To USFA: How to improve Summer Nationals

[JEC]

Registration:

1. Use BAR CODES for registration. The cost for NACs and Summer Nationals is negligible given the time/volunteering effort that is saved. The bar code can be added to the back of the USFA ID card and the Confirmation letter. Presenting one of them would suffice. Furthermore, it will speed up the speed for constructing pools as it could automatically be added in the list. (Obviously the program should have rejection mode for double scanning).

Scheduling:

2. The Youth fencers deal worse with delays than adults. As a parent of youth fencers and a fencer, I think that I deal mentally better. All Youth competitions should be scheduled at 8:00 am. Not this non-sense that strips are not available and that we begin 3 hours late with only have of the pools and 7 hours later DEs begin. An Y10 or Y12 fencer does not deal well with that, and we want to encourage love for the sport at those ages.

3. The best Summer Nationals I have attended is when the Div. I tournament is run either first two days or truly as a separate event at different time. Somehow, we need to encourage the Div. I fencers to attend Div. I-A. It only improves the quality of the competition building up the fencers that will eventually challenge at Div. I.

Participants:

4. Limit the number of qualifiers at Y12 by requiring attendance to at least one NAC or one RYC. This might not have much of an impact. If so, limit qualifiers to top 10 in any of the RYC tournaments (which are essentially sectional tournaments), or to top 15 in final RYC standings.

5. Limit the Div. II participants by reducing the number of divisional qualifiers (C and under) from 10 to 5, but simultaneously increasing the number of sectional qualifiers (currently top 6 eligible finishers) to top 20 that have not qualify through other route allowing some fencers from strong divisions a chance to qualify. If I apply this math to a Southwest section (in a year when we are not hosting SN), which has 7 divisions and had a Sectional tournament with up to 65 fencers in a weapon, it actually reduces the number of qualifying fencers from 70 to 35 via divisional route while increasing potential sectional qualifiers from 6 to 20 in a field of 65. Now if this is enacted, it is likely that the size of Sectional Qualifiers grows.

6. Limit the Div. III participants by qualifying only the next 10 (as compared to everybody who came) for the same C and under Divisional Qualifier tournament. Then, the second chance is at Sectionals (all fencers A->U), when only the next top 20 would qualify.

7. Increase the basic registration fee by $10 to support referee development and increase pay to referees. This should not be an increase "per event".

Venue:

8. Require concessions to be open during the entire event. If the venue concessions close then the local organizing committee would open their own.

ADD YOUR SUGGESTIONS

[picojeff]

Originally posted by JEC
1. Use BAR CODES for registration.

Good idea! The scanners themselves are dirt cheap, and software to generate UPCs is free. If only the USFA had more programmers to get something like this going.

3. The best Summer Nationals I have attended is when the Div. I tournament is run either first two days or truly as a separate event at different time.

Div I was originally scheduled at the beginning of Summer Nationals. The problem is that this conflicts with world cups in Puerto Rico and elsewhere, and is too soon after some events in Havana, which are all Olympic qualifying events. Obviously there are a lot of conflicting criteria for scheduling events. Not to mention that our National Champions will be chosen in bouts with referees who are very tired from a very long week of very long days...

Splitting Div I from Summer Nationals is one of the better ways I can think of to solve the problem, and I believe next season Div I Nats are in April.

Somehow, we need to encourage the Div. I fencers to attend Div. I-A. It only improves the quality of the competition building up the fencers that will eventually challenge at Div. I.

A great idea, but, how can you encourage this? I would really like to compete in Div Ia, it seems like a fun event. But if I have to stay in a hotel room more than 1 extra night, I'm not going to hang around for it unless there are national points on the line, or maybe prizes a la Duel in the Desert. But even big prizes won't get me to fly someplace or stay more than a couple extra days. Not to mention I didn't even go to Sectionals because it is too expensive (I live near Washington DC, and Sectionals was in Miami - I can go to the WC in Puerto Rico for almost the same cost).

I honestly think Div Ia is as strong as it needs to be, and if you want stronger events you go to Div I NACs. We might use more NACs, or at least make the Canadian Elite events count again.

7. Increase the basic registration fee by $10 to support referee development and increase pay to referees. This should not be an increase "per event".

I think this very thing is on the agenda for the executive board this weekend. FYI, referees are not "paid", their expenses are reimbursed via a per-diem. A tremendous percentage of referees would earn more in one hour at their regular job than they do in a 10 hour day of refereeing. They really are just volunteers.

[three_hundred_fifty_five]

1. Use BAR CODES for registration.

Just a registration number can do, a bar code represents a number.

2. The Youth fencers deal worse with delays than adults.

Regardless of when they start, the USFA needs to preplan the logistics of the event better so everyone can benefit.


4. Limit the number of qualifiers at Y12 ...
5. Limit the Div. II participants ...
6. Limit the Div. III participants ...

What's with all this limiting business. The USFA is trying to grow the Summer Nationals.


8. Require concessions to be open during the entire event. If the venue concessions close then the local organizing committee would open their own.

This is not doable.

[Dragonfly]

With regard to childrens things: solution: have a team of volunteers arrive to make the strips overnight, or the day before, so everything is set up in advance [so if the kids are scheduled on a saturday morning at 9:00 - I think is better kids have trouble getting going in the a.m. and they need breakfast]. Kids may eventually go into a "Little League of Fencing" as in baseball. Having their own organization with USFA being the "Parent" organization overseeing their business. But having their own Vice President in charge of Children's events. The League could fence all in one or two days just prior to all the adult events, the adults could all be around to provide the awards and applesauce and then they'd be around for the adults events later on.

If the division split out as mentioned above; it will only serve to strengthen fencers at the national level. Top level fencers today are all dissappearing into the North America Cups. If the other divisions want to fence with them or fence eventually in the same pools as them, they're going to have to keep them in our arena. The further off they go, the more difficult it will be for the younger fencers to catch up to them.

Making it more competitive at the bottom for Division III [and I'm there, so I'm only making this more difficult for myself], it makes the top stronger. It's just such a tremendous pool, when I saw the numbers, I realized that's how big the entire nationals were 20 years ago.

Thanks again guys for letting me put my two cents in. Now I have to read the results of yesterday.
Bye!

[Peach]

I am happy that the Div IA draws different fencers than the Div I, and I like it being at a different time in the week. Even in years when I do both the Div I and the IA, I don't really want them close to one another. Frankly, many of the fencers in the I-A would rather that the top fencers didn't participate--I was asked a couple of times by other competitiors why I was bothering to do it, since I already have an A. It is an elite event which is between the II and the I.

I would like a computerized check-in system of some sort--Palms would do. This is the second USFA tournament where a pool in my event contained a fencer who had not even checked in. Last time it was Columbus, when we had to re-fence the Vet WS pools because a woman from my division was seeded in who was injured and didn't even bother to travel to Columbus, let alone check in. This time it was a young gentleman of my acquaintance who was seeded into the Div I-A WS, despite most certainly not checking in for it.

I would rather that they delay the start of an event (or flight the pools) than start it with completely unqualified or unsupervised referees. My pool in the Div I-A WS took nearly two hours to fence because of having an extraordinarily inexperienced referee.

[Inquartata]

How would the bar code idea speed up registration? I mean, each day I went to the table, gave my name, someone marked it off---total elapsed time about 5 seconds. And no costly scanners to buy...

[dberke]

One of my coaches and I were discussing bar codes the other day... Another use would be to avoid the insane crush of people clustered around the DE tableau printouts. If they set up scanners around the venue, you could just scan your bar-code and it would display your name and strip assignment. That would be a nice improvement over the current mob scene around the posted printouts.

If they stick with printouts, how about posting more of them (I believe they had only 3 locations this year) and perhaps using something larger than a 10 point font so that they're easier to read from a distance....

Dan

[JEC]

Inq.
At the table, they check your name. Sure it might take ten seconds. Then, the list is given to the bout committee who eliminates names from the pre-registration list or add names not found on the pre-registration list to create the initial seeding list and pools. This process takes about 20 minutes in a large competition before they start printing the initial seeding list, and posting pools five minutes later. Using bar codes would make it into less than 5 minute affair. With an average of 8 competitions per day, that might use the strips more efficiently.

I hope that you also claimed some of that 18 year-old English whisky. It was pretty good!

[Dragonfly]

You people must be exhausted, that you can type at this point is a miracle, I would be sleeping for three days before I could hit the keyboard.

Inquartata, we heard you had an outstanding day, and some of your bouts are pretty memorable, if you would favor us, as well as Peach with some of the highlights, I think the board would respond favorably. We heard you went one to one with the epeemike-ster; and you clobbered him. True or False. If true, what was the bout like?

Inquartata, one thought, is that it's possible that people recognized you and had you 'checked in' before you even got to the table. This has happened to me in the past, when people know you, they just put you in the right spot. For the others who are not known by anyone, they end up waiting longer, on all the lines.

[Inquartata]

Originally posted by JEC
Inq.
At the table, they check your name. Sure it might take ten seconds. Then, the list is given to the bout committee who eliminates names from the pre-registration list or add names not found on the pre-registration list to create the initial seeding list and pools. This process takes about 20 minutes in a large competition before they start printing the initial seeding list, and posting pools five minutes later. Using bar codes would make it into less than 5 minute affair. With an average of 8 competitions per day, that might use the strips more efficiently.

OK, I see your point.

They used to do all of the seeding and pooling by hand; the advent of computer software speeded things up enormously. I think that it all gets done fairly briskly these days, even at big events. Of course there's still room for improvement, but eventually you reach a point of diminishing marginal returns, where the technology costs more than the incremental improvements it brings.

I just don't want to have to have no bar code tattooed on the back of my neck or anything!

[Inquartata]

Originally posted by Dragonfly
Inquartata, we heard you had an outstanding day

I had one extraordinary day ( Div IA ), one fairly good day
( Vet 40-49), one average-for-me day ( Div III) and one bad day
( Div II).

In Div-IA I think I benefitted from some advice I've been giving others for a long time but am usually unable to take myself: relax, don't "want it" too much, just fence and don't be so concerned with results. I went in figuring I was going to do even worse than in Div II and just decided to try to have fun and learn something from the thrashing I was about to receive. Believe me, I was astonished to find myself 5-1 when the dust of the pool settled.

Naturally, this couldn't go on, so I contrived to wrench my knee winning my first DE. ( I blame those danged newfangled sectional aluminum pistes: sure, it's only an inch or so drop if you step off it, but if you step right on the edge, beware! )

Anyway, I was still happy with my performance, especially after the debacle of Div II.

Well, OK, so debacle may not be the right word. Div II was going well right up to the time when I lost my first DE...to the same guy who had eliminated me from Div III the day before...and by the same score at that! D'oh.

We heard you went one to one with the epeemike

No, never even saw him, though I saw his name a few times.

Inquartata, one thought, is that it's possible that people recognized you and had you 'checked in' before you even got to the table.

That's happened to me at the Duel in the Desert and at a couple of NACs ( made all the more flattering by the fact that the recognition was by a certain attractive young woman behind the desk! ), but not at Nationals this time, alas. As I said I walked up, gave my name, saw it checked off and that was it...

[Peach]

Boy, Inquartata, I don't know how you do it--after just doing the I-A and the Vet 50, I was worn out. Though my teammate Jeannine did the III, II, I-A, and Vet-50 and felt pretty good.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Originally posted by Inquartata
Naturally, this couldn't go on, so I contrived to wrench my knee winning my first DE. ( I blame those danged newfangled sectional aluminum pistes: sure, it's only an inch or so drop if you step off it, but if you step right on the edge, beware! )

DJ Apos. and you can have a long complaints session about those once he gets back- he sprained his ankle the weekend before nationals on one...

even if i don't feel your pain, he does!

[JEC]

I just came back from Austin where today I saw a "old saber" (a.k.a.: foil) bout. R. Exnicios got punch on the mask with his opponent guard .... and not even a card was shown.

[Zelda]

I'll concur about those Aluminium pistes. Only fenced on them a couple of times but woe betide coming off the edge at speed!
Congrats to Everyone who did/is competing at Nats.

[veeco]

Just thought I'd mention this, since I haven't seen anyone say it here so far.

The results have been updated pretty regularly on the website. IIRC, last year we had to well until the week was over to see any kind of results on the web, and now they have been posted regularly every day or 2 days. So kudos to the USFA and the organizing comittee in Texas for a good job.

Bravo!

[edew]

Originally posted by three_hundred_fifty_five
1. Use BAR CODES for registration.

Just a registration number can do, a bar code represents a number.

2. The Youth fencers deal worse with delays than adults.

Regardless of when they start, the USFA needs to preplan the logistics of the event better so everyone can benefit.


4. Limit the number of qualifiers at Y12 ...
5. Limit the Div. II participants ...
6. Limit the Div. III participants ...

What's with all this limiting business. The USFA is trying to grow the Summer Nationals.


8. Require concessions to be open during the entire event. If the venue concessions close then the local organizing committee would open their own.

This is not doable.

Bar codes are better because there is less chance of mistakes. A registration number, if hand written or hand typed, is just asking for problems. Actually, I think fencers should all have a credit-card type card with a picture, name, and bar-code information, all accessing a database (doesn't even have to have net access, bring the 50MB hard drive with you to the tournament ).

At the congress meeting, I asked about what the USFA will be doing with regards to anticipating continued growth of the Summer Nationals. I believe the Summer Nationals this year may have surpassed 3000 different competitors (and approximately 6000 entrants in all the events combined).

One suggestion is to have top 60% (or 70% or 75%) of Div III fencers qualify from the Div II/III/Vet qualifiers.

Another is 80% up from the pools in all events.

Another is better scheduling to have the kids events earlier in the day so they're not up at 11:00PM fencing to get into the final eight.

One suggestion is to move the date of the Summer Nationals to the week AFTER the 4th of July: some people actually want to spend some family time with relatives on the 4th and not always go to Summer Nationals; and in the case this year, some kids had to skip graduation to attend the nationals (that's dedication, or indifference to that high school).

There are also plans to pay the referees more, so that they're not overworked. And have two shifts, a morning shift that ends at around 5PM and an evening shift that starts at 3PM and goes to the bitter end.

The first day, I was there from 8AM to 11:30PM, and was let go at 9PM the second day, the day before my Div IA competition. By Thursday night, I was just drained and thus my performance at the Div I MF on Friday. Refereeing just wears a person out. The legs achieve a sort of rigor mortis after a while.

But the bottom line is this: restrictions and tougher qualifying paths will only be a temporary fix. The events will continually get bigger as there are now more and better clubs with ever more competitors. So what if you limit the number of qualifiers to the top 10%? If there are 100 local fencers attending, you'll get the 10 fencers qualifying as there are now. With 55 divisions, you could potentially still have events with 500 competitors in the not-too-distant future.

A better digital-only system might be a solution to make sure that mistakes (which occurred at the Div III MF's final-8 bouts) won't happen and thus delay the ending for another 30+ minutes.

Maybe we go with a 12 point bout system. A 4-point pool bout system. Two minute bouts and two minute periods. Such little bits add up tremendously over the course of the day.

[veeco]

Or you could just be reasonnable and have different national championship tournaments that are located in different places at different times...

[edew]

I think the logistics of getting the right referees to the right places and have to double up on bout committee people and such doesn't make economic sense.

There's still no guarantee that there will be sufficient people in each place, unless you split it by gender. Otherwise, if you split it by event categories, then it might be the case that people choose to go to location A and not to location B. Then, all the efforts and resources are overwhelmed in A and under utilized at B.

Also, coaches won't be too terribly thrilled by that idea.

One other possibility is to have a "Super Summer Nationals" once every four years, the year of the Olympics. Other years will have less of a nationals.