PDA

View Full Version : LPJS Harrogate Cancelled



kingkenny
-27th May 2005, 08:35
The lpjs Harrogate competition on the 03/07/05 has been cancelled. Please pass on this information.

kingkenny
-27th May 2005, 13:48
Tell all your freinds about me:chicken: :chicken:

PM1
-27th May 2005, 17:12
I am very disappointed to read this. It's only been going for about 2 or three years. I see others going the same way though:(

Twohat
-27th May 2005, 19:09
Thats a shame - it was within travelling distance for us. It wasn't very well supported last year though, and I think this year it was to be on the same day as the North West Junior Series last round.

If the worst comes to the worst now Moppet may have to trail down to Bath to defend her position in the U17 girls epee.

pinkelephant
-28th May 2005, 09:36
Originally posted by Twohat
Thats a shame - it was within travelling distance for us. It wasn't very well supported last year though, and I think this year it was to be on the same day as the North West Junior Series last round.

True - but the NW Junior series was always intended for BEGINNERS at epee and sabre. It shouldn't involve the same people.

PM1
-28th May 2005, 12:03
That's confirmed my view even more so then, that comps could do to be graded, not least in terms of home county weapons captains and individual development.....

Tubby
-29th May 2005, 13:21
Travelling distance for me too!!!

If numbers had been likely to be in the order of the Warwick or Blackpool LP events (nominated cadet events) it is unlikely Harrogate would have made the decision to cancel.

kingkenny
-3rd June 2005, 08:59
They did not shut it due to lack of entries.

PM1
-3rd June 2005, 18:36
So I now u'stand. Too late for us to do anything now, but will follow it up.:(

estoc
-5th June 2005, 12:37
That may be true that it was not through lack of entries, --But-- Tubby does have a very good point. It is possible that Durham LPJS Epee may not happen next year, due to lack of numbers.
If two of the LPJS Epee competitions are going to be used as nominated events for the Cadet boys ranking, it does give those two competitions an unfair advantage, perhaps a fairer way would be to move the 'nominated' around the circuit, or do as the Girls Cadets do, use the 'Opens', and leave the LPJS series for what it was originally intended.

pinkelephant
-5th June 2005, 19:17
The Whitgift LPJS is also nominated.

The rationale was to use the biggest LPJS events, which were geographically widely distributed, and at relevant points in the season without being too close together. If ALL LPJS comps were nominated, aspiring cadets would feel under pressure to compete more than they do now, with the resultant dent in their parents' bank balances. There has been a proliferation in LPJS events in the last few years, particularly epee competitions in the North, SINCE those three were nominated, but there may well be an insufficient client base to sustain so many. The Arnold competition was only allowed to start because Northampton dropped out, but that was before Simon agreed to everybody who wanted to run a competition running one with the consequent crowding of the fixture list (and huge increase in the cost to Leon Paul). The most popular survive and the others fall by the wayside.

I only went to Harrogate once, the first time it was run. Whilst there were lots of good things about it, I did feel it was not worth my fencers travelling to a competition where I had to re-mark every piste I refereed on because it had been laid out with ONE metre warning lines, and where there were pools of 4 to get the competition through quicker (whatever happened to the notion of competitions being for the fencers?) Whilst these faults may well have been adsdressed since, first impressions count.

Neil Brown
-5th June 2005, 20:18
In sabre, we nominate all Leon Paul series events for the general ranking list. The fencers who are trying to get selected for the international events at cadet don't go to them because the potential points are much fewer than can be gained from open events.

The fencers who are trying to get selected for younger British squad trips we run (U14 & U12 Kenten, U15 Moneteau) do Leon Paul events because they are too young to enter opens or can only score in weak events.

We in the UK have a free market in fencing competitons, LP series & opens. If an event can generate support it will generally continue, if it can't (LP series) or if the NIF is low (opens) it may end up being cancelled. Badly run opens with a high NIF from last year will be supported the following year (at the risk of offending anyone - Leicester open.)

I have often felt the men's epee system of nominating only a few LP series events is a bit unfair on the others. This year I helped start a new LP epee event in Dorset in January because the epee calendar had a bit of a Northern bias & the first event was in March.

Baldric
-5th June 2005, 20:33
Originally posted by estoc
.... or do as the Girls Cadets do, use the 'Opens', and leave the LPJS series for what it was originally intended.

I am not sure that this is the best way of going.

The problem with using the opens is that it leans towards teaching the cadets that the route to success is to learn to beat the middle ranking adult fencers. (Cos thats how you get the ranking points to make the squad).

Once they make the squad, they frequently find out that the method of fencing that got them there is not what they need to survive in European comps. There is some pressure at the moment to try to move away from this system, at least as far as foil is concerned.

gbm
-5th June 2005, 21:15
Originally posted by estoc
.... or do as the Girls Cadets do, use the 'Opens', and leave the LPJS series for what it was originally intended.

Because Opens were designed for our cadets to train on??
We need a series of cadet/junior competitions. We are lucky to have the LPJS and Premier series. It is only sensible that some of them are nominated.
Our young fencers should be beating the top young fencers. If there is a shortage of good young fencers in this country (is there?), then our most promising fencers should go abroad to fence good young fencers, not fence the variety of odd characters seen at Opens.
Perfect practice makes perfect, after all, and fencers at your average British Open are not exactly perfect.


Originally posted by Baldric
I am not sure that this is the best way of going.

The problem with using the opens is that it leans towards teaching the cadets that the route to success is to learn to beat the middle ranking adult fencers. (Cos thats how you get the ranking points to make the squad).

Once they make the squad, they frequently find out that the method of fencing that got them there is not what they need to survive in European comps. There is some pressure at the moment to try to move away from this system, at least as far as foil is concerned.

Exactly.

Our country seems to run on the Opens. How does this compare to other countries? In other countries, would 'recreational club fencers' (myself included) make up a proportion of the 'Open mix'?

We need these sorts of competitions.

A quote from Anita Blake on 'The Truth's thread...
"There are plenty of awkward fencers in the UK but very few whose style will translate to the World Cup circuit - they have given themselves a glass ceiling and will forever be big fish in a small pool."

Do we really need to do this to our most promising young fencers?

Or am I entirely off-track? ;)

PM1
-5th June 2005, 23:30
"we need a seres of cadet/junior comps " - don't hold your breath, but keep your eyes peeled.....:rolleyes:

As for nominated LPJS for ranking points, if anyone has it right, sabre have. In boy's epee, Arnold and Warwick are less than a month apart (April), and Whitgift is December. I have to say they are very well run comps, but others will point to who they are run by. I u/stand one of the reasons they carry points (overseas and not worlds) is to help with points for the first overseas, but I would have thought carry over points from the previous year are sufficient, and LPJS make little difference. Just my opinion.

Barry/Ben and co are looking at the LPJ series: it is meant to be for fun, and for the younger fencer. There are many different views on whether the series should be used for ranking (not that anyone could necessarily stop it, I guess).

I'm just sadenned that a comp in my region had to be cancelled, when its catchment area is potentially so great. :(

Tubby
-6th June 2005, 03:46
Not necessarily facts but life as I see it:
1. LPJS is a commercial venture.
2. The Region does not have a say in whether a comp is run within its boundaries.
3. If a club or individual runs a comp then they bear the commercial risk around that - fair enough. If an individual runs the comp he/she trousers the profit (or eats the loss).
4. If you have a spatial monopoly (e.g. Scotland) then you have a particular advantage/disadvantage for being the only comp for miles around.
5. Having three nominated commercial ventures puts them on a better commercial footing with less risk to bear.
6. If the folk who decide which comp is nominated picks their own or their mate's (probably because they know that the pistes will be correctly marked out and pools will be larger than 4) then other comp organisers may look at that and wonder who is trousering the loot.
7. At 10 an entry if I could guarantee 100+ entries and defray 500 I'd have said "yes I'd have some of that - kerching".
8. FACT - Brian Matless dropped the Harrogate comp partly due to the inherent advantage the nominated comps had with no prospect of it ever rotating. I was there when the decision was made.
9. Harrogate FC considered the running of the comp but assessed its risks based on the trend in prior years numbers and the numbers at Durham and decided not to take it on. I was there party to the decision.
10. Roy Elvin decided to take it on (young coach making his way into the commercial side of fencing) - I was there, I confirmed the date to Simon Trinder on behalf of Roy. For personal reasons he is unable to fulfill his obligation.
11. If 100% of the "profit" from the nominated comps go into running the GB cadet squad I'll shut my face about it. If not, who trousers the loot?

pinkelephant
-6th June 2005, 11:55
The club which hosts the event "trousers the loot" as you so delicately put it.

If fencers find this unacceptable I will happily give up running ANY competition tomorrow.

This is, incidentally, the ONLY competition which Arnold runs which makes any money. We host 6 other North West competitions without even charging for the hall.

Baldric
-6th June 2005, 12:25
To be honest, I don't think that the loot has much to do with it, regardless of who "trousers" it.

Having seen some of the work that goes into a comp (and the expenses of hall hire, medals, freebies for refs etc, most organisers would probably make more money if they abandoned the comp, and spent the equivalent time mini-cabbing.

In the cases that I know of, any profit ends up back in club funds, and the organiser ends up out of pocket for sundry expenses that aren't worth claiming back.

Tubby
-6th June 2005, 15:31
Originally posted by Baldric
To be honest, I don't think that the loot has much to do with it, regardless of who "trousers" it. That is where we disagree. Your catchment down in the South is larger than here in the North so you are better placed, that's fair enough (Norman Tebbit get on your bike and all that). You'll get 100+ going to your foil event. If your event is being hosted by a club relying on volunteers you'll make around 800, maybe 1000 if you do your own catering.

If Harrogate FC was in a position to make half that kind of money it would be a no brainer and we would have taken it on.


Having seen some of the work that goes into a comp (and the expenses of hall hire, medals, freebies for refs etc, most organisers would probably make more money if they abandoned the comp, and spent the equivalent time mini-cabbing.Which, given the trend in numbers is what has happened when Brian gave it up and HFC declined to take it on (apart from the mini-cabbing).

Tubby
-6th June 2005, 16:10
Originally posted by pinkelephant
The club which hosts the event "trousers the loot" as you so delicately put it.

If fencers find this unacceptable I will happily give up running ANY competition tomorrow.

This is, incidentally, the ONLY competition which Arnold runs which makes any money. We host 6 other North West competitions without even charging for the hall. I don't think fencers care who is making the loss or profit. Your volunteers will as they will give up their time for the school, club, county and country.

I think what you, Mike and the North West are doing is pretty amazing and deserves recognition. I certainly don't begrudge any school, club or person making any money on a tourney. The point I was making related to the apparent advantage nominating a few events gives those events. It isn't just in revenues but they attract the better fencers which in turn attract others who want to pit themselves against the best. The virtuous circle for those events is created but for the others like Harrogate and Durham with small catchments the vicious spiral.
Durham had about 26 entries this year 37 last year. Harrogate had 42 last year. Hall costs are fixed. It would not surprise me if Durham and Harrrogate are not on the fixture list next year.

Baldric
-6th June 2005, 17:11
Hi Tubby

I think we might be at cross purposes here.

I interpreted your "trouser" post as a dig at organisers, so I duly shot at you, as did PE.

If that was not your intent, I apologise.

However, not sure about your "catchment area" theory. Yes, we did get 100 plus for the P & S Foil, but by my calculations, only 30 came from clubs within 1 hrs travelling distance, and they were outnumbered by those who had travelled two hours or more. Remember - being on the coast, 50% of our catchment area is sea!

There was a problem on the saturday, cos several fencers were caught in a traffic holdup on the M25 - 70 miles away. The biggest single contingent was from Cambridge - a 3hr plus drive, even on a good day!

Having said all that - its a shame that Harrogate has been cancelled, and I share your worries about the ranking thing in epee. I know at least one southern based epeeist who went to Arnold (cos of the points) but was not planning to go to Harrogate (which I think he won last year). You can see his (dad's) point - a 500 mile roundtrip, plus overnight expenses........

On another point, I know another cadet epeeist who was injured at easter, and therefore unable to compete at either Arnold or Warwick (2 weeks apart?) and now can only hope to pick up points in the opens.

pinkelephant
-6th June 2005, 20:32
The only reason Arnold was in April this year was the date of Easter. It will be back in March where it belongs next year. I agree it and Warwick were too close together this year and it shouldn't happen again. Unfortunately Arnold had to move from its original weekend, which was "stolen" by the Edinburgh Coupe du Nord, and the Vets Nationals - which affect the organisers if not the competitors. I think I'm allowed to indulge in my hobby every so often and actually fence!

If too many competitions are nominated the fencers, who are children, are likely to suffer from burnout. Not all Opens are nominated after all - nor should they be. The ones which are nominated are chosen for their size, level of difficulty, and date. Does that perpetuate the status quo? Yes it does - as somebody on another thread pointed out, everybody hates Leicester but still go the next year because of the high NIF count the previous year, so it carries on being one of the best attended. (The fact that Bristol is now so huge is testament to the hard work of Colin and Barbara - when we started it 29 or so years ago it was just another small Open.) Why should all LPJS events be nominated if all Opens are not?

Baldric
-6th June 2005, 21:08
Originally posted by pinkelephant
The only reason Arnold was in April this year was the date of Easter. It will be back in March where it belongs next year. I agree it and Warwick were too close together this year and it shouldn't happen again. Unfortunately Arnold had to move from its original weekend, which was "stolen" by the Edinburgh Coupe du Nord, and the Vets Nationals - which affect the organisers if not the competitors. I think I'm allowed to indulge in my hobby every so often and actually fence!

If too many competitions are nominated the fencers, who are children, are likely to suffer from burnout. Not all Opens are nominated after all - nor should they be. The ones which are nominated are chosen for their size, level of difficulty, and date. Does that perpetuate the status quo? Yes it does - as somebody on another thread pointed out, everybody hates Leicester but still go the next year because of the high NIF count the previous year, so it carries on being one of the best attended. (The fact that Bristol is now so huge is testament to the hard work of Colin and Barbara - when we started it 29 or so years ago it was just another small Open.) Why should all LPJS events be nominated if all Opens are not?

Pink Elephant, we have met, so I know for sure that you can't have qualified for the Vets!

The whole business of nominated tournaments is fraught with difficulty (see my comments on the Yawning gap we fail to bridge thread).

My personal view is that cadets should not be put in a position that to obtain ranking points, they concentrate on learning how to beat middle aged, middle ranked club fencers in opens.

But thats another story....

Regards

Baldric.

Neil Brown
-6th June 2005, 21:20
This season for sabre, junior & cadet, only 2 senior opens will be nominated for world championships selection; the rest will be age group events. Details to follow when we have the FIE calendar.

Tubby
-6th June 2005, 22:49
Originally posted by pinkelephant
If too many competitions are nominated the fencers, who are children, are likely to suffer from burnout. Not all Opens are nominated after all - nor should they be. The ones which are nominated are chosen for their size, level of difficulty, and date. Does that perpetuate the status quo? Yes it does - as somebody on another thread pointed out, everybody hates Leicester but still go the next year because of the high NIF count the previous year, so it carries on being one of the best attended. (The fact that Bristol is now so huge is testament to the hard work of Colin and Barbara - when we started it 29 or so years ago it was just another small Open.) Why should all LPJS events be nominated if all Opens are not? Nominating an event will guarantee size and level of difficulty. On the dates for the nominated events was that set in fencing season terms? i.e. December, March, April or in LPJS season terms of March, April, December? Either way it appears lopsided, it could do with something in the middle for instance either Durham or Harrogate :) (or North/North East) on a rotation basis, one comp per year venue alternates or two comps per year nomination alternating.
As for burn out, do the sabruers have a harder time than the epeeists? Caitlin is fencing in both the LP epee and foil plus local comps plus BYCs plus cadet winton (if selected). She doesn't do Premier (a long way to go for a round of pools and a DE, maybe two). If she sticks (or is allowed to stick) with this fencing lark and gets to the stage where points means selection for her countries then we will be more discerning about which comps to go to. If all the LP events were nominated then the local events would be dropped or used as a training day. I'm sure I'm not the only parent that would take this approach to avoid burnout or bankruptcy.
Its interesting that the approach to nomination at LPJS is so different across the weapons. Sabre has the whole LP series, epee 3 comps and foil none. It could suggest that there is a degree of arbitrariness about it with epee having the effect of appearing unfair.

pinkelephant
-6th June 2005, 23:16
But the weapons have vastly different characteristics anyway. Opens are full of young foilists, particularly girls, because young girls are sufficiently physically developed to cope with foil at a high level. The converse is true of Men's Epee - a small thirteen year old boy is NOT physically equipped to deal with men's epee - and believe me I know. James might be a hulking great beast now, but he was a VERY short thirteenand fourteen year old. He still isn't that tall for an epeeist, but at least he is now very strong. For this reason the boys need something other than Opens to get them onto the ladder so they don't get hacked off before they've had a chance to grow. I can't speak for sabre as I have little experience of it as a fencer or a parent, but I suspect the pattern is more similar to foil than to epee.

Tubby
-6th June 2005, 23:26
Originally posted by Baldric
Hi Tubby

I think we might be at cross purposes here.

I interpreted your "trouser" post as a dig at organisers, so I duly shot at you, as did PE.

If that was not your intent, I apologise.

However, not sure about your "catchment area" theory. Yes, we did get 100 plus for the P & S Foil, but by my calculations, only 30 came from clubs within 1 hrs travelling distance, and they were outnumbered by those who had travelled two hours or more. Remember - being on the coast, 50% of our catchment area is sea!

There was a problem on the saturday, cos several fencers were caught in a traffic holdup on the M25 - 70 miles away. The biggest single contingent was from Cambridge - a 3hr plus drive, even on a good day!
I have nothing bad to say about comp organisers (being one myself and being out of pocket all the time) my challenge was at the executive decision to nominate the 3 tournaments. As I'm relatively new to the youth epee administration side a number of things had to be pointed out to me like the coincidence of Nick's, Mike's and Keith's comps being nominated, but that's probably because they are the best comps and are mutually supported. Do I have an interest in Harrogate being nominated, sure I do as it would mean more money for the club. If the event was to be run by Yorkshire Region then I'd be more interested as we could do with some funding for our cadet winton squad. Equally I can understand that the selectors will be hesitant about the quality of organisation, venue, location when selecting an event.
The commercial reality is that a nominated event will make a tidy profit.

Regarding catchment - anything that is not an overnight stay is catchment in my book.

Tubby
-6th June 2005, 23:30
Originally posted by pinkelephant
But the weapons have vastly different characteristics anyway. Opens are full of young foilists, particularly girls, because young girls are sufficiently physically developed to cope with foil at a high level. The converse is true of Men's Epee - a small thirteen year old boy is NOT physically equipped to deal with men's epee - and believe me I know. James might be a hulking great beast now, but he was a VERY short thirteenand fourteen year old. He still isn't that tall for an epeeist, but at least he is now very strong. For this reason the boys need something other than Opens to get them onto the ladder so they don't get hacked off before they've had a chance to grow. I can't speak for sabre as I have little experience of it as a fencer or a parent, but I suspect the pattern is more similar to foil than to epee. You make a fair point, size and strength does matter in epee.

Moppet
-27th June 2005, 22:09
True - but the NW Junior series was always intended for BEGINNERS at epee and sabre. It shouldn't involve the same people.

Does that mean that people like me who are doing the Leon Paul series aren't meant to do the nw series? Graham Kemp gave me an entry form...

pinkelephant
-28th June 2005, 07:21
The NW junior series was set up specifically to encourage people to try epee and sabre. It has now evolved so that people who are even on National Cadet squads are fencing in it - which is fine except that I worry it may put off the people it was originally designed for. We may have to think about restricting the entry to those who have not represented GB or NW.

Moppet
-4th July 2005, 08:04
Congratulations to fnork who won the NW junior series trophy!

Well done!

:party: :party: :party: