PDA

View Full Version : Which Team Events in the 2008 Olympics



Boo Boo
-29th December 2004, 13:22
As most will know, neither WF or WS team were contested at the last Olympics (due to the introduction of WS Individual and the refusal of the IOC to allow more medals or more participants to accomodate this...).

Which team events will NOT be contested at the next Olympics? Surely WF and WS WILL be included (and two of the other four weapons rotated out)???

Shouldn't this be decided and announced now - in case any fencers want to make a strategic decision...

Boo

Insipiens
-29th December 2004, 13:26
I would presume that this wil be a decision for the IOC.

I appreciate that the FIE may have just said, OK no team WF or team WS to ensure that individual WS was included but can we guarantee that the IOC are just going to accept what the FIE decide in swapping around sports.

After all I presume that the International Swimming federation (I have no real idea what it is called) cannot just decide whether to do different swimming races without IOC approval.

Is their a risk that swapping them around will mean we just lose even more events at the Olympics?

haggis
-29th December 2004, 14:04
Reasonably sure that the decision about which events would be included for the Athens Olympics was made at the FIE Congress meeting in Antalya in April 2001. IOC stated that there would be no increase in the number of medals or participants but seemed reasonably happy to let the FIE sort out which of the team events would be omitted. Assuming the same procedure this time round then the coming World cadets/Juniors in Austria at the end of March would the time and place. Not sure that either of the weapons that were excluded from Athens are guaranteed a place in Beijing...

Still, that gives you the best part of three years to start hanging around with the sabreurs/epeeists if WF misses out again

Regards

Haggis

Boo Boo
-29th December 2004, 14:08
Originally posted by haggis

Still, that gives you the best part of three years to start hanging around with the sabreurs/epeeists if WF misses out again


See, even coaches get strategic... :tongue:

Boo

haggis
-29th December 2004, 14:13
Originally posted by Boo Boo
See, even coaches get strategic... :tongue:

Boo

I could leap to my own defence but if WS is included and WF isn't and LBW, Jo Hutchison, Chrystal Nicholl, etc. continue to improve there's at least a decent chance that GB could qualify a team. Bearing in mind that you are already coached by one of the best sabre coaches in the country, are you sure that a late switch of allegiance (however initially abhorrent) wouldn't at least cross your mind...

Regards

Haggis

Boo Boo
-29th December 2004, 14:24
Originally posted by haggis
are you sure that a late switch of allegiance (however initially abhorrent) wouldn't at least cross your mind...


Think that I would be rather scarey with a sabre in my hand... :confused: (maybe I could scare people into loosing... ;) ).

Think that any coach would (has?) their work cut out for them with me.

Am just really interested in which weapons they will choose to exclude next time around and why. (wasn't MF drawn in the original lots for exclusion at Athens, but the FIE said "you can't not have MF in the Olympics!"???).

Personally, I think that lots SHOULD have been drawn during the Athens Olympics - people should have 3 clear seasons before the start of qualifying (some people DO try out at other weapons if they feel that they can't qualify at their own...).

Like Haggis says, fingers crossed for our WSs.

Boo

Insipiens
-29th December 2004, 14:36
Will the Chinese have any say or influence? After all they are the hosts. Their best medal chance has been MF, so perhaps they would be resistant to its loss.

Then again, after the last final maybe they will get exasperated and chuck it out anyway.

Which events have the fewest particpants? Is that a fair way to pick which should be included?

I bet it won't be 2 of the two men's events. (is there a smilie for stirring ;) ?)

pinkelephant
-29th December 2004, 17:00
What annoys me is the inconsistency. When athletics introduced Women's triple jump etc. they didn't have to cut back on other events to keep the number of medals the same.

Junkie
-29th December 2004, 17:06
The situation of rotating the team events seems a bit crazy I suspect that the IOC could well cut the team events altogether (probably for >2012 rather than 2008) to cut down on the number of fencers/medals which is atleast fair (well kinda) and makes the qualification process marginally easier to understand.

colliebeast
-29th December 2004, 19:25
Originally posted by Boo Boo
(wasn't MF drawn in the original lots for exclusion at Athens, but the FIE said "you can't not have MF in the Olympics!"???).


not sure about MF but at one point it was WS and MS that were out and all the boys got very upset threw their toys out of the pram and went on strike so to speak.

So it would seem there are ways to get your weapon back in...

Boo Boo
-29th December 2004, 19:28
Originally posted by colliebeast

So it would seem there are ways to get your weapon back in...

May have been MS rather than MF then...

Well it doesn't always work: the WF and MF went on "strike" during the Paris A-grade one year (WF Individual, MF team) to protest against WF team being excluded... didn't work :(

Boo

Foilling Around
-29th December 2004, 19:56
Personally I think they should negociate to include more individual fencers and scrap the team events altogether. They don't hold team judo events after all. We can then hold seperate world team champs in Olympic years. That is the only way to avoid the unfairness.

pinkelephant
-30th December 2004, 07:50
Hear hear - then there would be more spaces in the individual for those who don't get in at present because the spaces are taken by those who are simply a member of a qualified team.

vil
-30th December 2004, 10:19
Originally posted by Foilling Around
Personally I think they should negociate to include more individual fencers and scrap the team events altogether. They don't hold team judo events after all. We can then hold seperate world team champs in Olympic years. That is the only way to avoid the unfairness.
...and fencing in the "Flyweight" category, we have... :grin:

I actually think getting rid of the team events in order to bring in more individual events is a great idea. I suspect Joe Public doesn't doesn't even realise there is such a thing as a team event in fencing. Of course that begs the question: what would the additional individual events be? Weight divisions don't really make sense for fencing. Height divisions? Not too sure about that either. Right handed and left handed divisions anyone?

Oops, I just noticed you were talking about including more fencers rather than more events. :confused:

Insipiens
-30th December 2004, 10:22
I don't think Joe Public knows fencing is part of the Olympics at all.

Why not scrap the individual events and just have the team events?

After all, that would limit the number of medals France and Italy could win and help us to get ahead of them in the overall Olympics medal tables. ;)

PM1
-30th December 2004, 12:44
If there has to be something left out - and I agree with Pinkelephant that inconsistency in application of rules accross sports etc is ANNOYING - then leave out the teams and let in more individuals. Please.:confused:

Foilling Around
-30th December 2004, 14:26
So let's have a poll

Insipiens
-30th December 2004, 14:55
I didn't mean it seriously.

However, I do wonder what reasons one would give for leaving out the teams rather than the individuals.

Some reasons I can think of:

Fencing is first an dofremost and individual sport
If it means there are more spaces in the individual comps then more fencers would get to go
there would be less chance of some of the world's best fencers being unable to qualify
The British might actually have some competitors in events other than WS (presuming we could qualify a team for that)

There might be arguments for having teams, such as:

One good fencing nation cannot "aritificially" (open for discussion) inflate their medal tally overall by just being good at a "minor" sport
more teams could compete, so more countries could be represented at fencing
the final would not end up lacking tension because it is between two club-mates
if you exclude teams the world team championship in Olympic year would be in danger of becoming a side-show, while the reverse would never (?) be true
the chinese might finally get to win the team MF


I have just thought of these off the top of my head, and some of them may have more or less validity so I look forward to their ridicule. ;)

colliebeast
-31st December 2004, 13:19
I would argue that it becomes very dangerous to say to the IOC (who have already made it very clear they are not fond of fencing) that we want less medals.

Our sport already appears to be considered a second class sport and as we are all aware there have been murmerings about fencing being thrown out, so why give these skeptics extra ammo by reducing the medals available.

Also on a personal note I think team fencing can be much more exciting than individuals as the lead can change so easily.