|
Post by jazz007 on Jun 16, 2009 8:51:28 GMT -6
Okay, y'all.
Since I got so little pushback and so few questions this year, I basically came to the conclusion that the SSCC was dying either a) because people are losing interest or b) because I suck at world.
Feedback at the Section Meeting was emphatic that people ARE still interested, and don't think I suck... so I NEED to know WHAT GIVES.
PLEASE, PLEASE, use this opportunity to post CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK about this year's SSCC and events, and realize that I don't want it to suck, I don't care about power, and I don't hate a whole bunch of people just because they're not my best friends 4evar. I NEED input, or the SSCC will almost certainly die this year.
To further the goal of keeping the SSCC alive, there WILL BE a meeting at Summer Nationals if I have to host it in my hotel room - the purpose of this mediated meeting will be for folk, primarily athletes and tournament organizers and staff, to provide feedback and direction for the SSCC in the coming years. This meeting will generate the coming year's Ops Manual, which is the source of so much contention even though 90% of folks have never read the thing.
Looking over the already-set meeting schedule for Summer Nats, and comparing it with times when mediators and members are all likely to be available or able to drive up for it, my current intent is to schedule this meeting for
9PM on Friday, 10 July.
This allows the maximum number of folks to attend, although many will have to make some arrangements - there are no conflicting meetings listed, no events listed as conflicts, folk have time to drive up after work if they want, though it will be a *very* late drive back if you're not hanging in Dallas that evening. PLEASE provide feedback - a number of possibilities have already been rejected due to conflicts with other meetings or events or organizers, but if you can convince me it's a good time, I'm not set in stone on this (*yet*) so sound off!
Last but not least, please send this thread to everyone you can think of who is interested - I've asked the site mods to allow guest access on this board until the SSCC is hammered together again.
Thanks! Jaimie Managing Director (protem), SSCC Secretary, SWS
|
|
nemo
Blademaster
mobilis in mobili
Posts: 729
|
Post by nemo on Jun 16, 2009 12:20:00 GMT -6
PLEASE, PLEASE, use this opportunity to post CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK about this year's SSCC and events, and realize that I don't want it to suck, I don't care about power, and I don't hate a whole bunch of people just because they're not my best friends 4evar. I NEED input, or the SSCC will almost certainly die this year. Seriously. Do all future SSCCs HAVE to be merged with RYCs? Wang Memorial... not so bad The one at HAFC, my referees were glassy-eyed by quarterfinals The one at Rice, no where to move!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by dragonfly on Jun 16, 2009 17:45:25 GMT -6
Maybe make them like a Div 1 event: C and above only
Referees 7s or better
Large, spacious venues (the one for sectionals was very nice, except the equipment room was a bit snug)
50% of the strips grounded
Something deeply cool or imaginative as a trophy?
|
|
|
Post by jazz007 on Jun 16, 2009 23:07:55 GMT -6
They will not become rating restricted - that would completely defeat the purpose of the SSCC as it was presented to me, to be used as a training ground to give people strong national-style tournaments without the expense of going to NACs.
They DO NOT have to be merged with RYCs, and I'm glad you brought that up. The only combined event that was approved by the Commission in advance was the Wang. The HAFC event was an issue of political expediency, and it wasn't half bad but was a LONG weekend for everyone. This is a point on which I would like *everyone* to chime in - we need to decide soon if that will be an option for less-established tournaments.
Referees are supposed to be 8 or better past a certain round - it's codified in the ops manual - but the idea behind not making it too restrictive is to give the organizers lots of license in the hiring of referees, and provide a hot spot to put referees who have potential to the test.
Ground strips - same thing - it's recommended, NOT required, in the ops manual that there be a minimum of 2 grounded, but organizers have said that more are too expensive or too unobtainable. That's a point that I'm happy to include, but I've gotten pushback on.
-Jaimie
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Jun 17, 2009 8:47:48 GMT -6
The following is just my 2-cents and I am going in as someone who only occasionally referees at an SSCC and even more rarely fences in one.
This may sound strange or hypocritical, but I wish more divisions participated. Granted, I am not the most peripatetic fencer or referee (working for a living hurts a lot of interests), but the name of the circuit is "Southwest Sectional" not the North/South/Gulf Coast Texas circuit.
I also see three problems with making this work.
1.) Scheduling: Being wedged on a weekend between a NOC and NAC did in the Rose Condon, one of the most highly thought of tournaments in the section. NAC schedules are already up (more or less). On the part of locally hosted events, having schedules that are well-thought out in advance (every other year in my division we get to April when one club or another suddenly realizes that last August they scheduled their tournament for what turns out to be Mothers Day/Easter weekend... and then changes dates) and firmly held to would eliminate a domino effect. (Tournament A changes dates, requiring tournament B to change, etc, etc...).
The trick is, most locally scheduled tournaments depend on the timely release of an SSCC schedule. Catch-22.
2.) Travel Expense - Travel always costs more than staying home. The problem is that, currently, gas prices are still inching up and many still feel the weight of a slumping economy, lost or changed jobs, etc. There is not much you can do about this except wait it out. We may have a rough season or two yet.
3.) Laziness - Travel is also more of a pain than staying at home. Once, before the SSCC and its predecessor, there were fewer tournaments that drew significant numbers of As & Bs. For serious competition, you HAD to travel.
Sheer population growth has allowed the South Texas, North Texas and Gulf Coast Division fencers the luxury of traveling less. Even those with the discretionary time and income to allow lots of weekends out of town, may decide to stay home.
For example, a Houston fencer may drive to Austin or Dallas for a really good event, but they get lazy looking at Oklahoma City on the map. They figure that an Oklahoma SSCC may black our their local events for that weekend, but the very next weekend BC FA or Alliance or Salle Mauro has an event scheduled and FRED shows a fair number of As, Bs, Cs...
A San Antonio fencer may drive to Houston, but when they look at the drive to Shreveport...
Your get the idea. Additionally, an ambitious 15-year old fencer with parents who can afford travel has a wealth of cadet, junior, Div II, and Div III NACs they can turn to in any given year.
I do not mean to go gloomy on everyone, but I do think that the SSCC needs to take a serious look at itself and decide what its role is to be and what niche it wants/needs to fill.
So, Jaimie asked for a venue for just such a discussion and I happily provide it here. Now we need YOU to chime in with serious ideas and not just quietly lurk.
|
|
nemo
Blademaster
mobilis in mobili
Posts: 729
|
Post by nemo on Jun 17, 2009 12:24:38 GMT -6
My thoughts are that the SSCC was meant to be a link, an in-between point between the really good local tournaments and the NACs.
To do that the competition needs to be challenging, the judging good and consistant, the venue comfortable and easily accessed by out of towners coming from hotels.
Also, since it is a circuit of competitions with points going towards a grand finalist (awarded at sectionals, am I right?), there should be something that makes it different, sets it apart from a really good divisional tournament.
|
|
|
Post by jazz007 on Jun 17, 2009 12:37:57 GMT -6
Awarded at the first SSCC of the following season, now, because Sectionals is so close to the last event, and it has a different draw.
The purpose of the SSCC as it was pitched to me when I started fencing it in early 2005 was that it's intended to be a developing ground for people who are strong regionally and want to move nationally, OR who just want to be regional powerhouses and need good competition to stay strong. It's also intended for developing fencers to be pool fodder some place OTHER than a NAC that they just spent $1500 to get to - that's a really expensive 5 bouts and out in DEs, while the SSCC is a third that on a bad weekend and you get, ideally, the same quality of events.
So, that's what I went for when I was asked to serve on the Commission. I'm going to take a minute to brag - Terry Harkey, whether you like her or not, runs a good tournament, and she trained me from the ground up to run tournaments. She sponsored me onto the National platform, and I'm a regular on the BC at NACs and now Summer Nationals. I know which protocols HAVE TO BE FOLLOWED at EVERY level, and I know and am willing to bend the ones that can be bent in the interests of fairness, size, efficiency, etc.
I KNOW what a good tournament needs in the way of organization, but I DON't know what it needs to have DRAW for fencers.
When I look at the success or failure of an SSCC, I'm personally looking at 2 things - did the FENCERs like it, did they think it was well run, did they have fun? And, WAS IT ACTUALLY well run, or were the referees and organizers playing it by ear and pulling it off by the skin of their teeth or the grace of God? Even if the fencers can't tell, that second one is important.
Suggestions for awards are also appreciated! We'll need to get those ordered soon - now is the time!
|
|
Jett
Maitre
On the back![ss:Default]
Posts: 112
|
Post by Jett on Jun 17, 2009 17:19:08 GMT -6
Disclaimer: This opinions are strictly fencer based. My opinion as an LOC will be completely different, but I am under the understanding that you want fencer opinions.
I attended all of the SSCC's last season, and from a fencer's perspective, I didn't see too much wrong.
So, here's the breakdown on the mental process involved in choosing what tournaments to go to.
1. Date- If I'm free that weekend, I'll go.
2. History- If the tournament has been known to be huge in the past, I'll go
3. Attendance (this is the big one)- If I check Fred and I see a 15 man epee event, I'm not going to sign up. If I see 30+ fencers signed up, I'll go.
4. Rivalry- the exception to #3. Fencers draw fencers. I'll chase Robert Reed all over the Southwest Section to whoop up on him. But beyond that, I don't think I've ever been to a tournament where I wasn't asked on the way out. "Are you going to *insert tournament name*?" In the answer is no, more than likely the asker will try to convince me to go.
5. Location- While I'll be more willing to compete in Houston, I, like every other fencer, know that the same crowd of fencers will be there. Despite economic issues, fencers will travel if #1, #2, #3, and #4 are met.
6. Fees- Last, but definitely not least. 2 nights in a hotel= $100+, Travel- $60. Then add a $30/$15 registration/event fee. If any tournament goes over that, I won't be there.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Gorman on Jun 17, 2009 23:10:12 GMT -6
About the only reason I've heard people aren't going to SSCCs is cost. College kids can't/won't afford it, and parents feel if they're shelling out that much, they'd rather go to a NAC. The costs of making a last minute decision to attend one are prohibitive, knowing the flow of the semester or work that far in advance isn't always feasible.
Just my 2 cents.
Dan
|
|
|
Post by fox on Jun 19, 2009 8:17:11 GMT -6
Sure got quiet...
|
|
nemo
Blademaster
mobilis in mobili
Posts: 729
|
Post by nemo on Jun 19, 2009 10:27:16 GMT -6
Many read, few post.
Many complain to their friends and clique, few offer suggestions, especially written for all to see.
Just how people are.
|
|
|
Post by JEC on Jun 19, 2009 11:59:17 GMT -6
A couple of years ago, I began this thread about Sectional Championships that is related to an extent to SSCC tournaments: campechesteel.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=SWSection&action=display&thread=1238 The observation was that about 75% of USFA members in the section were concentrated in the 3 central divisions: NTX, GCTX, and STX. Attendance to Sectional tournaments (including Sectionals - a non-SSCC tournament) in those 3 divisions tends to be the largest, and sectional tournaments in other divisions tend to be smaller in size. A possibility would be to sponsor 9 SSCC tournaments a year, with 2 in each of those larger divisions (i.e.: 2x3=6; 67% of tournaments), and the other 3 tournaments in smaller divisions using a rotation system. If another division becomes stronger (i.e.: as defined as more members than any of the 3 central divisions) in USFA members, the format will be automatically have to be revised. The other comment is my view that Sectionals Championships should be assigned also in that manner... Rotation of the 3 largest divisions (~75% of members) alternating with 1 other slot. The 1 other slot is a rotation between the smaller divisions. I know that some of these views are not politically correct, but they are proportional to the location of USFA members.
|
|
|
Post by wmepee on Jun 20, 2009 15:50:11 GMT -6
I'll second most of what Davis said, and I selfishly like José's idea about keep Sectionals closer to home. For me, the deciding factors in my SSCC attendance are cost and my personal availability. I'm more likely to be available if the tournament doesn't cost so much to attend.
When I fenced in DC, we routinely ran strong local tournaments for a $15 entry fee. I know it costs more to rent venues and pay refs (among other expenses), but it was a real shock to get to the Southwest and be forced to cough up $40-50 for a tournament. MD Div's Cherry Blossom, arguably the strongest non-NAC event in the country, costs $40. Is there any reason we can't find out how they run an event for that price and look to replicate it? (and yes, I'm aware that the Cherry Blossom draws a ton of people, but it couldn't hurt to ask).
Mike Anderson
|
|
|
Post by the6dark6knight6 on Jun 20, 2009 18:35:19 GMT -6
I agree with all of your points Jett...As a fencer,the SSCC events are usually a good competition to go to if points #1-6 are met...personally,I just want a really good prize/incentive at the end of the SSCC to make all the travel/entry fees/hotel/time justified.The last few times I went to all the SSCCs,for being in the Top-3 at the end I got a discount voucher for a mask one season and a SSCC towel (yes,a freakin' TOWEL!!!) for another...not very inspiring.I hope the SSCC does grow and become successful,but for me right now I'd rather spend my cash on NACs,NOCs, or regionally strong tourneys with known good fencers regardless of them being SSCC events...And Jett,you just keep on trying to chase me!
|
|