Do we need a new classifier?

[kdmoore]

I understand that the classifier is a "standards" course, but should it reflect ideal courses more closely? Could it? All quotes are from the new rules. Here are 5 points to ponder ...

". The same goes for mixing strings requiring a 2-2-2 engagement with a 1-1-2-1-1 type engagement."

I had to smile when I read this, given the differing ways that we shoot the targets. I understand why. And given that this is a string that everyone memorizes it's totally ok. Boy wouldn't the classifier be boring if it was all double taps to the body

"Tactical reloads and reloads with retention are intended for use during lulls in the action and should not be required on the clock."

Really the genesis of this post. The above I believe is the abolishment of a required rwr. Is it time to do away with it on the classifier. Still can be a skill, ask the SO's to require it, but do it off the clock.

"Occasional targets out to thirty-five (35) yards are to be encouraged."

For all who struggle keeping a clean run, I propose moving back 15 yards for a string or two in stage 3. Range no longer large enough to shoot the classifier? Simple, shrink the targets .... lol

"No more than 25% of the shots required on any string of fire may be on steel targets and no more than 10% of the total shots required in the match may be on steel."

Given that we should expect to see steel, shall we add some in?

"CoF should be “revolver neutral” whenever possible. See glossary for further details."

What's this going to do with the 8 shot ESR's? do they still rwr?

[JD45]

I think that it should be changed to mimic the types of standards that you see at all state shoots. I'm all for a couple of shots at 35yds.,but how many times have you had to shoot 12 shots and reload from a barricade at 20yds. during a state shoot?