At today’s Board meeting, the USA Fencing Board is expected to appoint a Task Force to explore whether it is appropriate and viable to eliminate Y10 and Y12 events at national tournaments.

The Board’s agenda does not clearly specify if the reference to national tournaments includes both the March NAC and the Summer Nationals Y10 and Y12 championships events. The agenda’s reference to RYCs and SYCs, both of which are qualifying events for the Summer Nationals championship, seems to imply that USA Fencing intends to retain the Summer Nationals Y10 and Y12 championship events, but it is seriously considering the elimination of these events from the March NAC.

Background

The elimination of one NAC from the national tournaments annual calendar presents USA Fencing with an event capacity problem - it simply cannot host as many events at NACs.

In the 2022/2023 season, USA Fencing eliminated the Division 2 and Division 3 NACs resulting in an outcry from the adult fencer community at the loss of national fencing competition for adults during the fencing year.

To restore balance, USA Fencing must now find space to accommodate Division 2 and Division 3 events in the national tournament calendar. Eliminating the Y10 and Y12 events that have been staples at the March NAC for many years appears to be one solution for USA Fencing.

If you are wondering why USA Fencing eliminated one NAC, here’s the explanation I was given by an authoritative source at USA Fencing:

The elimination of the December NAC has been on the cards for a couple of years as it has consistently been a money loser for USA Fencing due to poor attendance.

However because of prior venue commitments, USA Fencing cancelled the November NAC in both the 2021/2022 and the 2022/2023 seasons, while maintaining the money-losing December NAC.

Starting in the 2023/2024 season, the December NAC will be cancelled permanently, while the November NAC will make its return to the annual calendar.

This is not the first time USA Fencing has considered elimination of of Y10 and Y12 events at national tournaments

The discussion to eliminate youth events at NACs was first tabled in April 2021 to bring USA Fencing practices on youth competition in line with the American Development Model (ADM) first developed by US Hockey to address the specific issues faced by their sport. The ADM has now been adopted by many sports governing bodies in the United States.

However, USA Fencing did not proceed with the discussion on elimination of youth NACs last year.

At the time, FP did collect a range of parent’s opinions on the subject of eliminating youth NACs. You can read these Parent Opinions HERE.

Circumstances have now put the issue of elimination of Y10 and Y12 NACs back on the agenda.

Here’s what the agenda item states:

“Youth Fencing Task Force – Y10 and Y12

Motion (Mr. Alperstein): That the Board of Directors of USA Fencing appoint a Youth Fencing Task Force to consider the advisability and propriety of conducting Y10 and Y12 events at national tournaments, with the report of its findings and recommendations to be delivered no later than the Board’s Winter Meeting in February 2023. The Task Force will comprise the chairs of the Tournament Committee, Sports Medicine Resource Group, and Youth Development Resource Group, (or their designees) the CEO and Membership Director of USA Fencing (or their designees), a coach with a background in youth development, and such other experts inside and outside of USA Fencing who can inform the Task Force’s work, as recommended by staff.

Rationale: There are many reasons to consider whether USA Fencing should continue to offer national level competition at NACs in the Y10 and Y12 age groups, and good considerations on both sides of the question.

Among the points suggesting that such competitions are not beneficial are the following:

• USA Fencing has formally embraced the “American Development Model.” The ADM model provides that activities for beginning athletes (generally under age 12) should “Emphasize practice over competition; if competing, not beyond local or regional levels.” During Stage 2 of the ADM approach (normally for athletes aged 10-16), emphasis should be on “furthering skill development through challenges, 2022-2023 USA Fencing Board of Directors October 30, 2022 Agenda such as recreational competition, organized sport programs or club participation,” and that this should occur through “Recreational competition at local and regional levels.” Stressful travel and competition at national tournaments seem antithetical to these principles.

• With the reduction in the number of NACs being conducted by USA Fencing, we have seen the loss of national level competitive opportunities for a large segment of USA Fencing’s membership, notably those who fence developmentally or recreationally in Divisions 2 and 3. Discontinuing or reducing the number of Y10 and Y12 events at the NACS would allow us to again provide services to these constituencies.

• The increased number and higher quality of SYCs, RYCs, and other regional and local opportunities for young fencers provide ample competitive experience, are more consistent with the ADM, and save family resources while providing clubs and divisional organizers with income to support their businesses and objectives.

• Referees and other observers have noted anecdotally that parent and coach misbehavior seems particularly acute and more troubling in younger age events, disrupting the tournaments and diminishing the enjoyment of athletes affected by poor adult conduct.

Among the points suggesting that such competitions are beneficial are the following:

• USA Fencing’s international success began after the adoption of youth fencing and our results progressed through Cadet, Junior, and Senior ranks as the youth fencers aged. Eliminating or reducing the number of national level youth events jeopardizes future international results.

• The viability and success of some clubs and financial support for some coaches may depend on having Y10 and Y12 events at the national level.

• Children are safer in national venues where FenceSafe and MAAPP are in the forefront.

These considerations for and against are by no means the only ones bearing on the issue, but are offered as examples of the reasons why USA Fencing should reassess its approach to Y10 and Y12 competition.”

USA Fencing has a tough decision to make

It appears that USA Fencing has a few conflicting goals at work here.

Creating a pipeline of internationally competitive fencers vs reducing financial and competitive pressure on younger fencers

As a member of the USOPC, one of USA Fencing’s biggest goals is to create a pipeline of fencers who are competitive at a global level and who can win medals in international competitions including the Olympics.

By its own admission, US Fencing is aware that “USA Fencing’s international success began after the adoption of youth fencing and our results progressed through Cadet, Junior, and Senior ranks as the youth fencers aged. Eliminating or reducing the number of national level youth events jeopardizes future international results.”

This goal conflicts with the goals of the ADM which is to “Emphasize practice over competition; if competing, not beyond local or regional levels.”

USA Fencing seems aware that the ADM goals make “Stressful travel and competition at national tournaments seem antithetical to these principles.”

How can USA Fencing now have its cake and eat it too given these 2 conflicting goals?

sycs do not reduce stress or national travel

The logic to reduce stress and national travel by eliminating youth NACs breaks down with the SYCs. Though classified as regional qualifying events, SYCs award national points and are open to fencers across the country regardless where the SYC is hosted.

Venue shopping is a fairly common practice amongst youth fencers hoping to gain national points in their age group or in the age groups above them. For example, a Y10 fencer seeking Y12 and Y14 national points can venue shop for an easier SYC tournament … which is frequently far from home. Once those Y12 or Y14 points are earned, that Y10 fencer qualifies to compete in both Y14 NACs and Cadet NACs.

Unless USA Fencing intends to plug these loopholes so that fencers under the age of 13 can never attend a NAC, there are plenty of opportunities for determined Y10 and Y12 fencers to continue to travel to earn national points even if USA Fencing axes the March NAC.

Even if Y10 and Y12 fencers lose their access to age group specific national tournaments, there are still opportunities in the system through which they can still legitimately compete at NACs designed for older fencers.

who actually competes at Division 2 and division 3 NAcs?

According to USA Fencing, “With the reduction in the number of NACs being conducted by USA Fencing, we have seen the loss of national level competitive opportunities for a large segment of USA Fencing’s membership, notably those who fence developmentally or recreationally in Divisions 2 and 3. Discontinuing or reducing the number of Y10 and Y12 events at the NACS would allow us to again provide services to these constituencies.”

It would be helpful if USA Fencing made clear who this “large segment of USA Fencing’s membership” is.

Understanding the demographics of this “large segment” would be very helpful in informing the final decision of what events to keep and what to eliminate.

Who comprises this “large segment”? Are they avid adult fencers? Are they high school fencers who register for these events as an add-on since they are already at a NAC? Are they parents who enjoy fencing and like the idea of having an event to compete in while they accompany their kids at a NAC? Are they high school fencers who are not competitive in the Cadet and Junior NACs and who need an interim level national event to foster their development?

To be clear, there is only one Y10 and Y12 NAC annually - that is the March NAC. Eliminating the Y10 and Y12 NAC will yield 2 events for re-distribution.

Meanwhile, USA Fencing has increased the number Cadet NACs from 4 to 5 annually and the number of Junior events from 4 to 5 annually as well. This increase in number of Cadet and Junior events has been very well received by high school fencers. It has boosted competition exposure for high school fencers and promoted the competitiveness of our Cadet and Junior fencers internationally.

Anecdotal evidence of misbehavior from parents of youth fencers

USA Fencing cites anecdotal evidence as potential justification for the elimination of Y10 and Y12 NACs - “Referees and other observers have noted anecdotally that parent and coach misbehavior seems particularly acute and more troubling in younger age events, disrupting the tournaments and diminishing the enjoyment of athletes affected by poor adult conduct.”

We would be deeply disappointed in USA Fencing if it were to overly rely on anecdotal evidence as justification for the elimination of Y10 and Y12 NACs.

If parental misbehavior is magnified in the Y10 and Y12 age groups as the referees and other observers anecdotally observe, surely it is is a problem both at NACs and at regional events.

The solution to this alleged misbehavior should be in the education of parents. Eliminating Y10 and Y12 NACs surely cannot solve the problem of over-invested, emotional parents inexperienced in how to handle their fencer’s competitive wins and losses. We would further propose more consistent application of disciplinary measures as a far better solution to this problem than eliminating the events.

The fact that parents of Y14, Cadet and Junior fencers are not observed to misbehave to the same extent suggests that parents have a learning curve and they learn to accept wins and losses with greater equanimity as their fencers grow.

MONEY-LOsing NACs and loss of income for coaches

Youth and high school fencers with goals to be nationally competitive are the biggest source of revenue for clubs and coaches as well as for USA Fencing itself.

USA Fencing needs to carefully analyze the long-term impact of eliminating youth competition at the national level on its bottomline.

If you read the parents’ opinions carefully, you will find that several of them report that national competition were very important in helping their youth fencers develop and that national competition added to the fun of the sport. Not all kids thrive on participation alone. Boredom is a big turn-off for energetic, talented kids.

USA Fencing should carefully assess if the elimination of national youth competitions may actually drive away the kids most likely to be the most committed to the sport. Ultimately, the committed kids are the most reliable source of revenue for clubs and USA Fencing.

The March NAC has been a profitable one for USA Fencing. Tampering with its composition may also erode its economics for USA Fencing.

balancing act for USA fencing

USA Fencing has a tough decision to make. We look forward to a reasoned decision based on documented evidence.