|
Post by cowpaste on Jan 31, 2005 14:23:01 GMT -6
A new Houston Cup event, a new Houston Challenge event. Same day. If this is not an obvious attempt at sabotage, I don't know what is.
Wow, this division is SO cool!!!
|
|
|
Post by Flamberge on Feb 1, 2005 1:18:25 GMT -6
Tournament collision 2? Well this was planned back in mid September when Hamza came back from his extended vacation in Egypt. He realized that ALL and KB had set the dates of the Houston Cup Tournaments for the season, so he felt that rather than cooperating the best thing to do was to schedule his own "in house" tournaments on the same dates. Not to be outdone in this effort to copy what others had already announced, BCFA decided that overlapping with KB April 9-10 and ALL May 21-22 was a successful strategy as well. All in the name of free enterprise in the GC Division....
|
|
|
Post by Poinard on Feb 1, 2005 9:02:33 GMT -6
or in the name of Darwin...
|
|
|
Post by MJ Wysocki on Feb 1, 2005 11:16:35 GMT -6
I would encourage us all to be very careful assuming what people intended to do or what was going through people's minds in scheduling of tournaments. Everyone will support which tournaments they want to, regardless of public debate. I think a lot of folks are tired of the debates and finger pointing about others intentions. It does our division no good and is hurting our reputation. Free enterprize will drive the market. Financial and 'people' resources will eventually rule what happens.
|
|
|
Post by MJ Wysocki on Feb 1, 2005 11:20:15 GMT -6
Please let me add one more thing. When elections come along for the division, observe what happens throughout the year, including the scheduling of tournaments, and let that factor into your vote.
|
|
|
Post by Poinard on Feb 1, 2005 12:59:04 GMT -6
I would encourage us all to be very careful assuming what people intended to do or what was going through people's minds in scheduling of tournaments. Everyone will support which tournaments they want to, regardless of public debate. I think a lot of folks are tired of the debates and finger pointing about others intentions. It does our division no good and is hurting our reputation. Good points, MJ. It looks to me like everyone's already made their choices. You are also right that a lot of us are tired of the bickering. When I go outside the Division, I hear the remarks about the ongoing little spats here. Locally, I've fenced at tournaments at several clubs this season and do NOT wish to be type cast as FOR this bunch or AGAINST another. I know they don't all like EACH OTHER, but I appreciate what Augie, Andrey AND Louise are doing. I think the Houston Cup is a good idea and I appreciate all the seminars to get us more local referees. Getting the NCAA CHampionships to Houston was also a way cool move. Anyway, I know where I'll be this weekend.
|
|
|
Post by cowpaste on Feb 1, 2005 13:52:44 GMT -6
So Marty, are you for or against the tournament collisions?
|
|
|
Post by Poinard on Feb 1, 2005 15:24:40 GMT -6
I don't know about Marty.
I think they are generally a bad idea, but nothing to get too worked up over.
Of course, what do I know. When I first saw this thread's title, I thought it was a reference to corps-a-corps.
;D
|
|
|
Post by MJ Wysocki on Feb 2, 2005 9:20:33 GMT -6
Whether I'm for or against is a mute point. But let me give you all one example of how serious the problem is. At a recent world cup I had an unsolicited conversation with an source who is extremely high in USFA management. This individual told me that Houston would NEVER EVER get a USFA major event (JO's or Nationals or NAC) because of the bickering between clubs. The 'don't want to get mixed up in the politics'. This person did say that they would consider brining something to Houston if the infighting stopped and the new divsion club was the sponsor not one of the old clubs. Folks, if you want anything on the national level to come to Houston, we need to start getting along especially in public. The USFA has NOTHING to do with the NCAA tournament, that is why Houston was awarded it. The public infighting has done us no good. It doesn't advance the sport and nationally people are observing. That's the only point I was trying to make. Sorry if I was not clear.
|
|
|
Post by cowpaste on Feb 2, 2005 10:21:27 GMT -6
HAHAHAHA! Great stuff. Honestly, I don't want any high level events to come down right now. I would be extremely embarassed by all the crap and fighting that goes on. I don't want outsiders to see us as a bunch of catty children, even though we are.
|
|
|
Post by MJ Wysocki on Feb 2, 2005 10:32:02 GMT -6
Well thats fine. But Houston will always be considered a second class fencing city untill we host something big. Our public fights are limiting the potential for ALL of our clubs to grow and prosper. As the saying goes 'a rising tide raises all ships'. Why would you not want something big to come to Houston??? Woudln't it be great for our area...the exposure..the chance to fence big name people, increased warenes of fencing in our community, not to mention not having to travel to NAC's and Div. 1 events. By the way contact me directly (713 870 3346) I will tell you who the conversataion was with, if you don't believe me.
|
|
|
Post by August Skopik on Feb 3, 2005 13:18:21 GMT -6
Mauro has done a very good thing the last two Houston Cups. Even though he is not participating this year, he sent me his schedule and I was able to schedule around it as much as possible. You get to schedule two foil events the same day in the same city. I remember when the top fencers would go to San Marcos/College Station or Dallas/San Marcos the same weekend for that type of action. It was quite a drive.
In my corner of the world there are two to three baseball leagues with elite teams playing the same weekend. Each with 3,000 players or so. What is wrong with fencing having 10% of these participating? Baseball has about 1/2 sitting the bench, and no one in fencing sits on the bench. We will have tournaments collide in the near future until all clubs get on board of the Houston Cup. That will enable tournaments every weekend but smaller and more focused.
It keeps getting printed that I dislike or hate someone, and that is untrue. Not all choices made are the best for fencing or even for that person's club, but I can't change someone's choices. I do look on with wonder sometimes.
Marty is correct that the top national events won't come to Houston in the present scenario. I don't need to confirm it with you by telephone, I have found you very admirable and a supporter of fencing by deeds and actions and I trust you. The ability to host a national event will just be a future dream until some of this ends.
We will just need to select as fencers the events that are most convenient. They need to start on time, finish promptly and be fun. As fencers, you need to tell the others about your experiences. Then you need to vote with your feet for the next tournament.
Augie
|
|
|
Post by Oliver on Feb 4, 2005 2:03:03 GMT -6
Here is what I observe...
A) There is no financial or political benefit for anyone to schedule over other peoples local tournaments. So there must be (and are) other reasons.
B) At Salle Mauro we encourage fencers to fence as many tournamnets as they like. If there is a conflict we encourage them to fence at our club tournament first. This can be proven by the large number of our fencers who fence at say, Alliance tournaments (though you may notice in comparison very few - if any- Alliance fencers come to ours).
C) There are certain key weekends where a local in-house tournament is great preparation for a club's fencers who will be participating in an upcoming larger national event. Since several clubs have high level fencers who travel to these tournaments, it is typical that they schedule tournaments at the same time.
D) While there have been various problems between the coaches & salles, it has been the public airing of these disputes and the subsequent trash talking and crap throwing by thier FENCERS and PARENTS which has caused the current public debacle. The coaches know better than to get involved like that, they know to handle thier problems and disputes privately. Frankly, it's thier business and while we should support them, we should not take center stage in misguided attempts to champion thier cases.
E) I like and am friendly with Augie, Andrey, Louise, and Mauro. I realize these people are involved in businesses which compete with each other. Sometimes it profits them to work together, sometimes to work against each other. I try not personalize these activities and impose my personal ethics or beliefs on thier private business - or turn thier struggles into public melodrama of epic proportions which ruins our division's public image
|
|
|
Post by cowpaste on Feb 4, 2005 3:08:04 GMT -6
Oliver, I really appreciate your input. I think people from all clubs should discuss this issue. I'm really disappointed in the club conflicts, so I honestly try my best not to take sides. However, do you understand my suspicion though? The tournaments are always posted at pretty much the same time on askfred.net, and this has happened two tournaments in a row. Back when I first started fencing in this division, tournament conflicts were REALLY rare. In fact, I remember just one, and everyone complained about it and were against it. Then all the crap started happening and the name calling and the bickering. Whee!
|
|
|
Post by Poinard on Feb 4, 2005 11:18:16 GMT -6
It looks to me like, whether or not some club leaders are scheduling their tournaments on the same date as other clubs deliberately or not, in time market forces will drive the greatest number of fencers to the better tournament.
As to whether or not this is "good for fencing," only time will tell. It may prove that diversity and choice (in the long run) prove more beneficial than consolidation and monopoly.
Of course, I could also be completely wrong...
|
|
|
Post by Colichemarde on Feb 4, 2005 17:14:50 GMT -6
As to whether or not this is "good for fencing," only time will tell. It may prove that diversity and choice (in the long run) prove more beneficial than consolidation and monopoly. I'll have to agree here. While I'm no fan of Mauro, I believe absolutely that less control by the USFA, the division or the Houston Cup organizers on "who can hold a tournament when" is absolutely essential to the growth of fencing in general in this town. I allow this may be inconvenient for the top competitors who can use my low-classified foil-fodder body to increase the overall numbers in an event. I guess I'm one of those selfish, recreational fencers whose only real purpose is to contribute membership dues to the USFA coffers.
|
|