Reshooting classifiers

[sperman]

It is my understanding that since USPSA only accepts the highest score, they only charge the fee for one classifier. I have no problem with match directors charging for a reshoot, but they aren't doing it because USPSA charges extra. Match directors, please correct me if I am wrong.

if I recall they charge for them. When my numbers were off that was always the reason

My memory jives with Kevin's -- IIRC every extra classifier showed up in EZWinscore as either a reentry for the same division, or as a new entry for a different division (with only one stage being scored).

I guess I was confused. I apologize for the distraction.

[MMC]

That's a good policy. I have shot IDPA classifiers when I first started and not been allowed to reshoot when I had a equipment issue. Done with IDPA.

[9x45]

MMC, that's because IDPA is supposed to be real world, no re-shoots.

[Aircooled6racer]

Hello: The clubs here charge $3 for reshoots and shoot them as many times as you want till you get the result you want. Only time I do a reshoot is to get classified in another division and that is after I shoot my gun for the match. I guess I will have to do that for Carry Optics now. Thanks, Eric

[Southpaw]

MMC, that's because IDPA is supposed to be real world

[sundevil827]

It's kind of sad seeing how many clubs allow folks to pay over and over to re-shoot until people get a score that they "like".

[Sarge]

It's kind of sad seeing how many clubs allow folks to pay over and over to re-shoot until people get a score that they "like".

I don't think we are saying that exactly. Of the re shoots when I was MD 99% of them only reshot once. A few were probably more like bets between buddies to see who could shoot a classifier under 4 seconds or whatever. But that was only a few times like I said.

But if somebody wants to shoot it 6 times I really don't care.

[MilkMyDuds]

In my first USPSA match last weekend, I saw at least 4 malfunctions during the classifier stage, ranging from C to GM class. Not a single shooter asked for a re-shoot. I wonder maybe the reshoot policy is not well communicated down to the local club level. As a newbie, I think reshoot or no reshoot either way is perfectly fine as long as all clubs are executing the rule consistently. I can see how the pool is diluted and the times tilted if some clubs allow unlimited reshoots while others do not even know about the possibility of reshoots.

[cnote]

Why does anyone care about someone else's classification,??????

and especially if trying to grand-bag? If it's not specifically breaking a rule, than it is legal and more money is going to HQ.

It's always amusing to look at results and see a bunch of lower class shooters beating the people who reshoot classifiers until they get the desired score

I would be more inclined to blow someone crap for obvious sandbagging.

Edited November 19, 2015 by cnote

[GunBugBit]

I don't see what the rub is with people shooting as many iterations of a classifier as they want.

There are limiting factors to this, anyhow.

People are only going to shoot the classifier as well as they can shoot at their best. Those who choose to shoot it only one time also had the chance to shoot it more times, but they didn't. The match days are only so long so no one will get unlimited attempts. Something is going to run out, whether it's time, money, bullets, or the shooter's energy. If somebody passes me in class because he stayed longer and had more tries at a classifier, good for him for putting forth that effort. Maybe some match I'll return the favor and we'll smile and laugh about it.

[GrumpyOne]

I don't see what the rub is with people shooting as many iterations of a classifier as they want.

There are limiting factors to this, anyhow.

People are only going to shoot the classifier as well as they can shoot at their best. Those who choose to shoot it only one time also had the chance to shoot it more times, but they didn't. The match days are only so long so no one will get unlimited attempts. Something is going to run out, whether it's time, money, bullets, or the shooter's energy. If somebody passes me in class because he stayed longer and had more tries at a classifier, good for him for putting forth that effort. Maybe some match I'll return the favor and we'll smile and laugh about it.

Not exactly. You can shoot that classifier all out time and time again, until you get a great score, quite by accident.

[sundevil827]

It's kind of sad seeing how many clubs allow folks to pay over and over to re-shoot until people get a score that they "like".

I don't think we are saying that exactly. Of the re shoots when I was MD 99% of them only reshot once. A few were probably more like bets between buddies to see who could shoot a classifier under 4 seconds or whatever. But that was only a few times like I said.

But if somebody wants to shoot it 6 times I really don't care.

There are definitely people here who are saying they are re-shooting over and over.

Of the 99% that you are talking about when you were MD, I can see that, and I'm not a fan of the re-shoot for no reason, but it is what it is.

It's the constant, over and over re-shoot that, to me, devalue the system. If the classification system is intended to be an indicator of a competitor's skill level, then it should do just that. If it takes me 7 runs to get a hundo on El Pres, is that really my skill level, or is it luck? Or is it that if everything breaks perfectly right for me I can do it? If people are going to re-shoot until they get what they want, let's just do away with classification, and then awards are given based on performance.

[teros135]

Yeh, I did that but shot it only once. Was classified (and shooting) in the upper half of C class. Shot a classifer at the bottom of A class and guess what...

Actually, if someone wants to get a "paper GM" (or whatever) card by reshooting classifiers over and over, fine. If that makes them feel better, well okay. Now they're in the higher class, and that's who they're shooting against in matches, especially majors. If they've made themselves "overclassified" they'll never be able to shoot against the folks at their actual level.

I'm less happy with the sandbaggers who deliberately hold back at classifiers and then shoot one or two classes above at majors. That's unfair to the honest competitors. The only good thing about that is they'll probably not be able to do that for long because they'll pull themselves into the higher class.

[motosapiens]

It's the constant, over and over re-shoot that, to me, devalue the system. If the classification system is intended to be an indicator of a competitor's skill level, then it should do just that. If it takes me 7 runs to get a hundo on El Pres, is that really my skill level, or is it luck? Or is it that if everything breaks perfectly right for me I can do it? If people are going to re-shoot until they get what they want, let's just do away with classification, and then awards are given based on performance.

I pretty much agree with this, at least for myself, but I don't care that much what other people do. I think it is worthwhile to mercilessly mock people who abuse the system.

I also think they are hurting themselves in the long run, not because 'class' awards are worth stale dogpoo (they're not), but because the classification scores can provide a motivational carrot. seeing my classification scores go up because I am working on the skills needed to shoot classifiers is rewarding and makes me want to practice more. If i just reshoot over and over til i hook up and nail a few, that motivational factor will be gone, and instead I'll just get frustrated with my future scores not being up to that standard.

[GunBugBit]

I don't see what the rub is with people shooting as many iterations of a classifier as they want.

There are limiting factors to this, anyhow.

People are only going to shoot the classifier as well as they can shoot at their best. Those who choose to shoot it only one time also had the chance to shoot it more times, but they didn't. The match days are only so long so no one will get unlimited attempts. Something is going to run out, whether it's time, money, bullets, or the shooter's energy. If somebody passes me in class because he stayed longer and had more tries at a classifier, good for him for putting forth that effort. Maybe some match I'll return the favor and we'll smile and laugh about it.

Not exactly. You can shoot that classifier all out time and time again, until you get a great score, quite by accident.

OK. So?

[d_striker]

Yeh, I did that but shot it only once. Was classified (and shooting) in the upper half of C class. Shot a classifer at the bottom of A class and guess what...

Actually, if someone wants to get a "paper GM" (or whatever) card by reshooting classifiers over and over, fine. If that makes them feel better, well okay. Now they're in the higher class, and that's who they're shooting against in matches, especially majors. If they've made themselves "overclassified" they'll never be able to shoot against the folks at their actual level.

I'm less happy with the sandbaggers who deliberately hold back at classifiers and then shoot one or two classes above at majors. That's unfair to the honest competitors. The only good thing about that is they'll probably not be able to do that for long because they'll pull themselves into the higher class.

How do you know they are holding back on classifiers?

Classifiers test a small subset of practical shooting skills and it's predominantly stand and shoot.

Anyone that is a relatively fast mover and knows how to get in and out of positions will do better overall in a match than they will shooting a classifier. I don't practice classifiers. I spend my limited time and ammo on practicing skills that will yield me the most points in a match which is typically long field courses.

I tend to finish much better in a match than I do classifiers.

[Ron Ankeny]

Our club allows re-shoots at the competitor's request if they have an equipment malfunction, hurl a magazine into the ozone layer, etc. We try to follow the intent of the classifier system as stated in the manual:

It is understood that anyone can do poorly on a classifier stage for various reasons, and this is why the USPSA board of directors has allowed members to reshoot a classifier stage for classification purposes. This permission should not be construed to mean that members can shoot classifier stages repeatedly until they have a score they like. The integrity of the classification system is at stake.

In contrast, some clubs let the competitor re-shoot to their heart's content as a fund raising event, feel good everyone gets a cupie doll activity, etc. I suppose that either speaks to reading comprehension and/or integrity across the board.

Edited November 21, 2015 by Ron Ankeny

[motosapiens]

I'm less happy with the sandbaggers who deliberately hold back at classifiers and then shoot one or two classes above at majors. That's unfair to the honest competitors. The only good thing about that is they'll probably not be able to do that for long because they'll pull themselves into the higher class.

Stop worrying about 'class' and pretending you're only competing against other people who don't train enough to get better. Compete against yourself. Compare your scores to the overall winners (and the people you know that are currently better than you). Make yourself better. Everything else will take care of itself.

[teros135]

I'm less happy with the sandbaggers who deliberately hold back at classifiers and then shoot one or two classes above at majors. That's unfair to the honest competitors. The only good thing about that is they'll probably not be able to do that for long because they'll pull themselves into the higher class.

Stop worrying about 'class' and pretending you're only competing against other people who don't train enough to get better. Compete against yourself. Compare your scores to the overall winners (and the people you know that are currently better than you). Make yourself better. Everything else will take care of itself.

Thanks for the fatherly advise, Moto, but I never even implied that I'm "worried" about class or what anyone else does. I do compete against myself and find that when I do my scores go up. I've always looked at the "combined" scores and those in my Division (and others, where I know the shooters). Don't we all strive to make ourselves better?

In a major match, however, it's not fair for the sandbaggers (and yes, Virginia, they exist, and they'll often admit it, or at least show it by their very slow and deliberate Classifier performance at locals) to jump in and take a class win, because we DO get to compete against others in our class, within our Division.

If someone wants to claim the high road and say they don't care about class, I'd like to see that person decline an award for winning their class at a major.

[teros135]

Yeh, I did that but shot it only once. Was classified (and shooting) in the upper half of C class. Shot a classifer at the bottom of A class and guess what...

Actually, if someone wants to get a "paper GM" (or whatever) card by reshooting classifiers over and over, fine. If that makes them feel better, well okay. Now they're in the higher class, and that's who they're shooting against in matches, especially majors. If they've made themselves "overclassified" they'll never be able to shoot against the folks at their actual level.

I'm less happy with the sandbaggers who deliberately hold back at classifiers and then shoot one or two classes above at majors. That's unfair to the honest competitors. The only good thing about that is they'll probably not be able to do that for long because they'll pull themselves into the higher class.

How do you know they are holding back on classifiers?

1. Because some admit it.

2. They shoot (I don't mean move, stage plan, etc, but shoot) very slowly and deliberately in a simple stand-and-shoot scenario on the classifier stage but shoot much faster (and still accurately) on the arrays in the other stages, many of which for us are pretty straightforward. So slowly that it draws attention to itself compared to the rest of their performance. And only on classifiers.

Come on, let's not pretend that sandbagging doesn't exist.

.

[d_striker]

1. Because some admit it.

2. They shoot (I don't mean move, stage plan, etc, but shoot) very slowly and deliberately in a simple stand-and-shoot scenario on the classifier stage but shoot much faster (and still accurately) on the arrays in the other stages, many of which for us are pretty straightforward. So slowly that it draws attention to itself compared to the rest of their performance. And only on classifiers.

Come on, let's not pretend that sandbagging doesn't exist.

.

If they are admitting it, sure.

I honestly don't see much sandbagging around here. I see a lot of grand bagging though. In the end, either way, I don't really care what anyone else does. Where I do start getting irked is getting called a sandbagger by grandbaggers.

Believe me when I say that no one wants to make GM more than I do. Class wins are meaningless to me. Class win trophies end up in a box in the garage which will eventually get tossed in the trash.

[Sarge]

1. Because some admit it.

2. They shoot (I don't mean move, stage plan, etc, but shoot) very slowly and deliberately in a simple stand-and-shoot scenario on the classifier stage but shoot much faster (and still accurately) on the arrays in the other stages, many of which for us are pretty straightforward. So slowly that it draws attention to itself compared to the rest of their performance. And only on classifiers.

Come on, let's not pretend that sandbagging doesn't exist.

.

If they are admitting it, sure.

I honestly don't see much sandbagging around here. I see a lot of grand bagging though. In the end, either way, I don't really care what anyone else does. Where I do start getting irked is getting called a sandbagger by grandbaggers.

Believe me when I say that no one wants to make GM more than I do. Class wins are meaningless to me. Class win trophies end up in a box in the garage which will eventually get tossed in the trash.

Make sure to tell the MD's that go to all the trouble and expense to get those trophies for the 95% who do care. You might save them a few bucks...

[d_striker]

1. Because some admit it.

2. They shoot (I don't mean move, stage plan, etc, but shoot) very slowly and deliberately in a simple stand-and-shoot scenario on the classifier stage but shoot much faster (and still accurately) on the arrays in the other stages, many of which for us are pretty straightforward. So slowly that it draws attention to itself compared to the rest of their performance. And only on classifiers.

Come on, let's not pretend that sandbagging doesn't exist.

.

If they are admitting it, sure.

I honestly don't see much sandbagging around here. I see a lot of grand bagging though. In the end, either way, I don't really care what anyone else does. Where I do start getting irked is getting called a sandbagger by grandbaggers.

Believe me when I say that no one wants to make GM more than I do. Class wins are meaningless to me. Class win trophies end up in a box in the garage which will eventually get tossed in the trash.

Make sure to tell the MD's that go to all the trouble and expense to get those trophies for the 95% who do care. You might save them a few bucks...

If I could predict what place I would finish in my class, I would.

That's why I put them in a box first. I feel bad throwing it away right away so I let it sit in a box and then throw it away when it's time for a cleanup.

[obsessiveshooter]

A few months ago I started paying upfront to reshoot the classifier, when the match allows it. I'm glad I did. I've been C class forever and have had a history of getting jams on classifiers, or dropping a mag, etc. But, on regular field courses I generally shoot like a high B. So, I'd like to get to B class so that my class reflects where I am in ability. With C class, you can totally bomb a classifier, get a 35.1%, and it's going to count. Once you're in B class, that number has to be 55.1%. That's a big jump. It seems like once you hit A class you can go balls-to-the-wall on classifiers and know you'll either have an solid run or it just won't count. Which isn't that different than me shooting the classifier twice right now; I'll either shoot a run that shows my ability, or it won't count. The odds of me dropping a mag or having a jam on two consecutive runs are really small. I try to shoot as fast as I can call my shots on both runs, and see what happens. I never machine-gun it in hopes of an awesome run.

My last match should have brought me up to B class next time they run the numbers. I don't feel like I cheated to get there. I might feel different if I were jumping to A though, because that might be pushing it as far as ability=class.

[ericjhuber]

A few months ago I started paying upfront to reshoot the classifier, when the match allows it. I'm glad I did. I've been C class forever and have had a history of getting jams on classifiers, or dropping a mag, etc. But, on regular field courses I generally shoot like a high B. So, I'd like to get to B class so that my class reflects where I am in ability. With C class, you can totally bomb a classifier, get a 35.1%, and it's going to count. Once you're in B class, that number has to be 55.1%.

I don't see how that's anything other than perfectly reasonable especially if your access to classifier stages and matches is limited. Why get stuck in a division where you don't feel challenged because you had a mag issue on a classifier where you normally would have cranked out a B score?

My classifier history is pretty mercurial (just click on the link in my signature and you can see how much I've beclowned myself at classifiers.). If and when I think I'm a legitimate C shooter in Single Stack based on local club matches and major matches, yeah, I'd reshoot a classifier at a classifier match if I did something silly like blow a mag change.