Top 62 seeds for the October NAC epee

Discussion in 'Fencing Discussion' started by Rollhigher, Sep 12, 2018.

  1. Rollhigher

    Rollhigher Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2013
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Have the top 62 seeds in the Div I epee events for the October NAC been posted? I believe it was set at the close the regular fee entry period.
     
  2. jdude97

    jdude97 Podium

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,922
    Likes Received:
    228
    They have as of a few days ago and can be found here: https://www.usafencing.org/2018-oct-nac-epee

    It's worth noting that there's a new procedure by which the top 62 spots are filled if a top 62 seeded fencer withdraws before the start of day 1.

    Also on the October NAC page it says which events will be flighted on each day. Don't believe I've seen that before, although good for travel planning. It is as follows:
    Day 1, Friday: none
    Day 2, Saturday: div1WS
    Day 3, Sunday: div1MS, div1ME (I assume this means the day 2 part of div1, not the classification event which starts at 1pm)
    Day 4, Monday: div1MF
     
  3. jdude97

    jdude97 Podium

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,922
    Likes Received:
    228
    Just noticed now that check-in times for div1 day 2 and div1 classification event are both 12-1pm on Sunday. I'm pretty sure at each NAC last year one was in the morning and the other in the afternoon. Seems odd to hold them contemporaneously.

    Hopefully they don't flight pools in both events. My thinking is they'll flight pools in the div1 day 2 since the pools get announced the night before and so can be assigned start times like at a World Cup.
     
  4. teacup

    teacup Podium

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,976
    Likes Received:
    188
    What if a fencer with a bye withdraws on Day 2 or is a no show?
     
  5. jdude97

    jdude97 Podium

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,922
    Likes Received:
    228
    Then a pool is short handed but that's how it was last year too. Last year the pools were posted the night before so what I'm saying I think will happen is no different in practice than what's already happened. With that said, the BC did make an ad hoc decision after pools had already started at the October 2017 NAC to balance at least one pool which had it's top 2 seeds no show. While I'm sure that was the correct choice for fairness, it troubled me that they made such an adjustment contrary to the published rules that pools would not be adjusted. IMO pools should not be made until fencers have checked in on the day of the event even for day 2, and possibly get filled in with the top seeds on the consolation event.
     
  6. Ancientepee

    Ancientepee Podium

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,170
    Likes Received:
    354
    At the Nationals one year when they were still doing pools of 5/6 and they were set up ahead of time, four fencers did not show up for a pool of 5. By the time they finished paging the fencers and realized that they would not be showing up, the other pools had started fencing but they found one pool of 5 where one of the fencers had not fenced a bout yet. In those days, a fixed number of fencers (in this case 3) qualified out of each pool. They told the fencer that they were moving him to another pool. He protested until they explained that he would be in a pool of 2 with 3 qualifying to the next round and so he was guaranteed to qualify to the next round. The two fencers in the new pool fenced one bout and the loser qualified to the next round with a bout indicator of 0.000.
     
  7. teacup

    teacup Podium

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,976
    Likes Received:
    188
    I understand that USA Fencing is trying to emmulate SWC's but unlike FIE World cups, no fines are issued to no shows.

    (Btw, I am not suggesting that fines be levied against no shows, just commenting that NACs aren't the same as SWCs, so not sure why it was decided that pools can't be adjusted.)
     
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2018
  8. jdude97

    jdude97 Podium

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,922
    Likes Received:
    228
    Yup I was thinking about this story when I made my last post. Definitely read it on FdN a few years back. But even that occurrence sounds insanely unfair. Those first 2 fencers only qualified due to no shows, then even worse is that 3rd fencer who got in only because he hadn't fenced a bout yet. But worse than unfair, I'm sure it was incredibly extra-judicial (i.e. contrary to the rules).
     
  9. jdude97

    jdude97 Podium

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,922
    Likes Received:
    228
    They have made things a bit better this year with allowing top 62 seeds to withdraw up until the night before day 1 and be replaced with 63rd, 64th, etc. seeds, but still no accommodation for last minute no shows/injuries. Does anyone have a counterargument for why not to fill with the top fencers who didn't qualify for day 2? I could see some logistical challenges, but less if the events are actually starting at the same time (and neither are flighting with pre-announced start times). Have check in for day 2 and the classification event 12-1, then at 1 you get told what event you're in, top 126 are in div1 day 2. At least if they are flighting with pre-announced start times that is a legit reason to pre-announce pools -- 0 reason to do so when everyone has to re-check in anyways.
     
  10. Ancientepee

    Ancientepee Podium

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,170
    Likes Received:
    354
    You didn't read the description correctly. The first round pool would have had only ONE fencer because of the no-shows. The SECOND fencer got in only because he hadn't fenced yet. There was no THIRD fencer in that pool. Because the format of the competition assumed that three fencers would qualify out of each of the first round pools but only two now qualified out of one of them, this meant that the second round had one pool that was short a fencer. If they hadn't moved the fencer, the second round would have had two pools that were short a fencer. Consider the unfairness to the second round fencers if they hadn't moved the fencer.
     
  11. jdude97

    jdude97 Podium

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,922
    Likes Received:
    228
    Sorry about that...I skimmed you post thinking I already knew the story but had it wrong. I can see the argument that what they did was the fairest solution: it couldn't have been unfair to the fencer who was moved into the pool (they auto-qualified, although they were deprived the chance to fence competitive bouts -- it's the same way I'm a bit peeved when in a pool of 5 because sure I have a chance to go undefeated more easily but really I'm here to fence). It couldn't have been unfair to the fencers from the same pool who weren't moved (sure it was arbitrary but now they have fewer people to beat to get top 3). It made the event more even for the next round, although I wouldn't necessarily consider this unfairness unless we either consider it unfair the fencers in the short pools get to fence fewer bouts or, more likely, unfair to the fencers in the uneven second round pools who have a harder chance to qualify. I do again get the implied argument that since the second round is more important than the first, it's more important to have fewer short pools in the second round than in the first, but you've only gone from 1 short first round pool and 2 short second round pools to 2 short first round pools and 1 short second round pool: not a great improvement.

    Furthermore there are counterarguments that what I said before really is unfair: if the fencer who got moved was the scrub of the pool, it deprived the other fencers of a win for their win % (similar to when the U in the pool takes an injury withdrawal). It is unfair to the loser of the 2 person pool's lone bout who is stuck with the bottom seed in the next round. It is unfair to the tournament as a whole that it's distorted with a fencer who has a 100% win rate based on a single pool. Since everything that goes on in a tournament is intertwined, the sheer arbitrary and extra-legal nature of the whole process is unfair to a majority of the fencers, even if it's in small and inarticulable, yet nevertheless, compounding ways. If they wanted a rule that allowed for the balancing of pools in this manner, they should've had that rule. Once the tournament starts without that rule, oh well but them be the rules -- better fix it for next time. And on that I say it sounds like we're a few decades on and given what happened at the October 2017 NAC div1 ME day 2 with the no shows and last minute, extra-legal pool balancing, nobody learned (or at least thought to make any rules). And even going towards this upcoming NAC, it does seem they've learned enough to allow withdrawals and re-fills up to a later date (night before start of day 1) but still haven't made afaik any rules about pool balancing.
     
  12. teacup

    teacup Podium

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,976
    Likes Received:
    188
    Why not change the rule to allow rebalancing at the start of the second day? While these events may be trying to be SWCs, they aren't.
     
  13. jdude97

    jdude97 Podium

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,922
    Likes Received:
    228
    Remember to bring your coats everyone! Forecasted lows down to 34 in Milwaukee!
     
  14. Inquartata

    Inquartata Podium

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    36,872
    Likes Received:
    1,340
    But how will the guards see your wristbands if you are swathed in coats?
     
  15. jdude97

    jdude97 Podium

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,922
    Likes Received:
    228
    T-2 days to NAC start and no preliminary seedlings posted. Unusual.
     
  16. mfp

    mfp Podium

    Joined:
    May 10, 2002
    Messages:
    2,091
    Likes Received:
    373
    While there's no link to them from the event page, the work-in-progress "preliminary preliminary" event seedings can be found in the usual place. The "Last Updated" timestamps show they were still being modified as of this morning.
     
  17. jdude97

    jdude97 Podium

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,922
    Likes Received:
    228
    To clarify what mfp was saying because I didn't understand it myself at first: go to usfencingresults.org > results > 2018-19 > 2018.10-OCT-NAC and you'll see preliminary seedings. Unfortunately usfencingresults.com and usafencingresults.com now redirect to the sports ngin login page. Fortunately I tried the .org version with success. And they had better be a work in progress as my info is wrong!
     
  18. jdude97

    jdude97 Podium

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,922
    Likes Received:
    228
    I'm getting a 404 error when I try to see div1 women's epee results...anyone else?

    Update: it works when I go to usfencingresults.org through the back channels.
     
  19. Montoya

    Montoya DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    686
    Likes Received:
    56
    Or click on the classic view.
     
  20. dberke

    dberke Podium

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    316
    This has been fixed. Sorry for the inconvenience!

    Dan
     

Share This Page