Buying a Spot on the World Team

[Capt. Slo-mo]

Mo brings up a point that I've hijacked into a new thread.

Originally posted by Mo
One of my kids is high enough on the point list to get the mailings for International Competitions IE World Cups.

For the Junior Cadet Pan American Games, there is no money available. For the Cadet World Cup in Poland, there is no money (assistance) available but they will be sending a coach. (snip) Either the parents or the fencer pays for the World Cup competitions. (snip) The way that the point system is set up demands that a fencer has a huge amount of economic support. (snip) It is a huge financial and emotional investment to support a fencer. The rank and file all have their dreams too, they plan on being at the top someday. (snip) You have to attend them to win them.

Like Mo, I also have a child beginning to consider World Cup competitions, with the dream of making the US team. But it seems the slots on the team are in large part for sale.

The way the point system is weighted, you can't make the US team without adding international points, even, if say, as a cadet, you win every single domestic meet, and place well at the junior and Div 1 level. This means you must go abroad. A lot.

This sets up a system where the fencers who are the best funded can go to multiple overseas events and accrue a boatload of points, even with modest results. Strangely, it enables that fencer to make the US team over a domestic competitior that the well-funded fencer might never beat while fencing at home.

I fully agree that international experience is very valuable for a potential US team member. But just as only a certain number of domestic meet results count towards team selection, why not limit the number of international meets whose points can be added to the team selection criteria? The way it stands now, the international results just keep piling on, where US meets are limited to the four best (or 2 best in Div 1).

I can't send my kid to every single cadet, junior and senior World Cup in the hopes of amassing bushels of points. There are other fencers who can and do go that route. Does that guarantee that the US is represented by the best fencers at the World Championships, or just the best funded fencers?

[Dee EffEll]

Nothing unique about that in our sport, as opposed to others. Given two athletes with similar abilities coming into fencing at an early age, one rich one poor, the rich one will generally do better over time simply because s/he can afford more training, more lessons, better coaches, travel to more camps, and of course, go to more competitons.

What will be interesting in the (not so far?) future is parents that have financial resources may be afforded the opportunity to select specific genetic makeup of their offspring. Want your kid to be a successful athlete? A little snip-snip under a microscope, and bingo! Your child is born with the genes of a fencer! Paying for world cup travel will be the least of your worries.

Sad truth is that while money can't buy happiness, it can buy you a lot of travel to look to be happy on a medal stand.

[edew]

Unfortunately for fencing, there's no one or even a set of genes that would be considered "fencing genes". To do well in fencing, one must have a strong intestinal fortitude, determination, quick reflexes, athletic build, thin, smart, and a whole host of things.

It'll be easier to genetic engineer a better swimmer or a better runner than a better fencer.

(There was an article in Playboy in the 70s about the evolution of sport through genetic engineering. The illustrations showed track runners with gazelle like legs and swimmers with finned hands and gilled jaw lines. I think, while the illustrations were just for kicks, the article was quite prescient.)

[nahouw]

Nobody is buying a spot on the World Team -- they all got there through many years of dedication, hard work, and personal sacrifices of time and money, including social life, delaying education and work after graduation. Sada Jacobson has only gotten to be number 1 in the World after many, many years of training at least 3 hours a day, 6 days a week, every week of the year....it is just a question of how bad do you want it, how hard are you willing to work for it, and it takes 100% committment.

ALL fencers pay for their own trips. The only competitions that get funded are the Pan-Am Games and the Olympics, because it is the USOC and not the USFA that pays for it. We don't even send teams to the World University Games anymore because the USOC has declined to fund it. Junior Pan-Ams have never been funded, and only 1 fencer per weapon is selected to keep the size (and expense) of the cadre down. Depending upon weapon program, they may pay for athletes for 1 World Cup in conjunction with a team event, because team events are important to Olympic qualification. Depending upon the weapon program, funding for a coach to attend a competition is provided, if that event has a large number of entrants for the coach to oversee and support.

Funding for World Championship teams is based upon your International results -- you can see the schedule of how much the USFA will fund a fencer in Chapter 5 of the Athletes Handbook. The USFA doesn't have funding free and available to give to everybody -- they only give funding to people who have results, and in accordance with those results.

For Cadet and Juniors, the selection criteria counts the top 4 results of Domestic events and the top 4 results of Designated International events. For Cadets, the 2 Div 1 NACs count for the International component. And the US and Canada each host a Junior World Cup, so theoretically speaking (depending upon weapon program, and assuming that the US and Canadian JWC receive designation), you can get your max of 8 competitions that count for selection without ever leaving North America -- as long as you consistently place high enough in each event. There is nothing wrong with the selection criteria -- you have to have consistent high placements in order to make the team; it is a matter of how many events that you have to attend in order to achieve those results. See Chapter 4 of the Athletes Handbook for the details of the selection criteria.

For the Seniors, the top 2 results amongst the Div 1 NACs and National Championships count along with the best 5 results from Designated competitions. Many Senior fencers also choose to go to the non-Designated competitions (for more competition experience, or to boost their FIE ranking to help in future seeding) -- these competitions don't count as an add-on, but rather, they just serve as a replacement points for a NAC.

It is a very good sign as to the level that American fencing has come in these last few years -- the USA is now considered as serious international competitors. Our top competitors are doing so well internationally, that in some weapons, if you want to make a team, you have to have some international results. But we still have a long way to go -- in Seniors, theoretically speaking, if you won both NACs in MF and WE (you could also include WF but for 50 points), you would be on the team -- no international competitions would have been required. The team point standings for Junior and Cadet have been removed from the USFA website, but I'm sure that same could be said for some of the weapons (WS and MS excepted).

You make it sound as if fencers with dedication that choose to make the sacrifices of their time and and their own money to go to International competitions are very easily accumulating points. It is not easy to obtain International results -- the competitions are fierce. USFA points are only given if you reach the top 32 or higher. A couple of examples as to how hard it really is: In Women's Epee, Kelley Hurley and Amy Orlando both chose to attend the vast majority of Senior World Cups this year. There are 18 WE World Cups. Both spent alot of time living in Europe in order to save on the airfare, staying in either hostels or campgrounds in order to save on the housing expense. Kelley had 1 top 32 and 2 top 64 results; Amy had 2 top 64 results. There was no accumulations of points for their efforts.

For the past 2 years, the USFA has sent 10 WE fencers to the World Cup in Cuba -- each year, there was only 1 fencer who only made it to the round of 64; and this past year, the competition was especially strong, since it counted for Olympic qualification -- USFA caps the strength factor at 2.0, but the actual strength factor of this competition was 3.5 -- stronger than the World Championships.

The bottom line, considering that US Fencing has progressed to the point where International results are now expected, is that the fencer has to go out and compete Internationally to prove themselves. It is your results that gets you on the team -- whether you can do this in 4 competitions or 10 competitions, it is up to you.

As to the money issue, take for example Kolobkov -- the Russian Federation doesn't have alot of money to send him to all these competitions, so they choose his competitions wisely to give them more bang for their buck. The FIE ranking only counts World Championships, 4 European competitions and 2 non-European competitions. He only competed in 4 European competitions this year -- no non-European competitions, and he is ranked 13th in the world. It is by his skill that he is ranked so high; he attended less than the allowable competitions considered for the FIE ranking -- if he can do it, than money is not an issue. It is by his skill that he is where he is (he is just an amazing fencer -- a joy to watch).

You don't have to send your kid to every single World Cup event -- your kid is a cadet -- be smart about the events that you send him to. Send him to the Designated Cadet event, some other European cadet events, and maybe a Junior World Cup -- see how he does, see what he learns. It is a building process. Get your priorities in order -- if you think that by sending him to Senior World Cups will get him points, you need to think again -- you are putting him in a position where he is way over his head and are wasting your money; he needs to develop at the European cadet events and/or Junior World Cup level. If he is to make a team, it is by his results -- whether he can do this with minimal competitions, or has to attend alot of competitions, it all boils down to his skill and his desire to do so.

[Dee EffEll]

Originally posted by edew
Unfortunately for fencing, there's no one or even a set of genes that would be considered "fencing genes".

No? Optimizing speed and reaction time is never going to be possible? But then, if someone was to invest in a kid with fast reflexes and a lot of short distance speed, I would expect the parents to have the kid take up anything but fencing. No money in fencing, so why make the investment?

[Sabresque]

Originally posted by nahouw
Nobody is buying a spot on the World Team -- they all got there through many years of dedication, hard work, and personal sacrifices of time and money, including social life, delaying education and work after graduation. Sada Jacobson has only gotten to be number 1 in the World after many, many years of training at least 3 hours a day, 6 days a week, every week of the year....it is just a question of how bad do you want it, how hard are you willing to work for it, and it takes 100% committment.

ALL fencers pay for their own trips. The only competitions that get funded are the Pan-Am Games and the Olympics, because it is the USOC and not the USFA that pays for it. We don't even send teams to the World University Games anymore because the USOC has declined to fund it. Junior Pan-Ams have never been funded, and only 1 fencer per weapon is selected to keep the size (and expense) of the cadre down. Depending upon weapon program, they may pay for athletes for 1 World Cup in conjunction with a team event, because team events are important to Olympic qualification. Depending upon the weapon program, funding for a coach to attend a competition is provided, if that event has a large number of entrants for the coach to oversee and support.

Funding for World Championship teams is based upon your International results -- you can see the schedule of how much the USFA will fund a fencer in Chapter 5 of the Athletes Handbook. The USFA doesn't have funding free and available to give to everybody -- they only give funding to people who have results, and in accordance with those results.

For Cadet and Juniors, the selection criteria counts the top 4 results of Domestic events and the top 4 results of Designated International events. For Cadets, the 2 Div 1 NACs count for the International component. And the US and Canada each host a Junior World Cup, so theoretically speaking (depending upon weapon program, and assuming that the US and Canadian JWC receive designation), you can get your max of 8 competitions that count for selection without ever leaving North America -- as long as you consistently place high enough in each event. There is nothing wrong with the selection criteria -- you have to have consistent high placements in order to make the team; it is a matter of how many events that you have to attend in order to achieve those results. See Chapter 4 of the Athletes Handbook for the details of the selection criteria.

For the Seniors, the top 2 results amongst the Div 1 NACs and National Championships count along with the best 5 results from Designated competitions. Many Senior fencers also choose to go to the non-Designated competitions (for more competition experience, or to boost their FIE ranking to help in future seeding) -- these competitions don't count as an add-on, but rather, they just serve as a replacement points for a NAC.

It is a very good sign as to the level that American fencing has come in these last few years -- the USA is now considered as serious international competitors. Our top competitors are doing so well internationally, that in some weapons, if you want to make a team, you have to have some international results. But we still have a long way to go -- in Seniors, theoretically speaking, if you won both NACs in MF and WE (you could also include WF but for 50 points), you would be on the team -- no international competitions would have been required. The team point standings for Junior and Cadet have been removed from the USFA website, but I'm sure that same could be said for some of the weapons (WS and MS excepted).

You make it sound as if fencers with dedication that choose to make the sacrifices of their time and and their own money to go to International competitions are very easily accumulating points. It is not easy to obtain International results -- the competitions are fierce. USFA points are only given if you reach the top 32 or higher. A couple of examples as to how hard it really is: In Women's Epee, Kelley Hurley and Amy Orlando both chose to attend the vast majority of Senior World Cups this year. There are 18 WE World Cups. Both spent alot of time living in Europe in order to save on the airfare, staying in either hostels or campgrounds in order to save on the housing expense. Kelley had 1 top 32 and 2 top 64 results; Amy had 2 top 64 results. There was no accumulations of points for their efforts.

For the past 2 years, the USFA has sent 10 WE fencers to the World Cup in Cuba -- each year, there was only 1 fencer who only made it to the round of 64; and this past year, the competition was especially strong, since it counted for Olympic qualification -- USFA caps the strength factor at 2.0, but the actual strength factor of this competition was 3.5 -- stronger than the World Championships.

The bottom line, considering that US Fencing has progressed to the point where International results are now expected, is that the fencer has to go out and compete Internationally to prove themselves. It is your results that gets you on the team -- whether you can do this in 4 competitions or 10 competitions, it is up to you.

As to the money issue, take for example Kolobkov -- the Russian Federation doesn't have alot of money to send him to all these competitions, so they choose his competitions wisely to give them more bang for their buck. The FIE ranking only counts World Championships, 4 European competitions and 2 non-European competitions. He only competed in 4 European competitions this year -- no non-European competitions, and he is ranked 13th in the world. It is by his skill that he is ranked so high; he attended less than the allowable competitions considered for the FIE ranking -- if he can do it, than money is not an issue. It is by his skill that he is where he is (he is just an amazing fencer -- a joy to watch).

You don't have to send your kid to every single World Cup event -- your kid is a cadet -- be smart about the events that you send him to. Send him to the Designated Cadet event, some other European cadet events, and maybe a Junior World Cup -- see how he does, see what he learns. It is a building process. Get your priorities in order -- if you think that by sending him to Senior World Cups will get him points, you need to think again -- you are putting him in a position where he is way over his head and are wasting your money; he needs to develop at the European cadet events and/or Junior World Cup level. If he is to make a team, it is by his results -- whether he can do this with minimal competitions, or has to attend alot of competitions, it all boils down to his skill and his desire to do so.

Nahouw, I don't think you understand what they're saying. They aren't saying that the people who work hard and do well are buying their way onto the team, it's just that the fact is that out of two fencers who both work really hard, have amazing talent, and could do well at world cup events, the one with more money to go will be the one who makes that last spot on the team. The person with more money will be able to go, and place, at numerous world cup events. The person with less money will be able to place, but might not be able to afford as many events, or any at all. This will mean WAY more points for the person who has more to spend.

I wouldn't say that most of the people on the US team buy their way in, but if you have money it's a big advantage. It's easy to feel frustrated when you're the one stuck at home.

[three_hundred_fifty_five]

Originally posted by edew
...(There was an article in Playboy in the 70s about ...

Playboy magazine, the most reliable source for information.

[three_hundred_fifty_five]

This situation applies to pretty much all non-European fencers. Those in non-European countries also have a small number of fencers with an accumulation of world-cup points compared to Europeans.

There are other amateur sports that require a good amount of personal money to be spent to get onto the sport's national team.

I can't afford to go to even NACs or the Summer Nationals so I just go to local or regional events. Money is money.

[Mo]

Originally posted by Sabresque
Nahouw, I don't think you understand what they're saying. They aren't saying that the people who work hard and do well are buying their way onto the team, it's just that the fact is that out of two fencers who both work really hard, have amazing talent, and could do well at world cup events, the one with more money to go will be the one who makes that last spot on the team. The person with more money will be able to go, and place, at numerous world cup events. The person with less money will be able to place, but might not be able to afford as many events, or any at all. This will mean WAY more points for the person who has more to spend.

I wouldn't say that most of the people on the US team buy their way in, but if you have money it's a big advantage. It's easy to feel frustrated when you're the one stuck at home.

Sabresque,
This is so true. I was talking to a fencer on a World Team. He said that if he enters a World Cup, fellow fencers will anounce they are not going, they don't need the points, blah blah. As soon as he arrives at the venue, they are there too.

The points for the Seniors are SOOO tight. You cannot afford to miss a meet if someone in close contention to "your" spot is going to one.

Of course if you are someone like Sada Jacobson, there is really a slim chance to overtake her.

If you are trying for next year's cadet or junior team. What points count. Nahow you really seem to know.
You say the two Div 1 NAC's is that for cadet or Junior?
What exactly are the four that count for Cadet and the four that count for Junior?
I have been trying to look it up and can find it for last year but still don't really get it.

Sabresque how the heck are you?? Getting better? Rehabbing well? When can you start fencing again? I mean on your feet LOL.

[nahouw]

Originally posted by Mo
If you are trying for next year's cadet or junior team. What points count. Nahow you really seem to know.
You say the two Div 1 NAC's is that for cadet or Junior?
What exactly are the four that count for Cadet and the four that count for Junior?
I have been trying to look it up and can find it for last year but still don't really get it.

It is similar for any year, and is always posted on the website and the Athletes Handbook: selection is based on the sum of Group I plus Group II points. With the reduction of events, the HPC might change the number of events that count -- we have to wait to see the Athletes Handbook when it comes out.

Cadet Group I (best 4 results out of these 7 events): U16 Summer Natls; U19 Summer Natls; Cadet NAC; Louisville JWC; Junior NAC; JO Cadet; JO Junior
Cadet Group II (best 4 results of) Div I NACs, Designated Cadet Event; Designated JWCs

Junior Group I (best 4 results out of these 6 events): U19 Summer Natls; Louisville JWC; Junior NAC; JO Junior; Dec NAC; Jan NAC
Junior Group II (best 4 results of) Designated JWCs; Designated Senior World Cups

[swordsen]

This is a problem that exists in most competative sports. The child whose parents can afford to move them full time to karoly's cymnastics center has a much better chance than the one who works out at the local club. Money talks and it always has. Someday if I ever win the lottery there will be alot more money available to alot more people in this sport.....