Thank you @superdomestique ! The SN schedule is out, and we know our event schedule (we’ll be there well after 7/1); but it sounds like a great idea to wait until after the season to request an interview. My son has visited and met with three coaches - UNC, Brown and Stevens. He wants to touch base with them again at Nationals and hopefully a few others.
Arwarw - As a practical matter most if not all of the top recruits in each gender and weapon have already met with coaches at their top choices. In fact a chosen few (as indicated above) may have even ‘committed’ to the college of their choice. While rule of thumb is no official contact prior to July 1 after the athlete’s junior year in high school, there is nothing that stops the fencer from initiating the contact, including an unofficial campus visit. Other than so-called dead-periods, e.g., in late November, a coach can meet with the athlete and even with his/her parents, on-campus and discuss pretty much everything. Depending on your son’s relative position on the recruitment ladder for his year and weapon, you will have greater or lesser success at setting up these meetings. Post-JOs a lot of coaches have downtime and are willing to meet with visiting fencers. After last year’s JOs we were able to meet with coaches at a couple of the Ivies as well as at some of the “big box” schools including UND and OSU. The more desirable a recruit, the more urgency there will be from coaches to commit. Most will certainly want to know before SNs, probably in March-April. Some, those with tighter rosters, may even want a commitment earlier. Good luck!
@BrooklynRye He is not a top rated fencer. He’s not looking at any of the current top 10 fencing teams. He’s just hoping to touch base with the coaches he’s already met with and to maybe get to know a few others while at SN. Interesting that you say most coaches will want commitments prior to SN. I haven’t found that to be the case with our local fencers here - even the top recruits.
@arwarw, I am glad you said that.
I think commitments before SN are unusual and unheard of in March/April. In any event, any “commitment” made by either a coach or a fencer before July 1st before the high school student’s senior year is not binding on either party.
This is an important distinction as these non-binding commitments may serve as distracting noise to an already opaque recruiting process. For many families who follow this informative CC thread it is important to separate the noise from the realities of the process and I would not want any college fencing aspirants to be discouraged from fully participating in the process and/or having the opportunity to put their best foot forward because the noise because too loud.
It is important not to allow rumors of “commitments” to color your approach or to limit the universe of schools your fencer may be good enough to be recruited. While there are many families who make early unofficial visits, speak to coaches earlier than the NCAA July 1st date, and all other positioning, the final recruiting/admissions decisions are made in the weeks/months after SN (at least for the academically elite fencing programs). Anyone who tells you differently is listening to a siren’s song of non-binding recruitment noise and may potentially become a cautionary tale.
I can think of two examples of the inherent dangers of listening to this noise. Leading up to my son’s recruitment year, during the period between JOs and SN, there were two fencers who were ranked higher on the JPL whose pre-SN college “commitments” were openly discussed.
The first example was the top fencer in our weapon, and was widely expected to attend a most prestigious Ivy powerhouse. When my son emailed the coach of this program to schedule a SN meeting he was told by the coach that he already knew who he was going to take, so it would be a waste of everyone’s time to meet at SN. While disappointed, my son expanded the universe of schools he was interested in, but continued to update this coach with his grades, scores and fencing results. At SN, my son did not meet with this coach, however, the top fencer whom this coach wanted, to everyone’s surprise, announced his commitment to another Ivy powerhouse (thankfully to a school my son was not considering). We were fortunate that our son had diligently kept this coach apprised of his interest, and perhaps more importantly his improving grades/scores/results, so he was then aggressively recruited and was ultimately offered a LL by this program. In the end, our son accepted a LL from a different program, however, the lesson we learned was: regardless of all the noise, it’s not over until it is over for both the fencer and the school until binding commitments can actually be made: Keep plugging away until everything is official and final.
The second example was a top-10 fencer who made it known well before SN that he had “committed” to a 2nd tier Ivy. While my son had initiated correspondence with this coach during junior year, he did not meet with the coach at SN, partially because we had heard the recruited position in our weapon had been filled. However, in late September of senior year (a few days after SAT results came out) the coach of this program called our son to offer him a recruited position on the team. At that point, we had already decided on another program, but we later learned that the fencer who “committed” before SN did not pass the preread and could not be recruited at that Ivy. He ultimately matriculated at a non-academically elite fencing powerhouse.
Examples like those described above happen every year. It is worth noting that while we did not meet with the above-mentioned Ivy coaches at SN, we tried to meet with almost all the coaches of academically elite programs at SN because nothing is certain until your academic record is complete (full junior year grades are published). One surprise can upset the whole recruiting universe, so it is important to keep all your options open and lines of communication clear with all the coaches.
As a data point, my son received 4 LL offers (the 2nd example above would have been the 5th) and was given strong encouragement to apply Early from the two other academically elite fencing programs. He verbally committed to his first choice Ivy program in mid-August after the preread was official (and informed all the other programs of his decision), submitted his application on September 15th and we sweated it out until the actual LL was received on October 1st.
In our experience, you do not have to have extensive contact with college coaches or a lot of school visits before July 1st to successfully participate in the college recruiting process. While it is for others to say that our experience was the exception, I do not think it was.
Quite frankly, our son had a slow start in the sport (he was still splitting his time between fencing and soccer thru sophomore year) and we were not sure if he was recruitable in fencing given all the noise. As a consequence, we had a late start in the overall recruiting process. We had only taken one unofficial visit before SN, so July was a bit of a whirlwind. I am glad we did not let the noise overly influence our process. As an aside, we did not discover CC, this thread, or @sherpa’s wealth of knowledge of information until after the entire process was over. While we would not have done anything differently has we know about CC earlier, this thread is a great resource.
In summary, at the academically elite fencing programs, binding recruitment commitments cannot be made until the preread has been successfully completed, and a student’s academic file is not complete until full junior year grades/scores are available (which is generally around the time SN begins in late June). The college fencing recruitment process is long, stressful and can be noisy. So I guess this is a long way of saying that it is important to be aware of what is noise and what is not. Try to ignore all the noise, stay focused on the process, and what is best/possible for your fencer.
Hello @sherpa
Any information on fencers transferring between schools?
Can coaches have any impact on admissions in this process?
I’m only aware of a couple fencers who have transferred. I’m reasonably confident coaches can help with the process.
Like any other athlete, they have to follow the NCAA transfer rules. Coaches can help you or kill you in the process.
I think my daughter’s coach would be helpful except if D wanted to transfer to a school in the same conference, then the coach would say no and D would have to sit out a year or more
I hate getting into ‘pissing’ contests over subject matter that is as multifaceted and nuanced as college recruiting. There are as many experiences with this process as there are athletes. One of the reasons why I inquired of Arwar as to the level of her son’s fencing is because, despite what Superdomestique writes, commitments before SN are fairly common. Now what I mean by “commitments” is clearly not a binding contract. Up until a student is accepted to the college, either party may change course. However, speaking from recent personal experience, starting in August 2014 and running through Junior Olympics into Worlds, more than a dozen of my son’s peers had made non-binding commitments to their top choices and every single one of them will end up at his/her respective school. Again, these are not binding commitments until the ink is dry on the acceptance letter, but when it comes to the very top recruits, they can often pick their spot, have a handshake deal with the coach, and usually the deal closes. I say this not as a matter of opinion but of documented fact.
You are correct that allowing the “noise” of unsubstantiated commitments can distract an athlete and his/her parents from continuing to target properly. Because, even if talk of such commitments is accurate in the sense of an understanding between a coach and an athlete, they are not binding, there may always be a last minute change of plans and thus an opening for the enterprising runner-up. But not being distracted by “noise” is different than being unrealistic about one’s chances of recruitment. It does not take a rocket scientist to lay out the projected rosters at the major fencing programs around the country, match that up against the current recruitment class, and have a sense of who may need/want/take who and of who may go where. Yes, there’s a bit of guesswork involved, but fencing is such an intimate sport, those in the upper echelons of recruiting are more than a little privy to information and intentions.
I cannot speak for the relative number of recruiting decisions that are made before or after Summer Nationals, but I know it is not as cut and dried as “all” or even the majority of decisions post-SN. As I said, the top recruits in each weapon and gender will have communicated with the top programs as early as the summer prior to their junior year in high school. Many of them will have non-binding understandings with the coaches. You very rarely see a top recruit running around the convention center at SN having interview sessions. Rather, you see the 2nd and 3rd tier at tables and couches all over the venue trying to squeak out remaining recruitment slots or at least a spot on the team assuming academic admissions. Yes, July 1st (or earlier depending on confirmation of high school senior status) is the date after which the gloves are off and everyone is talking to everyone. But please believe me when I tell you that most of the top recruits are done. Non-binding or not when these deals are made, they are done, and most of them will matriculate at the school with which they made their deal.
By all means stay the course. If your child is exceptionally intelligent and fortunate, he or she may get in to their school of choice on their own, non-recruited merit, and may well compete on the school’s fencing team. There is no reason to throw in one’s cards until the final hand is played. Just be realistic.
What Superdomestique describes with last minute changes does indeed occur. I would argue that it is rare, but any such occurrence provides that one opening your child may need to land his/her desired spot. Even in a year (2015-2016) in which there were a disproportionate number of early commitments, there were cases in which a fencer changed his/her mind, leaving room for someone else.
In keeping with Superdomestique’s data sharing (much appreciated), my son received LL/commitment offers from 8 DV1 fencing programs. He met with the coach at his first choice in the fall of his junior year. He met with many other coaches dating from as early as July prior to his junior year through just after JOs. He met with no coaches after February of his junior year. He exchanged verbal commitments with the coach at his first choice in March of his junior year (the pre-read was expedited to accommodate the early commitment). He applied ED in September, received his LL in October and was officially accepted in December. Yes, any student (not just recruits) can be bounced for illegality, misconduct or an academic meltdown during senior year. I say unlikely if only judging by the high-functioning demographic most unique to the fencing community. Possible? Yes. Likely, not even close.
It is important to differentiate between the top-tier recruits and those essentially waiting for those dominos to fall before finding their own slot. If you are in that lower tier then, yes, it may not matter how often you visit or how much contact you have. I would advise showing interest, including a visit if it is not too burdensome. Coaches want to know of your interest even if you are not their top choice. You may also be appealing to them based on your academics (see standardized test averages and balancing at NCAA schools). I would not deny my child the process, even if he was not a top recruit, however unrealistic. But as the parent, I would always try not to fantasize too much.
In sum, I think we are all on the same page, wanting the best for our children and looking to pay it forward and to share with others. This is all for the good. As I began, everyone’s experience is different. But I am fully convinced that a top recruit can commit early (however non-binding) and that the majority of recruitment slots are filled, at least in principal, long before Summer Nationals.
Respectfully.
I’ve enjoyed reading the discussion between @superdomestique and @BrooklynRye. Clearly both are knowledgeable and experienced. Aside from hangups on a few terms I believe they’re generally in agreement with each other.
For another data point I’ll relate my son’s timetable. As background, he had a very strong AI and had been consistently highly ranked in cadet, junior, and senior.
Junior year he (and I) made unofficial visits to Princeton, UPenn, Columbia, Brown, Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Haverford, and maybe one or two more. Every coach knew that, with their support, DS would fly through admissions. Ours were exploratory visits; DS wasn’t ready to commit and wasn’t seeking offers. Still, coaches at four of the eight schools I’ve listed explicitly offered support and two others, while less explicit, were extremely supportive and encouraged us to keep in touch. The only two schools where support was unclear were Yale, where the coach was relatively noncommunicative and Harvard, which we visited but didn’t meet with the coach because he had erroneously told us that NCAA rules precluded us from meeting on campus.
We wondered if the Harvard coach’s unwillingness to meet had been a sign of disinterest or an honest misunderstanding of NCAA rules. We suspected the former (though this made little sense considering son’s AI and ranking), but later learned that it was apparently the latter when the coach reached out to recruit him after SN. After (as opposed to during) SN may seem strange, but son skipped SN that year for an academic activity. Later still my belief that the Harvard coach had misunderstood NCAA recruiting rules was confirmed through PMs on CC from recruits who had heard the same thing from him.
For another anecdote, as a student at Princeton my son once hosted a top prospect for an official visit. This prospect was clearly that year’s number one recruit in his weapon but, there he was, in the fall of his senior year of HS, not yet having committed to any college. As I recall he made OVs at most if not all of HYPS before finally making his choice.
I believe that it is not uncommon for mutual commitments to be made well before SN but I also believe that this is neither the rule or the exception. Another question is how strong these commitments truly are. My guess is that most hold, but the athlete might have a change of heart, receive a better offer, or suffer an injury. A coach with limited slots might happen upon a better prospect. Or there could be a coaching change, at which point the prospect might follow the coach, or ???
As for my son, he didn’t commit to Princeton’s coach until August or September of his senior year, and had a likely letter in October.
My advice to any potential recruit is the same. Make unofficial visits junior year and, once you’re sure you know where you’d like to go, try to secure a commitment from the coach. I wouldn’t assume that all positions are filled by SN; it’s more like a game of musical chairs where the last slots are available into the fall. More than anything, it’s important to understand where you truly stand and to maintain open and honest communicating with the coaches. Good luck to all!
I guess it is a result of our relative lateness to the recruiting process, the practice of early, non-binding commitments seems so unusual to me. This lack of knowledge is due more to my inexperience than anything else, however I have tried to share our family’s recent experiences and make comments on this thread to be helpful to those who have yet to go thru the process.
The coaches at the academically-elite schools all told us that in our weapon, top fencers with top academics were much more rare than top fencers in the other weapons. Apparently, there are some years where no academically-qualified candidates are available, so the competition for fencers in our weapon with top academics can be really fierce. My son’s academic record was pretty solid and his SN performance was his best to-date (2 podium finishes), so perhaps this is why, despite no early commitment offers, our recruiting experience went so quickly and successfully after SN.
While it is not clear if my son took someone else’s non-binding spot, we are extremely grateful that the coaches we met with at SN had not made any early commitments to other fencers in our weapon. As a data point, of the four LLs my son was offered (in July), the three programs that he did not pursue did not take another fencer in our weapon in the EA/ED round.
Nevertheless, I think @BrooklynRye’s general comments offer a rarefied insight into what can happen at the highest levels and I congratulate him on his son’s success.
While I am now aware that ultra-early, non-binding recruiting does happen, I would offer that the overlap between this universe and the universe of post-July 1st binding commitments is not 100%, and that one does not have to enjoy early, non-binding commitment to be considered a recruitable fencer at the LL/NLI level.
I think that while @BrooklynRye’s and my experiences were very different, what we are saying is not that far apart. Our main difference seems to be how much a fencer and their family can/should rely on a commitment that is still non-binding.
For those who have enjoyed ultra-early, non-binding commitments, I wonder when these fencers and their families feel comfortable telling other coaches, programs, and/or peers that that have decided on a given program? Personally, we found it difficult to “go public” with any admissions information until the LL was in our son’s hands. Perhaps we are the exception, but we fully acknowledge how crazy/competitive the admission process is at the top schools. I am not sure if my son were a significantly better fencer would have made us confident enough to share our news any earlier.
For the purpose of sharing with those beginning the recruiting process , I offer some random thoughts and anecdotal experiences:
The risks of relying on non-binding commitments can run both ways. Over the years, there have been instances where top recruits accepted non-binding commitments at more than one school (it’s non-binding, so why not? is the rationale) . This can really upset non-binding commitments down the line for many coaches when the actual applications are due in September. It is my understanding that this happened to several Ivy coaches, and some of them have become less willing to make early commitments as a consequence.
Because of this, I continue to feel the real downside of the early, non-binding recruit is that they may stop exploring all their options before the music stops and/or before they know enough to make this important decision. The same goes for the coaches.
As another data point in our recruitment year, of the top 10-12 HS seniors in our weapon, five fencers were accepted Early to academically-elite programs (assume LL or equivalent), and two did not receive their acceptances until the Regular round (possible LL, but also possibly not first choice). The rest of the top guys went to non-academically elite powerhouses and it is unclear when these fencers committed to these programs Early (it is possible that some may not have passed the academic preread of their non-binding commitment to an Ivy). This anecdotal dataset would suggest that not all the top fencers in a given weapon know where they are going before the post-SN process was fully underway.
It is worth noting that just because many non-binding commitments have ultimately worked out, it does not make them fact, it just makes them part of an incomplete historical dataset. The examples of non-binding commitments that did not work out are rarely documented.
In any case, I hope none of my comments can be construed as initiating or continuing a pissing match. I think @sherpa, @BrooklynRye, and others have offered excellent, and more importantly different perspectives on this arcane topic.
For those who have been following the discussion, it is always nice to hear if our comments have been useful/helpful in your process. To the degree possible, let us know how things have worked out, and if there are any other important considerations that have not already been discussed.
Good luck to everyone.
Thank you for your eloquent and thoughtful response, @superdomestique . I think discussions such as this are good for all to gain various perspectives, none of which is less valid than another. What you say about staying the course to possibly break a tie with a stronger academic record is a very important concept. Less competitive Ivies, e.g., Brown and Yale, as well as Stanford, and to a certain extent Duke, put academics substantially ahead of athletic accomplishments. I have heard of more competitive programs extending all manner of accommodation to desirable athletic recruits to compensate for academic records not quite in line with the school’s general requirements. There are limits, but a lot of leeway as well.
From our respective experiences I think it is clear that to each his/her experience is unique and that there can be a tendency to view such experience as “the norm.” In my case, as the parent of a highly-recruited fencer, there were seemingly no holds barred in the outreach from all of the major DV1 fencing programs, the extent to which each was willing to ‘commit’ (recognizing the limits of such early promises), and the degree to which there were perks that can be offered to entice top recruits to commit.
Yes, this does indeed happen. From both my personal experience as well as from what common sense tells me, I believe that each year there is a depth chart of roughly 4 top fencers in each gender and weapon. These become the early and primary targets for schools looking to recruit in those genders and weapons. Some years are clearly stronger than others in any given gender and weapon. While there are probably top fencers who wait until late in the game, I would argue that this is rare (at least as far as those top 4 in each gender/weapon), and that most often the more recognizable fencers who wait do so for reasons other than recruitment offers, e.g., for academic or desire to go to a specific school reasons.
Actually SD, we don’t even disagree on the extent to which a given fencer should rely on early commitments. I think it is the norm for the elite and should be taken with a grain of salt, if given at all, by any fencer outside of that rarified group. While there are occasional rumors of fencers ‘promised’ slots who were then rejected by the school, I often find these to be unfounded or, when investigated, based on a factor outside the control of the committing coach, e.g., academic issues.
As far as going public, I abide by the age-old adage that a true secret is something you share with no one. Once a second party knows the information the possibility now exists for others to find out. In any case, I think it is a personal matter. One fencing family told of their fencer’s commitment in the late summer of the fencers SOPHOMORE year in high school! Others wait til the last minute, at least until the LL is received. In any case, as I noted earlier, in a community as small and intimate as fencing, most people, at least in a given gender/weapon group, have a strong sense of where at least the top fencers are going. As an aside-hobby, by breaking down the rosters of the major DV1 fencing programs and cross-referencing those ‘needs’ with the current recruiting class, and injecting my personal knowledge of families and fencers, I have been extremely accurate in predicting where the top fencers in my son’s weapon (as well with respect to his female counterparts) land. In fact, in my son’s recruiting year I was 100% correct.
As far as the competitive side, I am leery to attribute too much power to people to affect the recruiting process with knowledge of someone’s early commitment. I know that this is a factor and fear of many of the more reticent parents, but I’m not so sure. On the other hand, I believe that when coaches get wind of a fencer committing elsewhere it can definitely poison the soup and, unfortunately, sometimes this wind is blown by the parent of a fencer competing for recruiting slots. This actually happened to us (the parent actually confessed to doing this) and, as it turned out, there was more than one parent who did the same thing.
In keeping with SD’s sharing, I personally think that it is unethical and inconsiderate (for the reasons SD cites) to make more than one commit. Although technically “non-binding” if the fencer truly wants to go and the coach truly wants him/her, then the parties at least intend to follow through. Committing elsewhere in such cases is a breach of trust and in bad faith. It is also inconsiderate to other fencers who may have truly made one of the offending fencer’s secondary choices their first.
I guess, once again, it depends on your relative security in your recruiting position. For the rarified few, they probably feel at little risk of being screwed over by a coach. But for the large majority, positive words, even of the most flattering kind, should probably not be enough to suspend the search. There are coaches, well meaning, kind and smart, who are known to be great schmoozers. Many a fencer has gone down the primrose path of reassurances and a sense of commitment only to find they are out in the end.
Interesting contrast. Of the top 12 HS seniors in our weapon, 10 committed and were accepted ED/EA to top DV1 programs/schools. 1 fencer applied RD. The remaining fencer, by rumor only, is SD’s cautionary tale of counting on reassurances of a place only to be rejected by the school. You can see, SD, from whence my take on early commitments stems. In the case of the RD applicant, note that this was solely due to academic issues, not a lack of desire on the part of either the fencer or the school in question to commit. However, to SD’s points, the 1 unfortunate anomaly should act as a big caution sign to parents and fencers.
Sorry for the off-color description of our back and forth, SD. No offense taken at all. This is a great group discussion which I hope gives much information and food for thought to the general community of parents with kids looking to fence in college. I too hope we get some feedback as to the helpfulness (or lack thereof) of our posts).
As a high school fencer’s parent, I started to follow this thread about 2 years ago. I have read every single line of all the posts here, some times more than once. It’s both a great learning experience and a nice entertainment. I want to thank everybody who contributes to this thread, especially Sherpa, who generously and tirelessly provides us very helpful and interesting information. I had some private communications with him too and almost met him once. I am sure lots of people have similar experience as I do. So guys please be nice to Sherpa, he’s got lots of hidden friends out there. LOL.
I feel guilty that in last 2 years I have only taken but never given any information about college fencing recruiting. First reason is that I just don’t feel I have anything special to share, whatever I could say already been said by Sherpa, or some other guys with more experience and knowledge. Another reason is my son didn’t want to release any information about him until he fully committed with his college choice. Now it’s all over (since last December), I can freely talk about college fencing recruiting and whatever it involves. But of course, I don’t want to repeat whatever Sherpa and others already talked about. So what’s important, helpful yet not being talked about, at least not widely acknowledged?
From my son’s college recruiting experience, I found one thing that I like to share with everyone:
The fencing coaches from the elite colleges communicate to each other closely! What does that mean? It means they know every top fencer very well. How well? They know not only your academics, your fencing performance, but what your top college choice is. Unless of course you don’ even have a top choice, or you never talked with anyone. In my son’s case, even though he tried hard to hide his college preference, but when he sit with the coaches in the last Summer National for interviews, he was so surprised that every coach seem to know where he really wanted to go. So they didn’t even bother to try to persuade him (well, except one college), even though he ranked number one natinally and his AI is the highest you can get. Because of that, my son didn’t even bother to apply to other colleges other than his top choice.
So if you or your child is one of the top fencers with good academics, be careful with your college choice intention, unless of course, you are 100% sure where you want to go and 100% sure you will get in.
Great to have so many experienced fencing parents plugged into this thread.
I do think that there is a very wide gulf between being the #1 fencer in weapon/highest AI possible (see sr_oradba’s post #371 above) and being a D-rated/average smart kid who might be interested in fencing in college — and the majority of visitors to this thread will fall somewhere in between these two extremes.
I guess the point I’m trying to make is that the parents who had/have top-ranked kids who went on to elite college programs need to take into account that not every kid (or parent of a kid) who finds this thread is going to be as desirable a recruit as your kids…and they should tailor their advice accordingly.
I’ve lurked here for quite a while and and just joined now that my daughter is a HS junior. @SevenDad 's last comment finally hooked me into joining:
I think that’s a great comment, and it definitely applies to us. My daughter isn’t on the JWF points list, but she’s a strong C fencer with top grades. She absolutely loves fencing, spends almost every non-school awake moment at her club fencing or reffing local events (she is also a rated ref). She really wants to fence in college, but at this point is still trying to figure out what colleges are interesting (based on both academics and fencing), even after several unofficial visits and general admission open houses. The college coaches we’ve met have all been very accommodating, interested, and friendly, and some have followed up later.
Mostly I just wanted to sat thanks to the great parents here that really help out all of us that are trying to navigate this maze!
Actually, there are four extrema, as follows:
- Great fencer, great academics
- Great fencer, poor academics
- Poor fencer, great academics
- Poor fencer, poor academics
Obviously, #1 is in great shape and #4 is out of luck. Fencers tending towards #2 and #3 though may also have a shot, depending on the school.
My kid is closest to #3, but he is definitely a better fencer than “poor.” He’s D rated and has no national points, but nevertheless has sparked interest at a couple of Div3 schools, because he competes with moderate success and has a fantastic academic record.
I also appreciate very much the comments on this thread posted by experienced parents. Thanks especially to sherpa.
By “sparked interest,” I mean that the coaches sent letters to the admissions department in support of the application.
@whatisyourquest: I would argue that there is still a very wide range between the minimum required to be considered a “great fencer” and being “#1 on NRPS/national team member/world championship medalist” and whatever the minimum is for being able to claim “great academics” and “highest AI possible”.
I agree about the wide range for being a “great fencer.” I don’t think that the range is so large for “great academics.” There are many more kids that can achieve the highest AI possible than there are kids that are world champions, etc. (Maybe that’s the point that you are making?)
The point I was trying to make is that within both the academic and fencing spheres, I think there is a wide range that could be considered “great” (which could also be read, at the bottom of the acceptable range, as “good enough”).
For example, on the academic front, a 3.7 GPA and 700s across the board on the SATs might be “good enough” even for an Ivy, but that’s only a 211 AI (according to Tier1online calc), vs. a 4.0 GPA and 800s across the board SATs, which yields a 237 using the same calculator.
Then on the fencing front, a kid might be a C-rated fencer in the top third of the NRPS list, which is very different than being the #1 person on that same list.
Hi, I was wondering how good an aspiring recruit had to be to be taken seriously. Before my senior year, I had read a lot of this thread, but didn’t think that I was good enough for fencing to have any significance in admission. I’m currently a senior, but I’m still curious.