Shooting extra classifiers

[steel1212]

If you approach it like a regular stage why reshoot it....

[ZackJones]

I'd say everyone who goes to a special classifier after they are initially classified must also be a grandbagger, since they're trying to shoot more classifiers than required by normal matches.

I disagree for a couple of reasons:

1 - Some of our clubs have waiting lists to join and the only way to get live fire time is to shoot in matches or try and shoot at a public range. Here in South Carolina we have public Department of Natural Resources ranges and it's pretty much anything goes there but there's no way you could set up even a small stage there for practicing when most of the time it's elbow-to-elbow with folks shooting.

2 - I recently read in Ben Stoeger's book something along the lines of "before you can shoot well on the move you need to shoot well standing still" Given that most classifiers have very little movement it's a great way to practice / improve on your stand and shooting skills.

3 - Match/classifier fees support the club and the sport.

4 - It gives those of us that have been away from shooting for an extended period of time (10+ years for me) a chance to see how our skills measure up now compared to when we were previously classified in the division.

[BillD]

Heck, why does USPSA throw out scores that are 5% below your current class? That encourages a 'hero or zero' approach (particularly at classifier special matches) that is just grandbagging by a different name. If you actually had to count that trainwreck classifier you were trying to burn down, there would be a lot fewer grandbaggers.

:

Sure would be lot less M cards handed out.

[gng4life]

Heck, why does USPSA throw out scores that are 5% below your current class? That encourages a 'hero or zero' approach (particularly at classifier special matches) that is just grandbagging by a different name. If you actually had to count that trainwreck classifier you were trying to burn down, there would be a lot fewer grandbaggers.

Like I've been saying all along, they do it because it would not show your ability. The classifiers are supposed to show everyone across the US that this is what you can do on this CoF that is presented to everyone in the exact same manner. You have a jam, mag problem, etc. those are external factors that just happen sometimes but that is not indicative of your true skills. The basis of IPSC shooting is freestyle but the exception to that is the classifiers. This is a quote from the Classification Book:

"...The classification system is able to determine a competitor’s accuracy and speed as those abilities are quantifiable. The system is not able to measure the ability to “game” a stage as those intangible skills are not quantifiable"

The classifiers are not the same as other stages. The only way to really "game" a classifier is to sandbag it by going slower than normal, intentionally hitting a NS, etc. If you can shoot a classifier at 90%, awesome, you must be doing something right and that would take quite a bit of skill, no matter what they say about grandbagging.

I think USPSA got it right and believe me, it's beats the alternative - sandbagging! That's the one that fires me up when someone is a C shooter and goes to a big match and they are shooting 90% of a GM and are beating most A and Master shooters - that's the thing we should be more worried about.

[motosapiens]

Heck, why does USPSA throw out scores that are 5% below your current class? That encourages a 'hero or zero' approach (particularly at classifier special matches) that is just grandbagging by a different name. If you actually had to count that trainwreck classifier you were trying to burn down, there would be a lot fewer grandbaggers.

Like I've been saying all along, they do it because it would not show your ability. The classifiers are supposed to show everyone across the US that this is what you can do on this CoF that is presented to everyone in the exact same manner. You have a jam, mag problem, etc. those are external factors that just happen sometimes but that is not indicative of your true skills. The basis of IPSC shooting is freestyle but the exception to that is the classifiers. This is a quote from the Classification Book:

"...The classification system is able to determine a competitor’s accuracy and speed as those abilities are quantifiable. The system is not able to measure the ability to “game” a stage as those intangible skills are not quantifiable"

The classifiers are not the same as other stages. The only way to really "game" a classifier is to sandbag it by going slower than normal, intentionally hitting a NS, etc. If you can shoot a classifier at 90%, awesome, you must be doing something right and that would take quite a bit of skill, no matter what they say about grandbagging.

I think USPSA got it right and believe me, it's beats the alternative - sandbagging! That's the one that fires me up when someone is a C shooter and goes to a big match and they are shooting 90% of a GM and are beating most A and Master shooters - that's the thing we should be more worried about.

I tend to agree with you that USPSA has it right at the moment, but I enjoy the discussion and the devil's advocate position, so let me continue in that vein:

don't people have jams and malfunctions and brainfarts on regular stages? yup. Do they get to re-shoot them? Not unless they cleverly bump into the RO or knock their hearing protection out or otherwise cheat. Perhaps those malflunctions really are your ability (your ability to keep your gun running, plan your stage, and shoot what you can see). Hmmmm.

Regarding sandbagging, it doesn't bother me at all if a C shooter is beating most A and Master shooters. It bothers me a little if MD's reward such people by giving them prizes for "winning' their "class", but whatever, I get better prizes by just going to work and driving a small car, so it's all good. In my moto-topia, valuable prizes would get handed out by random draw, and C class 'winners' would get a plaque that says "welcome to B".

[motosapiens]

If you approach it like a regular stage why reshoot it....

I've only done it a couple times, and probably won't do it again. I re-shot because I didn't approach it like a regular stage and had my head up my azz, and was more worried about that last decent classifier I needed to upgrade than about just looking at my sights and shooting what I can see.

Keep in mind I'm speaking from the perspective of a MUCH less experienced shooter than you, still learning and improving quickly. For lots of folks in the A/B/C classes, their classification lags many months behind their actual abilities, and it's kinda annoying to beat all the other C's and lots of B's and A's, but still need just one more 52% or better classifier to upgrade to B.

But whatever. Shooting is fun.

[praetorian97]

Yep. That's a great example. If you were to ask me how I did at nationals, I'd tell you I was 50th overall (and I was happy with that result).

I've shot with Moto and that statement is the God's honest truth. We gave him congrats and he was more focused on how he did overall.

[lugnut]

In my moto-topia, valuable prizes would get handed out by random draw, and C class 'winners' would get a plaque that says "welcome to B".

I'm surprised you didn't get bumped to B from the Nats.... that's strange.

[NicVerAZ]

Regarding sandbagging, it doesn't bother me at all if a C shooter is beating most A and Master shooters. It bothers me a little if MD's reward such people by giving them prizes for "winning' their "class", but whatever, I get better prizes by just going to work and driving a small car, so it's all good. In my moto-topia, valuable prizes would get handed out by random draw, and C class 'winners' would get a plaque that says "welcome to B".

That's how it is done in IDPA.

[CB45]

I've resisted posting in this thread as I have reshot a few classifiers this year.

My experience has been that only the first reshoot is ever worth a darn. After that, my brain gets in the way by "trying".

There's been several times where I've reshot, and it turned out worse. That's embarrassing.

Some weeks I've got it, some weeks I don't. The classification system does a good job of leveling it all out.

Look up your favorite GM's classification history. They aren't shooting every classifier 95% or better. They screw up too.

[steel1212]

Now that I am a GM I look at classifiers a little differently. They really are just stages for me. If there are a lot of no shoots I dial it back a bit but yeah we don't shoot GM percentages all the time. I also don't reshoot it if I don't get a GM percentage....lol sorry couldn't resist.

[Sarge]

Corey,

First I have to say I am not picking a fight over this stuff. Also, I have seen you shoot enough to know you are the real deal. But I think any shooter who already has his GM card is going to have a totally different take on this whole line of discussion. Me personally, I think the classification system generally does a pretty good job of depicting a shooters abilities in the game. Throwing out grandbaggers and sandbaggers of course. So now we are talking about a run of the mill shooter like me. I am finally closing in on A in Open. I try to shoot as many matches as I can, I practice a little, I dry fire some in the winter, and I shoot a winter league most weeks to stay in tune. SO no, I won't ever make GM with that routine. It takes much much more than that. But I am improving enough that I shoot some very good classifiers but still have the occasional stinker. I don't recall ever reshooting a classifier. But if I found myself at 74.99% and my gun jams up I would probably reshoot it. If I just screwed the pooch on it then I would most likely let it ride. My reasoning is that my gun rarely jams but I am quite capable of screwing the pooch on any stage so I think the classifier should reflect those statistics accurately.

I would like to make A and I am disappointed when a don't shoot a classifier well enough. But I don't want it enough to just reshoot every classifier all season to get there.

I honestly believe if I were a GM I would feel like this is a boring topic and I would never care how well I shot a classifier again. And I would tend to tell other shooters to just practice more, work all the bugs out of your game and your gear and let the chips fall where they may.

[steel1212]

Kevin your mostly right but I do remember shooting classifiers before I got a G. I never reshot any of those either. I don't know maybe I've just seen to many take advantage of it and it's left me with a sour opinion on the matter.

Edited December 14, 2013 by steel1212

[Sarge]

Yeah, I am certain we all know at least one who has shot classifiers multiple times to get where they got to. Heck, we probably know the same shooter who did. But I could not show my face at a match and have people oohing and aahing over my shooting abilities only to see me finish maybe in the top ten, at best.

But sometimes I will get the occasional, "Good shooting Sarge, what are you an A"?

[Supermoto]

Kevin your mostly right but I do remember shooting classifiers before I got a G. I never reshot any of those either. I don't know maybe I've just seen to many take advantage of it and it's left me with a sour opinion on the matter.

People reshooting classifiers has zero effect on your match. So you're just mad that they didn't accomplish the same goal the way you did?

[steel1212]

Me mad? Son this is far from me being mad. And as far as them reaching the same goals as me....not quite.

You are right though it has zero affect on my match because the people I'm talking about don't concern me on match day.

Edited December 14, 2013 by steel1212

[Supermoto]

Me mad? Son this is far from me being mad. And as far as them reaching the same goals as me....not quite.

You are right though it has zero affect on my match because the people I'm talking about don't concern me on match day.

You should ask USPSA to put an asterisk next to their GM

[steel1212]

Lol that would be...interesting :-)

The kicker to that is USPSA only sees the 2 turned in. The one for the match and the one they wanted to enter for classification, not the others they didn't like.

But in the end your right it doesn't concern me.

Edited December 14, 2013 by steel1212

[lugnut]

Me mad? Son this is far from me being mad. And as far as them reaching the same goals as me....not quite.

You are right though it has zero affect on my match because the people I'm talking about don't concern me on match day.

You should ask USPSA to put an asterisk next to their GM

I should ask for one next to my M. I did a classifier match twice with the same gun. I'm ok with it as all that matters is match placement to me at this point. Never was allowed to make up one in a match though... maybe those people should get a double asterisk!

[Chris iliff]

I completely respect everyone's opinion. I think the real question should be, "Does the person finish matches within their class, or at least with everyone else that is in their class?" Throw a Grauffel in a match and it seems even our nations best can't finish in their class.

This, to me, is the measuring stick.^^^^^

I have never witnessed people shooting the same gun over and over to get a great score. I'm sure this would be frowned on at most of the matches I attend. I've heard it does happen, I started a HHF thread thinking it was very common, only to find out not so much.

Edited December 14, 2013 by Chris iliff

[motosapiens]

<snip> But I am improving enough that I shoot some very good classifiers but still have the occasional stinker. I don't recall ever reshooting a classifier. But if I found myself at 74.99% and my gun jams up I would probably reshoot it. If I just screwed the pooch on it then I would most likely let it ride. My reasoning is that my gun rarely jams but I am quite capable of screwing the pooch on any stage so I think the classifier should reflect those statistics accurately.

I would like to make A and I am disappointed when a don't shoot a classifier well enough. But I don't want it enough to just reshoot every classifier all season to get there.

I honestly believe if I were a GM I would feel like this is a boring topic and I would never care how well I shot a classifier again. And I would tend to tell other shooters to just practice more, work all the bugs out of your game and your gear and let the chips fall where they may.

great post sarge. When you're perched right on the verge of the next class, would it make a difference to you if your 'pooch-screwing' resulted in a 54% score vs a 55%? The difference being one gets thrown out, whereas the other may drag your average down if you have one or two similarly screwed pooches, or it may result in a score from 3-4 months ago still counting when you know you have progressed since then.

I guess if I had to come up with a formula for when I would not mock people for re-shooting classifiers, it would be something along the lines of "it's OK to re-shoot once for getting that last score or two to make your classification reflect your abilities, but it's lame if you do it to try to bump up to a class well above your match-shooting abilities." Of course that would only be if I really cared, which I don't, I just enjoy the exchange of opinions, especially with so many very experienced shooters here.

[whitedog]

I've only shot 3 "majors". In each I was within around 4 points of whatever my class average was at the time. So, to me, the system is on the mark. One had Mr. Vogel in my division.

If I constantly, as some do, reshot classifiers I doubt it would have turned out that way.

I think we each have our reasons for doing it. Some honorable. Some not.

[Neomet]

I personally don't see how this is any different than intentionally tanking classifiers. It is manipulating your classifier scores. I recently got a burr under my saddle over a paper GM and it got me looking at why the practice bothered me so much.

Doing 42 hero or zero reshoots of one classifier is certainly within the rules and sandbagging is impossible to prove. I don't care for either but so what, that is just my opinion and I can continue to choose to do neither. Others clearly don't agree with me and it is their right to run their lives as they see fit. Sadly, I am not Chief Justice of the Ethics Court. At least not yet. Yeah, I don't like it, and yes I will shake my head as yet again a GM struggles to get an A class percentage at a major match, or I see another 85% overall for the C class winner, but really in the end it is not worth the angst of being upset. All we have control over is ourselves. Others will do as they will.