should I request to move up in class

[Chris Keen]

Second,??? So is it presumed then that an M or GM at a sectional is not as skilled as at the Nationals???? To me this would make the card worth less than the paper its printed on ...... [snip]

I didn't read it that way at all. I think he was just saying that your typical sectional doesn't have the same level of talent that the Nationals does. Sure, if you just happen to shoot one where the top five or ten guys in the country show up, it's pretty close to nationals, but even those guys probably do more prep and training to get ready for the biggest match of the year. For all of those reasons, most folks don't shoot their percentage at Nationals....so their card isn't really reflecting what they can do against the best. ...... [snip]

It's curious that someone might think just because Max M., Bob V., or Rob L. are doing prep work and training to get ready for the biggest match of the year .... that I (or anybody else in USPSA) is/are not doing said training. That's why the Nationals are at the END of the season and not the start of it ... so you have some time to get ready, and warm up to it. Plus you spread your talent (and shooting errors) out over 16-20 stages, and over 3-4 days of different schedules & varying weather conditions.

So I honestly believe you shoot your best (or close to it) at the Nationals every year. Since you are shooting against the best of the best, and they usually tend to finish 5 or more guys in the same range (top 5%) that no one had a breakout performance, so you can accurately and fairly judge your performance and use it as a barometer of your TRUE classification percentage.

But I don't think this match would qualify in this situation. Sorry Sean, good job, but keep working at the classifiers. They will eventually make themselves worth every single one you shoot.

[Flyin40]

If you think your underclassed and want to ask to be moved up then do it. Your opinion is really the only one that matters. I did a little digging and looked you up on Uspsa and also the results of the Texas limited. I even broke out the calculator for you. If you shoot 3 more classifiers at an even 85% you will be master. If you go to a 6 classifier match then your 95% will drop off and it will take more. Personally if I were in your position I would just shoot the classifiers to make Master. I have had several matches that were State and Sectional that counted as classifier scores. Also if your going to Area matches those can count too.

Flyin

[G-ManBart]

Second,??? So is it presumed then that an M or GM at a sectional is not as skilled as at the Nationals???? To me this would make the card worth less than the paper its printed on ...... [snip]

I didn't read it that way at all. I think he was just saying that your typical sectional doesn't have the same level of talent that the Nationals does. Sure, if you just happen to shoot one where the top five or ten guys in the country show up, it's pretty close to nationals, but even those guys probably do more prep and training to get ready for the biggest match of the year. For all of those reasons, most folks don't shoot their percentage at Nationals....so their card isn't really reflecting what they can do against the best. ...... [snip]

It's curious that someone might think just because Max M., Bob V., or Rob L. are doing prep work and training to get ready for the biggest match of the year .... that I (or anybody else in USPSA) is/are not doing said training. That's why the Nationals are at the END of the season and not the start of it ... so you have some time to get ready, and warm up to it. Plus you spread your talent (and shooting errors) out over 16-20 stages, and over 3-4 days of different schedules & varying weather conditions.

So I honestly believe you shoot your best (or close to it) at the Nationals every year. Since you are shooting against the best of the best, and they usually tend to finish 5 or more guys in the same range (top 5%) that no one had a breakout performance, so you can accurately and fairly judge your performance and use it as a barometer of your TRUE classification percentage.

That's interesting, but in the real world very, very, very few people are able to put the same amount of prep time in that the top handful of guys do (which is probably why they win!). I can't remember the exact details now, but Max said he was on the range every single day for weeks on end before the 2009 Nationals and had his father helping him load mags, tape targets etc. Really, how many of us are really going to be able to do that, much less have a helper load mags and paste targets? Maybe you've been able to do that....and if so, that's great, but it's unfortunately not common.

If there wasn't a mismatch between classification and results at the Nationals most people would be shooting around their percentage....and that just doesn't happen. I don't recall what the numbers were for 2008, but in 2009, I think only four Open A shooters (what I shot) were at 75% or above R,

Edited July 18, 2010 by G-ManBart

[Pezco]

The ratings will catch up, just enjoy the wins while you can. Good shootn!

[Chris Keen]

If there wasn't a mismatch between classification and results at the Nationals most people would be shooting around their percentage....and that just doesn't happen. I don't recall what the numbers were for 2008, but in 2009, I think only four Open A shooters (what I shot) were at 75% or above R,

Well then maybe there's a disconnect between LTD and OPEN , or perhaps I'm just an anomaly, but I based my opinion on how I personally finished at Nats.

2007 - LTD A - 77%

2008 - LTD A - 76%

2009 - LTD M - 90%

And you're right, I cannot expect to do the same level of practice that the top GMs do, but how is that any different than any other given day? I can't take off work to practice for a state, an Area, or the Nats ...... but I can practice. So with all things being equal, I still see it as the best way we have to compare ourselves Nationally.

[G-ManBart]

If there wasn't a mismatch between classification and results at the Nationals most people would be shooting around their percentage....and that just doesn't happen. I don't recall what the numbers were for 2008, but in 2009, I think only four Open A shooters (what I shot) were at 75% or above R,

Well then maybe there's a disconnect between LTD and OPEN , or perhaps I'm just an anomaly, but I based my opinion on how I personally finished at Nats.

2007 - LTD A - 77%

2008 - LTD A - 76%

2009 - LTD M - 90%

And you're right, I cannot expect to do the same level of practice that the top GMs do, but how is that any different than any other given day? I can't take off work to practice for a state, an Area, or the Nats ...... but I can practice. So with all things being equal, I still see it as the best way we have to compare ourselves Nationally.

I don't think there's really a difference between Limited and Open. In 2009, only 5 Limited Masters shot above 85%. You just happen to be one of them And hey, you were 89.99%....come on man, sneaking a hundredth in on us

In the same match only 4 Limited A's shot above 75%.

In 2008 only 3 Limited Masters shot above 85% and 45 of them didn't A's did better that year, with 13 above 75% and 39 below.

I don't disagree that the Nationals is the best way to gauge yourself, but it's not a perfect system either because it's one match and stuff happens. The fact that you can have only 3 out of 48 Masters break 85% is just too weird. It's not like 45 of them suddenly had the worst match of their life, or had some weird happen like a broken gun etc. Either way, I don't think either way is a perfect gauge, but they're what we have. R,

[spanky]

If there wasn't a mismatch between classification and results at the Nationals most people would be shooting around their percentage....and that just doesn't happen. I don't recall what the numbers were for 2008, but in 2009, I think only four Open A shooters (what I shot) were at 75% or above R,

Well then maybe there's a disconnect between LTD and OPEN , or perhaps I'm just an anomaly, but I based my opinion on how I personally finished at Nats.

2007 - LTD A - 77%

2008 - LTD A - 76%

2009 - LTD M - 90%

And you're right, I cannot expect to do the same level of practice that the top GMs do, but how is that any different than any other given day? I can't take off work to practice for a state, an Area, or the Nats ...... but I can practice. So with all things being equal, I still see it as the best way we have to compare ourselves Nationally.

I don't think there's really a difference between Limited and Open. In 2009, only 5 Limited Masters shot above 85%. You just happen to be one of them And hey, you were 89.99%....come on man, sneaking a hundredth in on us

In the same match only 4 Limited A's shot above 75%.

In 2008 only 3 Limited Masters shot above 85% and 45 of them didn't A's did better that year, with 13 above 75% and 39 below.

I don't disagree that the Nationals is the best way to gauge yourself, but it's not a perfect system either because it's one match and stuff happens. The fact that you can have only 3 out of 48 Masters break 85% is just too weird. It's not like 45 of them suddenly had the worst match of their life, or had some weird happen like a broken gun etc. Either way, I don't think either way is a perfect gauge, but they're what we have. R,

Could that simply be proof that it takes more than being classified by classifiers to be truly competitive in your class?

This might sound bad but I'm a firm believer in not moving up by classifiers. Matches, field courses, etc etc are much different than shooting classifiers and I know (as possibly proven by the stats that you gathered) that most people are not truly competitive in their respective classes.

[Chris Keen]

If there wasn't a mismatch between classification and results at the Nationals most people would be shooting around their percentage....and that just doesn't happen. I don't recall what the numbers were for 2008, but in 2009, I think only four Open A shooters (what I shot) were at 75% or above R,

Well then maybe there's a disconnect between LTD and OPEN , or perhaps I'm just an anomaly, but I based my opinion on how I personally finished at Nats.

2007 - LTD A - 77%

2008 - LTD A - 76%

2009 - LTD M - 90%

And you're right, I cannot expect to do the same level of practice that the top GMs do, but how is that any different than any other given day? I can't take off work to practice for a state, an Area, or the Nats ...... but I can practice. So with all things being equal, I still see it as the best way we have to compare ourselves Nationally.

I don't think there's really a difference between Limited and Open. In 2009, only 5 Limited Masters shot above 85%. You just happen to be one of them And hey, you were 89.99%....come on man, sneaking a hundredth in on us

In the same match only 4 Limited A's shot above 75%.

In 2008 only 3 Limited Masters shot above 85% and 45 of them didn't A's did better that year, with 13 above 75% and 39 below.

I don't disagree that the Nationals is the best way to gauge yourself, but it's not a perfect system either because it's one match and stuff happens. The fact that you can have only 3 out of 48 Masters break 85% is just too weird. It's not like 45 of them suddenly had the worst match of their life, or had some weird happen like a broken gun etc. Either way, I don't think either way is a perfect gauge, but they're what we have. R,

Well honestly this sort of discussion should be in a separate thread, Sorry Sean.

And I agree with every bit of what you said there Chris. Even the part about sneaking in a hundredth in on ya! (Hey I used the old famous IRS "round up & down" system, what can I say?)

But since we could debate this all night long, I'll end my discussion by saying that THIS MATCH (referring to the TX LTD that the OP mentioned) is also ..... only 1 match. And therefore should not be used solely to move you up or down in your classification Sean. Sorry but I believe that while your performance at a big match should definitely "count as a classifier", and may even bump you into the next class simply because you were already close to that class ........ but it shouldn't be used to bump a competitor based on 1 match alone.

[sfinney]

....... that most people are not truly competitive in their respective classes.

Amen brother. I'm one of them

It's one thing to shoot some good classifier scores, quite another to compare yourself to the best at a major match.

[G-ManBart]

Could that simply be proof that it takes more than being classified by classifiers to be truly competitive in your class?

I think that's probably correct....only a few classifiers have movement and that's where it's really at on most stages. R,

[Sean Gaines]

If you think your underclassed and want to ask to be moved up then do it. Your opinion is really the only one that matters. I did a little digging and looked you up on Uspsa and also the results of the Texas limited. I even broke out the calculator for you. If you shoot 3 more classifiers at an even 85% you will be master. If you go to a 6 classifier match then your 95% will drop off and it will take more. Personally if I were in your position I would just shoot the classifiers to make Master. I have had several matches that were State and Sectional that counted as classifier scores. Also if your going to Area matches those can count too.

Flyin

Flyin, thanks for doing the math, well first classifier is out of the way at 89%, and if they count tx state limited next month that will be an 86%, so I guess all I have to shoot another 85% and I will make master. thanks for all the information guys.