NASCAR Type Point Series

[MikeFoley]

Clubs send their champions to a sectional or state match, state/sectional champions go to the area championship, and the area champs go to nationals.

That is the way it should be, but anyone with $250 can shoot the Nationals. Good in some ways, not so good in others. A lot of the talent has no interest in Nationals. Look at two famous 3gunners absent from Nats that shot a lot of state and area matches. I love going to the Nationals, it is the most fun I have all year, and it is like a homecoming of sorts in our sport. There will always be those who do not want to go, or want to go, D-GM. I like the idea of a Point Series, but I am really torn about giving up Nationals.

[Caspian_45]

Jake a question for you.

If 95% is the top of master then 10% over would be 105% correct? No master would ever move up correct?

No I don't understand the old PS. No need to try and explain it to me. I shoot to have fun. I like shooting the nationals and want to see it continue. But I agree the attendance needs to improve.

I am not for a PS of any kind. So please don't make me pay to make it work.

Some people like to shoot 2 or 3 divisions over the year at major matches. Some area matches are designed to favor a particular division over another. I think that needs to be considered.

[Caspian_45]

Oh yeah forgot to mention I am a LIFE member. I don't pay membership dues ever again.

[Barrettone]

The numbers Shred quoted are dismal, to be sure. However, they are rendered moot with the elimination of nationals. It effectively changes the ball game. We won't have a true indication of how successful it is until we try it, as you are replacing one venue with another. My .02 FWIW.

Jeff

[Paul B]

Barretone

If you are "average Joe" shooter, and don't want to pay an additional $10 for your classifier...Guess what??? You don't have to go to the match.

Ok, I won't go and I suspect there would be more of me as word gets around. It isn't the $10 it will be the funding scheme that will get under their skin like it does mine.

I don't think anyone feels bad about covering reasonable expenses of the organization, but I, for one, won't subsidize a pot for a few people who will be winning prizes anyway.

By the way, I don't go to major matches to see or compete with our cadre of professional shooters, I go to have fun with friends and test my shooting skills. I can't think of one major that I've attended because "Robby will be there or Todd will be there." That's not to take anything away from their abilities, but "average joe" shooter doesn't go to beat them.

If we have a point series competition, it should be funded by those who are interested, not imposed on those who are not. If some want more money then get a corporate sponsor - can anyone say "Chevy Truck Challenge."

[Tupperware]

Barretone

If you are "average Joe" shooter, and don't want to pay an additional $10 for your classifier...Guess what??? You don't have to go to the match.

It isn't the $10 it will be the funding scheme that will get under their skin like it does mine.

I, for one, won't subsidize a pot for a few people who will be winning prizes anyway.

I don't go to major matches to see or compete with our cadre of professional shooters, I go to have fun with friends and test my shooting skills.

AMEN, BROTHER!

[Nik Habicht]

Nik:

First, go back and see my post, I edited it. Secondly, what do you think is currently happenning with the monies you send to national office. Surprise, surprise...It is helping to fund a national event. People pay more for qualifier rounds in several other sports, It is a fact of life. I understand your point, but under the current system, you are paying anyway but just don't know it. Do you really think that that $5.00 tournament fee is the cost of processing your match??? Let's not be naive. As a "classifier event" (3 GM's will be there-no doubt - And USPSA got them there to help pump your match.) it is not out of line IMHO. Hope this clarifies.

Jeff

Jeff,

Sure I get that the $5.- isn't all going to tournament processing, much like the shooter activity and classifier fees aren't just paying for those services. But there's the rub: with those fees the shooters are paying for services --- classification, existence of the parent organization, NROI, rulebook, authorized targets, Front Sight, etc.

What does the shooter who is asked to fork over an additional $10 to support the point series get, if he's not a point series participant? I don't see the added value --- I do see Area and Section match fees climbing so that some competitors can be paid $$ to shoot. That's where my problem lies: I don't shoot for cash (big shock to those who have shot with me, I'm sure. ) I know shooters who wouldn't think twice about a $10 increase, and I know others who would be affected.

Want to have a point series like you outlined above? Figure out how to pay for it with sponsor support and participating shooters' entry fees. Leave those people who don't want to participate out of it without preventing them from attending thier area match.

Finally, I don't think USPSA gets three GMs out to the Area matches --- I think most of them come for the shooting. If the match runs well, they look forward to returning. If the match doesn't run well --- maybe they go elsewhere next year. But what do I know? I could be all wrong.....

Convince me, if you can.....

[Jake Di Vita]

Caspian,

The only time a Master would move up (unless a change in normal classification happened) would be if he or she placed top 3 in Master in the point series.

Guys, I feel that most of you have truly missed the point of this whole thing. All that is going on is bickering over paying an additional five or ten dollars for a point series match. With how the idea is looking in my head right now, that would not be required from anyone.

What is the goal here......The growth and prosperity of the shooting sports. I don't much see a point of having a Nationals if this type of point series came into existence. There would be no reason for it....

Nationals is meant to pick a national champion... and I think that having a point series national champion as one who was the most consistent all year long is a much more accurate representation than one big match.

Think of the advantages. If there were 10 matches you could shoot....only 8 of which counted....chances are it would weed out most extraneous circumstances. For example....Blake getting DQ'd at this years nationals....if it was run the in a way like was suggested above, he would still have a shot (pun intended) at it, which goes for everyone that had something crappy happy to them at nationals.

Here is my take on it....

There will still be Area championships and every 3 years a world shoot, so you really aren't losing much there. We would no longer have the problem of USPSA losing money because of the nationals. The mere fact of significant prize money would draw more publicity and more people to this sport. If you don't want to be involved in the point series, there is nothing saying you have to. I have no intention of making people who dont want to be involved in it support it (the increase in dues i mentioned was only something to get the ball rolling). Area and section match fees would not climb for anyone as point series entrance would be taken care of at the beginning of the year.

I see very many advantages for very few disadvantages.

Instead of everyone saying why the idea won't work....offer up ideas on how to MAKE it work.

[Sterling White]

This thread should be combined with this thread and a way to voice some ideas to the BOD!

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...topic=18711&hl=

Its a continuation of the same issues and topics.

Here's the meat and potatoes.......as previously mentioned:

The point series could be a huge success but it would take these things to make it work:

1. A clear communication plan that describes: what it is and how it works.

2. A business plan that includes: marketing, sponsorship, incentives, and the awards.

3. A major lifter to back the organizations goal for the point series, ie., establishing a purse!

4. Designated matches (it could be Area matches the 1st year)

5. Competitors

6. Probobably the most important item - A key person who can carry the ball, rub elbows with sponsors, and grow funds.

We should not try to build a purse from within our own ranks. Forget an extra $5 or $10 out of our own pockets. Save that for the plane ride and motel rooms when you fly across the country to a designated match that is on the West or East Coast or somewhere between.

Put $25K or more, $50K, on the table (sponsor funds up for grabs) and lets get this party started!

[Flexmoney]

The entire reason for going to this type of format is to crown a "TRUE" champion who showed consistency throughout the year...not a one-hit wonder.

Jeff, I just don't think a blanket statement like "one hit wonder" can apply to our National Championship. As Smitty said earlier, 20+ stages means a guy isn't going to get lucky.

And, I don't know that consistency makes the Champion. Important...Yes. But, there is the BIG MATCH phenomenon...the choke factor. I think that is a fantastic part of what makes a Champion. There is nothing like THE Big Match to bring that out. (Look at the Olympics...screw up there and it is a 4 year wait to get another chance.)

Why should I, as a no, one or two big-match shooting person (that would be, say, 95% of USPSA), pay an extra $5 dues each year that I have no chance of ever winning?

Right. As I said in the last thread...unless we get new money from somewhere...we are "taxing" our resources for the gain of few.

Sounds like a great way for the BOD to get voted out of office.

Likely so.

Participants or sponsors pay is the only way. (anybody considered the legal implications of any of this? I wouldn't be surprised to see it violate any number of states' lottery laws)

Right..NEW money.

...and I think that having a point series national champion as one who was the most consistent all year long is a much more accurate representation than one big match.

Again, I don't think I will agree. I know plenty of non-upper calss shooters that go to the Nations with the goal of not getting DQ'ed. And, I know plenty of upper-class shooters that have "big-match-ittis". They make mistakes that they wouldn't make at a lesser match (where all the marbles aren't on the table). The shooting at the top is a mind game.

And, who can shoot a series of matches? It's not just cost and vacation time...it is also opportunity cost...the cost of not being available to do other things. (note the lack of TJ and the Burner at most matches since we went to war).

For example....Blake getting DQ'd at this years nationals....if it was run the in a way like was suggested above, he would still have a shot (pun intended) at it, which goes for everyone that had something crappy happy to them at nationals.

I watched Blake's gun tumble. I felt terrible about it. But it is part of the game. So is bringing guns and equipment that works. I don't think anything crappy happens too the shooter. The shooter is reponsible for every aspect of their game.

[Barrettone]

Okay...SCRAP the entire of idea of a $10 match fee increase. You still have $250 per point series entrant, and the entire nationals prize table if you eliminate it and replace it with a Points Series. You DO NOT HAVE TO PARTICIPATE NOR PAY IF YOU DON'T WANT TO. Now, are there any more complaints??? Now, here is the catch. If you don't enter, you are not entitled to any of the points series prize table, nor are you entitled to be national champion, even if you smoke every GM that comes along. It will be as though you were never there, as your results don't count for diddly. Just like Eric Grauffel winning open at this years Nats. He is NOT the national champion. He can't be because he does not hail from the US of A. It would be entirely self-sufficient, no whiners have to pay if they don't want to, AND you get a viable venue with a sh*tload of purse money (with 500 competitors - a conservative number - it would be $125,000) and prizes. You don't need to market what you already have. The sponsors already give to Nats. If you eliminate them, they will sponsor the Points Series as it would be the new official USPSA championship. You have Area matches at a minimum as the designated matches, with the possibility of adding one more per area to make it geographically equal. You then crown a champion who showed consistency throughout the year, and avoid the problems Jake listed above. I already said that I would spearhead the project to make sure there was some hustle behind it, so there is your leadership. Did I miss anything???

Jeff

[Flexmoney]

Jeff,

Relax a bit. And, could you ease off on calling people (like me) whiners?

[MikeFoley]

I have read, and re-read this thread, and the one that Gary started. I cannot forsee the benefit to the A-D class shooter. I don't want to make Jeff angry, but most shooters could care less about how much money the top shooters are going to take home. When you refer to national champions, are you referring to a national champion in every division and class? I think the payout for a division should be equal for champions in every class. If I progress to the top of A and stay there through the tournament season, I worked as hard, maybe harder, than (and I hate to use this example because we talk him to death) Rob.

This is not going to ever be NASCAR, and I am so glad for it. Does anyone remember the Jeep incident? We do not have to sell our souls to corporate sponsorship to continue to play and not lose money. Some would say I have no vision for the sport, but I say the direction we are discussing is only a very small representation of how the organizaton feels. If you remove the earned slots, nationals is just a big match where we all get to play our hearts out, kind of like AAA college football, no chance of most shooters going pro for sure.

I think guys like T_T are truly athletes, and I want to be like them. They sacrifice a lot more than we see to get where they are. Sure it looks like fun, and it probably is. They should be rewarded, but I don't think half the guys I shoot with at a 6 club circuit with even know they exist.

FLEX, I would love to accept your challenge of being part of the solution, but other than expressing our ideas to our AD, where do we go from here? This is not a democracy, but we have to do what is best for all of the shooters that our success depends on. I just think we all have different views of the roles they play.

[Jake Di Vita]

OK, First....

Kyle,

Do you really think it will be easier to beat the top GM's at 8 matches (96 stages) or 1 big match (24 stages...last year).

fomeister,

If you have the same payout for every class, you don't encourage improvement to the higher levels of the sport....just the higher levels of your class.

I don't see how there isn't a benefit for D-A class shooters. If you win, you are still winning a few thousand bucks. Look at any other sport...Compare college athletics to Pro. You earn nothing in college but a crap load in pro. I don't think this should be like that, I think every class and division should get something for it...If you think the D class winner should be paid equal to the GM or Overall winner, I don't understand why. Like I said, payment being higher in higher classes will spur most people to improve more.

This game is the funnest I've ever participated in....but money talks. If there are certain people who are not interested in shooting for money, there is no reason you have to.

The way I see this is a huge benefit for some, and people who aren't interested, won't be affected by it.

[Flexmoney]

FLEX, I would love to accept your challenge of being part of the solution, but other than expressing our ideas to our AD, where do we go from here? This is not a democracy, but we have to do what is best for all of the shooters that our success depends on. I just think we all have different views of the roles they play.

Huh??

My challenge?

[MoNsTeR]

Barretone said:

...with 500 competitors - a conservative number...

497 people shot the '04 Nats. According to shred's numbers, 697 people shot 2 or more area matches last year (bump that up to 3 and the number falls to a paltry 253). Now, it's possible that with Nationals gone, and a huge purse of prize money on the table, many more shooters will be motivated to go out there and shoot more big matches. However I don't think it's plausible that effect will be large enough to make the on-the-table version of the plan work. To see why...

Jake Di Vita said:

I don't see how there isn't a benefit for D-A class shooters.

If you're not sponsored or independently wealthy, you can't shoot enough matches. Surprise, D-A shooters aren't generally sponsored or independently wealthy!

I know I would have a shot at C class Lim-10. Now let's see, to go to a match I have to take two weeks off, incur $300-$400 in travel expenses, $100-$200 in lodging, plus indidental expenses, plus match fee, plus ammo, I'm guessing it totals at least $2000 (using my crappy old job to estimate lost pay). Times 8 matches is, oh!, $16,000! So even if I was literally assured of winning, the prize would have to be at least that big to get me to participate.

Compare that to Nationals, and you'll see why there's no benefit for lower-classed shooters.

[Flexmoney]

Kyle,

Do you really think it will be easier to beat the top GM's at 8 matches (96 stages) or 1 big match (24 stages...last year).

There are a lot of factors there to consider. It is a totally different "thing".

If I can make all 8 matches, and Smitty can't...that is one place I have moved up.

If TJ is off giving classes and misses most of the big matches (like he did last year)...that is another spot I would be able to move up.

All the junior shooters that placed well at Nationals in Open this year...will they make the matches they'd need to make to be competitive? Can the West coast shooters get to all the needed matches?

----------

I like the idea well enough. But, I'd need to see a lot more than I have so far on the execution side of the plan. I haven't seen yet where the logistics are there to make it happen.

And, even if we could get something along the lines of "The Pepsi Point Series Challenge"...that would likely hurt other matches. If something like that could become a reality, that would mean less resources would be available at the "other" major matches that we now enjoy.

---------

I don't think you can have a point series tax for those not participating. And, without that, you don't (now) have the money.

Lets consider the best case senario...all the big-dogs show up for the matches (the same that actually make it to the Nationals now). Why would I sign up? I have got to find the time and money to travel to a number of Point Series matches to be competitive. Lets be real here...even if I had the practice budget and range access to work my ass off (no excuses)...will I be in a position to beat Robbie...Phil...Taran...Mike V...Travis? How about the next guy that has to fund the project, what are his chances?

It looks like a lot of money and time...any way you cut it.

And, if that money is out there now...ready to be spent...I think we'd know about it.

For something like this to work...you'd need NEW money. Outside sponsorship. Getting that would take an industry-wide shift in thinking. (I'd call it a paradigm shift, but Sam and EricW would think I went coporate on them. )

It could happen. But, companies can't throw marketing dollars away. They have to get a benefit...or they will put employees out of work. We'd need to be able to show somebody a marketable product (entertainment).

It won't happen next year.

[Cameron]

How about points series winners by Area, with a Points series National Championship(seperate venue) based off of Nationals results. When going by area, using state level, sectional,and Area match scores would count on the point system. That way, the person that is unable to make 5-6 Area matchs will still have a chace at being a point series winner at a Area level.

This would allow us poor folk a chance to shine at a more localized level, without needing the funding to make 8-10 major matches at $2,000 a trip. Plus, a "Area" winner will likely have more visibily in recruting new members locally.

Just thoughts..

[Jake Di Vita]

$2000 a trip?!?!?!?!?

Using the figures you just supplied, it would never cost more than $1000.

Also I am not sponsored in any way, nor independently wealthy.

I don't think it would happen next year either, I'm am trying to think of things that could happen in the future.

I do kind of like Cameron's idea and individual area point series champions...but I'm not sure I see the benefit, unless you were talking about running it with more at stake, which would require as Kyle said, finding the money.

So now it comes down to this.....What can we do to interest other companies in sponsoring this type of program.

I think it comes down to TV.

[Cameron]

Some additions to my previous post.

How about a one time Area points series fee of say $100.00. I believe this small fee, coupled with an Area series would attract more folks into shooting a point series.

Call it the BE cup!

[driver8M3]

The sponsors already give to Nats.  If you eliminate the Nationals, they will sponsor the Points Series as it would be the new official USPSA championship

i think one reason sponsors like to sponsor the nationals is they have such a large group of shooters in a single location where they can set up a booth and sell lots of stuff. would you get the same amount from sponsors with the point series? many of them already sponsor area/sectional matches...would you expect them to give more for the combined area/point series match? what do they get in return?

[Sterling White]

I'd like to give some food for thought on how the flow of money would work.

Scenerio #1 - Shooters register for the Pt. Series (w/o) paying an entry.

Under a sponsor(s) only pot that equals $50k (total prize money)

To qualify for the money a shooter must meet these requirements: 1. Shoot 6 of the 8 Area Matches (placement determines points earned) and, 2. minimum of 20 shooters in each division.

yep...2 easy requirements. Accounting is another issue that would need to be set into place by the BOD designated Rep.

The breakout of money would then need to be determined by the BOD but a simple percentage based system could be established like this:

Total # of shooters in the point system = 100%

(Breakout expressed as a percentage of: # open + # limited + # lim 10 + # prod + # revolver) x $50k

So, if 20% of the total number of shooters were open that would mean that $10k would be up for grabs in open (unless someone else can come up with a better suggestion). Keeping things equitable the BOD would need to determine by Class the payback for winners and/or overall finish.

I will need to think about Scenerio #2 before posting to see what you think about this....there are several options for payback.

[MikeFoley]

That seems logical, put the money where the numbers are. I like it.

[blackdragon]

I like the way some of you guys are spending all that sponsorship money!

Ivan

Armscor

[Sterling White]

Hey Ivan....glad to see a potential sponsor stepping up to the plate! Welcome aboard.

OK.... here's something that could happen with a sponsor.....lets say Armscor was approached for the point series and they agreed to chip in $10k but it came with strings. The string is this.....Armscor wants the shooters to use their brass or bullets. How could we (as shooters) or the BOD deal with this? I think the question needs to be asked by the BOD before we (as a group) conclude that it will not happen.....its too easy to jump to conclusion on an unproven program.

For myself.....I would start reloading with an Armscor product to meet the requirement, probably would use their 40 brass or bullet in the designated matches. (Which would mean buying a steady stream of it all year long and using it all the time)

If Pepsi or Coke were sponsors....their logo would be placed on the shirt!

I am going out on a limb here but am guessing that most Marketeers would say that the opportunities are plentiful to make this work.

The Point Series needs a person with a vision, leadership skills, and resources (working in concert with the BOD) to pull it off. This is the point were I think the BOD and Mike V. sit down to talk about it.