wgj3 Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 (edited) Help needed... We have a match sponsor who is looking to run a match in a fashion with which I am not terribly familiar... Their idea is to run the match with 6-8 stages with par times of 30-90 seconds. Each stage would have a maximum number of points available to be earned by the shooter for getting hits as prescribed by the stage brief. Likely that most stages would probably have a max value of 12-15 pts. At the end of the match, whoever has the most points, wins. There would be no penalties for missed targets, you just don't get the point(s) if you don't get the hits. It would be a 2-Gun match with pistol and rifle. Rifle targets out to around 250-300 max. Mostly steel targets with little to no reset. Can I use the PRS scoring option in Practiscore to make this happen? I was looking for something where I could simply build a match with 8 stages, add the shooters, and enter the number of points that each shooter earns on each stage. Then the program would add each shooter's stage points and determine the match standings based on whoever earned the most cumulative points. It looks like the PRS scoring requires a time for each stage and we are not interested in doing that on more than maybe a single stage to act as a tie-breaker. It also appears to require you to enter multiple targets with a Hit/Miss option instead of just total hits/points earned for the stage. As a follow-up, does this sound like an appealing format? I'm not at all sold on it myself because everything that I have ever shot is timed and you are rewarded by getting it done faster; USPSA, Outlaw 3-Gun, 3GN, IDPA, etc... Edited June 28, 2016 by wgj3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AHI Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 would not the par time 30 or 90 seconds be your time ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgj3 Posted June 29, 2016 Author Share Posted June 29, 2016 Only if the shooter used the full amount of time alloted. The point would be to not have to record a time at all unless a particular stage needed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightops Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 Can't you use the "Time Plus(Points)" match style? It lets you specify if the stage is scored as points or as time plus. Make your par stages as points with whatever max per stage, and make your tiebreaker a time plus stage but only worth 1 point So lets say you had 3 shooters going into the tiebreaker (51,50,50) Whichever of the two 50's had the better score would get a larger fraction of the 1 match point, but even if they had the best time overall on the tiebreaker and it bumped them to 51, the actual winner would have some fraction of a match point added to his natural 51 score to keep them in first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonytheTiger Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 To answer your last question: sounds dumb as hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgj3 Posted June 29, 2016 Author Share Posted June 29, 2016 Tony, I kindof agree, but I cant explain exactly why... Is it just because its different from what we are used to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonytheTiger Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 That's probably part of it. Do you get one shot per target or can you blast away till time runs out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ziebart Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 (edited) What about USPSA fixed time stages? I tried it on my android and it seems to work. Only issue is you have to live with all steel being worth the same 5 points and each alpha on paper being 5 points as well. People may not spend the time to shoot the rifle, if they can rack up easy pistol points. That is all on stage design though. This can be a fun format depending on implementation. Ideally you put more targets out that people can shoot in the allotted time. You can also limit the number of rounds allowed. It also reduces timer issues if shooting too close together. Edited June 30, 2016 by ziebart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgj3 Posted June 30, 2016 Author Share Posted June 30, 2016 Maybe limit rounds on some stages, but generally not limited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgj3 Posted June 30, 2016 Author Share Posted June 30, 2016 I could see the USPSA fixed-time stage option being a possibility other than the fact it would then score the match with hit factors, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgj3 Posted June 30, 2016 Author Share Posted June 30, 2016 (edited) ... Edited June 30, 2016 by wgj3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkCO Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 I could see the USPSA fixed-time stage option being a possibility other than the fact it would then score the match with hit factors, etc. No, fixed time is only points, no HF, which is bypassed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgj3 Posted June 30, 2016 Author Share Posted June 30, 2016 Interesting indeed. So that would make it 500 point match instead of a 100 point match. That would make the top score something like 490 and the bottom would be 300 or so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ziebart Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 Bottom is 0 if they don't hit anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acpie360 Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 It might be easier to do the paper scoring. Since stage time doesn't matter, all you have to record is hit points. There is neither HF nor stage point you need to calculate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgj3 Posted July 1, 2016 Author Share Posted July 1, 2016 I'm thinking paper may be the answer too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgj3 Posted July 1, 2016 Author Share Posted July 1, 2016 Bottom is 0 if they don't hit anything. Right, but the thinking on setup is that 70% of the points should be pretty easy for anyone with guns that run. Will the guys at the bottom feel worse losing by 200pts in a 500pt match rather than 40pts in a 100pt match? The sponsor is a relatively new local shop who wants to increase foot traffic. Their thinking is that they want the guys who arent winning to feel like they're close enough that a new scope or longer mag or different trigger is the answer. That mentality works better for them than "I'm too slow and out of shape and don't practice enough to make up 200+ seconds in a time-plus match"... I DON'T like it, but I get it. Same guys will still win, but the bottom guys are "closer". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightops Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 I've seen Pro-Am matches shot in this scoring, but they were 100% falling steel targets against a par time that you could not possibly get all the points. But 1 knocked over piece of steel is 1 point, and the tiebreaker stage was time plus. It was a fun match, and a simple enough scoring system. But most of the fun was in that it was all reactive steel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ziebart Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 With guns that run is the key point. If someone has a squib they are not going to go far. Stage setup will be key to ensure people feel successful. I am not sure if 5 vs 1 point will have that much affect on a person's attitude. Arcade games rack up way more points than needed. At the same time in multigun we use bonuses instead of penalties for extra hard target so people don't feel bad about skipping them. The affect on scores is the same. If every steel is worth 1 point it may be easier to just score on paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgj3 Posted July 1, 2016 Author Share Posted July 1, 2016 We will shoot out to 200-300yds, so "all falling steel" is not so simple to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now