DVC and targets

[grassy knoll]

target size or shape shouldn't really matter as long as the course design is done properly - this was said before but i really agree

i also don't want to have target designs be associated with resemblence to people or bad guys or head shots and body shots-

i didn't think this used to matter until a guy asked me if the mini poppers were the kids and the regular poppers were the adults

[DogmaDog]

Fair enough.  At the top levels, accuracy is a must, and the system works.  At local club levels, it seems that the high scoring shooters are shooting very fast, but not terribly accurately.  

So the question now is:  "How do you get there from here?"  Conventional wisdom says work on accuracy and the speed will come, but observation shows that when the speed is there, accuracy is out the window, probably because these shooters are working on speed, and letting the accuracy go away.  But they're winning the local matches.

So it starts to look like the scoring system isn't good as a training tool...winning matches at the local level reinforces shooting styles that won't develop into world class performance.  

Obviously that's going to be true in some trivial sense in any shooting discipline...you need to train outside of matches, and do non-match training exercises in order to win matches, but there ought to be SOME correlation.  

I guess my point can be summed fairly concisely:  I dislike the fact that the shorter path isn't the true path, and that the true path is obscured by huge C rings that are worth 80% and can be shot in 50% of the time.

I'm throwing out a lot of opinions, and asserting their correctness, even though I don't necessarily believe strongly that they are correct.  That's because I do value your insights and I've been learning from them, and your more likely to argue effectively against an emphatic opinion than against something more wishy-washy.

Semper Fi,

DogmaDog

[DogmaDog]

Grassy Knoll,

"...a guy asked me if the mini poppers were the kids and the regular poppers were the adults"

Heheheh.  Huh.  I dislike the amoeba targets (even though I haven't shot one) precisely because they're so "PC"

Although I guess I do draw my own line...at an IDPA match there was a stage where we had to shoot a steel plate to activate two pop-up targets.  The steel plate represented a dog owned by disgruntled former employees (the pop-ups).  I didn't want to shoot a dog .

[grassy knoll]

dogmadog

i don't like the PC either - i wanted to register grassy knoll as my IPSC alias for international classification and it was rejected because it brought up too many bad feelings and could be used against the sport

so i picked 6th floor and that was ok ??

[jhgtyre]

Poppers are people?  I thought they were penguins!

[Duane Thomas]

"With your zeal for editing, you missed BSeevers' point.  I'm not sure of the textbook definition of irony...but, he was supporting the position of your previous post."

Zeal for editing? Hm. I'm not sure I understand.

That's one thing about reading something as opposed to having it said to you. Absent the "speaker's" vocal tones and facial expressions, sometimes it's hard to differentiate dry humor from seriousness.  

"Maybe there is some irony in that Roger Bannister is the the man that broke the four-minute-mile "barrier".  Who the heck is Bannerman?  (The four minute mile barrier was broken by another runner a mere 46(49?) days later.)"

I KNEW I should have looked that up! Interestingly, the second man to break the four-minute mile barrier actually beat Bannister's time. But, as Bannister is at some pains to point out in his book (called, amazingly enough, THE FOUR-MINUTE MILE), Bannister did it on a blustery day with a serious headwind; the other guy did it under perfect conditions. Shortly thereafter the two of them met in a race which Bannister won, in the process beating his own "personal best." And shortly after that, he retired from running to become a neurosurgeon.

[Flexmoney]

DT,

...just trying to zing ya a little bit.  (note the "nudge & )

[Duane Thomas]

Noooo problemo!

[MBneACP]

Penguins? Poppers are penguins? Jeez, I think I'm going to be sick! Like Lyle Lovett, I LOVE penguins, which are so sensitive to your needs. Next Vince will be telling me that the amoeba target represents the "kill zone" of an average adult panda bear.

Interesting thread. I do agree that IDPA's scoring has been its "secret weapon" in its quick expansion. When I was running IDPA matches, it took like two minutes to explain the scoring system to someone who wanted to walk up and shoot, and it made good sense. The USPSA system...well, never mind.

To Brother Duane, I've been lobbying to get a traditional El Prez as part of a Factory Nationals stage (I have some manufacturers who would love to chip in a few bucks for an El Prez "prime," which is what triathlete guys call stage money). I note that IDPA has been slipping modified El Prez's into their Nationals, and I think it's a great idea. El Prez is sort of our *roots* (or kata, if you prefer).

Since I abandoned hi-cap world and went back to .45 single stacks, I've been a happier puppy (although I'm probably getting my girlfriend an STI Edge in .45 for competition as soon as Skinner perfects the 10 round magazine...interestingly enough, she's an attorney, takes her job seriously and refuses to play the hi-cap game because it's *duh* illegal; she went through the gun safe and shot pretty much everything I had and selected my old Edge Limited gun as the "best shooting" gun I owned...Skinner...take note!).

That said, I carry a 9mm on a daily basis (an STI LS; maybe I'm in a rut). It shoots light, is fiercely accurate, is flat and carries about as well as any gun I've carried (in a Lou Alessi IWB); with the current crop of 9mm ammo (Hornady XTP or Cor-Bon), I don't feel I'm giving up anything.

[Vince Pinto]

Dammit. Bane found me, again. Is there anywhere safe?

[Duane Thomas]

DogmaDog,

The thing is, the shorter path doesn't really lead where we want to go. Yeah, a fast but reasonably accurate shooter can kick ass on a slow but accurate shooter....but who cares? We don't want to be either of those guys. Even though the fast/sloppy guys can beat the REALLLLLY slow guys, they'll never beat someone who can do both. And it's not an either/or choice:  we CAN do both, be fast and accurate. Of course doing both takes more work than "either/or."

I think every shooter goes through a phase where they want to hose through a stage as fast as possible, and sometimes their speed runs ahead of their ability to hit the A-zone. And doing that they'll beat the guys who have no real speed at all. That doesn't mean the system's broken, even at the local level. It just means they haven't found the balance of high speed with accuracy yet. If they want to become great they will. If not they'll always be stuck doing okay at the local level against really weak competition.

But the guy who's really slow but very accurate is unbalanced as well.  After he does a 10-second stage in 35 seconds he might think it's wrong he lost because "I was more accurate than those fast guys." But he's missing the point. He is lacking one of the two fundamentals. And you can't compensate for a total lack of one fundamental through having a whole lot of the other.

I don't really have a problem with having a big "center mass" C-zone that counts for 80 percent of points possible. Not to interject too much of the real world into the discussion here, but with the average gunfight nationally running about 3 seconds a fast center mass hit beats the hell out of a slow, perfectly centered hit you died before you could get off. "You can't miss fast enough to win....but you can hit slow enough to lose."

[BSeevers]

Back to my previous statement(kind of forgot about this thread) I remember hearing when people said a 10 sec El Prez was impossible. Sort of like a four minute mile was"beyond the capabilities of the human body"  Some said you would die if you tried. No body ever said that about a 4 sec El Prez but it tells us to never limit ourselves.  Its has already been said the good shooters shoot fast and ACCURATE.

I usually have one of the highest point totals when I shoot well or win a match. Some people just see My 8.59 run and say boy he is really fast. Some never even notice I dropped 4 points. Shooting really fast is something many of us with good eye/hands can do. Doing it and getting mostly "A's" is really difficult. I know, I also don't do it on a regular basis

I will say that skills levels in the last few years are much higher than before. I blame part of it on this forum

[Flexmoney]

All hail...THE FORUM!!!

BSeevers make the point that BE has been trying to tell us all along...We are our own limiting factor.  

DT's lastest post brings us full-circle.  C-hits are A-OK...cause we are shooting Major power factor.

D.V.C. lives.  (But, we could stil move some of the targets back...or get them moving a little more often.)

[redmist10]

Excellent topic to revive...thanks for the previous input guys. Any previous IDPA only shooter should read some of your comments.

As a recent "convert" to cross-competition (IDPA first and now IPSC/USPSA) I am noticing a distinct difference in shall we say "scoring potential."

I'm noticing that you can shoot up to 13+ points more accurately on a stage and still lose the stage to the faster shooter (not a new premise but the amount of speed needed to do this is considerably less in USPSA). Speed in USPSA seems to negate much of the accuracy shooting advantages you see in IDPA. Shooting Major doesn't affect this for revolver, in my case, since IDPA also has the "power" in ESR increased to mimick USPSA major. So in the end, speed over points will win more stages...or so it would seem.

The real crux seems to be the C zone on down. By giving 4 points to B/C you almost give up nothing by increasing the speed....so I guess I need to turn on the jets when shooting USPSA...but will it negatively affect the cross-over back to IDPA? Probably, unless I can dial it back in....which is never easy once you go down that path.

"You can't miss fast enough to win....but you can hit slow enough to lose."

How true...

Something for new transition shooters like myself to ponder I suppose.

[Jake Di Vita]

I tend to disagree when I see Max shooting 97 - 98% of the possible points at EVERY match he shoots.

At the top levels you can't have one without the other and even hope to have a chance.

[Jim Norman]

I think that the accuracy vs speed argument has some validity, but if you are talking about whether you can shoot faster, but less accurately at a local match than at a big match, I think you have to take into consideration the level of competitor at your local match. At out last two matches we had over 60 shooters ranging from GM down to new, first match. If you think you can out run JJ Racaza and give up any points while doing it and have a hope of beating him.... Same goes for a few of the others that shoot here.

What you need to do is pick a stalking horse and shoot against that person, How fast and how many points are they pulling on a stage, always pick someone that is at least 10% better than you are, but don't go to much beond that, Mentally you need to know that you can catch him. When you do, pick another person.

Oh, and try and go get a little practice in sometime between matches.

Jim Norman

[Jake Di Vita]

I totally disagree. You can't "shoot against" a person and hope to improve because you will always be pushing yourself....in a match, pushing yourself is the only sure way to crash and burn.

Your goal should always be performance....not beating so and so. Thinking you can keep up or catch someone else is a major trap I see a lot of decent shooters falling into. When you start trying to catch someone 10% better than you that does two things....one is introduce a shitload of tension, and the other is it gives you an expectation of what your performance should be.

Bad juju.

[BSeevers]

Besides they could be having a SJITY day

[shred]

What you need to do is pick a stalking horse and shoot against that person, How fast and how many points are they pulling on a stage, always pick someone that is at least 10% better than you are, but don't go to much beond that, Mentally you need to know that you can catch him. When you do, pick another person.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That works OK as motivation to practice.. until you're the one on the top of the local heap. Then you realize that all you can work on is personal improvement as measured by something else. Then you realize you should have been doing that all along.

[Jim Norman]

Shred, at least you got it. You look at the people around you, and you see if youcan push yourself to win over them. If you pick JJ and you are a c shooter, you will be sorely disappointed. So pick another C that is better than you, see what he does, see if you can run faster, shoot straighter and when you do, find the next guy up the line. If all you do is race against yourself, you have no idea of what is really possible. I think I can only do it this fast ecause that is as fast as I have done it. then someone burns it and I realize there is more there to be trimmed and I try to do it. Sometimes you crash and burn. I have zeroed a stage or two in absolutely awsome style. But I have come back and run faster and shot straighter for having pushed myself.

Jim

[shred]

My point was that while friendly rivalries are all well and good, the way to measure true improvement is within, not without.

You need a reference every so often to know where you stand overall, but to concentrate on another shooter at a match is like looking in the rearview mirror during an auto race-- it just puts two drivers in the car behind you.

[Jake Di Vita]

I totally echo shred's last post.

Jim,

Go ahead and shoot based on how everyone else is shooting...eventually you'll realize that it is only hurting you.

It took me about 2 years before I actually understood it...(I have been shooting IPSC for about 2 years).

[Jim Norman]

Gentlemen, I understand what you are saying, I think, But I am not sure you understand what I am saying. I am not putting the whole of my being into "Beating" another particular shooter. I am looking at a shooter or more than one that is a better shooter than I as gauge of progress. I can look at my scores, but they may or may not represent my progress depending upon who is the top dog at a particular match. But by using another shooter that you may see at most of your matches you have a more realistic guage of how you performed on a particular day. If you are lucky enough to have a couple of GM shooters that frequent your local matches, you may be able to use the scores as a guage.

It is important to choose a shooter that is better than you and you must regularly update your choice.

Jim

[Jake Di Vita]

I understand what you are saying...I guess that is where our different temperments come into play.

To know how I shot I don't need to look at my scores or the results of a match...I know how I performed based on how I felt when I shot. When your only goal is performance...sometimes when you do perform well....you win which is an added bonus. Winning should never be the driving factor because then you will always be chasing something rather than experiencing it for what it is.

This is just my take on it.

[mcoliver]

Anybody or anything that motivates me to go out and practice, is a good thing in my book.