Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

-1 Points down = 1 second?


Peplow530

Recommended Posts

Apparently at the IDPA Nationals awards this week Joyce Wilson gave a speech on the progression of the sport. One huge thing she mentioned was in the near future they are planning on changing scoring a target -1 = 0.5 sec, to each -1 = 1.0 seconds to overall time.

What are all of you opinions on this scoring change, good or bad for the sport? Will you continue to shoot a stage the same way you always have in the past or approach one a little more cautiously?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 483
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I have shot in non-idpa matches where the outlaw rules basically doubled all penalties, like you have mentioned.

It completely changes the way you shoot. You CANNOT afford to hit anything but -0. Heck 2 shots in a -1 will kill your stage.

Edited: for me it ends up being quite boring because you cannot afford to shoot fast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting thought. It would place the focus on accuracy, and less focus on speed. Perhaps it would serve to differentiate the sport from USPSA a bit more. That said, since the scoring change would be the same for all shooters, would it really make that much difference? It would serve to simplify scoring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting thought. It would place the focus on accuracy, and less focus on speed. Perhaps it would serve to differentiate the sport from USPSA a bit more. That said, since the scoring change would be the same for all shooters, would it really make that much difference? It would serve to simplify scoring.

You make excellent points.

The scoring change is the same for all shooters... But it seems to seperate the division's even more... The really good shooters are already very fast and generally very accurate. At least that is what I have seen in the matches I have shot like this. The only exception I have seen is a particular shooter friend (also a BENOS member, and will probably chime in) who has lost some speed through the years, but is EXTREMELY accurate, can now place higher than he would normally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, in the way way back of the beginning of IDPA it was -.3 seconds to 1 point down, and they thought it was too fast, so slow it down some to .5 seconds, and so now they are moving to just time plus scoring, seems simple enough. Whats next? 2 hits anywhere, or 1 in the A zone, just like 3 gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it will matter much. Those who win will still win because they are better shooters. I have shot some stages that were more like USPSA, and some that had hardcover on everything but the head to force people to slow down. The results were the same, the normal group of top finishers were still on top. The penalty will apply to all so i see no real relevance to this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've only seen it once or twice in the 3 years I've been shooting... But I've seen a shooter be fast enough to win even though they were probably the most points down as well. Again, very rare circumstance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What problem are they trying to fix?

I was there. At the Banquet.

I had been up for a long time and it was a late night, but I remember this from her speech... "This is a sport where people carry guns for self defense. We are each ultimately responsible for where our bullets go." In my understanding this is implying that accuracy is more important than speed. Joyce also said that she has absolutely no date on when this change could occur, 6 months or 2 years.

Looking at where I placed in the overalls and then using this new scoring I would have been in the same spot. I only saw a few places where the scores would be changed. ESP SS There were some guys close in score but not close in PDs Lets take ESP SS position 15 & 16.

15) 345.43 with 50 PD's and 16) 345.52 with 102 PD's Those two people wouldn't have switched positions on the leader board. But the guys in 17 & 18 would have. again both guys shooting the match in 347 seconds but #17 had 70PD's and number 18 had #77 PD's

I dont agree with the change. But IDPA doesn't always seem to make the best decisions in my mind. To me it seems that want to make it as far from a 'Game' as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had been up for a long time and it was a late night, but I remember this from her speech... "This is a sport where people carry guns for self defense. We are each ultimately responsible for where our bullets go."

I wonder what makes her such an expert on defensive shooting........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

let's use my scores at the recent Wolds as an example. My final score was 282.56. Let's say 283 for the match. I was 88 points down, or 44 seconds in penalties. So my raw time for the match was 239. So 15% of my final score was from errors.

Using the new scoring my final score would have been 327. So now 27% of my score is from errors. That is what I think makes it a poor decision, upping the percentage of your score that comes from errors. Once someone has shot enough to figure this out they will start to weigh and balance speed and accuracy more in their mind. And this will slow a majority of people down.

Will it change overall results? Not at the top but surely in the middle. And for quite a few people a slower game is less interesting.

If you want to push accuracy turn a mike into a 5 sec penalty and leave the rest alone.

These types of things really force the issue of training, real life, defense, rule books, games and so on that haunt the identity of the membership and the organization. In my opinion only and not that of anyone I represent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IDPA still has a "failure to neutralize" penalty, right?

How about making the -3 area just a -2 area and not dividing by half?

Actually, if you are going to make whole points down into whole seconds added, then you might as well turn the minus signs on the targets into plus signs.

Math is hard...adding those 1.5's together sucks. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically, it becomes a shooting a zero down match. It would never be a "good idea" to not make up a -1 or worse

Now people will start running out of ammo cause I bet you won't be allowed to carry more ammo than you do today

What a charlie foxtrot....just when I was thinking of renewing my membership and shooting some of the nicer matches around here, I change my mind again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would this cause the classifier times to be changed? Reclassify everyone? Many, myself included would drop a class if points down were doubled.

I would not be a fan of a match where you are chasing all zeros. I would rather see things such as a miss being down 5 seconds and no shoot throughs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had been up for a long time and it was a late night, but I remember this from her speech... "This is a sport where people carry guns for self defense. We are each ultimately responsible for where our bullets go."

I wonder what makes her such an expert on defensive shooting........

It has nothing to do with a defensive shooting situation. Carry guns, full house ammo, everyday gear? Ha! G34 mod'd out to beat heck, hand loaded down to 125.2PF, photographers spring loaded mylar lined vest, or course, just like in real life.

"Ultimately responsible for where our bullets go" All that means is you have to live with the shame of missing and popping a no-shoot. But, if you fast enough, really fast, you can still win, just like in real life....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shoot the outlaw match Butterpuc mentions and do not find it boring. Certainly not when they turn out the lights. But the emphasis is definitely shifted. It is INTENTIONALLY shifted because the target audience is Law Enforcement for whom bullet accountability is emphasized. Also 10 sec HONT for the same reason.

We frequently hear that "Larry Vickers meant for it to be a second per point" but I go back far enough to remember that, as 9x45 says, the original plan by the actual BOD was .3 sec per point down; immediately increased to .5 sec/point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...