Jett
Maitre
On the back![ss:Default]
Posts: 112
|
Post by Jett on Sept 6, 2006 9:47:28 GMT -6
Ok, everyone whispers about it, but I'm going to come out and say it.... What the h*** happened?!
My first Bobcat in September '04 charged $20 first weapon and $5 each additional weapon. This upcoming Bobcat has raised its price to $30 first weapon and $10 each additional weapon. The Austin Challenge is taking it a step further by charging $30 registration and $10 each weapon.
That's almost double the price of a tournament over 2 years. This cost does not include gas, food, or hotel.
Is fencing becoming only a sport for a rich? Or are we trying to weed out the riffraff to make room for the elite?
I can no longer invite people into our world simply because of the prices. Weapons, Masks, glove, lame, jacket, knickers, USFA Membership, Club Membership, body cords... a $400 investment into the sport from the get go. Then tag on an extra $150 each weekend for a tournament?
Someone give me some insight as to why that extra $150 must exist.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Gorman on Sept 6, 2006 11:26:23 GMT -6
Because people have decided they have to have top-flight referees and grounded strips and these things cost. There are still some tournaments that ref out of pools and these are the way to go if you want to save a few bucks.
That said, I had a parent telling me that her kid that swam cost as much as her kid that fenced. That's with the lessons, travel, equipment (yeah in swimming too I guess), etc.
Dan
|
|
|
Post by DavidSierra on Sept 6, 2006 12:24:24 GMT -6
Dan is indeed correct. The economics and expectations of fencing tournaments not only justify the tournament prices, they dictate them.
There are a number of rather large expenses associated with putting on a "first class" type of tournament, such as the Bobcat, the Austin Challenge SSCC tourament, or the SSCC tournament that I'm hosting in November, The North Texas "Big D." Venue, equipment, awards, armoury, bout committee - the list goes on.
Venue - very few clubs have access to a venue of suitable size for free, except for university clubs, and often these have interesting restrictions and other pieces of fun associated with them (ask the UT Fencing Club about some of the things their Rec Sports department has sprung on them at the last minute for using their venue).
Equipment - this can be a varying expense, depending upon factors. Grounded strips are expensive to purchase and store, and as a result, those with access to numbers of them charge a fee for their rental. Even without a rental fee, they often have to be transported significant distances, incuring gas and other expenses. Same with scoring machines; can you scare up 14 sets of boxes, reels, and floor cords, plus spares on a moments notice? Even with equipment sharing between clubs, there's usually some expectation of a reduced entry fee, a small rental fee or something else.
Tournament Officials - This is the biggest expense. You think good referees come cheap? Even after per-diem (which can range from $40-$100, depending upon referee ranking), there are still travel expenses (seen the price of gas lately?), lodging expenses ($60-$90/night/hotel room) and food. $250-$300 per tournament official is a reasonable budgetary expense for out of town officials. And as a referee myself (and a fairly high rated one), I can tell you that referees are far from overpaid. Up-and-coming referees barely make enough to cover their travel expenses, and higher level ones certainly don't make money comensurate to their skill level and time spent. And its not just referees - none of our local areas has the bout committee staff to put on a top level event by itself, if you want good people. Of course, we could always go back to the days of no referees, and bout committees that were also fencing and doing armoury... I'll take the improvement, thank you, and so will my students.
And there are other expenses associated as well, publicity, insurance, and more.
Now, this is not to say that there aren't ways to make a fencing tournament show a profit, and in fact, many tournaments are run specifically as fundraisers for different causes (the Rose Condon benefits the Rose Condon Scholarship fund, [plug notice] the Big D will support the Eric Wang fund). But to make an event show a significant profit requires a LOT of hustle - most of the profit comes from sponsorships. I can tell you right now, the entry fees for tournaments BARELY cover the expenses.
And no, economies of scale DO NOT apply to fencing tournaments. More fencers = bigger venue, more referees, larger bout committee, more equipment, better awards...
Now, Dan is correct - there are other types of events out there. I put on a couple of 'less formal' events each year myself, utilizing a smaller space, no grounded strips, developmental referees... you get the picture.
But if you're coming into the sport thinking its going to be cheap, you're under some major dillusions. But, its certainly no more expensive than a lot of other sports and a LOT less than many. No one is trying to weed out anyone, or make it a sport only for the rich. I invite you to sit down and really think about it.
|
|
|
Post by thecarpinator on Sept 6, 2006 21:59:24 GMT -6
It's not necessarily a sport for the rich, but if want to be any good you'd better be ready to work your ass off to afford it. I paid for my early days of fencing working two bartending jobs. After lessons, club dues etc. I might have had a couple of bucks left over for luxuries (like food).
When I talk to beginning fencers out there, I hear a lot of "I can't afford it"... well.... you can afford it, you just have to sacrifice a ton for it. And it only get's more and more expensive... $150 for a weekend is a walk in the park when you compare it to heading out to a world cup tournament in Europe...
|
|
kb
Squire
Posts: 261
|
Post by kb on Sept 6, 2006 22:17:44 GMT -6
And its not just referees - none of our local areas has the bout committee staff to put on a top level event by itself, if you want good people. Every tournament I've been to in the last two of three years has steadily improved in quality and size. Terry Harkey does a great job, the folks at UT have put on excellent tournaments, as does the San Marcos crowd. These are large tournaments. Their BC and LOC have been pleasant, events run on time and everyone is out of the venue at a decent hour.
|
|
|
Post by LongBlade on Sept 7, 2006 3:10:14 GMT -6
All I know is the last couple I tried to run cost twice as much as the year before, and 200 times as much as those I ran in the 70's. Prices go up. That's the way life works.
I remember back when I paid $5.00 entry fees, and an extra $1.00 per event... and thought that was outrageous! Of course, I also bought a week's worth of groceries for $20.00 back then, too. I drove from here to Dallas and back to San Marcos for about $10.00, too.
If you really want beginners to get in the sport on any kind of regular basis, you need a basic "loaner" set. I have a few. And anyway, beginners should not be thrown into tournaments in the first place! All that does is show them how bad they are against seasoned competitors! Not the way to get someone started in fencing!
|
|
|
Post by fox on Sept 7, 2006 7:16:57 GMT -6
My first Bobcat in September '04 charged $20 first weapon and $5 each additional weapon. This upcoming Bobcat has raised its price to $30 first weapon and $10 each additional weapon. The Austin Challenge is taking it a step further by charging $30 registration and $10 each weapon. True, but I can look at how much I paid for a full tank of gasoline in Septemebr of 2004 versus what it costs me today. Also (and I can't recall the title) there was a discussion thread on Fencing Net a month or so back comparing tournaments in the various divisions around the country. One thing I noticed was how much more common things like pools and DEs being self-directed are as you move away from our area (SW Section). In a lot of places, only the qualifiers have dedicated referees, the others are largely directed by fencers who are not too busy. This sounds very much like how it was done in my youth. In my competitive years, I would have gladly paid a little more to have a director who had nothing else on his or her mind that day than directing.
|
|
|
Post by DavidSierra on Sept 7, 2006 10:45:40 GMT -6
Also (and I can't recall the title) there was a discussion thread on Fencing Net a month or so back comparing tournaments in the various divisions around the country. One thing I noticed was how much more common things like pools and DEs being self-directed are as you move away from our area (SW Section). In a lot of places, only the qualifiers have dedicated referees, the others are largely directed by fencers who are not too busy. One of the first things that is commented upon by fencers, coaches and high level referee types who've come to tournaments in our region (for one reason or another) is the quality of our referee cadre, even the lower-rated and developing ones.
|
|
|
Post by vraptor on Sept 7, 2006 12:37:21 GMT -6
I just got through running the last Fete de Lune Vet's tournament and I want to put my two cents into this discussion.
First, let me say that the feedback I got was generally good and I took the trouble to survey entrants on how we did. The comments I got back were generally positive but there was a trend in the responses to "make it cheaper".
I can understand that. I especially understand that now that I'm retired. But (and this is a really big "but") my club is probably going to lose a ton of money holding Fete de Lune. This is not unusual. Tournaments are generally money pits, even Veteran's events. You'd think that this wouldn't be the case, Veterans being able to afford more than an impoverished college student, but even Vets get hit by rising costs, most notably, gasoline.
These days, the expectation of the average competitor is that there will be certified directors (the higher the rating, the better), a certified armorer, a spacious and well-lit venue, and a low entry fee. Fete also had a banquet, but given what we lost on that, it's about to go the way of the dodo unless something changes.
This year, in response to input from the ladies, we tried to hold gender separate events. We got the strips and directors to support separate events and bought the trophies and medals. NONE of the ladies events had enough participation to make as separate competitions and the women who made the most noise about separating competitions from the men never even showed up. I could quote Ray Nagin here.
My point here is that tournaments are trying to meet the expectations of the competitors and the economics aren't meshing. I had to add five bucks to the entry fee to meet the higher costs of the new venue. I had to add five buck to the price of the individual banquet meal (if you brought a guest) and that was absolutly break even. I was fully justified in charging more, but I have had to accept that tournments are going to be money losers and just move on. I also have to accept the law of supply and demand when setting prices. Raise the price and fewer people will come.
The ecomonics of all of this are completely bas-ackwards. Non-profit clubs like mine can't keep this up. The reson for this is that losses from tournaments have to come out of the pockets of our members. This puts people like me (President and Board Chairman) in an untanable position. My job is to look out for the interests of my fellow club members, not soak them for money to run a tournament. But they also expect me to run good tournaments.
For-profit salles have it even worse unless they can offset costs like the venue with their own facilities and refereeing with their own employees. I'll grant you that a money-losing tournament might find it's way to the deduction form on the tax return, but you can't do that very often and expect to keep the doors open and people employed.
I've got my own private opinions about how this came about, but the bottom line is that we should probably re-think the entire model. Local tournaments CAN"T be run like mini-NACs if they're going to survive. What we need is some innovation. It's time to prove we're as smart as we claim to be.
|
|
|
Post by DavidSierra on Sept 8, 2006 7:43:07 GMT -6
Actually, there are a number of groups who have found ways to hold a tournament and not get soaked financially - myself among them. The specifics of that is not something that is really appropriate for discussion in a format such as this, unfortunately. In a one-on-one, face-to-face interaction, thats a different story though.
|
|
|
Post by katyblades on Sept 8, 2006 10:05:30 GMT -6
Dear Vraptor,
You ran a very good tournament, and I was too tired to even talk at the end so I did not get to tell you. I had not fenced since I tore my meniscus in South Houston, so I was pooped.
The problem is multi-dimensional. We have a growing sport that demands more competitions. The floor space is expensive. Referees are expensive. Trophies are expensive, (Very nice foil, thanks to you and Nicole). I became acutely aware of the dynamics when I hosted the SSCC in 2003 and lost quite a bit a money that came directly from my pocket.
There are ways to reduce those costs in hosting a USFA tournament, but we still have to look bottom up and not top down. If Ray Sexton, (3rd in the world in Vet 60 again, congrats), or Jim Carpenter needs to have the elite directors and top flight everything to compete in every tournament, then those type of fencers will need to go to NACs. (I USED THEIR NAMES SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THEY ARE GREAT FENCERS AND THEY WILL GRAB A STRIP AND SELF-DIRECT AT A MOMENTS NOTICE). If some of the best in the area don't need great directors and the costs involved in having this every weekend, then do all of us need this for every tournament?
If we do, then we will need to pay for these services. There are certainly top tournaments that will need these directors, and then we need to pay the price. There are probably many tournaments that do not and need to continue to develop more directors.
Are we outside the curve of our professionalism in that it is not yet economically feasible?
|
|
|
Post by DavidSierra on Sept 8, 2006 14:25:29 GMT -6
Are we outside the curve of our professionalism in that it is not yet economically feasible? And that right there is the key question... *chuckle* the problem is, the answer isn't really clear, becuase, I'd argue, based upon my experiences over the past several years, that its right on the verge of being economically feasable. Augie, you're right, we need to develop more referees. Let me point out a couple of things though that might help to illustrate just how difficult a task this is. We have, in the sectional referee corps right now, an amazing wealth of high level referees. At least one Olympic caliber referee, a couple of 2's, several 3's, and numerous 4's and 5's. This is, for the sake of discussion here, our 'professional' referee corps. We have the ability, really for the first time ever, to be able to referee ANY competion held in the Section with homegrown talent, short of a NAC - and that's only beacuse of the numbers required. But for anything else? Yea, we can handle it. But there are only so many of these top level people, even with the numbers we have now . They need to be assisted by others. Without trying to incite a war about 'epee is easy to referee' (because, in truth, its not) the fact DOES remain that is easier to train a person to be able to referee epee to the level of a 6 than it is to get that person to that level in sabre or foil. A 6, remember, means that person is capable of refereeing the gold medal match of a "B" rated tournament. Even still, I can tell you that it would take about a year to reach that level in epee, taking the seminar, refereeing at every possibility, and working his way up at SSCC events - and that's taking a person who was familiar with the weapon in the first place and didn't have to be taught about the basic fundementals of fencing. In one of the right of way weapons? Double the time, minimum. Okay, shave off a little time for someone who is highly conversant in the weapon in question, but even then you've still got a LOT of training to do (and its about more than being able to call ROW correctly, although, anyone who thinks that I say its not, is misunderstanding entirely). Aside: I can count on one hand the number of really good foil fencers I know in this region who I would feel comfortable recomending to work at a NAC, even if they do understand the mechanics of right-of-way. If you want a foil bout to be refereed without any cards for covering target area, ducking with the mask, or corps-a-corps, but with good ROW on the other hand, there are a number of good foil fencers I can recomend to you. Anyway, it boils down to this: It takes YEARS to train a referee to be truely capable of working even the mid-level events. And that is where the next level of development in referee development needs to come. Once there is truely a good cadre of 6 and 7 level referees to draw on for tournaments (without TRAVEL!!!), with a couple of the "professionals" thrown in to the mix that might be brought in from a bit further away, the prices of tournaments are going to level off. And quite honestly, speaking as a coach, I'm not going to be bringing my students to compete in a tournament that doesn't have a solid referee cadre. And certainly not one that is self refereed, unless its a little warmup type of event close to home. No WAY would we travel 4-5 hours, and incur the cost of gas and hotel for self-refereed pools. For that kind of expense, we want refs who can properly parse the action and conduct themselves with decorum. So, yea, I guess you could say I'm part of the forces driving higher entry fees. But consider the alternatives!!!!
|
|
|
Post by katyblades on Sept 9, 2006 23:29:18 GMT -6
In terms of developing referees, you will see quite a few from my club in the next several years. While Chase is definitely competent, you don't get that way without directing. Today I had a tournament outside the USFA, ( I couldn't get the date sanctioned by the GCD), and the events were directed by my students. I paid them to ref, but they are definitely in a learning stage. I will continue to pay them and have them direct and more of my students in the future tournaments.
It is just like developing fencers. They need many opportunities to be able to get better. Without travel, it gives them more dates to be able to develop. I have three that I would put at a 7/8 level foil in addition to Chase and two 7/8 level saber. I also have 4 6/7 level epee, but I have been working at some of these longer.
|
|
|
Post by vraptor on Sept 10, 2006 13:20:15 GMT -6
Guys, referees are part of the problem, but only part. And referee development, while an issue in some areas, isn't the answer to rising tournament prices. You bet. Supply and demand laws tell you that if you have more referees available, the price will go down. But a number of costs (BIG ones) are not going to be touched by having a slew of referees certified in the Division.
The biggest single cost is venue. Unless you're lucky enough to be able to get a free gym, the costs to rent one is going up. Ditto for hotel floor spaces, assuming there's a hotel in your neighborhood with enough floor space to use. A lot of hotel chains are downsizing their physical plant to cut costs and a large ballroom is one of the first things to go.
An armorer costs money. I don't have a problem with paying an armorer because if you need him, he worth havinng around. And why shouldn't he be paid for giving up a day or two of his weekend? It would probably be cheaper to have live spares for equipment, assuming you can arrange for enough, but if you can't, you have to have somebody around who can either fix the equipment or definitively assign the problem to the fencer's gear.
If you're a Vet's event with a banquet, you're going to take a bath on it unless you hold it at Mickey-D's.
You gotta buy trinkets to pass out. Medals aren't a big costs, but cups and trophies can get steep. You want to have nice awards for people. But you can't go overboard.
The Division just voted to allow a fee for TC reps. I don't have a problem for doing this for the same reason I don't have a problem paying an armorer, but it's going to be an additional cost.
In case you hadn't noticed, there's a little theme developing here. and it isn't my gritching about running a tournament. The real driver here is participant expectations. David doesn't want to drive his kids four or five hours for pool-directed events. I don't necessarily blame him. People expect a spacious, well-lit venue, not a basement. People expect an armorer (my favorite epee didn't pass the shim test!!) People expect full three-weapon tournaments. People expect gender separated events. People expect nice bling when they do well. Division wants to have it's say about things.
Our expectations as CUSTOMERS have ramped up and this is going to be reflected in the price of a tournament. If yo try to hold a tournament without meeting minimum expectations, nobody will show up.
|
|
|
Post by katyblades on Sept 10, 2006 21:40:14 GMT -6
I just held a Non-USFA tournament that you can look up on askfred, and I know that if you talk to the participants and the parents of the Youth 12 they were not disapointed. Many of these participants had participated in nationals, RYCs and local USFA events.
I still go back to what the Bay Cup was doing, events geared towards what that club could host. The events may have been smaller, but how much less fencing do you do?
|
|
|
Post by DavidSierra on Sept 11, 2006 9:46:37 GMT -6
Augie,
I agree, there is definitely a place for such kinds of events, and they are an important part of the process. And, there is also a place for the larger, more formal types of events as well. However, my personal feeling is that in the case of limited resources, the USFA Event-sanctioning bodies (namely, Divisions) need to concentrate their efforts on the latter, not the former. But the advantage of this is that then the smaller club events can blossum and prosper.
|
|
|
Post by katyblades on Sept 11, 2006 13:39:14 GMT -6
David,
When does a small club become a large club, and when do the focus of the division become the ignoring of the minor majority? In the Gulf Coast Division, (and this is a GCD board), we need to make certain that we focus the tournaments to benefit the members of the division as much as we can.
While we are a small club in terms of time in existence, we now have over 100 people that participate in fencing. We will double in size this season based upon the current new participants and the model in place. All but three participants from the last tournament were Katy Blades members, and we had many that did not participate. We also had two finalists in the Adelman epee tournament at the same time, including Trevor Pedersen fencing for first, (Good job Trevor).
We have discussed this and are on the same page, so I want everyone to know that you are interested in the growth of fencing overall, and not just interested in maintaining the "status quo". The problem is that most of my fencers are youth, and therefore won't join the USFA unless there are tournaments geared towards them. The good news is that there are two RYCs in Houston, and if there were not then many of my students would not join not join the USFA no matter how much I thought it was a good thing. Unless there is a compelling reason such as tournaments, then joining the USFA is not an easy sell.
|
|
|
Post by DavidSierra on Sept 11, 2006 20:59:37 GMT -6
Augie,
I don't think the size of the hosting club really should be taken into consideration. Honestly, it should be a non-factor. It should not be a matter of "we have a large club, so we deserve to have our club tournaments have some special status." And the type of tournament you just described - the overwhelming majority of the participants being from one club sounds to me more like a 'club tournament.' Its not really what I think falls under the category of a large, formal event. A large, formal event would have a number of clubs participating, hired referees, distinct bout committee, some sort of armoury staff, etc. To be perfectly honest, I think that USFA-sanction is handed out FAR too lightly, to FAR too many tournaments that really don't deserve that status. But then, I'm a stickler for proper proceedure, and for having things run in the manner laid down. Which is not to say that club tournaments aren't important - they are. Very important.
Additionally though, who says that RYCs are the only USFA youth tournament that your fencers could go to? Yes, your Division has two RYC's - but I caution you that such a situation may not be something that lasts forever, the majority of the Divisions of the USFA only have 1, and many have zero. But, what about a large, NON-RYC youth tournaments? Surely that is something that needs to be investigated. Or, other large, formal USFA tournaments that have youth events as well (the North Texas SSCC Tournament has included youth events for several years).
Of course, different Divisions = different approaches. The Gulf Coast Division is getting HUGE. And such a size requires different approaches and considerations than have been handled in the past. Ya'll could do well to study the operations of some of the other really big divisions, like New England and Virginia. Trust me, they operate very differently.
|
|
|
Post by katyblades on Sept 11, 2006 21:50:17 GMT -6
David, You keep forgetting you are entering the GCD vacuum when you post on this site. The RYCs will probably be the only youth USFA tournaments in this division this year. You can look on my website at www.katyblades.com, and look under local competitions and see that every weekend that is reserved CAN'T host a competing competition that weekend unless the host club gives permission. While that is great in theory, it is difficult to coordinate. My personal club is growing so wildly in so many different directions I don't even know what the best events for my spring tournaments will be. Jerry Dunaway was in the same boat. Do we hold Div. II, Div. III, youth, etc. I had 10 fencers approx. 14 in my teenage beginning class tonight, 8 in my youth fencing league and these were all brand new. I have 10 youth 12 beginning tomorrow, and have 6 or 8 beginning Saturdays. If we hold two healthy RYCs in Houston, and the RYCs in El Paso and Dallas are healthy, then why not add to them? There should be one in San Antonio also, with AFA doing what it is doing.
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Sept 13, 2006 8:43:18 GMT -6
But the advantage of this is that then the smaller club events can blossum and prosper. Indeed, many larger, more prestigious events started out small. As to the "smaller" individual-club oriented tournaments. I think the nature of a particular club dictates the kind of tournament they host (or, at least, should.) If a club is largely made up of school-aged fencers, it is silly for them not to focus on youth tournaments. Clear Lake Fencing Club has always had a fair-sized percentage of our membership in the 40+ years of age range. So it is not surprising that we hold a veterans' event. In addition to Katy Blades, I believe Alliance Fencing Academy, Salle Mauro and Bayou City Fencing Academy generally offer between them a number of youth events through the season. I will grant that they are often part of larger events that include open competitions, lately in all three weapons. The decision to change this format is in each club's hands. I think that smaller clubs with a unique identity are in a good position to create tournaments that address their specific needs. I note that the Brazosport Fencing Extravaganza, a small, mostly epee club in Lake Jackson puts together a very enjoyable all-epee tournament every November (Saturday after Thanksgiving). This will be, I believe, their third year, and they have cultivated a loyal following beyond their club. I fully understand Augie's quandary. I think all of us have wrestled with the question, "What sort of tournament should our club put on?" We have, usually, over 15 clubs and, by season's end, over 600 USFA members in the Gulf Coast Division. David is right, the Gulf Coast Division is HUGE. The last few years we have ended as the 6th largest of the 68 (I think) divisions in the USFA. What a situation: 15-18 clubs and almost EVERYONE wants to hold a bunch of tournaments and had out classifications. When we had multiple tournaments on top of each other, there was much complaining. Now that each club gets at least one of what I term "Divisional Exclusive" weekends, we complain we are shut out. In both situations I think the problem is not as bad as we often think. For instance, it is true that one of the clubs I belong to plans an E & Under tournament for one Saturday in October. This is not one of the "exclusive" or "blacked-out" weekends. What a great opportunity for another club to hold a Div I type tournament. Send us your occasional fencers, your recreational fencers. E & Unders do not necessarily need a tournament with 6-10 A classified fencers in their event. Elite level fencers do not always enjoy fencing a bunch of purely recreational or novice fencers (although many are darned good sports about it). It would give a lot of my club's fencers (who are locked out of an E & Under) somewhere they could fence. I think a couple of simple emails between folks at the clubs and with the four people who make up the Gulf Coast Division's EC, or the Tournament Committee Chair, can go a long way to smoothing things out (and when emails fail, there is always the old telephone call.) Sometimes we do need to "Throw the rascals out," but other times we just need to "work it out." ...just my uninformed 2-cents.
|
|
|
Post by Prudence on Sept 13, 2006 19:19:44 GMT -6
It's not necessarily a sport for the rich, but if want to be any good you'd better be ready to work your ass off to afford it.
I agree. Everything you do in life takes effort. If you want to compete not only do you have to set time aside to practice and attend tournaments, but you're going to have to set aside some money as well. Being a college student I am 1) definitely NOT rich, 2) NOT able to work full time, and 3) NOT always able to attend tournaments (either because of work, assignments, family obligations, etc.) However, I'm still a USFA member.. I still try to take as many personal lessons as possible, I still pay to have my equipment fixed, and I still attend SWIFAA/USFA tournaments. If I can do it then certainly someone older then me with a full time job can too. People (especially beginners) that say they can't afford it and quit the sport, weren't REALLY that interested to begin with.
Fencing is NOT for the rich, but it IS for the diligent.
|
|