Come and try. WARNING: it could be a lifelong commitment

I don't know if this is a problem in other clubs or sports but there seems to be a definite challenge in managing the transition between fencing beginner and fencing regular at my club. We do quite well in getting 10-12 people along for a beginner's course over six weeks and they seem to enjoy it but then after the course is done 95% of them never come back, which is frustrating. As a mid-level coach at the club one of my jobs is to work with fencers of an intermediate level and encourage their continued participation in the sport but if not many stay to intermediate level then it's a bit tricky! So I wonder if we could do better and here's my reasoning:

Beginner's course: is this the wrong title? Are we giving the impression that once you've done it you're a fencer? Shouldn't we be terming it an introductory course? This would make more sense to me and the course should give the impression that there are years of learning and development that can be undertaken subsequently. In Karate you are aware that a black belt (or even the next belt) is not coming soon, that there will have to be significant study and practice before they are achieved and also that this is the natural order of things. I think that sometimes modern sports are guilty of bowing to the 'quick dip/smorgasbord/tapas/mezze' culture in which people want a brief experience of the activity and then tick it off. Well, guess what? Some things can't be mastered or experienced in twelve weeks. In fact fencing can't really begin to be understood in that time. You have to manage the basic moves instinctively before you can understand the complicated ones and then you can start thinking about strategy. And that's another few years worth of work.......
Which weapon? Here's a conundrum for any club; how to introduce the weapons and in which order....... Maybe clubs should have a 'mask of sorting' a la Harry Potter which tells the budding fencer which weapon they should pursue..... Traditionally fencers tend to start with foil and I think this is the right move. Foil is arguably the most complex weapon in terms of convention and provides a good introduction into the world of fencing. Once a fencer has got some time in with the foil they can think about diversifying. If a fencer is introduced to the weapons early enough they can then decide where they want to go ambition wise, rather than gravitating away from foil because the other weapons 'look better' or seem 'easier'. I feel it's a good idea for club weapon Captains to get involved with new fencers as soon as possible to introduce themselves and their weapon and spot any potential future competitors/team members.
Progression of learning: it's important to show people that there are loads of techniques to come and get them on the hook intellectually and provide them with something to look forward to. Fencing knowledge develops over a long period and is not to be taken lightly in terms of the challenge and achievement it can give people. It's not all about awards but they can help.
Physical challenge: I feel that sometimes we overlook the physical demands of fencing as a sport in favour of the 'swordy' aspect. Years of fencing have ensured I have remained flexible and in reasonable shape and this is a positive benefit that we may not give enough emphasis to; after all, there are some people out there who like keeping fit!
Healthy competition: fencing provides an almost unique style of competing against another person. If the student is initiated into the skills of combat carefully and sensibly there are many positive experiences to look forward to, with an ongoing developmental challenge as the student develops. Quite often students can get thrown into the deep end and this can be potentially off putting if the student is not used to one on one contact sport.
History lessons: fencing has a huge history to turn to when it comes to engaging the imagination but do we as a sport make enough capital out of it? The odd historical anecdote can enliven any lesson and also stimulate a desire to learn more within a student.
I haven't got the definitive answer to my self posed question of how to keep beginners coming back, but thinking about it is pretty important for the future. Any thoughts out there in the blog-o-verse?

What's it all about?........ *

There's a lot of debate raging in British Fencing at the moment about the upcoming Olympics that we are hosting in the UK next year. The focus seems to be on winning medals, presumably based on the theory that a lot of money is being pumped into fencing (although the facts of that matter is another debate altogether...) so therefore the money givers want a result i.e. a medal. Shiny shiny is the only thing that matters or so it seems...... Today it was announced that after the upcoming world championships the athletes aspiring to Olympic selection will be reviewed as follows:


The initial cohort of athletes, have been selected up to and including the period to the end of the World Championships (end of October). Immediately following the World Championships a fundamental review will be undertaken of all athletes selected for the Programme from 1st August 2011.
As a result of the review athletes will be categorised as:

1. Capable of winning a medal in 2012

2. Showing a performance and training trajectory that would deliver a medal in 2016

This is a very difficult subject to discuss as everyone will have their perspective on this. My personal one is that I am not convinced that the 'medal or bust' approach is the right one. For me the thing is all about the journey; imagine the feel of walking out onto an Olympic piste..... is that something that should be denied an athlete just because it is judged by some statistician that their weapon/gender/age group is not going to get GB a medal? Shouldn't it be a little bit about the wonder of it all? The sheer achievement of even getting there? Or is it all about satisfying an ultimately shallow desire for medals from an instant-fix nation?
Now I'm talking about it from the perspective of a 'never going to have been there or done it journeyman coach' so I might be romanticising it a bit in terms of ultimate outcomes. It may be different for the athletes concerned; they may accept it's all about the glitter and not the journey and I imagine the feelings of gaining a medal are truly remarkable, but not everyone can or will. My views may well be completely out of touch with the times but let's think of the impact on youngsters coming up; on the future top athletes of fencing. Are we really saying that unless they can win a medal they won't get funded? Who is to judge this? How will they do it? What criteria will the selection be made on? Are we really sure that this is what UK fencing is all about?

As I say, it's a really tricky subject and everyone will have a strong opinion. If I was to introduce selection criteria they would look something like this:
Fighting spirit
Decent technique
Role model for other athletes in their sport
Behaviour appropriate to representing your nation
An appreciation of and delight at the opportunity

Looking at them, they're just as hard to judge as any other yardstick. But they seem much more worthwhile to me.
 
* if you found yourself subconciously saying "Alfieeeee...." after the title you're a person very much like me....