idpa classifier...do your absolute best?

[Onagoth]

Sandbag, dude. Collect as much wood as you can. IDPA trophies are the $hit. Plus they award them to 10th place.

Hahaha....I wish I could tweet that or something!

Seriously, I barely made Master with a Glock, but can't quite get there with a .45 in CDP. I practice like 2 percent of what i once did. In USPSA, I am still in C-class.

My point is, for me at least, IDPA master= C class in USPSA, roughly. Just making master in IDPA is not a high goal, unless you are 98 years old. We should all shoot to master class in IDPA, with practice, The big thing is actually winning a state shoot as a master. Now that is a whole new ballgame.

Totally agree.

I classifier as expert by 1 second a couple years ago and was worried I would never do well in a match ever again. But, notwithstanding some mental mistakes, I usually make the top 5-8 shooters in a match.

Having said that, I'm still a C shooter in IPSC, maybe a B on a great day.

[motosapiens]

I personally did my best but ended up Marksman on my first classifier, as I am a solid Sharp Shooter. I simply screwed the 3rd string because I aimed at the target as I would have a USPSA target (shooting dead center when I should have aimed 2/3 from the bottom).

slightly off topic, but if you look at the A zone on a uspsa target, you'll notice it is also offset towards the upper half. If you aim dead center at the target, you may end up with lots of c's and even d's on far away targets. I aim for the center of the upper half of the torso on both targets.

[Nimitz]

I've never understood why anyone would not try and perform to the best of their ability every time they compete ...

[Nimitz]

Practicing classifiers prior to a classification match is a form of gaming or reverse sandbagging ... If you are a good shooter you will shoot the CoF or standard exercise well whether you practice it or not before hand because you have mastered the fundamentals of practical shooting which is what theses things are supposed to test ...

[motosapiens]

Practicing classifiers prior to a classification match is a form of gaming or reverse sandbagging ... If you are a good shooter you will shoot the CoF or standard exercise well whether you practice it or not before hand because you have mastered the fundamentals of practical shooting which is what theses things are supposed to test ...

I don't think it's any different than practicing any other skill. If you practice the classifiers, you will be working on exactly the skills you need to succeed at IDPA. Really, the only one that is imho worth practicing is the 3rd stage, because most matches don't have alot of 20 yard shots, and most people shoot too fast and aim at the wrong spot on the target.

[ihocky2]

I would practice the classifier some so you are comfortable with it, but it is not like Steel Challenge where you want to only practice the same thing time and time again until it is on auto-pilot.

As for if you should sandbag, give it your best but don't try to push yourself too far. Most people will get a few good runs when they really hammer the gas, but end up dropping more points overall and end up doing worse. Shoot at your standard pace and make good hits. My first classifier I made sharpshooter, from a couple years of practice and some steel matches I was pretty decent at standards. But my entire first year of sanctioned matches I finished dead last in ESP sharpshooter and usually was beat by several marksmen. I had the skills to shoot standards well, but I did not have the rest of the game yet and would take dumb procedurals and did not have great stage breakdowns or smooth movement through the stage. It was actually pretty disappointing to finish every match in the bottom of my class. With time I improved and now hold my own in my class. So like I started with, shoot to the best of you ability and don't try to push too hard above that.

[lc2hl]

Shoot it to the best of your ability. As a benchmark, it makes sense, but that is about it. Sandbagging, intentially is not a good thing for yourself or your self esteem.

I have seen shooters shoot and practice the classifier to get to EX, then get decimated at a sanctioned match.

Last classifier I shot was ESP at 89.87. Just missed MA. Does it bother me? You bet it does. 1 point less down and then I would be MA in ESP as well. My current classifications are SSP:MA, ESP:EX, CDP:EX.

Being able to perform at a match outweighs what a piece of paper says you are. I have had horribly bad matches, and matches that were on autopilot where I could not do a thing wrong.

Practice what matters, not a benchmark. Then go shoot matches and find out where you really stand.

[Jim Watson]

IMO, the classifier doesn't mean much. I'm sure there are a few experts/masters out there who rack up tons of penalties and misses in a real match

Not that I see.

The Masters and upper Experts generally get few penalties and few points down. If they have a bad day, they don't win.

"I'd rather be the slowest sharpshooter than the fastest marksman."

Me, too. I scratched my way into Expert a good while back when I was more agile, and it is just nice to be known as the Expert around here. I always knew I was, but now I have a plaque to prove it.

[Kool Aid]

I shoot the IDPA Classifier like I'm trying to win the overall match, so sandbagging is pointless IMO. Lately, I'm classifying very high Expert in SSP. My initial classification in USPSA this year was B in Limited shooting my SSP gun scored Minor. Some of my Limited classifiers would have been solid A scores in Production.

I've gamed and practiced the snot out of the IDPA Classifier trying to make Master, yet my placement in field matches is very similar among other Experts and Masters. Like Rowdy, I think its an urban legend that someone could make IDPA Master by Classifier, then choke in field matches. The Classifier is so long and tests such a broad range of skills that luck and gamesmanship have little bearing on overall score. I've run it both conservative/accurate and fast/loose with similar overall scores. More often, its USPSA where I come across B shooters who choke in field matches.

Edited August 19, 2013 by Kool Aid

[Onagoth]

I'm not sure how anyone can consider the classifier representative of match performance.

There are no FTNs, no moving targets, no no-shoots and no thinking.

I know the classifiers are the same for everyone and the par times are set based on that, but I don't think everyone handles the above missing elements the same way.

To put it another way, you can practice the classifier 100 times and eventually get to master, but I wouldn't say this prepares you to shoot master class at a big match.

[19852]

As a lifelong athlete and long time competition shooter I cannot imagine not doing my best at all times. It just sets a bad personal precedent.

[jmbaccolyte]

Personally, I'm too old to do well with all the running from place to place that is part of USPSA. So I probably would be a "C" class or lower shooter in USPSA (the local USPSA match doesn't send in the scores to the national organization).

I haven't made Master yet in IDPA ESP, but I'm improving on the Classifier by slowing down a little and trying for accuracy, instead of spraying and praying. I hope to become a "paper" Master, before I'm too old to shoot fast enough. I don't shoot many matches because I work nights now and the IDPA matches around here seem to be mostly in the mornings when I'm asleep. But the idea of "choking" on the pressure of a friendly competition is ludicrious to me, I guess it depends on your background and temperment. Based on the comments made by others here, there are a lot of shooters who are better and faster than me who are effected by the pressure of competition.

[motosapiens]

Personally, I'm too old to do well with all the running from place to place that is part of USPSA. So I probably would be a "C" class or lower shooter in USPSA (the local USPSA match doesn't send in the scores to the national organization).

You are fooling yourself and making excuses if you think that running has very much at all to do with success at uspsa. There are 350 lb guys that make GM and shoot circles around former track athletes like myself. You do have to maintain focus for a longer period of time (32 round max vs 18), and you do have more choices about how to shoot things, so more thought and preparation are required for a stage, but athleticism is not really that important. Alot of the better shooters (esp in unlimited capacity divisions) specifically plan their stages to move less and shoot mo bettah, and it works.

[jmbaccolyte]

I've seen photos of some guys at the GM level that looked kind of like I do around the waist, but 350 pound Grand Masters? You're not just trying to encourage me? I'd think their knees would give them trouble before too many years of that.

Still, the running (I was never a track star, anyway) does seem to take up a significant portion of the total time, but I guess that depends on course design. I've been to a few local matches where you had to run 25 yards or more between the first string of fire and the last because they put barriers between the shooting areas. That amount of running leaves a lot less time for shooting, if you're slow. I hadn't thought about course design making that much difference.

[Bones]

^{Barring intentional actions, your Classifier score will likely not vary more than 10% on any given day at any given skill level.}

^{Food for thought re: the independent IDPA match bump & Classifier classification systems. The system's basic attribute - two independent promotion paths - leads to some interesting outcomes.}

^{Start with 100 Marksmen in any Division. Have them do nothing - no practice, no skill improvement, no equipment change, etc. - but shoot against one another in successive Major matches.}

^{After the 8th match, the system produces it's first MA. After the 33rd match, MAs are the majority. After the 49th match, the system literally locks up and 73% of the participants have been promoted to MA.}

^{I have always supported coupling the systems by requiring a documented classifier score and match result to be promoted - esp. to MA level - or mandating portions of the classifier in major matches to provide a more complete assessment of skill sets. It would also normalize the population distrubtion against the best (100% line) at any given time. No additonal work would be required for the former, as all this data exists(ed) in the system.}

^{Essentially, without a calibration against something - like a 100% line - Classifications are locally subjective and generally imprecise relative to other existing Action Pistol systems.}

^{From some perspectives, there are not too many XXs (pick your Classification), there are too many XXs in XX+1 class. The system as it exists cannot produce any other outcome.}

^{IDPA Match Bump Analysis - starting with 100 Marksmen - same population competing in successive Major matches}

# MM SS EX MA Total

^{1 100 0 0 0 0 100}

^{2 90 10 0 0100}

^{3 81 18 1 0100}

^{4 73 25 2 0100}

^{5 66 30 4 0100}

^{6 60 33 7 0100}

^{7 54 36 10 0100}

^{8 49 38 12 1100}

^{9 45 39 14 2100}

^{10 41 40 16 3100}

^{11 37 40 19 4100}

^{12 34 39 22 5100}

^{13 31 39 23 7100}

^{14 28 38 25 9100}

^{15 26 36 27 11100}

^{16 24 35 28 13100}

^{17 22 34 29 15100}

^{18 20 33 30 17100}

^{19 18 33 29 20100}

^{20 17 33 28 22100}

^{21 16 31 292 4100}

^{22 15 29 30 26100}

^{23 14 28 29 29100}

^{24 13 27 29 31100}

^{25 12 26 28 34100}

^{26 10 25 29 36100}

^{27 9 23 30 38100}

^{28 9 21 29 41100}

^{29 9 19 29 43100}

^{30 9 18 28 45100}

^{31 9 17 27 47100}

^{32 9 16 26 49100}

^{33 9 15 25 51100}

^{34 9 14 24 53100}

^{35 9 13 23 55100}

^{36 9 12 22 57100}

^{37 9 11 21 59100}

^{38 9 10 20 61100}

^{39 9 9 19 63100}

^{40 9 9 18 64100}

^{41 9 9 17 65100}

^{42 9 9 16 66100}

^{43 9 9 15 67100}

^{44 9 9 14 68100}

^{45 9 9 13 69100}

^{46 9 9 12 70100}

^{47 9 9 11 71100}

^{48 99 10 72100}

^{49 9 9 9 73100}

^{Something to think about,}

^Craig

Edited August 28, 2013 by Bones

[Onagoth]

That is actually kind of interesting

[Moltke]

What is this black magic?

[jmbaccolyte]

I don't understand the math, Bones, but not everyone's chance of winning is the same in real life. Look at Duane Thomas' poll sticky at the beginning of the IDPA area here and looks more like the top three shooting groups are about equal at 30% of the total shooters.

[motosapiens]

In an academic sense, Bones' analysis is interesting, but it's also not very realistic. Does anyone see any real evidence that match promotions are why so many USPSA B shooters are master in IDPA? I think the classifier times are the more likely suspect.

[motosapiens]

I've seen photos of some guys at the GM level that looked kind of like I do around the waist, but 350 pound Grand Masters? You're not just trying to encourage me? I'd think their knees would give them trouble before too many years of that.

Still, the running (I was never a track star, anyway) does seem to take up a significant portion of the total time, but I guess that depends on course design. I've been to a few local matches where you had to run 25 yards or more between the first string of fire and the last because they put barriers between the shooting areas. That amount of running leaves a lot less time for shooting, if you're slow. I hadn't thought about course design making that much difference.

I can't speak for the local matches in your area. In my area, running fast is not that important, but leaving as soon as you are done shooting, and starting to shoot as soon as you get to a new position are both very important. At the nationals and area match I've attended, also not much running. Not really any different than an idpa match in terms of movement, except longer strings of fire, so more total movement.

[lugnut]

My perspective:

I can't imagine any form of sandbagging. Never understood that at all. I'd rather be competing with people better than me anyway.... rather come in 3rd with 10 Masters than 1st with !0 Experts for example.

At some point classifiers really don't mean much anyway... honestly. At some point you will get to point where all that matters is overall. And if you don't get to that point... you usually have a pretty good idea of who you should beat regardless of their classifications.

No classification system if perfect. Not USPSA's or IPDA's. In IDPA you have a classifier that is a pretty decent test of skills but it doesn't test everything one might see in a match. On the other hand some matches might be biased to a particular set of skills. A match bump at a match where the "better" shooters don't show up isn't as good as a match where lots of better shooters DO show up. So many variables.

At the end of the day the goal is to develop skills necessary to compete well at matches... that's it. No one pays attention to who wins the classifier stage (USPSA)... the match is what counts. Always do the best you can... anything less is... well.... weak.

[lugnut]

In an academic sense, Bones' analysis is interesting, but it's also not very realistic. Does anyone see any real evidence that match promotions are why so many USPSA B shooters are master in IDPA? I think the classifier times are the more likely suspect.

IMO IDPA SSP Master skills are about on par with USPSA B. IDPA ESP/CDP are on par with strong B. That's just my gut based on what I have seen. I made SSP Master about the same time I made B. I was ESP/CDP Master while I was a solid B... close to A.

In most cases it has nothing to do with match bumps IMO.

[Glshooter]

Does anyone see any real evidence that match promotions are why so many USPSA B shooters are master in IDPA? I think the classifier times are the more likely suspect.

I see evidence of it all the time. At almost every sanctioned Idpa match there will be an expert bumped to master just because of the number of people shooting expert class. It doesn't mean they have master class shooting ability, just that they were able to beat 9 other shooters on that particular day. They either get beat real bad in master class the next match or switch divisions.

[Blueridge]

The classifier tests a set of skills that are useful for shooting well in general. That said it does not gaurantee that whatever classification you achieve you will be competitive in. It is a foundation of skills for a sport that can have stages that have challenges that the classifier cannot fully prepare you for. The considerable number of possibilities that stages can challenge you with can look nothing like the classifier you trained for. There are no swingers, activated targets, non-shooting skills (such as carrying something, or dragging a dummy while also engaging targets), shooting from a vehicle while seated, etc. . .

I always aim to shoot the classifier to my ability, but the real test is how I do at matches.

[jmbaccolyte]

The classifier tests a set of skills that are useful for shooting well in general. That said it does not gaurantee that whatever classification you achieve you will be competitive in. It is a foundation of skills for a sport that can have stages that have challenges that the classifier cannot fully prepare you for. The considerable number of possibilities that stages can challenge you with can look nothing like the classifier you trained for. There are no swingers, activated targets, non-shooting skills (such as carrying something, or dragging a dummy while also engaging targets), shooting from a vehicle while seated, etc. . .

I always aim to shoot the classifier to my ability, but the real test is how I do at matches.

I agree with much of this, but would add that running from place to place to shoot is also not as heavily weighted in the Classiifier as in matches. And that matches that have a lot of running are probably in violation of IDPA principle # 4. "Provide shooters with practical and realistic courses of fire that simulate potentially life-threatening encounters..." If you're on your local SWAT or HRT team then yes, I guess so. But if you're a regular street Officer, or state or federal Agent, or a civilian I'd say it's not "practical and realistic".

Swingers, activated targets, carrying or dragging someone and shooting from a vehicle are all interesting things, but how often does that happen in real life?

I never heard of a shootout which required a Police Officer to run from place to place to shoot bad guys. But most of my training along these lines was about the lessons learned from shootouts where more than one Officer died because of tactical errors based on bad training procedures, like the CHP shootout in Newhall, CA or the Miami FBI shootout.