Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

6/28/18 New high hit factors and retired classifiers


Paulie

Recommended Posts

higher scores calculated under the old HHF's prior to 6/28/18 will never drop off of your %  as any re-shoots under the New HHF will receive a D by the system. Any new classifiers not already in your pool calculated under the new HHF's will get a B or C code and wont be used. 
They raised the bar by 25% to me that makes any score prior to 6/28/18 invalid.. I understand it needed to be done however why should I as a member who pays USPSA to maintain the classification system suffer with being over classed based on invalid data due to their mismanagement of the system we pay them for?
I want a total classification wipe to zero ( Unclassifed).  I will re-class under the post 6/28/18 HHF's without that the classification system is a totally useless tool for me that I continue to pay for. I see you joined hear in 2016 have no idea how long you have been shooting USPSA,   I have been an active USPSA shooter since 1993 the classification system is a tool I have used since day 1 but without a reset to zero it is useless to me based on the rules governing the data currently in the system ( that is now wrong) and new data coming in.
You're new super low scores remain on your record, they are just not used in the calculation of your current classification. If none of your scores for a period of time are at your current classification you would have plenty of evidence to support your petition

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 211
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

No you don't the BOD's position is the pre 6/28/18 % is valid to keep you where you are irregardless of their 25% adjustment on 6/28/18. higher scores calculated under the old HHF's prior to 6/28/18 will never drop off of your %  as any re-shoots under the New HHF will receive a D by the system. Any new classifiers not already in your pool calculated under the new HHF's will get a B or C code and wont be used.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

You're new super low scores remain on your record, they are just not used in the calculation of your current classification. If none of your scores for a period of time are at your current classification you would have plenty of evidence to support your petition

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
 

Ben their done that with Limited the last M score I posted was 2/4/2006 and I medically retired from the military in 2009 with a 70% disability rating. I finally got it through my thick head that I couldn’t compete in limited any lounger and gave it up 2014 I have abysmal limited scores from 2006-2014 tons of 20  and 30%ers. BOD's position is that M Limited is still justified... that is why I sold off all my limited gear  in 2014.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No you don't the BOD's position is the pre 6/28/18 % is valid to keep you where you are irregardless of their 25% adjustment on 6/28/18. higher scores calculated under the old HHF's prior to 6/28/18 will never drop off of your %  as any re-shoots under the New HHF will receive a D by the system. Any new classifiers not already in your pool calculated under the new HHF's will get a B or C code and wont be used.  
Have you shown you are not capable of performing at your current classification and petitioned for a lower one?

The position that you do not move down because classifiers are adjusted is consistant with what has happened in the past when adjustments were made with no announcement, they used to just make up new ones when someone felt it was reasonable to do so.

I have been in the sport only a decade or so and I remember seing HHF get changed on some classifiers, the on line classifier calculators were regularly wrong because the %used to create the database they used no longer matched the one USPSA was using.

Oddly uspsa mentions adjusting the HHF over time, did you protest that policy?



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

Have you shown you are not capable of performing at your current classification and petitioned for a lower one?

T


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
 

yes with Limited the last M score I posted was 2/4/2006 and I medically retired from the military in 2009 with a 70% disability rating. I finally got it through my thick head that I couldn’t compete in limited any lounger and gave it up 2014 I have abysmal limited scores from 2006-2014 tons of 20  and 30%ers. BOD's position is that M Limited is still justified... that is why I sold off all my limited gear  in 2014 .. so no M level classifier or match performance  from 2006-2014 + the 70 % disability is not justification to move down in Limited. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, 2011BLDR said:

Ben their done that with Limited the last M score I posted was 2/4/2006 and I medically retired from the military in 2009 with a 70% disability rating. I finally got it through my thick head that I couldn’t compete in limited any lounger and gave it up 2014 I have abysmal limited scores from 2006-2014 tons of 20  and 30%ers. BOD's position is that M Limited is still justified... that is why I sold off all my limited gear  in 2014.

 

So you're shooting C class on classifiers due to a disability and they wont drop your classification from M? When was the last time you tried to petition to get it lowered? Did you piss off your Area Director? If you've been having this problem since 2006, with 12 years of evidence you should be able to get this done.

 

That said your situation makes you want everyone's classification reset, and I think that's going a little over board. It seems like you a ulterior motive is wanting that. I for one can't wait for the next major match when everyone is classified U because we all got reset.......I've said this before, that's a great way to piss off a huge chunk of the membership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, 2011BLDR said:

yes with Limited the last M score I posted was 2/4/2006 and I medically retired from the military in 2009 with a 70% disability rating. I finally got it through my thick head that I couldn’t compete in limited any lounger and gave it up 2014 I have abysmal limited scores from 2006-2014 tons of 20  and 30%ers. BOD's position is that M Limited is still justified... that is why I sold off all my limited gear  in 2014 .. so no M level classifier or match performance  from 2006-2014 + the 70 % disability is not justification to move down in Limited. 

 

Although I guess it doesn't matter now, you're at 93.xx % in PCC so they probably aren't going to drop you. Hell, a couple more % in PCC and you'll be M in open too. I see no reason for them to reset your scores now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is pointless I never said I  wanted everyone to reset to zero just myself. It is a tool I have used since 1993 when I joined USPSA.  With a drastic adjustment in HHF's and the rules of the program counting pre and post adjustment %'s as valid the system is basically frozen for members with old HHF % remaining valid.  Request for Limited denied 2014 and M Limited scores from 2006 used in BOD decision IRT PCC today.

 I am out of this discussion 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, 2011BLDR said:

This is pointless I never said I  wanted everyone to reset to zero just myself. It is a tool I have used since 1993 when I joined USPSA.  With a drastic adjustment in HHF's and the rules of the program counting pre and post adjustment %'s as valid the system is basically frozen for members with old HHF % remaining valid.  Request for Limited denied 2014 and M Limited scores from 2006 used in BOD decision IRT PCC today.

 I am out of this discussion 

 

Like I said, no reason to reset someone score in limited when they are 2% short of GM in another division. Makes you sound like a sandbagger.

Edited by Racinready300ex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Like I said, no reason to reset someone score in limited when they are 2% short of GM in another division. Makes you sound like a sandbagger.

The reality is I was at 93.1275% on 6/27/18 post HHF adjustment 6/28/18 it is 78.8763%  so from top of M to bottom of A but we wont run a recalculation ???.... shooting the exact same Hit factors on the 6 classifiers post 6/28/18 will result in all of them being automatically code D.. How am I sandbagging when it is USPSA that has changed the # 's but want the old #' s and the new #'s to both count as good? 

 

At the end of the day we as members pay USPSA for the classification system via dues and mission fees, as a member and participant  I expect it to be a valid usable tool for me.  As of 6/28/18 it is not vary usable . I have said my position , stated my case and been denied I hope everyone enjoys the period of stagnation in the  classification system that is comming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, 2011BLDR said:

The reality is I was at 93.1275% on 6/27/18 post HHF adjustment 6/28/18 it is 78.8763%  so from top of M to bottom of A but we wont run a recalculation ???.... shooting the exact same Hit factors on the 6 classifiers post 6/28/18 will result in all of them being automatically code D.. How am I sandbagging when it is USPSA that has changed the # 's but want the old #' s and the new #'s to both count as good? 

 

At the end of the day we as members pay USPSA for the classification system via dues and mission fees, as a member and participant  I expect it to be a valid usable tool for me.  As of 6/28/18 it is not vary usable . I have said my position , stated my case and been denied I hope everyone enjoys the period of stagnation in the  classification system that is comming.

Sorry to hear you dropped so much!

Think about all the sandbaggers out there licking their chops thinking they will actually get away with sandbagging because of the new HHF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, stick said:

Sorry to hear you dropped so much!

Think about all the sandbaggers out there licking their chops thinking they will actually get away with sandbagging because of the new HHF.

 

Sandbaggers won’t like the new guys coming in under this set of HHF’s. Sort of evens the field for them, no? 

 

Newly minted B class guy might have shot an el prez in 5.95 all Alphas. That’s 74% in limited now....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think we'll really see any difference at a match.

 

Sure going forward someone who makes B class may have a harder time if their club regularly shoots the classifiers that went up. And assuming the current C class guys improve an move up to B while current B class guys don't improve they'll be in trouble down the road. But in reality, if someone lower than you works harder than you eventually they will be beating you doesn't matter what card they hold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, 2011BLDR said:

The reality is I was at 93.1275% on 6/27/18 post HHF adjustment 6/28/18 it is 78.8763%  so from top of M to bottom of A but we wont run a recalculation ???.... shooting the exact same Hit factors on the 6 classifiers post 6/28/18 will result in all of them being automatically code D.. How am I sandbagging when it is USPSA that has changed the # 's but want the old #' s and the new #'s to both count as good? 

 

At the end of the day we as members pay USPSA for the classification system via dues and mission fees, as a member and participant  I expect it to be a valid usable tool for me.  As of 6/28/18 it is not vary usable . I have said my position , stated my case and been denied I hope everyone enjoys the period of stagnation in the  classification system that is comming.

 

I said Sandbagger because you implied your shooting C class times in limited when you're at 78% in open and 93% in PCC and you're using the change in HHF as a excuse to reset your classifications. Seemed fishy. But I don't know you or your situation.

 

Like I said above it's not really going to matter, going forward your still shooting against the same PCC Masters you did last month. If the guys that weren't as good as you last month get better and make M and start beating you. Well, that would of still happened had they not changed the classification system. 

 

But, I can kind of see your point, and USPSA HQ doesn't always think things all the way through. I guess you didn't see this coming when you were shooting classifiers in PCC?  To me it's been pretty clear that some of the HHF's weren't nearly high enough and the guys hundoing them where going to get themselves into trouble. I think it's kind of funny really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did some #'s crunching and found close to the same percentage swing the other way in other classifiers:

 

Classifer Old pcc New PCC % Change
03-07 68.8272 83.2414 14.142
13-07 71.8827 90.2945 18.4118
99-61 68.7017 79.0678 10.3661
13-05 76.8464 87.1282

10.28

 

I didn't go all the way back but looked at a few, so at the end of it I don't see that the new HHF's would have any change on my current classification.  I think I would have made Master sooner than I did with the open based HHF's.  

Edited by 2011BLDR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow!  I'm just seeing this for the first time.  Very very disappointing...

 

I started shooting over 5 years ago and made A class in production last year.  I'm 55 now and the old body and eyes are starting to slow down so I've been racing to make Master, which has always been my dream.  My CPA wife keeps all our financial records so I can come up with exact numbers, but I bet I've spent well over 25K on this sport over the years. I've beat my arms and hands to death in dryfire, and practiced 500 rounds a week for over 4 years, often in temperatures over 90F and 90% humidity.  (And I've enjoyed every minute...)

 

I agree that they need to run classification system the way it was designed, so I'm not saying it was the wrong move...  But, I always thought it was great that most people could, if they put in the hard work, achieve the goal of becoming a master. Even if they aren't exceptionally gifted athletes.  I always seemed to do well in matches, and my percentages against the GMs seemed to be remarkably close to my classification.  Now I don't think I'll ever make master.... Hate to be a crybaby, but this really sucks for me.  Who cares if there are alot of highly ranked shooters.  If a lot of people are willing to dedicate themselves and put in the hard work, a lot of people deserve the letter.  Guess I should be thankful I made A class...  :)  

 

I'd would like to better understand how they come up with these high scores.  Are they the high score a GM would shoot if they're trying to win a match that counts for something, or are they the from shooters who get lucky when they're trying to blow out a classifier in a match where they have nothing to lose.  Guess it really doesn't matter in the long run.  Fair is fair...  WAAA!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've gotten a little better on my draw and reloads in the past three months, but not fast enough to keep up with the HHF.

 

 

Date Number Club F Percent HF Entered Source

6/30/18

06-03 Area 59 D 65.2578 10.4034 7/03/18 Stage Score
3/31/18 06-03 Area 59 Y 66.1096 9.8619 4/01/18 Stage Score
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Just4FunLP said:

Wow!  I'm just seeing this for the first time.  Very very disappointing...

 

I started shooting over 5 years ago and made A class in production last year.  I'm 55 now and the old body and eyes are starting to slow down so I've been racing to make Master, which has always been my dream.  My CPA wife keeps all our financial records so I can come up with exact numbers, but I bet I've spent well over 25K on this sport over the years. I've beat my arms and hands to death in dryfire, and practiced 500 rounds a week for over 4 years, often in temperatures over 90F and 90% humidity.  (And I've enjoyed every minute...)

 

I agree that they need to run classification system the way it was designed, so I'm not saying it was the wrong move...  But, I always thought it was great that most people could, if they put in the hard work, achieve the goal of becoming a master. Even if they aren't exceptionally gifted athletes.  I always seemed to do well in matches, and my percentages against the GMs seemed to be remarkably close to my classification.  Now I don't think I'll ever make master.... Hate to be a crybaby, but this really sucks for me.  Who cares if there are alot of highly ranked shooters.  If a lot of people are willing to dedicate themselves and put in the hard work, a lot of people deserve the letter.  Guess I should be thankful I made A class...  :)  

 

I'd would like to better understand how they come up with these high scores.  Are they the high score a GM would shoot if they're trying to win a match that counts for something, or are they the from shooters who get lucky when they're trying to blow out a classifier in a match where they have nothing to lose.  Guess it really doesn't matter in the long run.  Fair is fair...  WAAA!!!

 

I think everyone on both sides of this debate would like to know how they came up with the HHF's. It would answer a lot of questions and probably end the debate over these new numbers.

 

I personally haven't looked through all the numbers on these new HHF but I can't imagine MA is out of reach for people who work at it. Have you taken any classes from either local GM's or big name trainers like Anderson or Steoger? Have you read up on all the books? There is so much information out there these days. From your post you live fire more than I do, probably dry fire as much as I do if not more. My hands are sore, and I get shooters elbow. I have been at it a little longer than you and I just made G yesterday with two runs under the new HHF.(96 & 92) I'm younger than you, (38) maybe that's it. But as your eyes may be starting to go, I'm blind in one eye and have never had great vision in the other. Perhaps a DOT is in your future.

 

Anyway If you're stuck in A training for 5 years like you describe I think  there is something missing. I doubt anyone can diagnose it over the internet but getting time with a good instructor might do it. Don't give up, if you want it you can make it happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/10/2018 at 3:48 PM, 2011BLDR said:

yes with Limited the last M score I posted was 2/4/2006 and I medically retired from the military in 2009 with a 70% disability rating. I finally got it through my thick head that I couldn’t compete in limited any lounger and gave it up 2014 I have abysmal limited scores from 2006-2014 tons of 20  and 30%ers. BOD's position is that M Limited is still justified... that is why I sold off all my limited gear  in 2014 .. so no M level classifier or match performance  from 2006-2014 + the 70 % disability is not justification to move down in Limited. 

 

That’s crazy. 

 

You should just re-register using middle or nick name first and real last name. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Paulie said:

You should just re-register using middle or nick name first and real last name. 

 

I don't think he should have to do any of that…

 

I think the classification should be based on the last ten classifiers regardless of what percentage they are. Classifications should automatically go down as well as up. I cannot think of any other sport where rankings only go up automatically, but require a manual intervention to go down.

 

Sandbaggers can be identified easily enough and publicly shamed when necessary. Just because a few want to cheat to win better prizes is no reason to cause problems for everyone else.

 

I too would like to see the criteria/explanation for the new HHF's; We as members paid for this service and as such I think we are owed an explanation as to how these decisions were made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

I think everyone on both sides of this debate would like to know how they came up with the HHF's. It would answer a lot of questions and probably end the debate over these new numbers.

 

I personally haven't looked through all the numbers on these new HHF but I can't imagine MA is out of reach for people who work at it. Have you taken any classes from either local GM's or big name trainers like Anderson or Steoger? Have you read up on all the books? There is so much information out there these days. From your post you live fire more than I do, probably dry fire as much as I do if not more. My hands are sore, and I get shooters elbow. I have been at it a little longer than you and I just made G yesterday with two runs under the new HHF.(96 & 92) I'm younger than you, (38) maybe that's it. But as your eyes may be starting to go, I'm blind in one eye and have never had great vision in the other. Perhaps a DOT is in your future.

 

Anyway If you're stuck in A training for 5 years like you describe I think  there is something missing. I doubt anyone can diagnose it over the internet but getting time with a good instructor might do it. Don't give up, if you want it you can make it happen.

 

Racinready300ex. Thanks for he encouragement .  I actually wanted to, and will on another thread, ask for help on my classifiers.  Most say it’s not advisable to practice classifiers, but I started practicing them a while back and found it it helpful to experience what it takes to shoot at a higher level, and classifier scores provide a benchmark to comparison. It’s really helpful, and really makes practice a lot of fun. That’s why I’d like to know more about how the high hit factors are determined.  It’s not a judgment on the process.  I assume the ultimate goal is to determine what a top shooter can do with some consistency...??? For instance, for a land speed record they require the driver to make a pass followed by another pass within a reasonable amount of time.  With this idea in mind, I’d assume they don’t simply take the highest one time score that’s uploaded from a match, but rather someone has the task of using their judgement and ignores scores that appear to be an anomaly. Again, I appreciate the work USPSA does to make this a fair system, it would just be kind of nice to understand how it works.  Just curious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Just4FunLP said:

 

Racinready300ex. Thanks for he encouragement .  I actually wanted to, and will on another thread, ask for help on my classifiers.  Most say it’s not advisable to practice classifiers, but I started practicing them a while back and found it it helpful to experience what it takes to shoot at a higher level, and classifier scores provide a benchmark to comparison. It’s really helpful, and really makes practice a lot of fun. That’s why I’d like to know more about how the high hit factors are determined.  It’s not a judgment on the process.  I assume the ultimate goal is to determine what a top shooter can do with some consistency...??? For instance, for a land speed record they require the driver to make a pass followed by another pass within a reasonable amount of time.  With this idea in mind, I’d assume they don’t simply take the highest one time score that’s uploaded from a match, but rather someone has the task of using their judgement and ignores scores that appear to be an anomaly. Again, I appreciate the work USPSA does to make this a fair system, it would just be kind of nice to understand how it works.  Just curious. 

 

They certainly haven't been vary open with this kind of information and never have been.
 

I recommend practicing classifiers. Not really related to this topic, I'll shoot you a message explaining my thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s not so bad if you look at the most likely classifiers. Lots of the changes are moot because few clubs run them...Big Barricade II and Take ‘em down for example. 

 

So I ranked the most likely classifiers based on ease of setup and the average change is under 3%. 

 

Out of the 76 classifiers, these 45 are most likely (at least at indoor or space constrained clubs) IMO. 

 

The take away is that there are only a third or so that need to be avoided if you are inclined to improve classification. The ones that increased 6% or more are in red. Top 45 ranked most to less likely....

 

E824EA40-2306-4B54-BFDB-AAAD654A5F31.thumb.jpeg.e9288db8bfc59126f9c749f53ed04dd7.jpeg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I figured it would be good to run my own numbers so, for what it's worth, here it is...   I basically took my original HF and used the calculator on the USPSA website to come up with my new percent, then I simply subtracted the pre-update percentages from the post update changes.  I'm not a mathematician, so there's probably a better way of doing this.  When I saw this a couple of days ago I looked at about 3 of my previous scores and it looked like I'd get a 9% hit, but maybe it's not quite as bad as I first thought.  My goal is to make Production Master.

 

Paulie.  How did you come up with your numbers?

 

If this data is too out of whack I'll delete it.  

 

 

Classifier Percentages before and after June 2018 HHF update.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...