With some claasifiers being removed?

[Chills1994]

90 local matches a year?

That's just nuts!

I think that sounds like heaven.....

Normally, that would sound like heaven to me too, but the match fees and the driving and the reloading of all that ammo. Sometimes I like my alone time on the range:

I like to step back and do some diagnostics.

[Chills1994]

Jake wrote:

So we take 19 classifiers and turn them into a Nationals Match?

This is starting to sound alot like Medical Insurance.....

you can keep your classifiers........oh well no you can't.

Look I get it, cat is out of the bag, and now we are seeing the outcome

I am confused about something. By asking this question don't take it as me Monday morning quarterbacking the AD's (you guys probably already thought of this), but why not keep those classifiers and say they are off limits to revo shooters? Let the other 5 divisions still shoot them.

Or

Still let the revo shooters, both 8 and 6 shooters, have at them but make them all know they are pending until some time 6 or 8 months down the road? Program in some tweak to EZWin where the submitted HF's has an 8 or 6 next to it. Then whomever is at HQ running the database can figure out if there is such a huge disparity between the highest hit factors of the 8's versus the highest hit factors of the 6's.

Statistically speaking, there is kind of a ceiling effect with HHF's...what is the highest hit factor you have ever seen on a classifier?

12?

16?

20?

You're going to end up with submitted HF's scrunched up against this ceiling anyway.

At least I think so.

Edited February 6, 2014 by Chills1994

[Chills1994]

Pardon me for the triple post, but I undertstand that if you're an A in limited then the least you can be is B in production or open or single stack, right?

Is that the same case with revolver?

I mean if you're a Master in Open and the moment four revolver classifiers get crunched by the HQ database, POOF! you're an instant A in revo even if your revolver percentage was just 50%.

How many revo shooters are out there who only hold a classification in revo?

How many revo shooters are out there who have a higher classification in another division besided revo?

Said another way...just how many completely virginal USPSA'ers are out there who are going to blow $1,200 on an 8 shooter and then grandbagg their way to a GM or M in the revolver division only to screw themselves into an M or A class the minute they get 4 legit classifiers in a semi-auto division?

If am wrong about the class down thing from your highest classifed division, then disregard all the above

[alecmc]

I wish he would have asked for input in the USPSA forum instead of the revolver forum.

why is this turning into an "us versus them" thing.

is your opinion somehow more valuable then those who it actually might effect?

I bet if the letter stating the retiring of some classifiers was not release I doubt anybody would of even noticed they were gone

Alec,

I don't think it needs to be an us vs. them thing, but you can't tell me with a straight face that the retiring of a bunch of classifiers only affects revolver shooters.....

Poor choice of words, let me rephrase.

If the classifiers stayed as they were, It would of negatively impacted the Revolver Division, (since the BOD voted and passed it, this is the consequence, it just is what it is.).... It affects everybody, by not being able to shoot a handful of classifiers anymore.

Also, I'm really not seeing the picture when alot of people here are just saying, wait till nationals and recalculate a higher hit factor with the 8 shots.... That wont work ------ Tick Tock for example ( 8 shots, reload , 8 shots ) You re calculate the time it takes for an 8 shot to do it, but now what about the 6 shooters? The 6 shot gun still has to 6 shots, reload , 2 shots, reload , 6 shots, reload 2 shots ) The time will be so incredibly far out of reach , that I bet you Jerry himself couldnt score higher then Mid - C class on it.

You raise the bar for the 8 shots, and you now are making the guys shooting 6 shooters suffer.

The only way to win is REPLACE the classifiers that were taken away with some new ones, They'll have to either to work so that no advantage is given to either gun. ( ie - reload after 6 , or total round counts more then 8 rounds so that each gun has to reload the same amount of times )

Pardon me for the triple post, but I undertstand that if you're an A in limited then the least you can be is B in production or open or single stack, right?

Is that the same case with revolver?

I mean if you're a Master in Open and the moment four revolver classifiers get crunched by the HQ database, POOF! you're an instant A in revo even if your revolver percentage was just 50%.

How many revo shooters are out there who only hold a classification in revo?

How many revo shooters are out there who have a higher classification in another division besided revo?

Said another way...just how many completely virginal USPSA'ers are out there who are going to blow $1,200 on an 8 shooter and then grandbagg their way to a GM or M in the revolver division only to screw themselves into an M or A class the minute they get 4 legit classifiers in a semi-auto division?

If am wrong about the class down thing from your highest classifed division, then disregard all the above

Dont know if people will do it intentionally or not, Stupid if they do..... I'm more concerned about the unintentional ones. -- You have Timmy new shooter who is classified D (or U) class in revolver come out on a match day with his 8 shot a few weekends in a row, shoots, Tick Tock, Diamond Cutter, ect ect - and makes " A Class " -- He doesnt belong in A class, and now , as far as match results go, he's S.O.L.

Edited February 6, 2014 by alecmc

[Chills1994]

Timmy New Shooter is such a small subset...

Of a subset....

Of a subset of shooters

He is kind of diving head first into a weird end of the USPSA pool.

Hopefully, somebody would be nice enough to clue him either at the matches or tell him about the BE forums. "PSST! Hey buddy, you are going to want to sign up for open or production at the next match or do _______ because you are going to be overclassified in revo."

[alecmc]

Hopefully, somebody would be nice enough to clue him either at the matches or tell him about the BE forums. "PSST! Hey buddy, you are going to want to sign up for open or production at the next match or do _______ because you are going to be overclassified in revo."

Really? What if Timmy New shooter wants to shoot revolver division and has no interest in the others.

Just sweeping " the revolver division problems " under the rug because people dont want to lose some classifiers is wrong, The whole purpose of the classification system is to keep some sort of integrity with how you get graded. The best way to do this, is dropping those classifiers. -----You cant shoot Diamond cutter anymore? Oh Boo-Hoo . I mean really, whats the big deal, it's not like the first time classifiers have ever been retired.

Edited February 6, 2014 by alecmc

[Chills1994]

You really think that is the purpose of a classification system???

[Bosshoss]

I am confused about something. By asking this question don't take it as me Monday morning quarterbacking the AD's (you guys probably already thought of this), but why not keep those classifiers and say they are off limits to revo shooters? Let the other 5 divisions still shoot them.

Or

Still let the revo shooters, both 8 and 6 shooters, have at them but make them all know they are pending until some time 6 or 8 months down the road? Program in some tweak to EZWin where the submitted HF's has an 8 or 6 next to it. Then whomever is at HQ running the database can figure out if there is such a huge disparity between the highest hit factors of the 8's versus the highest hit factors of the 6's.

The problem with this is how is a shooter going to get classified in revolver if none of these classifiers count for revolver?

Pardon me for the triple post, but I undertstand that if you're an A in limited then the least you can be is B in production or open or single stack, right?

Yes

Is that the same case with revolver?

Yes

I mean if you're a Master in Open and the moment four revolver classifiers get crunched by the HQ database, POOF! you're an instant A in revo even if your revolver percentage was just 50%.

Yes

How many revo shooters are out there who only hold a classification in revo?

There are some but not many.

How many revo shooters are out there who have a higher classification in another division besided revo?

I would guess that most of the shooters that have a revolver classification have a higher classification in another division. Revolver is my highest classification and I know lots of other revolver shooters that it is also their highest classification.

Said another way...just how many completely virginal USPSA'ers are out there who are going to blow $1,200 on an 8 shooter and then grandbagg their way to a GM or M in the revolver division only to screw themselves into an M or A class the minute they get 4 legit classifiers in a semi-auto division?

Really? Go read the range diary section of this forum. Everyone shoots USPSA for their own reason but moving up in their class is what many base their success on. Go to a classifier match and you will generally see 3 types of shooters. New shooters that are trying to get classified, and seasoned shooters trying to get classified in a different division than they nominally shoot. Then you see B and A class shooter trying to move up into the next higher class. It is a perfect chance to burn down some classifiers and not screw up a whole match. These are the same shooters that usually reshoot a classifier at the monthly matches trying to get a better score.

Is there anything wrong with that? Nope if that is what a shooter wants go for it.

I have seen shooters spend a lot more than $1200 dollars on guns and reloaders, etc. trying to get the magic that will allow them to move up in class. A easier short cut like a revolver with the right classifiers would be no problem for some and then they can sell the gun and brag to their friend that they are GM.

BTW I have never done a reshoot on a classifer and the only classifier match I have ever shot was almost 20 years ago when I was the MD and had to be there anyway so I shot it. That is my choice and I don't have a problem with those that do reshoots and shoot classifier matches.

Dropping these classifiers will keep the Grandbagging at the same level it is at now and not let it get out of hand.

If am wrong about the class down thing from your highest classifed division, then disregard all the above

[Chills1994]

Key word being "virginal" as in never having shot a match before, doesn't have one classifier on file. It's kinda normal to see some guy show up with a Ruger P89, shoot one match, and usually the light clicks on: "OH! Maybe everybody is shooting a Glock or some version of a 1911/2011 for a reason???"

[The Antichrome]

I have been attempting to write my S/C, AD, and Prez about this issue. But honestly I get so mad about it that I cant put it into words without getting uncivil.

Revo shooters wanted 8 round guns because they would be competitively superior to 6 shooters. Now we have to make all classifiers 6 round neutral to keep the HHF's from going thru the ceiling...which proves that the 8 rounders are superior.

Why does it suck that some Classifiers got pulled? Because the new ones were pretty cool. Some of us got to shoot them as Nationals stages and were hoping to shoot them as Classifiers.

We did all this for what? 2 dozen full-time, everytime, dedicated Revo guys? Even if the (imagined) 200 Icore shooters crossed over into USPSA ...does it make a difference to the other 20,000 of us?

I truly believe that this is not only the most misguided thing USPSA has ever done, I also believe it is the most poorly executed.

[Sarge]

I truly believe that this is not only the most misguided thing USPSA has ever done, I also believe it is the most poorly executed.

We are quickly losing any room to talk about IDPA!

[JakeMartens]

I truly believe that this is not only the most misguided thing USPSA has ever done, I also believe it is the most poorly executed.

We are quickly losing any room to talk about IDPA!

http://youtu.be/URDaMqd2gHw

[Norther]

Now we have to make all classifiers 6 round neutral to keep the HHF's from going thru the ceiling..

Where'd you get that? Has the BOD said anything like that? If the HHF is so different on a classifier, then the six-shooters will just have one every once in a while that is so low it won't count. Big deal.

I'm not real happy about losing our new classifiers, but hopefully they'll be back. I can see dropping (or delaying for a while) the ones with a serious 8 round advantage, to avoid the instant GM thing. I am seriously opposed to changing the way classifiers are selected, i.e., making them "six round neutral".

Yes, my only USPSA revolver is a six-shooter.

[sperman]

All the classifiers that are being retired require more than 6 shots before a reload. Robert is correct, from now on, every classifier will be 6 shot neutral.

[ZackJones]

Many of the classifiers that were retired could be "fixed" by removing a target or piece of steel. For example 13-09, Window Pain could be made 6-shot neutral by either removing the steel or replacing T1 and T6 with steel. The problem is by modifying the existing ones the HHF will be screwed up so new ones will have to be created. Instead of complaining about them being removed why not sketch out a suitable replacement and submit it to the classification committee for consideration.

[sperman]

I've already sent several classifier suggestions to members of the committee, but that isn't going to stop me from complaining.

If every revolver shooter submitted a new classifier, we might get replacements for the 20 that we lost.

[Sarge]

I've already sent several classifier suggestions to members of the committee, but that isn't going to stop me from complaining.

If every revolver shooter submitted a new classifier, we might get replacements for the 20 that we lost.

key word being "might"

[Chris iliff]

Well, what we have now is one division, the smallest by the way, dictating to the entire shooting body the types of classifiers we can shoot.

This is a complete joke!!

I'm happy that my Area 5 director could see this fiasco looming and the implications and voted NO. Good on him and the other NO voters.

Folks, this has fundamentally changed your sport! You no longer enjoy the freedom that you once had, and you never will. Do you get it? From now on every classifier has to satisfy the revolver divisions 6 shot or 8 shot dumbass rule. Revolver is dictating what all other divisions get to shoot, there is no way around this new fact. Our sport has fundamentally changed because of it. Not to get political, but the parallels to politics are hilarious! Tragic, but hilarious!!! Since no reload with 8 shots is going to beat a reload with 6 shots almost every time, they have jacked this up for everyone. Hence, let's throw out what doesn't comply. To me it is a big deal and the people who voted for it didn't get what they were doing? There is no way they could have got it.

The only way this works is if you COMPLETELY split revolver into 2 separate divisions, then the classifiers can stay the same as always and you just have to figure (fudge) the 8 shot minor HHF's.

I just don't understand how only 3 of our elected officials got this correct.

And wow! To further piss me off, I now understand why there is a classifier committee, they are used for cleanup of poor decisison making by the entire board.

They don't get to provide any input for which classifiers get implemented or how HHFs are determined, they just get the crap job of cleaning up the craptastic results of the bods doofus votes.

Great,.........just great.

Rant off

Edited February 7, 2014 by Chris iliff

[sperman]

There is another viable option (IMO.)

Update all the classifiers so that anyone shooting revolver division must perform a mandatory reload after 6 shots. All other divisions shoot them as they normally would, and we don't have to throw any of them away.

I'm hoping that since a new version of EZWinScore hasn't been released, and a new Classifier Course Book hasn't been published this is still an option. Writing my AD now.

[ZackJones]

I've already sent several classifier suggestions to members of the committee, but that isn't going to stop me from complaining.

Okay you can complain because you've submitted suggestions

[ZackJones]

There is another viable option (IMO.)

Update all the classifiers so that anyone shooting revolver division must perform a mandatory reload after 6 shots. All other divisions shoot them as they normally would, and we don't have to throw any of them away.

I'm hoping that since a new version of EZWinScore hasn't been released, and a new Classifier Course Book hasn't been published this is still an option. Writing my AD now.

Add A5 director as well to your email. I've looked through half of the retired classifiers so far and your suggestion would work on all of them. There are other ways to even things out but your suggestion of mandatory reload after 6 shots are fired would probably be the easiest to implement and have the least impact on HHF.

[56hawk]

All the classifiers that are being retired require more than 6 shots before a reload. Robert is correct, from now on, every classifier will be 6 shot neutral.

Is there a rule that says new classifiers can't be 8 shot neutral?

[Chris iliff]

All the classifiers that are being retired require more than 6 shots before a reload. Robert is correct, from now on, every classifier will be 6 shot neutral.

Is there a rule that says new classifiers can't be 8 shot neutral?

By allowing two different platforms in one division they have screwed the proverbial pooch. Let's say they are all 8 shot neutral. Ok great, now how in the hell can a 6 shot major PF revolver come close to the same HF as an 8 shot minor revolver????

Remember the 6 shot guy has to do a reload!! He is at best gonna eat a second of time for that reload. That is going to kill his HF. In the same division, with all things equal, the guy shooting 8 shot minor is gonna clean his clock every time on that classifier.

Hence, now, because of this woefully devised and implemented idea, the ENTIRE shooting body, across all divisions, get to have all classifiers subject to this assinine rule to satisfy the least populated division in the sport.

Obtuse, short sighted, narrow thinking come to mind.

Split it out into two divisions and be done with it or cancel the idea.

Why do I and every other member across all divisions have to accept LESS variety in classifiers just to satisfy a new rule implemented for the least populated division in USPSA????

This is whacked!

[eric4069]

There is another viable option (IMO.)

Update all the classifiers so that anyone shooting revolver division must perform a mandatory reload after 6 shots. All other divisions shoot them as they normally would, and we don't have to throw any of them away.

I'm hoping that since a new version of EZWinScore hasn't been released, and a new Classifier Course Book hasn't been published this is still an option. Writing my AD now.

Add A5 director as well to your email. I've looked through half of the retired classifiers so far and your suggestion would work on all of them. There are other ways to even things out but your suggestion of mandatory reload after 6 shots are fired would probably be the easiest to implement and have the least impact on HHF.

+1

Eric

[Bosshoss]

First off not all revolver shooters were in favor of this change.

Second this was open for discussion for quite awhile on the USPSA forum and had been discussed since June of last year on this very forum. This is not NEW. Nobody cared because they didn't shoot or care about revolver division. The rest of us were trying to get answers about how this rule was researched and going to be implemented but to no success. This could have been avoided like the production trigger pull rule that was purposed last year but alas no one worried about revolver division.

I was told that this rule would be permanent and could not be brought up for a change back to what it was for 2 years. That is why some of us were against this rule. They had no idea what they were going to have to do or change to get this rule going.

Edited February 7, 2014 by Bosshoss