IDPA GM class

[Strick]

So they made an announcement that they are looking at a GM class. Of course they didn't state how they were thinking about setting it up.

I am curious what the BEnosverse thinks about a Grand Master class.

[steel1212]

So they made an announcement that they are looking at a GM class. Of course they didn't state how they were thinking about setting it up.

I am curious what the BEnosverse thinks about a Grand Master class.

I personally think its over due. I suck at the classifier so I can't really say much but I think there are those that really need to be in another level. They will still beat 99.9% of us but I don't see why the opposition of it.

[DWFAN]

I'm for it..

ETA, but I also think there are too many trophies given out, and that its quite possibly too easy to move up in the IDPA world. Just because someone can burn down a 3 stage classifier, shouldnt make them an expert or MA. Or because they beat 10 EX or SS at a regional, does that mean they should be competeing on the next level.

Here are the Top to Bottom spreads for the Auto divisions at Nationals. It seems to me that it should get tighter going from the bottom to the top, which is pretty much the case except for MA classes. So, either make it harder to get to MA, or add a GM class.

CDP MA 164.22

CDP EX 126.58

CDP SS 240.62

CDP MM 293.98

ESP MA 150.42

ESP EX 118.41

ESP SS 218.23

ESP MM 590.19

SSP MA 195.39

SSP EX 225.68

SSP SS 208.32

SSP MM 504.3

Edited September 28, 2010 by DWFAN

[rvb]

I like competing against the best. I'm ok with NOT getting a trophy, but it's more fun to finish w/ a trophy, even a "lower place" trophy when you're beat by the best or finish among the best.

besides, half the incentive for making MA was to never have to shoot the stinking classifier in a match again. yawn.

furthermore, 1 in 3 [roughly] gets a trophy anyway. Before we add more classes maybe consider attendance awards?

-rvb

Edited September 28, 2010 by rvb

[Duane Thomas]

Before we go any further, who are "they"?

[steel1212]

I'm for it..

ETA, but I also think there are too many trophies given out, and that its quite possibly too easy to move up in the IDPA world. Just because someone can burn down a 3 stage classifier, shouldnt make them an expert or MA. Or because they beat 10 EX or SS at a regional, does that mean they should be competeing on the next level.

Here are the Top to Bottom spreads for the Auto divisions at Nationals. It seems to me that it should get tighter going from the bottom to the top, which is pretty much the case except for MA classes. So, either make it harder to get to MA, or add a GM class.

CDP MA 164.22

CDP EX 126.58

CDP SS 240.62

CDP MM 293.98

ESP MA 150.42

ESP EX 118.41

ESP SS 218.23

ESP MM 590.19

SSP MA 195.39

SSP EX 225.68

SSP SS 208.32

SSP MM 504.3

I think that kind of shows the opposite of what your saying. It looks like to me that the EX in CDP and ESP should be in Master class and now they will be. The SS in SSP should be in EXP and now they will be.

[Dan Burwell]

I personally don't care one way or another I compete to win, not my class but the match. Having said that they need to be very carful about how they are going to promote a person to this new class, otherwise it is going to have the same percieved problem they have now, too many masters that cannot compete with the top dogs.

If they continue bumping one for every 10 you beat sooner or later GM class will be overly populated as is the current Master class. If you have it based on the current classifier, people will undoubtedly shoot their way into it that cannot compete in a match with the GMs.

I don't pretend to have the answers but I can see how if not done correctly is not a solution to the problem they are trying to sovle.

[Strick]

Before we go any further, who are "they"?

IDPA HQ made the announcement at teh awards banquet ant Nationals.

[steel1212]

I personally don't care one way or another I compete to win, not my class but the match. Having said that they need to be very carful about how they are going to promote a person to this new class, otherwise it is going to have the same percieved problem they have now, too many masters that cannot compete with the top dogs.

If they continue bumping one for every 10 you beat sooner or later GM class will be overly populated as is the current Master class. If you have it based on the current classifier, people will undoubtedly shoot their way into it that cannot compete in a match with the GMs.

I don't pretend to have the answers but I can see how if not done correctly is not a solution to the problem they are trying to sovle.

I thought you had to beat X amount of competitors above you class before you got your bump? If you shoot your way into via the classifier then that is no difference than grand bagging and if you can't compete then you can't compete. What they need to do is look at the consistent winners of the divisions at nationals and their times. Take Dave and Bob for example. Take their classifier times for the past few years and avg them and maybe add 5-10 seconds and there you go.

[Strick]

I personally don't care one way or another I compete to win, not my class but the match.

That is the way I look at it also. I still need a little work though.

If they continue bumping one for every 10 you beat sooner or later GM class will be overly populated as is the current Master class. If you have it based on the current classifier, people will undoubtedly shoot their way into it that cannot compete in a match with the GMs.

I don't pretend to have the answers but I can see how if not done correctly is not a solution to the problem they are trying to sovle.

I agree that except I don't see to many peopel getting a match bump. In my area there are a bunch of shooters, TX had about 75 at Nationals the next closet state was 40 couple, but I have not seen 10+ masters in a division at sanctioned matches.

I don't think the perceived problem can be solved by just making a higher class and sticking 5 or so shooters in it. I would think the only way to solve that problem is a complete restructuring of all the classes

[Dan Burwell]

I thought you had to beat X amount of competitors above you class before you got your bump? If you shoot your way into via the classifier then that is no difference than grand bagging and if you can't compete then you can't compete. What they need to do is look at the consistent winners of the divisions at nationals and their times. Take Dave and Bob for example. Take their classifier times for the past few years and avg them and maybe add 5-10 seconds and there you go.

It is ten people from your current class and the one above. So if you finish second out of 20 masters you go up, or if you take third out of 28 but you also beat 2 shooter in the class above.

I'd be willing to bet they have no info on what Dave or Bob can shoot a classifier in, since I am sure they avoid them like the rest of us do.

[gb32]

This was discussed at the AC meeting Tuesday night. We discussed it not just being a classifier time but also tied to major match performance, Nationals for instance. The classifier time I put forward was 65 sec.

I believe part of the problem is that overpopulation of MA class in general. I believe the match bump process should be more like 1 for every 15 and possibly factor in with overall performance within the Div.

I'm with Burwell, whatever. I'm going to IDPA matches to win them.

[Bones]

I agree with every point Dan and Gary made.

Frankly, I believe the opinions of current MAs matter the most, as they are directly affected.

If it strictly a competition-based criteria is used, the natural progression will yield the current results.

I strongly believe a system that uses a combination of match AND Classifier performance data will selectively remove most of the population from MA. The side benefit of such a system is that it could be applied now without additional data, since both match results back to 2006 and most recent classifier scores already exist in the database or could be easily added.

Craig

Edited September 28, 2010 by Bones

[Strick]

This was discussed at the AC meeting Tuesday night. We discussed it not just being a classifier time but also tied to major match performance, Nationals for instance. The classifier time I put forward was 65 sec.

I believe part of the problem is that overpopulation of MA class in general. I believe the match bump process should be more like 1 for every 15 and possibly factor in with overall performance within the Div.

I'm with Burwell, whatever. I'm going to IDPA matches to win them.

I am curious how many Masters can shoot a MA class classifier let alone one less than say 75 seconds. I have seen very capable MA shooters not be able to shoot the classifier time as it is now, but they can win state and regional mathces as well as be competitive at Nationals. Seems that all 65 seconds does is take out possibly the Vogels and Sevigny's from the MA class. Personally I don't like the idea of a GM class just to segregate a half dozen shooters and insulate the "regular" MA from being beat.

Also attaching it Nationals doesn't seem overly fair either since you may not be able to attend or you may not make match because it is full.

[lugnut]

If you shoot your way into via the classifier then that is no difference than grand bagging and if you can't compete then you can't compete. What they need to do is look at the consistent winners of the divisions at nationals and their times. Take Dave and Bob for example. Take their classifier times for the past few years and avg them and maybe add 5-10 seconds and there you go.

That is the way I see it as well. Bottom line is many of us newer "Masters" in IDPA get laughed at as the top shooters will beat us so badly it's almost comical. For me anyway- I feel like I'm a good shooter but not really a "Master". Master has a stronger meaning to me. Not to make a correlation to USPSA but I think they got it fairly well set up as far as classes go. I'm a high B shooter but not close to USPSA Master yet... or a generic "Master" in my eyes. The problem is you can't just strip everyone's classification away so going to a GM class makes sense to me. But I don't care too much as I know were I stand in the hierarchy of the shooting community anyway!

Oh and for those that think there with be LOTs of people in a GM class as described as Steel mentioned- I don't buy it. Shooting a sub 80s classifier is something that most shooters I know (in SSP/ESP Master now) can't do. 5-10 seconds above Rob/Dave S times are going to be in the high 60s, low 70s at worse.

Edited September 28, 2010 by lugnut

[Dan Burwell]

I'm with Burwell, whatever.

[prreed10]

I would rather see it as a win from a major match. Designate 3 or 4 well attended matches in which a DC as a Master at will get you bumped.

I also think they need to revise the "1 in 3" trophy rule as well (maybe 1 in 5) and cap it at 10 total trophies per class. 16th place SSP Marksman... Nothing against that person in particular.

[DWFAN]

I'm for it..

ETA, but I also think there are too many trophies given out, and that its quite possibly too easy to move up in the IDPA world. Just because someone can burn down a 3 stage classifier, shouldnt make them an expert or MA. Or because they beat 10 EX or SS at a regional, does that mean they should be competeing on the next level.

Here are the Top to Bottom spreads for the Auto divisions at Nationals. It seems to me that it should get tighter going from the bottom to the top, which is pretty much the case except for MA classes. So, either make it harder to get to MA, or add a GM class.

CDP MA 164.22

CDP EX 126.58

CDP SS 240.62

CDP MM 293.98

ESP MA 150.42

ESP EX 118.41

ESP SS 218.23

ESP MM 590.19

SSP MA 195.39

SSP EX 225.68

SSP SS 208.32

SSP MM 504.3

I think that kind of shows the opposite of what your saying. It looks like to me that the EX in CDP and ESP should be in Master class and now they will be. The SS in SSP should be in EXP and now they will be.

What if its the bottom of the EX that should be in SS though ?

In your example that could make the MA spread even bigger.. (not really, because the top of every class beat someone in the class higher. Some SSP/SS finished higher than SSP/MA. So, besides being a sandbagger, does that mean they are Masters, or that some Masters should have been experts ?

I know its not a perfect example, but I would think that a tighter spread would be better.

[Bones]

I guess that all depends on your particular definition of "very capable".

Personally I view the IDPA Classifier as a display of basic shooting skills on demand.

Being able to win at matches and display basic shooting skills on demand meets my personal definition of "very capable".

Craig

Edited September 28, 2010 by Bones

[Bill Nesbitt]

What is the problem that needs solved?

When you work your way into a higher class, then you need to work harder to win.

[Strick]

What is the problem that needs solved?

When you work your way into a higher class, then you need to work harder to win.

I agree and this is coming from a now 3 division MA that knows he needs some work to win Nationals next year.

[lugnut]

I personally don't care one way or another I compete to win, not my class but the match.

I think that's common amongst the top shooters in the sport like yourself, however you could also ask why have any classes at all for that matter? Seriously. Not suggesting we do that but it wouldn't matter too much to me. Not that it would ever happen.

[Loves2Shoot]

Not enough Masters in the NW to even matter, GM would be even less populated, as M is sparse.

I'm for dropping all classes though, and if you give awards on the curve, then take it from match finish of the match curve.

[Chills1994]

[steel1212]

What if its the bottom of the EX that should be in SS though ?

In your example that could make the MA spread even bigger.. (not really, because the top of every class beat someone in the class higher. Some SSP/SS finished higher than SSP/MA. So, besides being a sandbagger, does that mean they are Masters, or that some Masters should have been experts ?

I know its not a perfect example, but I would think that a tighter spread would be better.

Thats kind of the point. if they are the bottom of their class they where just at the top of their previous class and they need to work more.