Of class, foreign shooters, and USPSA Nationals

[omnia1911]

Let's hope that IPSC doesn't make the same mistakes with the administration of its classification system, or they will find themselves having these same discussions. So far, they have kept their matches order of finish in division. That is a good thing.

Progression through a classification system is a useful reference tool to judge your skill improvements relative to other shooters around the country, but is a terrible tool for recognizing or awarding competitive accomplishments in a match.

[Wakal]

While poking around in the soon-to-be-dufunct 14th Edition Rulebook, I noticed the following on page 21:

Winning first or second in class at an Area Championship or Major Tournament AND shooting into the next higher class will result in promotion (except to Grand Master)..."

All righty then. The existing rules indicate, continuing my 2003/2004 C-Open result example, that the foreign shooter who took top C/Open in 2003 (68.26%, 74 overall, would have been 2/B ) should have been promoted to B last year. The foreign shooter who took top C/Open in 2004 (77.68%, 28 overall), and the same foreign shooter who won top C/Open in 2003 and ended up as only 2/C in 2004 (75.22%, 46 overall)...they would have been 1 and 2 in B, or 2 (!) and 6 A...and should be promoted to at least B this year.

So, when can we expect the results to be scrubbed and the classifications updated based on the 2004 US Nationals? It obviously wasn't done in 2003, but better late than never! I would go out on a limb and guess that these two are not the only people blatently gaming the system...and that have not been moved up in class as mandated by the 14th edition rules!

Alex

[Ron Ankeny]

Alex:

Considering the upward bias of the classification system, any shooter that has been improving, shooting classifiers regularly, and has been in the sport for 10 years or more, is in my view blatantly abusing the system if they don't have at least an M card.

[Wakal]

I agree.

Of course, I also think that the classification system is a sop to get the weak-willed to settle for a lesser goal than match winner, so I'm kind of biased

But if we are going to have rules, lets follow them

Alex

[Ron Ankeny]

Crap, tried to get a rise out of you and it didn't work. I agree with you. If we are going to have a system the rules need to be enforced.

[TRNinTX]

BJ shot so many majors this year that it was difficult to attend local matches and shoot classifiers. (His major sponsor has to work and maintain a marriage some weekends) . His classification has finally caught up but it took longer than it probably should have. As has been discussed before, when Max or Chris (Open) or Dave (Prod) shows up at a match it throws the percentages off and the other competitors have to really shoot well to even shoot in their class.

[Wakal]

BJ rocks! And has lots of classifiers this year

The no-classifier-shooting C-Class Open pair of gentlemen in my example, though...need to be MOVED UP. Two nominally C shooters who are running 77% and 75% of Eric... And I would guess that they are not the only system abusers, just the two I noticed

Alex

[revchuck]

This might be a place where USPSA could borrow an idea from IDPA. If you place within the top 10% of your class at a major IDPA match, you get kicked up one level. For example, if there are 32 shooters in, say, CDP Expert, the top three become Masters. This isn't required at club matches.

Nothing will stop the sandbaggers, but this does slow 'em down.

IDPA has had a raffle-only prize table since its inception, but the folks who want to win regardless of anything else will work just as hard for the trophy. Even if the prize table were eliminated, sandbagging and other forms of dishonesty would continue. For that matter, so would the efforts of honest shooters who are hard-core competitors but who play within both the letter and the spirit of the rules.