Agenda Annual Meeting of the USFA Board of Directors

September 16, 2007, 8:00 am Chicago, IL

The Board of Directors meeting is divided into three major phases:

Information: Minutes of the previous meeting; officer, director and committee reports; and general announcements.

Budget: Approval or disapproval of the budget, requests for major changes in it including staff or executive actions that may involve budget changes.

Decision: Motions before the Board (excluding those directly related to the budget) are divided into three categories:

URGENT: Motions that have not had a First Hearing but must be acted upon by the Board for time or other considerations.

SECOND HEARING: Motions that have had First Hearing at the previous Board meeting; Second Hearing motions must be voted upon as presented, with only minor changes permitted (if a motion requires major changes or fails completely, it must be re- presented as a First Hearing Motion at a subsequent Board meeting).

FIRST HEARING: Motions that are new to the Board, but for which decisions are not urgent. A First Hearing motion may not be voted upon unless the Board moves it to the Urgent category; instead, it is automatically placed in the Second Hearing category at the next meeting unless the sponsor withdraws it.

Every motion must have an individual sponsor identified in the agenda and in attendance at the meeting. The sponsor presents the motion, answers questions, takes notes on suggested changes, and shepherds the motion if it is referred to committee. Committees that are presenting motions must assign a member to fulfill this duty.

Index of Appendices

Description Appendices/ Page Attachments Officer Reports President’s Report - Nancy Anderson A 14 Vice President’s Report - Sam Cheris B 16 Secretary’s Report - Linda Merritt C 16 Vice President’s Report - Ed Wright D 16 Vice President’s Report - Ro Sobalvarro E 16 Treasurer’s Report - Derek Cotton F 17 Membership Report - Michael Massik G 17 Budget vs. Actual Budget Report Executive Director’s Report - Michael Massik

Committee Reports Executive Committee Reports of Actions Legal Resource Group H 18 Veterans Committee I 19 Tournament Committee J 19 Fencing Officials Commission K 20 High Performance Committee L 31 Hall of Fame and Awards M 42 Wheelchair Committee Report N 43 Sport Science, Safety and Technology Committee O 44 Grants and Development Committee Marketing Commission FIE Advisory Group Bylaw Review Committee USOC Report Schools and Clubs Committee Armorer’s Committee Promotions/Public Relations Committee Information Systems Committee Divisions and Sections Committee Youth Development Committee Coaching Development Committee Athletes Advisory Group *Reports are provided by committee chairs regarding their committee’s activities; approval of the submitted reports does not indicate adoption of items within each report.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 ii I. Information

A. General Information and Organizational Items:

General announcements –

Appointment of Parliamentarian

B. Minutes of the July 1, 2007 Special Meeting of the Board of Directors

Motion (Ms Merritt): To approve the minutes of the July 1, 2007 Special Meeting of the Board of Directors (the minutes are attached to this document)

C. Officer and Director Reports: (Please refer to the Index of Appendices)

D. Committee Reports 1. Executive Committee Reports of Action July 1, 2007 The EC approved the following actions: • Resolved to convene a disciplinary panel to determine whether the conduct of the coach black carded the first day of competition at the Summer Nationals warrants further disciplinary action or is part of a continuing course of conduct that does so

September 15, 2007 The EC approved the following actions: • that the Board of Directors vote on the disciplinary panel report distributed at the meeting • that the election committee establish oversite supervision for the next election of the Nevada Division; cost to be borne by the division • that a disciplinary panel be appointed to investigate complaints against a member and make a recommendation to the Board of Directors of what, if any, discipline is warranted • to table the request of the Interim Executive Committee of the New Jersey division for a disciplinary panel until an Executive Committee is elected pursuant to the bylaws that comply with USFA requirements and decides whether or not to continue with the complaint. (Steve Sobel abstains from vote) • that a letter will be sent to the Pacific Coast Section requiring the section to forward to USFA all information and receipts of disbursements and backup; USFA will hire an auditor to review and if necessary further investigate. The cost of the audit will be borne by the Section. • to approve first hearing item #2 (Ron Herman) of the September 16, 2007 agenda 2. Committee Reports: (Please refer to the Index of Appendices)

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 1 II. Budget Phase

A. Financial Reports: The complete financial reports for the Budget Phase will be mailed to the Board under separate cover in advance of the meeting Budget vs. Actual report for period ending July 31, 2007.

Motion (Mr. Cotton): To approve the Budget Report as submitted to the Board III. Decision Phase

A. Urgent 1. Motion (Mr. Cheris): The Board empowers the Executive Committee to act on its behalf between meetings. Rationale: This is a motion that is made at every Annual Meeting that allows the corporation to continue to do business in its traditional manner. 2. Motion (Ms. Merritt): to approve the Committee List as distributed at the Board Meeting.

B. Second Hearing 1. Motion (Mr. Soter): The Board of Directors meetings shall not be held on the same calendar day as any National Tournament events. This rule shall not apply to any Special Meeting of the Board called to consider a single matter. Rationale: The National Tournaments have become too big, long, and hard to permit the Board to squeeze its meetings in on the same day as a National Tournament. Many Board members have active roles as Tournament Administrators and Tournament customers; those who do not, should, or should be out on the floor watching the business operate. Therefore, Board meetings should be scheduled on the afternoon before or the morning after National Tournaments. This rule need not necessarily apply to true special meetings. Discussion: Does the organization still need to have three meetings a year? Perhaps the time has come to have semi-annual meetings with each meeting held at a time other than at a national tournament. Another option is to add a day before or after the Summer National Championships and the Junior Olympic Championships. Is this right time for annual meeting or should it be before the season starts?

The above motion was tabled to this meeting 2. Motion (Mr. Herman on behalf of the TC): That at National Championships medals be presented only to fencers placing in the top three of the finals for all but the Youth 10 and Youth 12 competitions, and further, that these medals be newly designed to reflect the significance of such championship performance. Rationale: Athletes have often noted that there is no differentiation between medals at NACs and Championships, and are eager for recognition of truly superior performance. Fencers finishing in first through eighth place in Youth 10 and Youth 12 competitions would continue to receive medals.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 2 3. Motion (Mr. Baker): That, beginning with Summer Nationals in 2008, all fencers who have qualified for Division II will automatically be granted qualifier status in Division III if they are classification-eligible and all fencers who have qualified for Division IA will automatically be granted qualifier status in Division II if they are classification-eligible. Rationale: This motion partially rolls back changes made in September 2006. The rationale for that change was that athletes should be required to compete in their division-level qualifiers to gain entry to the National Championships at the Division II and III levels. While removing the various age-group paths (cadet or junior qualification) accomplished this goal, much of the "trickle-down" qualification took place from events already at the divisional level. These paths should be restored. The action taken by the Board in September 2006 was unnecessarily broad and had consequences far in excess of those anticipated by many of the members who voted for the change. This motion restores the qualification paths to

C. First Hearing 1. Motion (Mr. Cracraft): To amend Chapter 3, Section C, Paragraph (1) of the 2006 USFA Operations Manual as follows (changes and/or additions in italics): Competitive members of the USFA can earn classifications at competitions that have been sanctioned by recognized entities under the jurisdiction of the USFA Board of Directors: e.g. The Executive Committees of Divisions and Sections, the USFA Youth Committee, or the USFA Tournament Committee. For a local competition or a Regional Youth Circuit competition to be sanctioned, it must be approved by the Executive Committee of the Division wherein it is located. Section senior and junior championships are sanctioned by the Section Executive Committee. Super Youth Circuit Competitions are sanctioned by the USFA Youth Committee. National tournaments are sanctioned by the USFA Board of Directors, acting on the recommendations of the Tournament Committee. Only sanctioned competitions are to be posted on the cognizant organization's schedule and website, or listed in the annual USFA Athlete's Handbook. The specific categories of competitions of competitions at which classifications can be earned are described in Chapter 6." Rationale: As this section is currently written, a Regional Youth Coordinator is given the authority, as an individual, to sanction USFA tournaments; this is an authority that not even the president of the USFA has. RYC tournaments are often organized by individual clubs, and in a number of cases, have been set-up, approved and run without the local Division even being consulted. It is not unusual that the RYC might not live within 200 miles of a Division, and therefore have very little knowledge of the capability of the host club to run a quality tournament; knowledge that the Division's Executive Committee will have. Requiring that the Division sanction the tournament will remove that risk. It must be acknowledged that there will be instances when political rivalries within a division could lead to situations where a capable organization is denied sanctioning by the currently elected EC. However, it is also believed that this small risk is far preferable to the liability that the USFA could incur from an uninformed RYC giving USFA sanction to a low-quality and unsafe tournament.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 3 On the other hand, Super Youth Regionals are major tournaments organized and usually conducted directly by members of the Youth Committee, which is therefore in a position to oversee and control the quality of the event. Moreover, like every other type of tournament in the USFA (with the present exception of the RYCs), these SYCs are reviewed and sanctioned by a committee, rather than a single individual. 2. Motion (Mr. Herman): to modify the USFA VOLUNTEER TRAVEL AND EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT POLICY as follows: a) In GENERAL CONCEPTS, Coaches and Cadre section; 1. Add at the end of the first sentence: “but no less than the equivalent honorarium for service at a domestic event.” 2. Delete sentence “This honorarium must be approved in advance by the National Coach(es) for the weapon(s) and will be taken from the relevant Weapon Squad budget(s).” Replace with “This honorarium will be taken equally from all Weapon Squad budgets. Rationale: In the past, Trainers and Armorers have reliably received neither per-diem nor honorarium as specified in the current reimbursement policy. The requirement of prior approval from Coaches has added an additional layer complication to a process that should be very simple. The appointment to an International event represents the highest level of achievement in these fields, yet is recognized less than service at National (or even regional/local) events. The time commitment to international events is much greater than to domestic events, and in the case of the Trainers there are additional requirements for training and service that can add weeks of un-reimbursed expense to their commitments. Additionally, our trainers are usually Physical Therapists, who not only lose the income from their patients, but often have to arrange at their own expense to have their patients cared for in their absence. Concern has been expressed in both communities that without the provision for honorarium and per diem (when appropriate) we are limiting our pool of applicants to only those who can afford the loss of both the time and income required for participation. If three meals are provided daily, per diem is usually not provided, but too often armorers and trainers are not in a position to leave the venue to obtain the provided meals or are at the venue too late to receive the meal. They then eat at their own expense. Honorarium, however, not only recognizes the expertise of the cadre member, but helps offset the real loss of income that participation in these events entails: it should be provided as a matter of course, not at the option of another cadre member With the possible exception of the Team Manager none of the volunteer cadre works harder or longer than these two groups for the direct benefit of the Team while at these events. Providing the prescribed Honorarium recognizes and rewards their contribution to the teams’ efforts. b) In Line Items, 6:

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 4 In the first sentence, eliminate “and” before FOC; after “representatives,” add “and Head Technicians” Rationale: The duties of the head technicians are such that he or she should be reimbursed at the same level as the FOC representative or top referees. It is the Head Tech who is responsible for setting the level of control, definitively answering any questions from FOC or Bout Committee on technical matters. They hire the crews, supervise the staff, LOC, and hired workers at the events, are responsible for the shipping, receiving, and inventorying of the equipment, and have other administrative responsibilities that justify a higher rate of reimbursement than the staff armorers. 3. Motion (Mr. Dilworth): At each board meeting the USFA National Office is required to prepare and distribute with the budget report a statement of the sources and uses of cash, by month, for the period from the previous board meeting (actual figures) to the period of the next board meeting (pro-forma). Further, at the meeting where the budget is approved the USFA National Office is required to submit an anticipated statement of the sources and uses of cash, by month, for the same period as that covered by the budget. In addition, at each board meeting the USFA National Office must present a list of accounts payable that are aged more than 30 days from the date of presentation of the relevant invoice or report. Finally, at each board meeting the USFA National Office must present to the board for its approval a list of all variances from the approved budget, both revenues and expenses, which exceeded in the past or are anticipated to exceed the lesser of $10,000 or 10 percent of the budgeted item. Any expense that does not fall under the current budget must also be presented for approval to the board. This motion will take effect beginning at the Board meeting subsequent to the adoption of this motion. Rationale: In the past, it was not unusual for the board to pass a budget knowing that there was going to be a deficit at the end of the year. The last several years have seen the financial position of the USFA improve significantly, with budgets generally anticipating a break even position. This is an extremely positive development. However, there have been a number of occasions over the last several years when payments from the national office to members of the USFA for reimbursement of expenses or payment of honoraria have been delayed by a significant amount of time as a result of “cash flow” problems. Also, as was highlighted at the last board meeting, the current processes for financial oversight of the corporation are either non-existent or are not being consistently followed. Requiring the national office to undertake the preparation of the enclosed statements along with the current budget reports will make it possible for the board to have adequate financial oversight of the USFA. In addition, requiring the preparation of the above reports will make it less likely that problems will occur in the first place. Should it become clear that there will be an issue at some specific time in the future, either as a result of an unanticipated variance or a cash flow shortage; the board could

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 5 take measures to solve that issue. Finally, if there are simply problems of timing that require the USFA to delay payment of expenses or honoraria, the National Office could inform people that this is going to occur, allowing people to plan. 4. Motion (Mr. Dilworth): The USFA shall establish a Budget and Finance Committee with the make-up and duties described below: There shall be three members of the Budget and Finance Committee. The Chairperson of the committee will be the elected Treasurer of the USFA. One other member of the Committee shall be appointed by the President of the USFA with ratification by the full Board of Directors. The other member of the Committee shall be elected from the body of the Board of Directors at each annual meeting (in the fall, prior to the beginning of the season). This member must not be one of the six elected USFA officers and may not be a Presidential appointment to the Board. None of the members of the Budget and Finance Committee may be members of the Audit Committee (if one is established in a separate motion). The duties of the Committee and the USFA National Office in relation to it shall be the following: • The USFA National Office is required to send all required financial reports to the members of the Budget & Finance Committee at least two calendar weeks prior to each board meeting. Should questions arise from these reports the USFA National Office shall attempt to answer those questions prior to the Board meeting. • The Budget & Finance Committee, along with the President and the National Office, shall be responsible for the development of an annual budget, taking into account the strategic goals of the organization and the priorities as set by the Board. This budget is to be presented to the full Board of Directors for a vote prior to the beginning of each season. • The Budget & Finance Committee, independent of the President and the National Office, is required to approve the budget by simple majority prior to it being presented to the full Board of Directors. • At each Board of Directors meeting the Budget & Finance Committee is required to report on the financial health of the corporation, highlighting any significant financial issues that have arisen between Board meetings and also raising any concerns about potential future issues. • At each Board of Directors meeting the Budget & Finance Committee will review all variances from the approved budget, both revenues and expenses, which exceeded in the past or are anticipated to exceed the lesser of $10,000 or 10% of the budgeted item. Any expense that does not fall under the current budget must also be presented to the board for its approval. The Board of Directors may assign additional duties to the Budget & Finance Committee as it sees fit. Rationale: The USFA used to have a budget director (Irwin Bernstein most recently) who would essentially perform the duties listed above. Since Irwin’s passing, we have settled this entire responsibility upon the shoulders of the Executive Director and his

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 6 staff. The purpose of this motion is to provide assistance to the Executive Director in the preparation and maintenance of the budget and to improve communication about financial matters between the National Office, the Board, and the membership at large. 5. Motion (Mr. Dilworth): The USFA shall establish an Audit Committee with the make-up and duties described below: There shall be three members of the Audit Committee. The Chairperson of the Committee will be a member of the Executive Committee of the USFA who has financial acumen and an understanding of the auditing process. One other member of the Committee shall be appointed by the President of the USFA with ratification by the full Board of Directors. This person may not be a member of the Executive Committee. The final member of the Committee shall be elected from the body of the Board of Directors at each annual meeting (in the fall, prior to the beginning of the season). This member must not be one of the six elected USFA officers and may not be a Presidential appointment to the Board. The duties of the Committee and the USFA National Office in relation to it shall be the following: • Any member of the Audit Committee shall, upon request, be provided with access to all books and records of the USFA. • The USFA National Office is required to send all required financial reports to the members of the Audit Committee at least two calendar weeks prior to each board meeting. Should questions arise from these reports the USFA National Office shall attempt to answer those questions prior to the Board meeting. • The USFA National Office is required to provide copies of all required regulatory financial filings to the Audit Committee at least two weeks prior to their filing with the necessary regulator. The relevant regulators will include, but not be limited to, the US Olympic Committee and the US Internal Revenue Service. • The Audit Committee is required to hold a vote on each regulatory filing, with a majority being required to allow the filing to proceed. • Should a filing not be approved by the Audit Committee, the President will be notified immediately by the Chairperson of the Audit Committee. The President will call a meeting of the Executive Committee to determine necessary actions to allay the concerns that caused the filing to be rejected. Ultimately, the Executive Committee may, through a two-thirds super-majority vote, decide to allow filings to proceed without the approval of the Audit Committee. • The Audit Committee shall meet with staff and the independent CPA, as well as meet in executive session, solely with outside auditors, both during the audit process and in order to review the draft audit before the presentation of the audit to the Board by both the outside auditors and the audit committee chair. The Board of Directors may assign additional duties to the Audit Committee as it sees fit. Rationale: All publicly traded companies and most 501 (c) (3) organizations have an

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 7 Audit Committee made up of members of the Board of Directors. These Audit Committees fulfill duties similar to the above, ensuring that the company remains in compliance with required laws and ensuring that the funds of the shareholders are being used appropriately. As the USFA grows in size and complexity it is necessary to put more formal structures in place, treating the USFA as a more fully realized business. The Audit Committee is designed to be separate from and independent of the budgeting and finance processes and, unlike the Budget and Finance Committee does not have the authority to actually suggest budgets or variances. It is strictly designed ensure that we are correctly accounting for our revenues and expenses, are maintaining accurate books, and are reporting accurate data both internally and externally. 6. Motion (Mr. Herman on behalf of the TC): that a single team tournament be held at all future Summer Nationals; if Division 1 championships are held at a time other than at Summer Nationals, a Division 1 team championship will be held at that time. In addition, the Tournament Committee recommends that seeding for all Summer Nationals team events and Division 1 team events be based upon participating fencers’ national points and classifications. Rationale: At the September, 2006 Board of Director’s meeting the following motion was adopted: As a pilot program, the Tournament Committee proposes that a single team tournament be held for each weapon at the 2007 Summer Nationals, and that seeding for those tournaments and the Under 19 Team tournament be seeded using national points and participating fencers’ classifications. Further, the Tournament Committee will review the effectiveness of these changes and in light of the review will make a recommendation concerning whether to make these changes permanent. The rationale for the previous motion included the following observations. When a separate Division I National Championships was established a few years ago, it was decided that it would have its own team championships specified as the Division I National Team Championships - actually it was intended to be the original National Team Championships. In order to continue team championship competitions at the Summer National Championships, a new category was approved, the Open Team Championships. Because the purpose of a National Team Championships is to determine the best team in each weapon, it is proposed once again to combine both the Division I Team Championships and the Open Team Championships at Summer Nationals. There would then be one National Team Championships, composed of teams representing member clubs of the US Fencing Association. If Division I championships are held at a time other than at Summer Nationals, a Division I team championship would be held at that time. This would not be the case for this pilot program, however, as the Division I championships will be held at Summer Nationals. An additional advantage of this approach will be the enhancement of team unity and team spirit for our clubs across the country. The Board approved a motion creating a single team in 2002, and a single tournament

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 8 was held at Summer Nationals in 2003. The Board reversed this decision at its meeting in October, 2003. Separate tournaments were held in 2005 and 2006. In addition, the Tournament Committee recommends changing the seeding process. Team seeding has been based on actual results from competitions held at Summer Nationals prior to the team competitions. The proposed change, using team members’ national points and classifications, has several advantages. Clubs will be better able to select their teams, knowing that their team seeding will not be dependent on the team members’ standings at Summer Nationals. They will be able to do so well in advance of the tournament, which also will permit seeding to be completed and posted earlier. In addition, there will be more flexibility in scheduling of team competitions, as they will not require the results of other competitions for seeding purposes. Scheduling and seeding for teams at the 2007 Summer Nationals was carried out as specified in the motion. Scheduling, as anticipated, was facilitated, as there was no longer a need to hold the team championships after other competitions. In addition, seedings were received without comment by the teams, and were ultimately validated in that teams that had high seeds tended to finish well; and, those with lower seeds were eliminated earlier in the competition. In one instance the final team standings exactly replicated the initial seeding. 7. Motion (Mr. Ranes): That classification changes be allowed for the 2007 Senior National Team Championships in the same manner as specified for Division I National Team Championships in the current version of the USFA Operations Manual. Rationale: Prior to October 2000 classifications could be earned at any National Team Championships by members of teams that placed in the top three. A modification was made in 2000, effective with the 2001 National Championships that limited classification change considerations only in Division I National Championships. At the 2007 National Championships the Division I Team Championships and the Senior/Open Team Championships were combined for National Team Championships. Because the “title” of those Championships was changed to Senior Team Championships classification changes were not considered as it was no longer a Division I National Team Championships. The combining of the two Team Championships made the Team Championships as strong if not stronger than just a Division I National Team Championships. 8. Motion (Mr. Ranes): to modify Chapter 6, Section 3: Awarding of Classifications, USFA Operations Manual, 2006 Edition from: 3. A fencer qualifies for a “B” classification by fencing in the final round of four as a member of a team that wins a Division I National Team Championships. 4. A fencer qualifies for a “C” classification by fencing in the final four as a member of a Team that places second or third in the Division I US National Team Championships. NEW WORDING [indicated by italics and underline]

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 9 3. A fencer qualifies for a “B” classification by fencing in the final round of four as a member of a team that wins the USFA National Team Championships if 6 or more teams competed in that Team Championships. 4. A fencer qualifies for a “C” classification by fencing in the final four as a member of a Team that places second or third in the USFA National Team Championships if 6 or more teams competed in that Team Championships. Rationale: For future National Championships it is proposed that all national team championships be it Division I, Senior/Open or Under-19 be considered for similar classification changes. It can be shown that the Under-19 National Team Championships are equivalent in strength as the Division I and/or the Senior/Open Team Championships thus the reason for simply stating that any National Team Championships would be eligible for classification changes. In addition, to ensure reasonable strength of such championships that there be a minimum of six teams competing in any one National Team Championships competition for classification changes to be considered. 9. Motion (Ms. Merritt): to further amend the relevant passages of the 2006 edition of the Operations Manual since only one piece was changed as a result of motions from 2002 and 2003 as shown below in the rationale. A. AGE RESTRICTED COMPETITION: Any USFA age restricted competition can be rated for classification change consideration except that those competitions that are restricted to Cadet (Under 17 or Under-16) or Youth age categories must meet the criteria for a Group C1 or higher for the competition to be rated for classification changes. [BOD, July, 2003] B. RESTRICTED: Competitions may be restricted to fencers under or over a certain age, to Unclassified fencers or novices (relatively inexperienced fencers), or to other categories of fencers provided that an appropriate description of the basis of eligibility of contestants must be announced in the schedule. Restricted competitions may not be rated unless the restriction is based solely upon fencers’ classifications or age or Division or Section membership. [Proposed modification for Sept. 2007 USFA Board of Directors] [Add “or age” phrase in last sentence] The wording of “B” reflects the Ops Manual Edition 2000 and was not changed when age restricted competitions were allowed to award classification changes. Rationale: At the July 2002 meeting of the USFA Board of Directors, it was approved that: Classification changes can be affected at any USFA age restricted competition sponsored or sanctioned by USFA Division, Section or National. Prior to this change, classification changes for age restricted competitions were only allowed at Section and National level USFA competitions. At its July 2003 meeting the USFA Board of Directors approved a modification to the motion shown above and that was approved in July 2002. To allow classification changes for age restricted events U17 and below* at division, regional, and sectional tournaments only when they meet or exceed C1 criteria.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 10 Rationale: Too many inexperienced youth athletes are obtaining classifications unsuitable to their actual fencing ability mostly because the number of fencers in an event allows for a classification change. * for clarification, U17 and below refers to U17 and younger. 10. Motion (Ms. Merritt): To revise the Operations Manual to specify that classifications may be awarded only at tournaments at which electrical apparatus for the scoring of touches (i.e., does not required conductive strips) is used. Rationale: While the Operations Manual states that “all USFA competitions should be conducted with electrical equipment,” it is silent regarding the necessity of using such equipment as a pre-requisite for the awarding of classifications. The revision to the Operations Manual makes it clear that classifications are not to be awarded at “dry” competitions. 11. Motion (Mr. Rodgers): to amend the Operations Manual, Chapter 3, Section 4, to add Mixed Wheelchair events. The added section would read: Mixed Wheelchair A mixed wheelchair competition is a competition in which members, both able-bodied and disabled may compete. Mixed wheelchair competitions are not permitted in competitions used to determine qualifiers to the National Championships competitions. In a mixed wheelchair competition an able-bodied fencer who drew a wheelchair fencer would fence the wheelchair fencer on a wheelchair piste, able- bodied fencers would fence other able-bodied fencers in the normal manner. It is the responsibility of the wheelchair fencer desiring to fence in a mixed wheelchair event to ensure that the proper wheelchair fencing piste is available for use. Classifications can be earned at mixed wheelchair competitions, simply comparing the classifications of all fencers relative to the rules for earning a new classifications. See Chapter 6.

Rationale: The number of wheelchair fencers in the country is small. New fencers currently have no opportunity to gain tournament experience before attending a national or international event. This motion would enable organizers who wish to have a mixed event with wheelchair fencers to do so. Thus enabling the wheelchair fencers to gain the necessary tournament experience at a local and club level before moving up to national and international level competitions. 12. Motion (Mr. Dilworth): to adopt the FIE rules listed below: m.5 … Equipment and Checking of Weapons 5. a) At foil and épée, only traditional or homologated pointes d'arrêt are accepted. No other kind of pointe d'arrêt, notably new ones that are not homologated, will be accepted at the weapon control. In order to make the identification easier, please note that a traditional pointe d'arrêt has two screws to fix the tip of the pointe d'arrêt to the base, the whole is in metal and there is no plastic in the base. To make the checking of weapons easier and allow the complete observation of the

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 11 tip and its base, foil fencers are requested to present their foils with bare points not covered with adhesive tape over the first 15cm. b) In order that the registering of hits by the contact of the point on the opponent be correctly registered by the scoring device, the pointes d'arrêt must be clean. The electrical resistance measured in ohms must not exceed the limit of two ohms (m.5.4.a). c) The blades, the guards at épée and foil and the guard at saber must be totally of metal. Apart from at sabre where the part of the guard next to the pommel is insulated (insulating sheath), their exteriors must not be covered by any material (plastic or other). The guard may not feature any advertising. This is also the case for the insulated part of the sabre guard. d) Any fencer or other person who tries to register hits in a way that does not comply with the rules, either with the weapon or by manipulating the scoring device, will be excluded from the competition or from the competition zone and, after identification, will be liable to further penalty. Authorised designs m.45. Only electrical apparatus designed with wires connecting the fencers to the central apparatus and registering hits by light signals with auxiliary sound signals are authorised, except for apparatus without wires using encoded waves authorised by the SEMI. This excludes other apparatus based on wireless waves and those which register sound signals only. Fencing material used at an official FIE competition and featuring the FIE emblem must, without exception, have obtained a certificate of homologation delivered by the FIE SEMI commission to the manufacturer concerned, certifying that his fencing material complies with FIE Rules. The following is the material that manufacturers must submit to the SEMI Commission, subsequent to a request in writing for homologation and the authority to mark with the FIE emblem: apparatuses for the signaling of hits, blades, foil and épée points, masks, jackets and breeches, protective plastrons. To obtain the FIE homologation of a piste, the manufacturer concerned must contact the SEMI and submit a file requesting homologation, including all technical characteristics, and a sample of the piste (30 cm wide x 40 cm long). If the analysis is positive, the SEMI will issue a homologation certificate authorising the manufacturer to mark the piste (from the date of the delivery of the certificate) with the FIE emblem. For the homologation file of their fencing material to be completed, manufacturers must answer any SEMI requests for information regarding the homologation. When the SEMI commission has received the file requesting homologation, including the manufacturer’s samples and the reports of the different tests tests (from the institutes CRITT, Denkendorf and IFTH for clothing, under-plastrons and masks; and CRITT, Sofranel and Visti for blades), if the analysis is positive they will issue a homologation certificate authorizing the manufacturer to mark his future production (from the date of the delivery of the certificate) with the FIE emblem. The SEMI must be informed of any modification whatsoever that has the effect of causing a non-conformity to the samples provided for the original homologation.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 12 Obviously the manufacturer must wait for written confirmation of the SEMI Commission’s agreement to the proposed modification before launching the new production. The FIE emblem is a registered trademark. The fact that a piece of equipment carries the FIE emblem attests that the latter has been manufactured in accordance with the prescriptions of the Safety Norms and the Rules of the FIE. 2.1.2. TRANSPARENT MASKS … 4. Homologation of transparent masks and test methods Before being put on sale and used, all transparent visor masks must be approved and homologated by the SEMI. 4.1. Homologation To obtain FIE homologation, the manufacturer must send his masks to one of the following three institutes: In Germany "Denkendorf" ; in France CRITT or IFTH. The institute will conduct penetration resistance tests on the metal mesh and the visor in accordance with the CEN norms (e.g. Norm EN 13567). If the test results are positive, the constructor must send two examples of the mask to be homologated, together with the Institute’s certificate, to the headquarters of the SEMI in Lisbon, for the violent-shock tests. If this result is also positive, the SEMI will issue the homologation certificate to the manufacturer, and the mask may be put on sale and used at official FIE competitions. The installation of a clock and a system for showing the score are both obligatory for the homologation of scoring apparatus; they must be visible to the spectators.

IV. Good and Welfare

1. The next Meeting of the Board of Directors

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 13 APPENDIX A President’s Report Nancy Anderson

We are beginning a new season, the last one of this quadrennial. Since the last meeting of the Board of Director’s in July, there have been several events of note: • There was the conclusion of the Summer Nationals in Miami with the largest participation ever in the Youth Competitions. • The Pan American Games took place in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. There were some extraordinary performances by our US athletes, but that event also served as an alert that other Pan Am Countries are growing in strength. Cuban athletes, who have barely had a presence in mayor competitions over the past few years, showed they are grooming some fencers of note. Venezuela garnered two gold medals; Canada and Argentina also shined. As the Olympics approach, quality is being fine tuned all over our world of fencing. US fencers brought home 3 gold, 4 silver, and 2 bronze medals from Rio. • The University Games were held in Bangkok, Thailand. Given the overloaded schedule in the spring and summer, the early date of the World Championships in Russia and the lack of funding for these Games by the USOC, we were represented by only those athletes who were willing to personally undertake the cost of this very expensive tournament. • At this writing, the Pan American Zonal Championships are taking place in Montreal, Canada. The Championships have been very troublesome and costly for Canada to host: beyond Canada’s control, dates were changed twice in recent months resulting in a very expensive and remote venue. We have the participation of a full team of our tops athletes, as results will be awarded international points equivalent to a Grand Prix, making this tournament the most important one of the summer. Results so far are (individual events only): 4 gold, 5 silver, and 6 bronze. Not bad!

Along with these events and spectacular performances, we have also had some very troubling incidents. Behavior within our fencing community has been increasingly reprehensible by many of its participants, including parents, coaches, administrators at every level and others. Thankfully, it is not the norm, but every instance only serves to undermine the integrity of our sport and bring to it unwanted attention. If we are to support the quality of the people that contribute to fencing in the US (athletes, coaches, referees, parents, club/divisional/sectional/ national officers and the many volunteers that make things happen at every level), we would be much better served to work together rather than tolerate increasing divisiveness and bad behavior. I am appointing a task force to develop a comprehensive plan to deal with these situations quickly and appropriately within the rules of fencing and civility. The composition and charge of this task force will be announced at the September Board meeting for endorsement.

As announced at the July Board meeting, a task force has also been formed to study the current structure of the USFA and make recommendations for positive change.

With the work of these two task forces and the ongoing careful work of the Tournament Restructuring Task Force, all of whom will be asked to provide the membership with preliminary recommendations in February for review and comment (with a final report in July), we will

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 14 hopefully provide the incoming administration with a thoughtful blueprint to help them carry the USFA forward for the next quadrennial.

The Olympic Games in Beijing are less than a year away. The previous administration streamlined its efforts and resources to support the successful outcome of US fencers in Athens. Following that model, the USFA has been able to plan earlier and more carefully than any time in the past. We were one of the first sports to visit the installations in Beijing, become acquainted with the BOCOG members, and secure the best possible conditions for our athletes, family and friends at the Beijing Olympics. Our seasoned team leader, Bob Largman, armed with experience from Sydney and Athens, has made several trips to Beijing with the USOC; his extensive reports on concerns, conditions, expectations and how best to deal with them are available to anyone interested through the High Performance Committee.

In July, the International Olympic Committee approved the Youth Olympic Games for athletes of ages14-18. The first Summer Youth Olympic Games will be held in 2010, at a still undetermined place and time. While all summer sports in the 2012 London Olympic Games are expected to be included, there may be limited events for those sports. You may find further information at the IOC website. • The USFA Youth Regional programs, tournaments and the Super Regional Tournaments, along with national Youth events, are certainly a timely and exciting development in our association. However, we must all bear in mind that our youngest athletes have a right to fence as a child and not as an adult. • We must be vigilant in every instance that a children’s love of sport without undue pressure from those around them is the trait that will allow our youngest fencers to progress happily and successfully to higher achievements, should their skills and personal passion motivate them.

The USFA has a busy year ahead. Along with the many club competitions, divisional, sectional, and NAC tournaments, we will have sprinkled in: • USFA elections for 2008-2012 national officers; • Youth competitions at local and regional levels; • Qualifiers for JOs and Summer Nationals; • Cadet tournaments around the world; • Junior World Cups; • Senior World Cups and Grand Prix; • Veteran’s World Championships in Sydney, Australia in September, 2007; • Open World Championships in October, 2007 in St. Petersburg, Russia; • An FIE Congress in Madrid, Spain in November, 2007; • Junior/Cadet World Championships in Catania, Italy in April, 2008 • Olympic Games in Beijing, China in August, 2008!

The USFA has a great deal on its plate. With this busy schedule and all these important events, I hope all of us will encourage those closest to us to perform at their best, help everyone else in our community to do likewise and, above all, to enjoy our participation in our sport to the fullest!

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 15 APPENDIX B Vice-President’s Report Sam Cheris

Please review the reports of the HPC and FOC

APPENDIX C Secretary’s Report Linda Merritt

The agenda and minutes will serve as my report.

APPENDIX D Vice President Edward Wright Veterans Committee There have been no significant actions following the Summer National Championships, at which time the teams were named to participate in the Veterans World Championships to be held in Sydney , Australia . The Chair of the Veterans Fencing Committee, The Executive Director, USFA, and I have had an exchange of emails to finalize the language of a Veterans fund-raising agreement that would ensure that funds raised for Veterans Fencing would be reserved for those purposes until expended.

Marketing Committee As stated in my last report, the Marketing Committee accepted my recommendation that the name be changed to the Marketing Resource Committee. This change reflects the fact that our original charge has been accomplished, and that further contact be carried out in discussions between Christine Strong Simmons, Associate Executive Director, USFA, and Brad Circone, Principal, Circone and Associates. The other members of the

Marketing Resource Committee would be available on an as-needed-basis during the teleconferences.

APPENDIX E Vice President Ro Sobalvarro TBD

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 16 APPENDIX F Treasurer’s Report Derek Cotton

TBD

APPENDIX G Executive Director’s Report Michael Massik

We have completed negotiations to become one of the inaugural members of the US Olympic Committee media initiative. This initiative includes both a television and internet component and the plan is to unite both communication vehicles into a seamless presentation that will provide the American viewer or sports enthusiast with an integrated experience. The plan is moving forward rapidly and the US Olympic Video Network is anticipated to launch in 2008. The internet component of the plan is currently being finalized and will launch prior to the video network. Through the combined efforts of the USOC and their internet partners, we will be able to provide enhanced internet functionality to our members. Additionally, we will receive USOC staff assistance in upgrading and maintaining our website and our presentation to the world. Coaches College began almost immediately after the conclusion of Summer Nationals. This season of Coaches College included a successful session for the education of Wheelchair Coaches. As usual, the entire Coaches College program ran smoothly, efficiently, and effectively. A cartographic mapping plan for our entire membership base has been proposed and initial steps have been taken so that we will be able to map the population density of our entire membership base. This project is being performed at no cost to the organization and should be complete by the end of the current membership year. Despite persistent rumors to the contrary, our cash flow has recovered from the previous difficulties and all bills can be paid within thirty days of receipt and processing. We have signed a merchandise contract with Team IP to sell branded merchandise for the organization. The terms of the contract are more favorable than those of our previous merchandiser. We continue to finalize preparations for the upcoming Beijing Olympic Games. To date, we have developed plans to accommodate pre-Olympic training camps, assist friends and families, and are finalizing all aspects of operations and structure for a successful Olympic Games. All contracts should be signed before the end of 2007. We are finalizing a media effort that will include both a media and public relations component. This effort should launch at the end of September, 2007. This promises to be an interesting and challenging season. NBC and other media outlets have already designated fencing as one of the key sports to watch during the Beijing Olympic Games. Consequently, we anticipate that the media coverage will increase both the visibility and the growth of fencing in the USA.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 17 APPENDIX H Legal Resource Donald Alperstein

In the short time since the last meeting of the Board, the LRG has been actively engaged in the following tasks:

1. Providing ongoing and special attention to the continuing problems of the several divisions and sections on matters of elections, governance and fiduciary responsibility, including financial accountability. Attending to divisional matters is consuming an increasing part of the LRG’s time, attention and energy; 2. Dealing with disciplinary matters, including following up on a completed disciplinary report, overseeing the appointment of a disciplinary panel, preparing for the constitution of another panel, and dealing with further requests for disciplinary investigations; 3. Providing background information and editorial suggestions to the editor of American Fencing in connection with articles submitted for publication and regarding the communication of legal principals in the magazine; 4. Monitoring and participating in ongoing litigation that should only be discussed orally in executive session so as to preserve the attorney/client privilege; 5. Monitoring ongoing litigation in one USFA division brought by a disgruntled member against the leadership of the division for injunctive relief regarding the division’s electoral process and other governance issues; 6. Advising numerous individuals, committees, divisions and other USFA interests regarding Bylaw provisions, athlete rights and responsibilities and procedural matters for the preparation and presentation of motions; and 7. Advising the Executive Committee on procedural aspects and substantive requirements of an appeal from a decision made on the floor of Summer Nationals. To the best of counsel’s knowledge, there are no immediate threats of additional litigation against the organization, although more and more frequently the LRG hears of individuals or entities who have alluded to litigation as a means of redressing real or perceived grievances.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 18 APPENDIX I Veterans Paul Levy

The Veterans World Fencing Championships will be held in Sydney, Australia at the Olympic Park on September 14-16, 2007. We have filed 46 of the possible 48 entries. There are 320 entries in all, one of the largest groups ever at this event. We are bringing a team armorer, several coaches and two international referees, and we expect to do well. In 2008 the Championships will be held in Limoges, France, and in 2009 they will be in Moscow.

It is expected that the federation leaders will discuss adding 40+ and 70+ fencing groups and team events to these Championships in the future. In each of the past four years there have been unofficial team events, and they have proved popular. In the 2007 European Championships, additional categories were quite large (except for women in 79+), and they will probably be added to the Commonwealth Championships.

The two NAC tournaments and the Summer Nationals showed increasing veteran participation and enthusiasm. More and more local veterans tournaments are being scheduled. England and Canada have expresses interest in home and home team competitions.

Solid strides have been made to independent fund raising to support national and international veterans events. These funds were used this year to support the armorer and special expenses associated with the trip to Australia.

The committee and all veterans thank Ed Wright and Corinne Greenman for their assistance and support throughout the year.

APPENDIX J Tournament Kalle Gerriz

The Tournament Committee wishes to commend Corinne Greenman for ensuring that schedules for all NACs and the JOs were posted by mid-August. This is the earliest that our schedules have been available and her efforts are most appreciated; not only by the committee, but also by the fencing community at large. The committee is working with the National Office to evaluate potential venues for the 2008- 2009 season and beyond. We will meet this fall to consider a variety of topics, including afternoon resource usage, strategies for enhancing our volunteer pool and ways of working with clubs, divisions and sections to support their volunteer base.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 19 APPENDIX K FOC Bill Oliver

Since our July 2007 report, the FOC has successfully fulfilled its mandate to assign referees to the required domestic and international events. I would like to thank departing FOC members Russell Wilson and Charles Washburn for their years of service on the FOC and the fencing community. 1) General FOC Information We've enjoyed another highly successful referee development year, we currently have 282 referees with a 4 rating or higher, and a total of 2,137 individuals who have earned a referee rating or who are in the process of doing so. Athlete participation at World Cups, NAC’s, SYC’s and RYC’s, not to mention local and regional competitions is rising dramatically. Consequently, the demand for referees is also rising. Once again, the FOC has been made aware that not all Sectional Championship competitions had FOC representation last season. We would like to ask the Board’s assistance in stressing to the various Section Chairs the requirement to have an FOC representative at each Sectional Qualifier. 2) Tournament Size The 2007 Summer Nationals was slightly smaller than the 2006 Nationals, but we still hosted over 1,650 athletes, participating in 80 events, on 65 strips, utilizing 145 different referees! In addition, we've seen a steady increase in the numbers of athletes and the number of strips that have been used at NAC's, over the past decade. Ten years ago an average NAC had 750 athletes and used 24 strips. This past spring, the Tucson NAC had 1,600 athletes and 42 strips. Upcoming NACs this year will likely have in excess of 40 strips each. With these explosive number increases, the persistence of repechage, and the ever-increasing popularity of the Youth and Veteran's programs, we are seeing competition days that are running in excess of 16 hours. Our referee cadre has risen to this challenge, but the long days and longer competitions are taking their toll. We will be seeing younger referees utilized at higher and higher levels of competition. 3) Discipline The FOC is deeply concerned with the furor over the issuance of a black card at Nationals. This relatively ordinary occurrence resulted in a major incident. The FOC is aware that our existing black card procedure is out of date, and has empanelled a team to develop a more robust procedure to ensure that each recipient of a black card is afforded consistent application of the rules and allowed a prompt opportunity to appeal. The FOC has also established a strict policy for referee behavior while they are engaged as referees. Coaching will not be tolerated. Other inappropriate behavior will also not be tolerated. 4) International Assignments Due to the continuing success of our athletes, the attendance at World Cups has skyrocketed at

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 20 all levels. Subsequently, we are mandated by the FIE to provide even more referees at World Cups. Last season, we sent referees to a remarkable 112 events, not including the Grand Prix events. This coming season, the National Coaches have designated 136 total Senior and Junior events; again, not counting the Grand Prix events. In addition, approximately a dozen cadet events will be added to the calendar. Given that we have 26 active international referees, this represented a substantial burden on an already staggering referee cadre. The good news is that we sponsored seven Americans to the FIE referee Exam at the Pan Am Zonal Championships. This is the best prepared group of candidates we’ve ever sent and we have high expectations for their success. As of this report, the referee selection process has begun for the Cadet and Junior season as well as the Veteran World Championships and the Junior Pan American Games. It is likely to be an even busier season with the Olympics looming on the horizon. The FIE mandates that we supply one referee for every five athletes we send to a World Cup. Failure to do so will result in substantial financial penalty or the denial of our athlete’s participation in the tournament. This season it is very likely that we will be required to supply two referees for each senior world cup and many of the junior world cups. Thanks to the continuing efforts of the International Assignment Subcommittee we expect to comply with this mandate throughout the coming season. 5) Referee Development Our referee development program is enjoying phenomenal success. Referee Seminars have become very much in demand in areas as diverse as New York City, Anchorage, Alaska, Honolulu, Hawaii, and Birmingham, Alabama. What’s more, as the program has matured, the seminar has become more than just a means to train referees. It’s become a conduit for “National Level” information to be disseminated throughout the country. We often see coaches and athletes as well as parents and spouses attend the seminar to see how it’s being done “in the big leagues.” The Referee and Professional Development subcommittee has had significant success with the peer review/mentoring program. Over 50 nationally rated referee were individually mentored this season and given verbal and written feedback. In addition, the FOC assigners teamed seasoned referees with less experienced referees. We will utilize a combination of seminars, peer-review, mentoring, and audio/visual aids to help our excellent corps of referees become even better. 6) Communication The FOC Newsletter has been an unqualified success, with subscriptions up to almost 700, as of the July issue. It is being issued every other month, with special editions for urgent matters such as the FIE rules changes last fall, and the special procedures for Summer Nationals. The referee database has become more than a means of recording referee ratings. With new search features, enhanced data fields, and the inclusion of referee contact information (accessible only to FOC members) the database is proving to be an invaluable tool for FOC and local tournament organizers to select an appropriate group of referees for almost any competition. The FOC wishes to express its gratitude to Peet Sasaki for his continuing efforts in programming and maintaining the Referee Database and its interface. We also express gratitude to Bruce Gillman, who has taken on the gargantuan task of entering all of the referee information into the database, both new ratings and changes.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 21 The FOC receives many inquiries from the membership either directly or passed on from the National Office. These inquiries run the gamut from simple rule questions to ambiguous interpretations. Each inquiry is responded to in a timely manner. In the past two seasons, the FOC has fielded over 600 individual requests for information, rules, interpretations, etc. All in all, 2006 – 2007 was a very successful season. We are looking forward to continued success in 2007 – 2008, and on into the Olympic Games! FIE Rule Changes FIE (British) Version; June 2007 Obligatory use of the Rules t.1. These Rules are obligatory without modification for the ‘Official Competitions of the FIE’, viz.: — The World Championships, in all categories — The fencing events at the Olympic Games — All World Cup competitions. — The Zonal Championships. Substitution and use of the non-sword hand and arm t.22. 1. The use of the non-sword hand and arm to carry out an offensive or defensive action is forbidden (cf. t.114, t.117, t.120). Should such an offence occur, the touch scored by the fencer at fault is annulled and the latter will be penalized as specified for offences of the 2nd group (red card). Olympic Games and World Championships Individual competitions t.37. 1. For the rounds of pools and the direct elimination table, the Refereeing Delegates select the referees by drawing lots. 2. For the pools, the referee must be of a different nationality from that any of the fencers in the pool. 3. For the direct elimination tables at each weapon, the Refereeing Delegates establish, among the referees present, a list of the best referees in each weapon (according to the grades obtained during the season). For each quarter of the table, 4 referees are assigned by drawing lots from among at least 7 to 8 referees, to referee the bouts in the order of the table. They must be of a different nationality from that of any of the fencers participating in that quarter of the table. As the table progresses, the referees will be switched around in a sequence established beforehand. 4. At the end of each round, the Refereeing Delegates can withdraw a referee whose performance was not satisfactory. This decision must be taken by the majority of the Refereeing Delegates present. However, a referee may not be changed during of a bout except in exceptional circumstance. In such a case the decision, which must be well founded, must be taken by the majority of the Refereeing Delegates present (this rule is equally valid for team competitions). 5. For the final of 4, the Refereeing Delegates, immediately after the end of the direct elimination tables, select 4 referees by lot from among at least 7 to 8 referees, who must be of a different nationality from any of the fencers. 10 minutes before the final, the Refereeing Delegates will draw lots to assign the referees for all the bouts at the same time, in the following order: 1st semi-final, 2nd semi-final, final, and 3rd place (Olympic Games).

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 22 FIE (British) Version; June 2007 6. The drawing of lots is done with the help of a computer for the pools and up to the direct elimination table of 64 and by hand from the direct elimination table of 64 onwards. t.38. Team competitions The same rules as those in article t.37 3), 4), 5) and 6) are applied to the team competitions, with two referees per match Regulation equipment and checking of equipment by the Referee t.43 Before the start of each pool, team match or bout by direct elimination, the Referee must assemble all the competitors and verify that (cf. t.35.2.c): a) in all weapons, the FIE guarantee label is present on the fencers’ equipment (clothing, masks). (See the USFA note below) b) in foil, the conductive jacket conforms to the provision of Article m.28 when each competitor is standing upright, is on guard and is in the lunge position; c) in épée, the material from which the clothing is made has not too smooth a surface, and the competitor is wearing a jacket conforming to the regulations; d) in sabre, the conductive jacket conforms to the provision of Article m.34 when each competitor is standing upright, is on guard and is in the lunge position; e) in all three weapons, each fencer is wearing, under his jacket, a regulation protective under-plastron, made of cloth which can resist 800 Newtons. (See the USFA note below) f) in all three weapons, the fencer is not equipped with any electronic communication equipment which would allow a person off the piste to communicate with the fencer during the bout. In pools, this checking must be done at the roll call of the fencers. For bouts in the direct elimination and the finals this checking must be done in the assembly area. The organizers of all official FIE competitions (junior and senior) must make provision in their set-up for an assembly area.

2. For bouts in the direct elimination and the finals at the World Championships and the Olympic Games, and for finals of World Cup competitions, the two fencers in each bout will go to the equipment checking zone, located near the strip, 30 minutes before they are due on the strip. Their equipment will be checked under the responsibility of the SEMI (or the designated expert for finals of World Cup competitions). If any anomaly is identified the equipment at fault will be changed at once, without any penalty being applied. The SEMI delegate will hand over the bodycords, the masks and the weapons that have been checked to the Referee for the bout. Ten minutes before they are due on the strip the fencers will report to the Referee designated for their bout. The Referee will hand over a bodycord to each of the fencers in the access zone for the strip. He will check that the fencers are wearing regulation under-jacket protection. 3. The Referee and the fencers must stay together in the access zone until they go on the strip. One minute before they go on the strip the Referee will give a weapon to each fencer, for him to plug in his bodycord. No check will be carried out on the strip prior to the bout. 4. Competition organizers must organize a waiting area where the fencers can warm up during this checking procedure.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 23 FIE (British) Version; June 2007 6. Non-regulation equipment t.45. …. (No change to introduction and section 1; omitted here for space considerations) …. 2. When during a bout an irregularity is found in the equipment which could be caused by conditions during the bout: Examples: — conductive jacket with holes in which hits are registered as nonvalid, — weapon or bodycord no longer functioning, — pressure of the spring in the point too weak, — the travel in the point no longer regulation, the Referee will apply neither warning nor penalty and any hit scored with the equipment which has become defective will be awarded. However, even during the course of a bout, any fencer whose weapon, at the moment he presents himself on guard and ready to fence, has a curve of the blade which exceeds that permitted (cf. m.8.6, m.16.2, m.23.4) commits an offence in the first group and will be penalized in accordance with Articles t.114, t.116 and t.120. Non-regulation equipment t.45. …. (New addition to t.45) …. The same penalty is also applied for the absence of name and nationality, in accordance with the rules, on the back of the jacket at Junior World Cup competitions, at Individual Senior World Cup competitions before the last 64, and at Zonal Championships. 5. If the conductive jacket does not conform to the rules, the fencer must put on a spare jacket that does conform to the rules. If this jacket does not have his name and nationality on the back, the fencer has until the next stage of the competition (from the pools to the table of 64, the table of 32, etc) to get his name and nationality printed on it. If this is not done and except in cases of 'force majeure' the referee will eliminate the fencer and he cannot continue to participate in the competition. (USFA Note: ) Presence on time t.86. 1. The fencers, completely equipped, with all equipment conforming with the regulations (cf. t.43–t.45) and ready to fence, must be present at the time and place appointed for the beginning of the pool, match, or bout of direct elimination, or at the time appointed for the checking of their equipment before their bout (cf. t.43.1–3), as well as during the competition, whenever the Referee requires it. 2. When presenting themselves to fence a bout, the fencers must arrive on the piste completely ready to fence — regulation clothing, jacket fastened, sword-hand gloved and holding the weapon, bodywire connected to the plug inside the guard. The mask should be carried in the unarmed hand. Before the start of the bout, the fencers' hair must be fastened and placed inside the clothing and/or mask in such a was as to ensure that: — it does not cover a valid surface (and thus prevent a hit from being scored).

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 24 FIE (British) Version; June 2007 — it does not conceal the name and nationality of the fencer. — it does not need to be put back in place during the bout, thus interrupting it. In the case of violation of this rule, the referee will apply the penalties for group 1 offences (t.114, t.116, t.120). 3. Under no circumstances should the fencers dress or undress in public except in the case of an accident duly recognised by the doctor on duty or by the representative of the Medical Commission (cf. t.87.8, t.114, t.116, t.120). 4. They must arrive on the piste, to fence their bouts, with two weapons (one as a spare) and two bodywires (one as a spare) which satisfy the regulations and are in perfect working order(cf. t.45.1, t.114, t.116, t.120). 5. Before the start of the pool, the team match or the bouts of direct elimination (individual or team): i) When a fencer or complete team do not present themselves to the Referee at his first call, ten minutes before the time indicated to come onto the piste for the start of the pool or team match, or the start of the bouts of direct elimination (cf. Article t.43.2), the fencer or team concerned will be eliminated. ii) A team is considered complete when at least three fencers are present. iii) In a team match only those members of the team (the fencers, the team captain and one trainer — cf. Article t.92.4) who are present at the Referee’s first call, ten minutes before the time indicated for the start of the match, may take part in the match. 6. In the course of the competition, individual or team, when a fencer does not present himself on the piste, ready to fence, when ordered to do so by the Referee: — The fencer or team member not present will be penalised with a Yellow Card; — A second call will be made, one minute after the first call, followed by a Red Card for the fencer or team member not present; — A third and last call will be made, one minute after the second call, followed by elimination from the competition for the fencer not present in an individual competition or for the whole team in a team competition. 7. Should a fencer abandon a bout by leaving the piste (cf. t.18.6), he will be penalised as specified in Articles t.114, t.116, t.120. Fencing etiquette t.87. 1. The competitors must fence faithfully and strictly according to the rules laid down in these Rules. All breaches of these rules will incur the penalties laid down hereinafter (cf. t.114–t.120). 2. All bouts must preserve the character of a courteous and frank encounter. All irregular actions (flèche attack which finishes with a collision jostling the opponent, disorderly fencing, irregular movements on the piste, hits achieved with violence, hits made while falling) are strictly forbidden (cf. t.114–t.120). Should such an offence occur, any hit scored by the fencer at fault is annulled. 3. Before the beginning of each bout, the two fencers must perform a fencing salute to their opponent, to the Referee and to the spectators. Equally, when the final hit has been scored, the bout has not ended until the two fencers have saluted each other, the Referee and the spectators: to this end, they must remain still while the Referee is making his decision; when he has given his decision, they must again perform a fencing salute and must shake hands with their opponent, with the unarmed hand. If either or

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 25 FIE (British) Version; June 2007 both of the two fencers refuse to comply with these rules, the Referee will suspend him/them for the remainder of the competition taking place and from the following two FIE competitions in the weapon concerned (cf. t.114, t.119, t.120). The points or titles obtained at the moment of the offence remain acquired. 4. Non-combativity When both fencers make clear their unwillingness to fight, the Referee will immediately call ‘Halt!’ 5. Individual events a) If during the two first periods of a direct elimination bout both fencers make clear their unwillingness to fight*, the Referee will award a warning (yellow card) against each of the two fencers and will proceed to the next period, without the minute rest. b) If the offence is repeated, the Referee will each time award a penalty hit (red card) against each of the two fencers and will proceed to the next period, without the minute rest. c) When both fencers make clear their unwillingness to fight* during the third period of a direct elimination bout:- i) if there has been no occurrence of the offence during the preceding periods, the Referee will award a warning (yellow card) against each fencer, and will proceed to a last minute of fencing; ii) if the offence has already been committed during the course of the preceding periods, the Referee will award a penalty hit (red card) against each of the fencers, and will proceed to a last minute of fencing; This last minute, which will be fenced in its entirety, will be decisive and will be preceded by a drawing of lots to decide the winner should the scores be equal at the end of the minute. 6. Team events a) If both teams make clear their unwillingness to fight* during a team match, the Referee will award a warning (yellow card) against each of the two teams and will proceed to the next bout. b) If the offence is repeated, the Referee will each time award a penalty hit (red card) against each of the teams and will proceed to the next bout, and so on up to the last bout. c) If both teams make clear their unwillingness to fight* during the last bout:- i) if there has been no occurrence of the offence during the preceding bouts, the Referee will award a warning (yellow card) against each of the teams, and will proceed to a last minute of fencing; ii) if the offence has already been committed during the preceding bouts, the Referee will award a penalty hit (red card) against each of the teams, and will proceed to a last minute of fencing; This last minute, which will be fenced in its entirety, will be decisive and will be preceded by a drawing of lots to decide the winner should the scores be equal at the end of the minute. 7. The fencer, whether on or off the piste, must keep his mask on until the Referee calls ‘Halt!’ He may under no circumstances address the Referee until the Referee has made his decision (cf. t.114, t.116, t.120). 8. Under no circumstances may fencers remove their clothes on the piste, even to change their bodywire (cf. t.114, t.116, t.120). 9. At the end of a bout, the Referee must bring together the two fencers, to announce clearly the score, which will be transmitted to the Directoire Technique. He must say clearly: ‘Mister X won against Mister Y with the following score …’

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 26 FIE (British) Version; June 2007 * Clear unwillingness to fight (non-combativity) If two of the criteria below are combined, there is unwillingness to fight: 1. criterion of time : one minute of fencing without a hit 2. absence of blade contact 3. excessive distance (greater than the distance of a step-forward-lunge). t.104. A competitor may have a hit awarded against him which he has not in fact received, either because he has crossed the rear limit of the piste (cf. t.27), or because he has committed an offence which has prevented his opponent fencing (a flèche attack which jostles the opponent, a corps à corps at foil or sabre, the use of the unarmed hand while fencing, etc.) (cf. t.96.2, t.114.3.a/b, t.116, t.117, t.118.1, t.120). Exclusion t.105. 1. A competitor… t.120 Use of non-sword arm/hand * ...... t.22.1 t.127. e) The athletes who participate in FIE competitions undertake to respect the FIE anti-doping Rules, use neither prohibited substances nor prohibited methods and agree to submit to any anti-doping control, whether in- or out-of competition; o.2. 1. The official competitions of the FIE are open to fencers (individual or team) of all FIE member countries. 2. Every competitor or participant in a competition, irrespective of his status, is required to be licensed for the current season (cf. Statutes, Chapter IX). o.53. Entries for World Championships 1. Three months before the start of the events, the federations will receive an entry form from the Organising Committee, on which they are required to specify the number of fencers and teams participating in each event of the competition’s programme, two months before the start of the events. No additional entry of fencers will be accepted after this date. 2. The entry of fencers and teams by name is to be made via the FIE website. This entry of the names of the fencers and all possible substitutes, and the entry of teams, must be made fifteen days before the first event of the Championships at the latest. 3. After the cut-off date for entries indicated on the FIE website, there can be no further additional entries nor any withdrawal of a name. Nevertheless one or more fencers may be added, up until 10.00am on the day before the competition, after payment to the FIE of a fine of 150 euros per fencer added To do this the national federation must address a request to the FIE to add a fencer, together with the payment equivalent to the fine. Changes of names, only with the agreement of the FIE and only for reasons of ‘force majeure’ or injury, can only be made up to 24 hours before each event. o.54. Entries by name for Senior and Junior World Cup competitions, Satellite competitions and Zonal competitions 1. The entry of the names of the fencers and all possible replacements, and the entry of teams, must be made via the FIE website 7 days before the competition at the latest (including for satellite competitions). - from 2007-08 season; until then 8 days for Satellite competitions, 15 days for all others.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 27 FIE (British) Version; June 2007 For Zonal competitions, both senior and junior, the entries of the fencers and of the teams must be made via the FIE website 7 days (from 2007-08 season; until then,15 days) before the first event of the Championships at the latest. .2. After the deadline for entries indicated on the FIE website, there can be no further additional entries nor the withdrawal of a name except in cases of properly authenticated injury or ‘force majeure’. However, before the Tuesday preceding the competition: — a fencer may be replaced by another. To do this, the national federations must send to the FIE, in writing (fax or e-mail), a request for a fencer to be replaced. — one or more fencers may be added, on payment to the FIE of a fine of 150 Euros per fencer added. To do this, the national federations must send to the FIE, in writing (fax or e- mail), a request to add a fencer, together with a copy of the bank transfer for the appropriate fine. From the Tuesday preceding the competition, if a fencer is withdrawn because of injury or 'force majeure', the national federations must inform the FIE and the organisers. The fencer cannot be replaced (from 2007-08 season; until then the text remains "In cases of injury or ‘force majeure’, the rules for World Championships will apply"). 3. In the case of team competition entries, the names of the fencers making up the team may be modified up until midday on the day before the competition, by informing the organisers. 4. Confirmation of the presence of the fencers and teams is made at the time the fencers and teams are entered. 5. Should a fencer or team who have been entered not present themselves to fence, their federation will be penalised with a fine of 500 Euros/750 Swiss francs, payable to the FIE, except in cases of properly authenticated injury or ‘force majeure’. 6. For Grand Prix competitions and Team World Cup competitions, as the referees are designated by the FIE, the delegations are not required to provide referees. 7. The organisers of all official competitions must, at risk of a penalty of a fine of 1000 Euros/1500 Swiss francs, refuse the entry of any fencers not appearing on lists conforming with the above, any entry not requested by a federation and any entry of either fencer or referee not in possession of an FIE licence valid for the current season. o.78. The Directoire Technique 1. The Directoire Technique shall consist of three suitable members from the organising country or invited by it. 2. (from 2007-08) For Grand Prix competitions, the competition supervisor, designated by the Executive Committee of the FIE, shall also be president of the Directoire Technique. Participation o.79. 1. For Individual Category A competitions, both Senior and Junior, at each weapon, each national federation may enter a maximum of 12 fencers. The organising country (competitions in Europe) may enter up to 20 fencers plus the number needed to make up the pools. 2. For Individual Category A competitions outside Europe, the organizing country may enter up to 30 fencers plus the number needed to make up the pools. 3. For Grand Prix competitions, entries are limited to a maximum of 8 fencers per weapon per country. The organising country may enter up to 12 fencers, plus the number of fencers needed to make up the pools, up to a maximum of 20 fencers.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 28 FIE (British) Version; June 2007 4. For Zonal Championships, both Senior and Junior, each national federation may enter:- - a maximum of 4 fencers per weapon in the individual competitions. - one team (consisting of 3 fencers with or without a reserve) per weapon in the team competitions. m.5 … Equipment and Checking of Weapons 5. a) At foil and épée, only traditional or homologated pointes d'arrêt are accepted. No other kind of pointe d'arrêt, notably new ones that are not homologated, will be accepted at the weapon control. In order to make the identification easier, please note that a traditional pointe d'arrêt has two screws to fix the tip of the pointe d'arrêt to the base, the whole is in metal and there is no plastic in the base. To make the checking of weapons easier and allow the complete observation of the tip and its base, foil fencers are requested to present their foils with bare points not covered with adhesive tape over the first 15cm. b) In order that the registering of hits by the contact of the point on the opponent be correctly registered by the scoring device, the pointes d'arrêt must be clean. The electrical resistance measured in ohms must not exceed the limit of two ohms (m.5.4.a). c) The blades, the guards at épée and foil and the guard at saber must be totally of metal. Apart from at sabre where the part of the guard next to the pommel is insulated (insulating sheath), their exteriors must not be covered by any material (plastic or other). The guard may not feature any advertising. This is also the case for the insulated part of the sabre guard. d) Any fencer or other person who tries to register hits in a way that does not comply with the rules, either with the weapon or by manipulating the scoring device, will be excluded from the competition or from the competition zone and, after identification, will be liable to further penalty. Authorised designs m.45. Only electrical apparatus designed with wires connecting the fencers to the central apparatus and registering hits by light signals with auxiliary sound signals are authorised, except for apparatus without wires using encoded waves authorised by the SEMI. This excludes other apparatus based on wireless waves and those which register sound signals only. Fencing material used at an official FIE competition and featuring the FIE emblem must, without exception, have obtained a certificate of homologation delivered by the FIE SEMI commission to the manufacturer concerned, certifying that his fencing material complies with FIE Rules. The following is the material that manufacturers must submit to the SEMI Commission, subsequent to a request in writing for homologation and the authority to mark with the FIE emblem: apparatuses for the signaling of hits, blades, foil and épée points, masks, jackets and breeches, protective plastrons. To obtain the FIE homologation of a piste, the manufacturer concerned must contact the SEMI and submit a file requesting homologation, including all technical characteristics, and a sample of the piste (30 cm wide x 40 cm long). If the analysis is positive, the SEMI will issue a homologation certificate authorising the manufacturer to mark the piste (from the date of the

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 29 FIE (British) Version; June 2007 delivery of the certificate) with the FIE emblem. For the homologation file of their fencing material to be completed, manufacturers must answer any SEMI requests for information regarding the homologation. When the SEMI commission has received the file requesting homologation, including the manufacturer’s samples and the reports of the different tests tests (from the institutes CRITT, Denkendorf and IFTH for clothing, under-plastrons and masks; and CRITT, Sofranel and Visti for blades), if the analysis is positive they will issue a homologation certificate authorizing the manufacturer to mark his future production (from the date of the delivery of the certificate) with the FIE emblem. The SEMI must be informed of any modification whatsoever that has the effect of causing a non-conformity to the samples provided for the original homologation. Obviously the manufacturer must wait for written confirmation of the SEMI Commission’s agreement to the proposed modification before launching the new production. The FIE emblem is a registered trademark. The fact that a piece of equipment carries the FIE emblem attests that the latter has been manufactured in accordance with the prescriptions of the Safety Norms and the Rules of the FIE. 2.1.2. TRANSPARENT MASKS … 4. Homologation of transparent masks and test methods Before being put on sale and used, all transparent visor masks must be approved and homologated by the SEMI. 4.1. Homologation To obtain FIE homologation, the manufacturer must send his masks to one of the following three institutes: In Germany "Denkendorf" ; in France CRITT or IFTH. The institute will conduct penetration resistance tests on the metal mesh and the visor in accordance with the CEN norms (e.g. Norm EN 13567). If the test results are positive, the constructor must send two examples of the mask to be homologated, together with the Institute’s certificate, to the headquarters of the SEMI in Lisbon, for the violent-shock tests. If this result is also positive, the SEMI will issue the homologation certificate to the manufacturer, and the mask may be put on sale and used at official FIE competitions. The installation of a clock and a system for showing the score are both obligatory for the homolgation of scoring appatuses; they must be visible to the spectators.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 30 APPENDIX L High Performance Stacey Johnson

SUMMARY OF MEETINGS, 2007

1. High Performance Plan: The High Performance Committee met the end of June at the beginning of the Summer National Championships in Miami. Discussions centered on the USOC requirement of a High Performance Plan for 2008 due to the USOC by August 1st. The essence of that plan will be the preparations for the Olympic Games in Beijing. Jim Carpenter, who was hired in late April as the new High Performance Director (HPD) is working with Jim Page and Michael Massik in preparing this report as well as learning the various programs under the jurisdiction of the HPD, 2. International Teams: The summer is filled with a number of significant international tournaments, beginning with the Pan American Games in Rio, followed by the Pan American Zonal Championships at which double FIE points can be earned by the athletes, the World University Games in Thailand and the World Championships in October in St. Petersburg, Russia. Not only the athletes but the coaches have a heavy schedule preparing for these tournaments as well as continuing their own careers. In the meantime, staff has been working on the next edition of the Athlete Handbook which should be available at the USFA Board meeting. 3. Formats: The HPC decided that it will review formats for National point competitions with any changes to be effective for the 2008-2009 season. Since team competition has become so critical in qualifying for the Olympic Games it was decided to investigate with the Tournament Committee the feasibility of adding team competitions at the NAC Division I tournaments. It would be expected by the start of the 2008-2009 season that repêchage is not likely to be in use at Division I NAC. Coaches are being polled to determine their preferences and option they might have instead of repêchage. The HPC discussed that repêchage may send the wrong message to athletes in that although they may lose a direct elimination bout they still have another chance; in international competition once a direct elimination bout is lost the athlete is eliminated from the competition. 4. Olympic Team Credentials: There are some problems that have occurred regarding availability of credentials for the number of cadre that has been appointed for US Olympic fencing team. Discussions are continuing with the USOC to determine just what credentials for what roles will be available. 5. International Teams: Attached to this report are the names of the members of the different teams that have been fielded this summer and will still be forthcoming. In addition, the results of the World Junior/Cadet Championships, the Pan American Games and the Zonal Championships are included as information items for the Board.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 31 2007 US INTERNATIONAL TEAMS & RESULTS

US PAN AMERICAN CONFEDERATION ZONAL CHAMPS.- MONTREAL TEAM MEMBER ROLE TEAM MEMBER ROLE BUKANTZ, Jeffery Captain THOMPSON, Hanna W. Foil CARPENTER, James Chief / WE Coach ZIMMERMANN, Iris W. Foil LARGMAN, Robert Team Manager SMART, Erinn W. Foil SELLERS, Lonnie Trainer WILLETTE, Doris (Team) W. Foil SORENSEN, Robert Armorer CROSS, Emily W. Foil DESAUTELS, Bernard Armorer GOODHARTZ, Nat Coach, WF LAGAN, Andrea Staff Liaison PEDERSON, Michael Coach, WF HORANYI, Andras M. FOIL DUPREE, Jedediah M. FOIL LEE, Ivan M. Sabre MEINHARDT, Gerek M. FOIL SMART, Keeth M. Sabre TIOMKIN, Jonathan M. FOIL MOREHOUSE, Timothy M. Sabre GERSHON, Simon Coach, MF ROGERS, Jason M. Sabre BURT, Lacey W. Epee HAGAMEN, Tim (team) M. Sabre HURLEY, Courtney W. Epee COSTIN, Daniel Coach, MS HURLEY, Kelley W. Epee WARD, Rebecca W. Sabre LAWRENCE, Maya W. Epee ZAGUNIS, Mariel W. Sabre KELSEY, Weston Seth M. Epee WOZNIAK, Dagmara W. Sabre MATTERN, Cody M. Epee JACOBSON, Sada W. Sabre THOMPSON, Soren M. Epee KORFANTY, Edward Coach, WS UNGAR, Benjamin M. Epee BADAWI, Amgad Ref Test DEMIRCHIAN, Gagik Coach, ME KLINKOV, Ariana Ref & Test

US WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS, ST. PETERSBURG, RUSSIA TEAM MEMBER ROLE TEAM MEMBER ROLE BUKANTZ, Jeffery Captain THOMPSON, Hanna W. Foil CHERIS, Sam Chief of Mission ZIMMERMANN, Iris W. Foil LARGMAN, Robert Team Manager SMART, Erinn W. Foil CAROLLA, John Trainer WILLETTE, Doris (Team) W. Foil CAROLLA, Marli Trainer CROSS, Emily W. Foil HERMAN, Ron Armorer GOODHARTZ, Nat Coach, WF PORTER, Matthew Armorer PEDERSON, Michael Coach, WF LAGAN, Andrea Staff Liaison LEE, Ivan M. Sabre HORANYI, Andras M. FOIL SMART, Keeth M. Sabre DUPREE, Jedediah M. FOIL MOREHOUSE, Timothy M. Sabre MEINHARDT, Gerek M. FOIL ROGERS, Jason M. Sabre TIOMKIN, Jonathan M. FOIL HAGAMEN, Tim M. Sabre GERSHON, Simon Coach, MF WILLIAMS, James M. Sabre BURT, Lacey W. Epee COSTIN, Daniel Coach, MS HURLEY, Courtney W. Epee GELMAN, Yury Coach, MS HURLEY, Kelley W. Epee WARD, Rebecca W. Sabre LAWRENCE, Maya W. Epee ZAGUNIS, Mariel W. Sabre CARPENTER, James Coach WE WOZNIAK, Dagmara W. Sabre KELSEY, Weston Seth M. Epee JACOBSON, Sada W. Sabre MATTERN, Cody M. Epee KORFANTY, Edward Coach, WS THOMPSON, Soren M. Epee UNGAR, Benjamin M. Epee FINDLAY, Douglas FIE Referee DEMIRCHIAN, Gagik Coach, ME KOLOMBATOVICH, George FIE Arbitrage

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 32 AUGUST 2007 WORLD UNIVERSITY GAMES, THAILAND

Men's Epee (Tm 14th/15) Women's Epee Stanley Vaksman 42nd/70 Lauren Willock 43rd/48 Nathanial Sulat 32nd/70

Men's Foil (Tm 11th/13) Women's Sabre Kurt Getz 30th/66 Valerie Providenza 14th/35 Scott Sugimoto 44th Alex Salsman 45th Team Leader: Michael Itkin OVERALL RANKINGS: Team Coach: Boris Vaksman CHINA, UKRAINE, RUSSIA & KOREA-3rd HUNGARY & FRANCE – 5th

US WORLD VETERANS CHAMPIONSHIPS, SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA TEAM MEMBER ROLE TEAM MEMBER ROLE LEVY, Paul Captain EVERSON, Sharon Referee HARKEY, Scott Armorer SCAGGS, Damon Referee GROSS, Steve V50 MF ADAMS, James V60 MF THOMISZER, Frank V50 MF SEXTON, Ray V60 MF PANTEL, Glenn V50 MF PATTERSON, Jan V60 MF LUTTON, Tom V50 MF CAMPANA, Rinaldo V60 MF HICHA, Paul V50 MS APOSTOL, Paul V60 MS YUNG, Wang V50 MS SEXTON, Ray V60 MS STREB, Joseph V50 MS CALDERON, Peter V60 MS MEAGHER, Rod V50 MS KOVACS, Alex V60 MS DRAGONETTI, Walter V50 ME CAMPE, Kaziieras V60 ME COCHRANE, Robert V50 ME SEXTON, Ray V60 ME RICHARDS, Dick V50 ME LIPP, Robert V60 ME CHIDEL. Robert V50 ME CAMPANA, Rinaldo V60 ME STARKS-FAULKNER, Jeannette V50 WF GRAHAM, Bettie V60 WF WALTERS, Anne-Marie V50 WF O’LEARY, Ellen V60 WF RUNYAN, Cindy V50 WF BEDROSIAN, Pat V60 WF OFFERLE, Judy V50 WF ANDERSON, Ruth V60 WF EYRE, Jane V50 WS O’LEARY, Ellen V60 WS RUNYAN, Cindy V50 WS KALLUS, Diane V60 WS BENDER, Jeannine V50 WS GREEN, Sherry V60 WS PESTOTNIK, Sharol V50 WS BOSCO, Marianne V50 WE KALLUS, Diane V60 WE HURME, June V50 WE BEDROSIAN, Pat V60 WE STRAKA, Paula V50 WE GRAHAM, Bettie V60 WE STILL-GONSALVES, Sally V50 WE RUBIN, Kathyrn V60 WE

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 33 APRIL 2007 JUNIOR AND CADET WORLD FENCING CHAMPIONSHIPS Belek, Turkey

CADET WOMEN'S SABER (56 Competitors)

GOLD WARD Rebecca (17, Portland, Ore./OFA /home school) 2 ILLARIONOVA Anna RUS 3T BESBES Azza TUN 3T KHARLAN Olga UKR 5 BUJDOSO Alexandra GER 6 LEE Ra Jin KOR 7 NIKULINA Victoriya RUS 8 GUARNERI Paola ITA 13 AKSAMIT Monica (17, Matawan, N.J./Fencers Club) 39 VLOKA Caroline (16, Upper Saddle River, N.J./Fencers Club)

CADET MEN'S FOIL (86 competitors)

1 MIAKE Ryo JPN 2 LARI Tommaso ITA 3T CASTELLANI Enzo (16, Keller, Texas/Fencing Inst. Of Texas) 3T SERRI Cedrik FRA 5 EON Seung Bae KOR 6 KIM Hyo Gon KOR 7 OSMAN Wassim ROU 8 KONTOCHRISTOPOULOS GRE 18 MEINHARDT Gerek (16, San Francisco, Calif./Massialas Found.) 22 DESMET Ariel (16, Portland, Ore./NorthWest Fencing Center)

CADET WOMEN'S EPEE (74 Competitors)

1 KOLOBOVA Violetta RUS 2 BRIASCO Brenda ITA 3 ANTAL Edina HUN 3 KLAFSTAD Pia NOR 5 FIAMINGO Rossella ITA 6 FERNANDEZ Clementine FRA 7 ZADOROZHNA Olha UKR 8 BRANDFIELD-HARVEY Neely (16, Houston, Texas/Salle Mauro) 9 HURLEY Courtney (16, San Antonio, Texas/Team Hurley) 22 SCANLAN Susannah (16, St. Paul, Minn./Twin Cities F.C.)

CADET MEN'S SABER, (70 Competitors)

1 SAVICH Boris RUS 2 SZILAGYI Aron HUN 3 COUTURIER Vincent CAN 3 HOMER Daryl (16, New York, N.Y./Fencers Club) 5 SBRAGIA Stefano ITA 6 POLOSSIFAKIS Joseph CAN 7 SZABO Matyas ROU 8 MAHAFFEY Harrison (16, Los Angeles, Calif./Los Angeles Int'l .F.C.) 21 OCHOCKI Aleksander (16, Clark, N.J./Fencers Club)

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 34 APRIL 2007 JUNIOR AND CADET WORLD FENCING CHAMPIONSHIPS

CADET WOMEN'S FOIL (69 Competitors)

1 DERIGLAZOVA Inna RUS 2 KAZHIKINA Ekaterina RUS 3T LYCZBINSKA Hanna POL 3T STRANIERO Stefania ITA 5 IVANOVA Anastasia RUS 6 VOLPI Alice ITA 7 BLAZE Anita FRA 8 HIRAISHI Noriko JPN 11 PRESCOD Nzingha (14, New York, N.Y./Westbrook Found.) 35 MCGILL Kylei (14, Jamaica, N.Y./Westbrook Foundation) 47 REESE Hayley (16, Louisville, Ky./Louisville F.C.)

CADET MEN'S EPEE (94 Competitors)

1 ROSELLO Pau ESP 2 SPAUTZ Falk GER 3 BARDENET Alexandre FRA 3 HEIMENDINGER Florian FRA 5 COMMARMOND Anthony FRA 6 SAMUELSSON Anton SWE 7 LAMBERT Mykae CAN 8 ADAMOV Anton RUS 16 KAULL James (16, Washington, D.C./Chevy Chase F.C.) 62 WATSON Adam (16, Richford, Vt./Vermont Fencing Alliance) 80 DOLEZAL Joshua (16, South Bend, Ind./Escrime du Luc)

UNDER-20 WOMEN'S SABER (75 competitors)

1 KHARLAN Olga UKR 2 DIATCHENK Ekaterina RUS 3 MUNTEANU Elena ROU 3 WARD Rebecca (17, Portland, Ore./Oregon Fenc. Alliance/home school) 5 BESBES Azza TUN 6 PUNDYK Galyna UKR 7 PETO Reka HUN 8 VECCHI Irene ITA 18 VLOKA Caroline (16, Upper Saddle River, N.J./Fencers Club) 19 WOZNIAK Dagmara (18, Colonia, N.J./Fencers Club/St. John's '10)

UNDER-20 MEN'S FOIL (16 competitors)

1 MINUTO Martino ITA 2 IM Yong Tae KOR 3 ASPROMONTE Valerio ITA 3 LOPATENKO Georgiy UKR 5 SZEKI Bence HUN 6 JOURNET Benoit FRA 7 KHOVANSKY Alexey RUS 8 SARDA Thibault FRA 9 DESMET Ariel (16, Portland, Ore./NorthWest Fencing Center) 24 MEINHARDT Gerek (16, San Francisco, Calif./Massialas Found.) 36 CHINMAN Nicholas (17, Boulder, Colo./Northern Colo. Fencers/Penn State '10)

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 35 APRIL 2007 JUNIOR AND CADET WORLD FENCING CHAMPIONSHIPS

JUNIOR MEN’S EPEE (132 competitors)

1 BLASZYCK Alexandre FRA 2 WICAS Graham USA 3 JIAO Yunlong CHN 3 BACKER Fredrik NOR 5 SUKHOV Pavel RUS 6 LAMON Sebastien SUI 7 BOREYKO Denys UKR 8 BESKIN Grigori ISR 38 SMITH Dwight USA 74 VAKSMAN Stanley USA

JUNIOR WOMEN'S EPEE (102 competitors)

1 SAMUELSSON Emma SWE 2 MURONI Marzia ITA 3 BERGDAHL Johanna SWE 3 MOSLER Dominika POL 5 SHECHTMAN Iris ISR 6 MESTRES Julie FRA 7 ANTAL Edina HUN 8 HURLEY Courtney (16, San Antonio, Texas/Team Hurley) 46 HURLEY Kelley (18, San Antonio, Texas/Team Hurley/Notre Dame '09) 37 SCANLAN Susannah (16, St. Paul, Minn./Twin Cities F.C.)

JUNIOR MEN'S SABER (100 competitors)

1 BEISHEIM Benedikt GER 2 PARK Young Jun KOR 3 BEAUDRY Philippe CAN 3 IACOMETTI Luca ITA 5 DOLNICEANU Tiberiu ROU 6 PUNDYK Dmytro UKR 7 HOLLOSI Bence HUN 8 PELLEGRINI Alberto ITA 23 SPEAR Jeff (18, Wynantskill, N.Y./Fencers Club/Columbia '10) 39 MAHAFFEY Harrison (16, Los Angeles, Calif./Los Angeles Int'l .F.C.) 40 DAVIDSON Raskyrie (18, Newark, N.J./Westbrook Found.)

JUNIOR WOMEN’S FOIL (91 Competitors)

1 BINGENHEIMER Sandra GER 2 KOROBEINIKOVA Larisa RUS 3 ERRIGO Arianna ITA 3 KREISS Fanny HUN 5 BAILEY Victoria FRA 6 NISHIOKA Shiho JPN 7 JANG Ye Seul KOR 8 MENG Shuang CHN 17 WILLETTE Doris USA 36 PRESCOD Nzingha USA 49 NEMECEK Samantha USA

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 36 APRIL 2007 JUNIOR AND CADET WORLD FENCING CHAMPIONSHIPS

JUNIOR WOMEN'S SABER TEAM (19 teams)

1 UKRAINE 2 RUSSIA 3 USA Rebecca Ward, Caroline Vloka, Dagmara Wozniak, Eileen Hassett (17, Beaverton, Ore./Oregon Fenc. Alliance) 4 POLAND

JUNIOR MEN'S FOIL TEAM (33 Teams)

1 ITALY 2 CHINA 3 RUSSIA 4 FRANCE 5 USA Nicholas Chinman, Ariel DeSmet, Gerek Meinhardt, Ben Parkins (17, The Woodlands, Texas/Salle Mauro)

JUNIOR WOMEN'S EPEE TEAM (26 teams)

1 FRANCE 2. HUNGARY 3. CHINA 4. ESTONIA 7 USA Courtney Hurley, Kelley Hurley, Susannah Scanlan Christa French (19, Southlake, TX/ Grapevine TX F.C./Northwestern '10)

JUNIOR MEN'S SABER TEAM (25 teams)

1 UKRAINE 2 FRANCE 3 ITALY 4 POLAND 11. USA Raskyrie Davidson, Harrison Mahaffey, Jeff Spear, Aleksander Ochocki

JUNIOR WOMEN'S FOIL TEAM (24 Teams

1. RUSSIA 2. ITALY 3. CHINA 4. POLAND 8. USA Samantha Nemecek, Nzingha Prescod, Doris Willette, Kylei McGill

JUNIOR MEN'S EPEE TEAM (35 Teams)

1. RUSSIA 2. SWITZERLAND 3. HUNGARY 4. ISRAEL 17. USA Dwight Smith, Stanley Vaksman, Graham Wicas, Ben Wieder

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 37 JULY 2007 PAN AMERICAN GAMES, Rio de Janiero, Brazil

MEN'S INDIVIDUAL EPÉE (21 competitors)

1 LIMARDO Ruben VEN Gold 2 CARRILLO Andres CUB Silver 3 FERNANDEZ Silvio VEN Bronze 3 INOSTROZA Paris CHI Bronze 5 MATTERN, Cody, USA 6 KELSEY, Seth USA

MEN'S INDIVIDUAL FOIL (18 competitors)

Gold HORANYI Andras USA 2 ALVEAR Felipe CHI 3 RODRIGUEZ Carlos VEN 3 SOUZA João BRA - Brazil

MEN'S INDIVIDUAL SABRE (21 competitors)

1 BEAUDRY Philippe CAN Gold 2 WILLIAMS James USA Silver 3 MAYER Nicolas CAN Bronze 3 AGRESTA Renzo BRA Bronze 6 IGOE, Benjamin USA

WOMEN'S INDIVIDUAL EPÉE (17 competitors)

Gold HURLEY Courtney USA Gold 2 LEPROHON Julie CAN Silver 3 ESPINOZA Angela COL Bronze 3 MENEZES Clarisse BRA Bronze 10 HURLEY, Kelley USA

WOMEN'S INDIVIDUAL FOIL (19 competitors)

1 GONZALEZ Mariana VEN Gold 2 THOMPSON Hanna USA Silver 3 KWAN Monica CAN - Canada Bronze 3 COMPAÑI Misleydis CUB Bronze

WOMEN’S SABRE (21 competitors)

1 GONZALEZ Mailyn CUB Gold 2 JEMAL Alexis USA - USA Silver 3 BARATTA Emma USA - USA Bronze 3 SASSINE Sandra CAN - Canada Bronze

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 38 JULY 2007 PAN AMERICAN GAMES, Rio de Janiero, Brazil,

MEN'S TEAM EPÉE (8 Teams)

1 CUB Cuba Gold 2 VEN Venezuela Silver 3 USA United States Bronze 4 CAN Canada ------

Team beat Puerto Rico, 45-35; lost to Cuba 45-26; defeated Canada 45-37 Team of: Cody Mattern, Seth Kelsey, Benjamin Ungar, Andras Horanyi (substitute)

WOMEN'S TEAM SABRE (7 Teams)

1 CUB Cuba Gold 2 USA United States Silver 3 CAN Canada Bronze 4 VEN Venezuela ------Bye in first round, defeated VEN 45-34; lost to Cuba for GOLD 45-39 Alexis Jemal, Eileen Grinch, Emma Baratta, Hanna Thompson (Substitute)

MEN'S TEAM SABRE (8 Teams)

1 USA United States Gold 2 CAN Canada Silver 3 ARG Argentina Bronze 4 CUB Cuba ------

Defeated Brazil 45-16; defeated Argentina, 45-39; defeated CAN 45-34 Tim Hagamen, Benjamin Igoe, James Williams, Benjamin Ungar (Substitute)

Countries participating in one or more individual events:

Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Columbia, Cuba, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru, Puerto Rico, Venezuela >

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 39 2007 PAN AMERICAN ZONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS, CANADA

MEN’S Épée (17) PL LAST NAME FIRST NAME CTRY 1 FERNANDEZ Silvio VEN 2 KELSEY Weston USA 3 INOSTROZA BUDINICH Paris A. CHI 3 MATTERN Cody USA 5 LIMARDO Francisco VEN 6 LIMARDO Ruben VEN 7 LINTEAU Thomas CAN 8 MEJIAS Wolfgang VEN Other countries: Puerto Rico, Argentina, Mexico, Bolivia

MEN’S FOIL(19) PL LAST NAME FIRST NAME CTRY 1 MEINHARDT Gerek USA 2 MCGUIRE Joshua CAN 3 TEISSEIRE Nicholas CAN 3 TIOMKIN Jonathan USA 5 RODRIGUEZ Carlos Eduardo VEN 6 DUPREE Jedediah USA 7 HORANYI Andras USA 8 SOUZA Joao Antonio BRA Other countries: Argentina, Chile, Puerto Rico

WOMEN'S EPEE (19) PL LAST NAME FIRST NAME CTRY 1 DUNNETTE Catherine CAN 2 HURLEY Kelley USA 3 HURLEY Courtney USA 3 SCHALM Sherraine CAN 5 MARTINEZ Maria VEN 6 LEMPROHON Julie CAN 7 BRAVO ARANGUIZ Caterin CHI 8 LAWRENCE Maya USA 10 BURT Lacey USA Brazil, Columbia, Mexico, Peru, Puerto Rico, Venezuela

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 40 WOMEN’S SABRE (21) PL LAST NAME FIRST NAME CTRY 1 WARD Rebecca USA 2 JACOBSON Sada USA 3 SASSINE Sandra CAN 3 ZAGUNIS Mariel USA 5 OVTCHINNIKOVA Olga CAN 6 CLOUTIER Julie CAN 6 WOZNIAK Dagmara USA 8 SASCHENBRECKER Wendy CAN Others: ARG. MEX, PUR, VEN

MEN’S SABRE (15) PL LAST NAME FIRST NAME CTRY 1 SMART Keeth USA 2 MOREHOUSE Timothy USA 3 BRAVO Carlos VEN 3 ROGERS Jason USA 5 ACHTEN Alexander ARG 6 BEAUDRY Philippe CAN 7 LEE Ivan USA 8 AGRESTA Renzo Pasquale Zeglio BRA Mexico

WOMEN’S FOIL (21) PL LAST NAME FIRST NAME CTRY 1 THOMPSON Hanna USA 2 SMART Erinn USA 3 CROSS Emily USA 3 LUAN Jujie CAN 5 GONZALEZ Mariana VEN 6 KWAN Monica CAN 7 CARBONE Alejandra-A. ARG 8 SUAREZ Yulitza VEN 9 ZIMMERMANN Iris USA Bolivia, Columbia, Mexico, Peru, Puerto Rico

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 41 TEAM RESULTS

WOMEN’S SABRE MEN’S SABRE

1. USA 1. USA 2. CANADA 2. CANADA 3. VENEZUELA 3. VENEZUELA 4. ARGENTINA

WOMEN’S EPEE MEN’S EPEE

1. CANADA 1. CANADA 2. USA 2. VENEZUELA 3. VENEZUELA 3. USA

MEN’S FOIL WOMEN’S FOIL

1. CANADA 1. USA 2. USA 2. VENEZUELA 3. BRAZIL 3. CANADA

APPENDIX M Hall of Fame Andy Shaw

The Hall of Fame Committee is doing well. One change must be made this year. Danny Bukantz has told us that he will no longer be able to function ably for the Hall of Fame. I am requesting that Arnie Messing replace Danny Bukantz since he still has the passion to work for the HOF. We hope that this move will be approved.

We have developed a Hall of Fame website that is affiliated with my fencing club where I have also created the first Museum of American Fencing in US history. Feel free to take a slideshow tour of the Museum.

Check out www.museumofamericanfencing.com and visit the Hall of Fame as well. Little by little each of the Hall of Fame bios will be accompanied by photos and much more detail.

The Hall of Fame website will also have information and news articles about the past inductions going back to the 1960's when the Hall was founded.

In addition, the Hall of Fame committee will be listing all previously nominated individuals who have not yet been inducted. This will make our nominating process more transparent. Our policy will be to re-nominate those previous nominees every few years.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 42 APPENDIX N Wheelchair Carla Mae Richards

This past July, the annual Coaches College, led by Alex and Elisabeth Beguinet, had, for the second year in a row, a session specifically for wheelchair fencing. Michael D’Asaro, Jr and Mario Rodriguez led the coaching session at the Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs, Co. There were 6 students who took the course and gained the knowledge that will allow them to start wheelchair fencing programs at their clubs. It was recognized that in order to expand the wheelchair fencing program in the United States we must first enlist more coaches in wheelchair coaching and then have those coaches seek out wheelchair athletes. As much as the energy motivates us to do demonstrations and bring fencing to potential wheelchair athletes, without coaches the interest will dry up and the wheelchair athletes will turn to other sports. I attended the wheelchair coaching session to understand how the program operates, discuss the future of wheelchair fencing with the students and the coaching staff, and to meet with members of the USOC Paralympic Committee. Unfortunately some of the key persons of the Paralympic Committee had left for the Pan American Paralympic Games in Rio. Even so, I was able to meet with key persons in charge of the Paralympic Committee Outreach Program with whom USFA seeks to work more closely. The Outreach group has close connections with military rehabilitation centers and schedules sport demonstrations around the country. We will work with them by providing fencing contacts in the areas where such demonstrations are scheduled. The most serious problem facing the expansion of the program is the lack of reasonably priced wheelchair frames, an essential element in working with wheelchair athletes and in doing demonstrations. There is no immediate solution to that problem though there are plans available for one to make wooden frames. The problem with those frames is the weight so that once set up it is expensive to ship elsewhere. Several persons have indicated an interest in developing a design of lightweight but sturdy materials and to find a US manufacturer willing to produce such frames. Right now the only places where one can purchase frames are located in England, France and Germany. Due to the many costs involved and the likelihood that minimum criteria would not be met, the USFA decided not to hold the Zonal Wheelchair Championships in Miami. The international wheelchair fencing association requires the host of such Championships to meet certain standards including number of countries represented and number of participants. The responses from the Pan American countries was such that it seemed that the USFA would spend a considerable amount of money and not meet the standards to qualify individuals to the Paralympic Games. If one meets the standards, the winner of each of 12 competitions qualifies to the Paralympic Games. It is difficult to find four countries with wheelchair fencers for each of the 12 competitions. US fencers can qualify for the Paralympic Games through the international wheelchair world standings. At this time there is the potential to qualify 4-5 fencers. The cut off dates for international world cup selection is Feb. 28, 2008.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 43 APPENDIX O Sport Science, Safety and Technology Committee Dr. John Heil

PROGRAMS & SERVICES June 2006-September 2007

PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT Performance Enhancement Team (PET) Technology eScout (Electronic Scouting Project) Goal: Athlete profiling by collecting and coding bout data, and enter to a data base; Also for “team game” analysis. (Intended as a complement to video recording of bouts). Project status: PDA application is ”near ready” for use at events with software development in later stages of beta testing; Initial stages of development of PC application; User manual in development; Conversion for use on “Smart Phone” is in planning. eScout Video (Video Technology Program) Goal: Develop video review capability on PDA device for stripside use Project Status: Tool is in development with goal of readiness for use at World Champs. This is a collaborative project with USOTC Technology department and will interface with USOC EoP (Eye on Performance) technology program -- which provides a cost effective alternative to Dartfish for video editing Ongoing utilization of Dartfish software for coding and storage of bouts by some weapon squads with status of development unknown at this time Need to provide education about eScout and training on use of device to coaches and athletes in order to speed readiness for use in the Olympic run-up year Nutrition Have established relationship with the Athlete Performance Group (High profile elite athlete training centers located throughout USA- headquartered in Phoenix, AZ) to provide nutrition consulting services. • Introductory seminar at Richmond NAC • Nutrition display at Tucson NAC with individual consultation upon request • Monthly “Nutrition Blast” (short topic review in nutrition) – available for email distribution to all weapon squads - but currently subscribed to by Women’s Saber • Team Consultation available Services are coordinated with the USOTC Service are “pro bono” but with expectation of acknowledgement on website (which is not yet available-see website entry below) Sport Psychology Programs available as noted elsewhere in report.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 44 Lack of funding has inhibited continuation of Sport Psychology services as provided over the last 2 quads. See attached report discussing role and function of sport psychology consultation Strength & Conditioning and Injury Prevention Programs – Dormant Consultants are identified but no systematic program development underway Sports Medicine & Science Web Site Extended efforts (since 2005) at site development continue to be problematic. Draft version of site is available. Awaiting assignment of web master to upload site materials (ie., fencing related sport science materials, sports medicine & science staff, feedback regarding medical coverage etc.) and to open site. Sports Medicine & Science information on USFA Website is incorrect. Research Facilitate data collection for masters thesis for fencing coach, German Valderrama Professional Education Implement professional continuing education programs for sports medicine & science staff to facilitate development of professional skills, and as a benefit to staff. Initial programs at 2007 Junior Olympics, Denver, CO & 2007 Summer Nationals, Miami, FL INTERNAL LIAISON Consultation with Brad Circone and Kathy Schifferle of US Fencing Marketing Committee • Assessment of scientific value of USANA nutritional products pursuant to establishing a marketing relationship • Sponsor development strategies and leads EXTERNAL LIAISON Consultation with SportTech Production Co., Seattle, WA Re: Sport Science documentary series. Program outline and proposal on fencing submitted. (Copy available for review). Update: Pilot of general program developed and in review; Exploring development of podcasts. Presentation in seminar on Anti-Doping in Sport at International Congress of Law and Mental Health (2007), Padua, Italy Self-funded USFA EVENT CONSULTATION Sport Psychology & Sport Science Consultation 2006 NAC, Richmond, VA 2007 Junior Olympics, Denver, CO 2007 Summer Nationals & Board Meeting, Miami, FL

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 45 Additional EVENT CONSULTATION 2007 Coventry Commonwealth (State) Games of Virginia Self-funded 2007 USFCA Conference, Oklahoma City, OK USFCA funded ELITE ATHLETE CONSULTATION Ongoing consultation with elite athletes through personal contact at US Fencing events, by phone & email. Reduced frequency of contact due to decreased availability at events as a consequence of travel budget restrictions EDUCATION & TRIAGE Ongoing services provided to general membership Consultation Information/Education Provision of materials to coaches, athletes and administrators on Sport Medicine and Science topics (by direct contact to US Fencing Sports Medicine and Science) This service will be shifted to the Sports Medicine and Science website when site is opened Intervention/Triage Direct consultation to coaches, athletes and administrators on Sport Medicine and Science topics by phone, email or face-to-face Referral to local sport science specialists Sport Psychology Test Profiling Available to elite athletes “pro bono” Available to US Fencing athletes as fee for service Club Sponsored Seminars Virginia Academy of Fencing DC Fencers Club Publications American Fencing Magazine Ongoing articles in American Fencing Magazine (Sports Medicine Q&A Column; Sport Science Column) Reduction of column length has undermined effectiveness Technical Reports New Releases Heil, J., Buford, B., Chirby, B, Gore, K. (2007). US Fencing Referee Study of Stress & Coping.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 46 United States Fencing Association Technical Report No. 2007-01. Colorado Springs, CO: United States Olympic Training Center. Heil, J. (Release Pending) Team Game Project Report Open Circulation Documents Available upon request

Heil, J. & Zealand, C. (2001). Psychological Skills Training Manual. United States Fencing Association Technical Report (No. 2001-01). Colorado Springs, CO: United States Olympic Training Center. Previously distributed as electronic book to Clubs as part of membership fee for 2005; Also released to American Fencing Supply to make print copies for sale at national events.

Heil, J. & Gregory, J. (2004). Modern Pentathlon Mental Training Protocol. United States Fencing Association Technical Report (No. 2004-01). Colorado Springs, CO: United States Olympic Training Center.

Heil, J. (2002). Psychological Preparation for Competition: The Men’s Epee Team Mental Training Protocol. United States Fencing Association Technical Report (No. 2002-01). Colorado Springs, CO: United States Olympic Training Center.

Heil, J., Hartman, D., Robinson, G., & Teegarden, L. (2000). Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: Identification and Management in Athletes. United States Fencing Association Technical Report (No. 2000-01). Colorado Springs, CO: United States Olympic Training Center.

Limited Circulation Documents Available to coaches, athletes and administrators upon request Heil, J. & Soter, P. (2003). Stripside Coaching . United States Fencing Association Technical Report (No. 2003-01). Colorado Springs, CO: United States Olympic Training Center A proprietary document available for limited distribution to coaches while awaiting posting to a secure web site.

“Psychological Preparation of the Fencer” by Tyshler & Midler – Translation of Soviet text on Sport Psychology with annotated guide prepared by Dr. Steve Hesky Draft copies are available from while awaiting posting to a secure web site.

Contact:[email protected]

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 47 About Sport Psychology Consulting For the sport psychologist, the question most frequently asked and most difficult to answer is: “What do you do at competitions?” The question comes from coaches, athletes and administrators, and also from aspiring sport psychologists and established clinical psychologists. This is not an easy question to answer but well worth trying. Sport psychologists provide a variety of services: educational seminars, team building activities, and individual sessions. These intervention structures pretty well parallel what is done by psychologists in clinical (i.e., individual and group sessions) and academic (seminars/instruction) settings. In contrast to the work of the clinical psychologist, the services provided by a sport psychologist are broader in scope. These services range on a continuum from counseling (like what the clinical psychologist does) to performance consulting (more like what the coach does). Mental training, goal setting and other services are like coaching, in that they entail practical skills training that is directly and obviously linked to performance. (In fact, some sport psychologists like to refer to themselves as “mental coaches”.) Some of the work done by sport psychologists with sports organizations resembles that done by organizational behavior consultants with businesses - such as internal studies (e.g., referee research project), advice on policies (e.g., competition age limits; codes of conduct), and executive coaching. These functions generally fall more to the Chair of the program than to a particular sport science specialist. As sport psychology becomes integrated into a sport, its potential scope of services broadens. Most think of sport psychology as a direct service for athletes, which it is. But it is for coaches too, and for parents, as well as any of the organizations “players,” metaphorically speaking. Not all services are direct, that is, they need necessarily be provided directly to the beneficiary. An indirect service, for instance, a conversation about an athlete with a coach or a parent may resolve a problem without direct contact with the athlete. Similarly, working with an athlete may defuse tensions with a coach or a parent, improving those important relationships. However, most of what happens, most of the time when on-site at a competition is not structured. At first pass it seems a lot like there is a lot of hanging out – which is true. But it is hanging out with a purpose. What we do with the rest of the time at events is influenced by a number of factors including: the degree to which established relationships exists, the extent to which there is a programmatic approach to sport psychology, the size of the group, and the organizational role for sport science to name a few. Often we are exploring what needs to be done and working to create an opportunity for that to unfold. That is, we are attempting to identify and present the role for sport psychology in that sport. Few sport organizations have a clearly defined role and function for sport psychology, so the development of a systematic approach to service delivery is usually in the making. It is an ideal situation for program development, to have the right people assembled in a room to work directly on identifying needs, setting goals and discussing strategies. However, this happens far too seldom. Even when this opportunity is presented and well utilized, there is still more to do outside the formal work setting. The development of sport psychology within an organization more often unfolds in an amorphous rather than a systematic fashion. The beginning (or opportunity) may come as an invitation to an event - but this is often without a clear understanding of what needs to be done, or a plan of how this can work at an operational level within the organization. If sport

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 48 psychology is to have an established role within an organization, (at least for awhile) these issues will need to be worked out. It is an ongoing process, which happens in both a “top-down” and “bottom-up” fashion. “Top-down” opportunities are driven by the organization and include: funding for programs and services, access to events and people, and formal credibility. This is often an objective decision linked to a perceived need within in the sport. “Bottom-up” implies a “grass roots” level service which ideally leads to growing acceptance and credibility. The role for sport psychology tends to unfold incrementally across time and across people. It is a give and take process that rests on successful service delivery. Individual sport psychology consultation, for example in an office setting, is typically “bottom-up.” This parallels traditional clinical psychology interventions in that they are private and self-contained – nobody else may know that the service is being provided. However, for sport psychology to become mainstreamed in a sport organization both processes (“top-down” and “bottom-up”) need to occur. There is a lot of work to do to make this happen. In some ways, sport psychologists are like missionaries, in that they come as an outsider to a culture. To succeed they must find a place for themselves within that culture without necessarily fully becoming a member. This requires sensitivity to boundaries – knowing the places to go and the places not to go. Acceptance in the culture relies on developing trust and is marked by the diminishing of boundaries. However, true success entails establishing credibility, and demonstrating the ability to add value to that culture. Ultimately, this is a person-by-person process. This means time together in the sport setting between the sport psychologist, coaches, athletes, administrators etc. The process of creating acceptance and demonstrating value happens most comfortably and naturally when there is an established training center, where most of the people are together most of the time. Training camps, especially those of substantial duration, also function well in this regard. However, where these opportunities are not available, the process of establishing sport psychology programs and working out the details of service delivery falls to competitions. Developing and implementing a sport psychology program is a week-by-week and year round process. Much of the day-to-day work can be done by phone and email. However, periodic face- to-face contact is essential. It is in a sense, an anchor for the program. Sport psychology (like most other endeavors) is a personal process, and will wither without personal contact. This is especially true where both the leadership of an organization and its members are geographically disbursed; and when much of the leadership is volunteer, part-time, or minimally reimbursed. Whatever the setting, so much of what happens at events is informal - “on the fly” and “between the lines.” There are opportunities at the venue, on the bus, in the hotel. This is a two-way venture – with the sport psychologist trying to know the sport and the sport trying to know the sport psychologist. Invariably, people have questions about sport psychology – “What is it?” “Does it really work?” “How does it work?” “Will it work for me?” And sometimes there are those who feel compelled to tell you that it doesn’t work or isn’t needed. This experience is particularly true of sport psychology relative to the other sciences. This is part of the give-and- take of the process. It reflects the relatively new role of psychology in the sport environment and the pre–existing expectations (often incorrect) of what psychology is and does. It also is influenced by the less tangible nature of sport psychology relative to the other sport sciences. The sport psychologist begins by watching and listening, getting to know people and getting known by them. In this regard, the sport psychologist is like a farmer – planting seeds that will

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 49 hopefully sprout and bear fruit at a later date. Relationship building is the seed that yields fruit of the “teachable moment.” The “teachable moment” is the right combination of time and circumstance in which a person is maximally ready to gain new knowledge – at a uniquely deep level of understanding. The “teachable moment” is a window of time that opens and then closes. It is opens most often in an extraordinarily emotionally charged situation. Timing is the key. The stage is often set by a dilemma – an emotionally compelling situation seeking an answer with immediacy and urgency. (The answer may have been presented before but not fully comprehended – with the right time and circumstance allowing the insight to click into place.) Other times, it is personal blind spot revealed, coincident with the realization that the blind spot has been an obstacle to success. Creating the teachable moment is central to system of theory and action that drives psychological intervention. For this to happen the sport psychologist must be there. Unfortunately, much of important learning about the self is driven by personal suffering and loss. All too often, personal suffering is what brings people to psychology. To enable learning to precede and thereby avoid suffering is the primary goal sport psychology. It is the single greatest benefit of integrating sport psychology into a sport organization. It is well worth noting that working the “teachable moment” is an intangible, intuitive ability of all great coaches. But the shared disappointment by coach and athlete presents a challenge to the coach – who must step outside his or her own dilemma to focus on the athlete. Here is where the sport psychologist can help – the athlete and the coach. Domestic and international events offer different possibilities and constraints. The domestic events have a wider array of individuals – more athletes and coaches, more parents and administrators. However, they are usually present for a shorter period of time and committed by time and duty to their clubs or constituent groups – and to an extent less accessible. The elite athletes attend domestic events sporadically, and are often there for a minimal period of time. For the international competitions there is a smaller group for a longer period of time, with far fewer distractions. More time means more opportunity to interact with athletes and coaches. The pressures of the higher levels of competition are more revealing of the athletes, of the coaches and of the organization as a whole. As a consequence, this is the best setting to get to know the players and the sport itself. It is an excellent setting for interventions. It is the optimal setting for the “teachable moment.” It is at international events that the sense of team is developed. It is at international events where team competitions happen – our sport’s best opportunity for success, which we paradoxically study and practice the least. In fact, international events are often “turning points” in an organization. If sport sciences are to play an important role in a sport organization, then sport science needs a presence at the sport’s important events.

USFA Board of Directors 2007-2008 50