Professional Class?

[Bear1142]

Has the time come to create a "Professional" class? Simply, anyone whose classifier % is above 98% graduates to the Professional class. They compete for the overall win only and pay enhanced entry fees with either a winner takes all cash prize or a graduated prize scale for everyone in the Professional class, similar to golf or Nascar. No trips to the prize table, no plaques. The enhanced entry fee can either be as much or as little as the MD decides. You must have at least two in class to participate in payout structure. If you're the only Professional in your division, then you pay the standard entry fee and can compete in the match, but do receive any cash/prizes/plaques/or titles. Professional class shooters only compete against each other and not the standard USPSA classes.

It might need some tweeking, but it's a start.

Erik

[chp5]

Grand-Pooba class

If there is such a class, I think it should be based on major match performance, not classifiers.

[Matt Cheely]

If there is such a class, I think it should be based on major match performance, not classifiers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

+1

[alma]

Why have a pro class? That is what the GM class is for. The people who are usually the ones who have invested the most time and energy into perfecting their game, why shoulden't they have some of the rewards that come with that.

[Flexmoney]

Erik,

That makes no sense to me at all???

What would be the reason?

[Loves2Shoot]

Erik,

That makes no sense to me at all???

What would be the reason?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ditto, if anything they should get a reduced fee

I've invested more money than I want to think about getting to the level I'm at, and it I were to make it into the top 2% I sure as hell wouldn't want to pay more to shoot.

If you want to win a prize, practice your ass off, once you hit GM high overall is the only prize you get anyway. If you are pissed you don't get a good prize, practice more.

I'm sick of the entitlement mode of thinking.

"The GM's are so much better than me, the only way to get a good prize is to take them out of the equation."

BS, I was a D class shooter once too, I could have stayed there if I wanted to and still had lots of fun, but I wanted to do as well as I can. Why penalize those who work hard, that pisses me off.

The prizes you can recoup at a prize match are a drop in the bucket to the sacrifices you've made to make GM.

[EricW]

GM's are not to blame for my lack of initiative and priorities.

[Bear1142]

Flex,

Sorry for not giving all of the background information. This idea was a response to Bruce's idea about having a Pro/Am type entry fee. Someone responded that nobody would voluntarily pay the higher entry fees. This was an idea spun off of the A1 thread.

Flex and Loves2shoot,

  Erik,

That makes no sense to me at all???

What would be the reason

I've invested more money than I want to think about getting to the level I'm at, and it I were to make it into the top 2% I sure as hell wouldn't want to pay more to shoot.

Here's the idea. Yes, you are paying more to shoot, but you're competitive pool is very small. Money generated from the higher Professional class fees are used only for payback to the Professional class shooters (minus the same percentage for match expenses the regular entry fees generate.)

Here's an example, say there are 5 Professional class shooters in Limited at any given match. Say their entry fees are $350 instead of $150. So 350x5= $1,750. Say $250 of that helps to cover match expenses, then you have $1,500 for prize money. You can either make the match a winner takes all or set up a % system. First place get 50%, Second gets 25%, third gets 10%, etc.. all the way down to 5th.

As Loves2shoot stated, we have all spent a lot of money to get where we are. This type setup allows the top 2 %, mostly the true Professional shooters to setup a much bigger stakes match that is financially worthwhile for them to attend without diminishing the resources (prizes/cash/plaques) of the regular classes. You no longer have a setup where the lower B,C,& D class shooters are subsidizing the upper level GM's. Yes, the Professional's pay more, but the are rewarded much better.

I also like the idea of match performance in addition to classifier % being used to determine the Professional class.

[Flexmoney]

Not too far off of the current Point Series?

[chp5]

If there is such a class, I think it should be based on major match performance, not classifiers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

+1

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I wish USPSA only granted GM status based on major match performance anyway. At the very top level - which the GM class is supposed to represent - it really doesn't matter how well you shot the El Prez in a club match.

IMO - at that level - the only thing that matters is this: can you bring it - stage after stage in a major match.

Not trying to offend any of our GM's (especially Erik - since he's local and much bigger than me) Just my 2 cents.

[Loves2Shoot]

The pro shooters are already getting paid, they don't shoot matches for the $$$, you can make more $$$ teaching a class for the day than that payout.

You up my fee by $200 and I'm not coming.

The rewards aren't better.

SOCIALISM in shooting is a crappy idea IMO.

The only difference between a regular shooter and a great shooter, is hard work.

Sorry if I sound pissed, but the idea of isolating the greatests shooters cause they are better, work harder, and invest more is lame.

If you want them to come, bribe them or pay them or provide a great match, don't charge them more. The "regular shooters are the one's that benefit most from them being there. They get to see how good they "could" be, and most great shooters are more than willing thier experiences with everyone.

PS. There are maybe six guys who would even be in this new class, especially if you made 98% by major match performance. Do the math over the major matches for the last 5 years and it makes even less sense.

[Loves2Shoot]

I wish USPSA only granted GM status based on major match performance anyway.  At the very top level - which the GM class is supposed to represent - it really doesn't matter how well you shot the El Prez in a club match. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you did it that way here are a list of Limited GM's that might not be GM's from Major Match finishes this year:

Mike Seeklander

Phil Strader

Matthew Trout

Douglas Bryant Chaffin

Emanuel Bragg

Estuardo Gomez

Erik Lund

Kert A. Gaskill

Taran Butler

Travis Tomasie

Michael Voigt

Blake Miguez

Shannon Smith

Yong Lee

Chuck Bradley

I would love to be in THAT list of non-GM's.

You would have to drop EVERYONE a class (or two.)

[bgary]

There are maybe six guys who would even be in this new class, especially if you made 98% by major match performance. Do the math over the major matches for the last 5 years and it makes even less sense.

A couple of years back, the USPSA Board toyed with the idea of creating a "super-GM" class, composed of people who had shot 95% or better at a Nationals. The idea was that, any major match won by one of these guys could be used as a classifier score, and we'd start seeing classifications driven by match performance rather than just classifier-book stages.

When the analysis was done, I think there were only about 6 names on the list... and we could all probably name them off the top of our heads.

Bruce

[chp5]

I wish USPSA only granted GM status based on major match performance anyway.  At the very top level - which the GM class is supposed to represent - it really doesn't matter how well you shot the El Prez in a club match. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you did it that way here are a list of Limited GM's that might not be GM's from Major Match finishes this year:

Mike Seeklander

Phil Strader

Matthew Trout

Douglas Bryant Chaffin

Emanuel Bragg

Estuardo Gomez

Erik Lund

Kert A. Gaskill

Taran Butler

Travis Tomasie

Michael Voigt

Blake Miguez

Shannon Smith

Yong Lee

Chuck Bradley

I would love to be in THAT list of non-GM's.

You would have to drop EVERYONE a class (or two.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not sure what you mean. Take for example Travis. I'm quite sure he's shot 95%+ at many Area matches. I'm almost sure at least half of those guys got 95% or above in Area matches in the last season and a half. Those are the same guys that would be a threat at any match and with any level of competition. That's the level of shooter I'm refering to. They are simply on another level.

Maybe we are not connecting on the math. I'm not saying it needs to be calculated the same way as other classifications. Maybe it's as simple as requiring two 95%+ scores in two Area matches in any one season (that's just an example). Anyway, my opinion is that GM should be based on major match performance, not classifiers.

[Loves2Shoot]

Then please do the math (best 6 of last 8) and educated yourself about what that scores tell you, like Bgary stated, you will understand what we are saying. The scores are on the USPSA website.

Many times second place at major matches don't get 95% (even Travis, Jarett, blah blah blah.)

Most GM's don't care anyway about their classification, they just want to win or get better each time out.

[BigDave]

Most GM's don't care anyway, they just want to win or get better each time out.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you start putting up money and they just might. Look at Bianchi. The top 2-3 shooters put up 1920's and then the match is decided by X's.

$$$ is one helluva motivator

Lumber - I like your idea

[BDH]

A couple of years back, the USPSA Board toyed with the idea of creating a "super-GM" class, composed of people who had shot 95% or better at a Nationals.  The idea was that, any major match won by one of these guys could be used as a classifier score, and we'd start seeing classifications driven by match performance rather than just classifier-book stages.

When the analysis was done, I think there were only about 6 names on the list... and we could all probably name them off the top of our heads.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bruce, overall, I still support this. It is based on major match performance and even though it is a small group, what an elite group it would be....

[Flexmoney]

Of current shooters, going off the top of my head...

The group could be a few in Limited. (our deepest division for talent)

In Open, the list shortens quickly. Less than a half dozen, I'd think...likely less than 4.

Production...only Dave.

Revolver...only Jerry.

Limited-10 ...well, nobody (unless TGO is playing around).

Sorry if some of my buddies are doing the math and feel left off the list. (quit reading this and go dry-fire )

[Steve Anderson]

Hell, I coulda stayed an A and won a crapload of first A...but that's not the big show.

I wanna stack up to to the legends, and then get back to work getting better.

Let's go for it.

All the way, baby.

sa

it's a disease, I know.

[Carmoney]

Dividing it out into yet another class sounds an awful lot like something IDPA would do. Let's just shoot.

[Bear1142]

Loves2shoot,

While I appreciate your comments, here are some things to consider.

The pro shooters are already getting paid, they don't shoot matches for the $$$, you can make more $$$ teaching a class for the day than that payout.

Yes, that is absolutely try, BUT, you have to establish an identity and a track record of winning or performing at a very high level before a bunch of people are going to start dropping $400-$500 per day for your instructor skills. Also, not all GM are good instructors and all the good instructors are not necessarily GM's. But being a GM with a track record will convince people to give you a try, how well you can teach is what will keep them coming back.

SOCIALISM in shooting is a crappy idea IMO.

Your gonna have to school me on this one.

Sorry if I sound pissed, but the idea of isolating the greatests shooters cause they are better, work harder, and invest more is lame.

You see it as isolation? I see it as an incentive for shooters to strive for. Once you make Professional class, you have a shot (no pun intended) at competing for more money. I see it like the PGA, even the last place finisher still gets some money under the graduated pay-out system. Why couldn't a similar system work here?

If you want them to come, bribe them..

We are, with more prize money

..or pay them or provide a great match, don't charge them more.

Not quite sure what you're saying? Are you saying the matches should pay the GM's to shoot? I certainly don't think that will fly, and I don't know any club that doesn't work very hard to provide a great match.

The "regular shooters are the one's that benefit most from them being there. They get to see how good they "could" be, and most great shooters are more than willing thier experiences with everyone.

Absolutely, this is one of the great aspects of our sport and like I said previously, If you attract a lot of top GM's along with putting on a great match, you'll have no problem filling the match.

PS. There are maybe six guys who would even be in this new class, especially if you made 98% by major match performance. Do the math over the major matches for the last 5 years and it makes even less sense.

Like CHP5 stated, make it 95% of a major match score and include Area matches and you'll have many more in the Professional class. Off the top of my head you can move Shannon Smith, Seeklander, Butler, Tomasie, Miguez, Strader, and add Ara Maljian. This is just from Area's 1, 6, 7, and 8.

[shred]

All I know is I want to make GM. I also know when I get there I won't want to drop an extra $200 on match entries.

Is 6 people giving money to Max any better than 100?

[Bear1142]

When you get to Max's level, you won't be giving it to him. He'll have to win it by beating you.

Erik

[Bubber]

I might be off base a little on this one. There have been a few Pro-Am matches. It was set up on The Skins Game format. Set up in Par time events with reative steel targets. Your score was the number of hits (targets must fall) in the alloted time. Each stage was worth a sum of money. In case of a tie the money moved to next stage. One tie all tie method. The first part was like a warm up similar to the Wincester Match prior to the Shoot offs in Colorado. Then the next day entryfee was quite a bit higher for all and you could to choose to compete with the big boys. It was fun but it doesn't seem to be around anymore. later rdd

ps One other thing with the falling target and easy scoring it was a good spectator sport.

Edited July 1, 2005 by Bubber

[bgary]

I see it like the PGA, even the last place finisher still gets some money under the graduated pay-out system. Why couldn't a similar system work here?

Because of where the money comes from.

In the PGA, the "prize pool" comes from corp sponsors and TV money.

We don't have those.

In our case, the "prize pool" comes out of the pockets of the other competitors. My guess is, that if that model were used in the PGA, you wouldn't see cash payouts there either.

Bruce