Practicing classifiers

[Robusto]

If a match staff sets up stages for the upcoming match to practice, it's unfair to every competitor that wasn't invited to the practice session. That goes for classifiers & any other stages.

I have been asked to leave several times, escorted out and removed from the premises on a few occasions; but I have never been un-invited to set up.

 

[jtischauser]

What if your club was big enough like say USSA and you had all the classifiers setup all the time? That way all the members of the club could be GM's. Much like they have the steel challenge stages setup all the time.

 

[luke.reninger]

So this brings up a point. A range I was looking at seeing while on vacation had a rule that if you setup on Friday afternoon, you could shoot all you wanted until dark. The match was Saturday.

While I agree it would be unfair to practice the entire course of fire for a match beforehand, if that is the only way the MD gets setup help, then what?

 

[mike cyrwus]

If you wanna spend time practicing a classifier, then have fun being bored.

Matt wins!

 

[mike cyrwus]

So this brings up a point. A range I was looking at seeing while on vacation had a rule that if you setup on Friday afternoon, you could shoot all you wanted until dark. The match was Saturday.

While I agree it would be unfair to practice the entire course of fire for a match beforehand, if that is the only way the MD gets setup help, then what?

You just answered your own question, "it would be unfair to practice the entire course of fire for a match beforehand"

If that is the only way to get help, then you guys are going to be shooting a match that may not be fair. It is what it is; call a spade a spade.

Like this: I freely admit that alcohol has ruined millions of lives and in many cases, has brought horror and despair to untold families.
But that wont stop me from crackin the seal off a new bottle of WT tonight

 

[jtischauser]

This discussion is pointless because I know none of you SOB's practice anyway. Or at least that's what the scores say.

 

[Rockon71385]

I think it's important to remember why we have a class system. It's there so the guys that aren't at the top levels can feel like they have something to compete for. Who gives a **** if someone wants to artificially inflate their own classification? It's their loss. They can be the lowest GM instead of high A class at a major match. Having the GM card might help with sponsors if you're into that, and it might get you some fanboys at your local club, but the match results have a way of sorting out the bullshit.

As for someone practicing a classifier to improve their score at a club match, I still don't care. First off, it's a club match which means it's pretty much just a practice match for serious competitors. All the classifier diagrams are published. I could set them up at home and practice before matches just as easily as someone could do it at the range where the match will be held. Besides, practicing something the night before definitely doesn't guarantee you're going to shoot it better the next day.

 

[racnsoonr]

I still think the classifier system is fubarred in it's current state myself. You don't set a golf handicap on one par 3 every round. It's how you perform on the whole course which is graded by difficulty. There should be a better way to become classified based on how you perform against your fellow competitors on ALL of the same stages/based on overall difficulty..not one short stage

But to answer Mike's question, I don't care if someone gets practice runs at a classifer...reality is overall match finish compared to your peers to me

 

[Rockon71385]

I still think the classifier system is fubarred in it's current state myself. You don't set a golf handicap on one par 3 every round. It's how you perform on the whole course which is graded by difficulty. There should be a better way to become classified based on how you perform against your fellow competitors on ALL of the same stages/based on overall difficulty..not one short stage

But to answer Mike's question, I don't care if someone gets practice runs at a classifer...reality is overall match finish compared to your peers to me

Totally agree about the system being a poor measure of overall performance, but the devil is in the details.


Go here, and look at 06-02, 09-11, 13-09, 99-28, and 99-56: http://www.uspsa.org/uspsa-classifier-list.php



There are lots of awesome classifiers with movement, unusual start positions, 20+ rounds, etc. The problem is that the classifiers we see most often are the REALLY simple ones that are easy to set up. After spending the time and effort to set up 5 field courses, the small number of volunteers that set up most matches will usually opt for a nice simple classifier that only involves a shooting box and a few targets. I don't blame them, and I'm certainly not bitching, but I think that has a lot to do with it.

AS A SOLUTION I would like to see clubs set up more fast but freestyle speed shoots instead of feeling obligated to set up 5-6 long courses to satisfy the hosers. This would allow more time to spent on setting up the longer and more complicated classifiers. Even if a club just did this for, say, 6 months and then went back to normal, every shooter would probably be exposed to 6 classifiers they've never shot. Just an idea.

 

[technetium-99m]

I mostly see the classification system working.

I haven't really seen a paper GM regularly get their ass handed to them by B and C class shooters. Look at big matches, the results more or less flow GM through D with a bit of mixing here and there. When you have enough shots, stages, reloads, etc. to get a meaningful sample it's more apparent than a 60 or 70 round match.

I also don't believe you can practice your way to a GM run, you have the skill set or you dont.

 

[Matt1911]

This discussion is pointless because I know none of you SOB's practice anyway. Or at least that's what the scores say.

Very true.

 

[Airic]

All the people who think classifers are not a good measure of skill and not a good idea...offer a solution.

What should be done? How should people be ranked?

 

[poopgiggle]

Going by standings in major matches would mean I'd have to actually go to major matches, and eff that.

 

[Wall]

wow, this is actually almost like a real competition shooting discussion.

 

[mike cyrwus]

Who gives a **** if someone wants to artificially inflate their own classification? It's their loss.
I give a ****. A disproportionate self image is a great hindrance to developing a good well rounded shooter. I want to see good, well rounded shooters, thats why I care. I want to see everyone put emphasis on the competition, and the match, not the classifications. If I want to look at roosters, Ill look in my chicken coop.

They can be the lowest GM instead of high A class at a major match. Having the GM card might help with sponsors if you're into that, and it might get you some fanboys at your local club. hose fanboys are often new shooters, I want them to get better and worry about practicing and getting instruction, , not worry about buying a boomershooter jersey asap.

First off, it's a club match which means it's pretty much just a practice match for serious competitors. wrong wrong wrong. A club match is a match. period. we have new shooters and spectators. Which is the best way to present our sport to the public or potential new shooters?

I want to see the utmost display of good sportsmanship and honor. Honor honor honor. It cant be dead. Some of you guys need to watch some British WWII movies. The Nazi's had more respect for some institutions than some of our community.

 

[Tuflehundon]

Honestly though, I see more guys sandbagging classifiers than people trying to game them by shooting over and over. So many people that are C's or D's, that should be A's or B's.

 

[Robaire Pullicar]

But that wont stop me from crackin the seal off a new bottle of WT tonight

as long as it's 101 I'll forgive you

 

[Wild Bill1]

At the end of the day the vast majority of us are non sponsored weekend shooters doing it for laughs and to show solidarity with friends and people who are of the same mindset. I'd love to have a A, M, or GM on my card but what's that going to get me? It's cool to show off at a BBQ but, the letter doesn't add to score. Am I wrong? Meaningful rounds down range, stage planning, marksmanship, and transition speed sound to me like what helps you climb the ladder.

 

[jtischauser]

Honestly though, I see more guys sandbagging classifiers than people trying to game them by shooting over and over. So many people that are C's or D's, that should be A's or B's.

That's one of the issues with the system. I don't see why and definitely don't associste with anyone that would intentionally shoot classifiers poorly to keep their classification lower then it should be. There aren't big enough prizes at stake to risk ruining your reputation over.

What I do see a lot is guys like me that don't participate enough to achieve the higher classification they shoot at. I also see a lot of A, B, & C class guys that are getting better match finishes much faster then their classification scores go up.

I won't offer a solution because it would be long winded and it won't change anything. Major match finishes should definitely count more. Heck I won nationals in B class by a considerable amount in 2013 but I wasnt a high enough % of the winner to warrant a bump to A. An easy rule would be the top X shooters at Nats make GM. If you win or finish top 3-5 in your class at Nats you get a bump. Simple match performance stuff like that.

 

[Rockon71385]

All the people who think classifers are not a good measure of skill and not a good idea...offer a solution.

What should be done? How should people be ranked?

Very simple solution: introduce classifiers that involve at least SOME movement and require entry and exit from shooting positions. Do that, and the skills that win matches are being tested in the current classifier system.

Who gives a **** if someone wants to artificially inflate their own classification? It's their loss.
I give a ****. A disproportionate self image is a great hindrance to developing a good well rounded shooter. I want to see good, well rounded shooters, thats why I care. I want to see everyone put emphasis on the competition, and the match, not the classifications. If I want to look at roosters, Ill look in my chicken coop.

They can be the lowest GM instead of high A class at a major match. Having the GM card might help with sponsors if you're into that, and it might get you some fanboys at your local club. hose fanboys are often new shooters, I want them to get better and worry about practicing and getting instruction, , not worry about buying a boomershooter jersey asap.

First off, it's a club match which means it's pretty much just a practice match for serious competitors. wrong wrong wrong. A club match is a match. period. we have new shooters and spectators. Which is the best way to present our sport to the public or potential new shooters?

I want to see the utmost display of good sportsmanship and honor. Honor honor honor. It cant be dead. Some of you guys need to watch some British WWII movies. The Nazi's had more respect for some institutions than some of our community.

I get what you're saying, it just doesn't really bother me that much. Chumps with GM cards are still chumps. I shrug off the roosters and keep dry firing, and I already went through my, "play pro shooter" phase so that cracks me up more than it bothers me.

All in all, I agree that it would be better for the sport to have the classification system more accurately sort shooters according to their ability, but the guys who train for classifiers and then get destroyed on field courses are just more people I can beat. I do get your point about club matches being real matches. When you're new, club match results mean everything, and they should be fair.