Did the new Classifier miss an opportunity?

[Not-So-Mad Matt]

So, the new proposed rules include an updated Classifier (section  9.9), and I feel like they may have missed an opportunity to make the Classifier a better predictor of match performance. (You can see rowdyb shooting it masterfully.)

A few years ago I noticed that our local Classifier match didn't show Masters to shoot at a Master level, Experts at an Expert level, etc. Don't get me wrong, there was definitely a relationship between match performance and Classifier performance, but it wasn't nearly as tight as you might expect. There was a strong feeling among the shooters that the Classifier is its own thing -- a decent shooting test, but not a great test of IDPA skills.

That led me to ask, What should the Classifier emphasize? I ended up thinking that the Classifier would be (even) better if it tested skills like drawing from concealment and shooting while moving to cover and then slicing the pie around that cover. That's what IDPA is about, in a nutshell, and performance on such a test would better predict performance in a typical match.

What would you have liked to see in the new Classifier?

[rowdyb]

It is a common refrain, "I'm a Master but I can't shoot a MA level classifier." I don't know how many times I've heard it and seen it. And thank you btw.

[Blueridge]

I have not had the chance to shoot the new classifier, but I think that any one type of classifier course would have difficulty reflecting how a shooter would do in match stages. The variables involved in match shooting differ so much, that I cannot see a classifier reflecting more than just how proficient a person is at the specific skills tested in the classifier.

It is one thing to be proficient with a fundamental skill set, and another to put that skill set to use in a more fluid setting that matches are consistently.

I do think that the new classifier is a welcome change/improvement from the last classifier, but it still sets a baseline for a shooter to see what their fundamental skill set looks like.

[cerealbyter]

The old classifier was a true test. Match bumps aren't necessarily always a test of skill. Sometimes they are a test of who is playing on that particular day. That's why you saw the disparity, but when you saw a person master the classifier, you knew they were legit.

[jwayne]

12 hours ago, cerealbyter said:

The old classifier was a true test. Match bumps aren't necessarily always a test of skill. Sometimes they are a test of who is playing on that particular day. That's why you saw the disparity, but when you saw a person master the classifier, you knew they were legit.

I agree,,,,,,,match bumps reflect a good day shooting most of the time!!!