New 3-Gun Scoring System

[toothandnail]

Is the rifle shooting or pistol shooting "more important" than the shotgun shooting? It was stated earlier that this sport was martial in its beginnings so I would argue that its all equally important to know how to use all three guns. If that is so then make the point value standard per round required to neutralize all targets. 12 pistol 12 rifle 12 shotgun would make a 36 point course of fire. Incur time penalties for FTN targets, the farther away it is the higher the penalty. Time plus penalties, done. Winner gets 36 points and everyone else gets a fraction. Most points wins the match.

Sorry no name calling as I don't know anyone here personally.

That would work pretty good as well I think, should give stages a balanced score based on targets

The main problem I see is for the RO's scoring, in a high target stage with many varying distances, is keeping track of which targets were FTE, FTN, hit.

It's EASY with the guy who hits them all, or misses them all. The guy in between who is all over the board- hit/miss, engage/not engage, is a nightmare. I've been there done that.

I want to keep scoring as simple as possible, and the reset quick. The RO's have a hard enough job in a big match

Edited August 3, 2014 by toothandnail

[Moltke]

Is the rifle shooting or pistol shooting "more important" than the shotgun shooting? It was stated earlier that this sport was martial in its beginnings so I would argue that its all equally important to know how to use all three guns. If that is so then make the point value standard per round required to neutralize all targets. 12 pistol 12 rifle 12 shotgun would make a 36 point course of fire. Incur time penalties for FTN targets, the farther away it is the higher the penalty. Time plus penalties, done. Winner gets 36 points and everyone else gets a fraction. Most points wins the match.

Sorry no name calling as I don't know anyone here personally.

That would work pretty good as well, the main problem I see is for the RO's scoring, in a high target stage with many varying distances, is keeping track of which targets were FTE, FTN, hit.

It's EASY with the guy who hits them all, or misses them all. The guy in between who is all over the board- hit/miss, engage/not engage, is a nightmare.

How is scoring that any different than now? Steel is either knocked down, clays are busted, long range steel is called hit or not. Papers are pasted. Edited August 3, 2014 by Moltke

[toothandnail]

Is the rifle shooting or pistol shooting "more important" than the shotgun shooting? It was stated earlier that this sport was martial in its beginnings so I would argue that its all equally important to know how to use all three guns. If that is so then make the point value standard per round required to neutralize all targets. 12 pistol 12 rifle 12 shotgun would make a 36 point course of fire. Incur time penalties for FTN targets, the farther away it is the higher the penalty. Time plus penalties, done. Winner gets 36 points and everyone else gets a fraction. Most points wins the match.

Sorry no name calling as I don't know anyone here personally.

That would work pretty good as well, the main problem I see is for the RO's scoring, in a high target stage with many varying distances, is keeping track of which targets were FTE, FTN, hit.

It's EASY with the guy who hits them all, or misses them all. The guy in between who is all over the board- hit/miss, engage/not engage, is a nightmare.

How is scoring that any different than now? Steel is either knocked down, clays are busted, long range steel is called hit or not. Papers are pasted.

I'm thinking of the long range rifle targets, I've RO'd matches with different penalties for different range targets.

If there are only 1-3 it's easy , get 5+ with several different penalties for different ranges, a guy who has trouble and starts skipping around, hitting some missing others, spread over a wide area.

Some score sheets have the targets/penalties listed ,which helps. Other times it's been up to us RO's to remember, with tally marks ect. The latter is Not something that will happen at our matches.

I agree the SG/ pistol is easy to score, the range involved there makes it so.

Although we were told about a stage today, 9 SG poppers each threw a clay. I imagine that would have been fairly hard to call clay hits accurately. A very fun stage to shoot. IMO

[Moltke]

Oh I see what you're saying yeah, I guess something like all targets over 100 yards would be one high penalty and everything closer would be lower like 30 sec & 15 sec respectively. Having high penalties like that would also discourage skipping targets, whatever the target, at whatever distance. Game it if you can, otherwise shoot it straight up.

Then RO's just do as we do now. Time, plus penalties for FTN's.

[gose]

Is the rifle shooting or pistol shooting "more important" than the shotgun shooting? It was stated earlier that this sport was martial in its beginnings so I would argue that its all equally important to know how to use all three guns. If that is so then make the point value standard per round required to neutralize all targets. 12 pistol 12 rifle 12 shotgun would make a 36 point course of fire. Incur time penalties for FTN targets, the farther away it is the higher the penalty. Time plus penalties, done. Winner gets 36 points and everyone else gets a fraction. Most points wins the match.

Sorry no name calling as I don't know anyone here personally.

Sorry.....almost done, not quite. In time plus scoring, you would need to weigh based on 'perceived' time to complete a stage.....number of targets may or may not have a bearing on that.

Tim

If youre going to make the short stages worth very little in relation to the long stages, why not just simply run straight time? Sure, thats not perfect either, but at least you know what you get. Somewhat arbitrarily assigning point values is going to be very imprecise and it's inevitable that it will screw up a shooters and a match here and there just because the assigned values got completely off when someone unexpectedly burned down a stage.

If you dont like short stages being worth as much as large stages - run straight time

If you think that short stages are as important as long stages - run time plus with points

[Jesse Tischauser]

I don't think any of the action shooting sports are very true to the martial aspects anymore. Nobody wears a fishing vests for cover on the street or shoots bird shot at flying bad guys. Lol!

Edited August 3, 2014 by Jesse Tischauser

[Jesse Tischauser]

Is the rifle shooting or pistol shooting "more important" than the shotgun shooting? It was stated earlier that this sport was martial in its beginnings so I would argue that its all equally important to know how to use all three guns. If that is so then make the point value standard per round required to neutralize all targets. 12 pistol 12 rifle 12 shotgun would make a 36 point course of fire. Incur time penalties for FTN targets, the farther away it is the higher the penalty. Time plus penalties, done. Winner gets 36 points and everyone else gets a fraction. Most points wins the match.

Sorry no name calling as I don't know anyone here personally.

Sorry.....almost done, not quite. In time plus scoring, you would need to weigh based on 'perceived' time to complete a stage.....number of targets may or may not have a bearing on that.

maybe on a scale like the following:

short stage: 10 to 30 seconds 30 points

medium stage: 31 to 60 seconds 60 points

long stage: 60 to 90 seconds 90 points

ridiculous long stage: 90 to 120 seconds 120 points

really ridiculous long stage: 120 or more seconds 150 points

Sounds great!!! Now.....how do you base the time run??? ave shooter?? worst shooter?? Best shooter???

Or....the worst case....ave time done during the match.....bad.....no one knows where they stand till the end.

And THAT'S the burr!! Again.....leave it up to the MD/RM for their best guess

In all reality.....Hit factor (points/sec) and target points may tend to make more sense if you can simplify the paper target scoring.

Or....just leave it all up to the MD.....the good good matches, people keep going to.

Tim

I was talking to Rob Romero about this and he has a very similar idea. So I think you're on the right track Tim. I was thinking you would want to know/use need the top time. If you have a good shooter or experienced MD you can walk a stage or actually shoot a stage in and figure out pretty closely what a top time will be.

Once you get that top time you can multiply every stages anticipated best stage time by the same hit factor to get the stage points. Say 2-3 and get your match points. A 30 second stage would be worth 30X2.5=70 points , a 60 second stage would be worth 60X2.5=150 points. This takes into account slow/hard shooting and fast/easy shooting as well as gun transitions and heavy shotgun loading too. I'm digging this idea especially since two guys that are way smarter than I am came up with it independently.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Jesse Tischauser

[TRUBL]

Here's the other issue.......Top time??? For open? Limited? Optics? They will be different.

Probably best to leave it up to a consensus (BEST guess) of the top match personal (hopefully, if they are running the match, they can come up with good guess between them).

We did fairly well with the Tri-gun at the time and the guys doing the Nordic Shotgun Match seem to have a handle on it as well. I am sure most others can too.

Bad thing about 'waiting' for the top time to come in........you can have no interim scores and everyone sorta kinda has a good idea who will run the top times on any given stage........and I think it leads to much to gaming for what ever reason......probably better to come up with the weights before hand....again....BEST guess.

Tim

PS....Jesse....your hit factor, really is not a hit factor, just a constant and the values stay the same, just bigger or smaller. Remember, officially...Hit factor is Points/second

AND.....hit factor could be used as typically on shorter stages the HF will be higher than on Longer stages

IE: 30 second stage HF might be 5.3

IE 60 second stage HF might be 2.8

Edited August 3, 2014 by TRUBL

[Jesse Tischauser]

Here's the other issue.......Top time??? For open? Limited? Optics? They will be different.

Probably best to leave it up to a consensus (BEST guess) of the top match personal (hopefully, if they are running the match, they can come up with good guess between them).

We did fairly well with the Tri-gun at the time and the guys doing the Nordic Shotgun Match seem to have a handle on it as well. I am sure most others can too.

Bad thing about 'waiting' for the top time to come in........you can have no interim scores and everyone sorta kinda has a good idea who will run the top times on any given stage........and I think it leads to much to gaming for what ever reason......probably better to come up with the weights before hand....again....BEST guess.

Tim

PS....Jesse....your hit factor, really is not a hit factor, just a constant and the values stay the same, just bigger or smaller. Remember, officially...Hit factor is Points/second

AND.....hit factor could be used as typically on shorter stages the HF will be higher than on Longer stages

IE: 30 second stage HF might be 5.3

IE 60 second stage HF might be 2.8

I was suggesting the MD come up with the top time as well not waiting on it to come in. It really doesn't matter if you use open or Heavy irons. You're really just after the fastest time humanly possible to shoot the stage to eliminate outliers.

Typically 3-gun stages have really low hit factors because so much time is spent not shooting and long shots are slow. I think we can agree that it is very difficult to assign a weighted point value to each target because every target is so much different depending on presentation, distance, size, gun used etc. So rather than try to assign a point/target assign a point/stage based on time because the time really is what determines how hard or valuable a target is.

In USPSA pistol target points 5 per hit. 10 on paper and 5 on steel.

Hit factor = Total stage points/time

In this scenario we don't have predetermined target point values because we are saying there isn't a good average points per target value due to the variations in target tyke and presentation in 3-gun. So say we average it and use 5 like USPSA does. So then if we assign a best guess hit factor of 2-3 because that's pretty typical of a balanced 3-gun stage. Once we get our best approximation of the fastest stage time possible we can determine the stage points for the stage no matter how big or small it is or how many guns are used.

Hit factor = total stage points/time

Using my example of 2.5 being an average 3-gun hit factor based on 5 pints per target.

2.5= Total Stage Points/Time. Since we know the approximate best time from our expert stage evaluation we get,

2.5/Time = Total Stage Points

Add up all the stage pions and you get total match points.

Obviously the difficult part of this scenario is having a qualified expert to determine best stage times but it eliminates the flaw on cumulative time scoring of having a train wreck on a fast stage causing a huge accumulation of time. Or someone shooting the long range stage with a high average time really fast thereby winning the match in one stage. One can only gain or lose the available stage points. It also eliminates the discrepancies with the 100 stage points per stage if the stages aren't equally balanced in time and/or difficulty.

Ouch that hurt. Somebody smarter than me needs to see if that makes any sense.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Jesse Tischauser

[MickB]

Jesse,

Could not having a top competitor decide what the fastest times are by walking or (especially) shooting the stages be considered by some as an unfair advantage for that competitor?

For example, here in AZ we could use your team mate and our mutual friend.

I can only imagine what level of protests we would get at SMM3G if it was even perceived that a top level shooter had the advantage of a "practice run".

Example: At SMM3G 2014, one of your Sponsors wanted to take "action" video and pictures of your fellow team mate. Both I and the MD said that this could only be done on a stage that the individual had already shot for score, or we would set up a separate bay for this to be done. This was done specifically to avoid any perception that the competitor had an unfair advantage.

People would also complain if the MD had the same "practice run", let alone a highly ranked competitor.

The above consideration brings us back to what Tim discussed earlier about waiting for the top score to come in.

Mick

Edited August 3, 2014 by MickB

[TRUBL]

BTW......if you you are going to do Time plus, what I was meaning is that you want to stay away from points/sec for a factor as it would tend to make the point values for stages equal again and that is the problem now.

And.....if you multiply all the stages by the same factor, the percentages remain the same.

That's why I was looking at something simple like I mentioned before.....a set value for fast, medium, long, etc stages. Again.....it did seemed to work for the Nordic Shotgun Match.

Tim

PS>>>>>I would not use the 'fastest time humanly possible'.....just the best guess on what a good time would be.

Edited August 3, 2014 by TRUBL

[Jesse Tischauser]

Jesse,

Could not having a top competitor decide what the fastest times are by walking or (especially) shooting the stages be considered by some as an unfair advantage for that competitor?

For example, here in AZ we could use your team mate and our mutual friend.

I can only imagine what level of protests we would get at SMM3G if it was even perceived that a top level shooter had the advantage of a "practice run".

Example: At SMM3G 2014, one of your Sponsors wanted to take "action" video and pictures of your fellow team mate. Both I and the MD said that this could only be done on a stage that the individual had already shot for score, or we would set up a separate bay for this to be done. This was done specifically to avoid any perception that the competitor had an unfair advantage.

People would also complain if the MD had the same "practice run", let alone a highly ranked competitor.

The above consideration brings us back to what Tim discussed earlier about waiting for the top score to come in.

Mick

Definitely nobody gets a trial run if they are shooting the match score. But they could walk the stage and say I know this can be shot in X seconds.

[Jesse Tischauser]

BTW......if you you are going to do Time plus, what I was meaning is that you want to stay away from points/sec for a factor as it would tend to make the point values for stages equal again and that is the problem now.

And.....if you multiply all the stages by the same factor, the percentages remain the same.

That's why I was looking at something simple like I mentioned before.....a set value for fast, medium, long, etc stages. Again.....it did seemed to work for the Nordic Shotgun Match.

Tim

PS>>>>>I would not use the 'fastest time humanly possible'.....just the best guess on what a good time would be.

The current Nordic scoring is basically IPSC Shotgun scoring at 5 points per target. My idea is to give the stages a point value not a time value.

We are arriving at the same thing I think but I'm trying to be more specific on a stage being worth more or less if it's longer or shorter rather than just having 3 set values.

If you simply just gave every target 5 points like Ipsc shotgun your hard/slow targets lose value considerably which may not be a bad thing.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Jesse Tischauser

[TRUBL]

It's easy to say that for an all shotgun match.......but when you throw in pistol and rifle, a target rich stage may or may not be slower. You throw 16 paper in for pistol (32 rounds) vs 32 clay birds and they are not the same value.

Likewise......16 targets out at 200 to 400 yards vs 16 steel knock downs for shotgun could not be the same point value either.

Going by number of targets or number of shots can be a starting point.......you still need to look at the time it might take based of the difficulty. Is it hoser pistol, hoser rifle, how many reloads for shotgun, how difficult is the long range shots, are the no shoots tight in the shotgun targets, etc......the list goes on.

To count targets is a starting point only.....but a fast COF is gonna hose anyone that has a burb if you get it wrong and someone smoking a percieved long stage will hose everyone.

It's touchy.....all because of the human factor.

In the real world.....if you get all the stages to run 75 seconds ave.......no big deal. If an RM can do that, no need for weighing stages.....go time plus. The problem lies in the places that have berms and some natural terrain mostly. The 3GUN nation stages are all pretty close in time and are thus fairly balanced if you do a time plus.....and not total time

Tim

[AustinT]

This thread is bananas.

I think short stages are important. I think long stages are important. I think shooting a rifle well is important. I think shooting a shotgun well is important. I think shooting a pistol well is important.

I think being able to run an El Prez is important. I think being able to hit 10 250 yard targets is important. In terms of the martial side, which is why I started all of this, the El Prez is waaayyy more important. But I sure do like shooting 250 yard targets.

I'm not for anything that makes things more complicated for the MDs. Those guys have a sucky job already. And when something goes wrong, it's probably going to be my job to give it the first shot at figuring it out, because I'm probably going to be running either the timer or the scoresheet.

You have a better system? Put it into effect and see if everyone else likes it. If they like it, they'll start using it. Spewing words on the intarwebs is a waste of time, but boy, it sure is fun to argue sometimes.

[MarkCO]

Austin for President!

[toothandnail]

AND . . . . . . . . we're back to page 1

[EaZeNuTZ33]

I don't think any of the action shooting sports are very true to the martial aspects anymore. Nobody wears a fishing vests for cover on the street or shoots bird shot at flying bad guys. Lol!

I couldn't disagree with you more Jesse!

Have you seen the movie The Birds? Every single time I see a cloud of black birds gathering I start thinking of the tactical advantage of the quad load with a chest rig and belt full of Winchester AAs versus those little pecking bastards!!!

Don't even get me started on te movie Kujo!

[TRUBL]

Like I said all along.....I like time plus, I like easy. What we did at Tri-Gun was time plus. But we did not want a 15 second stage (which we basically had to do) determine the match. It was easy.....we knew it was going to be short, so we made the point value for that stage (actually 2 that year) stage less. It worked. It was time plus and it was easy. It's been done, it's nothing new.....a few matches do that now.

Yeah, I agree.....some of the thread may have been loony....but going back over the thread....a few things float to the top.

Time plus is most likely here to stay (amen)

A balanced approach to the stage design in the match is the best way to do it.

Weighing stages could work (and has) with a little thought....if the above can't due to the range facilities

Hit factor seems to be too complex and generally not wanted in 3 gun

Total time doesn't seem to have a great following....but is still used.

The MD does not need to be a rocket scientist, but being a lawyer would help.

I guess the KISS approach works.

But would the tactical vest have worked in "JAWS"?? We all know it would have in SHARKNADO!!

Tim

[Jesse Tischauser]

Like I said all along.....I like time plus, I like easy. What we did at Tri-Gun was time plus. But we did not want a 15 second stage (which we basically had to do) determine the match. It was easy.....we knew it was going to be short, so we made the point value for that stage (actually 2 that year) stage less. It worked. It was time plus and it was easy. It's been done, it's nothing new.....a few matches do that now.

Yeah, I agree.....some of the thread may have been loony....but going back over the thread....a few things float to the top.

Time plus is most likely here to stay (amen)

A balanced approach to the stage design in the match is the best way to do it.

Weighing stages could work (and has) with a little thought....if the above can't due to the range facilities

Hit factor seems to be too complex and generally not wanted in 3 gun

Total time doesn't seem to have a great following....but is still used.

The MD does not need to be a rocket scientist, but being a lawyer would help.

I guess the KISS approach works.

But would the tactical vest have worked in "JAWS"?? We all know it would have in SHARKNADO!!

Tim

When you say time plus do you mean cumulative time with no stage points? I ask because all matches use time plus penalties but some then convert that total stage time to points per stage. Edited August 4, 2014 by Jesse Tischauser

[Jesse Tischauser]

This thread is bananas.

I think short stages are important. I think long stages are important. I think shooting a rifle well is important. I think shooting a shotgun well is important. I think shooting a pistol well is important.

I think being able to run an El Prez is important. I think being able to hit 10 250 yard targets is important. In terms of the martial side, which is why I started all of this, the El Prez is waaayyy more important. But I sure do like shooting 250 yard targets.

I'm not for anything that makes things more complicated for the MDs. Those guys have a sucky job already. And when something goes wrong, it's probably going to be my job to give it the first shot at figuring it out, because I'm probably going to be running either the timer or the scoresheet.

You have a better system? Put it into effect and see if everyone else likes it. If they like it, they'll start using it. Spewing words on the intarwebs is a waste of time, but boy, it sure is fun to argue sometimes.

I thought this had been an interesting discussion trying to arrive at something that someone possibly could try at a match well at least until page 5. Edited August 4, 2014 by Jesse Tischauser

[TRUBL]

When I talk time plus......it is per stage (you earn points at each stage), not accumulative time......was never a fan of that in any shape, form or fashion, IMHO, it SUCKS.

And yeah Austin, you got my vote.

Tim

[EaZeNuTZ33]

When I talk time plus......it is per stage (you earn points at each stage), not accumulative time......was never a fan of that in any shape, form or fashion, IMHO, it SUCKS.

And yeah Austin, you got my vote.

Tim

Austin can't be president by today's standard.....we haven't had a president that short since James Madison!

[TRUBL]

Sweet...ya pulled Austin in it now....good show, good show!!

[AustinT]

When I talk time plus......it is per stage (you earn points at each stage), not accumulative time......was never a fan of that in any shape, form or fashion, IMHO, it SUCKS.

And yeah Austin, you got my vote.

Tim

Austin can't be president by today's standard.....we haven't had a president that short since James Madison!