Match Balance - Club level 1

[sarnburg]

I am the MD for a fairly active club, We have weekly Tuesday night USPSA in summer, year round Steel Challenge and USPSA on weekends with some multi-gun thrown in. We are very fortunate that we have 3-4 new shooters every week. Most of them come and go and a few become regulars.

We are now into our second month of weekly shooting and I have started upping the difficulty level of the stages. The last three weeks I have been getting some grumbling and last night I got out right complaints that the stages were too hard. For example we had a stage that 5 pepper poppers at Min safe distance, and 4 classic targets with no-shoots covering half of the A zone. Looking at the results https://practiscore.com/match-results/uuid?uuid=565b6342-d84b-11e2-b9fd-c475575227d1&page=stage4Combined

All told 15 of 37 shooters Zeroed the stage.

So my questions are as a shooter what kind of stages do you like at club level events? (Just for the record I absolutely hate the "it's only a level 1" excuse in stage design.)

As a MD/Stage designer at what point do you dial the difficulty back so insure success for the average shooter?

Thoughts?

Scott Arnburg

www.aipshooters.com

Edited June 19, 2013 by sarnburg

[Mark R]

Mix it up...some easy, some fairly hard. All the matches/stages I create, I try to keep long shots open and very close ones with hard cover or no-shoots on them to slow down the top dogs. I also use no-shoots to keep them off the walls and props. But I don't conscientiously dial it back.

If shooters want to shoot, they'll come back.

[MarkCO]

Balance, IMHO, is something learned based on many factors. But based on the stage you described, the scores and the classifications of some shooters I looked up, it might have been a bit too much.

Remember, DVC...speed and accuracy are intertwined with the stage design. Don't take this wrong, but if you, as a C class shooter can not reasonably shoot the stage at 90% of your normal speed with good flow and maybe one miss or no-shoot, then the stage should be adjusted. Difficulty is not just about slowing down and making precision shots to avoid no-shoots. A GM should be able to shoot the stage at his normal speed, with good flow and garner at least 90% of the points. Granted, it is kind of tough to figure out how that GM would do when you are not one. That is one reason that supports the notion that stage designers should go and shoot some majors and watch some top guys shoot those same stages.

That said, do you have some experienced shooters that can review or help you design stages? You have a CRO, so you have gone through stage design to some degree. Maybe send a few of your stages to your CRO instructor, or post some on here and let the Enosphere have a crack at them.

[MarkCO]

to slow down the top dogs.

A notion I totally disagree with. The "top dogs" will win no matter what you do. When you try to slow them down through stage design, all you do is frustrate and piss off the C, D, and U shooters. Difficulty and flow dancing with speed and accuracy...

[Mark R]

to slow down the top dogs.

A notion I totally disagree with. The "top dogs" will win no matter what you do. When you try to slow them down through stage design, all you do is frustrate and piss off the C, D, and U shooters. Difficulty and flow dancing with speed and accuracy...

I just don't like leaving a full target in the open at 4 feet away to allow point shooting. Wrong words, should have said make them use their sights.

[MarkCO]

to slow down the top dogs.

A notion I totally disagree with. The "top dogs" will win no matter what you do. When you try to slow them down through stage design, all you do is frustrate and piss off the C, D, and U shooters. Difficulty and flow dancing with speed and accuracy...

I just don't like leaving a full target in the open at 4 feet away to allow point shooting. Wrong words, should have said make them use their sights.

That works. I have been known to use the bumpy things on my slide once or twice...

[Flexmoney]

You are looking at it the right way. Keep checking the results to review how "your shooters" are coming along.

Honestly, your stage doesn't sound too hard. You did, however, get over a third of the shooters that zero'd it. It sounds like the steel was close, and sucked the shooters into kicking it into high gear? Which, they then ate it on paper?

I'd probably run the exact same stage next month.

[Tim/GA]

Sounds like what happens on classifiers- shooters just get to going way to fast (led by me of course!). Sometimes it is the paper that sucks them in to shooting the steel to fast, other times the opposite. The way you had it set actually should have made it easier since all of the paper had no shoots. If you had some paper with and some paper without it really would get a lot of newer shooters. Either they will shoot the open targets at to slow a pace or burn through the paper, including the ones with no shoots.

I try to have a balance of longer/obscured precision shots, medium quick ones and some wide open and in your face. Amazing how many A/D or A/M those close in "what front sight" targets will get due to transitioning to fast. Some stages will have both, some will have one or the other. That way you don't end up with a hoser match or a precision match, it is a mix. Could not see the classifications of your shooters, but I will say that having a couple of Masters and a couple of top notch As has been a help for me in designing stages, along with always have some new shooters at the other end of the scale.

[juan]

I think the bigger crime would be not dificult enough,

to me these matches should be training for the big ones,

I would love to shoot your match.

we went hrough something like this a few years ago. it actually brought out more shooters, and the ones that complained are still shooting and I think there better off for it.

[sarnburg]

Flex, here is a write up of the offending stage if you want to use it.

I am somewhat jaded that I really do not care for "hoser" stages with a bunch of open targets at 10 feet. On the upside after the last few weeks there are now more people willing to setup stages.

Scott

Speed Trap 13rds.pdf

Edited June 20, 2013 by sarnburg

[cellguy030]

You are looking at it the right way. Keep checking the results to review how "your shooters" are coming along.

Honestly, your stage doesn't sound too hard. You did, however, get over a third of the shooters that zero'd it. It sounds like the steel was close, and sucked the shooters into kicking it into high gear? Which, they then ate it on paper?

I'd probably run the exact same stage next month.

Nah, most if not all knew to take the paper first.

[cellguy030]

I think the bigger crime would be not dificult enough,

to me these matches should be training for the big ones,

I would love to shoot your match.

we went hrough something like this a few years ago. it actually brought out more shooters, and the ones that complained are still shooting and I think there better off for it.

Thats what I said... Im a mid to strong C and the last few weeks of Scott's "torture" have made me take notice that I need to work on some things. (more 35 yard week hand practice Scott?)

[Flexmoney]

15 yards to the paper...nobody is running it much faster than 12 seconds....with all those points down?

What am I missing here?

[cellguy030]

15 yards to the paper...nobody is running it much faster than 12 seconds....with all those points down?

What am I missing here?

Shots were much tighter than they look on the stage diagram

[MarkCO]

Agree, the stage diagram looks like a fairly straightforward standards. Looks like a 8 second stage for a GM, maybe 12 for a C.

[CHA-LEE]

After being on the board of a few different USPSA clubs, MDing a few major matches, and setting up countless stages I have come to the conclusion that you are usually best served by setting up shooting challenges that appeal to the marksmanship skills of the masses. My personal rule of thumb is this. If a stage has more than 40% of the shooters racking up shooting penalties (misses, no shoots, etc) then the shooting challenge is probably too difficult for the average marksmanship skills that attend the match. This is an ever evolving learning curve for both the stage designer and the shooters. Stages that are "Too Difficult" today, may be "Just Fine" a year from now when the average skill level raises.

I have found that most stage designers setup shooting challenges from a single vantage point or expected way of shooting the stage. Such as "Run here, stop, then shoot this target". You can do this, but these type of stages end up being "Follow the leader" style shooting because there is zero creativity in being able to shoot the stage in another logical way. You also limit the ability of higher skill leveled shooters to express their skills by having the choice to engage targets on the move or not.

The point I am trying to make, is that you can setup a stage with fairly easy shots but place the targets in a way that allows for multiple ways of solving the challenge depending on the skill level of the shooter. For example, you could have some 10 - 15 yard targets that a C class shooter could properly engage without penalty from a standing shooting position. But these same targets could also be engaged on the move by the higher class shooters who what to push the Risk vs Reward factor. Engaging these kind of targets on the move is a harder shooting challenge. So you end up with a Win/Win. The C class shooters can stand and shoot the targets and the higher class shooters can shoot it on the move. Both are happy with their skills being tested and are able to succeed at the shooting task at hand.

The primary issue with this is that WAY too many stages are being created and setup by C or B class shooters who honestly can't even assess what type of shooting challenge would properly test both C class AND GM level shooters. I believe that the M's and GM's should always do their best in assisting with stage creation and setup so they can assess the stage and help implement shooting challenges that can serve both skill levels.

I also want to reiterate that setting up very difficult shooting challenges that are intended to "Slow Down" GM's is a completely incorrect approach. What will happen is the GM's will use those situations to greatly distance themselves from the lower class shooters because the GM's have put in the practice to know exactly what it takes to overcome the shooting challenge with the least amount of wasted time. Doing this type of stuff only screws the average shooter who more than likely WILL fail at the very difficult shooting challenges because their raw marksmanship skills are simply not good enough to get the job done. Realistically, when I go to a match and see these type of "Slow the GM's down" type of shooting challenges I LOVE it because I know that I can easily gain 20% - 30% on that part of the stage alone on most of the other shooters, which gives me more of a buffer to push harder on the "Follow the leader" type of stuff elsewhere in the match.

[kellymc]

I probley would have zeroed it also. Maybe if the paper was forward and the poppers back their would have been less complaining. But after getting my Zero I wouldn't have complained

Edited June 20, 2013 by kellymc

[wes777]

You should run the same general setup again. However, move the no-shoots. Try putting them behind the poppers and leaving the paper open. Should reinforce the aiming at shorter distances and allow the newer shooters a larger scoring area.

[bikerburgess]

Another option for a stage like that is to change out the no shoots for hard cover, that way the shooters that have a harder time with the accuracy will not be getting no shoot penalties in addition to misses and are less likely to zero the stage but the better shooters will still be forced to hit accurate shots quickly to score well.

I am doing that with a stage I designed for this week ends match for just that reason.

Mike

[motosapiens]

My opinions are rarely popular, but as a C shooter (about to become a B ), partial targets at 15yd doesn't seem all that crazy hard, but based on the scores, perhaps you need to leave a little more of the A-zone open to make it more novice-friendly. or have 2 open targets and two tight no-shoots so even a few bad shots won't cause a zero.

To me, shots that anyone should be able to make *if* they take the time to aim shouldn't be considered too hard. OTOH, weak hand only at 20y with no shoots, or moving targets at long distances protected by no-shoots are things that could be discouraging.

As usual, cha-lee has some great ideas and advice. If you have difficult shots, but allow shooters the option of taking the time to move to a different/closer position to make them easier, you can challenge a wider variety of shooters.

Edited June 21, 2013 by motosapiens

[John Z Sr]

After being on the board of a few different USPSA clubs, MDing a few major matches, and setting up countless stages I have come to the conclusion that you are usually best served by setting up shooting challenges that appeal to the marksmanship skills of the masses. My personal rule of thumb is this. If a stage has more than 40% of the shooters racking up shooting penalties (misses, no shoots, etc) then the shooting challenge is probably too difficult for the average marksmanship skills that attend the match. This is an ever evolving learning curve for both the stage designer and the shooters. Stages that are "Too Difficult" today, may be "Just Fine" a year from now when the average skill level raises.

I have found that most stage designers setup shooting challenges from a single vantage point or expected way of shooting the stage. Such as "Run here, stop, then shoot this target". You can do this, but these type of stages end up being "Follow the leader" style shooting because there is zero creativity in being able to shoot the stage in another logical way. You also limit the ability of higher skill leveled shooters to express their skills by having the choice to engage targets on the move or not.

The point I am trying to make, is that you can setup a stage with fairly easy shots but place the targets in a way that allows for multiple ways of solving the challenge depending on the skill level of the shooter. For example, you could have some 10 - 15 yard targets that a C class shooter could properly engage without penalty from a standing shooting position. But these same targets could also be engaged on the move by the higher class shooters who what to push the Risk vs Reward factor. Engaging these kind of targets on the move is a harder shooting challenge. So you end up with a Win/Win. The C class shooters can stand and shoot the targets and the higher class shooters can shoot it on the move. Both are happy with their skills being tested and are able to succeed at the shooting task at hand.

The primary issue with this is that WAY too many stages are being created and setup by C or B class shooters who honestly can't even assess what type of shooting challenge would properly test both C class AND GM level shooters. I believe that the M's and GM's should always do their best in assisting with stage creation and setup so they can assess the stage and help implement shooting challenges that can serve both skill levels.

I also want to reiterate that setting up very difficult shooting challenges that are intended to "Slow Down" GM's is a completely incorrect approach. What will happen is the GM's will use those situations to greatly distance themselves from the lower class shooters because the GM's have put in the practice to know exactly what it takes to overcome the shooting challenge with the least amount of wasted time. Doing this type of stuff only screws the average shooter who more than likely WILL fail at the very difficult shooting challenges because their raw marksmanship skills are simply not good enough to get the job done. Realistically, when I go to a match and see these type of "Slow the GM's down" type of shooting challenges I LOVE it because I know that I can easily gain 20% - 30% on that part of the stage alone on most of the other shooters, which gives me more of a buffer to push harder on the "Follow the leader" type of stuff elsewhere in the match.

very well said, thanks

[Nik Habicht]

Another option for a stage like that is to change out the no shoots for hard cover, that way the shooters that have a harder time with the accuracy will not be getting no shoot penalties in addition to misses and are less likely to zero the stage but the better shooters will still be forced to hit accurate shots quickly to score well.

I am doing that with a stage I designed for this week ends match for just that reason.

Mike

Bingo -- I try to use hard cover on targets I want to make harder that are 12 yards out or further. That prevents a less accurate shooter from getting double dinged, while still teaching them that they need to work on longrange.....

I'll use no-shoots closer in -- so shooting targets on the move requires more of a risk benefit analysis, especially if there's a bunch of targets that can be engaged on the move. At that point playing with the amount of A-zone that's available, the distance from the FFZ, and even adding the occasional hard-covered, rather than no-shoot covered close target, forces shooter to learn how to adjust their vision from target to target....

[Trent1k1]

At our club we can't really shoot to the left and right due to the way the bays are built. This forces most of the stages to be pretty simple and with lots of relatively easy targets. I shot the Florida Open last weekend, and all I can say is WOW. When you aren't used to shooting 26 and 30 yard targets and then some evil guy throws no-shoots on them, it is a wakeup that at least at our range, we need to up some of the difficulty on some of our stages. Rather than forcing everyone to take the targets at 30 yards, we plan on doing some risk/reward sort of thing. Shooters will have the opportunity to move up and shoot it closer (much closer) but will need to balance that with the time it will take to run 20 yards up to the target.