checking rumors: next year's NAC schedule?

[Dee EffEll]

Sure, it's early. I think the USFA board will meet at summer nationals to discuss and perhaps approve a priliminary NAC schedule for 2003-2004. Anyone hear any rumors where we'll be going?

[KShan5[PrFC]]

....if you have money.

[Headless]

Nope!

[Saber-Psycho]

Was checking the FIE Page last night and the schedule for the FIE World Cups is POSTED!!

Click on calandriers or however you spell it in French. http://www.fie.ch/

[Dee EffEll]

Oh my. Senior epee in Baghdad, Iraq, 13 December 2003.

[DJ Apostrophe]

hmm... i read online somewhere that Saddam bought a large amount of Maraging steel at one point (apparently, one of its only other common uses is to hold some form of chemical used in chemical weapons, it corrodes all other types of steel). I wonder if you'll be able to buy blades cheaply... or if Saddam is planning on fencing in it...
-w

[edew]

Two Div I NACs, one in December and one in January, but the one in January is spread out over two consecutive weekends. There will be an early (April) Elite Nationals to help determine the Olympic squad.

1.5 Youth NACs, one Div II, one veteran, and one Cadet and one Junior NACs.

In short, there will be fewer NACs overall this coming season.

There will be the Junior World Cup in Louisville, but it's now moved to November instead of the previous September.

Only fencers with national points may attend, so it doesn't exactly substitute for a junior/cadet NAC (which was the intent).

Summer Nationals will be in Charlotte NC. One of the NACs will be in San Jose, CA (or thereabouts).

[DJ Apostrophe]

edew,
This is, obviously, a rather large deduction in the number of national events. Is the USFA planning to make the smaller number of National events in a year the norm? Or is the number of events expected to increase back to the normal after next year? The conspicuous absence of JO's in your list made me curious, I assume/hope its just an oversight. I can't see the USFA getting rid of JOs (though it would be two less qualifiers we had to run on the divisional level, which wouldn't be an all bad thing (tm)). Is the Div II/III going to be the October Date, the March date, or another random date?

Sorry there are so many questions, this is just the first bit of information about next year that I've got my hands on... so I'm a tad thirsty for more.
-w

[edew]

Of course there will be the JOs. I didn't add that to the list since it's a given, and it's not an NAC.

There will be, in October, a Div II/Cadet/Y14 NAC.

The December NAC will be Div I/Vet.

The January NAC will be Div I/Junior

The March NAC will be Div II/III/Vet

The April NAC is actually Div I Nationals and Youth NAC (possibly just Y10 and Y12, no Y14; although that's in deliberations).

Of course, all of this is tentative. Don't hold me to any of them.

Also, I find your discouragement to be puzzling. People shouldn't be relying on USFA for tournaments. It's better for yourself and fencing in the long-run to grow your own tournaments. Make your own tournaments; make sure different clubs or hosts run the various ones, and make them the de facto worthwhile tournaments to go to.

[veeco]

Originally posted by edew
One of the NACs will be in San Jose, CA (or thereabouts).

Do we have an idea of which one it might be? That would be sweet and I would definitely try to make it to California for this one if it's one I can attend. I would love to be able to fence a NAC there!

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by edew
Also, I find your discouragement to be puzzling. People shouldn't be relying on USFA for tournaments. It's better for yourself and fencing in the long-run to grow your own tournaments. Make your own tournaments; make sure different clubs or hosts run the various ones, and make them the de facto worthwhile tournaments to go to.

The fact of the matter is that while the divisions DO host their own tournaments, the divisions which can put on anything even remotely near NAC level are few and far between. the competitions put on by divisions and the NACs serve different purposes. Additionally, by increasing the geographical isolation by eliminating some NACs, there is a danger of increasing the talent rift between the strongest and weakest divisions.

-m

[veeco]

Originally posted by epeemike81
the competitions put on by divisions and the NACs serve different purposes.

That's true, NACs (at least DivI NACs) are only there to qualify an elite to go to world cups and world champs.

Additionally, by increasing the geographical isolation by eliminating some NACs, there is a danger of increasing the talent rift between the strongest and weakest divisions.

I am not sure it would matter so much. Actually, I don't think that 3 or 4 national competitions make a big difference in a competitors season as far as improvement goes. The first one people go to they most of the time get creamed. They learn from that first one, but the ones after that are pretty much the same.

Going regularly to strong local tournaments is more beneficial I think. In order to have strong local tournaments you need strong local competitors, and it's the coaches and the clubs at this level who make the difference. Once you have a lot of coaches and clubs in an area, the average level of fencing is bound to increase in that region, regardless of how much the people from that region go to NACs or not.

Once that level is high enough, divisions can start thinking about implementing some sort of qualifiers for NACs. This will enable them to send only their elite competitors to the NACs thus ensuring better results overall for the division. And it will force high level competitors to attend those local tournaments so they can fence the up and comers.

[Capt. Slo-mo]

Originally posted by edew
Summer Nationals will be in Charlotte NC. One of the NACs will be in San Jose, CA (or thereabouts).

What happened to the rotation sending the Summer Nationals out to the Left Coast for next year?

Those of us out by the Big Pond would certainly appreciate the proximity.

[JEC]

In their minds, Texas was on the Pacific side of the pond!!!

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by veeco
Once that level is high enough, divisions can start thinking about implementing some sort of qualifiers for NACs. This will enable them to send only their elite competitors to the NACs thus ensuring better results overall for the division. And it will force high level competitors to attend those local tournaments so they can fence the up and comers.

I think this is a great idea, seeing as how the best people in our division (Enoch Woodhouse, Roni Gold, Alejandro Bras) almost never fence in the division, but I don't anticipate it happening anytime soon. remember, btw, that requiring a divisional qualifier for NACs is a change which has to happen at the National level. without it happening, the trickledown effect of skill level starts with the NACs.

-m

[DJ Apostrophe]

Who said I was discouraged?
I fence on the local level, as much as I possibly can, and thoroughly enjoy it. There are many tournaments on my local level which are very strong and good events for most everyone (read: Pomme de Terre, New England Division, Five College Open, CT Div / UMass / Smith College).
That said, I am going to Summer Nationals this summer and am fairly excited about it. If it turns into a good experience (which I expect it will) I would like to go to more national events in the future, if for no other reason then it would be a fun excursion (think travel where I get to fence, not fencing where I have to travel). For sthe sake of argument, lets say that Div I participation gets chopped to A's and B's and there is one Div II/III nac during the season (which was the impression that I got reading your initial post)... that gives me, with my C03, exactly two opportunities to fence at a national level, the II/III nac and Summer Nationals. This is of course, in contrast to the 5 opportunities I would have had this year (two div II/III NACs and three div I NACs).
Bottom line: I like to fence, and the more opportunities to fence, local or national, the better.
-w

[NJP3]

Summer Nationals will be in Charlotte NC.

where did you hear this? That would be awsome!!!!!!!!!! I live in Boone NC which is like two hours from Charlotte!!
Thats practicaly my home town as far as fencing goes cause theres not much fencing in Mts of NC so I travel down there to compete all the time. Wow, does that mean that NC qualifies an extra 30%! How did you find out about this? and do you know where JOs will be held?

[edew]

Originally posted by NJP3
where did you hear this? That would be awsome!!!!!!!!!! I live in Boone NC which is like two hours from Charlotte!!
Thats practicaly my home town as far as fencing goes cause theres not much fencing in Mts of NC so I travel down there to compete all the time. Wow, does that mean that NC qualifies an extra 30%! How did you find out about this? and do you know where JOs will be held?

That's why there's an "Expert" written under my name, whereas you have "Just Joined" written under yours.

We all have our sources. Mine is fairly reliable.

[oiuyt]

So we lose:
A div III NAC in exchange for a Y14 NAC.
A Cadet/Junior NAC completely.
A Youth NAC completely.
And possibly lose a Y14 NAC.
All the wheelchair NACs are gone, is this an oversight?

We add nothing (other than the October Y14 which may just be equivalent to moving it from April to October as a net effect).

Yeah, THIS is the direction we should be moving....

Veeco- Wouldn't surprise me to see something like what you're describing get implemented over the next 3-5 years. Rather than on the divisional level, through an expansion of the system being set up and trial run in the RYC events. Those were being billed as a trial system for regional qualification to national events. Eventually expand them to additional age groups and you have a system similar to what you describe.

That even makes sense as fencing grows to beyond what can be handled at open national events. Then again, we require qualification to summer nationals and that draws considerably larger fields for the div II/III stuff than the NACs do.

Do we eventually want to go to a system where you need to get your tour card punched each year or two? Where you have a couple of shots/year at a regional event to prove that you deserve to fence nationally? Maybe yes, maybe no. Likely under such a system the national fencers stay that way with national results and still don't bother with local/regional events. The up-and-comers DON'T get experience against the top fencers but just against each other. The best of them go on to national events and either can't handle that level, and stay in limbo requalifying through the regional system, or also similarly disappear from the local scene. There will likely always be some national level fencers that continue to fence locally, but such a scheme isn't likely to produce more of them than what we have now.

Fencing is different from many other sports in that the athletes tend to feel entitled to get periodic shots at the top fencers in the country. We complain when we are excluded from competing in the same events as those used to select our national team. What other sports allow the unwashed masses to mix with Olympians?

I'm very disappointed by the loss of one of the div III NACs. I similarly dislike the loss of the Youth NAC, but would understand the feeling that it's replaced by the 3-4 RYC available (presumably most regions will add a RYC over the winter to replace the missing NAC). The Cadet/Junior NAC is less of a loss. These are the groups that already have the most competitions. Either in the form of all of the div II/III NACs, or the div I NACs in addition to JO's. And for the elites in this age group add in the World Cup. In a climate where there's already a strong feeling that the national office/BoD/HPC is ignoring the average or grassroots fencer, removing the "entry-level" NACs is not the way to go.

The NACs are one of the few things that the USFA as a national body offers to the typical fencer. Yes we get insurance for fencing-related accidents... woohoo. I like both the national newsletter and American Fencing. Yes our local divisions/sections get financial support from the national level, but for the most part this isn't seen, therefore isn't thought about, and in direct form is only about $3/fencer/year. I think that the national office does a good job. I like the USFA and easily think it's worth the $40/year (or less than a month's worth of entry fees for me). But removing some of the obvious value that is offered helps bolster the complaints of those who are inclined to feel that the USFA does NOT offer enough value.

The USFA should be actively looking for ways to expand the membership base of average fencers. That even makes sense if the goal is to increase the level of the top 5 in the country. Expand the number of fencers in the talent ditribution and the top tail of talent will be higher. Get the level of everyone up (by increasing the total number of fencers) and the tail will rise. There's a tradeoff in when increasing the overall will have this effect more than promoting the tail directly. I believe that the national policies have the balance wrong and are spending too high a percentage of the resources and effort/energy (ie non-financial resources) on just trying to promote the elite tail. It's something that reasonable people can set different values on, my opinion is just that we've skewed too far in favor of the elites and not enough on the grassroots.

-B :)

[edew]

You will agree and notice that USFA has a better chance of expanding the membership base by having more regional and local competitions rather than hogging all of them by having NACs be the de facto "major" tournament that fencers should attend.

Suppose the USFA membership grows to 50,000. Suppose the same percentage of that 50,000 is interested in competing.

It is then not feasible for USFA to be running more and more Div I, Div II, Div III, cadet, junior and so