I'll get 63 friends together so I
can get a better rating!

Kidding aside, I think this is absolutely horrible. We have rules
requiring honest, ethical behavior from the fencers, but apparently not
from the TDs.

I think there should be sanctions against the TD, and if anyone got
their C from this tournament it should be rescinded.

--Harold Buck


"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson

In article <20030129165826.20373.00000534@mb-fo.aol.com>,
remise@aol.com (Remise) wrote:

>
> 1) Fourteen fencers appear up for a scheduled open event.
> 2) The manager decides he wants to get 15, to raise the rating to a C-1, so
> phone calls are made to various fencers around town.
> 3) A 15th fencer does show up, after the scheduled closing time. It is made
> clear to him -- and apparently everybody else, too -- that his sole purpose
> is
> to raise the rated level of the event. He is requested to register, fence
> just
> one bout, and withdraw.
> 4) This is exactly what he does. There is no pretense of illness, injury, or
> any other valid reason for withdrawal. Needless to say, his withdrawal has a
> negative affect upon the indicators of the four remaining fencers in his
> pool,
> but that is a minor quibble.
>


I think this is a great idea! Maybe I'll get 63 friends together so I
can get a better rating!

Kidding aside, I think this is absolutely horrible. We have rules
requiring honest, ethical behavior from the fencers, but apparently not
from the TDs.

I think there should be sanctions against the TD, and if anyone got
their C from this tournament it should be rescinded.

--Harold Buck


"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson

"Remise" <remise@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030129165826.20373.00000534@mb-fo.aol.com...
> I have not been able to find the exact paragraph on this in the
rulebook
> (presuming there is one), and the USFA has not yet replied to my query
> (admittedly, I emailed them just yesterday), but since we have a meeting
Friday
> night, I am wondering if anyone can cite for me a rule dealing with the
> following situation:
>
> 1) Fourteen fencers appear up for a scheduled open event.
> 2) The manager decides he wants to get 15, to raise the rating to a C-1,
so
> phone calls are made to various fencers around town.
> 3) A 15th fencer does show up, after the scheduled closing time. It is
made
> clear to him -- and apparently everybody else, too -- that his sole
purpose is
> to raise the rated level of the event. He is requested to register, fence
just
> one bout, and withdraw.
> 4) This is exactly what he does. There is no pretense of illness, injury,
or
> any other valid reason for withdrawal. Needless to say, his withdrawal has
a
> negative affect upon the indicators of the four remaining fencers in his
pool,
> but that is a minor quibble.
>
> Where in the rulebook does it say this cannot be done? We would like to
> discourage both our managers from doing such a thing in the future. Quite
> frankly, I was stunned to be told this had happened. The least he could
have
> done was fallen down on the floor and insisted his ankle was twisted. I
won't
> even address the behavior of the manager.
>

I don't know where in the rules or operations manual it is stated, but if
anyone withdraws before end of pools its as if they never showed up. None
of their bouts are counted, not even the ones completed, when computing the
results for their pool.

Tyson Patterson

"Remise" <remise@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030129165826.20373.00000534@mb-fo.aol.com...
> I have not been able to find the exact paragraph on this in the
rulebook
> (presuming there is one), and the USFA has not yet replied to my query
> (admittedly, I emailed them just yesterday), but since we have a meeting
Friday
> night, I am wondering if anyone can cite for me a rule dealing with the
> following situation:
>
> 1) Fourteen fencers appear up for a scheduled open event.
> 2) The manager decides he wants to get 15, to raise the rating to a C-1,
so
> phone calls are made to various fencers around town.
> 3) A 15th fencer does show up, after the scheduled closing time. It is
made
> clear to him -- and apparently everybody else, too -- that his sole
purpose is
> to raise the rated level of the event. He is requested to register, fence
just
> one bout, and withdraw.
> 4) This is exactly what he does. There is no pretense of illness, injury,
or
> any other valid reason for withdrawal. Needless to say, his withdrawal has
a
> negative affect upon the indicators of the four remaining fencers in his
pool,
> but that is a minor quibble.
>
> Where in the rulebook does it say this cannot be done? We would like to
> discourage both our managers from doing such a thing in the future. Quite
> frankly, I was stunned to be told this had happened. The least he could
have
> done was fallen down on the floor and insisted his ankle was twisted. I
won't
> even address the behavior of the manager.
>

I don't know where in the rules or operations manual it is stated, but if
anyone withdraws before end of pools its as if they never showed up. None
of their bouts are counted, not even the ones completed, when computing the
results for their pool.

Tyson Patterson

I am as shocked as you are. You're right -- at least if he had some medical reason
to withdraw, that would be alright, although pretense of an injury is in itself a
red card; presuming that there was not a trainer at the event to evaluate this,
this point is moot.

What I don't understand is that if the competition manager allowed to let him
enter after the close of registration, his problem was solved -- the competition
manager should have been happy; yes, explain to the fencer the importance of
coming to the event on time, but tell him that an exception is being made only in
this case due to the circumstances.

Why did the competition manager tell him just to fence one bout and leave? Or,
did the competition manager just impress how he needed him to fence and why, and
then he chose to leave -- if it is the former, then only the competition manager
is at fault; if the latter, then both the fencer and the competition manager are
at fault. Your determination of these facts will help you apply the pertinent
penalties I would consider below:

I would give him a black card for not being present for the bout in the pool that
he failed to present himself to fence.

Withdrawing without a valid reason has a negative impact to the other fencers in a
pool, especially if you had pools of 6 and 5, and this happened in the pool of 5
(though this is not what happened in your case, it is something that I would
classify as more than a quibble, especially if you are not promoting 100% to the
DE -- it impacts so many other fencers). As such, I would consider it an offense
against sportmanship (you can't just abandon a competition), and give a black
card.

Or, you could give him a black card for collusion -- for that matter, you would
also need to give a black card for collusion to the manager of this tournament.
One of the reasons that the classification system has the requirement of so many
classified fencers have to reach the finals is a built-in check to prevent
collusion.

I would make sure that the tournament committee chair does not submit the results
of this competition to the USFA for ratings -- if they do, and the USFA accepts
these classification changes, then you would also have to give a black card to all
those fencers who received new classifications, because they have profited from
collusion -- they, too, should then get black cards, and with this black card,
they are excluded from this competition anyway, so they wouldn't be able to get
those classifications.

For that matter, if the division submits these results to the USFA, then the
division itself is also guilty of collusion. The classification change request
form is the division's representation to the USFA that the classifications were
earned appropriately. I think that if I was in your division, I won't let this
manager run another competition.

What we do in our division with any fencer who receives a black card, we bar them
from the next event that they are eligible for on our schedule -- this makes sure
they understand and correct their behavoir for the future.

You won't find a specific rule addressing this unique situation in the rule book,
because this is not something that would ever occur in an FIE competition -- I
think this happened because of the way that the USFA structures the
classification system and the requirement for C and over at Div I events. I don't
think that you will have a problem in the future, because the reason to deter this
behavoir is that the penalties you could levy above are far greater and
contra-indictitive of what they are trying to accomplish.


Remise wrote:

> I have not been able to find the exact paragraph on this in the rulebook
> (presuming there is one), and the USFA has not yet replied to my query
> (admittedly, I emailed them just yesterday), but since we have a meeting Friday
> night, I am wondering if anyone can cite for me a rule dealing with the
> following situation:
>
> 1) Fourteen fencers appear up for a scheduled open event.
> 2) The manager decides he wants to get 15, to raise the rating to a C-1, so
> phone calls are made to various fencers around town.
> 3) A 15th fencer does show up, after the scheduled closing time. It is made
> clear to him -- and apparently everybody else, too -- that his sole purpose is
> to raise the rated level of the event. He is requested to register, fence just
> one bout, and withdraw.
> 4) This is exactly what he does. There is no pretense of illness, injury, or
> any other valid reason for withdrawal. Needless to say, his withdrawal has a
> negative affect upon the indicators of the four remaining fencers in his pool,
> but that is a minor quibble.
>
> Where in the rulebook does it say this cannot be done? We would like to
> discourage both our managers from doing such a thing in the future. Quite
> frankly, I was stunned to be told this had happened. The least he could have
> done was fallen down on the floor and insisted his ankle was twisted. I won't
> even address the behavior of the manager.
>
> Thanks,
> B.C. Milligan

I am as shocked as you are. You're right -- at least if he had some medical reason
to withdraw, that would be alright, although pretense of an injury is in itself a
red card; presuming that there was not a trainer at the event to evaluate this,
this point is moot.

What I don't understand is that if the competition manager allowed to let him
enter after the close of registration, his problem was solved -- the competition
manager should have been happy; yes, explain to the fencer the importance of
coming to the event on time, but tell him that an exception is being made only in
this case due to the circumstances.

Why did the competition manager tell him just to fence one bout and leave? Or,
did the competition manager just impress how he needed him to fence and why, and
then he chose to leave -- if it is the former, then only the competition manager
is at fault; if the latter, then both the fencer and the competition manager are
at fault. Your determination of these facts will help you apply the pertinent
penalties I would consider below:

I would give him a black card for not being present for the bout in the pool that
he failed to present himself to fence.

Withdrawing without a valid reason has a negative impact to the other fencers in a
pool, especially if you had pools of 6 and 5, and this happened in the pool of 5
(though this is not what happened in your case, it is something that I would
classify as more than a quibble, especially if you are not promoting 100% to the
DE -- it impacts so many other fencers). As such, I would consider it an offense
against sportmanship (you can't just abandon a competition), and give a black
card.

Or, you could give him a black card for collusion -- for that matter, you would
also need to give a black card for collusion to the manager of this tournament.
One of the reasons that the classification system has the requirement of so many
classified fencers have to reach the finals is a built-in check to prevent
collusion.

I would make sure that the tournament committee chair does not submit the results
of this competition to the USFA for ratings -- if they do, and the USFA accepts
these classification changes, then you would also have to give a black card to all
those fencers who received new classifications, because they have profited from
collusion -- they, too, should then get black cards, and with this black card,
they are excluded from this competition anyway, so they wouldn't be able to get
those classifications.

For that matter, if the division submits these results to the USFA, then the
division itself is also guilty of collusion. The classification change request
form is the division's representation to the USFA that the classifications were
earned appropriately. I think that if I was in your division, I won't let this
manager run another competition.

What we do in our division with any fencer who receives a black card, we bar them
from the next event that they are eligible for on our schedule -- this makes sure
they understand and correct their behavoir for the future.

You won't find a specific rule addressing this unique situation in the rule book,
because this is not something that would ever occur in an FIE competition -- I
think this happened because of the way that the USFA structures the
classification system and the requirement for C and over at Div I events. I don't
think that you will have a problem in the future, because the reason to deter this
behavoir is that the penalties you could levy above are far greater and
contra-indictitive of what they are trying to accomplish.


Remise wrote:

> I have not been able to find the exact paragraph on this in the rulebook
> (presuming there is one), and the USFA has not yet replied to my query
> (admittedly, I emailed them just yesterday), but since we have a meeting Friday
> night, I am wondering if anyone can cite for me a rule dealing with the
> following situation:
>
> 1) Fourteen fencers appear up for a scheduled open event.
> 2) The manager decides he wants to get 15, to raise the rating to a C-1, so
> phone calls are made to various fencers around town.
> 3) A 15th fencer does show up, after the scheduled closing time. It is made
> clear to him -- and apparently everybody else, too -- that his sole purpose is
> to raise the rated level of the event. He is requested to register, fence just
> one bout, and withdraw.
> 4) This is exactly what he does. There is no pretense of illness, injury, or
> any other valid reason for withdrawal. Needless to say, his withdrawal has a
> negative affect upon the indicators of the four remaining fencers in his pool,
> but that is a minor quibble.
>
> Where in the rulebook does it say this cannot be done? We would like to
> discourage both our managers from doing such a thing in the future. Quite
> frankly, I was stunned to be told this had happened. The least he could have
> done was fallen down on the floor and insisted his ankle was twisted. I won't
> even address the behavior of the manager.
>
> Thanks,
> B.C. Milligan

i.e. the tournament only ever had 14 fencers total.

Though remember, the cut-off between 14 and 15 is arbitrary (though neccessarily
so)

j

Tyson Patterson wrote:

> "Remise" <remise@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20030129165826.20373.00000534@mb-fo.aol.com...
> > I have not been able to find the exact paragraph on this in the
> rulebook
> > (presuming there is one), and the USFA has not yet replied to my query
> > (admittedly, I emailed them just yesterday), but since we have a meeting
> Friday
> > night, I am wondering if anyone can cite for me a rule dealing with the
> > following situation:
> >
> > 1) Fourteen fencers appear up for a scheduled open event.
> > 2) The manager decides he wants to get 15, to raise the rating to a C-1,
> so
> > phone calls are made to various fencers around town.
> > 3) A 15th fencer does show up, after the scheduled closing time. It is
> made
> > clear to him -- and apparently everybody else, too -- that his sole
> purpose is
> > to raise the rated level of the event. He is requested to register, fence
> just
> > one bout, and withdraw.
> > 4) This is exactly what he does. There is no pretense of illness, injury,
> or
> > any other valid reason for withdrawal. Needless to say, his withdrawal has
> a
> > negative affect upon the indicators of the four remaining fencers in his
> pool,
> > but that is a minor quibble.
> >
> > Where in the rulebook does it say this cannot be done? We would like to
> > discourage both our managers from doing such a thing in the future. Quite
> > frankly, I was stunned to be told this had happened. The least he could
> have
> > done was fallen down on the floor and insisted his ankle was twisted. I
> won't
> > even address the behavior of the manager.
> >
>
> I don't know where in the rules or operations manual it is stated, but if
> anyone withdraws before end of pools its as if they never showed up. None
> of their bouts are counted, not even the ones completed, when computing the
> results for their pool.
>
> Tyson Patterson

i.e. the tournament only ever had 14 fencers total.

Though remember, the cut-off between 14 and 15 is arbitrary (though neccessarily
so)

j

Tyson Patterson wrote:

> "Remise" <remise@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20030129165826.20373.00000534@mb-fo.aol.com...
> > I have not been able to find the exact paragraph on this in the
> rulebook
> > (presuming there is one), and the USFA has not yet replied to my query
> > (admittedly, I emailed them just yesterday), but since we have a meeting
> Friday
> > night, I am wondering if anyone can cite for me a rule dealing with the
> > following situation:
> >
> > 1) Fourteen fencers appear up for a scheduled open event.
> > 2) The manager decides he wants to get 15, to raise the rating to a C-1,
> so
> > phone calls are made to various fencers around town.
> > 3) A 15th fencer does show up, after the scheduled closing time. It is
> made
> > clear to him -- and apparently everybody else, too -- that his sole
> purpose is
> > to raise the rated level of the event. He is requested to register, fence
> just
> > one bout, and withdraw.
> > 4) This is exactly what he does. There is no pretense of illness, injury,
> or
> > any other valid reason for withdrawal. Needless to say, his withdrawal has
> a
> > negative affect upon the indicators of the four remaining fencers in his
> pool,
> > but that is a minor quibble.
> >
> > Where in the rulebook does it say this cannot be done? We would like to
> > discourage both our managers from doing such a thing in the future. Quite
> > frankly, I was stunned to be told this had happened. The least he could
> have
> > done was fallen down on the floor and insisted his ankle was twisted. I
> won't
> > even address the behavior of the manager.
> >
>
> I don't know where in the rules or operations manual it is stated, but if
> anyone withdraws before end of pools its as if they never showed up. None
> of their bouts are counted, not even the ones completed, when computing the
> results for their pool.
>
> Tyson Patterson

In article <FqZZ9.246560$Hs2.14453221@kent.svc.tds.net>,
"Tyson Patterson" <cptdoom9@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> I don't know where in the rules or operations manual it is stated, but if
> anyone withdraws before end of pools its as if they never showed up. None
> of their bouts are counted, not even the ones completed, when computing the
> results for their pool.
>


And, presumably then, it's as if they didn't show up for the competition
itself, so they wouldn't count toward the number of people needed for a
C-1 event?

--Harold Buck


"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson

In article <FqZZ9.246560$Hs2.14453221@kent.svc.tds.net>,
"Tyson Patterson" <cptdoom9@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> I don't know where in the rules or operations manual it is stated, but if
> anyone withdraws before end of pools its as if they never showed up. None
> of their bouts are counted, not even the ones completed, when computing the
> results for their pool.
>


And, presumably then, it's as if they didn't show up for the competition
itself, so they wouldn't count toward the number of people needed for a
C-1 event?

--Harold Buck


"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson

Thanks. I have run lots of tournaments. I know this. I was hoping there was a
rule against withdrawing without a valid reason. If not, there soon will be, at
least in our division.

B.C. Milligan>
>I don't know where in the rules or operations manual it is stated, but if
>anyone withdraws before end of pools its as if they never showed up. None
>of their bouts are counted, not even the ones completed, when computing the
>results for their pool.
>
>Tyson Patterson
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Thanks. I have run lots of tournaments. I know this. I was hoping there was a
rule against withdrawing without a valid reason. If not, there soon will be, at
least in our division.

B.C. Milligan>
>I don't know where in the rules or operations manual it is stated, but if
>anyone withdraws before end of pools its as if they never showed up. None
>of their bouts are counted, not even the ones completed, when computing the
>results for their pool.
>
>Tyson Patterson
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

"Remise" <remise@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030129221640.01401.00000242@mb-mk.aol.com...
> Thanks. I have run lots of tournaments. I know this. I was hoping there
was a
> rule against withdrawing without a valid reason. If not, there soon will
be, at
> least in our division.
>
> B.C. Milligan>
> >I don't know where in the rules or operations manual it is stated, but if
> >anyone withdraws before end of pools its as if they never showed up.
None
> >of their bouts are counted, not even the ones completed, when computing
the
> >results for their pool.
> >
> >Tyson Patterson
> >
> >

OK, I ran a search on the 99 rules.

Chapter 5, Individual Competitons
1. General Rules for Pools
O.20 Withdrawal

A fencer who withdraws, or who is excluded, is scratched from the pool,
and his results are annulled as if he or she had not taken part.


Tyson Patterson

"Remise" <remise@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030129221640.01401.00000242@mb-mk.aol.com...
> Thanks. I have run lots of tournaments. I know this. I was hoping there
was a
> rule against withdrawing without a valid reason. If not, there soon will
be, at
> least in our division.
>
> B.C. Milligan>
> >I don't know where in the rules or operations manual it is stated, but if
> >anyone withdraws before end of pools its as if they never showed up.
None
> >of their bouts are counted, not even the ones completed, when computing
the
> >results for their pool.
> >
> >Tyson Patterson
> >
> >

OK, I ran a search on the 99 rules.

Chapter 5, Individual Competitons
1. General Rules for Pools
O.20 Withdrawal

A fencer who withdraws, or who is excluded, is scratched from the pool,
and his results are annulled as if he or she had not taken part.


Tyson Patterson

On 29 Jan 2003 21:58:26 GMT, remise@aol.com (Remise) wrote:

> I have not been able to find the exact paragraph on this in the rulebook
> (presuming there is one), and the USFA has not yet replied to my query
> (admittedly, I emailed them just yesterday), but since we have a meeting Friday
> night, I am wondering if anyone can cite for me a rule dealing with the
> following situation:
>
> 1) Fourteen fencers appear up for a scheduled open event.
> 2) The manager decides he wants to get 15, to raise the rating to a C-1, so
> phone calls are made to various fencers around town.
> 3) A 15th fencer does show up, after the scheduled closing time. It is made
> clear to him -- and apparently everybody else, too -- that his sole purpose is
> to raise the rated level of the event. He is requested to register, fence just
> one bout, and withdraw.
> 4) This is exactly what he does. There is no pretense of illness, injury, or
> any other valid reason for withdrawal. Needless to say, his withdrawal has a
> negative affect upon the indicators of the four remaining fencers in his pool,
> but that is a minor quibble.
>
> Where in the rulebook does it say this cannot be done?

How about t.88:

"Competitors must fence to their utmost ability in a sportsmanlike
manner until the end of the competition in order to obtain the best
possible classification, without giving away touches or seeking to be
favored by being given touches by anyone."

The fencer is obliged not to withdraw.

And o.58:

"The functions of the Bout Committee include the strict but complete
organization of the different events and the obligation to see that
the Rules are adhered to; they cannot decide on any departure from the
Rules except when circumstances arise in which it is absolutely
impossible to apply them."

The officials are obliged to enforce the rules, which means they may
not request that the fencer disobey t.88.

-Mark-

On 29 Jan 2003 21:58:26 GMT, remise@aol.com (Remise) wrote:

> I have not been able to find the exact paragraph on this in the rulebook
> (presuming there is one), and the USFA has not yet replied to my query
> (admittedly, I emailed them just yesterday), but since we have a meeting Friday
> night, I am wondering if anyone can cite for me a rule dealing with the
> following situation:
>
> 1) Fourteen fencers appear up for a scheduled open event.
> 2) The manager decides he wants to get 15, to raise the rating to a C-1, so
> phone calls are made to various fencers around town.
> 3) A 15th fencer does show up, after the scheduled closing time. It is made
> clear to him -- and apparently everybody else, too -- that his sole purpose is
> to raise the rated level of the event. He is requested to register, fence just
> one bout, and withdraw.
> 4) This is exactly what he does. There is no pretense of illness, injury, or
> any other valid reason for withdrawal. Needless to say, his withdrawal has a
> negative affect upon the indicators of the four remaining fencers in his pool,
> but that is a minor quibble.
>
> Where in the rulebook does it say this cannot be done?

How about t.88:

"Competitors must fence to their utmost ability in a sportsmanlike
manner until the end of the competition in order to obtain the best
possible classification, without giving away touches or seeking to be
favored by being given touches by anyone."

The fencer is obliged not to withdraw.

And o.58:

"The functions of the Bout Committee include the strict but complete
organization of the different events and the obligation to see that
the Rules are adhered to; they cannot decide on any departure from the
Rules except when circumstances arise in which it is absolutely
impossible to apply them."

The officials are obliged to enforce the rules, which means they may
not request that the fencer disobey t.88.

-Mark-

Nicely done...good combo.

j

Mark C. Orton wrote:

> On 29 Jan 2003 21:58:26 GMT, remise@aol.com (Remise) wrote:
>
> > I have not been able to find the exact paragraph on this in the rulebook
> > (presuming there is one), and the USFA has not yet replied to my query
> > (admittedly, I emailed them just yesterday), but since we have a meeting Friday
> > night, I am wondering if anyone can cite for me a rule dealing with the
> > following situation:
> >
> > 1) Fourteen fencers appear up for a scheduled open event.
> > 2) The manager decides he wants to get 15, to raise the rating to a C-1, so
> > phone calls are made to various fencers around town.
> > 3) A 15th fencer does show up, after the scheduled closing time. It is made
> > clear to him -- and apparently everybody else, too -- that his sole purpose is
> > to raise the rated level of the event. He is requested to register, fence just
> > one bout, and withdraw.
> > 4) This is exactly what he does. There is no pretense of illness, injury, or
> > any other valid reason for withdrawal. Needless to say, his withdrawal has a
> > negative affect upon the indicators of the four remaining fencers in his pool,
> > but that is a minor quibble.
> >
> > Where in the rulebook does it say this cannot be done?
>
> How about t.88:
>
> "Competitors must fence to their utmost ability in a sportsmanlike
> manner until the end of the competition in order to obtain the best
> possible classification, without giving away touches or seeking to be
> favored by being given touches by anyone."
>
> The fencer is obliged not to withdraw.
>
> And o.58:
>
> "The functions of the Bout Committee include the strict but complete
> organization of the different events and the obligation to see that
> the Rules are adhered to; they cannot decide on any departure from the
> Rules except when circumstances arise in which it is absolutely
> impossible to apply them."
>
> The officials are obliged to enforce the rules, which means they may
> not request that the fencer disobey t.88.
>
> -Mark-

In article <FqZZ9.246560$Hs2.14453221@kent.svc.tds.net>, "Tyson Patterson"
<cptdoom9@yahoo.com> writes:

>I don't know where in the rules or operations manual it is stated, but if
>anyone withdraws before end of pools its as if they never showed up. None
>of their bouts are counted, not even the ones completed, when computing the
>results for their pool.

Also:

And, presumably then, it's as if they didn't show up for the competition
itself, so they wouldn't count toward the number of people needed for a
C-1 event?

--Harold Buck

This is chicanery and the Division involved should decide on the suitable
reward for the meet manager, but that is their business.

In my opinion, the fencer, without a valid, or even poor, reason for
withdrawing, should be treated as if he received a black card for not appearing
for his next bout. The Division apparently has a policy of preventing a black
carded fencer from appearing in the next possible tournament. The fencer should
have known better than to participate in what was apparently a scam, so
exclusion seems justified.

But we cannot disregard or bend the fencing rules even for this situation where
there was an attempt to subvert other rules.

I am familiar with situations such as this from an incident when I was Division
Secretary. We had a situation where if we could still count a fencer who
received a black card, there would be an additional qualifier.

For guidance, let me point out something. We have seen results from NAC's where
somewhere along the list there appeared "FENCER EXCLUDED". The USFA does not
improve the finish of the fencer below by one place, that finish place remains
but the occupant is not identified. No one receives the points from the empty
position, the points received by all of the fencers behind are not improved. So
the excluded fencer was a participant in the tournament and is counted towards
the number of participants.

There is also a rule that says that a fencer who withdraws is entitled to the
place that he has earned. Fencers who (legitimately) cannot continue are
treated as if they had lost in the round they cannot finish. The fencer is
usually identified as withdrawn but occupies a place and can receive points.
(How do we treat multiple withdrawals?)

So, IMO, this tournament did have 15 participants, one of whom did not withdraw
but was excluded. But it is the obligation of the Division Secretary to certify
that classifications are correctly earned. So perhaps it is up to the Division
Secretary, or the division executive committee, to decide whether to submit any
classifications potentially earned.

In our case, the additional qualifier was accepted by the National Office.

Bill Hall

In article <FqZZ9.246560$Hs2.14453221@kent.svc.tds.net>, "Tyson Patterson"
<cptdoom9@yahoo.com> writes:

>I don't know where in the rules or operations manual it is stated, but if
>anyone withdraws before end of pools its as if they never showed up. None
>of their bouts are counted, not even the ones completed, when computing the
>results for their pool.

Also:

And, presumably then, it's as if they didn't show up for the competition
itself, so they wouldn't count toward the number of people needed for a
C-1 event?

--Harold Buck

This is chicanery and the Division involved should decide on the suitable
reward for the meet manager, but that is their business.

In my opinion, the fencer, without a valid, or even poor, reason for
withdrawing, should be treated as if he received a black card for not appearing
for his next bout. The Division apparently has a policy of preventing a black
carded fencer from appearing in the next possible tournament. The fencer should
have known better than to participate in what was apparently a scam, so
exclusion seems justified.

But we cannot disregard or bend the fencing rules even for this situation where
there was an attempt to subvert other rules.

I am familiar with situations such as this from an incident when I was Division
Secretary. We had a situation where if we could still count a fencer who
received a black card, there would be an additional qualifier.

For guidance, let me point out something. We have seen results from NAC's where
somewhere along the list there appeared "FENCER EXCLUDED". The USFA does not
improve the finish of the fencer below by one place, that finish place remains
but the occupant is not identified. No one receives the points from the empty
position, the points received by all of the fencers behind are not improved. So
the excluded fencer was a participant in the tournament and is counted towards
the number of participants.

There is also a rule that says that a fencer who withdraws is entitled to the
place that he has earned. Fencers who (legitimately) cannot continue are
treated as if they had lost in the round they cannot finish. The fencer is
usually identified as withdrawn but occupies a place and can receive points.
(How do we treat multiple withdrawals?)

So, IMO, this tournament did have 15 participants, one of whom did not withdraw
but was excluded. But it is the obligation of the Division Secretary to certify
that classifications are correctly earned. So perhaps it is up to the Division
Secretary, or the division executive committee, to decide whether to submit any
classifications potentially earned.

In our case, the additional qualifier was accepted by the National Office.

Bill Hall