Increasing participation

[ac4wordplay]

The more I think about it the more I don't get the divisions "increasing participation" or "growing the sport". I would say the vast majority of shooters that would be targeted don't have a slide mounted dot or a PCC, they have a regular ole duty sized handgun with a mag that holds a lot of rounds. When you tell them they can shoot Prod and load to 10 or shoot limited and get scored lowered that is when most say.....screw it.

Want those shooters to stay, have 6 divisions

Open

-minor

-major

Limited

-minor

-major

Prod

SSTK

Score the major minor divisions separate but also award an overall division award that way people can decide if they think shooting major is worth winning the overall division. Your average range guy, plinker will have a gun that can be competitive in any division and doesn't need to worry about PF to do so. Sure purists may not like that as much but I think that is where the growth would happen.

It seems like you're proposing categories within divisions (Open division, with a category choice of major pf or minor pf, and the same for Limited division), and minimizing the number of actual divisions. I'm not sure I'd support that, but I'm willing to keep an open mind about that. Following that thought experiment, (just playing - nobody needs to get bent out of shape here), I'd consider an additional change to your proposal: a "low capacity" division (LowCap) which would have categories for Production, Single Stack, L-10, and Revolver (all of which would no longer be individual divisions - now they are categories within the division "LowCap"). Three divisions, and their category options:

Open

-major

-minor

Limited

-major

-minor

LowCap

-production

-single stack

-L-10

-revolver

I'm not sure that I'd support it, but it may be interesting to think about.

[Strick]

Well......that is kind of the opposite way I was looking at it. I was looking at it as not adding more divisions but rather slim it down a little. Also if you want to consider my proposal as categories I guess that is one way to look at from an explanation point of view. I didn't include something for L10 because it is not needed, regardless of the popular "what about states that.....". Look at the results from last year in states that have limits,in a quick scan I counted a total of 8 entries in 4 matches in those states. Seems like the division exists for know reason. If anything I would maybe encourage a rule that allows locals in those states to be ablel to offer a L10 division.

[MHicks]

Can someone that shoots at a range with paid staff, including stage building and teardown, post some numbers for us? How many shooters, bays, stages and staff do you need to make it work? What are the match fees and how much does staff need to be paid to make it work? I'm talking about regular monthly matches. Just curious about how it's done. Mark

[Dr Mitch]

All this talk about growth and acceding to more types of guns sounds an awful lot like the search for the perfect spaghetti sauce. We are all consumers here. Someone has already solved this problem, albeit with a profit motive and a different industry. But the problem is the same: consumers have a wide variety of personal tastes, so how can we sell to someone who prefers what we don't currently offer in order to grow?

http://ed.ted.com/lessons/malcolm-gladwell-on-spaghetti-sauce

How about a Beginner division? Where new shooters can bring in their dramatically less competitive guns and gear and shoot the same stages. There are a lot more people out there with suboptimal guns than optimal guns. Some people only have four Glock 19s and want to shoot with full mags. Some people only have a Sig P220. Some people buy Kahrs ridiculous full-size guns. They have leather holsters and mag pouches because those are the cheapest and most commonly available. And there are a lot more of them than there are of us. Multiple orders of magnitude greater in number. Asking them to change their gear (spending $$$$) to try something they may not like is not the way to plant seeds if we are serious about growth. We can throw them a bone FOR FREE by offering a run-what-ya-brung division that keeps them scored against others that are new. If they get hooked, they will buck up to the bar and buy real guns and gear and participate in real divisions.

Also, I think problem of needing more host ranges should be it's own thread. Land procurment, land ownership, insurance, costs to build berms and build/buy props/targets are a unique set of extremely expensive issues.

[Beastly]

The part I don't see being discussed is attrition.

There is a steady stream of members leaving the sport for a wide variety of reasons. If we aren't attracting new members at a rate at least equal to the rate of attrition then the sport is in decline. Only a small percentage of new shooters will stick with it. A far smaller percentage will be motivated enough to step up and contribute, smaller yet to run matches. The contributors will eventally burn out and there needs to be new energized people ready to fill their shoes.

The only real solution to this is attracting new members - and yes, this will cause problems, but failing to do so causes bigger problems. How do we attract more and better quality (I don't just mean shooting skill)shooters, encourage those that stick to the sport to contribute, encourage the creation of new clubs, and minimize the burn out of those that are contributing?

[Chills1994]

Let's say USPSA's ranks declined to such a point that USPSA went away, would some sort of "practical" match at the local club spring up in its place?

Or is there some thing about the membership required to have X members to stay affiliated with, I guess, IPSC?

It is not like any other countries where an individual has to belong to some national competitive organization in order to buy or possess a gun?

[Sarge]

All this talk about growth and acceding to more types of guns sounds an awful lot like the search for the perfect spaghetti sauce. We are all consumers here. Someone has already solved this problem, albeit with a profit motive and a different industry. But the problem is the same: consumers have a wide variety of personal tastes, so how can we sell to someone who prefers what we don't currently offer in order to grow?

http://ed.ted.com/lessons/malcolm-gladwell-on-spaghetti-sauce

How about a Beginner division? Where new shooters can bring in their dramatically less competitive guns and gear and shoot the same stages. There are a lot more people out there with suboptimal guns than optimal guns. Some people only have four Glock 19s and want to shoot with full mags. Some people only have a Sig P220. Some people buy Kahrs ridiculous full-size guns. They have leather holsters and mag pouches because those are the cheapest and most commonly available. And there are a lot more of them than there are of us. Multiple orders of magnitude greater in number. Asking them to change their gear (spending $$$$) to try something they may not like is not the way to plant seeds if we are serious about growth. We can throw them a bone FOR FREE by offering a run-what-ya-brung division that keeps them scored against others that are new. If they get hooked, they will buck up to the bar and buy real guns and gear and participate in real divisions.

Also, I think problem of needing more host ranges should be it's own thread. Land procurment, land ownership, insurance, costs to build berms and build/buy props/targets are a unique set of extremely expensive issues.

Oregon with mushrooms is by far the best!

Beginners division?!? Oh please no! Who is the unfortunate soul who gets to hold their hands all day? How many times do they shoot this division before we say,"ok times up. Pick a real division or go back to shooting beer bottles on the farm". You just know some will want to stay right there and milk it for all its worth.

It's a game just like any other. You can't show up for a basketball game in wingtips.

I say let people find the game, check it out, get geared up, and play. Worked for me and basically everybody I know. It'll work for them too.

[Strick]

The part I don't see being discussed is attrition.

There is a steady stream of members leaving the sport for a wide variety of reasons. If we aren't attracting new members at a rate at least equal to the rate of attrition then the sport is in decline. Only a small percentage of new shooters will stick with it. A far smaller percentage will be motivated enough to step up and contribute, smaller yet to run matches. The contributors will eventally burn out and there needs to be new energized people ready to fill their shoes.

The only real solution to this is attracting new members - and yes, this will cause problems, but failing to do so causes bigger problems. How do we attract more and better quality (I don't just mean shooting skill)shooters, encourage those that stick to the sport to contribute, encourage the creation of new clubs, and minimize the burn out of those that are contributing?

Fundamentally changing the sport (not necessarily saying that is what is happening) to get that "new blood" just kills what we are shooting in a different way.

[IronArcher]

All this talk about growth and acceding to more types of guns sounds an awful lot like the search for the perfect spaghetti sauce. We are all consumers here. Someone has already solved this problem, albeit with a profit motive and a different industry. But the problem is the same: consumers have a wide variety of personal tastes, so how can we sell to someone who prefers what we don't currently offer in order to grow?

http://ed.ted.com/lessons/malcolm-gladwell-on-spaghetti-sauce

How about a Beginner division? Where new shooters can bring in their dramatically less competitive guns and gear and shoot the same stages. There are a lot more people out there with suboptimal guns than optimal guns. Some people only have four Glock 19s and want to shoot with full mags. Some people only have a Sig P220. Some people buy Kahrs ridiculous full-size guns. They have leather holsters and mag pouches because those are the cheapest and most commonly available. And there are a lot more of them than there are of us. Multiple orders of magnitude greater in number. Asking them to change their gear (spending $$$$) to try something they may not like is not the way to plant seeds if we are serious about growth. We can throw them a bone FOR FREE by offering a run-what-ya-brung division that keeps them scored against others that are new. If they get hooked, they will buck up to the bar and buy real guns and gear and participate in real divisions.

Also, I think problem of needing more host ranges should be it's own thread. Land procurment, land ownership, insurance, costs to build berms and build/buy props/targets are a unique set of extremely expensive issues.

That's much of the technique (although with some different rules) of IDPA.

Brings in people, many seem to gravitate to USPSA if/when they are ready to move on to more competition (gamer?) less "realism" (Timmy?).

I can see how USPSA could adopt something similar...

USPSA rules, run what you brung, no prizes save for maybe a medal or trophy for a win. X number of wins means you move up into an existing class.... or just let nature takes its course as it has been.

Edited January 25, 2016 by IronArcher

[Beastly]

So what hardare would 'Run what ya brung' support that Limited (or failing that, Open) would not?

[EdwinG]

Diversity is going to be the key to survival. The more women and non-white males we can get to actively shoot in matches, the better.

[OPENB]

Diversity is going to be the key to survival. The more women and non-white males we can get to actively shoot in matches, the better.

Huh? Are they going to reproduce? Please elaborate so that makes some sense.

[Chills1994]

I am still not understanding or wrapping my mind around the why USPSA needs to grow?

I posted in another thread today, the one about "why is Limited 10 still around?" started by Nimitz, I think, that it is just a simple matter of comparing all the classifier scores/fees submitted from the various divisions for all of 2015.

Then comparing those numbers to 2014.

EDIT: I don't quite get the diversity comment either.

Again, want women to show up, then install real bathrooms with real running water.

EDIT #2: as far as getting non-whites to shoot matches, ...I am not touching that with a ten foot pole...

Edited January 25, 2016 by Chills1994

[JD45]

The port-a-cans are hated by every woman I've met. I've known several that skip matches due to this.

[IronArcher]

So what hardare would 'Run what ya brung' support that Limited (or failing that, Open) would not?

Basically guns that suck for existing classes.

This is for people new to the sport, for them (ok, us ), it really is much more the Indian than the bow.

Soon as they win "X" number of matches (let's say maybe 3) in the class, they must move up and out.

Say a newbie brings some full open race gun, it's not like he will dominate that class for long. If he's TRUELY new, he might not even win his first couple of matches. Once competent, he/she will likely start winning pretty quickly, and have to move on.

The guy bringing his vintage WWII Luger, (guessing it's legal somewhere,) or a bone stock Glock with the "New York" trigger, will likely take longer to win, but he will get to see and compete in matches and maybe decide on a new gun in whatever class looks like the most fun to him.

They pay full entry fee, and wins mean nothing more than maybe a medal and 1 more step closer to playing in the other classes.

Your club/USPSA get more entry fees, more people trying it out, and hopefully more long term members.

[Ultimo-Hombre]

Ok.

Let's do this.

Stand by for making USPSA full blown politically correct. In 3.2.1....

[motosapiens]

I think it's a great idea to figure out a way to give newer shooters self-esteem trophies. We need more spoiled people whose mothers didn't love them in the shooting sports. Most of us that shoot now are actually pretty cool.

[Jake Di Vita]

Nevermind....I should just go on with my SOP of ignoring threads like these.

Edited January 26, 2016 by Jake Di Vita

[Dr Mitch]

I like where IronArcher's head is at.

Just eliminate "Run what ya brung" from any type of official scoring. Level 1 only. Classifiers don't count for score when uploaded. Something like that. This isn't rocket science. It isn't even long division.

I am surprised that anyone thinks that a noob division meant for temporary occupancy would be gamed by people trying to win.... What? What would anyone be winning? Dominance over ignorant unskilled shooters? This is "worst of the human condition" talk. Candy from babies.

I may also be more sensitive to the issue since my state has suffered massive attrition in the last few years. And nearly all new shooters that do show up have no idea what division they will be in. We place them based on what they brought to the match. There seems to be an uptick lately in the noob inflow, and having them duke it out seems like a clear winner.

[EdwinG]

Diversity is going to be the key to survival. The more women and non-white males we can get to actively shoot in matches, the better.

Huh? Are they going to reproduce? Please elaborate so that makes some sense.

I know it's hard to think but try.

You can't solely rely on a single demographic when it's only a certain portion of the population. If we want to grow this to be a true, common, professional sport with a non-firearms related sponsorships and a healthy amueratur membership, you need to expand the potential consumer base by appealing to as many demographics are you can.

It's just good business.

[Chills1994]

So we now have Hi Lady...

You are wanting what now?

Hi Afro-American?

Hi Hispanic?

Hi Indian Native American First Nations?

I guess you could say I know of one transgender'ed person who tried to claim Hi Lady at a state/sectional match, until the people in the audience of the prize ceremony started saying "Ask to see the driver's license!" Or so I was told.

[Ultimo-Hombre]

So we now have Hi Lady...

You are wanting what now?

Hi Afro-American?

Hi Hispanic?

Hi Indian Native American First Nations?

I guess you could say I know of one transgender'ed person who tried to claim Hi Lady at a state/sectional match, until the people in the audience of the prize ceremony started saying "Ask to see the driver's license!" Or so I was told.

this just keeps getting better!!!!!

[Brooke]

Now I'm confused! This started out to be a thread about having or not having new people in the sport because of over loading ranges and matches. Some want to eliminate newcomers because they want the sport to themselves and others want to expand it into the equivalent of the PGA Tour (see the Stoeger podcast). Neither of those is realistic in my HO.

Now the thread is gradually drifting to total revision of the divisions for what purpose I don not understand. Is it to increase participation or to somehow magically make volunteers increase or improve flow of the match? Does anybody know why? Does anybody really think it would do any of that?

What is a good solution to all problems? Here it is to buy land, form a non-profit club that offers all forms of shooting, pistol, rifle, shotgun, airsoft, archery, and other activities related to outdoors....hiking, fishing, 4H, etc. Some outside groups rent time to have various activities like defensive training or youth activities. That helps pay the bills but not at the expense of member related activities. Dues to the parent organization are under $300 per year and we pay to participate in any activity we want to be a part of, normally about $15 per match. At least for now non-members of the umbrella club can participate in our matches but pay a higher entry fee. Volunteers are easy to get because most of them are parent club members who want our club to thrive and expand facilities. Currently there are 10 pistol bays, skeet, five stand, sporting clays, a general purpose (highly overseen) range for pistol and rifle, and various venues to support the other activities listed above.

"Profits" from all the above are used to improve the facility. New pistol bays are now being planned. New range equipment is continually purchased.

If you have all the shooting interest that some claim in this thread, purpose to form a group, raise some money, and buy your own land. 200 interested people willing to put in $500 a piece in exchange for life membership in the new club will in much of the country buy you some land. The development of that land is a long term plan to include more and more activities. If you have the shooters already all that is needed is some leadership to get everybody together. It's work but it will succeed if you try.

[Ultimo-Hombre]

Now I'm confused! This started out to be a thread about having or not having new people in the sport because of over loading ranges and matches. Some want to eliminate newcomers because they want the sport to themselves and others want to expand it into the equivalent of the PGA Tour (see the Stoeger podcast). Neither of those is realistic in my HO.

Now the thread is gradually drifting to total revision of the divisions for what purpose I don not understand. Is it to increase participation or to somehow magically make volunteers increase or improve flow of the match? Does anybody know why? Does anybody really think it would do any of that?

What is a good solution to all problems? Here it is to buy land, form a non-profit club that offers all forms of shooting, pistol, rifle, shotgun, airsoft, archery, and other activities related to outdoors....hiking, fishing, 4H, etc. Some outside groups rent time to have various activities like defensive training or youth activities. That helps pay the bills but not at the expense of member related activities. Dues to the parent organization are under $300 per year and we pay to participate in any activity we want to be a part of, normally about $15 per match. At least for now non-members of the umbrella club can participate in our matches but pay a higher entry fee. Volunteers are easy to get because most of them are parent club members who want our club to thrive and expand facilities. Currently there are 10 pistol bays, skeet, five stand, sporting clays, a general purpose (highly overseen) range for pistol and rifle, and various venues to support the other activities listed above.

"Profits" from all the above are used to improve the facility. New pistol bays are now being planned. New range equipment is continually purchased.

If you have all the shooting interest that some claim in this thread, purpose to form a group, raise some money, and buy your own land. 200 interested people willing to put in $500 a piece in exchange for life membership in the new club will in much of the country buy you some land. The development of that land is a long term plan to include more and more activities. If you have the shooters already all that is needed is some leadership to get everybody together. It's work but it will succeed if you try.

What has happened to here was this pretty much turned into a bar fight.

I don't want to discourage new participation, rather I am concerned that perhaps some clubs shooting matches are already at capacity. Perhaps our leadership should be forming a comprehensive plan of increasing USPSA match capacity (assisting sections and clubs by both looking at more efficient match formats and assisting with facilities development) ALONG WITH bringing in new shooters.

But it all went downhill.

Too much emotion I guess. Some guys who wanna finally crush the open pistols and get hi overall with their rifle, and others who just wanna lock the doors and keep it all to themselves. ( this last sentence is sarcasm, it is meant as self deprecating humor for both sides of the debate. It is not meant to be taken seriously. If it offends you, hurts your feelings or makes you want to hurt me, That is unfortunate)

[motosapiens]

Brooke has posted the first intelligent post of this thread. Or at least the first intelligent sentence. If there aren't enough places to shoot, start your own uspsa range. I'd be willing to kick in alot more than $500 if I were in that situation, and our club bylaws would exclude fudds and other action-pistol haters.

If you have all the shooting interest that some claim in this thread, purpose to form a group, raise some money, and buy your own land. 200 interested people willing to put in $500 a piece in exchange for life membership in the new club will in much of the country buy you some land. The development of that land is a long term plan to include more and more activities. If you have the shooters already all that is needed is some leadership to get everybody together. It's work but it will succeed if you try.