USPSA SCORING

[Onepocket]

Jay thanks for the history! I have older friends that were in the sport back then and they say it was more a representation of your shooting. Box to box. 50 yard standards. Do you think the stages have changed a lot?

Edited August 13, 2015 by Onepocket

[Nik Habicht]

Back to the scoring: I agree with Strick but I don't think there is a better way. Never was that good at math. Maybe match HF would be a better representation of the best shooter????

In match hit factor scoring -- looking only at Stoeger and Vogel, Vogel wins. In IDPA scoring, assuming I remember the numbers correctly Ben beats Bob by ~ 2 seconds. I calculated by taking their raw time, adding a 1/2 second for every Bravo or Charlie, 1.5 seconds for a Delta, and 2.5 for a Mike -- I think that's how it used to go. (I know -- no B hits in IDPA, but we're shooting USPSA, and I'm not about to redraw the targets....)

The problem with that is, had Ben known they were using idpa scoring, his plan would have been adjusted. Look at the area 3 results. About the cleanest match result I've ever seen for point percentages

Yep -- just like I assume competitors would adjust their planning if match HHF scoring became the scoring norm.....

[Bunchies95]

Your HF determines your place and therefore stage points on that stage. But yes, its based on how your HF compares to others. I don't know how you can compete with someone else and NOT compare performances like you want though?

Your HF determines your place and therefore stage points on that stage. But yes, its based on how your HF compares to others. I don't know how you can compete with someone else and NOT compare performances like you want though?

So you agree that even though my HF determines where I rank for that stage my actual score used to determine a match winner is based on how well I did on a particular stage compared to that stage winner. So my score is not based on just my performance, it is based on others performance as well. Basing my score on someones shooting is not the same as comparing my overall match performance to other shooters.

Take Prod nationals, as close as it was the result could have easily changed based on how well a shooter outside the top 10 shot a particular stage. Would have had nothing to do with Ben's or Bob's performance.

IDPA kinda got the scoring right, atleast how I shot is my score, the only thing that can change where I finish is my own shooting.

I think there might be a flaw in your logic.....

You and I shoot an IDPA match. You shoot first on every stage in the match, and complete the entire match before I even roll in and shoot the following day. Let's say ten stages and you score ten seconds on each for a 100 seconds total time, including all points down.

I come along the next morning and shoot every stage in 9 seconds -- haven't I just pushed you down to second on every stage, and in the whole match?

In USPSA the comparison's the same, only in reverse. If my hit factor of 10 points per second beats everyone else, I get all the available stage points. If you score a hit factor of 9 points per second, you get 90% of my score -- my score didn't affect you in any different way, than it would have in IDPA. I simply shot faster and better in both examples -- not likely to happen in real life....

I think Strick is looking at this scenario:

**Assume 5, 100 point stages where everyone gets all points.

Shooter A shoots all stages in 10 seconds for a total time of 50 seconds. Shooter B shoots Stages 1-3 in 10 seconds, but shots Stage 4 in 11 seconds and 5 in 9.1 seconds for a total time of 50.1 seconds.

In time plus scoring and USPSA scoring, Shooter A always wins. (50 sec vs. 50.1 sec, 491 pts vs. 490.9 pts)

Now let's throw a pesky B class shooter (Shooter C) into the mix. He has no chance to win the match, but can influence the results using USPSA scoring. He normally would shoot all the stages in 15 seconds, but manages to connect on stage 4 and shoots it clean in 9.7 seconds. He has now made whatever went wrong for Shooter B less of an issue as shooter A&B's relative percentage to the HHF is closer than before.

Shooter B ends up winning the match due to the performance of Shooter C on one particular stage. (488 pts vs. 488.2 pts vs. 360.7 pts)

[Onepocket]

That's what I was talking about. The guy that try's to crush every stage comes in first on a couple and 25th on the rest, can really change the math. What if three or four shooters are doing this. Not that they would but could a group of guys get together and help some one to the top?

[Corey]

I think every match has 100s of shooters doing this...I'm trying to win every stage I shoot at every match I shoot. I know I can't win them all but if I'm lucky enough to steal a few points here and there, good for me

[Strick]

Your HF determines your place and therefore stage points on that stage. But yes, its based on how your HF compares to others. I don't know how you can compete with someone else and NOT compare performances like you want though?

Your HF determines your place and therefore stage points on that stage. But yes, its based on how your HF compares to others. I don't know how you can compete with someone else and NOT compare performances like you want though?

So you agree that even though my HF determines where I rank for that stage my actual score used to determine a match winner is based on how well I did on a particular stage compared to that stage winner. So my score is not based on just my performance, it is based on others performance as well. Basing my score on someones shooting is not the same as comparing my overall match performance to other shooters.

Take Prod nationals, as close as it was the result could have easily changed based on how well a shooter outside the top 10 shot a particular stage. Would have had nothing to do with Ben's or Bob's performance.

IDPA kinda got the scoring right, atleast how I shot is my score, the only thing that can change where I finish is my own shooting.

I think there might be a flaw in your logic.....

You and I shoot an IDPA match. You shoot first on every stage in the match, and complete the entire match before I even roll in and shoot the following day. Let's say ten stages and you score ten seconds on each for a 100 seconds total time, including all points down.

I come along the next morning and shoot every stage in 9 seconds -- haven't I just pushed you down to second on every stage, and in the whole match?

In USPSA the comparison's the same, only in reverse. If my hit factor of 10 points per second beats everyone else, I get all the available stage points. If you score a hit factor of 9 points per second, you get 90% of my score -- my score didn't affect you in any different way, than it would have in IDPA. I simply shot faster and better in both examples -- not likely to happen in real life....

I think Strick is looking at this scenario:

**Assume 5, 100 point stages where everyone gets all points.

Shooter A shoots all stages in 10 seconds for a total time of 50 seconds. Shooter B shoots Stages 1-3 in 10 seconds, but shots Stage 4 in 11 seconds and 5 in 9.1 seconds for a total time of 50.1 seconds.

In time plus scoring and USPSA scoring, Shooter A always wins. (50 sec vs. 50.1 sec, 491 pts vs. 490.9 pts)

Now let's throw a pesky B class shooter (Shooter C) into the mix. He has no chance to win the match, but can influence the results using USPSA scoring. He normally would shoot all the stages in 15 seconds, but manages to connect on stage 4 and shoots it clean in 9.7 seconds. He has now made whatever went wrong for Shooter B less of an issue as shooter A&B's relative percentage to the HHF is closer than before.

Shooter B ends up winning the match due to the performance of Shooter C on one particular stage. (488 pts vs. 488.2 pts vs. 360.7 pts)

Basically...yes

Or worse, a C shooter crushes a stage by 5% due to the timer not picking up the shots from his last position. That really messes with the match results.