Explain USPSA scoring

[Dkrad1935]

I shot in a match a month or so ago and got the scores back - And I dont know if I understood all the math to get the percentages. I get how the target is scored but the rest of the scoring had me a little befuddled. Is there a post explaining this or could someone give me USPSA scoring for newb's? Skip past the PF part - I got that…..I need the next chapter:)

[JakeMartens]

points divided by time = hit factor

highest hit factor in that division on that stage wins the total available points

then whatever % of the highest hit factor your hit factor is then you receive that % of the points

example

100 point stage, highest hit factor is 10.00 they get 100 points

your hit factor is 5.00, you will receive 50% of the points since your hit factor is 50% of the highest

[CZinSC]

Person with the highest HF per division on the stage gets 100% of the total points available. If it was a 30 round stage, that would be 150 points. Everyone else’s points are based on the their % of the top guys HF. Ie: Top guy shoots a 9.5 HF. He gets 150 points. Your HF was a 7.2, 7.2 divided by 9.5 is 75.78%. 75.78% of 150 points is 113.68 points. You do that for everyone on EACH stage. Those are your stage points. Add up all of your stages points to get your match points. Guy with most match points wins. PER Division. The Divisions don’t compete against each other.

Edited December 3, 2013 by CZinSC

[CZinSC]

Jake beat me to it.....

[bikerburgess]

On each stage you earn stage points basses on what percentage of the stage winners Hit Factor you shot on that stage. Each stage is worth as many points as the targets on the stage so a short stage with 6 shots is worth 30 points, (5 points per shot x 6 shots)

Your Hit Factor is calculated by taking the points you earned on the targets and subtracting any penalties then dividing by the time so you end up with a number that represents how many points your scored per second.

I know how confusing this can all be at first bit it will make sense eventually

Hope this helps.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[bikerburgess]

Man you guys type faster them me

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[kirbinster]

Why is it done this way? What I am asking is why do they normalize it against the guy that happens to do best that day rather than against a standard or just assign the points based on your hit factor compared against what say the best grand master would shoot it. That way the guy that finishes first might not get the full amount of points so he could actually compare how well he did against a grand master. It seems strange that your score could be dependent upon who decided to show up that day.

[Carnifex]

Why is it done this way? What I am asking is why do they normalize it against the guy that happens to do best that day rather than against a standard or just assign the points based on your hit factor compared against what say the best grand master would shoot it. That way the guy that finishes first might not get the full amount of points so he could actually compare how well he did against a grand master. It seems strange that your score could be dependent upon who decided to show up that day.

Aren't you only competing against who decided to show up that day?

[Shadyscott999]

Why is it done this way? What I am asking is why do they normalize it against the guy that happens to do best that day rather than against a standard or just assign the points based on your hit factor compared against what say the best grand master would shoot it. That way the guy that finishes first might not get the full amount of points so he could actually compare how well he did against a grand master. It seems strange that your score could be dependent upon who decided to show up that day.

That is exactly why it is done that way. There is no standard for field courses as they are different every match. You can only be judged against those who shot that exact course.

Classifier stages are done as a regular stage (against those there) and also against the HHF (High Hit Factor) normally set by a top GM in your division. That is how you get your classification, against an established, nationwide standard.

[kirbinster]

That was my point, that when you do the classifier you are compared against a high standard that is not dependent on who shows up. If you did it the way I was asking everyone in a match would still be ranked relative to each other based on their hit factor, but your score would absolute rather than relative. For someone that is less than an expert (like me) it does not matter too much, but I would think a really good shooter would get more value out of seeing how he did against someone other than himself (assuming he has the best score of the day).

[Nimitz]

Classifiers are setup exactly the same every time no matter where they are shot. This way they are always the same for everyone, every day and you can have a standard to compare yourself to regardless of who shows up, etc. This is why classifications work becuase when someone says they are an A class shooter in Production you know pretty much their shooting level since everyone shoots the same classifiers.

Every other stage ever shot in a USPSA match is different and therefore there is no way to do a valid comparison since there is no standard. So, in a match the only fair thing to do is be compared to the shooters who shot the same stage that you did that day ...

[BSeevers]

I don't get what you are asking.

When I win I am the best that day, based on who showed up. I don't really care who stayed on the porch. Thats like saying let's rank you against last years Super Bowl winner or the ugg Steelers. Uh no today is the game that counts.

Couple points, when you reach the higher levels in this you don't win because of the letters after your name. Its very competative at the top and one little goof ( I mean like a slight hestitation or make up shot) makes you drop 5 places cause there are plenty of people to grab your spot cause they are good too.

I think you might think of GM as a destination. It's not because of the system (classifiers are biased to draw/reload/shoot, necessary because of standardzation)) and fact that we allow amatuers and pros to compete, there are GM's and National level GM's. No slam on a GM but thats why you see the same names at the top of majors.

A regular guy can Hero or Zero 6 classifiers over and over to get the letters. You still need good skill to do that but not it's not very relative to the matches or the skill level of National winners

Edited December 3, 2013 by BSeevers

[kirbinster]

I understand what you are saying. What I find strange is that at matches I have been at they also printout a tabulation of everybody that has shot ordered by match points, and that makes no sense to me. How can you even think of comparing match points from one division against another? If they ranked everyone by just raw hit factor across divisions at least it would make some sense.

[Dkrad1935]

Thanks for the explanations. I get the math now. It seems odd to give the winner all the points for a stage.

Hopefully it will start sinking in if I can get in a few more matches.

[Shadyscott999]

I understand what you are saying. What I find strange is that at matches I have been at they also printout a tabulation of everybody that has shot ordered by match points, and that makes no sense to me. How can you even think of comparing match points from one division against another? If they ranked everyone by just raw hit factor across divisions at least it would make some sense.

Those numbers are never correct, unless the same guy won all the stages and then they still aren't correct. The combined scores are nothing butt fluff and mean nothing. You only shoot against those in your division.

[chevyoneton]

What I find strange is that at matches I have been at they also printout a tabulation of everybody that has shot ordered by match points, and that makes no sense to me. How can you even think of comparing match points from one division against another?

I have seen that and figure they are just sending out a quick and dirty so you can get a feel for where you are. It is interesting sometimes though like when YOU are shooting Revolver and beat several SS & Production shooters........

[NMBOpen]

The only real use for combined results is bragging rights, or who buys the refreshments after the match when you and your buddies shoot in different divisions.

[Chills1994]

@ DKrad1935:

I was in the same boat a couple of years ago. Moving from HF to stage points/percentages left me scratching my head.

You have your score for each stage, your hit factor. It is the rawest of data. In my mind at least, it needs no other mental mathematical gymnastics. You could just add all the hit factors for each competitor. The guy with the highest cumulative hit factor for the match is the winner.

Back then Flexmoney and a few other folks (Alan Meek?) tried to set me straight on it all.

What was proposed to me was that switching over to stage points and stage percentages makes the stages UNeven or UNlevel with all the other stages, on purpose.

For example:

Can you shoot a 5.0 hit factor on a 32 round field course stage?

Yeah, sure!

Can you shoot a 5.0 hit factor on a stand and shoot 6 round stage?

Yeah, sure!

Should the 32 round field course count the same or weigh the same as the 6 round stand and deliver stage?

The founders of IPSC (USPSA) back in the 1970's thought they shouldn't

It keeps some people who are one trick ponies who can just stand there and hose'em down from hanging with the guys who can actually move and shoot and mentally strategize stages.

[bdpaz]

I understand what you are saying. What I find strange is that at matches I have been at they also printout a tabulation of everybody that has shot ordered by match points, and that makes no sense to me. How can you even think of comparing match points from one division against another? If they ranked everyone by just raw hit factor across divisions at least it would make some sense.

Those numbers are never correct, unless the same guy won all the stages and then they still aren't correct. The combined scores are nothing butt fluff and mean nothing. You only shoot against those in your division.

That may be the official rule but in real life I prefer the combined results over division results. I want to know how I did compared to everyone else in the match.

[Shadyscott999]

I understand what you are saying. What I find strange is that at matches I have been at they also printout a tabulation of everybody that has shot ordered by match points, and that makes no sense to me. How can you even think of comparing match points from one division against another? If they ranked everyone by just raw hit factor across divisions at least it would make some sense.

Those numbers are never correct, unless the same guy won all the stages and then they still aren't correct. The combined scores are nothing butt fluff and mean nothing. You only shoot against those in your division.

That may be the official rule but in real life I prefer the combined results over division results. I want to know how I did compared to everyone else in the match.

I think you missed my point. Combined scores are inaccurate. Depending on which shooter in which division placed where on that stage, it skews the results. At least that is how I have always understood it.

[kirbinster]

I understand what you are saying. What I find strange is that at matches I have been at they also printout a tabulation of everybody that has shot ordered by match points, and that makes no sense to me. How can you even think of comparing match points from one division against another? If they ranked everyone by just raw hit factor across divisions at least it would make some sense.

Those numbers are never correct, unless the same guy won all the stages and then they still aren't correct. The combined scores are nothing butt fluff and mean nothing. You only shoot against those in your division.

That may be the official rule but in real life I prefer the combined results over division results. I want to know how I did compared to everyone else in the match.

I think you missed my point. Combined scores are inaccurate. Depending on which shooter in which division placed where on that stage, it skews the results. At least that is how I have always understood it.

My point exactly. If it were based off a set standard then I could compare my score when I shoot production against my friend that shoots a revolver. But the way it is the match points mean nothing across division. He might have actually shot much better than I did, but if the best revolver shooter was a grandmaster and the best production shooter that day was a "B" shooter my score might blow his away.

[Sarge]

I understand what you are saying. What I find strange is that at matches I have been at they also printout a tabulation of everybody that has shot ordered by match points, and that makes no sense to me. How can you even think of comparing match points from one division against another? If they ranked everyone by just raw hit factor across divisions at least it would make some sense.

Those numbers are never correct, unless the same guy won all the stages and then they still aren't correct. The combined scores are nothing butt fluff and mean nothing. You only shoot against those in your division.

That may be the official rule but in real life I prefer the combined results over division results. I want to know how I did compared to everyone else in the match.

I think you missed my point. Combined scores are inaccurate. Depending on which shooter in which division placed where on that stage, it skews the results. At least that is how I have always understood it.

He might have actually shot much better than I did, but if the best revolver shooter was a grandmaster and the best production shooter that day was a "B" shooter my score might blow his away.

AND, it still would not mean a thing.

[Nimitz]

That combined score list means absolutely nothing, don't hurt your brain thinking about it...

[Shadyscott999]

I understand what you are saying. What I find strange is that at matches I have been at they also printout a tabulation of everybody that has shot ordered by match points, and that makes no sense to me. How can you even think of comparing match points from one division against another? If they ranked everyone by just raw hit factor across divisions at least it would make some sense.

Those numbers are never correct, unless the same guy won all the stages and then they still aren't correct. The combined scores are nothing butt fluff and mean nothing. You only shoot against those in your division.

That may be the official rule but in real life I prefer the combined results over division results. I want to know how I did compared to everyone else in the match.

I think you missed my point. Combined scores are inaccurate. Depending on which shooter in which division placed where on that stage, it skews the results. At least that is how I have always understood it.

My point exactly. If it were based off a set standard then I could compare my score when I shoot production against my friend that shoots a revolver. But the way it is the match points mean nothing across division. He might have actually shot much better than I did, but if the best revolver shooter was a grandmaster and the best production shooter that day was a "B" shooter my score might blow his away.

You are chasing a rabbit down a hole to nowhere. Across divisions , equipment plays a huge part. I am a B Open shooter and I generally beat ALL of the M Production shooters. Just learn where you reside against your peers in your division. Gauge your improvement against them.