PCC USPSA Classification

[longbeard]

 

When I started PCC back in April I was a 65% Limited guy (and practicing a lot and rising).  I hit 86% in September, and  I'm now soon to be 90% in PCC.  I practiced quite a bit over the last season, but I don't feel that it's a just score because the classifiers are so skewed.  I hundo'd Fluffy's 2 and hit a 96 on Roscoe Rattle.  Not a major achievement with a rifle and no up-range start.  In fact, this past weekend a first time PCC shooter (an M production guy) hundo'd Roscoe. I want to shoot. I don't want to tank classifiers to avoid moving up, but I feel a bit silly with the M classification, let alone the prospect of hitting GM the next time some match runs a skewed classifer.

 

I am alone on this?  Doesn't it seem like the classification system might be compromised?  Run the right classifiers and make GM?!  And what about the relation of PCC to pistol classification?  Anyone think the classifications are equivalent?

 

Interested on fellow PCC shooter's thoughts on this. 

 

Also.  Sorry for the non-technical post, but this is where the PCC crowd hangs out.

Edited December 19, 2017 by longbeard

[MHitchcock]

Yes, there is a major skewing of classifiers. It won't be fixed until they give PCC its own classification scores based on PCC data not open. Some of the classifiers are harder for PCC than open, but the vast majority are much easier with PCC especially those requiring offhand/one-hand shooting or uprange starts. IMO what would fix a lot of the actual problem caused by this is unlinking PCC class from the pistol classes. Having someone who makes GM in PCC an automatic master in every pistol class is a little silly. However, at the end of the day, classification doesn't really matter IMO. If you are worried that you won't get your earlier B class win prize walk over tanking in M then you are shooting for the wrong reasons anyway. 

[Aircooled6racer]

Hello: I think the PCC classifiers will make you classified 2 higher than most of your pistol divisions. So if you are a B limited shooter you will end up a Master in PCC from what I have seen. With some of these classifiers being so old and shot so many times certain divisions hit factors are so high it is hard to move up. Open is one of them and so is revolver. The true way to see where you stand is shooting a major match to see your percentage compared to the GM's. When you do that you can see that classifier system works pretty well. Thanks, Eric

[Rolex]

I shoot with a guy that went to PCC as soon as it started- went to GM in just a few months.

 

Certainly not a GM with his Limited gun! 

[longbeard]

9 minutes ago, MHitchcock said:

Yes, there is a major skewing of classifiers. It won't be fixed until they give PCC its own classification scores based on PCC data not open. Some of the classifiers are harder for PCC than open, but the vast majority are much easier with PCC especially those requiring offhand/one-hand shooting or uprange starts. IMO what would fix a lot of the actual problem caused by this is unlinking PCC class from the pistol classes. Having someone who makes GM in PCC an automatic master in every pistol class is a little silly. However, at the end of the day, classification doesn't really matter IMO. If you are worried that you won't get your earlier B class win prize walk over tanking in M then you are shooting for the wrong reasons anyway. 

Agreed on all counts, but I do think it's important to have integrity in the classification system for those who wish to compete seriously.  The classic argument was always about sand-baggers staying low in class to finish well at majors.  This certainly isn't going to let anyone sandbag, but it also can dilute the classes and make the accomplishments meaningless to those who worked hard.  i.e someone worked their butt off to get a M in limited, and here comes a guy like me snagging an M card from shooting PCC.  Now M pistol class gets an asterisk of "oh, got it from PCC". 

 

I realize this is all just a hobby for most, and really shouldn't matter.  I just hate to see any sort integrity of the sport sacrificed due to some math issues. 

 

I think the best solution is to disconnect pistol and rifle classifications as you said.

 

 

[Timido]

I started USPSA last year with Carry optics. I was first classified with a 52% C shooter.  I then got into PCC.  I just got classified as an  A 84.9% .  That bumped my carry optics  % up to B.  Next time I shot my Carry optics trying to get that average up.  Now they won't use any percentage under like %60 to my average.   It will be very hard for me to ever improve my Carry Optics average.   One good PCC run will move me to Master and A class for Carry Optics 

Edited December 19, 2017 by Timido

[GorillaTactical]

I'm an 85% pistol shooter - I'm a 95% PCC shooter. 

 

This actually makes sense to me based on my own skill level between the two platforms...I'm better comparatively against other shooters with a rifle than a pistol...That said, there are absolutely ways to game the classification system for PCC (two of the most popular stages you highlighted above).  There are also classifiers which are almost impossible to hit a 100 on.

 

I agree that there very well could or maybe even should be a distinction between rifle classification and pistol classification.  But there's also a stigma with shooting PCC in general, never mind receiving high classification in it...I posted here when I made GM back in July, very happy with the accomplishment, and within 2-3 posts, someone immediately asked what my pistol classification was, expecting it to be significantly less.  

 

The best way to find out if you're over classified in PCC is too shoot majors and see how you do.  

 

 

[MikieM]

What difference does it make? Why compare carbines to pistols? Our only similarity is the calibers and the fact that we shoot the same courses of fire.

At a match you compete against others of similar talents with similar equipment. If you feel that you're not worthy of the title request a reduction in status.

As for me, I'm gonna be a GM. And I don't mean General Manager. 

 

[Gooldylocks]

3 minutes ago, MikieM said:

What difference does it make? Why compare carbines to pistols? Our only similarity is the calibers and the fact that we shoot the same courses of fire.

At a match you compete against others of similar talents with similar equipment. If you feel that you're not worthy of the title request a reduction in status.

As for me, I'm gonna be a GM. And I don't mean General Manager. 

 

The difference is for people that shoot multiple divisions. If you are a B or C shooter in all the handgun divisions then go and collect your free GM card for PCC, suddenly you are in way over your head in the pistol divisions. Which makes a difference if you live somewhere where nationals slots are awarded based on your results at club/sectional matches. Disconnecting PCC and the pistol divisions seems like the most logical solution to this that I have seen. 

[2011BLDR]

4 hours ago, MHitchcock said:

Yes, there is a major skewing of classifiers. It won't be fixed until they give PCC its own classification scores based on PCC data not open. Some of the classifiers are harder for PCC than open, but the vast majority are much easier with PCC especially those requiring offhand/one-hand shooting or uprange starts. IMO what would fix a lot of the actual problem caused by this is unlinking PCC class from the pistol classes. Having someone who makes GM in PCC an automatic master in every pistol class is a little silly. However, at the end of the day, classification doesn't really matter IMO. If you are worried that you won't get your earlier B class win prize walk over tanking in M then you are shooting for the wrong reasons anyway. 

Agreed, but that will never happen. USPSA dropped the ball when they decided :

1. Start the division with Open HHF without looking at how some Classifiers would be easier and some harder with a PCC

2. Allowed the PCC classification to affect the pistol classifications. 

 

#1. Will be addressed when the HHF scrub is completed BUT as in the past it will not change any scores already entered in the system

#2. Is impossible to address  without some % of shouters being upset options would be:

     A.Delink PCC and Pistol, what do you do with everyone that got a bump due to PCC? if you undo the bumps a % will be pissed and a % will be happy.  making it a voluntary thing wouldn't be fair and would be an administrative nightmare.

     B. Call it a provisional thing an reset EVERYONE to ZERO when you make PCC an official division with adjusted real PCC HHF's?   a % will be pissed that they wasted all the work put in to PCC already and a % will be happy that they can start over from ZERO. But  again what do you do with the existing Pistol bumps from PCC?

 

Great division and I love shooting it along with OPEN, but the introduction was poorly planed and executed.

Edited December 19, 2017 by 2011BLDR

[longbeard]

5 minutes ago, Gooldylocks said:

The difference is for people that shoot multiple divisions. If you are a B or C shooter in all the handgun divisions then go and collect your free GM card for PCC, suddenly you are in way over your head in the pistol divisions. Which makes a difference if you live somewhere where nationals slots are awarded based on your results at club/sectional matches. Disconnecting PCC and the pistol divisions seems like the most logical solution to this that I have seen. 

This

[Gooldylocks]

4 minutes ago, 2011BLDR said:

#2. Is impossible to address  without some % of shouters being upset options would be:

     A.Delink PCC and Pistol, what do you do with everyone that got a bump due to PCC? if you undo the bumps a % will be pissed and a % will be happy.  making it a voluntary thing wouldn't be fair and would be an administrative nightmare.

     B. Call it a provisional thing an reset EVERYONE to ZERO when you make PCC an official division with adjusted real PCC HHF's?   a % will be pissed that they wasted all the work put in to PCC already and a % will be happy that they can start over from ZERO. But  again what do you do with the existing Pistol bumps from PCC?

Rather than reset to zero, what about recalculating classifier %'s with the corrected HFs, with the scores they already shot on classifiers? Some people would be butt hurt that they got bumped down from their current class, but that number might be smaller than if everyone returned to U. Just a thought. 

[2011BLDR]

26 minutes ago, Gooldylocks said:

Rather than reset to zero, what about recalculating classifier %'s with the corrected HFs, with the scores they already shot on classifiers? Some people would be butt hurt that they got bumped down from their current class, but that number might be smaller than if everyone returned to U. Just a thought. 

 

Problem is you have  issues with HHF's in all the divisions ( on a on a smaller scale) Production is probably the worst.  I have seen numerous  GM's shoot  103- 115+ % on classifiers but it is entered as 100% so someone shooting  a 95-100% isn't real it is squed 10-25%. Do you do the same retroactive adjustments in all the Pistol divisions when the new HHF's are done?

one example 4 classifiers over 100%  ( 102.73- 110.72%):

 

https://azshooters.org/shooter?uspsa=A40144

 

 

Edited December 19, 2017 by 2011BLDR

[2011BLDR]

Another example 5 OPEN/ Limited over 100% (105.11-117.81%):

 

https://azshooters.org/shooter?uspsa=L3065

[Gooldylocks]

The classifiers aren't supposed to be set up so that 100% is the best score ever shot, but more of an average of those best scores. Just because someone can go out and thrown down a 14HF El Prez doesn't really mean that is 100%, that should (and is) over the average used as the best score. Some of the pistol classifiers definitely need adjusted, but that is a much less critical issue in my mind than the PCC classifications where a very large number of them are significantly off. Moving the production HHF up or down by 0.2 or the open by 0.4 here and there is not really close to changing the PCC classifiers by >1.0... 

 

The exception is the Fixed time classifiers, which need reworked badly, and I would be okay with recalculating people's classifications based on those changes. 

[L9X25]

 

They did not expect PCC scores to exceed Open scores and thought that everyone would be slightly under-classified until PCC HHF's were calculated and used.

I think they also expected to have PCC factors done much faster.    The problem is that people that make GM or M under the Open HHF's, will still be GM or M when 

HHF's are scrubbed and they are shooting 1 or 2 classes lower scores.  And as noted, that will also screw with everyone's other classifications that may be lower.

Edited December 19, 2017 by L9X25

[2011BLDR]

I showed 2 examples of regular guys  ( Not National champions ) across 3 divisions that have HF 10-17% over current HHF's .. so why is it OK to change PCC % based on HHF reset and not apply the same standard to ALL divisions?  

[longbeard]

Perhaps I put too much stock in class, but I think the whole thing is a bit of shame.  There are plenty of un-deserving pistol M/GM's I'm sure, but for the most part when you shoot with someone at that level you can generally expect to learn quite a bit.  I've always had respect for the time they've put in and what they've learned.  With the PCC thing now there's going to be an asterisk of PCCM/PCCGM.  Most of my buddies chuckle when I say M in PCC, and I chuckle along with them.

 

Perhaps they will fix it, but I suspect the damage is done.  The logisitics of backing people out of classifications is likely a technical and administrative nightmare!

[Gooldylocks]

3 hours ago, 2011BLDR said:

I showed 2 examples of regular guys  ( Not National champions ) across 3 divisions that have HF 10-17% over current HHF's .. so why is it OK to change PCC % based on HHF reset and not apply the same standard to ALL divisions?  

#1, because it is provisional division, so shoot at your own risk.

 

#2, because as I said above, the 100% score is NOT supposed to be the best score ever shot on a given classifier. I am not a national champion and I have a few 100s. Both of the two "regular guys" you linked to have been shooting for a long time, and have been high level shooters for a lot of years now. I never said some of the pistol classifiers didn't need adjusting, just that they are much less severely in need of changes compared to the rifle ones. I bet even if you did make the necessary adjustments and recalculated people's averages, they wouldn't even change their class, compared to the PCC shooters who are gonna get bumped down to A or B once those get recalculated. If the only people that are allowed to ever shoot a 100 on a classifier are national champions, then there are not gonna be very many GMs in the country.

[2011BLDR]

Well I am just a "regular guy" made Master in limited in the  late 90's.. that gave me an A In open with a B avarage right up until I retired from limited 2 years ago.. took me 12 mounths to drag the Open avarage up In to A after that limited retirement... running with 3 100% and 3 86-87% classifers In PCC with a M card..one more good one an it would bump me to GM and drag me to M Open... Usually place 7-4 th @ level 2-3 matches in A,  sometimes  high senior..

 

I see issues in all the divisions caused by the lack of matintantnce to the HHF for years ...PCC just cast a bit more light on It..

[Gooldylocks]

8 hours ago, 2011BLDR said:

Well I am just a "regular guy" made Master in limited in the  late 90's.. that gave me an A In open with a B avarage right up until I retired from limited 2 years ago.. took me 12 mounths to drag the Open avarage up In to A after that limited retirement... running with 3 100% and 3 86-87% classifers In PCC with a M card..one more good one an it would bump me to GM and drag me to M Open... Usually place 7-4 th @ level 2-3 matches in A,  sometimes  high senior..

 

I see issues in all the divisions caused by the lack of matintantnce to the HHF for years ...PCC just cast a bit more light on It..

Yet again, I never once said that there weren't issues to be solved with some of the HHFs in the pistol divisions. Just that PCC is the worst, by far. Your story, if anything, just confirms EXACTLY what I have been saying this whole time. If they adjusted the classifiers that needed adjusting for the pistol divisions and recalculated your average, I bet you wouldn't even change in class. In PCC though, if they adjusted them correctly, I would guess you would fall right back down into that same A range as in Open, which would be a more accurate representation (I assume, based on your open class). 

[longbeard]

As pointed out, there are issues in all divisions.  However, PCC is by far the worst.  Perhaps I'm missing something, but in the examples given the shooter getting 100+% was still an A class guy?  Meaning, yes, skewed, but likely still not obtainable by someone in C?  In PCC this is not the case.  

 

I gave a lot of thought.  If it were my perfect world, I would reset PCC to U after the provisional period.  Everyone would then fall to their highest achievement in pistol, and anyone should be able to re-classify in PCC.  I would also disconnect the two.

[2011BLDR]

With minimal effort i showed the same issue with HHF's in several divisions Limited, Open ,Production...  Scores 103-127% above the current HHF's this is not just a PCC issue..On all of my 100% PCC classifiers their were also Open Limited and Production shooters in that match that far exceeded the 100% just like I did with the PCC... i Just dont get the "lets single out PCC attitude" 

[Gooldylocks]

2 hours ago, 2011BLDR said:

With minimal effort i showed the same issue with HHF's in several divisions Limited, Open ,Production...  Scores 103-127% above the current HHF's this is not just a PCC issue..On all of my 100% PCC classifiers their were also Open Limited and Production shooters in that match that far exceeded the 100% just like I did with the PCC... i Just dont get the "lets single out PCC attitude" 

You are so stuck on this. The HHF/100% score IS NOT supposed to be the best score ever shot. It is supposed to be an average of some very high scores. That has no influence on whether someone can shoot a better score than that. My best El Prez in Open is sub 4 seconds with good hits, should that be the new 100% for 99-11? No, it shouldn't be, because one dude being able to throw down a 132% has nothing to do with the average. If the data show that to be current trend, then maybe moving it up some amount to the current median "high score" would be the right decision.

 

Just because you can show examples of 2 dudes that have been Master/GM level shooters for like more than 5 years being able to shoot >100% scores, does NOT mean that the pistol HHFs are dramatically off. Foley is already working to rectify some of the classifiers that need updating in the pistol divisions, moving them both up and down as necessary. I have this attitude of singling out PCC because it is dramatically, horrifically off in many cases. If you are a C pistol shooter, you should not be a GM in PCC, like we are seeing. An A shooter hooking up and getting a 105 in limited, I don't see that even close to as big of an issue (especially since in my experience, the difference in mechanical skill between an A and GM is very small, it is much more of a difference in consistency and mindset.) USPSA also seems to agree with this sentiment, based on the fact that scores up to 15% above your current class count for classification.

 

To see if I understand your argument: you saying that in your opinion, only very high M or GM level shooters should be able to shoot GM scores, and only National Champion contenders should be able to shoot over 100% scores? 

[Gooldylocks]

I also should say, I am okay with resetting everyone to U when it becomes un-provisional. I just think that would create a very large amount of butthurt with people that have already shot a lot of classifiers in PCC.