New 3-Gun Scoring System

[Jesse Tischauser]

Did everyone see what Larry is doing with point values at the upcoming FNH match?

[Sterling White]

What is "LS"?

I predict another fur ball complements of the pro shooter representing Stag Arms. Nothing like a good old personal attack to get the key boards warm

Nothing personal. Those numbers are pretty close. Last time I shot RM3G I shot HO for same reason. Better prize for less performance.

Quite trendy isn't it! I can take personal digs anytime and toss grenades back...LOL At least I haven't been fired by one of my sponsors lately

Edited September 4, 2014 by Sterling White

[Jesse Tischauser]

What is "LS"?

I predict another fur ball complements of the pro shooter representing Stag Arms. Nothing like a good old personal attack to get the key boards warm

Nothing personal. Those numbers are pretty close. Last time I shot RM3G I shot HO for same reason. Better prize for less performance.

Quite trendy isn't it! I can take personal digs anytime and toss grenades back...LOL At least I haven't been fired by one of my sponsors lately

You can't get fired unless your employed there sport. So whoever you're talking about owes me some $.

[Jadeslade]

This is what I think:

[Sterling White]

Had to take another read this morning - JT your funny! I actually got a good chuckle out of your digs.

[JFlowers]

9 pages and still going..... I knew there was a reason I liked the "a hit is a hit, a miss is a miss, just record the time and misses" scoring.

[CJW]

Did everyone see what Larry is doing with point values at the upcoming FNH match?

Indeed, I did. Since it was exactly the solution I put forth in post (checking...) #9 in this thread, I kind of liked it.

[Sterling White]

Wow.... Looks like the TO folks had trouble reeling in a Limited shooter this weekend at the Gen III 3g match

[RiggerJJ]

I guess it’s time for my rant, AGAIN…(thanks Sterling...)

Let me start with our match. We do one prize table. Why? Because we feel it is the most fair for ALL competitors. Shooters walk the table in order of percent of finish in their own division. Winners in each division may choose a “reserved” prize or "grand prize" for them kind of like separate prize tables, but these reserved prizes are only about 1 to 5 items deep depending on number of competitors in the division, and what the spread is at the top. If a division’s winner wins by a mile (I call it the run-away factor), we add major items to that reserved pile to help remove the sting. All competitors walk the table in order of percent of finish in their respective division, and can pick anything from the main table, or from the reserved prizes for their division, if there are any left. This is how this year’s 2^nd place in LS won the JP rifle. If say a shooter posts a overall score of 80.5% in Open, he will walk the table just ahead of the shooter in Limited that finishes at 80.4%. A single prize table distributed by percent of finish in division is easy to set up, easy to scout out as a competitor, gives the sponsors better exposure as EVERYONE is looking at ALL the things on the one table, and is the MOST FAIR distribution of prizes.

Different divisions. Comparing how one shooter WOULD have done in a division other than the one they competed in is comparing apples and oranges. Each competitor chooses the division they signed up for a reason. They practiced, competed in, and were prepared for that division. Saying a winner of one division would not have placed in the top 50 of another is, quite frankly, insulting. How they WOULD have done in another division makes no difference, how they DID in their chosen division does. The 3 gun world does not revolve around TS. There are many 3 gun competitors that do not like the TS division and do not compete in it. There is only one reason to call the smaller divisions unpopular, and that is because of the sucky prize tables.

Separate prize tables by participation percentages are NOT EVER even in distribution, nor are they ever fair. They are AWAYS bias toward TS division simply because it is the largest. And continuing to separate the tables and screw the smaller divisions will only continue to make these divisions smaller and smaller, maybe to the point of extinction. There are lots of us who say the prize table does not matter, “I just want to shoot.” BS! We have tried to run world class matches with no prize table, and they were poorly attended, purely because there was no prize table. The reason the TS guys feel the one table system is not fair is because they are used to having the best booty because the tables are loaded with booty by number of participants, not by merit! AND they also don't realize that many things are taken from the overall "pile of stuff" to put on the other tables.

I regularly hear so-called “seasoned” 3gunners tell newbie’s that they should “just” shoot TS because it’s “easier”. Compared to what? I will agree that some of the time, a newbie may have equipment similar to TS requirements, but what if they have an AR10 or an M14 and love it? What if they want to use a pump shotgun and a single stack 45? They usually get told by the “seasoned” 3gunner that they can use those in TS, but they won’t be competitive, instead of encouraging them to borrow their dad’s M1A and shoot HM. And the next thing they usually tell the newbie is “the prize table for TS is better anyway”, conditioning the newbie to thinking that 3gun is nothing but TS. And an Open pistol shooter showing interest in 3 gun is usually told to start over and buy all new stuff. This “de-evolution” of 3gun to a single division is disturbing, and not at all supportive of the sport or our sponsors. There were many reasons Open division and the Heavy divisions came into being, and many of our sponsors have branched out into supporting these different divisions with new parts and equipment. If we want to support our sponsors and the sport, we should all compete in more than one division and buy more stuff for them. To me, a 3 gunner that wins at more than ONE division is a true champion! Shooting the "harder" divisions is fun!

Someday I hope a major 3 gun match will have an equal number of competitors in each division…

jj

Edited September 13, 2014 by RiggerJJ

[DocMedic]

Someday I hope a major 3 gun match will have an equal number of competitors in each division…

jj

Only way for that to happen is to limit how many people can shoot in that one division. AND THAT WILL GO OVER WELL!

Edited September 16, 2014 by DocMedic

[EaZeNuTZ33]

Someday I hope a major 3 gun match will have an equal number of competitors in each division…

jj

Only way for that to happen is to limit how many people can shoot in that one division. AND THAT WILL GO OVER WELL!

Ya....not gonna go over well.

Only other way to make something like that happen would be to standardize prizes evenly among divisions to where the 1st, 2nd, 3rd,...place shooters in each division receive the same prize and the high overall shooter gets an additional prize. Several people would break out that gun they haven't shot in awhile for a shot at 3rd or 4th in HI compared to taking 35th in TacOps like usual.

Other problem that arises..... .30 cal rifle pills/powder and .45 pistol pills are noticeably more expensive than .224 rifle pills and 9mm pistol pills. If shooting factory ammo, the problem gets even worse!

I don't personally care for a prize table where I walk based upon the percentage of the top person in my division, although I used to think it was a great idea. The best example I can give would be that 30 people are in TacIrons, 150 people are in TacOps......James Casanova loses his shotgun at a dump barrel and DQ's. If he hadn't of DQ'd, I would have finished 75-80% of his time and I probably would have finished the same 75-80% of let's say Chris Anderson in TacOps.....BUT since James DQ'd, I'm now 96-99% of Brian Vaught's score and I walk the prize table ahead of 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th place in TacOps and walk away with a $2500 rifle compared to the $700 pistol I would have taken in my division.....that is probably comparable to the $600-900 prize taken around 15th-20th in TacOps. Knowing how this could work, I may break out my .308 and push to win Heavy Optics to try to get a top prize in an underserved division that is too expensive for some other shooters to even attempt. If I do that, I may shoot against 5 other people and walk away with the same prize Chris and James would.....yet, I'm not that caliber of shooter yet. I get the perspective you are coming from and understand the "why".....but after being in this for a couple years, I hate one thing more than anything...getting something I didn't earn, whether that's good or bad. I hate random draw prize tables for the same reason.

[Benelli Chick]

Someday I hope a major 3 gun match will have an equal number of competitors in each division…

jj

Only way for that to happen is to limit how many people can shoot in that one division. AND THAT WILL GO OVER WELL!

Ya....not gonna go over well.

Only other way to make something like that happen would be to standardize prizes evenly among divisions to where the 1st, 2nd, 3rd,...place shooters in each division receive the same prize and the high overall shooter gets an additional prize. Several people would break out that gun they haven't shot in awhile for a shot at 3rd or 4th in HI compared to taking 35th in TacOps like usual.

Other problem that arises..... .30 cal rifle pills/powder and .45 pistol pills are noticeably more expensive than .224 rifle pills and 9mm pistol pills. If shooting factory ammo, the problem gets even worse!

I don't personally care for a prize table where I walk based upon the percentage of the top person in my division, although I used to think it was a great idea. The best example I can give would be that 30 people are in TacIrons, 150 people are in TacOps......James Casanova loses his shotgun at a dump barrel and DQ's. If he hadn't of DQ'd, I would have finished 75-80% of his time and I probably would have finished the same 75-80% of let's say Chris Anderson in TacOps.....BUT since James DQ'd, I'm now 96-99% of Brian Vaught's score and I walk the prize table ahead of 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th place in TacOps and walk away with a $2500 rifle compared to the $700 pistol I would have taken in my division.....that is probably comparable to the $600-900 prize taken around 15th-20th in TacOps. Knowing how this could work, I may break out my .308 and push to win Heavy Optics to try to get a top prize in an underserved division that is too expensive for some other shooters to even attempt. If I do that, I may shoot against 5 other people and walk away with the same prize Chris and James would.....yet, I'm not that caliber of shooter yet. I get the perspective you are coming from and understand the "why".....but after being in this for a couple years, I hate one thing more than anything...getting something I didn't earn, whether that's good or bad. I hate random draw prize tables for the same reason.

So, if Daniel gets DQ'd, the second place guy doesn't deserve to win???

With you're understanding of how you THINK you would perform in another division, why even show up? Just send in the percentage you think you will shoot and they'll send you the prize you figure you deserve...(That is tongue in cheek!) You are comparing apples to oranges. Most matches have stage winners in each division, so that makes match points not comparable. Without running your times, in the other division, you can't really know how you would've performed in a different division. If you win a stage in the other division, when you change divisions, it changes everyone's scores in a points per stage system.

There is really no comparison between divisions. Yes, DH can be a problem when he's on his game. I have seen him not win a match without having a big mess-up. He's not perfect! I have also seen him run away with a match that is his kind of match. That's why we have some extra prizes set aside for any run away division winners.

But, by your analysis, coming in 2nd is more valuable than finishing with a higher percent. What if second place is 70%???

Also, Making individual prize tables fair and equitable is VERY difficult. DO you divide by number of guns?? Let's say 20 equal (and that doesn't really happen) rifles total. 150 Tac-Scope, 50 Open, 30 Iron, 25 He-Man Scope, 10 He-Man Iron. That would be one for every 13 shooters. Zero for He-Man Iron, 2 for He-Man Scope, 2 for Iron, 3 or 4 for Open, 12 or 13 for Tac-Scope. Okay...kind of Okay! Maybe put a big scope on He-Man Iron...but then, divide the tables by total table...say $100,000 - that's $375 per person. That's $3750 for He-Man Iron...so with a $1500 scope on the table, that's only $2250 for the other 9 shooters...$250 if all equal. For Open, that's $18750 - let's say only 3 rifles, for an average of $2000 for $6000 off the top...that's $356 for the other 47 shooters if all equal.

Tac-Scope - $56,250 - 12 rifles for Tac-Scope average $2000 = $24000 so $32,250 left for 138 people $233 if all the rest equal...

Hmmmm!!! Doesn't seem that balanced to me, and having everything divided equally is close to impossible anyway...Just sayin'

AND on separate tables, the second place prize is often (on the less populous ones) a HUGE step down. So let's just say, Mike Voigt and Jerry Miculek are shooting within a percent of each other. I've seen it!! One's in the lead, then the other. Last stage, one squeaks ahead by 2/10 percent..I think it was less than 2 points...the winner gets a $2500 rifle, second place on this table gets a $700 pistol...I've seen it, but hey, it's gun! They were both AMAZING!! They shot awesome! They shot ALMOST EQUAL, and their prizes are 28% apart! Is that fair??? I say...NOT!

Again, it's so much like public education, which I ran away from. The second highest test score should be put on a curve and made to be an "A" as well. If the whole class bombs a test except one student, it's the teacher's fault (or the winners fault) for messing up the curve, and all the other grades should be moved up to make the kids feel better about themselves!

To quote one of the top 5 Limited Scope Shooters at RM3G this year on not going to the prize table earlier (and he did get about $2000 worth of prizes), when we were chatting about the one prize table and the big jump this year in Limited Scope, he said "We should just shoot better!"

Now, that's a great competitor with a great attitude! He seemed okay with his prizes...

I'm sorry, I just can't understand assuming that any second place finish is better than an amazingly close 3rd place or 5th place or whatever!!!

But, I am known to be a bit crazy!

Denise

[MarkCO]

While I understand the point you and JJ are trying to make Denise, it just does not hold water, even in a downpour. In 2013 and 2012, I took my scores and recalculated them IN Open, and I was shooting Tac-Optics gear so I did not have some of the equipment advantages of the division. If I had just used a coupled mag on the ground and got bumped to open, the value of the prize would have gone up significantly and in one of those years, the number of people between me and first would have been cut almost in half. I was closer to 1st in Open, again, using Tac-Scope gear, than I was to 1st in Tac-Scope. So those dozen or so open shooters I would have beat had I been in Open (with my Tac scope gear) who walked the table before i did, you think they are better shooters? It does not make sense that shooters, with Open gear have worse raw scores than shooters in other divisions but are given prize table walks ahead of better shooters. I understand prize tables are hard, but there are better ways of doing one table.

I shoot RM3G because I love the match, the Whittington Center, the natural terrain and the people. You can run the prize table how you want to, but the fact is that the math does not bear out the assertions.

[Benelli Chick]

While I understand the point you and JJ are trying to make Denise, it just does not hold water, even in a downpour. In 2013 and 2012, I took my scores and recalculated them IN Open, and I was shooting Tac-Optics gear so I did not have some of the equipment advantages of the division. If I had just used a coupled mag on the ground and got bumped to open, the value of the prize would have gone up significantly and in one of those years, the number of people between me and first would have been cut almost in half. I was closer to 1st in Open, again, using Tac-Scope gear, than I was to 1st in Tac-Scope. So those dozen or so open shooters I would have beat had I been in Open (with my Tac scope gear) who walked the table before i did, you think they are better shooters? It does not make sense that shooters, with Open gear have worse raw scores than shooters in other divisions but are given prize table walks ahead of better shooters. I understand prize tables are hard, but there are better ways of doing one table.

I shoot RM3G because I love the match, the Whittington Center, the natural terrain and the people. You can run the prize table how you want to, but the fact is that the math does not bear out the assertions.

I know what you are saying, and this year, Open worked the same way, but you forget, that over one-third of the prizes would NOT have been on your table had we done separate ones. So, the value of your prize would not have been the higher one on the ONE table, it would have been one higher on a SMALLER table. While I tried to make the middle prizes on the separate tables similar in value when I was setting up separate tables, it never turned out that way. I don't know whether they are better than you, but I do know that in the division they shot in, they came out better. I understand the theory about getting bumped to Open...In 2013, there was no Daniel Horner, so what happened that year???? In 2012, 2nd place in Limited Scope was in 93%, closer than 2 of the other divisions, and Daniel was there. Each match is different.

No, our system is not perfect, but separate tables almost always gets worse prizes for the smaller divisions. 2nd Limited Scope got a JP this year, which was equal to 1st in the other divisions, because HS, HI, LI and Open 1st place all picked up the JP for their division. Our prize table was pretty deep, with trays worth over $800 way below the middle. In fact, one of the last prizes taken (because it was so bulky) was a $1200 safe. I don't feel like anyone really got ripped off!

Yes, sometimes it feels bad when you see someone you think you're better than go before you. But, if you can pick up something you want worth about the same - then...it's appearances I guess. Top quarter of each division gets the JP pin. Not by percent, by finish. Does it hurt when you are the first one not to get a pin?? Heck yes! Does it hurt less because we did it by order of finish instead of percent? I don't think so. But, again, it's by division. There is no real way to compare performance between different divisions. Sometimes, it seems really clear when James wins the whole match if everyone is in the same division and he has Iron sights, seems like he beat everyone else fairly. If an Open shooter does that, not a fair comparison.

It's just apples and oranges! I just know that separate prize tables was very unfair to the smaller divisions with very talented, excellent shooters who turned in performances that were outrageously amazing, and then they win a $700 rifle, and the Tac-Scope guy wins a $3000 rifle...and I'm not talking about Daniel. That doesn't seem right to us!

Don't know how to make it more fair (KM's recalculate by 2nd place) might work better...but, there will be a match, where that seems unfair to someone as well because of who shows up, and who gets DQ'd or gets sick or whatever. We have divisions to let people compete with different gears and be competitive. The only fair way would be to only have one division with all people shooting the same kind of guns, and one prize table, but what would be the fun it that? But, it would be fair!

I know, I know!! I talk/type too much!

Denise

Oh yeah - we do separate tables for He-Men and wee-men at He-Man Nationals, but that's because the match is geared to He-Men and the wee-men know coming in that they will be treated as second class citizens. So the two prize tables is a way to differentiate when we feel that the one division is more important and valued! (He-Man Nationals is SOOOOO politically incorrect! I mean it's HE-MAN after all!)

Edited September 17, 2014 by Benelli Chick

[EaZeNuTZ33]

I never said that someone coming in first due to DH or JC being DQ'd, doesn't deserve to win their division......I said it skews the results for the price table greatly. If James DQ's, everyone in Limited just got a 15-20% bump and their prize value increases dramatically. If DH DQ's, there is a chance that everyone in TO bumps up a good amount, but because so many good shooters shoot TO, someone like Jordan, Laker, Garcia,....is right there around 90-98% of Horner, so it's less likely everyone gets bumped up.

IMO....if you are shooting limited, you CAN compare to TacOps and Open. If you are shooting TacOps, you CAN coare to Open. You can always compare UP to a less restrictive division using the same calibers and equipment. We have all seen Horner win Open running his TacOps gear at a major match.....they didn't tell him no because he didn't have a red dot on his pistol and XRail on his shotgun!

For Instance:

I shot Limited at Generation III Gun and came in 3rd behind James at 77.16%.

I did the math on this earlier today and I believe my scores in limited, when moved to TacOps would have taken 16-17th and put me around 78.79%. Assuming I would have had magnification on the 350yd targets, I assume I would have finished higher, but for now....lets leave it where it is. I would have potentially bumped up 1-5 spots at the prize table with more than 1.5% higher finish.

If I watched scores closely and bumped myself to open on accident (purpose) by starting with 10-11 rounds in my shotgun on one stage....I finish at 97.34% of the Open winner with my Limited gear....essentially bumping myself up the prize table substantially. Based on walking the prize table based on percentage, getting bumped to Open, I would have walked the prize table after 3rd place in TacOps and taken a real nice Black Rain Ordinance rifle home instead of a certificate for an FNH pistol.

I will not compare my scores to heavy optics because I cannot say that my limited rifle is an advantage or disadvantage to my heavy ops rifle comparing capacity, recoil, addition of magnification.

I understand the thought process, like I said before, but when reality is introduced it can't hold water as Mark put it.

As for distribution....YES, take into account the total value of prizes for the match and compare it to the number of shooter per division. You may NOT have a gun on every table, or you may only have one lower value gun on the table. Drop the value of prizes incrementally based upon the number of shooters. If there are 5 shooters in one division and 50 in another, the 5th and 50th should have the same value ......math for 5th of 5 at 20% value is easy math, as is 50th of 50th at 20%......4th and 40th would be 40%......3rd and 30th would be 60%.....2nd and 20th would be 80%.

Now, here's the problem with doing prizes this way. If you shoot all divisions equally well, you will tend to lean towards TacOps where more "cannon fodder" resides and allows you to be in the top 10% of shooters while coming into a lower finish position.

If I was only concerned about prizes and I were visiting your match Denise and JJ, I would be more likely to shoot a division OTHER than TacOps, and would move out of Limited if I found out James was shooting your match. My chances of winning a division or placing with a higher percentage of the division winner, in let's say Heavy Optics, would be better IMO.....because 3rd- 5th place at 80-85% in HTO will have me walking the prize table better than 70-75% at 20th in TacOps, or 70-80% in limited at 3rd-10th. Now I am gaming what division to shoot based on the prize table, just like I would by shooting TacOps at a match with separate prize tables.

[Stlhead]

Prize tables are the devil.

[EaZeNuTZ33]

Prize tables are what draw a lot of USPSA shooters over to the dark side....even when they hate scatter guns.

[Benelli Chick]

I do see and hear all your points, but for the 12 years I've been shooting 3-Gun, I don't think the separate tables are fair. They appear to me to treat anything but Tac-Scope as second class citizens.

I also think one prize table is better for sponsors because ALL the shooters need to look at the same table where ALL the sponsors have their prizes. Also, since you don't know percents in other divisions, serious shoppers have to look at a much bigger section because they don't know where they will finish in the big scheme of things! All good for our sponsors. Their generosity is seen by everyone instead of just part.

You said you thought that if you came to our match, you would shoot something OTHER that Tac-Scope. You thought that was gaming the prize table...maybe we're gaming you! In 2007, 2/3's of the shooters at RM3G were Tac-Scope. This year, just half!

We do like to see other divisions represented and shot. Again, helps our sponsors. More people shooting different equipment, more sales!!

I really just like to see people come out and shoot the equipment they like the best, and perform to the best of their abilities on that day! i want them to have fun, talk to friends, meet new people, exercise their second amendment rights...you know, have a good, safe time. IF to do that, you feel you need to shoot a different division so you think you will get a better prize, I think you should!

A couple people have alluded to getting bumped to Open at the last minute to go to the table sooner. I've seen that happen before, too. Yeah, that sounds like gaming to me, and what if a certain someone gets bumped to Open as well. I've seen that happen before, too! No, seriously!

I hope people just come and shoot safe and have fun. The prize table is a bonus that is, quite honestly, the bane of my existence. I would love to have no prize table at all, but JJ and I have seen how well that works. We really do feel this is the most fair this way. It is not perfect, but separate tables seem very unfair to me at almost every match I've been to, and I shoot Tac-Scope.

If you want to come shoot in another division in order to try to place better, we would LOVE you to do that! We relish the differences between the divisions, and have enjoyed seeing growth in the He-Man divisions and in Iron. Open - which used to be almost as popular as Tac-Scope - has become less so lately...maybe pricey guns, extra equipment, I'm not sure. So, some more Open shooters would be good as well!!

I know we won't ever agree. But you can run the numbers different ways and end up with different kinds of people changing placement completely. Total time top people finish in different order than stage points. In USPSA pistol, if you use overall, different order of finish in some divisions that in separate divisions. AND OVERALL WINNER????? That's comparing apples and oranges. Once upon a time, overall winner was always Open...times they are a changing! But, don't get me started!

We do the best we can. We've put a lot of thought and care into it, to make things as fair as possible!

Back to the original topic that started this whole thread...just a bit too complicated for me. If I miscount or mismeasure, I will have to change points for a stage, which could possibly (if done in the middle of a match when a miscalculation is brought to my attention) change order of finish for some people and then the arguments on whether it's a 10 point pistol target or a 5 point one begins. I like the flexibility to have option targets sometimes. And again, I see the challenge as the stage/scenario (though we don't scenario as much as we used to). I don't think of each separate target as the challenge.

3-Gun is so dynamic! I see the long range rifle stage with running and then shooting long range shots...controlling your breathing...deciding when to go prone (considering the fact you're an old woman and can't get up...or the fact that you're a young whippersnapper and can throw yourself on the ground without a care about breaking a hip ) ---putting together an entire good stage, as the challenge. So many moving parts. So many things to think about! THAT'S the challenge to me. Transitions is part of the challenge of a 3-Gun stage. But I don't like to say which challenges are harder or more valuable. It's different for every person. THAT's the excitement! That's the joy of 3-Gun!

I've told many a new shooter...one of the things I like about 3-Gun, is that on almost every stage, there is something I did good for me...and there's also something that I messed up, need to improve, learn from etc.

So, in my mind, the challenge is the stage. So while all stages are not equal...or the same...(and we shouldn't judge them! )

each stage is the challenge and they should be scored accordingly. I like equal point stages. But, score them like you like! 3-Gun is dynamic and different and fun!!!

Denise

[AFH]

So many good quotes on page 9!!

Different divisions. Comparing how one shooter WOULD have done in a division other than the one they competed in is comparing apples and oranges. Each competitor chooses the division they signed up for a reason. They practiced, competed in, and were prepared for that division. Saying a winner of one division would not have placed in the top 50 of another is, quite frankly, insulting.

Exactly why ranking by percent of finish across different divisions is “quite frankly, insulting.”

Also, Making individual prize tables fair and equitable is VERY difficult. DO you divide by number of guns?? Let's say 20 equal (and that doesn't really happen) rifles total. 150 Tac-Scope, 50 Open, 30 Iron, 25 He-Man Scope, 10 He-Man Iron. That would be one for every 13 shooters. Zero for He-Man Iron, 2 for He-Man Scope, 2 for Iron, 3 or 4 for Open, 12 or 13 for Tac-Scope. Okay...kind of Okay! Maybe put a big scope on He-Man Iron...but then, divide the tables by total table...say $100,000 - that's $375 per person. That's $3750 for He-Man Iron...so with a $1500 scope on the table, that's only $2250 for the other 9 shooters...$250 if all equal. For Open, that's $18750 - let's say only 3 rifles, for an average of $2000 for $6000 off the top...that's $356 for the other 47 shooters if all equal.

Tac-Scope - $56,250 - 12 rifles for Tac-Scope average $2000 = $24000 so $32,250 left for 138 people $233 if all the rest equal...

Hmmmm!!! Doesn't seem that balanced to me, and having everything divided equally is close to impossible anyway...Just sayin'

Great set of calculations!! $/Shooter value of prize table based on above: HeMan Iron -$250, Open - $356, TacScope – $233. This shows that TacScope is actually receiving LESS/shooter than the “second class shooters” that are the basis of the complaints against separate prize tables. So instead of TacScope being overly “greedy,” prize table value is taken from it to inflate the value of the prize table for other divisions. I’ve set up prize tables a few times, and in my opinion, value is always taken from the TacScope table to inflate the value of other tables. For example, most matches would take one of the TacScope guns and put it on the HeMan Iron table

It's just apples and oranges! I just know that separate prize tables was very unfair to the smaller divisions with very talented, excellent shooters who turned in performances that were outrageously amazing, and then they win a $700 rifle

How does one “just know?” Go back to “Each competitor chooses the division they signed up for a reason. They practiced, competed in, and were prepared for that division. Saying a winner of one division would not have placed in the top 50 of another is, quite frankly, insulting.” While those who win each division should receive somewhat comparable prizes, from that point on down the list, the prizes should be somewhat equivalent based on the percent of finish. See below:

As for distribution....YES, take into account the total value of prizes for the match and compare it to the number of shooter per division. You may NOT have a gun on every table, or you may only have one lower value gun on the table. Drop the value of prizes incrementally based upon the number of shooters. If there are 5 shooters in one division and 50 in another, the 5th and 50th should have the same value ......math for 5th of 5 at 20% value is easy math, as is 50th of 50th at 20%......4th and 40th would be 40%......3rd and 30th would be 60%.....2nd and 20th would be 80%.

Next:

I really just like to see people come out and shoot the equipment they like the best, and perform to the best of their abilities on that day! i want them to have fun, talk to friends, meet new people, exercise their second amendment rights...you know, have a good, safe time. IF to do that, you feel you need to shoot a different division so you think you will get a better prize, I think you should!

I agree. So why create a system of awards that, for people who are concerned about the prize table order, makes it advantageous to shoot in a division other than that which they usually shoot?

I just realized that the concern of the single prize table is not the average shooter. The concern is the 2^nd to 4^th place finishers in the small divisions. The arguments always seem to go back to these positions. The guy who finishes 25% to 75% in the larger divisions (usually TacScope and Open), the middle of the pack shooter, is the one who is pushed further down by this system of making apples and oranges equal. Division to division comparisons are not legitimate, as everyone seems to agree. So WHY make that the basis for prize table distribution? This single prize table system rewards close finishes at the top, not excellence.

While I understand the point you and JJ are trying to make Denise, it just does not hold water, even in a downpour. In 2013 and 2012, I took my scores and recalculated them IN Open, and I was shooting Tac-Optics gear so I did not have some of the equipment advantages of the division. If I had just used a coupled mag on the ground and got bumped to open, the value of the prize would have gone up significantly and in one of those years, the number of people between me and first would have been cut almost in half. I was closer to 1st in Open, again, using Tac-Scope gear, than I was to 1st in Tac-Scope. So those dozen or so open shooters I would have beat had I been in Open (with my Tac scope gear) who walked the table before i did, you think they are better shooters? It does not make sense that shooters, with Open gear have worse raw scores than shooters in other divisions but are given prize table walks ahead of better shooters. I understand prize tables are hard, but there are better ways of doing one table.

I shoot RM3G because I love the match, the Whittington Center, the natural terrain and the people. You can run the prize table how you want to, but the fact is that the math does not bear out the assertions.

100% agree with all assertions!

Best quote:

Prize tables are the devil.

RM3G is a great match! Stages are great, terrain is great (I'm jealous actually), and the folks are great. Although, I don't agree with the prize system, I've hated missing the match due to work the last few years. Take care,

Andy

[kurtm]

Well, it used to be fairly easy to do prize tables. There was iron sight and scope. All the rest of the gear was the same....pistol and shotgun. Any stage that had rifle in it would have a scope winner and iron sight winner. Each would receive 100 points for the win and every other shooter got a percentage of the winner for scope or iron. Any tie in over all score was broken by a designated NON rifle stage. At the end you combined the two divisions, added up points and had one big table in decending order of points. SIMPLE!!

Edited September 17, 2014 by kurtm

[Benelli Chick]

Andy,

Thanks for the kind words!

I just gotta say I'm not comparing apples to oranges. I'm comparing apples to the best apple and oranges to the best orange...you pick the fruits for the other divisions!

I never say whether apples or oranges are better. The 1st place people go to the table at the same time. Best fruits first. Then I send the next best fruit...the apple that is 99% of the best apple goes before the orange that is only 98% of the best orange. But, if I have a 99.5% orange, then he's next.

I put my best fruits forward never choosing whether I like apples or oranges or cantaloupe better!

Now - what if my best fruit is all rotten??? Well, there's the rub! But, if you finish JP RM3G, I figure you're a good fruit!

[Stlhead]

Prize tables are what draw a lot of USPSA shooters over to the dark side....even when they hate scatter guns.

If people hate shotguns they why would they want to participate in a game that is 1/3 shotgun? I enjoy all my guns equally, and would find 2 guns far less appealing than 3. There are palaces for those that don't like shotgun. USPSA or IDPA.

I just hope that I can be forgiven for missing JJ and Denise's party this year and hope they will let me come back next year so I can be pelted with rotten fruit while shooting the epic all shotgun stage! I don't care how they do the prize table or even if they do it, I would go just to shoot the stages with my buddies and enjoy the Whitington center. If fact I would like to donate my trip to the table (how ever far down the list it is) to my favorite RO of the match (yet to be determined) to show who deserves sponsor swag.

[RiggerJJ]

yes, prize tables ARE the devil!

what's insulting is;

assuming all the prizes belong on the TO table, from which the smaller tables are populated.

promoting TO as the only division worthy of participating in.

people telling newbys to just shoot TO cause its easier and the prizes are better.

separating prizes by participation instead of by merit.

seeing the TO 1st-3rd prizes as 3 $3k popular brand rifles and the next larger division getting a single $900 no-name rifle.

Even USPSA uses a merit based system instead of standards based in their classification system. They do not award GM cards based on a shooter being IN the top 5% of all the shooters in that division, they actually use SCORES to classify; turning in scores at 95% or better yields a GM card. I assume that 3GN does the same thing in their classification system.

until we quit screwing the shooters of the smaller divisions, those divisions will continue to have less and less participation, to the point of extinction. Maybe that's what the actual goal is...

jmho...

jj

[EaZeNuTZ33]

yes, prize tables ARE the devil!

what's insulting is;

assuming all the prizes belong on the TO table, from which the smaller tables are populated.

Not assuming TO should have everything...I personally love shooting TI and know that I often shoot it at the cost of my prize table pull. The assumption is that you assign the percentage of value based upon the percentage of division participation. If everyone leaves TO for TI......TI becomes the new TO in participation.

promoting TO as the only division worthy of participating in.

I recommend new shooters to start out in TI....you get the basics better on rifle steel before leaning on magnification and closer range targets are easier without fussing as much with eye relief.

people telling newbys to just shoot TO cause its easier and the prizes are better.

It is easier...magnification can be a easy crutch to use for rifle steel, you don't have to spend a fortune on specific gear for Open, or more expensive ammo/guns for Heavy. If the prize table reflects higher participation, and the percentages are still broken out like I mentioned, the person's prize table experience should be the same at the lower 20% regardless of division.

separating prizes by participation instead of by merit.

This is purely subjective in nature.....you are associating merit with how someone compared to who won their division as a way to compare them to everyone on the prize table. If I were able to talk to every top 10% shooter in the country and secretly tell every one of them to stay out of Heavy Optics at your match, the people who typically fall WAYYYY down the list now walk the prize table right behind the TacOps winner. When I look at scores, I typically see clusters of shooters together. The first cluster includes the people that we always know have a chance to win the match/division due to being naturally talented and committed enough to win, the next cluster is usually around 70-80% of whoever the division winner is and is there because they have the talent but not the money / have the money to practice but not the talent for the next step / have the money and talent and are working their way up to that top cluster, then you have the guys who come for fun and rarely break 50-60% of the division winner and may have timed out on a stage or two. If a division does not have one or more of those top cluster guys, your version of merit means that the 70-80 percenters deserve to walk the prize table before 2nd place in Tacops because DH crushed it.

seeing the TO 1st-3rd prizes as 3 $3k popular brand rifles and the next larger division getting a single $900 no-name rifle.

Winning the Heavy Irons division against 4 other people is in no way comparable to beating DH in TacOps and 200 other shooters. Now, winning TI against 35-40 other shooters AND also winning HOA over TacOps IS a major accomplishment...and personally, that's where I've begun to think a HOA prize may be a good idea. We don't compare winning local monthly matches to winning the ProAm, so why would winning an uncompetitive division compare to winning one of the 3 most competitive divisions?

Even USPSA uses a merit based system instead of standards based in their classification system. They do not award GM cards based on a shooter being IN the top 5% of all the shooters in that division, they actually use SCORES to classify; turning in scores at 95% or better yields a GM card. I assume that 3GN does the same thing in their classification system.

USPSA breaks their system up by multiple classifications under one universal system. If you are unclassified, you compare to Masters correct? In order to accomplish this, you match and all others will need to submit to ONE unifying body......and I think we've been down this road before. USPSA isn't perfect either....what if your overall division winner is UNclassified, or an A class shooter wins the division over an M or GM. They may bump the shooter in the future, but how do you handle the prizes? Top GM gets top prize when he came in 2nd? Recent area USPSA match, I won the division in Limited as an unclassified shooter.....if there would have been anything but random draw, how would you handle me winning? I don't shoot USPSA enough to care about getting classified, and if it wasn't 30 minutes from home, I would never attend a random draw prize table event. I won a sweet winchester insulated 60oz diabetes giving soda mug from the prize table tho.....it's around here somewhere....I think.

until we quit screwing the shooters of the smaller divisions, those divisions will continue to have less and less participation, to the point of extinction. Maybe that's what the actual goal is...

Only the shooters are screwing the smaller divisions....if we want the smaller divisions to even out, grow, and get equal prize tables... we need to enter matches in those divisions more. Participation is low because less people want to shoot it for various reasons....not just prize table. Shooting a long range heavy match in TI is a LOT harder. The heavy divisions are under represented in part to ammo costs. I started reloading .308 to maybe have some fun in HTO this year and was entered in 2 matches in HTO that I have now changed to TO. The reloading cost in comparison is substantial with double the amount of powder, projectiles that cost more,..... If I were to shoot HI, I would need another shotgun, an iron sight only .308 rifle, and another match pistol. At least in HTO I can use my 9mm 2011 and M2 just like i would in TO and TI.

jmho...

jj

I don't think anyone has the perfect solution yet.......but I see major holes in how you do prize tables. Now...with that said, I haven't been to your match and understand that it's a blast and one that I need to attend at least once (along with a few other "epic" matches). Prize table would not be the deciding factor for my first match out there, but I could see it being the reason TI / HI / HTO want to come back and why some TO shooters don't.

[EaZeNuTZ33]

Prize tables are what draw a lot of USPSA shooters over to the dark side....even when they hate scatter guns.

If people hate shotguns they why would they want to participate in a game that is 1/3 shotgun? I enjoy all my guns equally, and would find 2 guns far less appealing than 3. There are palaces for those that don't like shotgun. USPSA or IDPA.

I just hope that I can be forgiven for missing JJ and Denise's party this year and hope they will let me come back next year so I can be pelted with rotten fruit while shooting the epic all shotgun stage! I don't care how they do the prize table or even if they do it, I would go just to shoot the stages with my buddies and enjoy the Whitington center. If fact I would like to donate my trip to the table (how ever far down the list it is) to my favorite RO of the match (yet to be determined) to show who deserves sponsor swag.

because prize tables are almost infinitely better.....they enjoy shooting their rifle....and many stages only require them to shoot 0-9 shotgun shells