Rules and Scoring for 3 Gun

[RiggerJJ]

In IMGA,

A single non-A hit on paper should be a 5 second penalty; FTN

No hit on paper (or steel) should be a 10 second penalty; miss

No attempt to engage should be a 15 second penalty; FTE

Simple!

Some matches tout that they use IMGA rules but they give 10 second penalties for a single non-A hit...I still haven't figured out why they do that...shouldn't you get something for the non-A hit???

Oh and edit to add: 100 points per stage! The stage winner in each division gets 100 and everyone below a percentage for match points. The Adding total time method just makes the longest stage the deciding stage.

Just a rant, sorry...

.jj

Edited September 17, 2011 by RiggerJJ

[J.Schmitt]

I like the matches with the hit it or didn't hit it scoring method. I would think that in a match with 80 percent or so steel that 2 anywhere or Horner would be pretty close, given a smaller percent of targets.

[Stlhead]

I think that if you are willing to shoot wearing only a speedo, your gun belt and the footwear of your choice you should be allowed to deduct 10 seconds from your time for every position you go prone at. No safety gear other than eye and ear protection allowed. If that rule where enacted, who would be rocking the tear away party boy warm up suit? 20 or 30 seconds could sure swing a stage! And add greatly to the number of YouTube hits. We could call it the Wienie bender bonus.

(originally this was meant to be a sarcastic post but about half way through it started sounding pretty good. Might be the beer.)

[P.E. Kelley]

You keep going like this JJ and I am going to put your name in for 3 GUN CZAR!!!!

I would like us to keep this stuff simple. You want more accuracy on paper up close???? Don't use draconian

scoring methods...just use smaller targets.

Don't want shooters to "blow-off" long range targets...add time bonuses or if you must time penalties.

Simple to score makes for faster stage clearance between shooters.

As soon as you start getting hammered for hit outside of the "A" zone that is when overlays and target disputes

begin and the clock between shooter is running.

And speaking of rules....

I am going to get bit hard for this little gem.

If "Our" thinking is going to be "if it ain't written down in the rules, then it must be OK" is the REASON

rules books get BIG!

I know how to play fair and do...do you??? I am not pointing fingers here just putting this out for digestion.

OK kids hammer away.

Patrick

[Chills1994]

outter limits wrote:

Uspsa will never use time plus at their nationals-no way to deal with major/minor

you did read that "they" are working on a revision, right?

I am ASSuming somebody with some marketing skills at USPSA HQ (err...USPSA corporate???) is looking at how 3gun/multi-gun is taking off and gaining exposure. HQ is gonna be looking for ways to capture...err...re-capture that market share.

When did the production (pistol) division come about?

When did the single stack division come about?

I am probably totally wrong on this, but I am speculating that USPSA HQ looked at IDPA's market of Glock 17/34 and 1911 shooters and they thought, "Hmmn...if we had this and this divisions, I bet would could get some cross over shooters from IDPA."

I like my idea of giving the major PF guys the option of just putting one shot on each paper target.

Theoretically, it would encourage some people to do some experimentation with non-minor rifles chambered in something besides .308, which probably tends to draw shooters towards Heavy-Metal/He-Man. Expensive experimentation, but experimentation nonetheless. In that same vein, dropping the major PF cutoff floor from 320 to something like 300 or 280 would, again, theoretically, encourage experimentation too.

All the scorekeeper has to do is look to see where "major" is circled on the scoresheet, and when the RO goes through and calls out the scores, he just calls out "FTN!...FTN!" for any paper without any new holes in it. The scorekeeper just keeps some tally marks and then adds up all the tick marks in the FTN box, and multiplies by 5 or 10 seconds. That gets added to the raw time.

jj wrote:

...The Adding total time method just makes the longest stage the deciding stage.

Huh?

I'm sorry, but you lost me there.

I take it you haven't really eyeballed any scores from major IDPA matches before, then???

Again, you have the raw data there expressed as a time. In my opinion, it is NOT in need of any other superfluous manipulation...which typically...all that does exaggerates results or spreads.

[Jesse Tischauser]

You keep going like this JJ and I am going to put your name in for 3 GUN CZAR!!!!

I would like us to keep this stuff simple. You want more accuracy on paper up close???? Don't use draconian

scoring methods...just use smaller targets.

Don't want shooters to "blow-off" long range targets...add time bonuses or if you must time penalties.

Simple to score makes for faster stage clearance between shooters.

As soon as you start getting hammered for hit outside of the "A" zone that is when overlays and target disputes

begin and the clock between shooter is running.

And speaking of rules....

I am going to get bit hard for this little gem.

If "Our" thinking is going to be "if it ain't written down in the rules, then it must be OK" is the REASON

rules books get BIG!

I know how to play fair and do...do you??? I am not pointing fingers here just putting this out for digestion.

OK kids hammer away.

Patrick

Exactly! Kinda like getting a reshoot for not having been asked to load and make ready with your empty pistol holster! Sorry Mr. Kelley I couldn't help myself! That was awesome!!!

[Jesse Tischauser]

In IMGA,

A single non-A hit on paper should be a 5 second penalty; FTN

No hit on paper (or steel) should be a 10 second penalty; miss

No attempt to engage should be a 15 second penalty; FTE

Simple!

Some matches tout that they use IMGA rules but they give 10 second penalties for a single non-A hit...I still haven't figured out why they do that...shouldn't you get something for the non-A hit???

Oh and edit to add: 100 points per stage! The stage winner in each division gets 100 and everyone below a percentage for match points. The Adding total time method just makes the longest stage the deciding stage.

Just a rant, sorry...

.jj

This is too easy! It will never work. Oh wait it already works great!

[MarkCO]

One thing a lot of MDs and sponsors don't consider, and most competitors don't care about is liability. When you run a "my match, my rules" event and the scores go in the toilet, or someone breaks an ankle, or worse, what will your insurance (if you even have any) cover? Is it enough. Is there any evidence you ever made a ruling in conflict with your "rules" or another ruling? Has someone who should have been "done" been allowed to continue shooting? A consolidated set of rules protects the MDs, sponsors and everyone else since they are no longer "Outlaw" but concensus rules. That goes a long way in a court of law. We talk about bringing in "new shooters" and with that will come new people that do not ascribe to the same set of values most of us hold to. Just go look at the threads on coaching. Sooner or later, some MD we all like is going to end up in the ringer because they refused to follow or work at adopting concensus rules. An island is great as long as everything goes your way. When it turns bad and you have no company or support, it becomes very bad. I've talked to a few MDs who think nothing bad will ever happen, and a few who were thankful for this type of perspective. Sorry to toss a glass of reality on the subject, but it is an important issue that is rarely even thought about.

[P.E. Kelley]

Liability?!?! Where is the "fingers in the ears, na,na,na" emoticon?

Good point Mark!

[D.Hayden]

In IMGA,

A single non-A hit on paper should be a 5 second penalty; FTN

No hit on paper (or steel) should be a 10 second penalty; miss

No attempt to engage should be a 15 second penalty; FTE

Simple!

Some matches tout that they use IMGA rules but they give 10 second penalties for a single non-A hit...I still haven't figured out why they do that...shouldn't you get something for the non-A hit???

Oh and edit to add: 100 points per stage! The stage winner in each division gets 100 and everyone below a percentage for match points. The Adding total time method just makes the longest stage the deciding stage.

Just a rant, sorry...

.jj

Very nicely and simplly stated.

I hate matches that use total time, one bad stage (like a gun failure) you're out of the match

I would like to see missing flying clays as bonus vs a 5 or 10 second miss.

[Chills1994]

jj wrote:

....I hate matches that use total time, one bad stage (like a gun failure) you're out of the match...

I am sorry if I come off sounding like an @$$, or that I am UNsympathetic...

but I thought USPSA and even moreso with "outlaw 3 gun" was that we were "big boy sports" where we all pull up our britches. (especially considering how the majority of ya'll absolutely poo-poo on any prize distributions that are other than by simple order of finish).

if you come to a match with untested equipment, or ammo that wasn't case gauged, and surprise, surprise, your schtuff doesn't run, that's your problem. I won't feel sorry for you.

yes, poop happens. equipment some times fails catastrophically. if you're not prepared for it, that you don't have a contigency plan in mind, I am not so sure that you should be able to recover from it.

[Chills1994]

Patrick wrote:

You want more accuracy on paper up close???? Don't use draconian

scoring methods...just use smaller targets.

A'yup...

paint on hard cover.

or close in the "bad guy target" with white no shoot ("good guy") targets.

[2MoreChains]

How about if using USPSA's Time Plus make the Major/Minor divide at the division level? HM-Tac and HM-Lim must be major PF for rifle and pistol. For Tactical, Limited, and Open, rifle and pistol must be over minor PF (same thresh-holds we use right now).

After all, when neutralizing paper with 1 A or 2 anywhere doesn't really matter if that C-zone hit is 4 pts or 3 pts. Steel must fall or clay must break or have one hole seems to be less controversial. Based on what I can find in the 2011 provisional rulebook, even though it doesn't specifically say this about major/minor, that's what seems to be the result if you use Time Plus. Or color me confused...

One of things my AD has been telling me is the difficulty with scoring hits on certain types of targets that are common in IMGA matches. Such as flying clays (hard to call that one BB hit) or the difficulty in getting the flipper or thrower to present the flying clay consistently for each shooter. Even though I haven't shot a ton of IMGA matches, I've shot enough to have had a few crazy clays come flying back at me or at odd angles. Plus, thinking back on it, I'm pretty sure there have been quite a few flying clays that I "missed" that I now think I hit with at least one BB before it hit the ground! We also need more kinds of self-setting steel targets that are USPSA approved for long distance rifle or slugs. No way anybody wants to walk 300 yds down range to reset a target, and how many clubs have MGM Recons, 10" Flash targets, or LaRue's in sufficient quantity?

Anyway, just a few things we stumbled upon while designing stages for an upcoming match... thank god we shoot near MGM central!

It would also be nice to know if one can use cinched mags, load to 10+1 shotgun shells after the buzzer or bipods in Tac or Limited, and a few other nuances that seem to change from match to match.

Edited September 17, 2011 by 2MoreChains

[Jesse Tischauser]

One thing a lot of MDs and sponsors don't consider, and most competitors don't care about is liability. When you run a "my match, my rules" event and the scores go in the toilet, or someone breaks an ankle, or worse, what will your insurance (if you even have any) cover? Is it enough. Is there any evidence you ever made a ruling in conflict with your "rules" or another ruling? Has someone who should have been "done" been allowed to continue shooting? A consolidated set of rules protects the MDs, sponsors and everyone else since they are no longer "Outlaw" but concensus rules. That goes a long way in a court of law. We talk about bringing in "new shooters" and with that will come new people that do not ascribe to the same set of values most of us hold to. Just go look at the threads on coaching. Sooner or later, some MD we all like is going to end up in the ringer because they refused to follow or work at adopting concensus rules. An island is great as long as everything goes your way. When it turns bad and you have no company or support, it becomes very bad. I've talked to a few MDs who think nothing bad will ever happen, and a few who were thankful for this type of perspective. Sorry to toss a glass of reality on the subject, but it is an important issue that is rarely even thought about.

Thanks for the buzz kill there Debby Downer! Nobody wants to think about liability. Seriously though does the USPSA provide insurance under it's umbrella to the sanctioned matches? I assume the outlaw matches use insurance through the NRA?

"We talk about bringing in "new shooters" and with that will come new people that do not ascribe to the same set of values most of us hold to. Just go look at the threads on coaching."

I'm not that new but you're right my values are way different than most people. I like beer,cigarettes, and the occasional poker game.

Edited September 17, 2011 by Jesse Tischauser

[RiggerJJ]

...

jj wrote:

...The Adding total time method just makes the longest stage the deciding stage.

Huh?

I'm sorry, but you lost me there.

I take it you haven't really eyeballed any scores from major IDPA matches before, then???

Again, you have the raw data there expressed as a time. In my opinion, it is NOT in need of any other superfluous manipulation...which typically...all that does exaggerates results or spreads.

Its quite simple really; For IDPA matches I suppose it works ok, don't really know, and don't really care. I don't agree at all with the IDPA concepts...but thats another story...

Total time scoring may work for a pistol match, IF all the stages have the same number of targets and take about the same amount of time to run. Where you get into trouble trying to press a 3gun match into that mold is usually the stages are different in length. Take a match with a 24 round burner shotgun stage that takes about 15-20 seconds to complete, and a long 3 gun stage that takes 2-3 minutes to complete, all the other stages are somewhere inbetween. The longer stage will have more weight in the total match when using total time, and the order of finish in that stage will probably be darn close to the order of finish of the match. And if you do poorly and take 4 minutes to complete that long stage, then you are totally out of any kind of decent finish because you are a minute behind everyone.

normalizing all stages to 100 match points turns each stage into a single challenge of itself. single gun burner stages, long 3 gun stages, doesn't matter because each is worth the same number of match points, and they are all different challenges which is what we are trying to test at a 3 gun match; the shooter's totally abilities with all combos of all 3 guns in all kinds of different scenarios, short, long, etc. if you win a 30 second stage by 3 seconds that gives you 10 matchs points over 2nd place. If you do the same in a total time match, those 3 seconds basically give you nothing, because in the longer stages 3 seconds isn't worth much.

More examples;

3 person, 3 stage match, Total Time scoring;

shooter A - stage 1-30sec ,stage 2-50sec, stage 3-120, total 200sec

shooter B - stage 1-27sec (stage win), stage 2-49sec (stage win), stage 3- 130sec, total 206sec

shooter C - stage 1-32sec, 2-52sec, 3-115sec (stage win), total 199sec MATCH WINNER

Or by normalized scoring;

shooter A stage 1 90 points, stage 2 98 points, stage 3 95 points, total 283 match points

shooter B stage 1 100 points, stage 2 100 points, stage 3 88 points, total 288 match points MATCH WINNER

shooter C stage 1 84 points, stage 2 94 points, stage 3 100 points, total 278 match points

In both matches, shooter A was the most consistent, and took 2nd place in both. GOOD SHOW!

Shooter C was not at all consistent, but won Total Time because he did so well in the long stage. Should he have won the match? I say no.

Shooter B won 2 stages but was last place in the 3rd stage. He won the normalized match, but was last place in the total time match because he lost the longest stage.

This is kind of a short match with only 3 stages, but you get the idea. With more stages the 88% that shooter B got will probably be his worse stage, but again, that total time problem of the longest stage being the deciding factor pretty much does him in.

jj

[Jim Norman]

OK, Time plus penalties doesn't work without modifications to force real attempts on Long Shots. Hit Factor actually works but again long shots need to be addressed. Two anywhere to neutralize I don't like, two D hits touching the Perf should not be considered as Neutralized. Two hits one being an 'A' Hit might cure that; One A one D Down Zero? Two hits, but no 'A' then add 1 second, only one hit add 5 seconds, no hits add 10 seconds, failure to engage add another 10 seconds. One thought is that a target that is not engaged zeros the COF, after all, you left a threat behind you.

Assigning stages points, be it Hormer 100,125, 150 or simply 100 points per stage balances out short courses and long courses. Straight time plus can allow a really good long range shooter to win a match by smoking the long shots and walking through the rest. Making each stage worth 100 points means you have to be all around good to win.

We have scored a match using Hit Factor, all scored Minor and then totaled up the Stage Percentages to get the match score. Works well and all stages regardless of complexity, number of shots or number of weapons require a decent score to win. the reason we went with minor was that everyone was shooting .223 and some were shooting 9mm while others shoot .40 or .45. We decided that if a .223 is minor then it made sense that all pistols were minor.

The benefit of using HF scoring and adding the percentages is that almost everyone that shoots this type of competition is familiar with HF Scoring from USPSA. EZWinScore and Stage Score are easily used reducing the learning curve.

Just my thoughts

[Benelli Chick]

"The benefit of using HF scoring and adding the percentages is that almost everyone that shoots this type of competition is familiar with HF Scoring from USPSA. EZWinScore and Stage Score are easily used reducing the learning curve."

Time plus per stage: lowest score wins. divide lowest score by your score and that's your percent on the stage or match points.

Hit factor scoring: highest hit factor wins. Hit factor found by dividing points by your time on the stage. 4 or 5 good, 6 or 7 really good (but that's for pistol stages) and you can't really tell what a good hit factor is going to be until you figure out the person who has the best one. (100 point stage, all A's in 20 seconds is a 5. 160 point stage run 40 seconds only a 4. But if the second is long range rifle, 4 is probably pretty good! 60 point pistol stage in 10 seconds that's a 6. May not be that good!) Anyway, highest hit factor wins, then calculate your percentage by dividing your hit factor by the highest hit factor. Though USPSA take your hit factor, divides it by the highest hit factor and then gives you that percentage of the possible stage points. I know a lot of people who have quite a hard time finding their hit factor, though the program does calculate it lickety split for you! Seems...not simpler to me.

Just sayin'

Also, as a match director, Hit Factor scoring really needs individualized score sheets for each stage for a big match...and if last minute changes happen, they're wrong. Time wise...RO sees two holes, walks on -OR- RO sees two holess, walks over to call the one near the line. Needs to whip out his overlay. Write it down for each target...JP RM3G 2011 stage 6 21 paper, 14 steel - MUCH easier to write down just the errors instead of 22 sets of 2alpha, or whatever plus the line for steel! I need to have 6 minute turn around's from shooter beep to shooter beep or we don't get done. Cutting that time down by just looking to be sure there are 2 holes or one in the head or heart makes our life faster and simpler!

Most people get that the shortest time wins and that mistakes make your time longer...but, I'm a math teacher, so maybe it's just easier for me!

[Chills1994]

I was just reading up on how CAS (yes, those guys with the big hats, boots, and chaps) does their scoring:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowboy_Action_Shooting

they do time plus where each miss tacks on 5 seconds to your raw time.

and it also appears that the CAS'ers sometimes do "rank point scoring":

n "Rank Point Scoring" the winner of a match is determined by adding up each shooter's ranking for each stage, with the lowest score winning. For example, if a shooter places first in every stage in a 10 stage match the shooters score would be 10 (a 1 for each stage) and would be the lowest score possible. There is some controversy as to whether "Rank Points" or "Total Time" is a better system.[1]

I'll have to look back over this thread to see if "Rank Point Scoring" has been mentioned already. RPS does kinda have my interest/curiosity piqued.

[DyNo!]

I'm a fan of 2 anywhere.

Accuracy can be made important in an IMGA match if the MD wants an accuracy intensive COF.

Just throw a few of those 4" or 5" plates out at about 25 yards away for a pistol or shotgun and add some micro poppers for a rifle.

We can also use Texas Stars to make people aim their pistols or distant ones for shotguns. The ideas about using hard cover and no-shoots work as well.

[Modoc]

I was just reading up on how CAS (yes, those guys with the big hats, boots, and chaps) does their scoring:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowboy_Action_Shooting

they do time plus where each miss tacks on 5 seconds to your raw time.

and it also appears that the CAS'ers sometimes do "rank point scoring":

n "Rank Point Scoring" the winner of a match is determined by adding up each shooter's ranking for each stage, with the lowest score winning. For example, if a shooter places first in every stage in a 10 stage match the shooters score would be 10 (a 1 for each stage) and would be the lowest score possible. There is some controversy as to whether "Rank Points" or "Total Time" is a better system.[1]

I'll have to look back over this thread to see if "Rank Point Scoring" has been mentioned already. RPS does kinda have my interest/curiosity piqued.

Chills has digested this fairly well. The key here is all targets are steel, so it is either a hit or a miss. As a Scorekeeper/Stats for my CAS clubs, I am not a fan of Rank Points. We have had shooters Score well on several stages and then leave before the end of the match and still take 2nd or 3rd. We are running our matches currently as Time Plus with additional time penalties for Procedural violations and MINOR Safety violations.

The Rank Points may work better in a Larger match rather than a small Monthly (Level 1 type).

[Chills1994]

just throwing this out there...it's kind of a side tangent..but let's just ASSume that we need to come up with a scoring system that is easily followed or mentally digested by Joe Sixpack:

at home on his couch watching 3gun nation on his TiVo/DVR.

and he is thinking, "Whoa! That looks cool! How do they figure out the winners? Ahh...man, they do what with target points, then they divide them by their time and WHHHHAAATTTTT??"

Then Joe Sixpack flips the channel over to Survivor or Big Brother.

[Lead-Head]

I like the IMGA for close stuff and Horner when long steel are involved. A hybrid woud be nice. I don't like to see long range targets get a round slung in its general direction. They need to be woth more in my opinion.

[Chills1994]

^^^ then like Trapr has said, the MD's/match staff need to make sure the long range rifle targets need to actually be visible to the iron sight shooters.

If am shooting irons and can't make out a target clearly, I'm just gonna dump a round or two at it just so it looks like I tried to engage it.

[SMSI]

One thing a lot of MDs and sponsors don't consider, and most competitors don't care about is liability. When you run a "my match, my rules" event and the scores go in the toilet, or someone breaks an ankle, or worse, what will your insurance (if you even have any) cover? Is it enough. Is there any evidence you ever made a ruling in conflict with your "rules" or another ruling? Has someone who should have been "done" been allowed to continue shooting? A consolidated set of rules protects the MDs, sponsors and everyone else since they are no longer "Outlaw" but concensus rules. That goes a long way in a court of law. We talk about bringing in "new shooters" and with that will come new people that do not ascribe to the same set of values most of us hold to. Just go look at the threads on coaching. Sooner or later, some MD we all like is going to end up in the ringer because they refused to follow or work at adopting concensus rules. An island is great as long as everything goes your way. When it turns bad and you have no company or support, it becomes very bad. I've talked to a few MDs who think nothing bad will ever happen, and a few who were thankful for this type of perspective. Sorry to toss a glass of reality on the subject, but it is an important issue that is rarely even thought about.

I don't want to sound like a lawyer (although I am one), but I don't think the particular type of scoring system will have an effect on liability. Unless some match director gives bonus points for sweeping the peanut gallery.

Hmm, maybe that would be a good way to cut down on unauthorized coaching. But that's another thread.

I think we have room for diversity.

[gose]

Assigning stages points, be it Hormer 100,125, 150 or simply 100 points per stage balances out short courses and long courses. Straight time plus can allow a really good long range shooter to win a match by smoking the long shots and walking through the rest. Making each stage worth 100 points means you have to be all around good to win.

The problem with just using 100 points for all stages is that the short ones (usually the one gun stages) get way more important than the long ones. A small screw-up on a 20s stage easily cost you the match, while struggling on a long stage wont hurt you as bad. Using 100/125/150 somewhat alleviates that problem. It's not perfect, but still better than using 100 across the board.

Time-plus scoring with 100/125/150p stages FTW!