Will they ever do away with major/minor for Limited?

[teros135]

31 minutes ago, wtturn said:

Not a lawyer, but I know how to formulate what we call an "analogy". If you are unfamiliar with that term, you can Google it and find out what it means.

At the risk of further confusing you, I did find it amusing that you chose to respond to my post with a non sequitur, to wit: a classic scene from South Park which in itself depicts a famous non sequitur. Well done indeed!

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk
 

Must be one of those "educated" people we're hearing so much about.

[IHAVEGAS]

34 minutes ago, wtturn said:

Not a lawyer, but I know how to formulate what we call an "analogy". If you are unfamiliar with that term, you can Google it and find out what it means.

At the risk of further confusing you, I did find it amusing that you chose to respond to my post with a non sequitur, to wit: a classic scene from South Park which in itself depicts a famous non sequitur. Well done indeed!

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk
 

Ok I will bite.

What is the rational connection between what you believe (or do not believe) would be best for the sport and being snotty about election results?

 

[GrumpyOne]

You guys let this thread get personal, and it will get closed...Keep it civil...Please.

[IronArcher]

So I'm hearing that it is ALMOST balanced for SS.... pretty darned close, depending on the match.
Because it seems to work OK for SS, then we shouldn't want to achieve similar results in Open and Limited because why? Because a level playing field in SS is much more important than in Limited and Open?

As for the electoral college quip, that would only apply IF we were complaining about losing a match because it isn't fair to minor. That's not what is going on here. Pretty much the opposite. Not complaining because the rules screwed us, suggesting that the rules could be more fair.

Edited December 4, 2016 by IronArcher

[Gooldylocks]

No, because if you desire to shoot minor then go shoot one of the other 5 divisions.

Single stack is "almost" balanced? What would it take for you to say that it is balanced? When minor is winning more than 50% of the matches?

Open has never once been included in this discussion, because you can shoot 38 or 9mm major in open, so you get both the most capacity and major. Changing it for open would make zero difference, other than cause a bunch of rules changes.

It has been established that the rules are perfectly fair for everyone. Everyone has access to the same rules, so anyone can read them and decide what they want to shoot. If you read the rules and say "buuuuuut I don't want to shoot a 40!" then you don't have to. You can make the decision to shoot minor. No one is stopping you.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[IronArcher]

I would say when they are winning 49% of matches and taking 9 of the top 20 at nats.

The rules are "perfectly fair" ....as long as you shoot major. [emoji848]
Note: I'm not concerned with caliber.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[kneelingatlas]

8 hours ago, IronArcher said:

I would say when they are winning 49% of matches and taking 9 of the top 20 at nats.

The rules are "perfectly fair" ....as long as you shoot major.
Note: I'm not concerned with caliber.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Equal opportunity does not necessarily correlate with equal results.

Edited December 4, 2016 by kneelingatlas

[ATLDave]

15 hours ago, IronArcher said:

So I'm hearing that it is ALMOST balanced for SS.... pretty darned close, depending on the match.
Because it seems to work OK for SS, then we shouldn't want to achieve similar results in Open and Limited because why?

Bwahahahaha!!!  If we make Limited and Open as successful as SS, then USPSA will probably fold.  

Leave the popular divisions alone.  Tweak the ones that are less popular.  

This really, really isn't that complicated.  

[IHAVEGAS]

23 minutes ago, ATLDave said:

This really, really isn't that complicated.  

+1

Try to make what you have as good as it could be, or leave well enough alone. 

Either perspective seems valid. I suspect that all sports have similar topics. 

 

[ATLDave]

What's the standard advice for lower and mid-level USPSA shooters?  Focus on the low hanging fruit.  If your reloads are slow, work on reloads.  If you aren't good at moving aggressively between positions, work on that.  

I would suggest the same approach makes sense regarding rules and equipment/division changes.  If you want to change stuff, change the ones that have participation problems.  Figure out how to make revo and L10 interesting to people again, if you just have to go tinkering with divisions.  Don't screw up the ones that are doing well and paying the bills.... especially not when the people who are currently playing in those divisions say "no thank you."  

FWIW, if I were inclined to fool with PF generally and/or in LTD, I'd go to a continuous PF multiplier, such that 140 PF gets more points than 125, but less than 160.  And if someone wants to blast with 200 PF, then they ought to get even more points on non-A hits.  With modern technology, the math is a non-issue.  It's not worth doing, because of the disruption, the possibility of getting the rules slightly wrong and effectively requiring everyone to buy new gear, etc.  But if I were building it from scratch, I'd look at something along those lines.  

^ Added just to prove I'm not incapable of envisioning change.  I don't think we should actually do this, but this would be a lot abstractly sensible than just jacking up C hits on 127 PF gamer 9mm.  

Edited December 4, 2016 by ATLDave

[IHAVEGAS]

3 minutes ago, ATLDave said:

... especially not when the people who are currently playing in those divisions say "no thank you."  

So you are saying pose the question to the membership & let the majority make an informed decision ? 

I'm guessing that a similar process would have prevented the powers that be from breaking 6 shot revolver. 

 

[ATLDave]

No, I'm saying even a rudimentary glance at the participation data says leave LTD and open and production alone.  

The experience of revo suggests that rule changes that optimize completely different guns are not generally positive for a division.  And so there's really almost NO chance you should remotely entertain the concept advanced in this thread.  Instead of having a disastrous effect on what was already a peripheral division (revolver), tinkering could break one or two of the three existing engines of USPSA.  

Again, this isn't complicated.  There's no problem to fix, but the stakes of attempting to "fix" this non-problem are existential.  Let's avoid elective open heart surgery, please. 

Edited December 4, 2016 by ATLDave

[IHAVEGAS]

1 minute ago, ATLDave said:

No, I'm saying even a rudimentary glance at the participation data says leave LTD and open and production alone.  

Which is a valid perspective, my perspective is why would someone only settle for good when they could have better.

Neither individual perspective means diddiy though, and we do not know what the majority would prefer. 

A vote of the rank and file , which I entertain no illusion will happen, would be interesting. 

[ATLDave]

A vote of the rank and file of people who participate consistently in the relevant divisions would not be interesting, because it would not be close.  I have spent a few years in this sport, and I have never, ever, ever heard a committed LTD shooter say, "you know, I really wish I could shoot 9mm in this division and be competitive."  That's a somewhat common sentiment among new shooters who show up with a Glock 34 and are annoyed to find that they either have to shoot sub-optimally in LTD (minor) or not load their mags all the way.  But I have never met anyone who is actually invested in the game (as in shot even a couple dozen matches) and said that.  Such people may exist, but there aren't many of them.

[IHAVEGAS]

Hmmm, so you are saying that the new guys see the obvious problem with the rules and then give up & roll with the flow rather than try and fix it? 

We are not going to agree on the issue, which is ok.

[Gooldylocks]

That's the thing, it's not a real problem. They are new and don't have any real experience on the topic but still think they carry a valid opinion.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Gooldylocks]

It's like climate change. Some people don't believe it, but that's only because they don't know anything about it. Then they go out into the world and spout off climate change isn't real, essentially claiming that their ignorance is just as important as our knowledge. Just because you think something does NOT make it true (or, in the case of limited minor, a problem).

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[IHAVEGAS]

2 minutes ago, Gooldylocks said:

Just because you think something does NOT make it true

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 

+1000

[Gooldylocks]

3 hours ago, kneelingatlas said:

Equal opportunity does not necessarily correlate with equal results.

Truth. Reading on my phone I missed this.

IronArcher, I would say that with the fewer people shoot minor in single stack to start with, the fact that they are winning 40% of the matches would tell me that it is balanced. You could, if you were so inclined, look at how many people shoot minor and then do a little math to normalize the counts, then you would be getting an accurate read of how balanced they are. My guess, extremely. You could also find a the confidence interval and standard deviation of # of wins to minor or major, and then you could actually try to make a sound analytical argument instead of a knee jerk emotional response.  

If you are going to try to legislate minor to be better and better until it is winning 49% of matches, then what happens when one year minor wins 60%? Or major makes a run for 65% of matches? Are you gonna go back to the drawing board and constantly reevaluate the scoring every time we have an anomalous year? Cause just so you know, you can't make it be perfectly 50:50. That's how math in the real world works. 

[ATLDave]

3 hours ago, Gooldylocks said:

That's the thing, it's not a real problem. They are new and don't have any real experience on the topic but still think they carry a valid opinion.

3 hours ago, IHAVEGAS said:

Hmmm, so you are saying that the new guys see the obvious problem with the rules and then give up & roll with the flow rather than try and fix it? 

The fact that someone (a new someone at that) wants to have unsuitable gear made suitable by forcing a rule change on everyone does not mean that they recognize a problem.  It means they haven't figured out the sport yet.  This goes right in line with new shooters complaining that accuracy is undervalued in USPSA, because their first match they shot 120 A's and 40 C's and only 3 M's, but some other guy shot 100 A's and 50 C's and 13 D's, and the other guy won, so what's the deal with that, can we make this more like IDPA please or maybe bullseye?  

No, we are not going to change the rules to suit a newcomer.  Figure them out.  

Edited December 4, 2016 by ATLDave

[IronArcher]

4 hours ago, ATLDave said:

Bwahahahaha!!!  If we make Limited and Open as successful as SS, then USPSA will probably fold.  

Leave the popular divisions alone.  Tweak the ones that are less popular.  

This really, really isn't that complicated.  

OK, I'm confused...  you worried about SS being less competitive when shot with major (assuming a change is made) but we should only change the divisions that aren't as popular as Open Lim and Prod.

The popular divisions are not popular because of the Major/Minor scoring system. 
I contend they could be even MORE popular if people could shoot the guns/calibers they like and have a fair chance at winning....NOT an unfair chance at winning (i.e. major right now).
What are you SO afraid of? That if you get scored 4 points for a C and a dude shooting minor gets 3.5 for a C, you can't win?

[ATLDave]

 

13 minutes ago, IronArcher said:

What are you SO afraid of? 

I'm afraid of people who don't understand the sport ruining with nonsensical rules changes in pursuit of a non-goal.  

I have explained multiple times that parity between minor and major IS NOT A GOAL.  Making changes in pursuit of something that IS NOT A GOAL is silly at best, and very harmful at worst.  Don't screw up the most popular divisions solving non-problems.  

Edited December 4, 2016 by ATLDave

[benvoice]

There is a "difficulty" difference between shooting 9mm at 125PF and 40sw at 165PF.  You have to control more recoil in Major than in Minor.  That's the reason for the scoring difference.  You can achieve faster follow up shots with Minor 9mm than with Major 40sw.  Also, 9mm with the same length magazine (141mm for Limited) means more rounds, making for fewer reloads and Decreasing the difficulty of running a course of fire.  Those are 2 reasons for Minor having a lower scoring system than Major. For those reasons, I certainly hope they never do away with Minor/Major...Keep things the way they are.  Although I will say that I know several Limited shooters who prefer 9mm for the division and ARE competitive against Major PF Limited shooters.  There are obviously fewer of them though, because the limited division is more about speed, and those shooting 9mm HAVE to worry about accuracy in order to compete with the higher scoring Major PF shooters who can get away with more "C Zone" hits and an occasional "D Zone" hit.

As well, there's no need to compare Production or Open Division shooters with Limited division shooters... They DON'T compete against each other.  A competitor only competes against others in the Same division.  No one looks at the highest scoring shooter of the whole match, but rather the highest scoring shooter of their division (most shooters who achieve the highest score of an entire match are usually from the open division).  Also within one's division you're theoretically only shooting against others in the same "Class" (i.e... GM, M, A, B, C, D).  So I'm only competing against other "B" Class Limited Division shooters at any given match.  Although it IS nice to end up beating some "A" and occasionally "M" shooters inside the limited division at a match.

I would also add one more thing... A lot of these questions could be easily answered with a visit to the USPSA.org site, which has a PDF version of the latest rules available to anyone.  It's only around 150 small pages... so take some time to read through it.  It will open your eyes/mind about a lot of perceived issues. =))

 

On 11/12/2016 at 7:54 AM, Thomas H said:

I'm thinking people didn't get what I meant.

The prior poster said that Major/Minor was based on difficulty.  If that were true, scoring would be very different.   It isn't true, and never has been.

Yes, I'm aware that Production and Open are different divisions.   And yes, Dr. Mitch, I understand Open just fine.

Point being:  If scoring was based on difficulty, we'd have a completely different set of criteria.  We don't, because Minor/Major has nothing to do with difficulty, it has to do with the power of the gun.

 

Now, whether or not that "power" actually has relevance to anything in the real world is a different topic.  However, that doesn't change the fact that saying Major/Minor is based on difficulty isn't true.

 

Edited December 4, 2016 by benvoice

[IHAVEGAS]

 

5 hours ago, ATLDave said:

 

I'm afraid of people who don't understand the sport ruining with nonsensical rules changes in pursuit of a non-goal.  

 

Obviously more freedom of choice in equipment is indeed a goal and allowing shooters freedom of choice is a fundamental principle of the sport.

"Practical competition is diverse, never permitting unrealistic specialization of either technique or equipment" - "Practical competition is free-style. In essence the competitive problem is posed in general and the participant is permitted freedom to solve it in the manner he considers best ..... "

 

[ATLDave]

10 minutes ago, IHAVEGAS said:

 

Obviously more freedom of choice in equipment is indeed a goal

 

Freedom of choice of equipment is a limited goal.  We don't score rimifire or 32 ACP.  And no magnum revolver cartridges or full power 10mm is competitive.

But you do have plenty of choice within the current rules.  Shoot minor LTD if you want.  You'll just get the scoring the rules have laid out for many, many years.