World Shoot Team Selection Process

[Matthew_Mink]

What exactly is the process? Do you take the 2003, 2004 national percentages, then add the highest odd 2003 area percentage, then add the highest even 2004 area percentage? Whichever 4 in that division gets the highest # gets on the Team? Just curious....

[Flexmoney]

Nope. I could give you more details, but i'd have to do a search and look it up first.

I'm not sure if a full-moon has anyting to do with it, but I think Area matches...years..and odd and even numbers play a part.

[Chuck Anderson]

You've got it pretty close. It's different for the divisions. Some were Odd 2003/Even 2004 and the others were Even 2003/Odd 2004 for area matches, then the Nationals both years.

[Matthew_Mink]

Oh yeah, I forgot it was different depending on division. But it is dependent on your percentage at the match, right?

[Chuck Anderson]

That's my understanding.

[John Heiter]

All I know is I'm tired of them always pestering me wanting me to be team captain. I swear, if Michael Voight texts me one more time... Maybe if I stay home this year some of the other countries will stand a chance.

[TDean]

Whatever the process is, it's lame. Not to diminish the talent of shooters picked for the team, but, for instance, why aren't Lisa Munson and Rob Leatham on the team this year?

It come down to who spends the most time and money shooting "points series" (or whatever matches count) matches and not who the best shooters are.

[Chuck Anderson]

I don't think that shooting six matches in two years is really that much to expect. I'm not really fond of the division between odd and even area matches. But, if you want a slot on the team it's pretty clear which matches to shoot.

[Matthew_Mink]

Is it six matches in two years, or four matches in two years?

[Flexmoney]

I don't think it is clear at all. (the fact that I don't know the process off the top of my head is a clue...I have lots of worthless trivia stuck in my noggin')

And, having to plan 2 years in advance...kinda sucks.

[Jake Di Vita]

I have posilutely no clue what the process is...and that is something I would like to know as that is a goal of mine for 2008.

[gmshtr]

If memory serves correctly, your percentages from the 2003 and 2004 Nationals are added to your %'s from your 2 best odd number Area matches shot in 2003 and 2 best even Areas in 2004 (it was the reverse for Open). I agree that it sucked this way. Rob should've been on the Limted team. His original intention was to be on the US Production Team. He shot the Area 5 with his XD, then found out that it was banned from the IPSC Production category. By then, it was too late for any team. There weren't enough Area matches left. Now, of course, the XD is legal in IPSC!

The WSXIII team was picked by the best two out of three previous Nationals results. Your best two finishes from 2000,2001, and 2002 were added together, and the lowest numbers made up the teams.

Rob - 2

Mike V - 6

Me - 8

Ron - 9

This ensured that the best shooters made the team. The best shooters show up for the Nationals, and the best compete against each other. Many of the best don't have the time to shoot these Area matches, but they make time to show up to the Nationals.

I posted what the teams would've been by using the old method somewhere on the forums, but I can't remember where. They weren't extremely different, but they did include Rob on the Limited team and Todd on the Open team...and I certainly wouldn't be one of the top guys on the Limited team (but I'd still be on it )!

Maybe it will go back to that method after this...let's hope.

[Caspian_45]

Phil's pretty close.

The way it got explained to me was. This was posted on the members page at one time but I cannot find it now.

The best percentage from 2 odd area matches in '03 and the best 2 even matches in '04 plus your single best nationals percentage from '03 or '04 doubled. Add that all together and the high 4 scores get the nod. This was for the Standard team. I was going to try for Standard so I know what the selection process was. After the first year I figured I couldn't make the team so I stopped pursuing it. Production team selection was the same as Standard I think.

For Open you need to reverse the area matches.

I didn't like the process. I think you will probably get the same people for the team if you just took the top 4 or 5 from the Nationals match.

[Tom Mainus]

I spent the last two years shooting the matches that I thought I had to qualify for the world team for revolver. Then they don't even use the process they came up with for picking the teams. I know revolver is the red-headed step child of USPSA. But don't say you are going to use matches A-B- and C to decide and then change your mind later on. Some people invested alot of money to shoot the right matches, only to get slapped in the face later on. Don't care how you do it, just stick to it once you made your decision.

(Rant mode off)

[Boo Davis]

Whatever the process is, it's lame.  Not to diminish the talent of shooters picked for the team, but, for instance, why aren't Lisa Munson and Rob Leatham on the team this year?

It come down to who spends the most time and money shooting "points series" (or whatever matches count) matches and not who the best shooters are.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Curiously, looking at the results over the past few years... It seems Leatham and Tomasie have been beating the standard team. I still remember like it was yesterday when Robbie first started shooting. Wow, has he matured in his shooting. I am happy to say that I beat Robbie on a club match stage! However, he did have a gun jam and a few mikes, but who cares!!!

Anyway, what are your thoughts on the Leatham/Tomasie situation....

Your friend,

Boo

[BritinUSA]

I think the whole thing needs to be revisited. Perhaps just base it on Nationals, but then if someone gets DQ'ed from one of them then their chances are over.

For the European Ryder cup they select most of the players based on the cash prizes that they have won, but the team Captain gets 3 personal choices. Maybe we need something like that.

ie.

First three members of the team based on Nationals only. If someone has an extenuating circumstance they can appeal to the Squad Director for the 4th slot. If no such appeal if filed within a certain time period then the fourth slot automatically goes to the 4th place person.

The squad director can examine the appeal and if they feel is has merit then that individual gets the slot, otherwise the 4th best person gets it.

This is simple and it does provide a mechanism for dealing with exceptional circumstances such as DQs.

[Rob Boudrie]

I think the solution is simple:

(1) Accept that a berth on the World Team is a "job" for which USPSA hires people, not a "prize" for winning a "contest". When one hires for a job the issue is not one of "documentable fairness" (except in civil service**), but one of getting a fully qualified applicant for the position.

(2) Since it's a "job", not a "prize", concerns of "was it fair to give it to xyz?" are simply irrelevant. The relevant question would be "did the USPSA board or its designee select a team which is the most likely to win the team events for the US?" Or, put another way, the question is "Did USPSA hire qualified applicants for the job?"

I am leaning towards the "let's call it a job, give the board full authority to pick the best team (or appoint a team selection committee), and get on with picking a winning team. In order for that to work, the membership will have to accept that it is no longer a "contest" with a "prize".

[kamakiri]

One thing seems certain to me... whether or not everyone is satisfied with the process by which our Standard team was chosen, the US Standard shooters, team members and non-team members, are going to stomp the rest of the world in a big way. I wouldn't be surprised if we take the top 6 or 8 (or more) places at the match. Our team is almost certain to win the team competition, and would do so pretty much regardless which of the top dozen or so US Standard shooters were chosen; likewise an American is extremely likely to win the individual title. If that individual happens to be Rob or Travis or someone else not on the official team, that hardly diminishes the achievement or the glory for that shooter or the US.

So, it seems to me that what matters most in the team selection process is that it be generally acknowleged as fair and reasonable by the competitors who have a real chance of making the team. They are, after all, the ones to whom it really matters, as they receive support from the USPSA. If the general consensus among top GM's is that just using Nationals finishes would give the best team, then probably that's the way to go (perhaps making some allowance for a Nationals DQ?). No doubt a selection committee, as Rob Boudrie suggests, would also yield excellent teams; the only problem with that method is that it would inevitably involve a certain amount of politics, whereas going purely by match finishes eliminates any possible debate over favoritism. --I think Nationals finishes would have given us a stronger Production team, which (despite all the hullabaloo over Standard) is probably where we're weakest this time, despite the immortal Sevigny.

[Caspian_45]

Rob while I agree that it is a "job". I disagree with appointing the members for the team. I can think of several reasons why appointing could be bad.

It is NOT a prize as I see it. It is an HONOR to make the team.

There should be a qualification process to be eligible for the team.

The best two (2) places from your last three (3) nationals. Add the places together and the 4 lowest numbers get to be the USPSA WS team. Thats my sugestion.

[Flexmoney]

I am leaning towards the "let's call it a job, give the board full authority to pick the best team (or appoint a team selection committee), and get on with picking a winning team. In order for that to work, the membership will have to accept that it is no longer a "contest" with a "prize".

Rob,

No offense to the BOD. You guys already have a lot to do. I just don't think you need this added to your stack of things to address ever time it comes up.

I like what Phil posted. Best 2 out of 3 finishes at the Nationals. That allows for one [DQ...screw-up...my dog ran away...ect.] from each competitor.

If a shooter can't hang at the big match (Nationals), then they don't need to be on the team.

Set it in stone. Let there be no doubt.

[AikiDale]

[Faux Admin Mode On]

Matt's original question concerned what the process was. Let's not get into a debate about what it should have been or ought to be.

[/Faux Admin Mode Off]

[chuckw]

I don't understand why this issue keeps coming up. The USPSA already has a list of the best shooters in the US, so why don't they use it?

http://www.uspsa.org/cgi-bin/members/db_top20.cgi

[RIIID]

I think one of the reasons the selection process was set up odd/even. Was to get the big dogs to shoot more area matches. It did get more people to travel around more. It's down fall is it requires a shooter to start two years before the World Shoot year. If a shooter starts a year too late there is no chance of making the team.

Rich

[BritinUSA]

I don't understand why this issue keeps coming up. The USPSA already has a list of the best shooters in the US, so why don't they use it?

http://www.uspsa.org/cgi-bin/members/db_top20.cgi

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The classification database does not accurately reflect the shooting ability. The courses are mostly speed shoots and are shot over and over again by everyone. If I had a range to practice and a bunch of easy classifiers I could get to the top of that table in no time. Could I win a World Shoot... NO !

[Jim Norman]

While it is true that there is a database of classifier scores, it is equally true that the percentage represented may have been arrived at over a number of years and may in some cases be years out of date.

I just checked the Limited A Class. THere are several people there that are at the top of the list that have either not shot in years or havenot posted a valid score in years.

Match performance is the only real criteria that should be used. It should be based upon a set number of matches and should be achievable by a majority of the shooters good enough to be able to win. In other words, you should not have to quit your day job and travel all over the country for three years if you are good enough, you are good enough. There are a lot of people out there that are good, but they have a limited travel budget, either in money or more likely in time.

Jim