|
Post by August Skopik on Feb 14, 2005 13:22:07 GMT -6
Dear Fencers,
I was hosting a Youth Tournament Feb. 25th and 26th at the Katy Blades Fencing Academy and recently added a D and Under event because many of the people that could not travel (Youth, babies at home, work, the usual lame excuses) asked for me to host a tournament of this nature. I was then asked to add women's events, because there are quite a few women that want to fence but are not ready to travel to SSCCs. It is now after the regular registration date, and the fees have gone up tremendously. I will post her email to me in the next posting, and she is willing to drop the late registration fees. Please review her email and my response. Thank you.
August Skopik
|
|
|
Post by August Skopik on Feb 14, 2005 13:22:46 GMT -6
Dear Augie (and Kevin) I was in Houston this weekend and couldn't help but hear a discussion regarding your upcoming tournament that is on the same weekend as the Rose. This is very difficult for me since I am not just personally involved as one of the workers in Rose, I am also a section officer and I'm apparently being quoted as in support. I would like to share a couple of things in this order: 1) my personal opinions 2) request other options 3) my official view Originally, we (ALM officers) saw your tournament listed opposite ours, but it was initially promoted as a youth tournament. This of course is at NO odds whatsoever with the spirit of the SSCC agenda to promote good age-appropriate fencing across the section, and our SSCC does not offer youth events. However, when you changed this tournament's type from youth (or novice) to a D and under, the situation changed. Essentially we are competing for the same fencers and some of the same resources from one of the closer area divisions. This harbors several problem. Let me explain, and I'm not trying to run over you or the division of anything, I'm just trying to let you see what this looks like from several perspectives, my personal one of course, then one as a division officer of the tournament which you have decided to step on, and as a section member and officer. And please understand I realize that I have no "say" in what your division does, but that doesn't necessarily mean I can't discuss it and help look for happy solutions. I have invested hundreds of hours in the Houston area in the past year, many times at my own expense because of my desire to see fencing grow. Growing fencing is a worthy goal, however, in this case I'm not sure that's actually what's happening. You don't have to have sanctioning to have a tournament to grow fencing. You don't even have to have it listed. It can be completely closed! The only benefit to sanctioning is to have USFA classifications awarded. Again, it could appear to some that you are having your own private tournament that would mainly be populated by only your fencers (or close associates), which you can do on any day of the week and doesn't actually constitute any "growing" the sport, if growing means reaching out to new, different or non-fencers. It could appear to outsiders, like myself, that this is an intentional effort to tempt your Gulf Coast fencers of moderate classification to fence in a tournament that would be of lower ability, which would not particularly challenge their abilities, but rather merely serve to generate possible classifications and revenue to benefit your own group. It is a D - that theoretically cuts into numbers we could use at Rose to make the epee and foil events much higher rated, not to mention YOUR classification. As an A fencer, we would certainly appreciate your contributing to the overall rating of the tournament, especially since we encourage our better fencers to attend yours. Area resources from the Gulf Coast will be used in this potential event that could be recruited for the SSCC. It would seem to us outsiders that you wish to slight your neighbors here in North Louisiana to schedule on top of our tournament whose proceeds (100%) go to a college scholarship for a fencer in the area and is done in memory of a young fencer. Our organizers and fencers will perceive this as intentional and not appreciate the Gulf Coast in general for this slap. It promotes an atmosphere of ill-will and distrust. Kevin may appreciate that I SPECIFICALLY am involved with growing women in fencing. I am one of the stronger supporters of good women's events being available (if reasonable) in every tournament. If you check the pre-registration at Rose, you will find it has the potential to produce FINE women's events. It's a good tournament, with a reputation for good referees and a happy experience (even if you don't win!) If you are creating a more or less 'closed' tournament and the female event is mainly Kevin's female fencers, aren't they just fencing their own? Why not invest in the drive to expose them to the really diverse regional talent they would encounter at the Rose? And while not particularly happy about the D & under mixed, I would be very upset if you have a D and under women's event that would have a huge potential of undermining the attendance of the very group we so diligently try to serve, as well as disallowing OUR female fencers from the opportunity to fence yours on another date. Therefore, let me move on to my request for you to please return your tournament to the youth tournament you originally scheduled or even better, let me invite you and yours to participate in the Rose (and we would waive late fees at this point) and maybe schedule the D and Under another weekend, where I would offer whatever resources I have to assist. Moving on now, officially, as a voting member of the SSCC, I view the change of the scheduled youth event to the D & Under as a competition that is potentially harmful to one of the 5 tournaments this year that the section has coordinated (with incredible effort and cooperation from other divisions). I am aware that you have quoted me (or something I said) as proof that I would approve of this conflict. You are very much mistaken on that part. Did I say that the section has NO authority whatsoever in any business of any division - absolutely. Did I say that I approved of South Houston's tournament going forward on the weekend it was granted by the division the previous season. Yes, absolutely. However, I did not agree that ANY tournament should be considered completely without conflict to an SSCC. It is a unique section, this Southwest Section. We have incredible cooperativeness from across the section for this goal of making 6 very special events happen. The divisions all agreed that they would strive to support each other in the spirit of cooperation so that we didn't end up with a NEW political football. EVERYONE (except Border and for valid reasons) agreed to this and as far as I know - this concept hasn't changed. The situation that resulted in the meeting at the Katy Blades SSCC tournament was due to the fact that the 2002-2003 Gulf Coast division officers (many of whom were the exact same officers from that current season) had given South Houston approval for their tournament many months in advance in the previous season. Because it is a public high school and venue is very difficult to get (and to change would be impossible,) the SSCC EC viewed it as incompetent for the Gulf Coast officers to schedule their own SSCC on top of a previously approved tournament and then try to kill the tournament that had been sanctioned previously. This left open the door to allow two tournaments (one being an SSCC) in the same city on the same weekend. It was HORRIBLY bad planning on part of the Gulf Coast officers, NOT on the part of the South Houston High School, or the SSCC board. I'm sure Jerry and Angela have their own comments to make, and I certainly don't speak for them, but the precedent that you want to put forward as having been established is actually a situation that you and other officers of the Gulf Coast helped to create from extremely poor planning. To my knowledge, there have been no tournaments in any other division except yours (I can assure you not in the ALM division) that have been sanctioned opposite an SSCC. The Gulf Coast division has done this repeatedly with impunity as long as the SSCC has existed. In my humble opinion, it is not in the interest of the fencers of the section and will undermine and ultimately reduce the strength of the Southwest Section Circuit Cup, something every member and every division in this section should be extremely proud of.
Sometimes you have to step back and look at the whole situation. Is it unethical for someone to sucker you into hitting their rear end thereby making you liable for repairs? Yes, of course it is, but it happens every day, and the damages must be paid. In my opinion as a SWS officer, I think it is wrong for you and your division to expect other divisions to cooperate with your SSCC tournaments and then not reciprocate. And if it is NOT wrong, it is certainly discourteous, and I don't support it. Please pardon the length of this correspondence. I just had several hats on and needed to be clear on each of them. I appreciate your time and hope you will work this out to the betterment of the entire fencing population. Sincerely, Terry Harkey Bout Committee, Rose Condon Memorial Secretary, Ark-La-Miss Division Secretary, Southwest Section
|
|
|
Post by August Skopik on Feb 14, 2005 13:58:58 GMT -6
Dear Terry and all other Divisions/Clubs/Sections: Kevin O'Neill was included in the email response because he has new or relatively new fencers that wanted to compete locally and could not attend the Rose Condon because it was too far to attend or other conflicts. Some of them he is enticing to join the USFA, and one of the enticements of joining the USFA is being able to earn USFA ratings. He wanted me to add D and under Women's events because he had interest from women in his club. I decided to host a D and Under when I had people ask me to add that event. I asked the D's and E's that were interested if they were attending the Rose Condon, and none were for a variety of reasons but one being the time constraint of travel (at least 4 hours). Hosting a D and Under in a city 4 hours+ away is a very minimal conflict, but I am making an appeal to any fencer that would attend the Rose Condon to attend the Rose Condon. This event is not to replace the training and experience acquired at a Sectional event. If you look at Terry's email you will see that she is waiving the late fees so take advantage of it!! I would like to answer several points in Terry's email. Last year's Katy Blades event was held on a date the Section decided upon, and there were no other options provided. The date was not decided by the division. Terry Harkey herself has discussed the lack of dates and how the Section needs to be more forgiving on events that don't conflict in the Longhorn Open 2003 meeting. We need to not look at this as a competition of resources, but providing more opportunities for fencing. Eventually, there may need to by Division Circuits and not Sectional Circuits because of the number of fencers. Wouldn't that be a tremendous problem? We are not competing for the same fencers!!! I have several women that this is one of their first tournaments, even though they have been fencing for several months. They need tournaments to keep up the interest, but if you send them to a SSCC with Bassa, Hurley, Hurley, Neeley, French, French, etc. then they will quit. They are not ready, and as a coach I would tell them they are not ready. I have made that mistake before in my short coaching career, (2 years), and I will try my best not to make it again. I will add that I have personally added many new fencers to the USFA roles. They joined because of my efforts, and I will be adding a considerable number in the coming months. All but 2 of the voting numbers listed on current Gulf Coast website of 46 have been added directly because of my efforts, (the other two I paid for so I added those also). I also have added a tremendous number of junior or youth fencers that are not listed in this number. Every Katy Blades fencer and every additional Katy Blades fencer that will be added through the rest of the year to the USFA membership will be because of me. I have a tremendous parental and student support group, but as the parents will tell you "no Katy Blades (Augie and Sandi) and no fencing for our young person". These fencers need an outlet with competitions, and please don't take the position that pushing down another club that is building fencing is more important than the sport itself. My email is katyblades@sbcglobal.net, and my website is www.katyblades.2itb.com.
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Feb 15, 2005 11:18:31 GMT -6
The Donkey has many questions....poor Donkey! Sure there is a long-standing tradition that nothing is more sacred or important than an SSCC event, but really, a D and Under is going to make that big of a difference? I checked AskFred. The Rose isn't hurting for male or female competitors at all. Nicely rated events all the way around. A few more Unrated fencers wouldn't make or break anything. Especially those fencers who aren't concerned with SSCC rankings at this time. Is Ms. Harkey upset that Kevin's group CHOOSES not to drive 6-7 hours to the Rose and instead attend a teeny-tiny tournament in Katy only 2 hours a way? His women would be fencing women from at least two other clubs at the Katy Blades event. (KB, Westchester, Brazosport and hopefully some others that can't make the Rose) Could Ms. Harkey be afraid that what happened at the Space City happen to the Rose? Everyone sign up and then no one show? Then she might lose some money... If Augie were in it for the big bucks revenue she thinks he'll get from a small DandUnder (I think it should be one word), he'd schedule it on a weekend where there wasn't anything else going on. Yeah, Augie and the rest of the clubs are just rolling in the dough that they make from tournaments....NOT. The only thing she CAN do is make such a stink that it takes away a fencing opportunity for a few dozen fencers who can't get to Shreveport. Maybe a kid that really needs the ego boost and doesn't care if he/she gets his/her first rating at a "DandUnder" or an "A" rated tournament will be robbed of the opportunity to get that rating. The delovorian length of her answer makes me think she is worried more about HER revenue than a small tournament stepping on the toes of the Rose. I won't go into her cynicism(sp?) at all. My .02 worth, Your pal the Donkey PS-Thanks Alliance, Katy Blades, Bayou City, Salle Mauro and all the others in the Houston area for scheduling LOTS and Lots and lots of tournaments. Y'all are doing a great job.
|
|
|
Post by August Skopik on Feb 15, 2005 13:53:28 GMT -6
This is my email to all of officers listed and to Terry Harkey:
Dear Terry, I looked at the entries and my additional entries that have not signed up yet because they don't even know about askfred yet because they have never fenced in a tournament. I have several rated fencers that are coming to my event because of personal reasons, (they weren't going to be able to go to the Rose Condon and had already decided that). I have two from TFA that are signed up, and I will email every fencer about your offer to waive the late fees that has signed up on askfred.net. I can't in good faith to the fencing community unschedule what is basically a first tournament for many young people in the area because you would rather they attend the Rose Condon. World Cups happen all the time, and they don't seem to conflict with the NACs or national or regional events. If you can determine through an independent audit that any fencer attending my event would have attended the Rose Condon instead, I will send you the entry fee from that fencer. I only ask that if we submit to that audit then you apologize publicly if none were going to the Rose Condon and/or we don't add 6 - 10 USFA members directly as a result of this weekend. If you are looking for beginners for cannon fodder to load up a tournament, then I can't send these high school students for it to be their first tournament. There are several reasons: 1. Their parents won't go. I don't know if your son's first tournament was four+ hours away. My own first tournament was at my club, and so was many fencers. Please share your personal experience if I am wrong. 2. They are not ready. I have other family committments on one of the evenings, so their coach can't be there. Therefore, they don't even know completely all of the basics of a tournament and will have no one there they can trust. We have discussed that the SSCC was not the place for a first tournament at several of the SSCC meetings. 3. THEY WILL QUIT. They need for fencing to be fun, and they will quit if it is not. I think it is fun to match my wits, (but not my knees), with the best in the area or country. I know the limitations I have when the doctors told me I would never walk again. I am happy with just being on strip some days, knowing that if things were a little different in my knee what could happen. I would like for each of them, and every fencer to have the opportunity to enjoy fencing. That sometimes means scoring a touch now and then, or at least feeling like you could. It is not for them to be used just to increase the ratings of the tournament. If that was the case, please join the crowd and fence and have each of your parents fencing also. I think that you could add a considerable number of entries that way. Please think again about what you are asking these fencers to do. They can't fence locally because you are hosting a tournament, even though they were not going to your event because of personal reasons. Again, I am not doing this to take away from your event and if you can prove I have a negative impact we will send you the entry fee from that fencer. This does not appear to be about growing fencing, but about limiting it now. Please call or email with any questions at 281.703.5064. August Skopik Katy Blades Fencing Academy
I SENT THIS BEFORE I READ DONKEY'S REPLY, AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE ON THE SAME PAGE. THANKS DONKEY. SOMETIMES IT GETS LONELY TRYING TO GROW FENCING. YEAH DONKEY, I SHOULD CALL IT DIV III BUT IT TOOK SO LONG TO EXPLAIN IT TO MY BEGINNERS THAT D AND UNDER IS EASIER.
|
|
|
Post by August Skopik on Feb 15, 2005 14:56:29 GMT -6
Here is Terry Harkey's email response.
Dear Augie, Either I don't think we're talking about the same thing, or you have completely missed the point. Your view is entirely too focused on yourself and your club. Isn't it correct that you are having an "open" D and under? My son's first tournament as a "D" was in Salt Lake City! That's a little bit further than 240 miles. A "D" and under is a VERY attractive tournament!! In fact - it is essentially an "Open Division 3" national category with the winner possibly taking home a "C"!!! You didn't seem to have any trouble UN-scheduling the youth event you originally had scheduled in the fall. What about all those disappointed Y10/Y12 kids who are going to be NON-USFA? The fact that you changed the youth event to a D & Under is what troubles me. Adding female events is another late occurring addition that hasn't had enough time for traction yet so maybe you could pull that part without disappointing the entire Gulf Coast. And what about those who HAVE ALREADY pre-registered at Rose (Salle Mauro, Houston High, Clear Lake, Galveston, etc etc,) ? They now find a good D & Under tournament available in their area. They WOULD have come to Rose, but now - they will have to think about it. This is the VERY reason the SSCC asked for every division's cooperation on protecting the SSCC tournaments. As I said, Augie, if your intention is getting a little tournament together of a bunch of new fencers (U's) or youth, I have absolutely no problem with that. I encourage that! If your idea is to have a tournament with D's and under - you are potentially undercutting this SSCC event, not with YOUR fencers, but with fencers who think they have a better shot at your D & Under than the Rose! I would fight for any other tournament just as hard - in fact, had your division NOT been the offending division involved in the Katy Blades SSCC incident, I would have worked to have the D & Under that SSHS disallowed, even though I am friends with a couple of the fencers and the coach! But under the circumstances - there was no one to blame but yourself and the other officers at that time who created that dilemma and then looked to the SWS to do the dirty work, which we all refused to do after we understood the whole story. However, if instead at that time, for example, my own friend Sharron scheduled a "D" and under for that weekend here in the ALM (even though they wouldn't be coming) I would have fought to prevent that from being sanctioned if it conflicted with the Katy Blades SSCC. I'm sure the Rose Committee doesn't desire any fees from you (we do accept donations to the Rose Scholarship, though), and we're not suggesting that you should send anyone to Rose. We want, and I think we deserve, the same security of knowing our tournament is just as protected as everyone else's has been. You are not just offending the Rose and the staff that works so hard all year for this event. You are offending the Ark-La-Miss division who has prevented anyone from scheduling anything on top of any SSCC including yours. You are also offending the very spirit of the cooperative effort of all divisions for the SWS Circuit Cup.
If you REALLY want to have a tournament, have one!! No one can stop you. The people that want to fence will get to fence and you will make a little money! The fight here is not over whether or not your fencers can fence the weekend of Feb 26-27, it's over the fact that you are insisting on a USFA sanctioned tournament that will draw D & Under fencers in order to give classifications. If you continue to insist on the sanctioning, which is not required to have a tournament, then that will tell everyone what your true motives are. However, I am a realist, and I feel, given the political climate in your division, it is very likely that your officers will grant you this tournament for fear that, to those who don't know any better, it will look like they are trying to "stomp on the little guy" or disallow a bunch of kids to fence. It isn't my call to make, I don't have that power. Sincerely, Terry
Just a note from Augie. Now the Youth 14, 12 and 10 kids are not disappointed any longer with local events not being USFA. They don't get the opportunity to earn ratings anyway if it is not a C1. As a matter of fact, it will be easier to explain to a 10 year old that the tournament with 15 person tournament they won was never a USFA tournament than to explain why there are no ratings awarded. Fence some of those kids in Youth 10 and Youth 12 if you think they don't deserve a rating.
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Feb 15, 2005 19:20:14 GMT -6
Ms. Harkey, I'm sure you're lurking out there somewhere. This is what the NICE southern girls would do in a situation like this: They'd smile and say "Well now Mistah Skopik, we surely will be missin' y'all at the Rose Condon tournament. It just won't be the same without yeww!" Then they'd go on their merry way, sip a mint julep and think about it tomorrow. For you, dahlin'-I suggest two mint juleps. Your pal the Donkey
|
|
|
Post by One of the Girls on Feb 16, 2005 8:57:49 GMT -6
Oh, come on... I was wantin' jumbo Margaritas!
|
|
Louise Cohens email
Guest
|
Post by Louise Cohens email on Feb 17, 2005 21:43:37 GMT -6
This is an email sent from our current Gulf Coast Division Chairman to all the clubs and the sectional officers today. The objective of this email and this campaign is to specifically prevent new fencers and youth fencers from the area from fencing in their first or one of their first tournaments when they weren't going to travel to Shreveport for the Rose Condon. The Gulf Coast Division by-laws include this:
Article II -- Objectives
The objectives of the GULF COAST DIVISION of USFA, INC., shall be:
The encouragement and development of the art of fencing.
The holding of local competitions and tournaments.
The promotion of participation in state, sectional and national competitions sponsored by USFA, INC.
Such other purposes and objectives as have been promulgated in the Bylaws of USFA, INC.
If you support Louise's position, then you have the opportunity to vote to support her as chairman in April. If you do not, then vote to change the leadership. Either way, do not give away your proxy and do not let your friends or people you know give away theirs!! If you are going, then you get their proxy and vote for them!
THIS IS LOUISE LEPIE's email!!
"Not just another Tournament! Not just another SSCC!
Imagine raising an energetic, athletic beautiful daughter - an only daughter - an only child who fences on her high school fencing team, rides, horses and is a wonderful example of good sportsmanship. She is always ready to volunteer to help others and has more friends at 18 than others have in a lifetime. She is doted on by loving parents who see a bright future for her and anticipate that someday they will dance at her wedding, spoil her children and grow old knowing such a daughter will always look out for them when age takes its toll.
And one day - all this ends!! A car accident - a death. Devastation. A life remembered but lost.
To ease the pain of the loss and continue her memory, the Rose Condon Memorial Tournament is born. It is a family, a communal event, full of joy and celebration. Once you have been there, you understand the potential for embracing the spirit of giving by all fencers. You can participate as a fencer, a contributor or a volunteer. This Tournament perpetuates Rose's name in a scholarship fund for students graduating from her high school. Fencers who may need such additional funds to continue their studies.
This is a selfless undertaking by many who loved Rose and some, like myself, who never met her, but feel the pain of a mother's loss.
We, in this Division, should realize the many levels of importance of this tournament and not be in conflict with it.
Not just another Tournament! Not just another SSCC!!"
************** There is one other note. There are several other memorial tournaments, and who is to say which is more important? The Van Buskirk, Pouj, Wilson-Sylvia, Frank's, Ken Hogan, etc. I knew or met many of these fencers, and several were very good friends. I miss many of these fencers/coaches very much. Does that mean that we can't schedule a tournament to get new fencers involved because there is a tournament 4 - 7 hours away? The last words Pouj told me he said publicly, "Don't stop fencing, coaching and doing what you do to help fencing". I will take Pouj's advice, and all that he has done to help fencing in this part of the country over the arrows of a couple.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Ray on Feb 17, 2005 22:45:40 GMT -6
From reading the various responses here...there seem to be two sides to the issue:
1) Following the rules -- hosting this tournament on the same weekend as the Rose violates the very rules that August decided to uphold when he held an SSCC event last year. It is in the Operations Manual of the SSCC very plainly that you should do your best to not schedule an event on the same weekend as an SSCC event. Yes perhaps someone's first tournament should not be an SSCC A rated event. It would probably be benificial for it to be a local tournament--even a D and under. There are still quite a few weekends in the season--and many in the summer after the "season" is over. Nothing stops you from hosting a tournament in the summer (to the best of my knowledge).
Technically the SSCC should have brought this scheduling issue up at the beginning of the year. The SSCC Operations Manual clearly defines a Youth event as one that you should avoid scheduling along with an SSCC event. This is partly their fault for not point it out earlier. Either way it's still a violation of the rules--that is an indisputable fact. Whether you choose to let it affect you is your choice though.
2) The spirit of fencing in the area -- promoting fencing in your specific region is good. Providing training and experience for young and new fencers is always a laudable goal. However, by choosing to narrow your focus you are actually offending people in the grander scheme of fencing. This D and Under may not "steal" a single fencer away from the Rose Condon...but it could. Some fencers from further away than Houston might decide to come to the Houston tournament instead of travel all the way to Shreveport.
Did you know that every cent of profit made from the Rose Condon goes towards a fencing scholarship/memorial fund for Rose Condon? This tournament is not to raise money for a club or to inflate anyone's rating--it's to honor the memory of a fencer, and to promote the spirit of fencing in the section. That's why every year, they fly in excellent fencers from other parts of the country. It's to give southwest section fencers a chance to compete with top-level fencers from other parts of the nation. That's the spirit that the Rose is held in. Why try to take away from that? It may not be your intent--but you can certainly see that some people will see it as malicious.
If you want a tournament--throw a club-sponsored tournament. Don't make it a USFA event--that way your "new" fencers can save the $50 USFA entry fee. Charge $5 a head, and have it be nothing but a fun time for everyone who comes. Why does it have to be a USFA sactioned event?
I've been watching all the internal politics that have happened in the last two years in the Gulf Coast, and I'm glad that I got out just in time. It's been really ugly in there, and I hope that people can start remembering the fundamental truth--fencing is supposed to be fun.
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Feb 18, 2005 6:57:25 GMT -6
Thank you, Jason.
What follows are my personal feelings on this matter.
I have to state that I find this conflict unfortunate in the extreme. About two years ago, my club (Clear Lake Fencing Club) found it had scheduled an event on an unfortunate date. It was not our intent to cause conflicts. We apologized and moved the event. We actually wound up pushing it into May due to the lack of any other dates that did not conflict with anyone else.
If I recall correctly, the Rose Condon Memorial was the first of the SSCC events this year to announce its date. I recall adding it to my calendar long before I could place dates for the others. Like many clubs, ours waits (often anxiously) for the SSCC dates before working out our own schedules. I remember this well, since this year the other dates came later than normal (no doubt because they were, in turn, waiting for the national schedule).
In our case, had we looked in the right spot, the problem with our date should have been obvious from the beginning. I can easily grant that one can look up and find that the date they have been planning to use for months suddenly has real problems. Logistically, this can be a major problem. Still, one can adapt and recover.
The Katy Blades have scheduled several tournaments for the 2004-2005 season (most, if not all, involving youth and/or beginner's events) and have cancelled/moved events in the past. It is not fun, but Mr. Skopik has time and time again proven his ability to organize (and, for my money even more impressive) RE-organize tournaments.
If the event is largely for new, local fencers I would hope that the option of altering the date, even slightly, would not be out of the question. This particular weekend should not be a make-or-break for the Katy Blades tournament calendar.
With the recent introduction of a fair and impartial rotation system within our division so that all clubs have an opportunity to try their hand at serving as an LOC for the SSCC and the tremendous amount of work recently done by Andrey Geva for our own SSCC event, the Space City Rendez-Vous, I was hoping that our relationship with the Section and the SSCC was beginning a slow, but promising period of improvement.
|
|
|
Post by August Skopik on Feb 18, 2005 8:05:27 GMT -6
I can't move the date of this tournament until at least 30 days into the future because the Gulf Coast Division leadership has posted new rules after my last "unclassified" event. I found that I had an open date with three weeks notice, and the Divisional Chairman declared it was an "illegal" tournament. There were four people rated at that tournament, none from my club, but all were very deserving and no one else is holding a tournament for this segment.
I then won't have time for 15/16/17 year olds that I am enticing into fencing to buy their gear for the National Qualifiers and sign up for the USFA. You can't grow without a plan.
It keeps coming back to last year. We as division officers had to take the position we took because we were threatened with lawsuits if we showed favoritism to Jerry over Louise. In fact, we were threatened by lawsuits by both sides. I was backed into a corner by one person, who for the first time publicly put forth her ideas on growing fencing locally.
I also keep getting people bringing up money. I am a not-for-profit. I need to pay the referees who work, (None of whom the Rose Condon administration has requested). I usually lose money on these tournaments, but my fencers and kids get to fence.
If I wanted to make money, I would host a day camp and give lessons to everyone and be done in 1/2 a day or day. I would make several hundred dollars with no risk and less than 1/2 the time. The issue is I would not be able to bring more fencers into fencing, which is what this is all about.
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Feb 18, 2005 9:25:43 GMT -6
Augie, I understand. I am not suggesting you are in fencing for the money. (There's money in fencing?)
I also appreciate your post. I just want all sides being heard. I know full well that backed-into-a-corner feeling. I hope this can be resolved.
|
|
|
Post by Letter from Louise on Feb 18, 2005 13:43:41 GMT -6
I find the fact that Louise Lepee has tried to rally behind the banner of a "scholarship" hilarious. I've had several conversations with Louise about her club and how to boost membership.
Let me tell you first off that she thinks a person who earns $60,000 a year is POOR. Last time I checked the national poverty level was far less than $60,000.
Secondly, when I suggested to get some warm bodies into her facility she should try and offer a scholarship to low income families she rebuked me by saying, "I don't believe in scholarships." I then suggested to her since you have such a HUGE facility that she can take the Walmart approach to fencing and lower her price point Louise nearly fell out her chair. She said,"The price is final and that's it." My thought was it's your business lady.
When I asked her to take advantage of her employees she has on staff by letting them make phone calls to setup demo's her reply was as follows, "my employees do not even know how to operate a computer."
I just shook my head in disbelief and couldn't believe the words out of her mouth.
The reason I've decided to reveal my experience with Louise are as follows, Augie should not stand alone and be criticized because he wants to host a D and under tournament. If I was a D in houston, texas I would save up for the Div II nac in Denver, CO. then spend my money going to Shreveport, LA. Unfortunately, I'm not a D fencer and will not be able to go to the Div II NAC.
If I was a D and under I would go to a local event to try out my new en guarde and to make sure I put my lame on.
Back to business......
August Skopik has setup a begginers tournament. It's over 7 hours away from the Shreveport tournament. The guy promotes fencing at all levels and is a stand up guy that loves the sport.
Louise writes some bloated stream of conciousness in a moment of emotional upheaval. The lady doesn't give a D--- about the sport, Gulf Coast Division or her so called friends.
She tries to undermine whomever she can, bend the rules, considers everyone who doesn't make a million dollars a year or attended an EAST COAST COLLEGE stupid.
For once I appeal to everyone on this site for support. Let the pontification and bastardization of the rules stop by removing the blight of the Gulf COAST from the chair. I rarely post on this site but when I saw what was going on and how August was being put on the witness stand by the OJ of the fencing world I had to say something.
Once again, I just wanted to say my peace because I really do love the sport and I hate to see someone who actually cares be crucified.
Signed, Tim Guerinot For Love Of The Game
|
|
|
Post by Jason on Feb 18, 2005 19:04:58 GMT -6
Tim,
Louise does not have a scholarship. The Scholarship is based from the Rose Condon Memorial fund. All proceeds from the Rose Condon (in Shreveport) go towards that fund...and the scholarship.
Also....Shreveport is more like 4.5 hours from Houston. Take I-45 north until you hit Buffalo, then 79 up to Shreveport. That's driving the speed-limit too...
I think that D and under tournaments are good...but as a blatant violation of the rules, it shouldn't be held. Make it a fence-for-fun tournament. D and Under you can't let all those youths fence anyway...
|
|
|
Post by mj wysocki on Feb 18, 2005 21:08:00 GMT -6
Jason, just to clarify, no rules were violated. The USFA has ruled that nobody can restrict anyone from when tournaments are held. The section has asked folks not to hold tournaments that conflict with SSCC's but nobody, including the Section can stop you or make a rule to restrict you to not have a tournament on a certain date. Actually, you can hold a tournament during Summer Nationals if you want! Even the USFA holds tournaments while major FIE tournaments are being held. Case in point, this weekend the USFA scheduled a tournament (Junior Olympics) while the FIE is holdiong a big international tournamenmt. Also Tim did not say Louise has any scholarships, re-read his post. In fact he said she does not.
|
|
|
Post by cowpaste on Feb 19, 2005 16:57:29 GMT -6
Blah blah blah. Houston can't even keep two clubs from hosting seperate tournaments on the same day in the same city, and somebody in a different state is complaining about a D and under far far away? So much dang whining. I'm sure the Rose tournament will still pull more fencers than the Space City did. Ha!
|
|
Generic Brand Fencer
Guest
|
Post by Generic Brand Fencer on Feb 22, 2005 11:50:15 GMT -6
Somebody please take down this !?*@#$!! web site. Yet more garbage shoveled through this portal. Terry, I think your fears for your tournament can only be described as hysterical. I'm really sure August's humble 'D and under tournament' has the gravity to suck all of the fencers away from your precious tournament. The geographical distance alone is enough to prohibit any such interference. Need any more really be said after this point alone? Even the highest level fencers balk at driving the distance to shreveport. And don't try to throw your weight around this division, we really don't care what "titles" you hold. Also, who designated you the sole representative of 'women fencers' Anyone who supports equality among the sexes is qualified to promote women in fencing, August included. August has shown a commitment and dedication to fencing untouchable by anyone in the southwest section-indeed the US, including YOU! Don't try to hold the fact that you have volunteered in our division as some special token. Nobody asked you to do this and we don't need your kind of "favors". We have more than enough qualified individuals to volunteer and develope fencing in our division without you. Better yet, why don't you volunteer and develope fencing in your OWN division?? Keep your divisiveness and rabble-rousing in your own division.
|
|
|
Post by cowpaste on Feb 23, 2005 2:30:17 GMT -6
Err..why would anyone take down this website? It's just a discussion forum. All the Gulf Coast people to go chat about fencing on some other random public forum. Should that be taken down too?
|
|
|
Post by Flamberge on Feb 23, 2005 9:49:13 GMT -6
Somebody please take down this !?*@#$!! web site. Yet more garbage shoveled through this portal. .......... While I disagree with the ad foeminam attack in the second half of the posting that you consider garbage, this is a valid discussion and disagreement between people who care about fencing. The problem - if there is a problem - of tournament scheduling overlap is something worth discussing, preferably in a civil and sedate manner, but should not be avoided since it affects the local fencing community (mainly in the division and by a stretch in the section). Did anyone notice that A&M had a tournament this past weekend scheduled in conflict with JO's in Arlington? Yes, it did affect quite a few fencers who had to make a choice. Did not hear any complaints from the USFA about this interference.... All it takes is sitting at one big round table before the season and everyone put forward what their desired dates are and do a bit of horsetrading that's all.... But for this to work, EVERYONE must participate (hint, hint, Louise & Mauro) and be willing to play fair and not just step on everyone else's toes to show who is the stronger club (hint, hint, Louise and Mauro).
|
|
|
Post by cowpaste on Feb 27, 2005 4:04:14 GMT -6
Ugh...I went to this bar, and now I am pseudo-wasted. I have to wake up in like...4 hours to go and compete at the KB D and Under....
|
|