Jett
Maitre
On the back![ss:Default]
Posts: 112
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 6, 2006 22:13:41 GMT -6
Post by Jett on Dec 6, 2006 22:13:41 GMT -6
FCUH is looking at Sat Jan 27 for SWIFA three. It's currently the only weekend not conflicting another tournament in the beginning of the semester.
|
|
|
Post by LongBlade on Dec 7, 2006 2:37:54 GMT -6
Oh, No! Tell me you aren't gonna put it there on the new proposed date for the SWIFA 2.5!
|
|
|
Post by LongBlade on Dec 7, 2006 2:42:59 GMT -6
Hey, Dan, You are the Moderator of this section. Can you please consolidate this with the existing topic on the 06-07 SWIFA #3 to avoid confusion?
|
|
Jett
Maitre
On the back![ss:Default]
Posts: 112
|
Post by Jett on Dec 7, 2006 9:02:05 GMT -6
We've changed the date 3 times with our Rec Center already. We were originally looking at Feb 17, the weekend of JOs, and after that, there's no free weekends.
Feb 3-4 Rose Condon Feb 9-10 Masters Feb 17-18 Burt Barker Feb 24 Battle on the Bayou (Houston) March 3-4 SSCC March 10 Spring Break March 16-18 SYC (Houston) March Div II/III Qualifier
Going past that would probably put SWIFA 3 ontop of SWIFA 4 which will most likely be held in April to avoid conflicts with finals in May.
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Dec 7, 2006 9:10:43 GMT -6
Hey, Dan, You are the Moderator of this section. Can you please consolidate this with the existing topic on the 06-07 SWIFA #3 to avoid confusion? If I may jump in at this point. The answer would be no. There is no code in this system or link/button to click that will do that. The proboards systems are just not designed to merge threads (believe me, I have looked). The closest answer would be fore him to lock one thread and guide everyone trying to reply to it (but getting locked out) to go to the other thread. You can go to the last post of thread you want everyone to go to. You can see a link at the bottom right of the last post that says "Link to Post" Click it and you get the precise url to that last post in the address field across the top of your browser. Copy-and-save it and post that addy at the end of the last post in the locked thread with a note sending folks to the link you are pasting in.
|
|
|
Post by LongBlade on Dec 8, 2006 9:51:03 GMT -6
We've changed the date 3 times with our Rec Center already. We were originally looking at Feb 17, the weekend of JOs, and after that, there's no free weekends. Feb 3-4 Rose Condon Feb 9-10 Masters Feb 17-18 Burt Barker Feb 24 Battle on the Bayou (Houston) March 3-4 SSCC March 10 Spring Break March 16-18 SYC (Houston) March Div II/III Qualifier Going past that would probably put SWIFA 3 on top of SWIFA 4 which will most likely be held in April to avoid conflicts with finals in May. Oh, the old problem of tournament overlap raises its ugly head. Actually, in the dark old days, we never had to worry about that. Now, we do. There is almost no way to avoid setting an event up against another one held somewhere.
Jett, I recommend you just set it whenever we can avoid doing it on top of a member school's tournament unless it is done in coordination with that tournament. Maybe against the Rose Condon, since how many SWIFA fencers are likely to go to that tournament? Anyone with any other input better say it now.
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 8, 2006 10:08:39 GMT -6
Post by Dan Gorman on Dec 8, 2006 10:08:39 GMT -6
I think the Spring Break weekend or the SRYC would be better. Unless the SWIFA Championships are going to be moved forward to one of those weekends. I still feel they should be prior to the USACFCs. Maybe SWIFA 3 on Mar 10, and SWIFA Championships on Mar 17-18? Or to close? Dan
|
|
Jett
Maitre
On the back![ss:Default]
Posts: 112
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 8, 2006 13:39:29 GMT -6
Post by Jett on Dec 8, 2006 13:39:29 GMT -6
Holding a SWIFA over spring break is surely going to raise hell or lower the availability of fencers to participate. I'm not sure about the other universities, but quite a few of FCUH fencers have spring break plans that has nothing to do with fencing.
Holding it opposite the SYC wouldn't have been a problem if it wasn't in Houston. I'm almost certain the available referees will be called in there to referee (myself included).
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 11, 2006 13:41:48 GMT -6
Post by Parry Nine on Dec 11, 2006 13:41:48 GMT -6
So in the interest of setting a date for SWIFA 2.5, when does UH want to do SWIFA 3?
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 11, 2006 16:11:19 GMT -6
Post by Dan Gorman on Dec 11, 2006 16:11:19 GMT -6
We could do SWIFA 2.5 at the end of SWIFA 3.0....
Dan
|
|
Jett
Maitre
On the back![ss:Default]
Posts: 112
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 11, 2006 17:21:46 GMT -6
Post by Jett on Dec 11, 2006 17:21:46 GMT -6
FCUH is still holding firm to having SWIFA 3 on January 27. As for the possibility of hosting SWIFA 2.5 before or after SWIFA 3 is something that would have to be discussed among our officers. I will have that answer for you all late tonight or early tomorrow.
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 12, 2006 9:32:57 GMT -6
Post by Damaris on Dec 12, 2006 9:32:57 GMT -6
Update----Ok talked to u of h and confered with kyle that TXST will move bert barker if the can do swifa 3 on feb 17th. Which is also the original date that we were told and put on the swifa website already.... Now we just have to see if there rec sports will give the venue to them.
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 12, 2006 9:50:09 GMT -6
Post by Damaris on Dec 12, 2006 9:50:09 GMT -6
Yet you know im starting to think we should just give up and do it (2.5) on SWIFA 3 date before SWIFA 3 starts..... cause u of h said they could do it and it would save everyone a trip...... Yet it is kinda unfair to the people that will have to fencing and then fence again.....
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 12, 2006 11:16:41 GMT -6
Post by Dan Gorman on Dec 12, 2006 11:16:41 GMT -6
Do it at the end of the day -- it won't impact the running of SWIFA 3 and those who'd be fencing in the the 2.5 would have been fencing all day like they would have for the DEs of SWIFA 2, so more accurate.
Just a thought.
Dan
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 12, 2006 12:09:11 GMT -6
Post by Damaris on Dec 12, 2006 12:09:11 GMT -6
No. I dont follow your logic on that one. you saying that is more accurate if they fence for a longer period of time then a shorter one. verses a shorter period of time then a longer one? also for it not impacting swifa 3 if its at the end of the event?..... I dont follow that logic either.... whether we do it at 9am or 7pm we still have to do the same stuff why would one not impact the other a vice versa? elaborate...... and again the nummerical logic of have 2 finish before 3 is more normal. We do want this season to go a normal as possible. Dont want people talk about how stupid or weird it was that swifa 3 was done before swifa 2
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 12, 2006 12:16:48 GMT -6
Post by Damaris on Dec 12, 2006 12:16:48 GMT -6
DAN IS THIS WHAT YOU MENT? With the first comment that it would be more accurate,...... I just Realized that you might be saying that,,, Because your already tired in de's that i would ring more true that they should be tired in swifa 2.5. is that what your saying? it is an interesting point yet... not important enough to make us go backward I think.
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 12, 2006 12:25:37 GMT -6
Post by Dan Gorman on Dec 12, 2006 12:25:37 GMT -6
There is an endurance component to fencing. The DEs reflect skill and conditioning of the athlete in question. If DEs are held without something prior, you serve to remove an amount of the conditioning (i.e. I could get on strip and win a couple bouts right now, but no way would I place as well at a tournament). This allows a less conditioned but equally skilled team to perform better against a more conditioned team. Additionally, the teams that don't have squads in the 2.5 will have squads that are fresher for the subsequent fencing. This could give them a bit of an edge.
As for the sequential flow of the season, I don't see the issue. Going back to the analogy of a rain date in baseball, those games are rarely if even played in their original order. Just because we name them numerically, doesn't mean we need be bound by that.
Dan
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 13, 2006 14:42:37 GMT -6
Post by LongBlade on Dec 13, 2006 14:42:37 GMT -6
I just finished speaking with Greg Krueger with U of H and he confirms that they have reserved the gym to hold SWIFA #3 on January 27, 2007.
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 13, 2006 21:56:51 GMT -6
Post by LongBlade on Dec 13, 2006 21:56:51 GMT -6
There is an endurance component to fencing. The DEs reflect skill and conditioning of the athlete in question. If DEs are held without something prior, you serve to remove an amount of the conditioning (i.e. I could get on strip and win a couple bouts right now, but no way would I place as well at a tournament). This allows a less conditioned but equally skilled team to perform better against a more conditioned team. Additionally, the teams that don't have squads in the 2.5 will have squads that are fresher for the subsequent fencing. This could give them a bit of an edge. As for the sequential flow of the season, I don't see the issue. Going back to the analogy of a rain date in baseball, those games are rarely if even played in their original order. Just because we name them numerically, doesn't mean we need be bound by that.Dan Dan, I'm gonna go with you on this one. I really think that we need to run #3 and then do 2.5 in that order. Why? So we have fresh teams from ALL the schools competing in #3. The remaining teams from #2 will all be equally worn out, tired, and sweaty. That's as close as we can replicate the situation at the untimely end of #2.
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 14, 2006 11:02:54 GMT -6
Post by Parry Nine on Dec 14, 2006 11:02:54 GMT -6
I agree with Dan's logic here also. Plus, perhaps we can get some of the other clubs to stick around and watch.
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 14, 2006 13:22:47 GMT -6
Post by Damaris on Dec 14, 2006 13:22:47 GMT -6
Ok im in the minority.. Im cool with democracy.... Yet, I still dont think that being tired affects fencing that much because of the start stop nature of it you get plenty of rest time. Well, mabye that just my fencing.
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 14, 2006 13:26:41 GMT -6
Post by Damaris on Dec 14, 2006 13:26:41 GMT -6
I have to say that i think more people will watch in the beggining than at the end of the tournement though.... Everybody just seems to leave when their done in SWIFA's. Much like regular tournements when there is only like 10 percent of the orginal population present.
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 14, 2006 21:48:33 GMT -6
Post by LongBlade on Dec 14, 2006 21:48:33 GMT -6
Ok im in the minority.. Im cool with democracy.... Yet, I still dont think that being tired affects fencing that much because of the start stop nature of it you get plenty of rest time. Well, mabye that just my fencing. Damaris, I'm twice your age... and then some... and being tired DOES affect your fencing. I wish we were all immortal! That said, it is neither here nor there, but it does replicate as closely as we can do it to the original situation (when the Gestapo/UNT Rec Sports called the end to SWIFA #2 on threat of calling the police on us) if we finish up 2.5 after a full day of fencing at #3.
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 18, 2006 7:47:54 GMT -6
Post by Prudence on Dec 18, 2006 7:47:54 GMT -6
the Gestapo.. haha .. well I had never been to a SWIFA tournament where we didn't finish DE's. I was sort of shocked, especially when the one-touch bout idea was mentioned. How do we prevent this from happening again? I wasn't able to fence again for the 2.5 because it was held on the weekend of my dad's birthday (Dec. 16th). At least that's when Patrick Moore said it was going to be.. correct me if I'm wrong.
"Vodka martini. Shaken, not stirred."
|
|
|
SWIFA 3
Dec 18, 2006 8:59:55 GMT -6
Post by LongBlade on Dec 18, 2006 8:59:55 GMT -6
I wasn't able to fence again for the 2.5 because it was held on the weekend of my dad's birthday (Dec. 16th). At least that's when Patrick Moore said it was going to be.. correct me if I'm wrong. You are corrected, Pru. We will be holding SWIFA 2.5 along with the SWIFA #3 at U of H on January 27, 2007.
|
|