euxx

@ClangClang I'd ask an unorthodox question first. If you have paper or even Excel, why you need PractiScore? Your Excel will give you your match results. The main reason to use PractiScore is that your ROs entering the data and that's the only time data is entered. When scoring on paper your data is entered more than once, and that lead to errors, typos, etc. Said that, if you have 3 squads, you need only 3 tablets. The Amazon Fire ones are cheap...

The "*" symbol indicates the used weigh, when more than one weight is entered in the app. The app makes no assumptions about weight being declared or bullets being weighted.

@gdc2506 you could use the free PractiScore app for your practice, but the app is not specifically crafted to be used to track practice. Its main purpose it to run matches. The USPSA website has several HOWTO videos available to members. Also here is a starting point for the apps on the PractiScore Community website https://community.practiscore.com/t/getting-started-with-practiscore-scoring-apps/3332 To record practice and track and analyze progress I created separate app called PractiScore Log. The last updated added support for scoring. Admittedly it doesn't track multi-string scores yet, but that is something I'm planning to look at in the future app updates. Though for steel challenge practice you can use your individual string averages to track your improvement over time. You can find more info at https://community.practiscore.com/t/practiscore-log-app-info/215

Just the weight used to calculate the average PF. No difference in this case, given that the only one weight entered at the chrono. The app makes no assumption or differentiates if weight was declared or bullet was weighted. You'd have to ask the chrono ROs or RM about the crono procedure. Your blanked statement about manufacturer's bullet wights been above declared value has no real ground in general. It can be the case for some vendor, but not for the other. It depends on the bullet manufacturing process (e.g. cast vs swage and how coating or jacket is made). Yes and no. With information we see, one can reasonably estimate chance of some of competitor rounds being under a minor PF at about 40%. We don't have to prove a given round was light or not, but can say with some level or certainty that it could have been light.

Hard to tell... With his time and HF the cost of Miss was 2.36 seconds. His match overall is 85.83% - 12th place. 2nd shot at the popper added .83 and 3rd shot - added .63 seconds. So, 1.46 together - that is still under that cost of Miss for his stage time. Taking only 3rd shot off would bring stage time to 11.42, HF 6.8 and cost of Miss - 2.20. With no miss 86.09% in the match - 12 place overall. With taking a miss - stage HF: 5.5. Match overall 85.35% and 14th place. Taking both of them off would make stage time 10.79 and stage HF 7.2. Cost of miss - 2.08 seconds. With no Miss - the match overall 86.31 - 12 place. With taking a Miss - stage HF: 5.8 and match overall 85.53% - 14th place. All in all, he seems did the right decision to shoot the popper and whole incident likely haven't affected his overall standing.

It could have been an issue with the popper, but I won't write off competitor's ammo either. Think about it... His ammo passed chrono with the average of the best 3 rounds out of 5 shots trough chrono and 2 rounds out of 5 were under 125 PF. Now, expanding same ammo PFs to stage shooting - 40% of shots were under powered. It could be more than 40% or it could be less, we don't really know. But we know there were some and with bad luck one of those low power rounds went into the heavy large popper. Just like that. So, knowing it's an edge PF ammo, competitor still took his chances at the major competition. It gave him some advantage in other places, but it also increased chances of popper not going down here... For a PRO competitor there is no one else to blame, it is all part of the game and he gambled on it.

On the other hand... The cost of those is close to the 1/3 of the tablet price. So, could wait when Fire 8 HD is on sale and get them. You get spares and devices to additionally backup scores to.

No for the first. I have a few older Ankers. They show 4..5 small led to indicate left charge. It also shows that when it is being charged, so you see when it is at full capacity. Will keep an eye on the coming deals and post here

One day only Anker PowerCore Slim 10000 PD Green, 10000mAh Portable Charger USB-C Power Delivery (18W) Power Bank Fast Charge $19.99 ($10 off) https://amzn.to/3tFom3N

It is really about making choices and all part of the game. Running ammo close to the PF limit is a choice too. A PRO shooter should know the risks associated with that. Seems like a gamble to me... PS: Nils ammo were over 132 PF and Mason's - over 135 PF

Can't say anything about repairing chronograph. But you can see what was entered for him at chrono in the match results.

At the same time, two out of 4 rounds they shot trough chrono for JJ were sub-minor...

The sub-minor does NOT give you a bump to Open. It gives you ZERO scores regardless of the declared division.

The 126 PF didn't help either... For the reference, Nils had 133 PF.

The Competitor app is not using that website dashboard. You can search your matches by your email, member#, competitor name, or just the match name... And then data is available for offline use and quick access. You can switch between matches you previously downloaded.

See the last part of my message as one of the possible options. Some sports using handicap of some sort as part of the competition... And no, I wasn't referring to the random "participation" prize table, but the class-awards. But besides that, none of it won't change the overall standing and you still going to compete against those PRO guys. It's gust they would be above any class awards.

See my point regarding the objective. The USPSA is really far past the point when they need two separate classifications (for both SCSA and USPSA). One for the PRO shooters and the other one for the mere mortals who are paying to keep organization alive. Alternatively they could remove the PROs from all classification-based standings at matches (say if competitor ever placed at the top 10..15 at the Nationals), so the regular competitors can have a chance to fight for the top M, GM awards.

This is really more like "if USPSA would be willing to work with PractiScore on this". They could have it a while ago. But even now, you have this "scores-by-squad" in the PractiScore Competitor app. And since this match is posting the scorelogs from ipads, the Competitor app picks updated scores nearly right after stage is scored (assuming wifi at the range hold up)...

Revolver super squad is done. No big surprises for the top 3.

Someone is using that "High Available"... Brian shot the opposite stages, so that is anomaly that will go away after day 2. You get more realistic order if you look at combined results for Revilver and say Production. There you can see that Bryan is about 4% behind.

The top 10% against real GMs (not the old time GMs) does not make a GM. And then also GM times start from 95%, so why set them at the current 100% from the top times? Shouldn't it leave some room for growth to all those GMs?

Looking at the past years of USPSA classifier changes, they are not going to tell you. But try to contact them and ask. Guessing here won't really give you an answer. I would have thought they could take absolute best stage times, aggregate them and give some extra margin to make it tough for GMs. It wasn't how it was done last year. But then again maybe it wasn't the objective and they just wanted to lure more people to get a GM coin and participate in matches and make money for the org. Low peak times would serve that objective. What also puzzle me is why no new stages being added...

I'm not following what difference does it make how often shooters shoots below their class? Perhaps a better question to answer first is what is the objective for changing the current peak times? If the idea is make everyone GM - that is one thing (and you may have a point in your calculations. But if the goal is to classify competitors relative to the current SCSA achievements - that is a different story (even so some former GMs are shooting at B levels).

IMHO, it makes no difference how many shooters shot their class or below. Some of those classes probably based not on the current, but 2..3 increases before that. A more interesting picture would be a distribution of the competitor's times broken by the classes percentages taking the current class winner's times. And take 5% from those top times (for GM's 95% threshold).

365 when searching by name. Unless there is another namesake: