Ratings Inflation and U, an Inland Empire Story. Or the One Post that will cause AJ to lose friends.

Ratings inflation in fencing is one of the more touchy topics of conversation. There are a few of us out there who did not earn their rating at a legitimately difficult tournament, or earned a high one early on in a joke of a tournament. Those fencers usually dislike discussing ratings inflation because they are a result of it.

You might be saying "Why are you stepping in this now? Nothing good is going to come of it." I have a reason for discussing this as it is important to the future of fencing in the Inland Empire. It has come up recently at UMFC and MFA club discourse that Spokane has several 'suspiciously' high ranked epeeists. I, for the record, disagree for a few reasons.

The first reason has to be explained a bit. Ratings do not mean the same in all parts of the country. An "A" ranked Epeeist in Seattle is not always similar in skill level to an "A" ranked Epeeist from New York. The same is true for Saber & Foil, I am just using Epee as an example because it is easily the most inflated for the division and indeed the entire section. This being said, there are plenty of legitimate terrifying Epee fencers in Seattle who wreck people on a national scale.

First reason: Epee is already grossly overinflated in our section
Second reason: The fencers in Spokane are NOT worse than their respective ratings given the overall abundance of their rating in the division. If we're going to point to Spokane and accuse them of diminishing the respect of a rating, then we are going to have to accuse Seattle fencers of coming over to Spokane and intentionally losing so that more ratings could be handed out to fencers in the Inland Empire. Which of course leads to more of our own homebrew tournaments passing out ratings to people who might not deserve them

I dare someone to make that accusation, because I do not have good enough evidence to make that claim. Nor do I believe in the veracity of such a statement.

Further, I would like to make an argument in support of ratings inflation. For a division as small as ours, having higher rated individuals prereg for an event may result in fencers traveling here from further away in the hopes of winning a rating. In other words, ratings inflation can grow the entire division merely by making it look good. If this weekend yields 3 extra C Epeeists in Missoula, it will signify the first time 3 Cs ever lived in Missoula at the same time. It will also mean that our Epee tournaments hold more steam and appeal for outsiders to swing on in and try their luck at a rating.

But I can hear some idealists saying "People are not interested in attending a tournament they know to be inflated. Just because you don't care that you're rating is way higher than it should be doesn't mean nobody does."

First, I could care less how idealistic you think other people are. People from Utah cal and ask if we actually plan to hand out ratings at our next tournament. They don't care where their skills are at, they want that A or B behind their name.

Some of us understand that ratings mean absolutely nothing. But many people subscribe to the belief that since so-and-so is rated, or highly rated, they know a lot about fencing. I want to provide those people with an outlet to express their beliefs in a way that benefits my direct goals of growing the division.