Of class, foreign shooters, and USPSA Nationals

[Jim Norman]

Allowing Foreign shooters to shoot at the US Nationals is OK by me, they add a certain flavor to our matches as well as exposing both sides to different cultures. They can also be USPSA members with an "F" before their number, OK by me. They should however, have to be actively classified to shoot for class winner. I think it is not too much to ask that they shoot a valid USPSA Classifier at least 3, maybe 6 times a year or that they and anyone else for that matter shoot as a U. You still get an order of finish trip to the table, but you eliminate the High "C" being a Foreign Master or a US Sandbagger.

Also any win in the Nationals should place you in the class that you win, unless your win is below the bottom percentage class. That is, If you are a "C", but place with an "A" percentage, you are now an "A". This for everyone, foreign or resident. This might not eliminate the problem entirely, but it would mean that you'd only get away with an out of class win one time.

Again, this is my opinion only, but as usual, it is right.

Jim Norman

[kdj]

Name a Division which should get first pick, and you'll have the guys shooting the other divisions bitching like hell. Remember, all divisions are equal, regardless of the size of the participation in each.

Surely, that's already been solved. There are seperate prize tables for each division.

One can now bitch about the allocation of prizes to each table but that's a seperate argument and has nothing to do with the picking order

Kevin

[Ron Ankeny]

Screw the cupie dolls, shoot for cash, top down, no classes.

[omnia1911]

I suspect that if the prize tables were eliminated from the match the complaints would shift to the sandbaggers who undeservingly got the plaques and trophies.

The problem isn't the prize table or the trophies. It is a classification system that has unfixable holes in it, and those who are willing to exploit them.

I say we have USPSA declare every member a GM* and we all compete head to head.

*GM=General Member

[Nik Habicht]

How about a simple suggestion: Award trophies to class winners but make the prize table based on overall placement in division?

Those who chose to sandbag for the ego value of being first C will upset less people than today when they sandbag for a valuable prize. The encouragement for newer/less able shooters to compete to their level is still there since they have a trophy to put on the shelf. Every one is happy.

Tell me what I'm missing this time

Kevin

Wow. Heads-up within the division? What a concept.

[Dalmas]

Personally I shot for the chance to be on the podium, if that would give something to bring home more than a medal fine, but the podium and percetage is important to me.

On some of the matches I've been there has not been a prize table, there is a lottery among everybody that has parcipated at the end or in the middle of the event where the "prize table" is raffled away. It's a fun event where you get to chat with fellow pistoleros and if you are luck you might win something to take home, if not oh well. I kinda like this set-up.

[Mistral404]

Olympics is very big business. Most of the US competitors in major sports are heavily sponsored and very very well paid! So I agree that the analogy with the Olympics is not relevant.

Foreign shooters do game our classification system. That is a reality. If a shooter has not shoot three classifiers in the past twelve then they shoot Unclassfied. But that is only a short term fix. Because in the future, they will shoot their three classifiers but they could tank them.

I do like the suggestion that if someone shoots significantly higher than there average that they should be re-classified after the match but before final standings are computed.

I think that if I am a B Limited shooter and for 24 stages I out shoot most A/M and a few GM then I am gaming the system. I do not deserve to win B limited. I should be reclassified up.

I also believe that when competing at Area and National matches, each stage should be computed into our classification system, not just the overall average.

As for rewards, some time ago it was expressed that D/C/B shooters are the most in numbers and provide the most money (in terms of fees and memberships). The should also have an equal share/opportunity at the prize table.

I would suggest rewarding the top three finishes in all classes, senior, lady, then by drawing award the remaining prizes. That way the people who support the sport would have a better chance of walking away with something.

[Sestock]

A quick fix for this would be to include 4-6+ present or future classifiers as part of the nats.

Those foriegn shooters or sandbaggers would have these stages count in the next run of classifiers in addition to their overall performance at the match.

Sandbaggers don't sandbag big matches so they would really try to shoot well on these stages at the nats.

Foriegn shooters would have a current classification for future USPSA matches.

At the annual meeting there was a mention that 8 or 9 stages in this years match were being considered for future classifiers.

[Ron Ankeny]

The 03 series of classifiers came out of major matches. The problem is the very concept of grouping shooters by classif. From a statistical/measurement perspective, USPSA does a great job of classifying shooters upwards. In fact, the system is so geared towards moving people up, it creates it's own form of grandbagging, especially when a shooter reaches class A..

I think what people also tend to forget is the fact the classification system doesn't assess the most important skills required to win at a big match. The only way for the system to work is for shooters to be current, the system must be reliable and valid, and shooters must be honest.

[Vince Pinto]

Foreign shooters do game our classification system.  That is a reality.

Are you guys actually suggesting that gaming and/or manipulation of the classification system is the exclusive domain of foreign members of the USPSA? If not, I would kindly ask all of you to refrain from directing your scorn at foreigners, as if the relative handful who attend the US Nationals are the root of all evil.

If there are general problems with the system, by all means suggest ways and means to correct them, but please don't single out foreign members for your woes.

[Jim Norman]

No Vince,

I do not think that all this is directed solely at the foreign shooter. I do however see that the foreign shooter has a better chance to scam the system than a Local shooter. We shoot 20-50 times a year and at least in my area every club submits a classifier =for every match. My classification is current. A foreign shooter gets classified as a C and then disappears from the system for a year or more, comes back after a year and shoots at least one class higher, not because he had just a good day, but because he has been shooting all year and improving, but there is no submission to USPSA of any classifier scores over this period. That should not be allowed either as a foreign shooter or as a local.

You should have to have a minimum number of VALID classifiers in the 12 months preceding the match or you should shoot as a "U" unclassified shooter. That way you can't tank your classifiers just to keep a low score. Foreign clubs could hold a "Special Classifier" match, just as we do once a year to allow new shooters to get a quick classification. I would be in favor of foreign clubs that are sending shooters to the US Nationals holding more than one "Special Classifier Match" annually, maybe two. That would give their shooters a fair chance to obtain a realistic classification score. Count the high 6 of the 8 stages shot, assuming they are "Valid" meaning with in 5% of the shooters previous average. This would be a requirement on an annual basis, although once classified, the shooter could submit as few as 4 VALID classifiers annually to remain in class.

Jim Norman

[Vince Pinto]

No Vince, I do not think that all this is directed solely at the foreign shooter.

Have you noticed the topic heading (and some of the comments directed specifically at foreigners)?

That should not be allowed either as a foreign shooter or as a local. You should have to have a minimum number of VALID classifiers in the 12 months preceding the match or you should shoot as a "U" unclassified shooter.

Fine, however your suggestion would apply equally to US domiciled competitors and foreigners alike, and that's my point.

[shred]

Hey, I'm a foreigner when I go outside the US. With a "B" class IPSC classification ('M' USPSA), I bet the locals would be pretty peeved too.

The problem goes both ways-- a shooter goes abroad occasionally, shoots a lot locally. Unless the local classification follows them, they're likely to be rated lower than they should be away from home.

Same goes if they only shoot USPSA classifiers occasionally, but practice a lot or shoot different divisions or whatever.

[Jim Norman]

Vince,

You are correct in that a lot of the comments have been directed at Foreign Shooters coming here, but there have been a lot of other comments that indicated that what ever is decided should cut both ways. I have no problem in that if I shoot at other than a USPSA match, I would either need to get and keep current an IPSC Classification or shoot as a U. I thnk that is fair and All I ask is that the same apply back this way.

This is now only just becoming an issue going out of the US as IPSC is only just started to have a classificaion system. USPSA has had one in place a lot longer.

I think that a better topic title may have been sandbagging the Nationals.

Jim

[BSeevers]

Foreign shooters do game our classification system.  That is a reality.

Are you guys actually suggesting that gaming and/or manipulation of the classification system is the exclusive domain of foreign members of the USPSA? If not, I would kindly ask all of you to refrain from directing your scorn at foreigners, as if the relative handful who attend the US Nationals are the root of all evil.

If there are general problems with the system, by all means suggest ways and means to correct them, but please don't single out foreign members for your woes.

Yes pretty much. I don't know too many people that sandbag from the US to win the "insert you favorite country Nationals" Now I am sure is it done, of course, but don't kid yourself. There are quite a few Semipro or Pro foreign shooters who have a M/GM skill level cherrypicking the US Nationals. As stated my solution is, no foreign USPSA members. Having a classifier minimum would be a good step also. This would help eliminate some USA sandbagging too. We are picking on the sandbagger. It seems that some winners seem to be from other countrys classed below their skills. Nothing against the countries just against sandbaggers.

[Vince Pinto]

As stated my solution is, no foreign USPSA members.

I'm extremely disappointed with this comment, which looks very un-American to me.

[BSeevers]

As stated my solution is, no foreign USPSA members.

I'm extremely disappointed with this comment, which looks very un-American to me.

Umm Not sure what you are saying but I am an American. You are not.

[fullautodave]

Would you guys quit arguing long enough to tell me when the match at Coney Island is.

[omnia1911]

It is only USPSA that requires a competitor to hold a specific Regional (USPSA) membership in order to participate in its Level II and III matches, which includes the USPSA Nationals. I don't believe any of the other Regions do this.

I suspect most of the foreign shooters wouldn't bother joining USPSA if it wasn't required to shoot the Nationals. Given this, there really isn't much motivation to move up in the USPSA classification system. The IPSC classification system has more relevance to their shooting.

[ErikW]

ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!

These guys are required to join USPSA in order to shoot the nationals or tournaments. USPSA eventually assigns them a classification. They sign up for a match, and their classifications are retreived from the national database. They probably couldn't shoot as "Unclassified" even if they wanted to.

[Vince Pinto]

They probably couldn't shoot as "Unclassified" even if they wanted to.

Actually they can. Errol Thomas, an Australian GM who placed 7th in Open Division, shot as "U", presumably because he's never shot USPSA classifiers.

If there's a problem, it's because (apparently) there's no requirement for competitors, foreign or domestic, to maintain or update their classification prior to shooting the Nationals. My objection to this thread is that the topic heading, and many of the comments herein, place the blame on foreign members, and that's bordering on xenophobia.

The inherent vice of all classification systems is that classifier stages are shot in multiple locations, and there's no way for anybody to tell whether the courses were set-up and conducted correctly and/or honestly, and I'm quite sure a person intent on cheating could submit false results.

The solution is simple. Base awards (medals and/or prizes) on actual match results, not on declared classifications. For example, whoever is closest to (but under) 75% wins "Top B". This would make the awards performance based, and it's nigh impossible to sandbag during a major match, because there are no prior records.

[Jim Norman]

First off, the Lewis System is shooter welfare, you may as well hold a drawing for prizes. We have a classifiaction system. It has flaws. Let's fix the flaws, not scrap the system.

Require that shooters have at least 4 valid classifiers shot in the last 12-18 months. Note the word VALID. If you are a C shooter and you shoot a non-acceptable score then you are not really trying. This especially applies to those that come out as a C and win with a score that eclipses High B. THis rule should apply across the board.

OR

Make the Nationals an INSTANT Classifer. SHoot the match and if you are shooting above your class, assumming that your class has the requisit number of GM's you move up right then and there. There are details that would need to be worked out to do this, but it could be done.

Personally, I like the first solution. It works pretty much across the board for all, whether a US natinoal or a foreign shooter. Now, if you have not shot a classifier in the last 12-18 motnths, you revert temporarily to U. You would need to shoot two valid classifers and then you would be reinstated at your now current rating.

Jim Norman

[Paul B]

I'm not sure I'm comfortable with this but I totally agree with Vince. The classic prize table is the root of most of this problem and a lot of others.

I just got through reading a lot of criticism about the prize table at the nationals and it may also be a major stumbling block in a 3 day nationals for everyone.

[omnia1911]

First off, the Lewis System is shooter welfare, you may as well hold a drawing  for prizes. We have a classification system. It has flaws. Let's fix the flaws, not scrap the system.

Require that shooters have at least 4 valid classifiers shot in the last 12-18 months. Note the word VALID. If you are a C shooter and you shoot a non-acceptable score then you are not really trying. This especially applies to those that come out as a C and win with a score that eclipses High B. THis rule should apply across the board.

OR

Make the Nationals an INSTANT Classifer. SHoot the match and if you are shooting above your class, assuming that your class has the requisit number of GM's you move up right then and there. There are details that would need to be worked out to do this, but it could be done.

Personally, I like the first solution. It works pretty much across the board for all, whether a US natinoal or a foreign shooter. Now, if you have not shot a classifier in the last 12-18 motnths, you revert temporarily to U. You would need to shoot two valid classifers and then you would be reinstated at your now current rating.

Jim Norman

Require that shooters have at least 4 valid classifiers shot in the last 12-18 months. Note the word VALID. If you are a C shooter and you shoot a non-acceptable score then you are not really trying. This especially applies to those that come out as a C and win with a score that eclipses High B. THis rule should apply across the board.

How would you know that a classifier score is valid? If a shooter's entire set of classifiers in the last 12-18 months are "C" scores, then he goes to the Nationals as a "C" class shooter and shoot a "B" class score, the "validity" of the shooter's classification score history is discovered after the fact. Isn't that what we have going now?

Make the Nationals an INSTANT Classifer. SHoot the match and if you are shooting above your class, assumming that your class has the requisit number of GM's you move up right then and there. There are details that would need to be worked out to do this, but it could be done.

I don't see where this is functionally any different than the Lewis Scoring Method. What would be different in using this method or the Lewis Scoring Method is that USPSA moves class winners at the Nationals up in class. One of these alternative methods could conceivably have a "C" class shooter who would otherwise win his class, not do so due to the arbitrary cutoff at 75%. Instead, a different "C" class shooter with a lower score (under 75%) would be the one moved up to "B" class by USPSA. Now you have what you consider the "sandbagger" remaining in "C" class. Now the game will be to manipulate your score so that you can come as close to 75% without going over. A difficult task, in deed, but I'm sure someone will try to work it to their advantage.

[Neil Beverley]

The problem only lies with those who may try to sandbag the results and therefore the prize table. I am not hearing anyone particularly moaning about shooters who have a classification level higher than their ability level.

All (most ?) shooters at matches try their best to get the best result.

There are many who try particularly hard to move up a classification because they take pride in it. They are not the problem.

Why not try to conceive a method where the classification at matches with regards to the prize table is the higher of either the classification system or the average of nn matches over the last or previous xx months?

I'm not against moving non current shooters into Unclassified. They can always make the effort to get themselves up todate

Add in a rule at matches that the classification has to be current (based on xyz criteria) to be eligible for prizes and you end up with a fairer system.

In the end I am generally in favour of a classification system at matches, it benefits a wider range of shooters, some of whom will never make M or GM. Personally I prefer trophies to prizes, but that's a separate issue. The important thing is to focus on a system at matches which makes the distribution of prizes as fair as possible. The system at matches does not have to totally conform (solely) to the existing classification system.

Target the defeat of sandbagging regardless of where the shooter comes from. The target is a fair system at the prize table.