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

Should amateurs have to shoot against "pros"?


davidb72

Recommended Posts

I have long wondered, why don't we pay out more? My girlfriend does rodeo. Even a local little jackpot barrel race (essentially our local matches) pays out. That's just how the game works. Getting your pro card is about how much money you have earned over the course of the year/years. Why would a similar structure not work?

it would work great if our entry fees were as high as rodeo entry fees and if we had hundreds (maybe thousands) of people willing to pay to spectate. I don't see that happening anytime soon.

A jackpot isn't that much more money than a local match, yesterday was 35 a run. Granted most people do both the AM and PM runs, but what if we came up with a sliding payout based on number of participants/entry fee? Only pay division and class winners or something, don't pay out nearly as deep as rodeo.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 172
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I have long wondered, why don't we pay out more? My girlfriend does rodeo. Even a local little jackpot barrel race (essentially our local matches) pays out. That's just how the game works. Getting your pro card is about how much money you have earned over the course of the year/years. Why would a similar structure not work?

it would work great if our entry fees were as high as rodeo entry fees and if we had hundreds (maybe thousands) of people willing to pay to spectate. I don't see that happening anytime soon.

A jackpot isn't that much more money than a local match, yesterday was 35 a run. Granted most people do both the AM and PM runs, but what if we came up with a sliding payout based on number of participants/entry fee? Only pay division and class winners or something, don't pay out nearly as deep as rodeo.

I think paying class 'winners' is the worst idea I've ever heard.

I think paying division winners is likely to be popular with the handful of guys that can win the division, but everyone else may not appreciate the income redistribution scheme. I'd rather keep entry fees lower. (we pay $10 for a match here).

Edited by motosapiens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have long wondered, why don't we pay out more? My girlfriend does rodeo. Even a local little jackpot barrel race (essentially our local matches) pays out. That's just how the game works. Getting your pro card is about how much money you have earned over the course of the year/years. Why would a similar structure not work?

it would work great if our entry fees were as high as rodeo entry fees and if we had hundreds (maybe thousands) of people willing to pay to spectate. I don't see that happening anytime soon.

A jackpot isn't that much more money than a local match, yesterday was 35 a run. Granted most people do both the AM and PM runs, but what if we came up with a sliding payout based on number of participants/entry fee? Only pay division and class winners or something, don't pay out nearly as deep as rodeo.

Most of the matches around here pay back your entry fee, in "range bucks" if you win. Payout is based on # of competitors in each division/class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have long wondered, why don't we pay out more? My girlfriend does rodeo. Even a local little jackpot barrel race (essentially our local matches) pays out. That's just how the game works. Getting your pro card is about how much money you have earned over the course of the year/years. Why would a similar structure not work?

it would work great if our entry fees were as high as rodeo entry fees and if we had hundreds (maybe thousands) of people willing to pay to spectate. I don't see that happening anytime soon.

A jackpot isn't that much more money than a local match, yesterday was 35 a run. Granted most people do both the AM and PM runs, but what if we came up with a sliding payout based on number of participants/entry fee? Only pay division and class winners or something, don't pay out nearly as deep as rodeo.

I think paying class 'winners' is the worst idea I've ever heard.

I think paying division winners is likely to be popular with the handful of guys that can win the division, but everyone else may not appreciate the income redistribution scheme. I'd rather keep entry fees lower. (we pay $10 for a match here).

Well I suppose if your matches only cost 10 bucks then I understand the drive to keep the price down. Ours are all 20 dollars around here.

I do agree that paying class winners is perhaps lame at the local level, but at larger matches (e.g. real rodeos) the payout scale gets deeper, and that seems reasonable to me (more expensive entry fees, more people, more competition at each classification level, etc)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason the concept of 'sandbagging' exits in USPSA is because we give out prizes, something substantial ones like guns, for winning your class. Delete 'class' prizes and sandbagging would be eliminated overnight .... Can you imagine the sandbagging culture that would develop if we started paying real cash for '1st C' & '1st D' class wins?

Cash prizes in competitions come from 2 sources: match fees & sponsors. Raising match fees to payout winners probably won't work for as Moto said, at the local level the same people win the matches every month becuase it's usually the same shooters attending. Changing the sponsorship structure so that companies are willing to put up cash because of the ROI would be the only way I see to realistically provide meaningful cash payouts at majors ...

Edited by Nimitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The structure of our sport actually makes it easy to only compete against "amateurs" if that's what you want to do. Just go through the results list and cross out anybody you don't want to compete against.

At the end of the day, if you've got Excel and some spare time you can slice and dice the results any way you want, and recalculate match scores and placings appropriately.

Personally I only care about my own result, and i want that to be ranked consistently against the "gold standard " of the best shooters around, so i can see how i am progressing. I don't care who the top shooter is - he could be a fully sponsored cyborg for all i care - as long as I'm improving compared to him then I'm happy

Sent by Jedi mind control

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nimitz hit the nail on the head with his last sentence.

Someone please tell me where I can get a driving lesson from Jeff Gordan, reading greens with Tiger, or free throw lessons from even a no name NBA star. When's my passing camp with Peyton start?

Within minutes on here we can be signed up for a class from Rob, Max or anyone that won nationals in the last decade for pennies compared to an intro course in golf from a big name pro.

Getting ammo or match fees paid doesn't mean you're a pro, it means someone likes you.

Andre Drummond is having a free throw camp this summer. I'm going to suggest he shoot them facing away from the basket with two hands and bank them. I think he holds the record for most free throw airballs and most free throw airballs in a row. It's hard to be a pro. I think there would be 10 people on a pro shooting tour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you "Competing" with? The bulk of my shooting expenses are travel expenses for majors. Even if you had a quarter less of an expenses budget than me you would still be going to 10+ majors a year. Which in fact is more than the majority of very active USPSA shooters out there. How many Majors do you go to now on your own dollar? If its only a handful then you are already NOT competing with how much I spend of my own $$$ to attend majors alone.

I go to as many as my time and money will allow me to go to. I am the USPSA match director at the new club we just formed as well.

This year I will probably go to 5 major matches of which I will work one. That's what my time and money allows.

I find it interesting how so many of the other professional shooters jumped to your defense. Sounds like you guys stick together!

I am honestly trying to understand your statement about not being able to "compete" with my level of sponsorship when I clearly invest twice as much of my own money than you currently do regardless of my sponsorship. When people assess others sponsorship they usually only look at the benefits received by the sponsorship and conveniently ignore the fact that it costs a lot in time, dedication, and $$$ to get there and maintain that level of participation. There is no free lunch in anything.

I dry fire almost every day that I don't do live fire. I try to practice live fire once a week usually between 200-400 rounds. I understand that getting the results we want takes time and effort. I may not spend or work as hard at it as you do, but I don't expect magical results to just happen either.

To me this is a hobby - same as when I was racing. I want to compete with other people who view it as a hobby, not some folks dressed up in fancy shooting blouses handing out protips all over the place.

You want to compete with other people who view it as a hobby? Well congratulations, we do exactly that.

...if instead you meant "I want to compete against other people who don't practice more than I do" you probably should have said that.

I personally found that as a hobby, practice makes me better. I also find that people who practice more, get better faster. People have individual priorities. If yours is that other things are more important than practicing, that's certainly fine---but it also means that if you have a problem with others having different priorities, then that would be YOUR problem.

As for people handing out protips---personally, if someone is doing something better than I am, and are willing to tell me how, I plan on listening. But then again, I'm not complaining that I have to compete against people who are currently better than I am, or practice more than I do.

As has been made very clear (and is well-known to pretty much everyone in the shooting world), there are only a couple of people in the U.S. who get paid enough so that "shooting" is what they do for a living. Everyone else has to make a living elsewhere, and find time to practice. Sure, they might get support, but hey, that's what happens when you practice enough to get good.

(This post written by someone whose only sponsor is himself. And likes shooting as a hobby. And likes to shoot against everyone else, and isn't grumpy because other people can practice more so I don't win everything.)

I note: I'm not sure I'd like to go to a club where the match director has been vocal about how wearing shooting jerseys makes him unhappy. Or that people who practice more shouldn't be allowed to play the game with people who practice less, because they take their hobby more seriously than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I think paying class 'winners' is the worst idea I've ever heard.

I think paying division winners is likely to be popular with the handful of guys that can win the division, but everyone else may not appreciate the income redistribution scheme. I'd rather keep entry fees lower. (we pay $10 for a match here)."

This!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the much of this, I think it's a moot point. Until you get to GM (just because there is nothing higher to separate shooters above that skill level), your supposedly shooting against other shooters of your ability.

Not me. I personally think that's a very limiting outlook. I don't want to only shoot against other people who don't work hard enough to get better. I want to shoot against everyone in my division.

IMHO, the class structure is only there in shooting for participation medal purposes. It makes sense in some sports to separate people by ability for safety reasons (many motorsports), or for competitive reasons (where you are competing against individuals, rather than everyone competing against the course, like team sports, or tennis), but in sports like golf or shooting, the only reason for separate classes is that some people get their feelings hurt from not being very good.

Take a look at most level II/III matches and look closely at where the '1st B' shooter or '1st C' shooter places WRT all the others one class above them and you'll usually see they beat a bunch of people who are classified higher than them ... So, what is their actual classification ...?

I to have no interest in "class wins' if for no other reason than I have no idea what being '1st C' or even '1st A' means ... I do know what being 1st overall in my division means and so that is what I care about ....

Edited by Nimitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you "Competing" with? The bulk of my shooting expenses are travel expenses for majors. Even if you had a quarter less of an expenses budget than me you would still be going to 10+ majors a year. Which in fact is more than the majority of very active USPSA shooters out there. How many Majors do you go to now on your own dollar? If its only a handful then you are already NOT competing with how much I spend of my own $$$ to attend majors alone.

I go to as many as my time and money will allow me to go to. I am the USPSA match director at the new club we just formed as well.

This year I will probably go to 5 major matches of which I will work one. That's what my time and money allows.

I find it interesting how so many of the other professional shooters jumped to your defense. Sounds like you guys stick together!

I am honestly trying to understand your statement about not being able to "compete" with my level of sponsorship when I clearly invest twice as much of my own money than you currently do regardless of my sponsorship. When people assess others sponsorship they usually only look at the benefits received by the sponsorship and conveniently ignore the fact that it costs a lot in time, dedication, and $$$ to get there and maintain that level of participation. There is no free lunch in anything.

I dry fire almost every day that I don't do live fire. I try to practice live fire once a week usually between 200-400 rounds. I understand that getting the results we want takes time and effort. I may not spend or work as hard at it as you do, but I don't expect magical results to just happen either.

To me this is a hobby - same as when I was racing. I want to compete with other people who view it as a hobby, not some folks dressed up in fancy shooting blouses handing out protips all over the place.

You want to compete with other people who view it as a hobby? Well congratulations, we do exactly that.

...if instead you meant "I want to compete against other people who don't practice more than I do" you probably should have said that.

I personally found that as a hobby, practice makes me better. I also find that people who practice more, get better faster. People have individual priorities. If yours is that other things are more important than practicing, that's certainly fine---but it also means that if you have a problem with others having different priorities, then that would be YOUR problem.

As for people handing out protips---personally, if someone is doing something better than I am, and are willing to tell me how, I plan on listening. But then again, I'm not complaining that I have to compete against people who are currently better than I am, or practice more than I do.

As has been made very clear (and is well-known to pretty much everyone in the shooting world), there are only a couple of people in the U.S. who get paid enough so that "shooting" is what they do for a living. Everyone else has to make a living elsewhere, and find time to practice. Sure, they might get support, but hey, that's what happens when you practice enough to get good.

(This post written by someone whose only sponsor is himself. And likes shooting as a hobby. And likes to shoot against everyone else, and isn't grumpy because other people can practice more so I don't win everything.)

I note: I'm not sure I'd like to go to a club where the match director has been vocal about how wearing shooting jerseys makes him unhappy. Or that people who practice more shouldn't be allowed to play the game with people who practice less, because they take their hobby more seriously than others.

I didn't say that.

Maybe you should re-read it so you understand it better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the much of this, I think it's a moot point. Until you get to GM (just because there is nothing higher to separate shooters above that skill level), your supposedly shooting against other shooters of your ability.

Not me. I personally think that's a very limiting outlook. I don't want to only shoot against other people who don't work hard enough to get better. I want to shoot against everyone in my division.

IMHO, the class structure is only there in shooting for participation medal purposes. It makes sense in some sports to separate people by ability for safety reasons (many motorsports), or for competitive reasons (where you are competing against individuals, rather than everyone competing against the course, like team sports, or tennis), but in sports like golf or shooting, the only reason for separate classes is that some people get their feelings hurt from not being very good.

Take a look at most level II/III matches and look closely at where the '1st B' shooter or '1st C' shooter places WRT all the others one class above them and you'll usually see they beat a bunch of people who are classified higher than them ... So, what is their actual classification ...?

I to have no interest in "class wins' if for no other reason than I have no idea what being '1st C' or even '1st A' means ... I do know what being 1st overall in my division means and so that is what I care about ....

The point being, if the OP doesn't want to compete against pros, he wants to compete against people who look at it as nothing more than a hobby, he can just shoot his class (assuming he isn't a GM, generally, getting to GM sounds like more effort than a simple hobby).

Again, I'm not sure how it works, but if the same guy places 1st "C" all the time, doesn't he get moved up to "B" eventually?

For this topic, if that is the case, I would assume most "pros" move up to "M" or "GM" pretty quickly. (Yeah, I know, don't ASSuME) ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say that.

Maybe you should re-read it so you understand it better.

Quotes from you:

"Simple question - should true "amateur" shooters have to compete against "pros"? When I was involved in motor racing there was a pretty clear definition of who was an amateur and who was a pro.There doesn't seem to be that distinction in USPSA. I would have thought the classification system would take care of this, but it seems like pros come in D class to GM these days."

So---apparently you think that "pros" (which is an ill-defined term in shooting) have skill levels of all types, from D to GM.

"Should any "pro" shooter be required to register as "industry" so they don't take prizes away from the "amateurs"?"

And are you interested in this for the prizes.

"I think if you have sponsors that cover a quarter of your annual shooting expenses you definitely qualify as a pro. How am I (who gets NO support - not complaining, just stating a fact) supposed to compete with that?"

Why not? You just said various pros are at all skill levels. Isn't your classification higher than a D?

"I go to as many as my time and money will allow me to go to. I am the USPSA match director at the new club we just formed as well. This year I will probably go to 5 major matches of which I will work one. That's what my time and money allows."

So you do USPSA often at a local level, and attend numerous majors in a year. And practice on your own. What exactly are you complaining about again, since you already have said that pros have skill levels from D up to GM?

"I find it interesting how so many of the other professional shooters jumped to your defense. Sounds like you guys stick together!"

Actually, pretty much EVERYONE spoke up against what you said. That could be taken as a clue. Especially noting that you didn't respond to their points, merely argued about the people who responded.

"I dry fire almost every day that I don't do live fire. I try to practice live fire once a week usually between 200-400 rounds. I understand that getting the results we want takes time and effort. I may not spend or work as hard at it as you do, but I don't expect magical results to just happen either.

To me this is a hobby - same as when I was racing. I want to compete with other people who view it as a hobby, not some folks dressed up in fancy shooting blouses handing out protips all over the place."

To which I originally replied:

You want to compete with other people who view it as a hobby? Well congratulations, we do exactly that.

I personally found that as a hobby, practice makes me better. I also find that people who practice more, get better faster. People have individual priorities. If yours is that other things are more important than practicing, that's certainly fine---but it also means that if you have a problem with others having different priorities, then that would be YOUR problem.

As for people handing out protips---personally, if someone is doing something better than I am, and are willing to tell me how, I plan on listening. But then again, I'm not complaining that I have to compete against people who are currently better than I am, or practice more than I do.

As has been made very clear (and is well-known to pretty much everyone in the shooting world), there are only a couple of people in the U.S. who get paid enough so that "shooting" is what they do for a living. Everyone else has to make a living elsewhere, and find time to practice. Sure, they might get support, but hey, that's what happens when you practice enough to get good.

(This post written by someone whose only sponsor is himself. And likes shooting as a hobby. And likes to shoot against everyone else, and isn't grumpy because other people can practice more so I don't win everything.)

I note: I'm not sure I'd like to go to a club where the match director has been vocal about how wearing shooting jerseys makes him unhappy. Or that people who practice more shouldn't be allowed to play the game with people who practice less, because they take their hobby more seriously than others.

And I'm saying it again, because it obviously is relevant, and responds directly to what you said.

Sorry that, because you don't treat your hobby with as high a priority as others, you aren't as good and instead want other people to somehow not have to compete with you. (Even though you started off by saying that "pros" come with all skill levels from D to GM. Or are you only unhappy about the ones who beat you in matches?)

I'm not a sponsored shooter, and I didn't have much trouble making M. I haven't made GM, but I haven't practiced as much as I'd need to do so. Other people have different priorities, and thus increase their skills faster. I'm envious of their time, but I don't begrudge them it. As has been shown repeatedly in this thread (which certain people have ignored) hardly anyone makes a living at shooting, and the ones who DO receive product and such in terms of sponsorship do so because they practiced enough to get good in the first place---and said product doesn't let them quit their day job.

Seriously, I'm not sure exactly what you are arguing for, here. Do you think there is a protected class of "pros" who are fully supported by others and spend all their time practicing shooting sports, that are in competition with you for prizes and match wins? How many of these people do you think there are?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say that.

Maybe you should re-read it so you understand it better.

Quotes from you:

"Simple question - should true "amateur" shooters have to compete against "pros"? When I was involved in motor racing there was a pretty clear definition of who was an amateur and who was a pro.There doesn't seem to be that distinction in USPSA. I would have thought the classification system would take care of this, but it seems like pros come in D class to GM these days."

So---apparently you think that "pros" (which is an ill-defined term in shooting) have skill levels of all types, from D to GM.

"Should any "pro" shooter be required to register as "industry" so they don't take prizes away from the "amateurs"?"

And are you interested in this for the prizes.

"I think if you have sponsors that cover a quarter of your annual shooting expenses you definitely qualify as a pro. How am I (who gets NO support - not complaining, just stating a fact) supposed to compete with that?"

Why not? You just said various pros are at all skill levels. Isn't your classification higher than a D?

"I go to as many as my time and money will allow me to go to. I am the USPSA match director at the new club we just formed as well. This year I will probably go to 5 major matches of which I will work one. That's what my time and money allows."

So you do USPSA often at a local level, and attend numerous majors in a year. And practice on your own. What exactly are you complaining about again, since you already have said that pros have skill levels from D up to GM?

"I find it interesting how so many of the other professional shooters jumped to your defense. Sounds like you guys stick together!"

Actually, pretty much EVERYONE spoke up against what you said. That could be taken as a clue. Especially noting that you didn't respond to their points, merely argued about the people who responded.

"I dry fire almost every day that I don't do live fire. I try to practice live fire once a week usually between 200-400 rounds. I understand that getting the results we want takes time and effort. I may not spend or work as hard at it as you do, but I don't expect magical results to just happen either.

To me this is a hobby - same as when I was racing. I want to compete with other people who view it as a hobby, not some folks dressed up in fancy shooting blouses handing out protips all over the place."

To which I originally replied:

You want to compete with other people who view it as a hobby? Well congratulations, we do exactly that.

I personally found that as a hobby, practice makes me better. I also find that people who practice more, get better faster. People have individual priorities. If yours is that other things are more important than practicing, that's certainly fine---but it also means that if you have a problem with others having different priorities, then that would be YOUR problem.

As for people handing out protips---personally, if someone is doing something better than I am, and are willing to tell me how, I plan on listening. But then again, I'm not complaining that I have to compete against people who are currently better than I am, or practice more than I do.

As has been made very clear (and is well-known to pretty much everyone in the shooting world), there are only a couple of people in the U.S. who get paid enough so that "shooting" is what they do for a living. Everyone else has to make a living elsewhere, and find time to practice. Sure, they might get support, but hey, that's what happens when you practice enough to get good.

(This post written by someone whose only sponsor is himself. And likes shooting as a hobby. And likes to shoot against everyone else, and isn't grumpy because other people can practice more so I don't win everything.)

I note: I'm not sure I'd like to go to a club where the match director has been vocal about how wearing shooting jerseys makes him unhappy. Or that people who practice more shouldn't be allowed to play the game with people who practice less, because they take their hobby more seriously than others.

And I'm saying it again, because it obviously is relevant, and responds directly to what you said.

Sorry that, because you don't treat your hobby with as high a priority as others, you aren't as good and instead want other people to somehow not have to compete with you. (Even though you started off by saying that "pros" come with all skill levels from D to GM. Or are you only unhappy about the ones who beat you in matches?)

I'm not a sponsored shooter, and I didn't have much trouble making M. I haven't made GM, but I haven't practiced as much as I'd need to do so. Other people have different priorities, and thus increase their skills faster. I'm envious of their time, but I don't begrudge them it. As has been shown repeatedly in this thread (which certain people have ignored) hardly anyone makes a living at shooting, and the ones who DO receive product and such in terms of sponsorship do so because they practiced enough to get good in the first place---and said product doesn't let them quit their day job.

Seriously, I'm not sure exactly what you are arguing for, here. Do you think there is a protected class of "pros" who are fully supported by others and spend all their time practicing shooting sports, that are in competition with you for prizes and match wins? How many of these people do you think there are?

We're going to have to agree to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's great that we can compete against the best the sport has to offer. No other sport I have been a part of would allow me the chance to play with the best in the country or world. I like knowing how I stack up against the best, I guess for some it is hard on the ego but for me it motivates me to work harder to improve. As far as guys wearing jerseys, they sell them every day and you can have one too. Not everyone in a fancy shirt is a top level sponsored shooter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not everyone in a fancy shirt is a top level sponsored shooter.

They're not?
From this comment plus your earlier one that "pros comes in all classifications from D to GM" you appear to have simply made the connection that 'shooting jersey = pro shooter' ....

Unfortunately nothing could be further from the truth ...

There is not a day that goes by here in Florida when I'm driving my car beachside when I don't pass one or more cyclists all decked out in those cool colorful cycling jerseys & shorts .... I'm pretty sure not one of them is on the way to winning the Tour De France or joining the US Olympic cycling team ...

Edited by Nimitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is not a day that goes by here is Florida when I'm driving my car beachside when I don't pass one or more cyclists all decked out in those cool colorful cycling jerseys & shoots .... I'm pretty sure not one of them is on the way to winning the Tour De France or joining the US Olympic cycling team ...

Yep, because no good cyclist in his right mind would ever live in florida, due to the humidity, cockroaches and lack of terrain features. :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is not a day that goes by here is Florida when I'm driving my car beachside when I don't pass one or more cyclists all decked out in those cool colorful cycling jerseys & shoots .... I'm pretty sure not one of them is on the way to winning the Tour De France or joining the US Olympic cycling team ...

Yep, because no good cyclist in his right mind would ever live in florida, due to the humidity, cockroaches and lack of terrain features. :devil:
Pretty sure we have nice terrain features here if you know where to look ... :)

post-32005-0-97302300-1455412587_thumb.j

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...