2011 USPSA MultiGun Nationals

[LChico]

I say long live the H.M. Limited USPSA National champ, if someone wants to challenge him for his title next year then get going. Until them he was first in the division at nationals so he gets the title. As for comparing his scores to any other shooter's what exactly does that show? I bet more people consider H.M. limited next year!

If you have a shared prize table does the USPSA HM Limited Champion get to walk the table before Taran? Does he get to walk before Honer?

The HM Limited winner won by 100% over his lone competitor. Whereas Horner won by 2.01% over the second place Tactical shooter.

If USPSA had a shared prize table and it was based on percentage of performance by the shooter in their division, the HM Limited winner would have walked before any of the other division winners.

Is that fair?

Well compare their raw scores and see if that is fair or not. Under that system, do you think the better shooter is walking the table first?

If USPSA used a shared prize table (thankfully we did not), there would be no need to compare raw scores or guess at who goes to a prize table first, because the scoring program can score everyone as if it were one big match (no divisions). It scores everyone based on time & hits. So the 100% scores earned in a very small division become 40% & 50% when scored heads up against every other shooter in the match. The Top HM_Limited shooter was 35% of the match winner & would be ranked 142th in match overall.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

2011 USPSA Multigun Nationals Statistician

[Chuck Anderson]

I would like to add my 2 cents in on a couple of the issues being discussed.

First: I was one that had their ammo go minor. I chrono'd my loads before I left home and I was at a 172 PF, should have been plenty of difference to allow for any altitude deviations. I wasn't trying to just skate by or cheat, I shoot this load whenever I shoot 9mm Major and at the 172 PF. The RO was tilting my pistol when he shot and it looked like most of the shots were going though the wood, when I questioned him about this he said he shot all the open guns this way. OK but there weren't enough holes for all the open guns! I have never had this happen before, could I have called the MD for a ruling, maybe, but I didn't and still had a fun match.

Second: Being a "B" class shooter, I will most likely never win a gun at a match with the way the prize tables are usually set up. What I would like to see is a table set up like the old DPMS Tri-gun Challenge and CMMG Midwest Championships where they bagged the prizes, but with a twist, put gun certificates into random bags so some of the lower classified shooters have a chance at a new gun. I think if a cash payout was given to the top 3 in each division (amount based on the number of entries per div) and then let them pick a bag like the rest of the shooters, it would be alot fairer. As an un-sponsored shooter, I probably spend more than a sponsored shooter since I pay 100% of all the expenses I incur for the match yet will never be able to win the top prizes. If $50 was taken from each entry fee and placed in the prize fund it could be distibuted to each division based on the number of shooters per division. If you had 100 shooters in your division, you would have $5000 to split between the top 3 and if you only had 10 shooters, you only get $500 to share. Your winnings would reflect the amount of shooters you had to beat in your division.

Finally: "Thank You" to all the RO's, match staff and sponsors, it was the best MG Nationals to date!

I finished 34th in my division and still managed to get a prize package worth $300-400! It was alot of fun getting to shoot with Mike V, Matt B and the Miculeks, hope to get the chance again.

Doug S' 2 cents worth.

Sponsors in my package:

GoGun-Outstanding support after the match!

Brownells

Midway

Remington

HiViz

Dawson Precision

Safariland/Speedfeed

Sinclair

Break Free

In response to your first point about the chrono. I've watched Greg and Ken shoot the guns at Chrono at probably over 20 matches. (and it's probably a lot more than that) I've never seen them hit the wood box the chrono is in. And they always use the same technique for each gun. Not sure what you're talking about when you say they were shooting the wood. If they were you woundn't have got a reading at all because it would have missed the screens inside.

Second. As to the comments in bold, I very, very seriously doubt that. Tell you what. I'll send you my receipts for the $50K+ I racked up in expenses last year, you send me a check for that amount and I'll send you the value of all the prizes and "sponsorship" I've received. You have no idea how much many of the guys spend. There are very, very few top level shooters that are sponsored at a level that even covers their full expenses for the year, let alone the cost of practice etc. Maybe 3-4 total? The rest of us are working guys, most who started out as C-D class shooters, spent the money, burned the practice ammo, and put in the time and effort. I don't have any problem with the statement that a B-D class shooter is the backbone of a match because there are more of them. And it would be an awful lame match without them there. But don't try to throw a statement in there that you've spent as much (time, money, relationships, blood) as them.

As far as prize "bags" I hate these things. Not just a little but a whole lot. As a competitor, match official, sponsor coordinator, and I've even sponsored a couple matches myself. I can't imagine anything more disrespectful to a sponsors contribution than to put it in an opaque bag and give it away to a random person who probably doesn't need it and will just end up selling it. If you're gonna run a random table fine, but let the person pick what they want and in the order they get randomly drawn. If you're going to run an order of finish match it should be just that. Just like the FNH match, let everyone see the table, no surprises. If a sponsor wants to give away a gun to the guy who finished at 50%, or dead last, fine, easy to do, but don't hide it let everyone know that, not just the one guy lucky enough to stumble randomly into a prize.

BTW, as a B class shooter, I'm pretty sure if you had gone to the FN match, you'd have won a gun. They had 107 of them on the table. You'd have been there till the next day getting the paperwork done on it, but you'd have still won a gun.

[MarkCO]

Well said Chuck.

[Bryan 45]

BTW, as a B class shooter, I'm pretty sure if you had gone to the FN match, you'd have won a gun. They had 107 of them on the table. You'd have been there till the next day getting the paperwork done on it, but you'd have still won a gun.

He's right. I'm a B class in USPSA and I won a FNX40. Thanks FN!

And Chuck, it's apparent you don't like opaque prize bags, but what about the black GLOCK plastic bags that are filled with every manufacturer's goodies except Glock?

Edited November 18, 2011 by Bryan 45

[Sterling White]

I agree with Mark - well said Chuck x2

[Sterling White]

Linda...read my post on RM3G's scoring above in this thread. Each division winner is 100%. Everyone else lines up in a single congo line by order of percent of the winner in their respective division.

Edited November 19, 2011 by Sterling White

[sbmd]

BTW, as a B class shooter, I'm pretty sure if you had gone to the FN match, you'd have won a gun. They had 107 of them on the table. You'd have been there till the next day getting the paperwork done on it, but you'd have still won a gun.

He's right. I'm a B class in USPSA and I won a FNX40. Thanks FN!

And Chuck, it's apparent you don't like opaque prize bags, but what about the black GLOCK plastic bags that are filled with every manufacturer's goodies except Glock?

B CLASS????? I find that hard to believe!

[LChico]

Linda...read my post on RM3G's scoring above in this thread. Each division winner is 100%. Everyone else lines up in a single congo line by order of percent of the winner in their respective division.

I understand that. There are separate division winners scoring 100% at EVERY 3 gun match I work. My objection is to the "single congo line" at a match that scores using divisions. I consider it inherently unfair. I prefer separate prize tables OR heads up scoring if there is only one prize table.

As I said before: The Top HM_Limited shooter was 35% of the match winner & would be ranked 142th in match overall. Why would he go to the prize table ahead of the 84 shooters in Tactical and the 44 shooters in Open who were under the 100% of the division leaders but above 35% on the combined overall results?

I don't like social engineering or politically correct awards in real life & I don't like them at the shooting range.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

2011 USPSA Multigun Nationals Statistician

Edited November 19, 2011 by LChico

[Sterling White]

With all respect, a division winner is a division winner regardless and the shooters who choose to shoot the division do so for a lot of different reasons. History shows that there is a group of hardcore iron shooters, ie., Miller, Swanson, Neal, and many more.....plus newbies joining their division with interest of finding a spot within the ranks. The limited division is as much a challenge to shoot as the tac-ops or open divisions. In the best interest of fairness shooters within a division should be judged against the #1 shooter within that division and the reward for performance is going to the table with other shooters who performed at the same level within their divisions. A prize table built around a mission count of a division is unfair and I use this years USPSA prize table as an example. Miller shot a great match and for earning the USPSA Limited Nat'l Champ title he was rewarded with a Mossberg pump shotgun off of the prize table while complete AR's went over 6 deep on the tac-ops table....I say foul.

[gose]

With all respect, a division winner is a division winner regardless and the shooters who choose to shoot the division do so for a lot of different reasons. History shows that there is a group of hardcore iron shooters, ie., Miller, Swanson, Neal, and many more.....plus newbies joining their division with interest of finding a spot within the ranks. The limited division is as much a challenge to shoot as the tac-ops or open divisions. In the best interest of fairness shooters within a division should be judged against the #1 shooter within that division and the reward for performance is going to the table with other shooters who performed at the same level within their divisions. A prize table built around a mission count of a division is unfair and I use this years USPSA prize table as an example. Miller shot a great match and for earning the USPSA Limited Nat'l Champ title he was rewarded with a Mossberg pump shotgun off of the prize table while complete AR's went over 6 deep on the tac-ops table....I say foul.

I dont disagree that the system used by most matches (like your Nats example) isnt fair, but I dont really consider having five guys from a division with 15 shooters walk the prize table in the top 15 (out of a total of 300) to be any more fair...

The problem is that the shooters in this system are really only compared to the winner of the division they shoot in. Is it really less of a feat to finish second in a 200 man strong TO than finishing second in a 40 man Open at 96%? For all I know, the guy finishing second in TO might even be a better shooter than the guy finishing second in Open, it just happens that the guy who won TO was a better shooter than the guy who won Open. So you're basically rewarding people for shooting in the division with the "worst" division winner...

If you want to do one single prize table, it seems like doing it on percentiles, not percentage, would be more fair (ie, 10th place in a 100 man division walks at the same time as second place in a ten man division, no matter their percentages). Not perfect, but to me that seems more fair than doing it based on percentage

Or you could "overload" the prizes on the division tables and do them more based on percentiles as well, so that the first place prizes are more equal valued across divisions, but it would also give someone finishing in the middle in the smaller division a similar prize to someone finishing in the middle of TO.

Either one of the percentile based distributions would take the size of the division as well as the different relative skill levels of the division winners out of play...

Edited November 19, 2011 by gose

[Sterling White]

This concept is forward thinking.... it removes the decision made by a person (prize table deciding official) where or what table to place a prize and then becomes the decision of the shooter as to the prize chosen from the table. I know when I walk into a room filled with prizes I look at the distribution.

Like I mentioned in an earlier post - you will see an exodus from scope tac to the other divisions. The creme of the crop shooters will set the bars within their respective divisions.

[gose]

This concept is forward thinking.... it removes the decision made by a person (prize table deciding official) where or what table to place a prize and then becomes the decision of the shooter as to the prize chosen from the table. I know when I walk into a room filled with prizes I look at the distribution.

Like I mentioned in an earlier post - you will see an exodus from scope tac to the other divisions. The creme of the crop shooters will set the bars within their respective divisions.

Tac Optics isnt the biggest division just because it has the biggest prize table, its also the most attractive to people since it has the biggest talent pool and it uses equipment that most people have and like; Open is too expensive and race-y, the heavy divisions are expensive and not that many own (or even want to own) a suitable .308s and Tac Irons gets screwed by targets at 500-600 yards that you cant even see without magnification.

I really doubt that switching the prize table format will change much in participation distribution, a few might leave TO but there wont be any exodus (especially not if 3GN switches to TO-only as its been rumored)

[Sterling White]

I say...put the decision of picking a prize into the hands of the shooter (regardless of division) by having one prize table in 2012!

Think about it....if there are 20 guns on one prize table then your goal is be in that group if you want to win a gun. You will size up "who is who" in the field of shooters by division. Under the "normal" distribution system 12-14 guns will be on the TO table because of mission count. The 14th position may have shot a 70% of the winner within the division however the poor sap in open or limited who shot in the 90% may be lucky enough to get a goody bag even though they shot a great match. Why...because a prize table official "DECIDED" which table should get what prize.

Edited November 24, 2011 by Sterling White

[gose]

I say...put the decision of picking a prize into the hands of the shooter (regardless of division) by having one prize table in 2012!

Think about it....if there are 20 guns on one prize table then your goal is be in that group if you want to win a gun. You will size up "who is who" in the field of shooters by division. Under the "normal" distribution system 12-14 guns will be on the TO table because of mission count. The 14th position may have shot a 70% of the winner within the division however the poor sap in open or limited who shot in the 90% may be lucky enough to get a goody bag even though they shot a great match. Why...because a prize table official "DECIDED" which table should get what prize.

I can pretty much guarantee you that most people wont. A very very limited number of top shooters might, but the vast majority dont have a chance on those 20 guns anyway, so they'll just shoot the division they want to shoot and is most likely to have the equipment for... TO.

I do like the idea of a single prize table, but I'm not sure I fully agree that the percentage based system is the best way...

Edited November 24, 2011 by gose