Point Series

[JFD]

I agree that $5 isn't going to break my back at all. However I don't go around throwing $5 bills away either.

If there were some numbers to support how many extra shooters attend a sectional match(to be specific) because it's a PS match, and it was significant, then I'd look at it as another way to support the sport on a local level. If the PS doesn't significantly increase the attendance at sectional and area matches, then I could care less about it and am not about to piss away $5 on shooters who already have the time and money to run all over the country shooting matches.

I don't see how increased interest in the PS is going to create any additional cash for match sponsors. Increasing their support for the PS will be at the expense of non-PS shooters, the same ones who aren't supposed to mind paying $5 - $10 more in match fees.

If the PS has been a benefit to USPSA, and by that I mean a benefit to a majority of the folks financing USPSA, then USPSA has done a very poor job of communcating it to the members.

[SmittyFL]

If you build it they will come.

I agree. If you have enough cash and prizes, folks will find a way to shoot it.

[shred]

If you build it they will come.

I agree. If you have enough cash and prizes, folks will find a way to shoot it.

Maybe for the "circuit" shooters it works, but I think people are ignoring the shooter that only gets to go to one or maybe two big matches per year. Financial reasons, work reasons, family reasons, whatever.

Of the 40 "regular" shooters in our club, less than 4 would qualify for the minimum PS matches. Of the rest, maybe 10 will shoot one or two bigger matches (Area or Section match) per year. Why stick them with a $5 or $10 extra just so somebody else can get a payday they could care less about?

If PS can't survive without a $ payout, it is fundamentally flawed.

[Shepard]

I want to see the Point Series continue. I think an aggregate series is our best chance to see how the competitive field is developing.

I suggest the participants pick their qualifying matches BEFORE they shoot them and reduce the number of necessary matches. A series that counts a competitor's best match or allows competitors to shoot numerous matches until they get the result they want unfairly favors those who can shoot the most matches.

Go the other way with the prize table. Realistically the only viable PS competitors are those who can make the Nationals and that number isn’t going to change. So make it a trophy match. The PS competitor pays the additional amount with his match fee.

I disagree that incentives will encourage participation. Most of us already shoot as many matches as we can. Personally, I wouldn’t mind increasing the price of all major matches to create incentive prizes but I don’t think it would change the number of Point Series competitors. I believe the top shooters deserve their winnings. They give far more to the sport than they take away in prizes but I can’t argue with those who don’t want to be charged for a match they can’t participate in.

I’d like to see the PS give us the fairest assessment of who the best shooters are across the competition year rather than who has the best Nationals (no Point Series) or who can shoot the most matches (current Point Series).

[Barrettone]

Phil,

I agree with you that we need to lower the number (and type) of matches one must attend. However, I also feel it needs to be regionalized and then the winners brought together at nats. Not everybody can afford to spend the money to get that precious multiplier for a nats appearance. Without it, you risk losing 25% of your score. Let people advance out of their region, so we can draw more "in area" shooters to the Points Series. This way, only people who are "in the hunt" will have to pony up for a nats experience. I don't think the PS was a major influence in nats attendance, so I don't believe it will adversely effect its turnout. I am confident that the participation would soar in PS if we told people that they only needed say one "other", 3 sectionals and an area match. Lets face it, even if we did get 500 points series competitors, would there be that many slots available for them to attend and get their multiplier to win it all??? IMHO, it must be regionalized....for both the competitor and the survival of the PS. Some guys only want to know where they stack up in region, and it gives them that ability as well. We would then draw people who have no intention of attending nats. Wider customer base = more $$$ for payout, both in and out of region. You just have to put a person in charge who will promote it, nurture it, get it better advertised (FrontSight) and get the sponsors involved...otherwise it is dead before it even gets started.

Jeff

[dajarrel]

In 2003 there were approx 150 shooters signed up for the point series. In 2004, 102. Both years had double entries where some would shoot more than one division at different matches thus reducing the actual number of true entrants to an even lower number.

The question remains, Why should the average guy or gal going to their state's sectional or Area match have to subsidize the pot for the point series 100-150 participants?

Even if one wanted to shoot more matches, if you aren't nearly finantially independent, you usually cannot afford to travel to the required 4 sectionals, 2 area matches, 2 "others" and the Nationals.

I guess that you could say the point series hasn't been real high on my shooting goals list.

I'm just another B class shooter working towards making A someday

dj

[MoNsTeR]

I don't have enough money or taste for road trips to shoot enough major matches to participate in the PS, so I'm going to look at it from a game-design standpoint.

Currently, you can count the nationals (x4), up to 2 areas (x2), up to 4 state/sectional matches (x1), and up to 2 "other" matches (x1). But, that phrasing -- "up to" -- is deceptive. Because the points are simply tallied rather than averaged, you MUST shoot the maximum number of matches to be competitive. The chance of winning anything by shooting less than the max is exactly zero. Game theorists call this a "dominant strategy," the right strategic choice regardless of other players' choices.

Right off the bat then, it's apparent the whole affair is pointless, because you have to shoot the nationals. The PS should be a substitute for nationals participation, not a complement. I really feel strongly about this, people who can attend nats already have the chance to play against the nation's best, the PS should be constructed for those that can't attend the nats.

Best idea I've got:

- eliminate cash payouts; trophies, sponsored prizes, or next year nats slots only

- cut the requirements (because they are requirements, not limits) to best area-or-nationals match + best 4 any-other-matches

- reduce the area/nats multiplier drastically, no more than x2, x1.5 seems right

- (alternatively, you could do best 5 matches straight up, as it may be easier to make an extra area match than an extra state/sectional/misc.)

- require matches to register for PS, but charge no fee

- charge competitors $25-$50 to register for the year, and (only!) if that's not enough, an additional $10 per match for each match beyond the required 5

- give the PS a real web page with a link from the main USPSA front page, I can't believe how hard it was to find just the rules for calculating points!

Obviously this isn't perfect but it's a start. The goal is to get lots of participants, and to make it something everyone can get enthusiastic about. My vision of the PS is something any vaguely serious competitor can participate in. 100 shooters is a joke! Make it easy, promote it, and you should be able to get 2000.

[Gary Stevens]

Thanks much to all who have posted ideas and comments and to those who will or might post some.

I will make sure the BOD is aware of the comments/suggestions noted here.

I like the point series, but realize it has problems, maybe even fatal. One of the things we have already talked about was reduction of the number of matches that would be required, and possibly a modification of the multiplier such as Phil had suggested.

I realize different Areas have different problems due to geography, but there isn't much I or anyone else can do about that except try to grow new clubs in those areas. One of the ideas was to reduce the matches to the Nationals, one Area, 3 State/Sectional and one Other match. Most of these should be able to be achieved within the shooters own Area with the exception of the Nationals. "Other" matches are available in an Area by simply asking your AD to give the match that status. You are limited to one per Area, but they are available for the asking.

The Point Series will never be successful without interest and shooters participating. This becomes the sticking point. To generate an amount of hard cash it takes a lot of shooters participating. Perhaps Jeff's idea of prizes/guns/etc. has merit. However, as I told him personally, the sponsors can only be tapped so often before they run over the hill pulling their hair out. I would hope the Series could be self supporting, but I don't know in all honestly.

Anyway, thanks for the comments/ideas, we, the BOD, need to do something and very soon.

And Jeff, as I told you, be careful of what you ask for, you might just get it

Gary

[kdj]

Reading this thread has made me realize that I don't know what the point series is, other than something that got the winner on the cover of a FS magazine a couple of months back!

I've shot 1 nationals, 3 area matches, a couple of sectionals and a few other matches this year, and I'd never come across the point series in any way that made me realize that it's something I might have been interested in.

What ever you decide to do with it, it needs to be more visible to new commers

Kevin

[Sestock]

OK here is a radical idea.

If USPSA loses money every year, why not DO AWAY with the nationals and replace it with the point series. Use the point series to crown the national champion in each division and class. This would encourage the super squad folks, USPSA staff and NROI to travel out to more area, sectional and tournament level matches.

Use a formula of the best performances at 4 area matches and 6 other tournament level matches to decide the champion. Weigh the area matches double. In place of the nationals have one area match be weighted at three times the score, rotate this match to different areas every year. You will have to make a minimum criteria for area matches to follow(# of stages, round count, etc).

Keep the annual entry fee at $10.00 and have every major match contribute $5 per shooter to the fund. MV and the USPSA staff can also solicit sponsors to further enhance the prizes/cash to the winners. This should make the prizes for the point series very attractive.

Keep the point series standing current on the web site.

This would be a much more competitive way to crown a national champion. We would be awarding the national champion to the most consistent and competitive participant in each class on an annual basis, not the best shooter for one match as is the current system.

Just my two cents.

[Sestock]

I forgot to add this.

Since most of the matches are shot in the summer and all are on weekends we would have more juniors elgible to compete for the national championship.

[Barrettone]

Damn Sestock...That's a great idea. Whoddathunk it???? No nats...just a points series national champion...I like it. Now if we could just get the powers-to-be to agree to it, and let go of the "big one".

Jeff

PS Gary...I look forward to the challenge, if it goes that way!

[Gary Stevens]

Interesting concept. Just as NASCAR has 36 races that decide the National Champion, we might have (X) number of matches to decide the National Champion via a point system.

Of course if you took it to the current configuration of NASCAR, who has experience in this point calculation stuff, you would have (X) number of matches that would qualify you to compete for the National Championships at a final match. I guess you could do this through the classes and the divisions and have the shootout, so to speak, at the final match.

I don't expect this to be welcomed with open arms, but it is an interesting concept.

[Sestock]

Gary,

I don't expect any idea like this to be welcomed at the BOD. That is why I said that it was radical.

If the BOD and the USPSA staff didn't have three national matches to worry about, then they would be free to work on getting more clubs and members and improving our public image in the media and local shooting communities. Imagine if we could have a marketing plan that was geared to the grass root level and promoted our sport from the bottom up.

If you eliminate the nationals it would allow more lower class/non-sponsored shooters to participate in the point series from a cost stand point. This years nationals ended up costing me $2000++ when you factor in the lost wages(as a consultant I don't get vacation). I could have easily driven to and shot 4 area matches for that cost.

Sometimes ideas like this need to be explored in order for our sport to grow.

Doug

[shred]

Use a formula of the best performances at 4 area matches and 6 other tournament level matches to decide the champion. 

Great! We crown the champion with the most vacation time and travel budget!

How many NASCAR drivers have other full-time jobs? I have a good $ job with 4 weeks vacation and I still only got to the Florida Open, 2 Sections, Area 4, Area 2, Steel Challenge and Nationals in one year. Good thing I have no family life.

I'd say instead if we must rank everybody, formalize Dowter's Top Guns rakings from a few years ago and keep that going-- that was cool and ranked almost everybody, without making them shoot every match. We have the technology, we can do it.

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=2630

The reason more people aren't going to more matches isn't the points series, it's because they have other needs for their time and money.

[RIIID]

A page or two back it was mentioned that everyone would be in the PS. But increased match fee drew some negative comments. Make the increase proportioned to the match. A sectional/ other match $2.50 per, an area match $5.00 per, and the Nationals $10.00 per. This would increase the total money availible without over taxing a smaller matches and few required matches to make easier to have a chance to win.

Just a thought,

Rich

[Gary Stevens]

Shred, can you tell me when the last National Champion wasn't one such as you have described?

[shred]

As an example; Who won Production Points Series last year? Who won the nationals? A "pro" shooter or an amateur?

How about for the last B-class champion?

All I was saying there was the proposal of ten majors per year is more than a little bit of a stretch for the bread and butter of USPSA shooters, most of whom will probably only get to one or two 'big' matches per year.

Somebody go hit the classification database and get a breakdown of shooters & the number of area matches each shot...

[Gary Stevens]

Sorry, when you said "champion" I thought you meant the National Champion, not a Division or Class winner.

[shred]

Sorry, when you said "champion" I thought you meant the National Champion, not a Division or Class winner.

You mean a Division winner isn't a National Champion?? Boy are some people going to be peeved.

[Matthew_Mink]

As an example; Who won Production Points Series last year?

Oohh, oooh, I know, I know!!!

[MoNsTeR]

If you eliminate the nationals it would allow more lower class/non-sponsored shooters to participate in the point series from a cost stand point.

Not if you have to shoot 10 majors to qualify.

I can imagine lots of D-B class shooters stashing away a few bucks, earmarkign some vacation time, and putting their name on the list for a nationals slot. Indeeed, witness how many low-classed shooters actually go to nats each year. I can not imagine many of those same shooters flitting about the country to shoot 10 smaller matches. More cost, less benefit.

If you want the point series to be relevant to Joe Shooter, the requirements have to get smaller, not bigger. Perhaps tiering the requirements by class could help, or tier them by region with ~4-5 matches needed to compete for an Area PS title and ~7-9 needed for the National PS title.

If, on the other hand, you want to replace a single national match with a point series champion as in racing, then yeah that could work. But despite already pigeonholing myself as a "can't-go-to-nats shooter," I don't think that's a very good idea. Honestly though, this isn't an issue that should be decided on a one-shooter/one-vote basis. The guys who shoot lots of matches at a highly competitive level have more at stake than I do, they should be the ones who decide.

[Sterling White]

Dear BOD,

Many options were or have been discussed in 3 previous threads:

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...hl=point+series

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...hl=point+series

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...hl=point+series

Before I pooooopooooo the points series I would like to make one suggestion: please take a look at NASCAR. They probably have the best example of a point series championship model that could be duplicated to some degree.

For myself, I have participated in the point series since its beginning and honestly believe that it has failed due to the lack of committment and incentives. For example, the 1st year of the point series I spent $2000 above my dedicated match budget chasing points that yielded a very nice plaque and a check for $90. This year I chased the points again with less intensity but spending close to $1500 above my dedicated match budget.....the yield will be virtually nada.

It's my $.02 opinion right now that unless you, the BOD, step up with a salvage plan should let this die a slow silent death.

sw

[bgary]

I'm not sure I understand (but I am trying to).

You say you spent $1500 above your planned match budget, chasing the point series.

Was that $1500 additional travel, lodging, match fees, etc for matches that you would NOT have gone too, except for the fact that they were point series matches?

Bruce

[SmittyFL]

The point series isn't for everybody. If you can't or don't go to the nationals or if you don't leave your state to shoot matches there probably isn't a solution to include you. I didn't participate in the point series because it would have been too costly to attend the needed extra matches to make it worth it.

If it's going to be successful there needs to be an incentive....period. "If you build it, they will come". Someone said earlier that if it requires cash to work it isn't worth it. I couldn't dissagree more. Why the hell else would you do it. You're not going to spend hundreds of extra dollars shooting matches you wouldn't normally shoot unless you have something to gain from it other than a plaque.

Up the entry fee, have the matches kick in, get some sponsors. If the prize pool is enough folks will shoot it, which will only make it grow more.