PDA

View Full Version : worlds results



martin pent
-12th April 2010, 18:21
Now the World Championships are over it's interesting to note which weapon results came out on top. In the cadets our best result was Amy Radford's (epee) with a last 8, whilst in the juniors Gareth Thomas (epee) got the best result with his last 16. Maybe it's about time our epeeists get a little more recognition than they do, especially as this is the strongest weapon by entry - 142 in JME and 82 in CWE. This difference in entry numbers also applies to most junior and senior A grade competitions!

Perhaps all our eggs shouldn't be in the foil basket!!! :shrug:

TRB
-12th April 2010, 22:29
Perhaps not, but as a lot of the funding is ringfenced to maximize medal opportunities at London 2012 as far as i can see these results sadly mean little (in regards to Olympics funding) as it is not at a senior - and thus Olympic - level, in fact unless i am mistaken there is almost no non foilists who realistically have a chance of making it to the 2012 Olympics.

Not to take away from these fantastic results, they are promising for future senior results but the chance of any of the current junior or cadet fencers making a big enough impact on the senior international scene in this Olympic cycle is very slim indeed. So perhaps after 2012 funding will not be purely for foil and then the other weapons can have a shout at qualifying for some funding, but until then I would be very surprised if anyone who is currently not funded recieves any serious funding.

Although after saying all that, I would love to be made to eat my words and have some young fencers crack the senior circut in time for London.

Foilling Around
-12th April 2010, 23:12
Perhaps not, but as a lot of the funding is ringfenced to maximize medal opportunities at London 2012 as far as i can see these results sadly mean little (in regards to Olympics funding) as it is not at a senior - and thus Olympic - level, in fact unless i am mistaken there is almost no non foilists who realistically have a chance of making it to the 2012 Olympics.



Possibly as far as qualifying by right is concerned, but as host nation we have a certain number of guaranteed places, I forget how many, so there will be more than just GBR men's foilists in London.

Foilling Around
-12th April 2010, 23:44
Here we go.

"QUALIFICATION OF THE HOST COUNTRY
In addition to its possible qualification through the current rules, the host country has the right to enter 8 fencers, to be distributed between team and individual events as it sees fit."

So if we qualify a Men's foil team by right that means all 3 team members can fence in the individual event and we can have 8 other fencers, which could be 8 individuals spread across all weapons or one team and 5 individuals spread across the other 4 weapons etc.

At present, if the Olympic selection for teams were made now, GBR would miss out by one place as they are the second best placed European team outside the top 4.

http://www.fie.ch/download/letters/2010/info/1/en/9.2%20-%20Qualification_OG_London_detailed_ang.pdf

To be certain of qualification we have to hope the foilists can be placed in the top 5 teams in the world.

That is why we need to put all our weight behind the foilists. Let's face it, they will be going to London in any event. Either they go by right by qualifying and so GBR will have 8 other fencers as well, or they go as host team and we have only 5 other fencers. (plus any who qualify via the zonal route)

Of course that does not seem to give the men's foilists much of an incentive to try to qualify, but if they do so then they are likely to knock out a dangerous team like France and so make their job in London much easier.

Hot Bot
-12th April 2010, 23:59
Here we go.

"QUALIFICATION OF THE HOST COUNTRY
In addition to its possible qualification through the current rules, the host country has the right to enter 8 fencers, to be distributed between team and individual events as it sees fit."

So if we qualify a Men's foil team by right that means all 3 team members can fence in the individual event and we can have 8 other fencers, which could be 8 individuals spread across all weapons or one team and 5 individuals spread across the other 4 weapons etc.

At present, if the Olympic selection for teams were made now, GBR would miss out by one place as they are the second best placed European team outside the top 4.

http://www.fie.ch/download/letters/2010/info/1/en/9.2%20-%20Qualification_OG_London_detailed_ang.pdf

To be certain of qualification we have to hope the foilists can be placed in the top 5 teams in the world.

That is why we need to put all our weight behind the foilists. Let's face it, they will be going to London in any event. Either they go by right by qualifying and so GBR will have 8 other fencers as well, or they go as host team and we have only 5 other fencers. (plus any who qualify via the zonal route)

Of course that does not seem to give the men's foilists much of an incentive to try to qualify, but if they do so then they are likely to knock out a dangerous team like France and so make their job in London much easier.
Hopefully there'll be at least 6 others, maybe even 7, as Richard Kruse and possibly Laurence Halsted could qualify individually surely, meaning we don't need to use host entries for them?

Red
-13th April 2010, 00:16
So if we qualify a Men's foil team by right that means all 3 team members can fence in the individual event and we can have 8 other fencers, which could be 8 individuals spread across all weapons or one team and 5 individuals spread across the other 4 weapons etc.

Dream on :rolleyes:
Equity across weapons is something for the FIE to worry about and not the BOA. Two teams and two individuals is much more likely (or if this can work, three teams if one fencer qualifies by right). In this game, teams are trumps.

TRB
-13th April 2010, 11:39
Possibly as far as qualifying by right is concerned, but as host nation we have a certain number of guaranteed places, I forget how many, so there will be more than just GBR men's foilists in London.

Ahh of course, how could I forget about the wild cards, my bad there then.

But as far as funding goes, should someone who may be taken to the Olympics even if they do not qualify for it be recieving funding off BF when it has said it's main aim is medals at London? I accept that there have been and will be exceptions to this statement due to things such as injury and illness eg Kruse's wildcard into Bejing after just missing out on qualifying at the Zonals due to an ankle injury I believe but this was a fencer who could realisticaly have qualified had he been at 100%.

Miss_P
-13th April 2010, 12:12
But as far as funding goes, should someone who may be taken to the Olympics even if they do not qualify for it be recieving funding off BF when it has said it's main aim is medals at London? Going to the olympics and receiving funding are two entirely different things. Some of our Team GB guys in Vancouver were self funded.

TRB
-13th April 2010, 17:35
Going to the olympics and receiving funding are two entirely different things. Some of our Team GB guys in Vancouver were self funded.

This now as far as funding from BF is concerned it seems to me to be one and the same. Or at least from what I have read, such as some of the articles in recent editions of The Sword, that is the impression I have. And unless I'm mistaken it seems to be the point raised by the thread starter.

tigger
-16th April 2010, 17:17
Our fencers have all the usual opportunities to qualify, then the wild card chance.

So team ranking first (MF?)
Then individual world ranking (Jon Willis, Kruse and Halsted are all quite close)
Then zonal qualifiers
Then wild cards.

I think MF have a great chance of team qualification, and Jon Willis plus 1 WS (choice of a few!), 1 WF, 1 MS and 1 WE have a very realistic chance of zonal qualification.

Say we get three through zonals, this optimistic scenario would give us 7 (inc MF reserve) qualifiers plus 8 wild cards.

I would be quite surprised if anyone who is making good enough results to indicate a strong possibility of them qualifying doesn't receive funding by 2012.

BTW I was impressed by a number of the fencers at the worlds, and felt it was the most positive World Champs I'd been to. In the past we've had the occasional medal/L8 which has papered over the fact that most people went out in the pools or first DE. This time I felt a lot more of our squad was competitive at this level, and had better confidence, techinique and footwork. Am important step forward. If someone had picked up a medal I think we'd be considering this the most successful worlds for a long time.

I think we should be looking to build a base of successful fencers in all weapons, and reward the most successful of these in whatever discipline they fence!

Keith.A.Smith
-19th April 2010, 17:50
I agree totally with Jon about the Junior and Cadet Worlds and I was there and could watch closely.

Keith