You know, it's funny how much people hate change.
Like, mess with my coffee order, fine, whatever,
but change the rules of my favorite sport.
Hold on a minute.
It's true, people get really passionate about tradition.
Exactly.
And that's what makes this whole USA Fencing thing
so interesting.
They tried to shake things up,
and people were not shy about voicing their displeasure,
to put it mildly.
Not shy at all.
It's been quite the saga to follow, actually.
Which is why we're doing a deep dive into it.
We've got some great stuff to dig into.
Particularly this, shall we say, spirited critique
from a fencing coach who's clearly quite invested
in the sport.
Definitely invested.
I think passionate is an understatement.
Oh, yeah.
This is a coach who bleeds fencing.
For sure.
So we're going to try to figure out what exactly USA Fencing
was trying to do with these proposed Y8 rule changes,
why our coach friend, among many others,
was less than thrilled about them,
and what this whole back and forth tells us
about where youth fencing is headed.
What do you think?
Well, the interesting thing is, USA Fencing doesn't usually
rock the boat this hard.
They're usually pretty cautious, especially when
it comes to changes impacting the younger fencers.
Yeah, it's not like them to just throw caution to the wind.
Right.
So for them to do a complete 180 like this after the backlash,
it's pretty unprecedented.
It's true.
They really poked the beard, didn't they?
Totally.
OK, so before we get into all the reactions,
let's back up a bit and actually lay out what USA Fencing
was proposing.
What were these big changes they wanted to make?
Right.
So basically, they threw three curveballs
at the Y8 category.
And for anyone listening who's not super familiar with fencing,
that's the eight years old and under group.
The youngest is the young.
Exactly.
So the first change was to reduce the maximum blade
length allowed for these young fencers.
OK.
And the thinking there was?
The idea, I think, was to give those really young kids
equipment that's a little easier for them to handle.
Developmentally, it makes sense to a point.
Right.
Like an eight year old trying to wield a full sized
eB that's got to be tough.
Yeah, it can be a lot for them.
And using a lighter, shorter blade
could help them develop proper form and technique early on.
Makes sense.
So that was curveball number one.
What was next on their list?
OK, so curveball number two was shortening the actual fencing
strip itself for those Y8 bouts.
Interesting.
So instead of fencing on a full length strip,
the kids would be duking it out on a shorter strip.
Pretty much.
Again, I'm guessing the thinking was
to make the playing field a little more manageable
for smaller kids.
Less ground to cover, literally.
Exactly.
So OK, making things maybe a little less physically demanding
for the littlest fencers seems reasonable on the surface,
but.
You can tell there's a butt coming.
There's always a butt.
You know me too well.
It's just that I'm getting this feeling
that there's more to the story here.
Am I right?
You're picking up what we're putting down for sure.
The real drama, the real controversy,
unfolded with USA fencing's third proposed change.
Hit me with it.
What was curveball number three?
OK, so this is where they really stirred the pot.
They wanted to get rid of direct elimination
rounds for the Y8 category and switch to a two pool
format for competitions.
Whoa.
OK, hold on a second.
Now that is a pretty big change, even for kids that young.
I mean, usually you have pool play to see the fencers.
Exactly.
You figure out the rankings based on how everyone
does in their initial pool bouts.
And then it's on to the really exciting part,
those nail biting direct elimination rounds
where it's win or go home.
Exactly.
But in this new format, everyone would just
stay in their designated pool no matter what.
Wins, losses, it wouldn't matter for moving on
to a different stage of the competition.
Wow.
So that's a pretty radical departure
from how things are normally done, even at the youth level.
Right.
And this is where our coach friend throws down the gauntlet.
I think you mean throws down the glove.
The glove, yes.
Of course, you know what I mean.
I do.
But yes, our fencing coach friend
is definitely fired up about this.
So what's their main point?
Well, they basically ask this really pointed question.
Why fix what isn't broken?
Which seems to be the question on everyone's minds
right now, honestly.
Totally.
But to really understand both sides of this whole debate,
I mean, why USA Sensing thought these changes were necessary
in the first place, and why so many people are pushing back,
we kind of have to take each of these proposed changes
one at a time and really pick them apart.
Let's do it.
Like what problem were they even trying to solve?
Exactly.
So let's start with the shorter blades.
OK, yeah.
What about those blades?
Our coach actually seems to think
that it makes sense to a point, right?
They do.
Like they get it.
Kids that young in a full-size blade, that tracks.
Right.
It makes sense to valve mentally, like we said.
So what's the issue then?
It's more about the logistical headaches it creates.
Ah, so it's not about the concept itself,
but about the practical side of things.
Exactly.
And the coach brings up a really good point about kids
potentially needing different blades for practice
and competition.
Oh, right, because they'd be practicing with a full-size
blade to get used to it.
But then they'd have to switch to a shorter, lighter one
for competition.
Exactly.
The coach actually uses this example,
and it's so vivid of a kid going from fencing
with a number five blade in practice to a tiny number two
blade during a competition.
I mean, can you imagine?
Just a huge adjustment.
It really makes you wonder about the impact
on muscle memory, on hand-eye coordination.
Like that's got to mess with your game, right?
It has to.
I mean, think about it.
You're used to the weight and balance of one blade,
and then suddenly you have to adapt to something
completely different.
Right.
It's like practicing your tennis serve with a brick
and then showing up to the match with a regular tennis ball.
That's a great analogy.
It just highlights how sometimes, even when the intention is
good, the execution can miss the mark.
For sure.
And it seems like this is one of those cases
where the heart might be in the right place, but.
But they tripped over the practicality of it all.
Exactly.
And that brings us to arguably the most controversial change
they were proposing, this whole two-pool system.
Right, which is interesting because on the surface,
it seems like the least radical of the three.
I know.
When I first heard about it, I was like, OK,
so they're just tweaking the competition format a bit,
no big deal.
Right.
And it seems almost gentler in a way, right?
Yeah.
Like, everyone gets defense more abouts.
No one feels bad about getting knocked out early.
Exactly.
Everyone's a winner.
Except.
Except not really.
Because as our coach friend so passionately points out,
it kind of misses the point of competition, doesn't it?
Yeah.
Like, at its core.
I mean, we're not talking about throwing these kids
into some kind of cutthroat win-it-all-cost environment.
They're eight.
Of course not.
But learning how to deal with a tough loss?
Yeah.
How to come back from a setback?
That's kind of important, right?
Absolutely.
It's part of life.
Exactly.
And the coach even says, parents and coaches,
we're all here to support these kids
when they have those tough days.
It's all part of the learning process.
And I think that's a really important point.
It's about building resilience, learning how to bounce back.
Because let's be real life is not always going to hand you
a participation trophy.
Exactly.
And as much as we want to protect kids from disappointment,
sometimes those disappointments are the things
that teach us the most valuable lessons.
So true.
So by trying to make things, I don't know, nicer,
with this two-pool system, are we actually
doing these kids a disservice in the long run?
That's the big question, isn't it?
Are we teaching them that it's OK to just coast along,
that there are no real consequences for not
performing your best?
And it's not like you want to create a high pressure cooker
for these eight-year-olds, but there's
got to be some kind of balance.
It does.
You need those stakes.
Because otherwise, what are they really learning?
Right.
And I think for some people, their gut reaction
to this whole debate is, oh, come on.
They're just kids.
Let them have fun.
But the thing is, kids aren't stupid.
They can tell when the stakes aren't real.
Exactly.
And they're less likely to push themselves
to really rise to the occasion.
And isn't that part of what we want for our kids?
To see what they're capable of.
Exactly.
So are we saying that this whole two-pool system
is a terrible idea, that there's no merit to it whatsoever?
Well, I think, like with most things,
there are two sides to the coin.
Some people might argue that it actually
makes the sport more inclusive.
Oh, interesting.
How so?
Well, some kids might be intimidated
by that traditional elimination format.
That's a really good point.
Like the fear of losing right away
might actually be a barrier to entry for some kids.
Exactly.
And for those kids, this two-pool system
might feel less high pressure, less intimidating.
Which could lead to more kids trying fencing and sticking
with it.
Precisely.
So it's not as black and white as it might seem at first.
Definitely not.
It's more nuanced than that.
There is a valid argument to be made on both sides.
Which makes you wonder, why did USA Fencing present this
so heavy-handedly?
It's like they didn't even try to have a conversation about it.
And that's where I think they really dropped the ball.
They didn't do a good job explaining their reasoning,
their thought process.
And if they had just said, hey, we're
trying to make white fencing more accessible,
and we think this two-pool system might be a way to do that,
people might have been more receptive.
Exactly.
But instead, it just felt like this top-down decree,
like, we're USA Fencing, and we know best,
so this is how it's going to be.
Which never goes over well.
Never.
People want to feel like their voices are being heard,
like they're part of the process.
Especially when it's something they're passionate about.
Right.
And you can't get much more passionate than the fencing
community.
You're preaching to the choir here.
So what happens next?
Well, just when everyone's up in arms,
ready to storm USA Fencing headquarters,
they pull a complete 180.
Yeah, the speed of that turnaround was pretty remarkable.
Talk about a plot twist.
It was like, hold on, everyone.
We need to rethink this whole thing immediately.
So what changed?
What happened?
I think they finally realized they had messed up big time.
And to their credit, they basically admitted it,
maybe not directly.
But they owned up to the fact that they had really
mishandled the whole thing.
Which is a hard thing to do to admit you were wrong,
especially for a large organization like that.
Totally.
So they deserve some credit for that, at least.
They didn't just dig in their heels
and pretend like nothing was wrong.
Exactly.
They hit the pause button, took a step back, and said, OK,
let's figure out a better way to do this.
And that better way involves more committees.
Right.
So they put everything on hold for now.
And they're sending it all back to the tournament committee
for further review.
And they also decided to create a whole new committee,
specifically for coaches.
Interesting.
So they're trying to bring in more voices, more perspectives
into the conversation.
It seems that way.
But is that enough?
Like, have they actually learned their lesson?
Or are they just kicking the can down the road?
That's the million dollar question, isn't it?
I mean, only time will tell if they'll actually
listen to the fencing community this time,
or if this is just a way to buy themselves some time.
Placate the masses, sweep it all under the rug.
Exactly.
But you know what I find really interesting
about this whole thing?
It's like we've stumbled into this much bigger conversation,
this philosophical debate about what youth sports should even
be about.
Oh, totally.
Like, are we raising athletes?
Yeah.
Or are we raising people?
Right.
And how do you find that balance?
Because competition, even at eight years old,
it teaches you things you can't learn anywhere else, you know?
Resilience, discipline.
How to shake off a loss and come back stronger.
Exactly.
And I think what's frustrating for a lot of people
and our coach friend touches on this
is that it feels like USA Fencing was trying
to sanitize the whole thing.
Make it all rainbows and participation trophies.
Right.
Like, if we shield kids from ever experiencing disappointment,
how are they going to learn how to deal with it
when they're older?
It's like we talked about before, those tough moments,
those setbacks, those are the things that shape you.
They really are.
But on the flip side, you don't want
to create this environment where these kids feel
like they have to win at all costs.
Oh, for sure not.
That's the other extreme.
And it can be just as damaging.
It's such a fine line.
It really is.
And unfortunately, I think this whole thing was handled
so badly that USA Fencing ended up
alienating the very people they were trying to protect.
The kids, the parents, the coaches.
Exactly.
And instead of fostering a sense of community,
a sense of shared purpose, it just
created all this division and distrust.
Which is a shame, because you know what?
This could have been such a great opportunity
to do what?
To actually have a real conversation about all of this.
About how we can make youth sports the best they can be.
About how we can balance competition and character
development.
About how we can create an environment where everyone
feels supported and challenged.
I know, right?
Imagine if USA Fencing had just come to the table and said,
hey, we've been hearing some concerns about white fencing.
We want to make sure it's accessible and developmentally
appropriate, but we also want to preserve
the integrity of the sport.
So let's talk.
What are your thoughts?
What are your ideas?
I know.
Wouldn't that have been amazing?
Right.
Instead of this whole debacle.
So here we are.
Rule changes on hold, committees being formed.
Yeah.
And a whole lot of uncertainty about what the future holds
for these young fencers.
It's true.
But if there's one thing I'm certain of,
it's that the fencing community is passionate.
That's for sure.
Yeah.
They definitely let their voices be heard.
And I think that's a good thing,
because it shows that they care about the future of the sport.
They want to get it right.
Exactly.
Yeah.
And hopefully this whole experience,
as messy as it's been, will ultimately
lead to positive change.
To a more inclusive, more supportive,
and maybe even a more thoughtful approach to youth sports.
That's the goal, isn't it?
It is.
So to our listeners, we want to hear from you.
Have you encountered similar debates in your own lives,
whether it's about a rule change in your favorite sport
or something going on at your kid's school,
or even just a disagreement within your own family?
How do you find that balance between honoring tradition
and embracing change?
It's a question we all grapple with in all aspects
of our lives.
So let's keep the conversation going.
Head over to our website, find us on social media,
and share your thoughts.
And until next time, thanks for joining us for this deep dive.