Ben Stoeger

Start pushing yourself in training.

If i get a class organizer, I will. You can be that hero.

That makes sense. Thank you.

I am happy to answer questions, but maybe you could just tell me what this has to do with the question I asked you.

Why not? Forgive me because I have not read your books, but the drills you have for 5 yrds, are they primarily for accuracy or speed? I prefer to do both accuracy and speed.

These guns don't run out of the box. I know you have a large frame 9mm.....mistake IMHO. Not really, have fun with the small frame czechnology. ask yourself....who is using a large frame 9mm? Who is using a small frame 9mm....and why? The only parts you can share with the CZ are the extractors, sometimes springs...(not hammer spring or firing pin spring)...and sometimes mags in small frame (some pins). I am not trying to deter you from the large frame, but I am trying to deter you from the large frame... I am using a large frame gun because I was advised by people that I trust that with the K9 mags the large frame guns run properly. I was also advised that the small frame guns do not run properly. What I have observed so far tells me I made the right choice. If you are happy with your small frame gun, more power to you.

If you have any large frame guns for sale, let me know.

These guns don't run out of the box. I know you have a large frame 9mm.....mistake IMHO. Not really, have fun with the small frame czechnology.

Why not?

There is a score, you figured a way to make yours go up. Never stop figuring stuff out.

These guns don't run out of the box.

The Tanfoglio frame fits my hand a lot better. ben, is there a significant difference between your stock ii and the stock iii? what made you choose stock ii? They are pretty similar. The Stock 2 has a bull barrel and is easier to get in the US.

Thanks man!

Huh? Don't they already have a system for updating the classifiers we already have?

Good point. If only there were some time and place where a bunch of really good GMs get together with guns, gear, and ammo and then shoot as well as they possibly can on stages that get set up for them. Yeah, a nationals with all classifier stages. That sounds as fun as a root canal. I would not spend money to attend a major match like that. Oh. I figured that they could maybe run one or two of them every year, but I guess you think they should go big or go home.

Good point. If only there were some time and place where a bunch of really good GMs get together with guns, gear, and ammo and then shoot as well as they possibly can on stages that get set up for them.

Oh "Oh" Hell. What you got to offer Ben? Speak up. I guess you've shot a documented 100% on this. What makes you think I have shot 100% on it? I am confused. OK. That clears that up. Now neither of us is confused about your ability on this particular classifier. Then why the, "Oh"? I have always thought that this classifier was a particularly poor test of relevant skills. I don't train to do well on this classifier, because I would rather train to do well at big matches. I am not one of the people saying it "has no place in the sport", but if you think this test is "relevant" than I suggest you re-evaluate both the classifier and the nature of the stages at an event like nationals. My personal ability level on this classifier is an interesting red herring to throw out. My initial reaction is that my personal lack of ability on this isn't really important to the conversation... after reconsidering though I think many people would point out that I am one of the people on the sort list of folks that may be one of the top 10 scores on a classifier that you would be averaging according to the policy. Maybe that is why you are curious? In any event, carry on.

Oh "Oh" Hell. What you got to offer Ben? Speak up. I guess you've shot a documented 100% on this. What makes you think I have shot 100% on it? I am confused.

Oh

Thanks, I agree that I don't think it is a problem across the board. I also agree that I care less after 10 years.But, I'm of the opinion that if it is happening I would like to minimize the effect. If it can be done simply. I'd like to hear more about some that people think are suspect. Maybe that's a good place to start? The thing is, unless you know where the HHF came from, you can't say the issue is a set of people who are practicing it until they get a score that is unrealistic for most people. 06-03 is an interesting example: In Production, the HHF is about 16.6389. That means a 0.85 draws and 1.0 reloads (each of those twice) and .144 splits 16 times. I'm sure there are some people out there who can do this--those numbers, at those distances, aren't impossible. That being said, Stoeger, Leatham, Mink, Sevigny, and Vogel have never gotten a GM score on this classifier in any division. Miculek, in 2006, managed a 95%. Once. (His other one in 2007 got an 83%.) So I, too, wonder where the HHF factor for that one can from. However, without any actual information I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that someone out there just practiced and practiced this and then ran it in a match until they got a number they liked. (And as someone has said---the HHF for that classifier is the same for all divisions.) Do we have any information that this type of practice=insane HHF actually occurs? Is there any information that HHFs are actually changed due to single, one-time results from club matches? I think they used Max's open gun score from an area match to set the production HHF... seriously.

It was half true

I got a tanfo you can have.

Oh here we go.